[Rumour] Chris Johnston: Lindholm is interested in staying

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by topfiverecords

Not just three 2Cs. Three True #2 Cs.

lol wtf, they aren’t three true #2 C’s. At very least they’re three legit #2 C’s, maybe even three #2 C’s on an elite team.

[DoubleK]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

lol wtf, they aren’t three true #2 C’s. At very least they’re three legit #2 C’s, maybe even three #2 C’s on an elite team.

Now the Flames are an elite team?

You really aren't very good at this.

[Sandman]

Originally Posted by gvitaly

Tre did see him play but not under the coach he extended(or was about to extend) to 2 more years. He didn't see him play with any of our players. It's excusable when we as fans misjudge a player's fit, but managers should know better, have more information, or wait for more information before such a large commitment is made.

We all saw Neal have how many consecutive 20G seasons before signing him here? That's all we could hear that summer how we can just bank on 20G because he's that consistent. Sounds familiar? Remember how Huberdeau's points will replace Gaudreau's and Kadri's will replace Tkachuk who should be an 80P player without Gaudreau. That's a fine assessment from a fan or the media, but that's also what distinguishes good GMs from bad ones, and that's why they're paid the big bucks, and we're not.

GM's make long commitments to players they've never had on their team, and have never played with those players all the time, usually on July 1st every year- Free Agent Frenzy. Literally happens all the time.

[gvitaly]

Originally Posted by Jay Random

So you're saying that nobody is qualified to be a GM unless he has the power to see into the future? I'd like to know who you think is qualified, then. You, maybe?

I'm only a fan, and far from a hockey expert. It's always easier to go around an argument to make it personal. It gets exhausting.

We keep on being told how much smarter GMs are than fans, and I agree especially when it comes to hockey. How much more information GMs/coaches/players have than us, especially when you combine it with information scouts give them, and the analytics department. That's one of the first things I get reminded whenever I criticise a trade/signing, I'm just reminded to trust the process. Yet somehow, we accept bad results because they 'seemed okay at the time'. Where's the accountability when it comes to GMs?

Couldn't the Flames have waited until Christmas to sign Huberdeau? Couldn't the Flames look at all the previous mistakes and avoid signing players late into their 30s? Is it bad holding your GM to a higher standard than the average fan?

Originally Posted by Sandman

GM's make long commitments to players they've never had on their team, and have never played with those players all the time, usually on July 1st every year- Free Agent Frenzy. Literally happens all the time.

Yet here we had the option to actually watch the player play. Like we did with Weegar for example. The point is that Tre needed a W, and that's why he rushed it. I agree that you can't watch free agents play for you, but that means that our managment team is doing something wrong at projecting the value of players before signing them.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by DoubleK

Now the Flames are an elite team?

You really aren't very good at this.

Whoosh.

[topfiverecords]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

lol wtf, they aren’t three true #2 C’s. At very least they’re three legit #2 C’s, maybe even three #2 C’s on an elite team.

Whoosh.

[flamesgod]

Originally Posted by gvitaly

Tre did see him play but not under the coach he extended(or was about to extend) to 2 more years. He didn't see him play with any of our players. It's excusable when we as fans misjudge a player's fit, but managers should know better, have more information, or wait for more information before such a large commitment is made.

We all saw Neal have how many consecutive 20G seasons before signing him here? That's all we could hear that summer how we can just bank on 20G because he's that consistent. Sounds familiar? Remember how Huberdeau's points will replace Gaudreau's and Kadri's will replace Tkachuk who should be an 80P player without Gaudreau. That's a fine assessment from a fan or the media, but that's also what distinguishes good GMs from bad ones, and that's why they're paid the big bucks, and we're not.

I guess he shouldn’t have extended Lindholm and Hanifin for 6 years each hey?

[gvitaly]

Originally Posted by flamesgod

I guess he shouldn’t have extended Lindholm and Hanifin for 6 years each hey?

Which one of them was signed into years in his 30s?

Is there a difference between signing a 21 year old Hanifin, and a 23 year old Lindholm to signing a 31 year old Neal, a 31 year old Brouwer, a 31 year old Kadri, a 30 year old Markstrom, a 30 year old Huberdeau, or a 29 year old Coleman? You tell me. The only one we lucked out on was Tanev.

[1qqaaz]

If Lindholm signs an 8 year deal and plays 75+ games per year, he'll have over 1000 games as a Flame and be second only to Iginla.

[Sandman]

Originally Posted by gvitaly

Which one of them was signed into years in his 30s?

Is there a difference between signing a 21 year old Hanifin, and a 23 year old Lindholm to signing a 31 year old Neal, a 31 year old Brouwer, a 31 year old Kadri, a 30 year old Markstrom, a 30 year old Huberdeau, or a 30 year old Coleman? You tell me.

