Proposal: Clarke MacArthur to Toronto

SpezDispenser

Registered User
Aug 15, 2007
27,572
7,142
With salary retention, we'll get more at the deadline

Based on deadline prices a player like MM would bring back a 2nd if he's retained (25-50%)
Take it or leave it.

toronto gets more if they retain salary

either a 2nd for michalek+something small

or

michalek for a 3rd+something


cant expect toronto to retain salary and get a minimal return

Wow, no thanks lol! I love MM9, but...yeah, those days are done where he's worth anything approaching a 2nd. I thought this would be a dump where Toronto shaves off half his contract and takes a 4th.

Forget I mentioned it!
 

Brock Radunske

안양종합운동장 빙상장
Aug 8, 2012
16,787
4,701
Wow, no thanks lol! I love MM9, but...yeah, those days are done where he's worth anything approaching a 2nd. I thought this would be a dump where Toronto shaves off half his contract and takes a 4th.

Forget I mentioned it!

What benefit would here be to dumping him with 2 months to go? He's a pending UFA, no?
 

4thline

Registered User
Jul 18, 2014
14,614
9,998
Waterloo
Wow, no thanks lol! I love MM9, but...yeah, those days are done where he's worth anything approaching a 2nd. I thought this would be a dump where Toronto shaves off half his contract and takes a 4th.

Forget I mentioned it!

Meh. A healthy Michalek is still quite possibly a 35-45 point veteran top 6 forward with size, at the deadline that's easily worth a 2nd+. That you guys couldn't afford to keep him and his inherent risk and upgrade your d at the same time doesn't make him a terrible hockey player. I don't think it makes sense to buy out of the game low when you're playing with the house's money. Ride it to the deadline, see what he is.

Plus iirc there's a rule a against retaining on a player and trading him back to the team you got him from, but im not sure if it's a calendar year or within the season
 

SpezDispenser

Registered User
Aug 15, 2007
27,572
7,142
Meh. A healthy Michalek is still quite possibly a 35-45 point veteran top 6 forward with size, at the deadline that's easily worth a 2nd+. That you guys couldn't afford to keep him and his inherent risk and upgrade your d at the same time doesn't make him a terrible hockey player. I don't think it makes sense to buy out of the game low when you're playing with the house's money. Ride it to the deadline, see what he is.

Plus iirc there's a rule a against retaining on a player and trading him back to the team you got him from, but im not sure if it's a calendar year or within the season

Yeah there might be a rule. I think it was less about not affording him and more about him not being worth 4 million a year anymore, hence my original thought of getting him back cheaper.

If you net a 2nd from mm at the deadline, that's fantastic for you, I don't begrudge him at all, great locker room guy.
 

4thline

Registered User
Jul 18, 2014
14,614
9,998
Waterloo
Yeah there might be a rule. I think it was less about not affording him and more about him not being worth 4 million a year anymore, hence my original thought of getting him back cheaper.

If you net a 2nd from mm at the deadline, that's fantastic for you, I don't begrudge him at all, great locker room guy.

I dunno imo healthy his per game impact is still that of a 4 million dollar player (prorated on 82 games). in just 45 games last year he scored enough to be in your top 6 wingers, ditto the year before in 66. But when you're playing with a shorter stack the benefit of having him in the lineup is balance by the drawback of having 4million dollars of that thin budget sitting on the sidelines, and that's a luxury that Melnyk can't afford. I firmly believe that if money was less of an issue and the Sens wanted to ice the best team they could last year and this MM would not have been included in that trade.

But that's beside the point. on the topic of CMac I can't see a situation that a deal makes sense. If he is insured the point is moot. If he's not the cost of dumping him is going to be exorbitant to say the least, likely more than the Sens can stomach. And that's without even going into the "what if he comes back." Be really ****** to lose a C. White or multiple 1st/2nd rounders to have the guy contribute to another team. He'd either have to be 100% confirmed done or have it set up as a pay by year type deal or something stupidly convoluted.
 

Xspyrit

DJ Dorion
Jun 29, 2008
31,779
10,665
Montreal, Canada
That's a really bad contract and Toronto doesn't have space on LTIR, so the return would have to be spectacular.

Robidas + Greening + 3rd round pick

for

MacArthur + Colin White/Thomas Chabot

I think Melnyk will just swallow the pill instead.

Nash for MacArthur, Chabot, and Ottawa's 1st 2017 or 2018 (their choice by end of season)

NO THANKS

Really ??? Were you around this off season when the Florida Panthers Traded David Boland and LAWSON CROUSE to the Coyotes for two draft picks ???

