[Rumour] Chris Johnston: Lindholm is interested in staying

[dissentowner]

Originally Posted by Moneyhands23

This seems almost the opposite of what Conroy is saying. But I guess that doesn't mean much. Like really the Hanifin trade could happen, but that seems about it.

This is me simply spitballing so I could be way off here. Like I heard last week they were close so was just wondering what the hold up is. I honestly have no idea, I have heard nothing but crickets today....probably because I fed the frog.

[powderjunkie]

Originally Posted by GreenLantern2814

The correlation is stars/elite players win you championships. Usually, you find them at the top of the draft.

If you’re not willing to suffer a rebuild, when a player like Eichel comes available, pay what it costs to get him, even if it’s considered an overpayment. If it cost you Tkachuk, Mangiapane and two 1sts, pay it, because you’re not getting that player any other way. Then you might have been able to sell Gaudreau on Eichel, he and Lindholm + Andersson as a core.

It doesn’t mean they’re everything, but it’s very hard to win without top-5 picks performing at a high level.

Erik Johnson is relevant because he represents a time when the Blues bottomed out.

Same with Seguin/Kessel.

Everyone had a sustained low point, nobody got to avoid it.

Calgary actually had more success of the back of this last rebuild than they’d had in 30 years - two division titles, a regular season conference championship, made it out of the first round twice in the eight years Gaudreau was here. It isn’t the 04 run, but it’s collectively more in less time than they ever managed with Iggy and Kipper.

Edmonton is proof it isn’t everything, but that’s a bigger black mark on Edmonton as an organization than it is the idea that having the two best players in the world isn’t the best recipe for success.

Boston never really bottomed out since drafting Thornton. The pulled a quick retool after the missed season, and the Thornton trade didn't even turn into anything significant for them.

Their 2 year rough patch got them Kessel 5OA and Zach Hammill 8OA. Kessel turned into Seguin and Hamilton, though only Seguin played on their cup winning team and he wasn't particularly significant.

Pretty amazing actually that Boston traded Joe Thornton, Tyler Seguin, and Dougie Hamilton for essentially nil returns (pretty sure Andrew Ference was the best piece they ended up with out of all of it), but still had ~15 years of contention including a Cup, 2 more Finals appearances, and the greatest regular season ever since the loser point.

And they did it all with their key guys:
45th
63rd
71st
50th
UFA (Chara)
UFA (Tim Thomas)

But you know what was probably most important? 2OA Seguin playing half the playoff games at 10:35 TOI.

and also trading with Florida to get a former 3OA pick who actually was really important...but 3OAs from Florida don't count.

[Redrum]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

No, he’s taking up one of their spots, but I think we’ll manage filling spots 3-6 with a mix of cheaper vets and young players. That’s what you want, isn’t it? That’s the whole point of not wanting to sign Lindholm, because you want some cap flexibility to pay young stars? So if Kylington earns a far bigger contract, it seems to make sense to reduce the amount spent on our 4/5 defencemen and not bring back guys that are 28 and 33 years old, right?

Why would you even entertain bringing Hanifin, Tanev, or Zadorov back or trying to replace them through free agency with more expensive players around the same age? lol. That’s the exact opposite of what you’ve been pitching with Lindholm.

What about the defensemen that were already there? We'll be up against the cap before he gets a raise, so how do we get that cap space? Gotta ship them out no matter how young or good they were and replace them with lesser players. What if there's 2 or 3 forwards that need a raise at the same time since we're using younger players that must be on their ELC to be so cheap? Can't dump one of the big contracts yet. Nobody will touch them and they still have 5 years left on them. The other contracts coming off the books will be peanuts because the cap is going up so much.

[GreenLantern2814]

Originally Posted by powderjunkie

Boston never really bottomed out since drafting Thornton. The pulled a quick retool after the missed season, and the Thornton trade didn't even turn into anything significant for them.

Their 2 year rough patch got them Kessel 5OA and Zach Hammill 8OA. Kessel turned into Seguin and Hamilton, though only Seguin played on their cup winning team and he wasn't particularly significant.

Pretty amazing actually that Boston traded Joe Thornton, Tyler Seguin, and Dougie Hamilton for essentially nil returns (pretty sure Andrew Ference was the best piece they ended up with out of all of it), but still had ~15 years of contention including a Cup, 2 more Finals appearances, and the greatest regular season ever since the loser point.

And they did it all with their key guys:
45th
63rd
71st
50th
UFA (Chara)
UFA (Tim Thomas)

But you know what was probably most important? 2OA Seguin playing half the playoff games at 10:35 TOI.

and also trading with Florida to get a former 3OA pick who actually was really important...but 3OAs from Florida don't count.

Boston is somehow the most well-run organization in the sport.

