The New Flames RFA Contracts (Lindholm and Hanifin)

[It's a great day 4 hockey]

Originally Posted by The Cobra

The length of the term for Hannifin will depend largely on how many years he'll commit to.

Can't argue with you there.

[Vinny01]

Originally Posted by Calgary4LIfe

Hanifin and Lindholm might both get bridge deals, but if not, the max Treliving is going to sign them for is 6 years. Probably 5 if I was to guess.


5x4.75 for Lindholm
5x5.25 for Hanifin


I do think that Hanifin will command more - just looking at the Hamilton contract. He may slide-in a bit cheaper (as I have guessed), or he may come very close either under or above. I think the Flames lock them both up for 5 years though.

5.25M and we only buy 1 year of free agency? If he wants over $5M
It is 6-7 years.

[Bend it like Bourgeois]

These will be interesting deals as there aren’t many comperables since the Soilers reset the salary bar last summer (No good).

All the comperables I can think of on D were 5M when Burns was the high bar at 8M at 8 I think?

Doughty and Karlsson will get 10. From that I think Hanafins number starts with a 6 if it’s 5+ years.

[TheoFleury]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

Hanifin will be signing his second contract while Lindholm is entering his third, and he has arbitration rights. Those factors mean that Lindholm’s deal will likely be more expensive.

Can't see them not wanting to lock up Hanifin for 6-7 years if they believe in his potential which they obviously do. A bridge would be about the stupidest thing they could do, so I could see Hanifin's AAV approaching 6m. Sounds crazy but he's a young stud dman and it's only 7.5% of the cap which will only go down as the years go by. He will point to Hamilton's deal which was 5.75mx6, but he doesn't deserve quite that much, but again, as a % of the cap, Hamilton's was actually larger. I get that Hamilton was coming off a 40+ point year, and Hanifin is coming off a 30+ point year, but NH is also a year younger at the time of the trade, and better defensively at 21 than Hamilton was IMO. Hanifin can even point to Ekblad who got 8x 7.5m. Now, Hanifin isn't as good as Ekblad but surely his is worth 6m on a long term if Ekblad is worth 7.5m. I get Ekblad is their #1 but that's exactly what the Flames project Hanifin to be as well.

Lindholm I'm less sure of, is he the type you sign to 7 years, or is 4-5 years more appropriate? You are right on his arb rights but at this point he's a 40-45 point forward which shouldn't be worth much more than 4.5m-5m in arb or if they sign him (depending on how many ufa years they buy). A guy like Pastrnak is a step up and younger but he signed for 6x 6.6m, so I can't see Linholm approaching that kind of a contract (less ufa years in that deal I get). Realistically, I wouldn't be comfortable paying Lindholm more than Backlund at this juncture, even on a 7 year deal.

I'd wager Lindholm gets 5.25mx 5-6 and Hanifin gets 6mx 7. Takes Hanifin to 28, and Lindholm's takes him to 28-29. Who knows though, I just really hope we don't see a bridge contract with Hanifin.

[Roof-Daddy]

I'd rather lock Hanifin up now for 7 years at around $5 million AAV because I think it'd likely be a huge bargain for the last 4 or 5 years of the deal, but a 3 year bridge wouldn't be a terrible idea at all. 3 year bridge takes him to 24, then an 8 year extension has him a Flame for every last one of his prime years which would be great if he lives up to his potential.

[CsInMyBlood]

This whole new contracts before they play a game for the team scares me. Reminds me of Matt Stajan getting a big long contract coming from Toronto.

19 goals, 57 points between Cgy and Tor that season. Gets a 4 year at 3.5M a year cap hit which was a hefty contract at the time. Highest point total is 33 after the contract. Has years of 6, 8, 5, 14 goals during that span.

Going to be interesting to see what they sign for. All I know is paying for potential isn't the best situation to be in. Nobody thought Stajan was going to get worse and fall off a cliff, but he didn't come close to the numbers he put up with Toronto.