Technically, we still don't really know what we have in Huberdeau or Kadri, as last year's mismanagement by Sutter destroyed their numbers. We don't know what their true value is in relation to their contracts yet. I'll give you one thing- the last few years of each contract will hurt, that much is certain. However, if the cap keeps going up, the salaries will seem slightly more palatable in time, especially if Huby puts up 80-90 points for the next handful of years.

[powderjunkie]

Originally Posted by gvitaly

I'm only a fan, and far from a hockey expert. It's always easier to go around an argument to make it personal. It gets exhausting.

We keep on being told how much smarter GMs are than fans, and I agree especially when it comes to hockey. How much more information GMs/coaches/players have than us, especially when you combine it with information scouts give them, and the analytics department. That's one of the first things I get reminded whenever I criticise a trade/signing, I'm just reminded to trust the process. Yet somehow, we accept bad results because they 'seemed okay at the time'. Where's the accountability when it comes to GMs?

Couldn't the Flames have waited until Christmas to sign Huberdeau? Couldn't the Flames look at all the previous mistakes and avoid signing players late into their 30s? Is it bad holding your GM to a higher standard than the average fan?



Yet here we had the option to actually watch the player play. Like we did with Weegar for example. The point is that Tre needed a W, and that's why he rushed it. I agree that you can't watch free agents play for you, but that means that our managment team is doing something wrong at projecting the value of players before signing them.

How do you think waiting would have played out better?

1. Huby plays great --> price goes up. Oops.
2. Huby plays to his more typical ~90 points --> price stays the same, but odds of him signing decrease, as he has less risk heading to UFA.
3. Huby plays bad --> price does not go down. Huby refuses to sign. We trade him for a decent haul. Okay, I guess.

Guess what, we can still probably trade him for a decent haul at some point, despite what the angry ranters here say.

[gvitaly]

Originally Posted by Sandman

Technically, we still don't really know what we have in Huberdeau or Kadri, as last year's mismanagement by Sutter destroyed their numbers. We don't know what their true value is in relation to their contracts yet. I'll give you one thing- the last few years of each contract will hurt, that much is certain. However, if the cap keeps going up, the salaries will seem slightly more palatable in time, especially if Huby puts up 80-90 points for the next handful of years.

Originally Posted by powderjunkie

How do you think waiting would have played out better?

1. Huby plays great --> price goes up. Oops. I wouldn't mind paying more
2. Huby plays to his more typical ~90 points --> price stays the same, but odds of him signing decrease, as he has less risk heading to UFA. You can trade him for an even better package if he doesn't want to stay, and you want players that want to win here
3. Huby plays bad --> price does not go down. Huby refuses to sign. We trade him for a decent haul. Okay, I guess.

Guess what, we can still probably trade him for a decent haul at some point, despite what the angry ranters here say.

Would you be able to trade either Huberdeau or Kadri for future considerations this offseason without retaining salary?

I don't mind staying positive about their production. It still doesn't change the fact that both those signings looked bad at year 1, and 0 respectively. I get that Tre was better than Feaster and Sutter, but that's still a pretty low bar. I hope Conroy is a much better GM than Tre.

Anyways I'm tired of this discussion. I'm pretty sure you guys see where I'm coming from.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by topfiverecords

Whoosh.

…whoosh?

[jayswin]

Guys, stop with the wooshes haha. I think the best point made is that Sutter was ****ed last season and we need to let each player show what they are this season. I think we'll see a much improved Huberdeau and Kadri.

[CF84]

Originally Posted by jayswin

Guys, stop with the wooshes haha. I think the best point made is that Sutter was ****ed last season and we need to let each player show what they are this season. I think we'll see a much improved Huberdeau and Kadri.

Swish

[Sandman]

Originally Posted by gvitaly

Would you be able to trade either Huberdeau or Kadri for future considerations this offseason without retaining salary?

I don't mind staying positive about their production. It still doesn't change the fact that both those signings looked bad at year 1, and 0 respectively. I get that Tre was better than Feaster and Sutter, but that's still a pretty low bar. I hope Conroy is a much better GM than Tre.

Anyways I'm tired of this discussion. I'm pretty sure you guys see where I'm coming from.

Much respect, gvitaly!!!

[dissentowner]

Originally Posted by DoubleK

Now the Flames are an elite team?

You really aren't very good at this.

They might not be an elite team, they are better than the Oilers though.

[Sandman]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

They might not be an elite team, they are better than the Oilers though.

Even when the Oilers are ahead in the standings, we are still the better team.

[combustiblefuel]

Originally Posted by Sandman

Even when the Oilers are ahead in the standings, we are still the better team.

This is the way.

[Sandman]

Originally Posted by combustiblefuel

This is the way.

This is the way.