Ryane Clowe

[Off Sides]

Clowe 40 games, 19 points, prorates to 38.95 points over 82 games.

Rangers should offer him a contract based on him scoring about 38-39 points for them next year and declining every year from that point. That is his production trend, like it or not.

 

[JD123]

Clowe 40 games, 19 points, prorates to 38.95 points over 82 games.

Rangers should offer him a contract based on him scoring about 38-39 points for them next year and declining every year from that point. That is his production trend, like it or not.

Have to agree. I know it was a small sample size but don't think he is a 4-5 million per year player especially with the cap coming down next year and other guys we have to sign down the line. Don't get me wrong it would have been awesome to have him in from the start in these playoffs because he has the type of size that could be useful in playoffs.

 

[Off Sides]

I think the Rangers need a player like Clowe. Overpaying for a player like Clowe, whether he is Clowe or someone else will never make sense to me. If it works out well, at best he may meet expectations. That is just odd reasoning to make a signing in my opinion. I'd prefer they signed, traded for, or developed players that had a decent chance of exceeding the expectations put on them by the contract they carry.

 

[Kershaw]

I think the Rangers need a player like Clowe. Overpaying for a player like Clowe, whether he is Clowe or someone else will never make sense to me. If it works out well, at best he may meet expectations. That is just odd reasoning to make a signing in my opinion. I'd prefer they signed, traded for, or developed players that had a decent chance of exceeding the expectations put on them by the contract they carry.

Sign Clarkson then if you want these 'character guys'.

Save the draft pick and get the better player.

 

[Richter Scale]

Sign Clarkson then if you want these 'character guys'.

Save the draft pick and get the better player.

Please give me substantive reasons why Clarkson will be better than Clowe in virtually any respect if he were to come to the Rangers. He is overrated based on one recent breakout season. People on here like to complain about how this organization and its fans do not look at the long term / gets obsessed with the new shiny object. Thinking Clarkson is a good signing is the epitome of that kind of thinking. If Sather signs him, I will barf.

 

[Green Blob*]

Clowe 40 games, 19 points, prorates to 38.95 points over 82 games.

Rangers should offer him a contract based on him scoring about 38-39 points for them next year and declining every year from that point. That is his production trend, like it or not.

Really? So hes on the decline as your saying (and we ALL can tell he is) so he got possibly 39 points in 82 games this year, so next year with that decline we can expect 32-35 points, the year after less.

And he wants 4M-5M?

Really man?

Unless he is willing to take 2M get him the hell off this team.

 

[Green Blob*]

Please give me substantive reasons why Clarkson will be better than Clowe in virtually any respect if he were to come to the Rangers. He is overrated based on one recent breakout season. People on here like to complain about how this organization and its fans do not look at the long term / gets obsessed with the new shiny object. Thinking Clarkson is a good signing is the epitome of that kind of thinking. If Sather signs him, I will barf.

I would take Clarkson 100x over a DECLINING Clowe.

Clowe is so damn overrated for being "tough" its not even funny. The guy can barely keep up in the NHL anymore.

And really? Your talking about "long term" and "new shiny object" But preach a washed up clow? Really??

 

[The Gloaming]

Devils fans CONSTANTLY talk about how bad Clarkson's hockey IQ is.

Why do we want to sign him? Because he had one good year where all of his deflections seemed to go in? Let's sign Carter, Bernier, Gionta while we're at it.

 

[trilobyte]

I think Ryane Clowe is a big plus for the team, and I hope he can get back soon.

Edit: Never mind the upcoming contract negotiations. The guy still provides some solid work. Quit throwing him under the bus already, he didn't do anything to you.

 

[Green Blob*]

I think Ryane Clowe is a big plus for the team, and I hope he can get back soon.

Edit: Never mind the upcoming contract negotiations. The guy still provides some solid work. Quit throwing him under the bus already, he didn't do anything to you.

So you would give a 4M a year for 4 years or whatever crazy thing he wants?

 

[Richter Scale]

I would take Clarkson 100x over a DECLINING Clowe.

Clowe is so damn overrated for being "tough" its not even funny. The guy can barely keep up in the NHL anymore.

And really? Your talking about "long term" and "new shiny object" But preach a washed up clow? Really??

1. I'm not convinced Clowe is washed up. I don't see him returning to 60-65 pt form. But even if Clowe is a 40-45 pt player, I'm happy with what he brings in his overall game. Clarkson brings very little beyond physicality and his recent breakout season in terms of points. I am not confident that he will replicate a ~45 pt season again.

2. I'm not overrating Clowe because his is physical. Clarkson and him are probably about even in this regard.

3. Even in his worst full season, Clowe was better than Clarkson in virtually every aspect of the game, including points pace. This also happened to be Clarkson's best season, his peak.

