Confirmed with Link: Nathan Horton to Toronto for David Clarkson

[CBJWerenski8]

Buying him out is simply not going to happen. We're going to have him for 5 years after this one. There's no getting around that. We have to deal with it.


But can we at least see him play ourselves before judging his play? please?

 

[We Want Ten]

Buying him out is simply not going to happen. We're going to have him for 5 years after this one. There's no getting around that. We have to deal with it.


But can we at least see him play ourselves before judging his play? please?

Dudes not a rookie, he has an extensive resume. Players tend not to get better as they age, or when they come here, so...

 

[CBJWerenski8]

Dudes not a rookie, he has an extensive resume. Players tend not to get better as they age, or when they come here, so...

Vinny Prospal revived his career here. Why can't Clarkson?

No, I'm not trying to be the Clarkson apologist. But jesus christ. How many of us here have actually watched him play more than 5 games the past two seasons? I haven't. And Leafs fans views are partially blind because they hated the dude from the minute the ink dried.

 

[Kev22]

I'd concede the point except for the fact we already have heard rumblings that Mike Priest forced Howson's hand on Carter. No reason to believe he couldn't have done the same on Horton. What would JD and JK do at that point? Resign?

I have to imagine that the Carter situation is part of the reason JD is here. At least that's how I perceived that type of move. If there isn't the division between hockey and business as presented, and Priest is involved in these decisions, then I absolutely agree with you that Priest is 100% to blame. It would make me question ownership a bit. There's probably a lot to this story that we'll never know.

 

[CapnCornelius]

Oh boy, I've been researching the insurance issue and it gets worse if this article is accurate.

http://www.sportsbusinessdaily.com/...-Covers-Player-Contracts-For-Seven-Years.aspx

As part of the plan, which the NHL purchases through New York-based insurance broker BWD Group, NHL teams are "required to insure a handful of players through a 'temporary total disability' program administered by the league." Each team "pays a premium based on the salaries of its five highest-paid players, but is free to allocate that coverage how it wishes." "... insuring a player under the league program 'costs about 5[%] of his salary.' [Per Bill Daily]

So, let's make this clear, the Jackets were already paying for insurance because the league requires them to pay the premium. The league does this so that they can keep the insurance facility in place for the benefit of all teams--otherwise the insurance company doesn't have as much incentive to make the insurance available if teams are only going to pick and choose when they want to use the insurance facility and cherry pick.

So, it was a sunk cost for the Jackets to pay the premium. What they then appear to have done was allocate the insurance not to Horton, but to another player based on their assessment that the odds of being able to claim on Horton FOR THAT YEAR was slim since he'd be out already for a good bit of the season with the shoulder injury--hard to miss 30 games on an insured claim if you may be out 40 games or more with an uninsured claim.

This was incredibly short-sighted and stupid.

 

[blahblah]

Dudes not a rookie, he has an extensive resume. Players tend not to get better as they age, or when they come here, so...

Nick Foligno, Mark Lestetu, Kevin Connauton

 

[XLJ]

Horton has always been injury prone. It is mind boggling how his big money contract wasn't insured

Clarkson is a dumb player. Also, he is redundant on this team. Much rather have gone after someone like Semin if you are going to trade for a bad contract.

 

[Kev22]

Based on everything I've read about Clarkson, the expectations on him can't be any lower. As long as he can lace his skates and move forward on the ice, he should be exceeding expectations. Seems like he's a Hartnell style of player to me.

 

[blahblah]

So, let's make this clear, the Jackets were already paying for insurance because the league requires them to pay the premium. The league does this so that they can keep the insurance facility in place for the benefit of all teams--otherwise the insurance company doesn't have as much incentive to make the insurance available if teams are only going to pick and choose when they want to use the insurance facility and cherry pick.

So, it was a sunk cost for the Jackets to pay the premium. What they then appear to have done was allocate the insurance not to Horton, but to another player based on their assessment that the odds of being able to claim on Horton FOR THAT YEAR was slim since he'd be out already for a good bit of the season with the shoulder injury--hard to miss 30 games on an insured claim if you may be out 40 games or more with an uninsured claim.