Having Seguin on an ELC let them add more depth to the lineup. And they happened to have cap space when Zdeno friggen Chara was available, because they decided punting on Joe Thornton was the right call.

And it was.

They always matter, even when they leave Chabot, Barzal and Connor on the table for nobodies.

We’re not them.

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by Aarongavey

The elite defensive thing is a little over blown.

Yeah...no it isnt.

Its a major part of the game and being a #1C....he excels at it.

There is just so much more to hockey/compensation than points/pts per 60/pts 5 on 5 etc etc etc

[powderjunkie]

Originally Posted by GreenLantern2814

Boston is somehow the most well-run organization in the sport.

Having Seguin on an ELC let them add more depth to the lineup. And they happened to have cap space when Zdeno friggen Chara was available, because they decided punting on Joe Thornton was the right call.

And it was.

They always matter, even when they leave Chabot, Barzal and Connor on the table for nobodies.

We’re not them.

It’s mind bottling. They also lost Marc Savard and didn’t miss a beat

[GreenLantern2814]

Originally Posted by powderjunkie

It’s mind bottling. They also lost Marc Savard and didn’t miss a beat

Any one of Boston’s miscues would set another team back a decade, and yet they’re one of only three salary cap teams to reach a Finals after losing one. And they’ve done it twice. (Vegas and Tampa)

They blew a 3-0 series lead and then won the goddamn Stanley Cup the next year - imagine Toronto showing that kind of sack.

Jeremy Jacobs, man. The guy knows how to win hockey games.

It starts at the top.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by Redrum

What about the defensemen that were already there? We'll be up against the cap before he gets a raise, so how do we get that cap space? Gotta ship them out no matter how young or good they were and replace them with lesser players. What if there's 2 or 3 forwards that need a raise at the same time since we're using younger players that must be on their ELC to be so cheap? Can't dump one of the big contracts yet. Nobody will touch them and they still have 5 years left on them. The other contracts coming off the books will be peanuts because the cap is going up so much.

Hanifin - 27 - 1
Kylington - 27 - 1
Tanev - 34 - 1
Zadorov - 28 - 1
Backlund - 35 - 1
Mangiapane - 29 - 2
Sharangovich - 27 - 2
Andersson - 29 - 3
Markstrom - 36 - 3
Coleman - 35 - 4

Those are the mid-level guys on contracts that expire in the next 4 years at ages that are similar or older to Lindholm when they expire (and therefore seem like people we’d want to get rid of, if I’m following).

Year 1 we clear about 20M, year 2 is 9M, year 3 is 11M, and year 4 is 5M.

$45M worth of currently signed contracts coming off the books in the next 4 years and we’re fretting? I don’t see it.

[blankall]

Originally Posted by GreenLantern2814

It doesn’t matter.

Top-5 picks, drafted or otherwise, on cap-era champions:

Carolina: Eric Staal (2) Andrew Ladd (4 - playoff call up)
Anaheim: Chris Pronger (2 - Hartford) Scott Niedermayer (4 - NJD)
Detroit: Brad Stuart (3 - SJ)
Pittsburgh: Sidney Crosby (1) Marc Andre Fleury (1) Evgeni Malkin (2) Jordan Staal (2)
Chicago: Patrick Kane (1) Jonathan Toews (3) Andrew Ladd (4 - Carolina)
Boston: Tyler Seguin - even if you want to dispute this one, they only got Seguin in the first place because they traded Kessel to the Leafs, and he was a 5th overall pick in his own right.
LA: Drew Doughty (2)
Chicago: Patrick Kane (1) Jonathan Toews (3)
LA: Drew Doughty (2) Marian Gaborik (3 - Minnesota)
Chicago: Patrick Kane (1) Jonathan Toews (3)
Pittsburgh: Sidney Crosby (1) Marc Andre Fleury (1) Evgeni Malkin (2) Phil Kessel (5 - Boston)
Pittsburgh: Sidney Crosby (1) Marc Andre Fleury (1) Evgeni Malkin (2) Phil Kessel (5 - Boston)
Washington: Alexander Ovechkin (1) Niklas Backstrom (3)
St Louis: Alex Pietrangelo (4) Brayden Schenn (5 - Los Angeles)
Tampa Bay: Steven Stamkos (1) Victor Hedman (2) Mikhail Sergachev (9 - Montreal, traded for 3rd overall pick Jonathan Drouin)
Tampa Bay: Steven Stamkos (1) Victor Hedman (2)
Colorado: Nathan MacKinnon (1) Gabriel Landeskog (2) Cale Makar (4) Bowen Byram (4) Erik Johnson (1 - St Louis)
Vegas: Jack Eichel (2) Alex Pietrangelo (4 - St Louis)

The evidence seems pretty overwhelming - you need to hit on your top 5 picks, assemble your entire core pre-salary cap, or be the Bruins.