4. Clowe creates more offense than Clarkson could ever dream of making. Clarkson's hockey IQ and playmaking skills pale in comparison to Clowe's.

5. Clarkson's recent point totals in his one breakout season were vastly inflated by a big increase in PP time with the Devils and having a significantly higher shooting % than he has ever had in his career. More than one third of his production came from PP pts. Clarkson got more than a minute more avg PP time per game than Clowe and still got less total points (yes, goals are goals - but are we really going to make this mistake again? Gomez's production was inflated by garbage goals on NJ's PP too...). Clowe has only ever in his career hovered around 1/5 of his pts coming on the PP.

6. Clarkson is just 6 months younger than Clowe and plays a very similar game in terms of physicality. And you're really going to make the argument that he is in that much less danger of declining?

7. Clarkson has been a mediocre third liner throughout his entire career. Clowe has been much more in the past and has a much higher ceiling. Whether he can live up to that going forward is certainly up for debate. But at his worst, he will be a solid third liner. Right now, he has been a very solid 2nd liner for the Rangers before getting injured.

Maybe you should learn about the respective players - or you know, watch more than a few games in which they played - before acting like you have a clue. The major bullet point in there is #5. This is not subjective.

Pretty much the same **** said another way in a different thread:

Italics added by me for context. Is this a joke? You can't be serious... Clarkson has been a mediocre third liner his entire career - he had one breakout season just last year which by all indications was an abberration, and everyone has been gushing about him since. That this is even a debate is absurd.

Clarkson's production last year was inflated by getting big PP time compared to past years and having a significantly higher shooting % than he has ever had. More than one third of his production came from PP pts. He was the king of garbage goals last year (yes, goals are goals - but are we really going to make this mistake again? Gomez's production was inflated by garbage goals on NJ's PP too...). In Clarkson's best year, he only barely kept pace with Clowe's worst year. And on top of all of that, he does not have the vision or playmaking skills that Clowe does. In terms of physicality they're probably pretty even. You can't even say that he is significantly younger -- he is just 6 months younger. What a joke.

 

[trilobyte]

So you would give a 4M a year for 4 years or whatever crazy thing he wants?

Actually, I have already stated that I would no do more than 3.5 per, on a 3 year contract, but of course, I think we want to see his playoff contributions. That's another reason that I hope he is okay, along with wanting him to personally get better (simple human goodness) and to help the team.

I'm not looking that far. I am looking at what he could conceivably do for the team starting Thursday. My view is that he will be missed.

 

[Richter Scale]

So you would give a 4M a year for 4 years or whatever crazy thing he wants?

The rumors are actually that he wants a hell of a lot more than that - somewhere in the range of $5 to $6 mil per year. And in that regard, I would agree with you - he is crazy.

I do not, however, think that $4 mil per year is that crazy for Clowe. Both he and Clarkson will be seeking at least that much. And I'm pretty confident they will both get it, despite the fact that Clarkson is supremely overrated by comparison.

 

[HatTrick Swayze]

Clowe and Clarkson aren't even in the same planet when on their games.

I live with 2 Devil fans. I am forced to watch a lot of Devils games. Clarkson couldn't even dream of connecting on the kind of passes Clowe makes from the half boards regularly, let alone having the vision to see the lane open up.

The only reason why Clarkson sniffs 30 goals is because he gets 3000 whacks at it. He is one of the all around dumbest hockey players I have seen relative to his statistics.

He would be a typical ex-Devil signing. Just a disaster. Oh and he's also not even as good of a fighter if that factors in. Don't get me wrong, for all the things I like about Clowe there are some major red flags. But to say Clarkson is comparable is extremely inaccurate, borderline laughable.

 

[Off Sides]

Really? So hes on the decline as your saying (and we ALL can tell he is) so he got possibly 39 points in 82 games this year, so next year with that decline we can expect 32-35 points, the year after less.

And he wants 4M-5M?

Really man?

Unless he is willing to take 2M get him the hell off this team.

With the Rangers cap construction, 2014-15 is a big year. Lundqvist, Callahan, Girardi, Del Zotto, Moore, Kreider, Brassard, Biron, Boyle, Pyatt, Asham will all need to be resigned or replaced. Add those contracts or their replacements in with what will have to be signed this summer and it's a ton of contracts.

Having Clowe taking up 4M(which is his current salary) or more in cap space at that time just seems like a bad idea to me. Lots can change between now and then, who knows what the cap will be, injuries, prospects, etc, but I think they should err on the side of caution. If they want to give Clowe a little more per year to make his contract end in two season so they can reevaluate everything then, I think that is a much better idea as long as they can still resign their RFA youth this summer.