The Leafs would never be interested in attaining another overpaid player for 4 more years unless the offer was Fantastic.... which means a top prospect, sorry to burst your bubble !:shakehead

So what would the Leafs give up for MacArthur and Chabot?

Bolland (16.5) vs MacArthur (18.6)
Crouse vs Chabot
2nd + 3rd vs ???

I have Chabot as a better prospect than Crouse so I am expecting more than a 2nd + 3rd

And MacArthur is NOT overpaid, he is just unable to play (we're not even 100% sure yet)

Ignorant to the interworkings of the Sens, but itsnt the issue their own internal cap, not the salary cap?

I think the premise around moving C.Mac is that his salary is detrimental to the team, as they cant really afford to pay a guy 4.6 million a year to not play for them. This is if its an uninsured contract.

Don't you think they would rather have MacArthur on LTIR and have a 63.5 budget instead, rather than wasting a prime asset like Chabot or Brown? They're not up against the cap, they don't NEED to move MacArthur

This year, Ryan Dzingel makes 750 000$ and will probably play instead of MacArthur. No need to send Chabot to a rival.

Ottawa is a budget team that needs its top prospects and kids to remain competitive. Chances are we'll just sit Mac and hope he gets better, and that one of our kids can fill that spot on the roster.

That is the most reasonable outcome. Worst case scenario, MacA's contract is a sunk cost, like Greening was
 

Halla

Registered User
Jan 28, 2016
14,727
3,779
I think Melnyk will just swallow the pill instead.



NO THANKS



So what would the Leafs give up for MacArthur and Chabot?

Bolland (16.5) vs MacArthur (18.6)
Crouse vs Chabot
2nd + 3rd vs ???

I have Chabot as a better prospect than Crouse so I am expecting more than a 2nd + 3rd

And MacArthur is NOT overpaid, he is just unable to play (we're not even 100% sure yet)



Don't you think they would rather have MacArthur on LTIR and have a 63.5 budget instead, rather than wasting a prime asset like Chabot or Brown? They're not up against the cap, they don't NEED to move MacArthur

This year, Ryan Dzingel makes 750 000$ and will probably play instead of MacArthur. No need to send Chabot to a rival.



That is the most reasonable outcome. Worst case scenario, MacA's contract is a sunk cost, like Greening was

comparing Greenings 5.3 remaining over 2 years to MaCarthurs 18.4 over 4?

IF Ottawa wants to move that contract, they know what the cost will be. If they dont wanna move a prospect, they eat the 18 million +. a lot of money for a team with an internal budget, a team that nickels and dimes its players
 

A1LeafNation

Good, is simply not good enough!
Oct 17, 2010
27,832
17,985
Take Robias Lupul Michalek Cowen Greening Laich Horton and we'll take MacArthur.
 

TML1967

Registered User
Jul 20, 2010
2,983
625
I think Melnyk will just swallow the pill instead.



NO THANKS



So what would the Leafs give up for MacArthur and Chabot?

Bolland (16.5) vs MacArthur (18.6)
Crouse vs Chabot
2nd + 3rd vs ???

I have Chabot as a better prospect than Crouse so I am expecting more than a 2nd + 3rd

And MacArthur is NOT overpaid, he is just unable to play (we're not even 100% sure yet)

Think the premise is Leafs give up a Lupul contract, maybe Hunwick (rumor being Ottawa wants a bottom pairing D man) (both insured) and with the addition being a second round pick.

Lupul seems the more likely of the two to play again, so you may get some serviceable 3rd line minutes out of him. If not, he stays on the IR and costs no real money.
 

Field of Dreams

Registered User
Oct 10, 2011
1,745
995
Port Credit
Seeing as he signed for us from Toronto...

And this is a panic thread.

It all points to Stupidity. :facepalm:

You're also missing the point.
It will be difficult to be competitive with effectively a 63m dollar team.
This is a real issue.
In Toronto this contract would not be an issue.
 

Xspyrit

DJ Dorion
Jun 29, 2008
31,779
10,665
Montreal, Canada
No interest. Id rather Ottawa be handcuffed then deal with that contract long term

Ottawa is NOT handcuffed. Don't you guys understand how it works by now? You are only "handcuffed" when you are up against the cap and Ottawa hasn't been even close to be a Cap team in more than a decade...

What is surprising is that you are a global moderator and you say this... Maybe you just didn't think before posting. You sir deserve a mulligan

Based on deadline prices a player like MM would bring back a 2nd if he's retained (25-50%)
Take it or leave it.

