Quote:
Originally Posted by flambers
My concern, even if they resign Lindholm, I am sure not the Flames are a playoff team.
They don't have the depth or the scoring.
|
And this is sort of my point. Going back, once again, Lindholm is an excellent player and seemingly an awesome guy. But if we're not making the playoffs with or without him, it doesnt make much sense to lock him up for 8 years when only 3 or 4 might be of actual value in conjunction with the rest of our already long contracts for ageing players.
I agree that players like Lindholm dont come around often, and I also agree that it is highly unlikely that we'd be able to replace him either via UFA or drafting with a player of equal or greater talent.
But if we're going to be an old, underachieving, mediocre team, we dont have to also be a cap-strapped one.
In a perfect world? If we'd just left Kadri alone and never brought him in and had that on our books I'd be a lot more lenient in my opinion of re-signing Lindholm.
But at the moment, its just too much for too long for players who are getting too old and not producing on-ice value and results for their contracts.
We could give Lindholm 8x$9...what does it matter if we're still just running on the treadmill and not getting anywhere?