No one's supporting the trade by saying Jarmo is competent in general, or that Clarkson's a good player. We're saying the money couldn't have been recouped in any way except by trading the contract., and that the return would inevitably be another bad contract from a cap team. And you couldn't have spent the money elsewhere -- it was tied up in Horton's contract.
This.
I see people complain that Clarkson will take a lineup spot from someone more deserving, but CBJ is going to have a roster loaded with up-and-coming players - if they're better than Clarkson, then one would imagine that the coach would put DC up in the press box, where Horton was. Unless people are going to complain that Clarkson is taking a press-box spot from someone?
Explain how he would have value other than in exchange for a guy with a crappy contract like Clarkson? I think its like tweedle dee- tweedle dum(b). Got a guy who can play a bit and maybe we get lucky ( I mean we're due right?)and he captures lightning in a bottle one more time.
I disagree that the outcome would ever have been better unless Mike Milbury gets hired as a GM. I guess the other time it could be better if we need the cap space and could have put Horton on LTIR.
This would be the only concern, but do the Jackets project to be a team up against the Cap any time soon? By my accounts, their cap situation looks pretty good for at least the next two seasons - the only expiring contract that might prove worrisome is Anisimov. The rest of the expiring deals are RFA's who can't possibly demand that much of a pay raise.
It's a calculated risk and Jarmo/JD went for it - good on them. That's why a team like the Jackets needs executives like them, unless some of you would rather have management that sits on their hands and hopes that successful teams fall into their laps?