We love Michalek but we'll leave it as we could still sign decent UFA players for 0 asset and less money

This is the kind of deal I was referring to a few pages ago. If the Sens need to pay either way, might as well get someone who can play!

Having Brown play 3rd/4th line minutes saves you (cash wise) the cost of finding another 3/4th line W (2ish million?) So you save 2 million in real cash, which is big for the Sens/any hard money cap team.

Dont think its worth much more than the 1 for 1, but could see LA retaining a bit of salary. At 1.2 retained, Brown gets paid the same as Mac. Cap wise, LA still has 4.65 million to spend on a replacement 3W, who should be a decent bit better than Brown. Could be a win-win.
Clarke MacArthur 4x$4,650,000
Dustin Brown 6x$5,875,000

That could be a solution but the problem is Brown has 6 years left vs 4 years for MacArthur. Works for the first 4 years, then becomes a burden the last 2

If MacArthur was the Sens only hope to be in contention. :help: :help: :help:

The post you quoted was from a Leafs fan. MacArthur doesn't make or break the Senators but if he was back to form, he would have been the Sens 6th best forward which is excellent depth (51 pts pace per 82 games the last 2 seasons he played). Losing him kills a bit of depth but the Sens have a guy named Ryan Dzingel who looks primed to do a very good job, so in the end it might not matter at all. There's also Nick Paul and Matt Puempel that could compete with him, as well as other very talented younger guys (but not ready). I think Dzingel runs away with it, he really makes me think about Carl Hagelin.

I dunno imo healthy his per game impact is still that of a 4 million dollar player (prorated on 82 games). in just 45 games last year he scored enough to be in your top 6 wingers, ditto the year before in 66. But when you're playing with a shorter stack the benefit of having him in the lineup is balance by the drawback of having 4million dollars of that thin budget sitting on the sidelines, and that's a luxury that Melnyk can't afford. I firmly believe that if money was less of an issue and the Sens wanted to ice the best team they could last year and this MM would not have been included in that trade.

What? He scored 16 pts last season... Stone (61), Hoffman (59), Ryan (56), Smith (36), Lazar (20) all outscored him. Would have been 3rd line RW on the Sens

The year prior, Stone (64), Ryan (54), Hoffman (48), MacArthur (36) all outscored him (34). He was on the 3rd line until injuries hit the team again.

You're right, respecting the budget is the reason why Michalek was included in the trade. The team would have been happy to have him. He is nice depth and well respected in the room, great work ethic too. But it was A LOT more important to acquire Phaneuf.

comparing Greenings 5.3 remaining over 2 years to MaCarthurs 18.4 over 4?

Comparing? What am I comparing lol? I just said that MacArthur could just be seen as a sunk cost, just like Greening was after they realized that he was not going to live up to his new contract.

Need more explications? Greening's extension kicked in by the start of 2014-15 season. He only played 26 games that year but was already a sunk cost burried in the AHL. The total amount for the whole contract owed to Colin was $7,950,000


Take Robias Lupul Michalek Cowen Greening Laich Horton and we'll take MacArthur.

:laugh: My Gawd, luckily the Leafs are a rich franchise... How can you manage to have so many bad contracts?:popcorn:

If they didn't have all that money to play with, they could be even worse than they have been the last decade, if that's even possible.

Think the premise is Leafs give up a Lupul contract, maybe Hunwick (rumor being Ottawa wants a bottom pairing D man) (both insured) and with the addition being a second round pick.

Lupul seems the more likely of the two to play again, so you may get some serviceable 3rd line minutes out of him. If not, he stays on the IR and costs no real money.

So, Lupul + Hunwick + 2nd for MacArthur + Chabot/Brown ?

This sounds a lot more reasonable that other crap I have read in this thread. I really don't think the Sens would do it but at least you're onto something.
 
Last edited:

Price is Wright

Registered User
Feb 5, 2010
12,520
5,658
essex
I could see a MacArthur/Bozak swap to be honest. Of course more would have to be added on Ottawa's side but it clears out a guy with little trade value with two more years on his deal and gives Toronto a chance to play someone else in the top nine.
 

4thline

Registered User
Jul 18, 2014
14,614
9,998
Waterloo
I could see a MacArthur/Bozak swap to be honest. Of course more would have to be added on Ottawa's side but it clears out a guy with little trade value with two more years on his deal and gives Toronto a chance to play someone else in the top nine.

It's no longer summer 2015, a year under Babcock as an effective 2/3C goes a long way to changing player from a "a guy with little trade value that needs to be cleared out" to a a veteran asset on a fair deal.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad