Value of: Brandt Clarke
- Thread starter Raccoon Jesus
- Start date
-
Xenforo Cloud will be upgrading us to version 2.3.5 on March 3rd at 12 AM GMT. This version has increased stability and fixes several bugs. We expect downtime for the duration of the update. The admin team will continue to work on existing issues, templates and upgrade all necessary available addons to minimize impact of this new version. Click Here for Updates
bleedblue1223
Registered User
- Jan 21, 2011
- 53,340
- 17,185
Blues would be interested. Could see Kyrou or Neighbours fitting the description of a player fitting your target description, those deals would look pretty different though.
I would give a lot up for Clarke. Inspite of his lack of playing time recently though, I doubt he's available
Rickard Rakell is a good right shot powerplay option that I could definitely see Dubas moving out for a young player.
I wonder if the Sabres would have any interest. They could use a RD and he could get some playing time.
glenngineer
Registered User
Marchessault
Saros
Smith
for
Clarke
Keumper
If we need you guys to add to balance out salaries I'm good with that
Saros
Smith
for
Clarke
Keumper
If we need you guys to add to balance out salaries I'm good with that
Boeser, if he isn't resigned by the deadline?
This idea of a "self rental" really bugs me.
This idea of a "self rental" really bugs me.
Realistically I think the Kings are probably still a year away from making any big decisions on Clarke. He's too important for them long term. They'll play him less down the stretch this year but probably a lot early next year and figure it out then. Or maybe even the year after, there's no big hurry.
Shesty + Trochek + Othmann + Jones/Brannstrom
for
Byfield, Clarke, Helenius + Dvorak
expect Rs will consider big bucks for Gavrikov, but will wait as you take him for current run
value
The Rs guys can all step in immediately, including Othmann
Ks have enuf crazy pivot depth, yes, must plan for Kopitar exit w/in 3 yrs, but not an immediate concern. Trochek = solid guy w/high face off win %.
Shesty is long term Vez quality prime G, you can flip Kuemper or Rittich [or both] for best offer
Othmann was a mid 1st, is an elc W
Jones/Brann is depth, you are taking a hit on backline but Dvorak is not even here now and OP premise is you have enuf D to make Clarke expendable
Spence gets mo mins
basically
you are getting massive upgrade in net, and lateral-ish atm swap at pivot, and a quality W prospect
for 4 young guys w/size, etc upside
Rs will go By-guy 1st line w/Kreider + JTM
Helenius would be awesome betw. Edstrom + Rempe
and we add 2 young D we need
we gamble on Garand joining quick
for
Byfield, Clarke, Helenius + Dvorak
expect Rs will consider big bucks for Gavrikov, but will wait as you take him for current run
value
The Rs guys can all step in immediately, including Othmann
Ks have enuf crazy pivot depth, yes, must plan for Kopitar exit w/in 3 yrs, but not an immediate concern. Trochek = solid guy w/high face off win %.
Shesty is long term Vez quality prime G, you can flip Kuemper or Rittich [or both] for best offer
Othmann was a mid 1st, is an elc W
Jones/Brann is depth, you are taking a hit on backline but Dvorak is not even here now and OP premise is you have enuf D to make Clarke expendable
Spence gets mo mins
basically
you are getting massive upgrade in net, and lateral-ish atm swap at pivot, and a quality W prospect
for 4 young guys w/size, etc upside
Rs will go By-guy 1st line w/Kreider + JTM
Helenius would be awesome betw. Edstrom + Rempe
and we add 2 young D we need
we gamble on Garand joining quick
Raccoon Jesus
We were right there
Some pretty good ideas so far really, I appreciate it.
I’m just reading between the lines. The org has made some bizarre comments about Clarke this year similar the ones they made about Vilardi and Faber before they jettisoned them.
The night Clarke made the sweet move around Pietrangelo and fed Kopitar Hiller said some weird shit about how he can’t take chances like that and they’ve successfully tanked his ice time and beaten the creativity out of him, all downhill ever since.
To me, between that, Blake being desperate to get out of the first round and assessing this team as a real threat, and Clarke consistently being the only odd-man-out with value, I think he’s a goner for whatever Blake sees as an upgrade.
I’m just reading between the lines. The org has made some bizarre comments about Clarke this year similar the ones they made about Vilardi and Faber before they jettisoned them.
The night Clarke made the sweet move around Pietrangelo and fed Kopitar Hiller said some weird shit about how he can’t take chances like that and they’ve successfully tanked his ice time and beaten the creativity out of him, all downhill ever since.
To me, between that, Blake being desperate to get out of the first round and assessing this team as a real threat, and Clarke consistently being the only odd-man-out with value, I think he’s a goner for whatever Blake sees as an upgrade.
I remember when Scott Wheeler was emphatic that Clarke was gonna be better than Simon Edvinsson...
He just Turner 22, still on his elc for another year and shows a lot of top 4 upside already. This makes no sense. Than again, Blake's made some questionable decisions
biturbo19
Registered User
- Jul 13, 2010
- 27,699
- 12,867
Something around this did come to mind. Only problem with it from a Vancouver perspective, is that Willander is coming...hopefully sooner, rather than later. So between that, Hronek + Myers, it could get a little crowded for RHD minutes in Vancouver as well. It's also not a place where i think Clarke would be likely to get much offensive and powerplay opportunity that he probably needs. Not that Willander plays the same type of game as Clarke, but even if you managed to move Myers or something, trying to break in two young RHD like that at the same time isn't likely to go over well with Tocchet/Foote.
So, while i agree with the sentiment about a "self rental"...i think it'd be preferential to seek out a return for Boeser that reinvests either up front in a Forward, or in some draft currency that could be reallocated there by flipping it, or just drafting a guy.
Jared Dunn
Registered User
Would like him in Montreal but imagine the Evans + Mailloux special isn't getting it done. I do think he could thrive under St. Louis though
I mean Clarke will be near or above 100 NHL GP at season's end and it probably wouldn't hurt to give Willander a year in the AHL unless he absolutely forces your hand so I feel like it would be manageable
VanillaCoke
Registered User
- Oct 30, 2013
- 27,412
- 14,493
Hronek-Brandt-Myers for now, with Willander climbing up the ladder, isn't a bad situation to be in though. RHD always fetch a premium, and trading one for a good winger later, as needed, isn't a bad plan to me either.
Plus after Myers game last night.....I think the Soucy treatment will do wonders for him, at least for a bit, to cool him off.
I agree that improving our D isn't quite as dire as earlier this season, with the additions of two Pettersson to the back end.
I'd prefer to keep Boeser long term, but he seems to have had it with all the BS on this team this year, as much as any of us, and our scoring by committee and random 3 point nights for plugs strategy is what Tocchet seems to prefer, rather than using the skill he inherited.
Uberpecker
Registered User
- Mar 3, 2011
- 3,783
- 1,973
Sabres would have to send an LHD the other way. Not sure if that's a need for L.A.
FSL KINGS
Registered User
- May 10, 2021
- 3,300
- 2,984
biturbo19
Registered User
- Jul 13, 2010
- 27,699
- 12,867
I don't really think we know what a year in the AHL will, or won't do for Willander at this point. It's perfectly normal for players, especially in that sort of vein, to jump straight from NCAA after a couple years, right to the NHL. That may or may not be the case with Willander...but i think that when you're moving big pieces like Boeser and acquiring guys like Clarke, you've gotta take a bit of a longer-term view of how you're allocating your assets to create a balanced team, with ideally not too much potential, eventual redundancy.
To me, this would be an offer i'd jump on if i'm LA. However, it also raises an intriguing quasi-3-way potential as well. I'd be interested in something like:
To COL: Brandt Clarke.
To LAK: Brock Boeser.
To VAN: Cal Ritchie+.
But i'm probably unusually high on Calum Ritchie. It'd also solve the problem for Vancouver of losing a top-end offensive forward without replacing them.
There would be ways to work around it...but ultimately, i'm just not sure that it makes the most sense to acquire a guy like Clarke with a big trade chip like Boeser, with the intention of probably ending up moving a guy down the road anyway. It's the sort of thing Buffalo have backed themselves into a weird corner with (only LHD) with Dahlin, Power, Byram. I'm sure especially with RHD, you could find a way to make it work...but it seems like something that just adds steps to the process that don't need to be there, and complicate the sort of deals you end up having available to yourself to get "full value" on guys.
I also think it's still worth wondering how much you'd be able to pump up Clarke's value in Vancouver anyway. Because again...he's not necessarily going to get prime offensive minutes and Top Unit PP time there either. So long as Hughes is there...and Hronek probably slots in ahead of him in a lot of ways for Tocchet/Foote as well. So you're trading for an offensive-minded D and powerplay guy...to play on your low minutes 2nd Unit at best, and maybe not even a fixture there over Hronek.
And i don't see Hronek going anywhere anytime soon. Myers has little real value and also isn't likely going anywhere until his deal is done. And Willander shouldn't be looked at as a trade chip either, as he projects as exactly the sort of defenceman the Canucks actually need to round out their blueline perfectly. More so than Clarke. So it'd end up being a weird prospective "flipping opportunity" with Clarke...where, i'd prefer to see them actually just skip that step and try to move Boeser for something that can backfill that loss up front, sooner rather than later.