 

[Dagoon44]

Please give me substantive reasons why Clarkson will be better than Clowe in virtually any respect if he were to come to the Rangers. He is overrated based on one recent breakout season. People on here like to complain about how this organization and its fans do not look at the long term / gets obsessed with the new shiny object. Thinking Clarkson is a good signing is the epitome of that kind of thinking. If Sather signs him, I will barf.

Clarkson is younger better and scores more. please with the breakout season non sense..he has continued to grow each season over the last 4 yrs he is what this team needs. Clowe is a great guy on this team but if his demands are what was printed he is out of his mind

 

[Nyrfan25]

Clarkson is younger better and scores more. please with the breakout season non sense..he has continued to grow each season over the last 4 yrs he is what this team needs. Clowe is a great guy on this team but if his demands are what was printed he is out of his mind

Clowe
30 years old
435 gp 104 g 175 a 279 pts

Clarkson
29 years old
426 gp 97 g 73 a 170 pts

They are relatively the same age and Clowe scores MORE.
Now Clowe is not worth what he has been asking and neither are worth long term risks.

 

[SingnBluesOnBroadway]

Clowe
30 years old
435 gp 104 g 175 a 279 pts

Clarkson
29 years old
426 gp 97 g 73 a 170 pts

They are relatively the same age and Clowe scores MORE.
Now Clowe is not worth what he has been asking and neither are worth long term risks.

Not in the last two seasons.

 

[Bleed Ranger Blue]

Clowe
30 years old
435 gp 104 g 175 a 279 pts

Clarkson
29 years old
426 gp 97 g 73 a 170 pts

They are relatively the same age and Clowe scores MORE.
Now Clowe is not worth what he has been asking and neither are worth long term risks.

Not sure where this comparison came from. I'd stay away from both, to be honest.

Its been a long, long, long time since the Rangers developed a guy capable of gritty play with a scoring touch. But whats even worse is bringing in these guys on the wrong side of 30. I'd rather do nothing.

 

[Nyrfan25]

Not in the last two seasons.

You're correct Clarkson had 30 goals and 16 assists last year for 46 pts in 80 games.
Clowe had 17 goals and 28 assists for 45 pts in 76 games.

This year is also a huge difference.

Clarkson had 48 games 15 goals and 9 assists for 24 pts.
While Clowe only had 40 games 3 goals and 16 assists for 19 pts.

 

[Nyrfan25]

Not sure where this comparison came from. I'd stay away from both, to be honest.

Its been a long, long, long time since the Rangers developed a guy capable of gritty play with a scoring touch. But whats even worse is bringing in these guys on the wrong side of 30. I'd rather do nothing.

The comparison came from directly above and i agree with the rest of your post.

 

[Bleed Ranger Blue]

Clowe
30 years old
435 gp 104 g 175 a 279 pts

Clarkson
29 years old
426 gp 97 g 73 a 170 pts

They are relatively the same age and Clowe scores MORE.
Now Clowe is not worth what he has been asking and neither are worth long term risks.

Interesting.

Despite playing nearly the same amount of games, I just get the impression that Clowe has much more mileage on him.

 

[NYR Viper]

Interesting.

Despite playing nearly the same amount of games, I just get the impression that Clowe has much more mileage on him.

I believe it is his skating. Clarkson is a glorified grinder and has the speed to get in on the forecheck. Clowe is a tough skilled player. Clowe plays the game as a more physical Jagr with the way he controls the boards using his size and reach (not comparing skills or speed, just board play).

 

[Bleed Ranger Blue]

I believe it is his skating. Clarkson is a glorified grinder and has the speed to get in on the forecheck. Clowe is a tough skilled player. Clowe plays the game as a more physical Jagr with the way he controls the boards using his size and reach (not comparing skills or speed, just board play).

You're giving Clowe's skill level an awful lot of credence by putting him in the same sentence as Jagr, even if you arent directly comparing their skills.

I dont think its so much the skating. I think its that injuries are used as an excuse for his lack of production over the past year or two, and I also think its because guys without a lot of mileage on them dont usually get knocked silly by skating into an elbow pad.

 

[NYR Viper]

You're giving Clowe's skill level an awful lot of credence by putting him in the same sentence as Jagr, even if you arent directly comparing their skills.

I dont think its so much the skating. I think its that injuries are used as an excuse for his lack of production over the past year or two, and I also think its because guys without a lot of mileage on them dont usually get knocked silly by skating into an elbow pad.

He plays that same style. Control the puck along the boards utilizing his body and then dish the puck off. I think you know I did not mean to compare the two players.

If you don't realize it's coming, a small tap can cause a concussion. Look at Crosby.