05-26-2023, 03:51 PM
|
#15601
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: SW Ontario
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Saqe
I think Johnson and Sillinger are their future #1 & #2 centers. I'm sure they would want Lindholm but whether he fits their rebuild is another question. Kekalainen is under a lot of pressure after messing up last years coaching hire though so who knows, maybe he gets desperate. The #3 should be off limits though no matter what, that's an ELC contract for years on a high end player who can probably immediately slot in your lineup, just too valuable.
|
I disagree, Sillinger to me has 3rd line C written all over him.
|
|
|
The Following User Says Thank You to dissentowner For This Useful Post:
|
|
05-26-2023, 03:54 PM
|
#15602
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: SW Ontario
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fighting Banana Slug
I can't see Columbus trading that #3, but perhaps #22, Sillinger and say, 3rd Rounder (CGY) for Lindholm?
I think the Flames need a C back. I believe Columbus has the cap room, but perhaps other pieces are required.
|
That would be terrible imo. As I said in my previous post, Sillinger looks like a 3rd line C at the NHL level to me. The odds of #22 being an impact player are low, more likely a bottom 6, so you are trading Lindholm for two bottom 6 players and a 3rd. I think people will be surprised how good of a return Lindholm can fetch. Especially because you will have a plethora of teams trying to land him given his track record and salary.
|
|
|
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to dissentowner For This Useful Post:
|
|
05-26-2023, 03:57 PM
|
#15603
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Calgary
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Saqe
I think Johnson and Sillinger are their future #1 & #2 centers. I'm sure they would want Lindholm but whether he fits their rebuild is another question. Kekalainen is under a lot of pressure after messing up last years coaching hire though so who knows, maybe he gets desperate. The #3 should be off limits though no matter what, that's an ELC contract for years on a high end player who can probably immediately slot in your lineup, just too valuable.
|
The question is, are they still in rebuild? They've got to show their fans something, like may be actually make the playoff? Their fans haven't enjoy any playoff let alone playoff success. How many years are their fans willing to wait.
|
|
|
05-26-2023, 03:58 PM
|
#15604
|
Franchise Player
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by dissentowner
I disagree, Sillinger to me has 3rd line C written all over him.
|
Sorry if you’ve posted before on this before - but what do you think Lindholm is worth? What do you think Hanifin is worth?
I think recent history in trades shows that:
Lindholm is not worth 3rd overall, and unlikely to be worth a top-10 pick by himself.
Hanifin is worth a later 1st + two 2nd round picks.
To CBJ: Lindholm, Hanifin
To CGY: 3rd overall + 34th overall
To me that trade is not bad value for either side. Flames get a foundational pick in a strong year (and a depth pick) while Columbus effectively presses the fast forward button. It’s the best case scenario for in my eyes - and I still don’t know if Columbus does that. 3rd overall picks just don’t get moved.
If Lindholm goes on the market, no one is bringing something more valuable to a 3rd overall pick to the table.
Quality > Quantity.
|
|
|
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to ComixZone For This Useful Post:
|
|
05-26-2023, 04:04 PM
|
#15605
|
Franchise Player
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrMike
What makes him valuable to the Jackets more than anyone else is if he WANTS to go there and sign long term with Johnny. They’d be getting 2/3rds of the best line in hockey one year ago, while the other is trying his best to get the Stanley Cup.
They know they have to over pay in free agency with most times not even having a chance.
I think it’s quite realistic that it would be on the table and Columbus would set up their top line of Laine - Huberdeau - Gaudreau for the next few years. If I was Columbus I would be excited and think it would be fair.
Signing Gaudreau kind of put them in the “win now” window for his first few years of his contract. We saw what a top line of two of them can do.
|
Lindholm to Columbus makes sense but the deadline return would be a late 1st and prospect and Sillinger would probably be about as good as can be expected or better than other prospects offered. Columbus doesn’t need to pay the third overall for Lindholm unless Detroit is offering the 9th overall or something
|
|
|
05-26-2023, 04:13 PM
|
#15606
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: SW Ontario
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by ComixZone
Sorry if you’ve posted before on this before - but what do you think Lindholm is worth? What do you think Hanifin is worth?