This was incredibly short-sighted and stupid.

Yeah, the covered Tyutin, Wiz, JJ, and then a couple of forwards. The forwards would have had a much shorter term (Foligno and Dubinsky just got covered). My guess Dubinsky and RJU.

So the were betting that Horton wouldn't end up with a career ending injury. As I said before I would make sure my biggest contracts are covered - not the biggest contract for that season.

Nice research. I'm not sure who is responsible for these decisions; it might be moved down the line. JD and JK may not have known. Someone should have their ass handed to them.

 

[Kev22]

Yeah, the covered Tyutin, Wiz, JJ, and then a couple of forwards. The forwards would have had a much shorter term (Foligno and Dubinsky just got covered). My guess Dubinsky and RJU.

So the were betting that Horton wouldn't end up with a career ending injury. As I said before I would make sure my biggest contracts are covered - not the biggest contract for that season.

Nice research. I'm not sure who is responsible for these decisions; it might be moved down the line. JD and JK may not have known. Someone should have their ass handed to them.

I've been calling it a calculated risk, but it's all betting. Obviously, his back was not even a concern at the time that made them decline the insurance. I'm just glad my money isn't involved in this. I'll agree that there might be a head roll for this one.

 

[DarkandStormy]

Oh boy, I've been researching the insurance issue and it gets worse if this article is accurate.

http://www.sportsbusinessdaily.com/...-Covers-Player-Contracts-For-Seven-Years.aspx



So, let's make this clear, the Jackets were already paying for insurance because the league requires them to pay the premium. The league does this so that they can keep the insurance facility in place for the benefit of all teams--otherwise the insurance company doesn't have as much incentive to make the insurance available if teams are only going to pick and choose when they want to use the insurance facility and cherry pick.

So, it was a sunk cost for the Jackets to pay the premium. What they then appear to have done was allocate the insurance not to Horton, but to another player based on their assessment that the odds of being able to claim on Horton FOR THAT YEAR was slim since he'd be out already for a good bit of the season with the shoulder injury--hard to miss 30 games on an insured claim if you may be out 40 games or more with an uninsured claim.

This was incredibly short-sighted and stupid.

Couldn't insure Horton in year 1 because shoulder was "pre-existing." Couldn't get insurance in year 2 because he came into the season with the bad back.

Poor planning and a gamble, but also terrible timing with Horton's injuries.

 

[Kev22]

Am I going to spend the next five years watching the Jackets sit in the basement? Go to home games with 12,000 people?

Did I miss something? The roster change is that we brought in a player that has use and sent out a player that will never play again. The core of the roster is still intact. If Monday comes and the core is gone, fine, I'll make the jump with you, but this is hysterical type thinking here.

 

[Cyclones Rock]

Oh boy, I've been researching the insurance issue and it gets worse if this article is accurate.

http://www.sportsbusinessdaily.com/...-Covers-Player-Contracts-For-Seven-Years.aspx



So, let's make this clear, the Jackets were already paying for insurance because the league requires them to pay the premium. The league does this so that they can keep the insurance facility in place for the benefit of all teams--otherwise the insurance company doesn't have as much incentive to make the insurance available if teams are only going to pick and choose when they want to use the insurance facility and cherry pick.

So, it was a sunk cost for the Jackets to pay the premium. What they then appear to have done was allocate the insurance not to Horton, but to another player based on their assessment that the odds of being able to claim on Horton FOR THAT YEAR was slim since he'd be out already for a good bit of the season with the shoulder injury--hard to miss 30 games on an insured claim if you may be out 40 games or more with an uninsured claim.

This was incredibly short-sighted and stupid.

Wow.

Just wow.

The Certifiably Buffoonish Jokers management team.

Whoever made the call on this needs to go away. Now.

 

[Dednimnepo]

Yeah, the covered Tyutin, Wiz, JJ, and then a couple of forwards. The forwards would have had a much shorter term (Foligno and Dubinsky just got covered). My guess Dubinsky and RJU.

So the were betting that Horton wouldn't end up with a career ending injury. As I said before I would make sure my biggest contracts are covered - not the biggest contract for that season.

Nice research. I'm not sure who is responsible for these decisions; it might be moved down the line. JD and JK may not have known. Someone should have their ass handed to them.

The PV loss due to short term risk was most likely greater than from the long term risk. Seems they guessed right through the season.

You guys have any statistics on the percentage of guys that ended their careers early due to injury where the injury occurs during the off season?

A reasonable business risk and most likely the best business decision bit the CBJ in the ass, it happens. My guess is if Horton passes his physical and plays in the preseason then blows his back we wouldn't be having this conversation about insurance.

The worst aspect of the Clarkson deal is that it means Horton's career is almost assuredly over. I see the Clarkson deal as picking up a player for the difference in the contracts which looks like a good decision to me.

 

[CapnCornelius]

Did I miss something? The roster change is that we brought in a player that has use and sent out a player that will never play again. The core of the roster is still intact. If Monday comes and the core is gone, fine, I'll make the jump with you, but this is hysterical type thinking here.

Has some use is a charitable way to put that he's Jason Chimera 2.0.

We have about $10 million locked up in the following players--Clarkson, Boll and Anisimov. They are bottom 6 players--no offense to Arty, but he's not going to be any more than that with who our other options are at center. On a budget team, spending $10 million on bottom 6 players is a recipe for disaster. When you do that and spend $4.5 million on a bottom pairing defenseman (Tyutin), you are asking for problems.

And those problems are manifesting themselves. To save money, the Jackets are looking to ship off one of their most productive defenseman on a defense that isn't that great to begin with. They are also likely to deal Cam Atkinson, a more productive player than Clarkson who would have likely cost us considerably less money and is still an RFA. Are they likely to replace those players with more talented players or less expensive players given their budget situation?

We can sugar coat the fact that something is better than nothing, but that isn't always the case either. Clarkson had a net negative impact on his teammates' on-ice performance. If that trend continues in Columbus, not playing him would be addition by subtraction.

And what of players like Rychel, Dano, Bjorkstrand, etc? With Clarkson on the team being paid what he's being paid will their be pressure to play him even if sitting him in the press box and letting one of the young players play is the best chance to win?

The moment the team didn't insure Horton, the die was cast. Now we have to simply hope for the least bad outcome.

 

[niflheim]

The Moor has done his duty, the Moor can go.
I wish good luck to David, hope he flourishes and feeling/ playing good here ( like Hartnell). At least we have TOP 9 RW now and two veterans Hartnell and Clarkson. This season wasn't good for us but as result we have open discussion about franchise intrinsic problems that come from unexpirience, here yet much job to do! Carry the Flag!

 

[CapnCornelius]

The PV loss due to short term risk was most likely greater than from the long term risk. Seems they guessed right through the season.

You guys have any statistics on the percentage of guys that ended their careers early due to injury where the injury occurs during the off season?

A reasonable business risk and most likely the best business decision bit the CBJ in the ass, it happens. My guess is if Horton passes his physical and plays in the preseason then blows his back we wouldn't be having this conversation about insurance.

The worst aspect of the Clarkson deal is that it means Horton's career is almost assuredly over. I see the Clarkson deal as picking up a player for the difference in the contracts which looks like a good decision to me.

Reasonable Business Risk? Show me the numbers to back such a case up.

Looking at the roster/salaries for that season, the long-term exposure from Horton is one of the greatest on the team. You can immediately discount the bottom 6/bottom pairing guys making minimal dollars and/or with minimal term as contracts you'd want to insure for the premiums paid--Skille, Tropp, Calvert, Comeau, DMac, Letestu, Prout, Savard, Nikitin--makes no sense to insure them. Then there were players like Johansen, Jenner, Atkinson and Murray on reasonable deals who also made no sense to insure.

Wisniewski, Tyutin and Johnson leap off the page as guys that you have to insure because of dollars and, more importantly, term.

The only forward other than Horton that really made any sense to insure was Umberger who had 4 years left at the start of the season at $4.5 million.

That leaves you with Bobrovsky and Horton. They could have insured both since they could insure up to 7 players (unclear to me if supplemental premiums get paid over 5 players). Bobrovsky only had a two year deal. Horton had 7 years.