And if any one of you ####s replies “Jonathan Huberdeau was a 3rd overall pick” then you ain’t gettin’ sent a pizza roll.

Once again, you have to look at the last few years in isolation, as those teams after built after the draft rules changed.

Yes, you need players like Eichel and Hedman to win, but you don't have to draft them. Plus players often move beyond their draft position to be key pieces on the same level as Eichel. See Stone.

And why are you discounting huberdeau? How is trading for huberdeau and different than trading for Eichel? Also cough cough Lindholm at #5. Kadri #7. Hanifin #5.

[Roof-Daddy]

I can't believe anybody is scared of the cap. We've been watching for years as teams squirm their way out of bad contracts and win cups with payrolls $10 million over lol

[howard_the_duck]

Originally Posted by blankall

Once again, you have to look at the last few years in isolation, as those teams after built after the draft rules changed.

Yes, you need players like Eichel and Hedman to win, but you don't have to draft them. Plus players often move beyond their draft position to be key pieces on the same level as Eichel. See Stone.

And why are you discounting huberdeau? How is trading for huberdeau and different than trading for Eichel? Also cough cough Lindholm at #5. Kadri #7. Hanifin #5.

Acquiring superstars drafted in the top 10 of the draft is poor asset management and cap management. It should be the exception, not the rule. It’s far more expensive to acquire those players and pay them at their peak value than it is to draft and develop them.

Also, we keep going back and comparing ourselves to Vegas, who was sitting on an all-time embarrassment of riches thanks to an expansion draft for the ages. They could absorb paying all the assets for Eichel because they had young players coming, not to mention being the top free agent destination in the league.

[howard_the_duck]

Originally Posted by Roof-Daddy

I can't believe anybody is scared of the cap. We've been watching for years as teams squirm their way out of bad contracts and win cups with payrolls $10 million over lol

Once again, the cap going up doesn’t excuse reckless spending. Lindholm isn’t even the reckless part. He just offers the franchise more value at this point with his trade return than he does by re-signing.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by powderjunkie

It’s mind bottling. They also lost Marc Savard and didn’t miss a beat

Plus the “I got 3 first round picks in 2015 and all I have to show for it is Jake Debrusk” fiasco.

[Royle9]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

Plus the “I got 3 first round picks in 2015 and all I have to show for it is Jake Debrusk” fiasco.

Sounds Familiar….
Oh right.

2013 - 3 first sound picks and all we had to show for it was Monahan.
It happens to anyone clearly, it’s a shame when it does.

Not bashing you cause I agree with your point

[Roof-Daddy]

Originally Posted by howard_the_duck

He just offers the franchise more value at this point with his trade return than he does by re-signing.

You have no idea if that's true or not unless you've been present when a rival GM gave an official offer to Conroy.

[howard_the_duck]

Originally Posted by Roof-Daddy

You have no idea if that's true or not unless you've been present when a rival GM gave an official offer to Conroy.

History gives me a pretty good idea at the calibre of return we can expect. I’m not all that deterred by the lack of movement at the draft. No one was moving picks this year.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Royle9

Sounds Familiar….
Oh right.

2013 - 3 first sound picks and all we had to show for it was Monahan.
It happens to anyone clearly, it’s a shame when it does.

Not bashing you cause I agree with your point

The big difference was the players taken right after Boston’s picks versus Calgary’s. Boston missed out on Barzal, Connor, Chabot, Erickson Ek, Boeser, Konecny, Roslovic, Beauvillier. Calgary picked Monahan, who was better than anyone who was picked afterwards, but for injuries. And in picking Poirier, Calgary missed out on Burakovsky (though Poirier could have been just as good IMO). No one after Klimchuk was any good until you get to darker horses in the 2nd round.

[PeteMoss]

There are good arguments against signing Lindholm - the main one being he probably won't be worth the money.

But it leading to some situation where we can't sign some young player who breaks out is not one of them. There is a 0% change that is a problem.

Step it up anti-Lindholm gang.

[flambers]

Originally Posted by PeteMoss

There are good arguments against signing Lindholm - the main one being he probably won't be worth the money.

Step it up anti-Lindholm gang.

My guess the biggest issue will be the term, its always a risk to sign a player to an 8 year contract (speculated) especially when the player will be approaching 30 when the deal starts.

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by Roof-Daddy

I can't believe anybody is scared of the cap. We've been watching for years as teams squirm their way out of bad contracts and win cups with payrolls $10 million over lol

Yeah but you have to have players that are okay with sitting in LTIR, retiring under suspicious circumstances, or have enough depth on your roster that you can make the playoffs with a top player hiding on LTIR. The Oilers for example used their get out of jail free cards last season and even a little help from Holland's buddy Steve this offseason hasn't helped them get out of their current salary cap bind as you only get so many rabbits you can pull out of the hat before you are pretty well paralyzed.