I think recent history in trades shows that:
Lindholm is not worth 3rd overall, and unlikely to be worth a top-10 pick by himself.
Hanifin is worth a later 1st + two 2nd round picks.
To CBJ: Lindholm, Hanifin
To CGY: 3rd overall + 34th overall
To me that trade is not bad value for either side. Flames get a foundational pick in a strong year (and a depth pick) while Columbus effectively presses the fast forward button. It’s the best case scenario for in my eyes - and I still don’t know if Columbus does that. 3rd overall picks just don’t get moved.
If Lindholm goes on the market, no one is bringing something more valuable to a 3rd overall pick to the table.
Quality > Quantity.
|
You preach quality > quantity and then propose a trade where we give proven quality for unknown quantity. It's a massive overpayment. It also in no way fits with ownership's mandate. If you did the trade you propose you are waiving the white flag on this upcoming year, our GM has different orders so it isn't happening unless the plan is to flip #3 and #16 possibly for a young #1 C. I don't see Lindholm bring dealt for a futures deal and if he is those futures will be moved for help now.
|
|
|
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to dissentowner For This Useful Post:
|
|
05-26-2023, 04:21 PM
|
#15607
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Calgary
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrMike
What makes him valuable to the Jackets more than anyone else is if he WANTS to go there and sign long term with Johnny. They’d be getting 2/3rds of the best line in hockey one year ago, while the other is trying his best to get the Stanley Cup.
They know they have to over pay in free agency with most times not even having a chance.
I think it’s quite realistic that it would be on the table and Columbus would set up their top line of Laine - Huberdeau - Gaudreau for the next few years. If I was Columbus I would be excited and think it would be fair.
Signing Gaudreau kind of put them in the “win now” window for his first few years of his contract. We saw what a top line of two of them can do.
|
You meant Lindholm, right?
I totally agree. If they want to get a great player to play with their great player they have to be willing to give. Looking at the success Florida having this playoff, he must be thinking if getting Lindholm to play with Gaudreau they might be that team comes next playoff. He might be willing to trade their 3rd OA for Lindholm, because he might not be around to see the player they going to draft at 3rd OA developed.
|
|
|
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to midniteowl For This Useful Post:
|
|
05-26-2023, 04:25 PM
|
#15608
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Calgary
|
I would easily trade Lindholm straight-up for either the 3rd overall, or for Kent Johnson. CBJ would not do either of these. Carlsson had the 11th best season of all-time for 18 and under players in the SHL.
|
|
|
05-26-2023, 04:26 PM
|
#15609
|
Franchise Player
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by dissentowner
You preach quality > quantity and then propose a trade where we give proven quality for unknown quantity. It's a massive overpayment. It also in no way fits with ownership's mandate. If you did the trade you propose you are waiving the white flag on this upcoming year, our GM has different orders so it isn't happening unless the plan is to flip #3 and #16 possibly for a young #1 C. I don't see Lindholm bring dealt for a futures deal and if he is those futures will be moved for help now.
|
Paint me a Lindholm trade then. What fits the ownership mandate as you see it?
|
|
|
05-26-2023, 04:35 PM
|
#15610
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: SW Ontario
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by ComixZone
Paint me a Lindholm trade then. What fits the ownership mandate as you see it?
|
I don't have to see it, the team believes their close, they are not dealing Lindholm for futures. I have no idea what a Lindholm trade looks like, I imagine they will probably add to him to sweeten the pot for a guy that is young and can help now, like Necas. I get it, people want to move in a rebuild direction, I am not even arguing against it. However we know for a fact the team thinks it's close and the mandate is to try and win now. What part of that message from ownership makes you think the Flames are moving their #1 C for draft picks?
|
|
|
The Following User Says Thank You to dissentowner For This Useful Post:
|
|
05-26-2023, 04:36 PM
|
#15611
|
Franchise Player
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by ComixZone
Paint me a Lindholm trade then. What fits the ownership mandate as you see it?
|
That’s the problem. It’s difficult to imagine a scenario where Lindholm is dealt and the Flames take a step forward next season.