Get this wrong and we are screwed going forward when you're talking about 7 year deals.

[Vinny01]

Originally Posted by CsInMyBlood

This whole new contracts before they play a game for the team scares me. Reminds me of Matt Stajan getting a big long contract coming from Toronto.

19 goals, 57 points between Cgy and Tor that season. Gets a 4 year at 3.5M a year cap hit which was a hefty contract at the time. Highest point total is 33 after the contract. Has years of 6, 8, 5, 14 goals during that span.

Going to be interesting to see what they sign for. All I know is paying for potential isn't the best situation to be in. Nobody thought Stajan was going to get worse and fall off a cliff, but he didn't come close to the numbers he put up with Toronto.

Get this wrong and we are screwed going forward when you're talking about 7 year deals.

Why would it remind you of Stajan and not Hamilton?

Stajan was a mid season trade. Hamilton is exactly what this is. Former top pick RFA players needing long term deals. The Flames traded a core piece in Hamilton and a top prospect in Fox for long term core players.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by CsInMyBlood

This whole new contracts before they play a game for the team scares me. Reminds me of Matt Stajan getting a big long contract coming from Toronto.



19 goals, 57 points between Cgy and Tor that season. Gets a 4 year at 3.5M a year cap hit which was a hefty contract at the time. Highest point total is 33 after the contract. Has years of 6, 8, 5, 14 goals during that span.



Going to be interesting to see what they sign for. All I know is paying for potential isn't the best situation to be in. Nobody thought Stajan was going to get worse and fall off a cliff, but he didn't come close to the numbers he put up with Toronto.



Get this wrong and we are screwed going forward when you're talking about 7 year deals.

This is a fairly silly comparison.

[CsInMyBlood]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

This is a fairly silly comparison.

Oh? Why?

Players can regress is what I'm saying. Just because they are young and have potential doesnt mean they automatically get better every season. Many examples of this in the NHL. I know the majority of this board loves the shiny new toy but many havent even seen these guys play a shift.

Dont think it's silly to point out paying for potential is a risky business.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by CsInMyBlood

Oh? Why?

Players can regress is what I'm saying. Just because they are young and have potential doesnt mean they automatically get better every season. Many examples of this in the NHL. I know the majority of this board loves the shiny new toy but many havent even seen these guys play a shift.

Dont think it's silly to point out paying for potential is a risky business.

Elias Lindholm is not Matthew Stajan. He is several years younger than Stajan was at the time of that trade, and has an established record as a 0.5 point/game player on an offensively anemic team. Noah Hanifin is a 21-year-old defenseman who has played in the top four, led his team in scoring from the blue line, played in the All Star game, and has already accrued 239 NHL games.

I would say there is virtually no risk of a regression for either of these players.

[The Cobra]

Originally Posted by CsInMyBlood

This whole new contracts before they play a game for the team scares me. Reminds me of Matt Stajan getting a big long contract coming from Toronto.

19 goals, 57 points between Cgy and Tor that season. Gets a 4 year at 3.5M a year cap hit which was a hefty contract at the time. Highest point total is 33 after the contract. Has years of 6, 8, 5, 14 goals during that span.

Going to be interesting to see what they sign for. All I know is paying for potential isn't the best situation to be in. Nobody thought Stajan was going to get worse and fall off a cliff, but he didn't come close to the numbers he put up with Toronto.

Get this wrong and we are screwed going forward when you're talking about 7 year deals.

I knew that the Stajan contract was bad from the get go.

You take a third line guy and give him 1st line time with great line mates and he'll get you 50 points.

Then you pay him big bucks and you realize your first line centre getting 50 points is quite poor and a recipe for missing the playoffs.

So you replace and he because a 30 points anchor.

And, of course, the Stajan situation has nothing to do with the Carolina trade.

