David Clarkson - Signs with Maple Leafs

[bustaheims]

It's actually a smart play we'll probably see more of. Especially across multiple players on a team in the future. It allows you to make some wiggle room by pushing bous money into the next year as a penalty if you needed that extra little bit for a trade at the deadline... or a player comes back early from an injury. It's definitely something I'm happy the leafs did.

So to simplify it's good because you can pay the bonus money that went over the cap the next year if you have problems.

It allows none of these things. Only performance bonuses can be used to exceed the cap and carry the hit into next season. Signing bonuses count in full for the season in which they're paid out.

 

[maplesyrup]

Can't remember where I heard it but when we traded Ken Klee to NJ, we had a choice of Clarkson or Suglobov as the return. - Myth, fact, I don't know but an interesting tid-bit nonetheless.... Maybe someone else heard that too?   

 

[Deebo]

Can't remember where I heard it but when we traded Ken Klee to NJ, we had a choice of Clarkson or Suglobov as the return. - Myth, fact, I don't know but an interesting tid-bit nonetheless.... Maybe someone else heard that too?   

I think that was Ernie who posted that after hearing it on Ottawa sports radio, the person saying it was in pro scouting for the Leafs when the deal was made. This pro scout recommended Suglobov.

 

[mr grieves]

Curious, why is something like $27M of the deal in signning bonuses?  His NHL salary each year is like $1M or $2M.... he gets big signning bonuses each year.

Just wondering if anyone knows why they (or Clarkson's agent) structured the deal that way.

(Bozak has $2M each season in signning bonus as well).

Richard Peddie actually talked a little about this on twitter the other day. I meant to mention it but forgot. Apparently when Grunwald was the Raptors GM he started to structure contracts like that because it's much more benefical to a player when it comes to taxes. So that way the Raptors would be on a more even playing field with some of the American teams that have better tax breaks.

So, David Clarkson loves the Leafs and loves the great city of Toronto... just not its schools, hospitals, roads, or parks.

 

[maplesyrup]

Can't remember where I heard it but when we traded Ken Klee to NJ, we had a choice of Clarkson or Suglobov as the return. - Myth, fact, I don't know but an interesting tid-bit nonetheless.... Maybe someone else heard that too?   

I think that was Ernie who posted that after hearing it on Ottawa sports radio, the person saying it was in pro scouting for the Leafs when the deal was made. This pro scout recommended Suglobov.

Ah. Cheers. Funny how these things work out (or don't) sometimes.

 

[Zee]

Curious, why is something like $27M of the deal in signning bonuses?  His NHL salary each year is like $1M or $2M.... he gets big signning bonuses each year.

Just wondering if anyone knows why they (or Clarkson's agent) structured the deal that way.

(Bozak has $2M each season in signning bonus as well).

Richard Peddie actually talked a little about this on twitter the other day. I meant to mention it but forgot. Apparently when Grunwald was the Raptors GM he started to structure contracts like that because it's much more benefical to a player when it comes to taxes. So that way the Raptors would be on a more even playing field with some of the American teams that have better tax breaks.

So, David Clarkson loves the Leafs and loves the great city of Toronto... just not its schools, hospitals, roads, or parks.

So now you've made the leap in logic that Clarkson pays $0 in tax.  Any other way you bash the Leafs moves this summer? I'm not quite sure where on the fence you stand with these moves.

 

[Erndog]

Can't remember where I heard it but when we traded Ken Klee to NJ, we had a choice of Clarkson or Suglobov as the return. - Myth, fact, I don't know but an interesting tid-bit nonetheless.... Maybe someone else heard that too?   

I think that was Ernie who posted that after hearing it on Ottawa sports radio, the person saying it was in pro scouting for the Leafs when the deal was made. This pro scout recommended Suglobov.

Ah. Cheers. Funny how these things work out (or don't) sometimes.

Yeah, that was me.

Shawn Simpson, who's a regular on The Team1200, and was a Leafs scout at the time said it on air.

 

[Zee]

Can't remember where I heard it but when we traded Ken Klee to NJ, we had a choice of Clarkson or Suglobov as the return. - Myth, fact, I don't know but an interesting tid-bit nonetheless.... Maybe someone else heard that too?   

I think that was Ernie who posted that after hearing it on Ottawa sports radio, the person saying it was in pro scouting for the Leafs when the deal was made. This pro scout recommended Suglobov.

Ah. Cheers. Funny how these things work out (or don't) sometimes.

Yeah, that was me.

Shawn Simpson, who's a regular on The Team1200, and was a Leafs scout at the time said it on air.