And while he’s a very good player, if you dig into capfriendly, the list of teams that a) need a top 2 centre, b) are in win now mode, and c) have the cap structure to fit him in longterm is not long at all. Like, maybe 3-4 teams. And it will be the Flames who will the motivated seller, since they won’t want to let him walk for nothing.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by fotze
If this day gets you riled up, you obviously aren't numb to the disappointment yet to be a real fan.
|
|
|
|
The Following User Says Thank You to CliffFletcher For This Useful Post:
|
|
05-26-2023, 04:38 PM
|
#15612
|
Franchise Player
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by dissentowner
I don't have to see it, the team believes their close, they are not dealing Lindholm for futures. I have no idea what a Lindholm trade looks like, I imagine they will probably add to him to sweeten the pot for a guy that is young and can help now, like Necas. I get it, people want to move in a rebuild direction, I am not even arguing against it. However we know for a fact the team thinks it's close and the mandate is to try and win now. What part of that message from ownership makes you think the Flames are moving their #1 C for draft picks?
|
I think the Flames will accept a rebuild when forced to and Lindholm walking flips that.
|
|
|
05-26-2023, 04:39 PM
|
#15613
|
#1 Goaltender
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by midniteowl
The question is, are they still in rebuild? They've got to show their fans something, like may be actually make the playoff? Their fans haven't enjoy any playoff let alone playoff success. How many years are their fans willing to wait.
|
I'm not sure what their view is right now, this year was a total disaster for them and undone by their rookie HC and injuries but last year they weren't too far off a playoff spot. I think Lindholm could be a fit do to Gaudreau but whether they want to give up on their core pieces is another thing. Also would Lindholm even re-sign with them? And at what price.
|
|
|
05-26-2023, 04:39 PM
|
#15614
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Calgary, AB
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by dissentowner
I don't have to see it, the team believes their close, they are not dealing Lindholm for futures. I have no idea what a Lindholm trade looks like, I imagine they will probably add to him to sweeten the pot for a guy that is young and can help now, like Necas. I get it, people want to move in a rebuild direction, I am not even arguing against it. However we know for a fact the team thinks it's close and the mandate is to try and win now. What part of that message from ownership makes you think the Flames are moving their #1 C for draft picks?
|
Disagree if it's the 3rd overall pick.
Thats a piece that potentially helps now and in the future.
I don't think trading Lindholm for the 3rd overall pick means a "rebuild" at all.
Edit: Should add I don't agree with trading Lindholm and Hanifin for 3rd overall. But that rumor from CBJ of 3rd for Lindholm + 2nd...no issue with that at all.
Last edited by SuperMatt18; 05-26-2023 at 04:44 PM.
|
|
|
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to SuperMatt18 For This Useful Post:
|
|
05-26-2023, 04:41 PM
|
#15615
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Indiana
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by SuperMatt18
Disagree if it's the 3rd overall pick.
Thats a piece that potentially helps now and in the future.
I don't think trading Lindholm for the 3rd overall pick means a "rebuild" at all.
|
Really, the 3rd OA pick would have such good cap efficiency on an ELC that it could actually help the team compete even better during that window.
|
|
|
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to 1qqaaz For This Useful Post:
|
|
05-26-2023, 04:44 PM
|
#15616
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Calgary, AB
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1qqaaz
Really, the 3rd OA pick would have such good cap efficiency on an ELC that it could actually help the team compete even better during that window.
|
Yup.
