Hectic Posted March 1, 2015 Share Posted March 1, 2015 So the Horton for Clarkson trade got me thinking.. why didn't the Blue Jackets go for Mike Richards instead? I mean I would rather have a 2 time cup winner on my team for the same contract and same amount of years remaining (Richards is 0.5 million higher, but same term remaining) than David Clarkson (who gets paid on a slash/60 mins playing time basis) Thoughts? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CRAZY_4_NAZZY Posted March 1, 2015 Share Posted March 1, 2015 Richards is a center...redundant for the CBJ as they have a younger, feistier, and offensively inclined in Brandon Dubinsky. He is already their shut down center. Also having Johansen, Wennberg in the midst means Richards is really nothing more than another bottom six guy. Clarkson at least will more likely see top six minutes on the wing of Johansen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nuxfanabroad Posted March 1, 2015 Share Posted March 1, 2015 You can also be almost certain TO will eventually spend up to the cap..so the LTIR is useful. The ownership are confident to always cover expenses, & keep turning profits. Even in a rebuild, due to the passion for hockey in the TO region. Should they start to decline, the LA market will never have that level of economic certainty, even if their team remains far superior. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-AJ- Posted March 1, 2015 Share Posted March 1, 2015 On somewhat of an off note, I'm glad that Richards is actually putting in effort in the AHL. He hasn't given up and is willing to demolish the AHL in order to gain back respect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apple Juice Posted March 1, 2015 Share Posted March 1, 2015 Because the Jackets would rather have someone who can contribute now instead of having to pay off someone $5 million every year on LTIR. Helps them in the middle of their rebuilding stage to have a seasoned NHL veteran play games while their prospects develop. Plus, MLSE can afford to pay a guy $5 million to sit out rather than Columbus ownership paying $5 million to sit.It's all about the money in terms of ownership and in terms of players involved, allows Toronto to finally trade what shouldn't have been for a guy who Columbus doesn't want because he's costing ownership money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hectic Posted March 1, 2015 Author Share Posted March 1, 2015 Because the Jackets would rather have someone who can contribute now instead of having to pay off someone $5 million every year on LTIR. Helps them in the middle of their rebuilding stage to have a seasoned NHL veteran play games while their prospects develop. Plus, MLSE can afford to pay a guy $5 million to sit out rather than Columbus ownership paying $5 million to sit. It's all about the money in terms of ownership and in terms of players involved, allows Toronto to finally trade what shouldn't have been for a guy who Columbus doesn't want because he's costing ownership money. I get the reasoning behind the trade, it's that I think Richards is a better player than Clarkson (and I guess shifting positions is something that we're use to as Canucks fans), but I still think Richards would be a more effective winger than David Clarkson he is awful Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toews Posted March 1, 2015 Share Posted March 1, 2015 I get the reasoning behind the trade, it's that I think Richards is a better player than Clarkson (and I guess shifting positions is something that we're use to as Canucks fans), but I still think Richards would be a more effective winger than David Clarkson he is awful I always got the inclination that the Kings ownership did not want to spend the money required to buy out a contract that has turned into a dud. I am guessing that Lombardi approached the ownership about a compliance buyout in the summer but he was denied that. I expected the Kings to buy Richards this summer. It was the more prudent move and Lombardi being one of the best GMs in the league I expected him to see things that way as well. The team just won a Stanley Cup with Richards playing on the 4th line, to me it was the move that made sense but didn't pursue it. I suspected then and imo Kings ownership does not want to spend that much money for a player that isn't going to play for them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BeefcakeBo Posted March 1, 2015 Share Posted March 1, 2015 I always got the inclination that the Kings ownership did not want to spend the money required to buy out a contract that has turned into a dud. I am guessing that Lombardi approached the ownership about a compliance buyout in the summer but he was denied that. I expected the Kings to buy Richards this summer. It was the more prudent move and Lombardi being one of the best GMs in the league I expected him to see things that way as well. The team just won a Stanley Cup with Richards playing on the 4th line, to me it was the move that made sense but didn't pursue it. I suspected then and imo Kings ownership does not want to spend that much money for a player that isn't going to play for them. They are spending that much money though on a player who isn't playing for them now. The question isn't why the kings wouldn't do this. It's why the hell did Columbus go for Clarkson when they likely could have gotten the same deal for Richardson. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hugor Hill Posted March 1, 2015 Share Posted March 1, 2015 On somewhat of an off note, I'm glad that Richards is actually putting in effort in the AHL. He hasn't given up and is willing to demolish the AHL in order to gain back respect. As long as he stays down there and eats up LA cap I'm content. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheOgRook Posted March 1, 2015 Share Posted March 1, 2015 Because the Jackets would rather have someone who can contribute now instead of having to pay off someone $5 million every year on LTIR. Helps them in the middle of their rebuilding stage to have a seasoned NHL veteran play games while their prospects develop. Plus, MLSE can afford to pay a guy $5 million to sit out rather than Columbus ownership paying $5 million to sit.It's all about the money in terms of ownership and in terms of players involved, allows Toronto to finally trade what shouldn't have been for a guy who Columbus doesn't want because he's costing ownership money. He didn't ask why the trade happened lol good effort though... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toews Posted March 1, 2015 Share Posted March 1, 2015 They are spending that much money though on a player who isn't playing for them now. The question isn't why the kings wouldn't do this. It's why the hell did Columbus go for Clarkson when they likely could have gotten the same deal for Richardson. There is still the 4.7M or so that the Kings have as a cap hit going forward now that Richards is in the minors. Buying out Richards meant increasing payroll. The Kings are a highly successful market right now but going forward, will that still be the case? Would there still be enough revenue being generated if the Kings struggled in the future and teams like the Lakers, Dodgers and Angels start winning championships? Its a matter worth considering as an owner. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tangelos Posted March 1, 2015 Share Posted March 1, 2015 Clarkson buyout is cheaper than a Richards buyout. CBJ has no intention of keeping Clarckson after this year IMO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BeefcakeBo Posted March 1, 2015 Share Posted March 1, 2015 There is still the 4.7M or so that the Kings have as a cap hit going forward now that Richards is in the minors. Buying out Richards meant increasing payroll. The Kings are a highly successful market right now but going forward, will that still be the case? Would there still be enough revenue being generated if the Kings struggled in the future and teams like the Lakers, Dodgers and Angels start winning championships? Its a matter worth considering as an owner. It makes absolutely no difference if they have Richards in the minors or Horton on LTIR. They pay the same money to players either way, but they do get some extra cap flexibility if the want by taking Horton on instead of Richards. It's not like they are forced to use the cap space if they don't want to. I think your missing the point of the OP, which is why didn't Columbus target Richards instead of Clarkson. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisbanks Posted March 1, 2015 Share Posted March 1, 2015 Clarkson buyout is cheaper than a Richards buyout. CBJ has no intention of keeping Clarckson after this year IMOclarkson will be on the team next year...their options were to pay a guy not to play or pay a guy to play.. they didnt want to waste money on a guy that would never play again , clarksons contract is no good but cbj ,when healthy, are a far better team than toronto and clarkson can easily turn his game around in columbus. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BanTSN Posted March 1, 2015 Share Posted March 1, 2015 Because LA turned them down? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
khay Posted March 1, 2015 Share Posted March 1, 2015 Simple, one is an NHLer, the other is an AHLer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jiggs50 Posted March 1, 2015 Share Posted March 1, 2015 Clarkson is 6'3 and a winger. Richards would be redundant for Columbus as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apple Juice Posted March 1, 2015 Share Posted March 1, 2015 He didn't ask why the trade happened lol good effort though...He kinda did. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elvis15 Posted March 2, 2015 Share Posted March 2, 2015 I'll answer the OP's question(s) with one more: why didn't you just ask this in the trade thread? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BanTSN Posted March 2, 2015 Share Posted March 2, 2015 ^Why waste time asking that when it just kills time available to get another beer? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.