Go look at the numbers. Show me where there is any reasonable business case to allocate the insurance to someone other than Horton when you factor in his salary and term.

http://stats.nhlnumbers.com/teams/CLB?year=2014

 

[KJ Dangler]

http://m.espn.go.com/nhl/story?stor...top&rand=ref~{"ref":"http://t.co/Cz6I9uPzRQ"}


Scouting the GM: Kekalainen's two-year anniversary as general manager of the Blue Jackets was this month, and he already has established himself as a fearless front-office leader. He traded for Marian Gaborik and later dealt him to the Kings. He made the fantastic Scott Hartnell trade with the Philadelphia Flyers when it looked like R.J. Umberger was unmovable. And he orchestrated the Horton-for-Clarkson swap, getting a player who can help the team instead of paying an injured player.

The Blue Jackets kicked around the idea of a similar deal for Mike Richards, although that never got past the conceptual phase. That's the kind of creative thinking that makes Kekalainen a general manager to watch as the deadline closes in.

 

[CapnCornelius]

http://m.espn.go.com/nhl/story?stor...top&rand=ref~{"ref":"http://t.co/Cz6I9uPzRQ"}


Scouting the GM: Kekalainen's two-year anniversary as general manager of the Blue Jackets was this month, and he already has established himself as a fearless front-office leader. He traded for Marian Gaborik and later dealt him to the Kings. He made the fantastic Scott Hartnell trade with the Philadelphia Flyers when it looked like R.J. Umberger was unmovable. And he orchestrated the Horton-for-Clarkson swap, getting a player who can help the team instead of paying an injured player.

The Blue Jackets kicked around the idea of a similar deal for Mike Richards, although that never got past the conceptual phase. That's the kind of creative thinking that makes Kekalainen a general manager to watch as the deadline closes in.

This is a head scratcher. We're praising a guy for making the mistake of acquiring a player that didn't fit the identity of the team and then trading him away for peanuts shortly thereafter? That's "fearless"? Was anyone praising Scott Howson and saying he was fearless for doing that with Jeff Carter? I believe the conventional wisdom was that it was a desperate move.

We're also praising him for making a desperation trade of a player that he failed to insure.



Listen, I see the good and bad with this GM. This sounds like it was written by Jarmo's agent.

 

[We Want Ten]

Nick Foligno, Mark Lestetu, Kevin Connauton

First of all, I said "tend to" which means not always.

Secondly, Clarkson is not an unknown. The only question is will we get Maple Leaf Clarkson or Devil Clarkson? Neither of which is great and neither of which this team should have been saddled with.

Hes not gonna blossom and hit his prime like Letestu or Foligno did, thats for sure.

 

[We Want Ten]

This is a head scratcher. We're praising a guy for making the mistake of acquiring a player that didn't fit the identity of the team and then trading him away for peanuts shortly thereafter? That's "fearless"? Was anyone praising Scott Howson and saying he was fearless for doing that with Jeff Carter? I believe the conventional wisdom was that it was a desperate move.

We're also praising him for making a desperation trade of a player that he failed to insure.



Listen, I see the good and bad with this GM. This sounds like it was written by Jarmo's agent.

Its like getting a purple heart for shooting yourself in the foot.

 

[CapnCornelius]

Couldn't insure Horton in year 1 because shoulder was "pre-existing." Couldn't get insurance in year 2 because he came into the season with the bad back.

Poor planning and a gamble, but also terrible timing with Horton's injuries.

Again, they could insure everything EXCEPT his shoulder...which is not the injury which presently sidelines him. Had they done so in year 1, the back injury would now be covered.

 

[niflheim]

@
CapnCornelius
It's clear as day



You can take one insurance and you have for ex. Modigliani picture and GE washer

What thing You insure? Our FO prefers washers

 

[CapnCornelius]

@
CapnCornelius
It's clear as day



You can take one insurance and you have for ex. Modigliani picture and GE washer

What thing You insure? Our FO prefers washers

What is "FO"?

 

[We Want Ten]

front office