It's 3rd overall + 7M in cap space that can be used to bring in another piece to help contend short term.
|
|
|
The Following User Says Thank You to SuperMatt18 For This Useful Post:
|
|
05-26-2023, 04:46 PM
|
#15617
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: SW Ontario
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by SuperMatt18
Disagree if it's the 3rd overall pick.
Thats a piece that potentially helps now and in the future.
I don't think trading Lindholm for the 3rd overall pick means a "rebuild" at all.
|
It doesn't matter if you disagree, or I disagree, it matters what the mandate from ownership is. People are acting like my personal view is to avoid rebuilding or trading for futures, it isn't. If ownership tells Conroy to bring in someone to replace our #1 C it is what he has to do. If your boss tells you to replace a part in a machine with a similar part and instead you order a different design that might turn out even better than the old part but has a very good chance to fail you are out of a job..Conroy isn't going to buck ownership after just getting the job.
|
|
|
05-26-2023, 04:50 PM
|
#15618
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Calgary, AB
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by dissentowner
It doesn't matter if you disagree, or I disagree, it matters what the mandate from ownership is. People are acting like my personal view is to avoid rebuilding or trading for futures, it isn't. If ownership tells Conroy to bring in someone to replace our #1 C it is what he has to do. If your boss tells you to replace a part in a machine with a similar part and instead you order a different design that might turn out even better than the old part but has a very good chance to fail you are out of a job..Conroy isn't going to buck ownership after just getting the job.
|
I know Murray Edwards likes to be involved in hockey decisions and people sometimes question that.
But I'm pretty certain that even he would see the value of the 3rd overall pick and what that would mean for the team longer term.
If there is a Lindholm for 3rd Overall trade on the table then I don't think Edwards is blocking that. He would see a star he could use to sell tickets for 10 seasons.
|
|
|
05-26-2023, 04:51 PM
|
#15619
|
Franchise Player
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by ComixZone
Sorry if you’ve posted before on this before - but what do you think Lindholm is worth? What do you think Hanifin is worth?
I think recent history in trades shows that:
Lindholm is not worth 3rd overall, and unlikely to be worth a top-10 pick by himself.
Hanifin is worth a later 1st + two 2nd round picks.
To CBJ: Lindholm, Hanifin
To CGY: 3rd overall + 34th overall
To me that trade is not bad value for either side. Flames get a foundational pick in a strong year (and a depth pick) while Columbus effectively presses the fast forward button. It’s the best case scenario for in my eyes - and I still don’t know if Columbus does that. 3rd overall picks just don’t get moved.
If Lindholm goes on the market, no one is bringing something more valuable to a 3rd overall pick to the table.
Quality > Quantity.
|
If Lindy and Hanifin are willing to do eight year sign and trades, I could see Columbus tabling #3 overall.
+ Marchenko. He’s exactly the sort of player Huberdeau needs. Heavy shot, deadly from everywhere on the ice. Big body too, knows how to protect the puck and find open space.
I’d say he’s almost as important a piece to return as the pick/prospect situation.
__________________
”All you have to decide is what to do with the time that is given to you.”
Rowan Roy W-M - February 15, 2024
|
|
|
05-26-2023, 04:52 PM
|
#15620
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: SW Ontario
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by SuperMatt18
I know Murray Edwards likes to be involved in hockey decisions and people sometimes question that.
But I'm pretty certain that even he would see the value of the 3rd overall pick and what that would mean for the team longer term.
If there is a Lindholm for 3rd Overall trade on the table then I don't think Edwards is blocking that. He would see a star he could use to sell tickets for 10 seasons.
|
I don't know. He seems hell bent on trying win now. I am all for it, I just have serious doubts the Flames will move Lindholm for something that can't help next season. I mean what if he doesn't see a star? What if he looks at all the blown picks up North and worries about a bad return?
|
|
|
Thread Tools |
Search this Thread |
|
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:52 PM.
|
|