[MacDaddy77]

I want to see 7 year contracts for both these players. lock them up

[Sylvanfan]

It's hard to believe that Lindholm has been in the league for 5 years already and is only 2 years away from UFA status. To this point I'm not sure he's earned more than 5 million AAV. I don't know if he's shown enough to justify getting the same contract Backlund did, but at the same age he's ahead of where Backlund was.

Hanifin is a guy where you should try to sign for 6 years if you can.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Sylvanfan

It's hard to believe that Lindholm has been in the league for 5 years already and is only 2 years away from UFA status. To this point I'm not sure he's earned more than 5 million AAV. I don't know if he's shown enough to justify getting the same contract Backlund did, but at the same age he's ahead of where Backlund was...

Elias Lindholm is miles ahead of where Backlund was when he was 23-years-old—374 GP 64G 188Pts v. 170 GP 23G 62Pts. Lindholm has averaged 13G and 38Pts over that time, while Backlund averaged 6G and 16Pts. Backlund is probably a better player today, but on the whole this is the going price for an RFA top-six forward with arbitration rights who projects to be quite a bit better soon.

[ricosuave]

Just wanted to point out that there a lot of similarities in Lindholm's game compared with Jiri Hudler.

Johnny, Mony and Hudler were one of the NHLs best lines, and played very well with each other.

Hudler was also the RW as Lindholm has been slotted in for.

[Flames Draft Watcher]

Originally Posted by ricosuave

Just wanted to point out that there a lot of similarities in Lindholm's game compared with Jiri Hudler.

After watching that Lindholm video I actually see the most similarities with Matt Tkachuk and his strengths. Both are hard on the puck, have good vision and hockey sense and both excel in tight spaces around and behind the net. Lindholm isn't quite as strong or physical as Tkachuk, not quite as dominant along the boards and not anywhere near the pest or agitator Tkachuk is but their skill sets are very similar it would appear.

[Plaedo]

Originally Posted by Flames Draft Watcher

After watching that Lindholm video I actually see the most similarities with Matt Tkachuk and his strengths. Both are hard on the puck, have good vision and hockey sense and both excel in tight spaces around and behind the net. Lindholm isn't quite as strong or physical as Tkachuk, not quite as dominant along the boards and not anywhere near the pest or agitator Tkachuk is but their skill sets are very similar it would appear.

Haven't had as much time lately to comb through the boards - this video you speak of, is it in this thread, or can you point me in the direction I should search if I want to watch it?

[Robbob]

Originally Posted by Plaedo

Haven't had as much time lately to comb through the boards - this video you speak of, is it in this thread, or can you point me in the direction I should search if I want to watch it?

https://forum.calgarypuck.com/showpo...postcount=1774

[transplant99]

Well Lindholm is on the record as wanting a "long term" deal so that should work a bit in the Flames favor. Given him a 6 year deal at 5 per, and call it a day.

[Cleveland Steam Whistle]

Originally Posted by The Cobra

Players like Johnny signed only a 6-year contract because that was his choice. The Flames would have loved to lock him up for 2 more additional years, even with a higher cap hit. But players want to become UFA's sooner,and at a younger age, so they maximize that last 8 year contract at a time when they are not seen as regressing.

The length of the term for Hannifin will depend largely on how many years he'll commit to. What I mean by that, it's not just Tre telling him how many years the Flames are willing commit to. It cuts both ways. Going year to year will eventually bite the Flames. If Hanifin wants a 7 year contract, the Flames should jump at the chance to get him signed during his premium years. But it will cost them.

I agree with much of what you are saying, but not sure I’m 100% in agreement that it’s all on the player for length. Using your Johnny example, im not entirely sure the Flames would have wanted more years even for more cap hit. In this case they may have, but I’m also sure there’s a sweet spot for team on term and the relative cap hit as well, not just for the player. Johnny for six at his current rate May have been more appealing to the Flames as well versus whet the AAV would have been pushed to to buy those extra years of UFA off of Johnny.