Just hammers home the point that sometimes at 19-20 you don't know what you have in a player, or the player needs more seasoning before he can become a good NHLer.  Clarkson did, Sublogov didn't.

 

[Joe S.]

Yeah, just curious.  Was wondering if there would be any benefit to the team.

Also, anyone sort of feel like Clarkson/Bolland is a little reminiscent of the summer we signed Roberts/Corson?

I thought the same thing, if Clarkson can have the sort of success Roberts brought to the Leafs I'd be more than happy.  Corson...not so much.  Bernier the new Cujo?  How many more parallels can we draw?  Any Sundin's out there?

Corson was fantastic that first year - it's the second year that it became drama filled.

 

[mr grieves]

Curious, why is something like $27M of the deal in signning bonuses?  His NHL salary each year is like $1M or $2M.... he gets big signning bonuses each year.

Just wondering if anyone knows why they (or Clarkson's agent) structured the deal that way.

(Bozak has $2M each season in signning bonus as well).

Richard Peddie actually talked a little about this on twitter the other day. I meant to mention it but forgot. Apparently when Grunwald was the Raptors GM he started to structure contracts like that because it's much more benefical to a player when it comes to taxes. So that way the Raptors would be on a more even playing field with some of the American teams that have better tax breaks.

So, David Clarkson loves the Leafs and loves the great city of Toronto... just not its schools, hospitals, roads, or parks.

So now you've made the leap in logic that Clarkson pays $0 in tax.  Any other way you bash the Leafs moves this summer? I'm not quite sure where on the fence you stand with these moves.

Oh dear, calm down. $0? Certainly not. Very well might be a lower rate than you or me, though. I honestly don't really care -- David Clarkson will provide more value to me, at society, than a hedge fund manager, doctor who runs a medical imaging clinic, or a lot of others who avoid their taxes. I just enjoy the irony of civic pride without civic support.

Now all this whining about "bashing"... Well, at some level, I wish my thoughts on the off-season were at fungible as your own. I take it we'll never see that hat eaten, huh?

 

[Britishbulldog]

It's actually a smart play we'll probably see more of. Especially across multiple players on a team in the future. It allows you to make some wiggle room by pushing bous money into the next year as a penalty if you needed that extra little bit for a trade at the deadline... or a player comes back early from an injury. It's definitely something I'm happy the leafs did.

So to simplify it's good because you can pay the bonus money that went over the cap the next year if you have problems.

It allows none of these things. Only performance bonuses can be used to exceed the cap and carry the hit into next season. Signing bonuses count in full for the season in which they're paid out.

That is what I was thinking as well.  It might be for taxes but it also gets that player a whack of money in one day rather in payments over the season.  The player must REALLY appreciate that as well.

Another thing I thought of with this is when trading a player with a signing bonus, after July 2nd a team acquiring a player with a significant signing bonus provides the cap hit without much financial cost for that season.

 

[Zee]

Curious, why is something like $27M of the deal in signning bonuses?  His NHL salary each year is like $1M or $2M.... he gets big signning bonuses each year.

Just wondering if anyone knows why they (or Clarkson's agent) structured the deal that way.

(Bozak has $2M each season in signning bonus as well).

Richard Peddie actually talked a little about this on twitter the other day. I meant to mention it but forgot. Apparently when Grunwald was the Raptors GM he started to structure contracts like that because it's much more benefical to a player when it comes to taxes. So that way the Raptors would be on a more even playing field with some of the American teams that have better tax breaks.

So, David Clarkson loves the Leafs and loves the great city of Toronto... just not its schools, hospitals, roads, or parks.

So now you've made the leap in logic that Clarkson pays $0 in tax.  Any other way you bash the Leafs moves this summer? I'm not quite sure where on the fence you stand with these moves.

Oh dear, calm down. $0? Certainly not. Very well might be a lower rate than you or me, though. I honestly don't really care -- David Clarkson will provide more value to me, at society, than a hedge fund manager, doctor who runs a medical imaging clinic, or a lot of others who avoid their taxes. I just enjoy the irony of civic pride without civic support.

Now all this whining about "bashing"... Well, at some level, I wish my thoughts on the off-season were at fungible as your own. I take it we'll never see that hat eaten, huh?

"I honestly don't really care" -- then why did you bring it up?

 

[mr grieves]

Curious, why is something like $27M of the deal in signning bonuses?  His NHL salary each year is like $1M or $2M.... he gets big signning bonuses each year.

Just wondering if anyone knows why they (or Clarkson's agent) structured the deal that way.

(Bozak has $2M each season in signning bonus as well).

Richard Peddie actually talked a little about this on twitter the other day. I meant to mention it but forgot. Apparently when Grunwald was the Raptors GM he started to structure contracts like that because it's much more benefical to a player when it comes to taxes. So that way the Raptors would be on a more even playing field with some of the American teams that have better tax breaks.

So, David Clarkson loves the Leafs and loves the great city of Toronto... just not its schools, hospitals, roads, or parks.

So now you've made the leap in logic that Clarkson pays $0 in tax.  Any other way you bash the Leafs moves this summer? I'm not quite sure where on the fence you stand with these moves.

Oh dear, calm down. $0? Certainly not. Very well might be a lower rate than you or me, though. I honestly don't really care -- David Clarkson will provide more value to me, at society, than a hedge fund manager, doctor who runs a medical imaging clinic, or a lot of others who avoid their taxes. I just enjoy the irony of civic pride without civic support.

Now all this whining about "bashing"... Well, at some level, I wish my thoughts on the off-season were at fungible as your own. I take it we'll never see that hat eaten, huh?

"I honestly don't really care" -- then why did you bring it up?

"I just enjoy the irony of..." -- A man cannot live on fancy stats and bleakness alone, you know.

 

[bustaheims]

So, David Clarkson loves the Leafs and loves the great city of Toronto... just not its schools, hospitals, roads, or parks.

Just so we're clear, you do know that municipal taxes aren't based on salary but rather on property value, right?

 

[mr grieves]

So, David Clarkson loves the Leafs and loves the great city of Toronto... just not its schools, hospitals, roads, or parks.

Just so we're clear, you do know that municipal taxes aren't based on salary but rather on property value, right?

I'm not from Toronto, but, in general, yes, this is how city taxes work, and, excluding whatever funding or grants come from the state/province or feds, how locally funded public institutions -- parks and schools -- get their money.

But "...loves southern Ontario..." didn't really, you know, zing quite right.

 

[losveratos]

It allows none of these things. Only performance bonuses can be used to exceed the cap and carry the hit into next season. Signing bonuses count in full for the season in which they're paid out.

Yes you're right... I wasn't thinking properly.

I'll just use the excuse that it's late here in China and I'm tired ^_^

 

[Champ Kind]

Given a few days to digest this (and Bozak's) deal last Friday, I have to say I am thrilled to have the player in Toronto.  I really like Clarkson, feel he will add value to the team, and has a nice prodigal son element to nit.

Term, money, contract......meh and blah, as far as I'm concerned.  This is what free agents cost.  And had Nonis not done anything, there would be equal amounts of criticism levied againt his lack of risk taking.  There are those that will argue this point, but I firmly believe Clarkson > Grabovski.  So, all-in-all, a good signing, I think.

It's also clear that for every Tucker, Clark, Malone the "breakdown by 32 camp' refers to, I can easily rhyme off Iginla, Roberts, Pronger and Ian Laperriere as players who played a really hard, robust style and maintained success well into their mid-30s.

Heck, even Dale Hunter, who played about as dirty and punishing as anyone, maintained a decent level of play into his 36'th year.

So, for me, it comes down to the question of whether the Leafs are a better team with Clarkson than without him.  My answer is an emphatic 'yes'.

 

[Champ Kind]

So, David Clarkson loves the Leafs and loves the great city of Toronto... just not its schools, hospitals, roads, or parks.

Just so we're clear, you do know that municipal taxes aren't based on salary but rather on property value, right?

I'm not from Toronto, but, in general, yes, this is how city taxes work, and, excluding whatever funding or grants come from the state/province or feds, how locally funded public institutions -- parks and schools -- get their money.

But "...loves southern Ontario..." didn't really, you know, zing quite right.

You don't say!

 

[sneakyray]

he talked about expanding the charities hes involved in around the GTA (kitchenre I believe was mentioned in his press conference).  This guy will probably donate more money to Toronto area charities than I make...so I'm not about to say the guy doesn't have any civic pride.

much better use of money than giving anymore than is needed to the bloated bureaucracy that is any level of our government.

 

[Kin]

But "...loves southern Ontario..." didn't really, you know, zing quite right.

Except, of course, it didn't zing right because it doesn't make any sense at that point. I'm going to guess that David Clarkson hasn't actually given many interviews where he expressed his love for the vaguely defined geographic region that he's from but rather, you know, the city.

Besides, if you were from Toronto you might know that being alright with sticking it to the rest of the province is the surest sign that Clarkson really is one of us.