Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community

Go Back   Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community > Main Forums > Fire on Ice: The Calgary Flames Forum
Register Forum Rules FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 10-10-2023, 12:32 PM   #8801
dino7c
Franchise Player
 
dino7c's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ashasx View Post
I don't think Lindholm is a top player or anywhere close to it so it's hard to gauge what his value relative to the highest paid players in the league.

I just think that's his value right now and even then, I think it's likely that becomes a contract this team quickly regrets. There's no surplus value there for the team - only deficit - on a team loaded with deficit contracts.
You said immovable object...that is what I disagree with if he is making just over half of what top players are making
Horvat moved for a decent return

I'm saying 8x8.5 would not be an "immovable object"

if we are getting in the 9's it gets more risky
__________________
GFG
dino7c is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-10-2023, 12:34 PM   #8802
Ashasx
Franchise Player
 
Ashasx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dino7c View Post
You said immovable object...that is what I disagree with if he is making just over half of what top players are making
Horvat moved for a decent return

I'm saying 8x8.5 would not be an "immovable object"

if we are getting in the 9's it gets more risky
If the Flames sign Lindholm to 8x8.5 and he has a repeat of last season, that's a negative value contract that the Flames would have to entice for another team to take.

Also though, just the idea of having to convince Lindholm to take a massive overpayment to stay here rubs me the wrong way. I mean I get it, if you feel the team can't compete, may as well make bank, but I'm getting kinda annoyed that the Flames can't nail these contracts.

Last edited by Ashasx; 10-10-2023 at 12:36 PM.
Ashasx is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Ashasx For This Useful Post:
Old 10-10-2023, 12:38 PM   #8803
dino7c
Franchise Player
 
dino7c's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ashasx View Post
If the Flames sign Lindholm to 8x8.5 and he has a repeat of last season, that's a negative value contract that the Flames would have to entice for another team to take.

Also though, just the idea of having to convince Lindholm to take a massive overpayment to stay here rubs me the wrong way. I mean I get it, if you feel the team can't compete, may as well make bank, but I'm getting kinda annoyed that the Flames can't nail these contracts.
Horvat had 70 points last season...his previous high being 61 and got a handsome return with a 8.5M contract attached
Lindholm is a better all around player...had 64 points in his terrible year under Sutter

you can debate if the Flames should do it or not based on where their team is but Lindholm's market value is AT LEAST 8.5. That would not be an overpay.
__________________
GFG

Last edited by dino7c; 10-10-2023 at 12:42 PM.
dino7c is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to dino7c For This Useful Post:
Old 10-10-2023, 12:42 PM   #8804
Tkachukwagon
Powerplay Quarterback
 
Tkachukwagon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2019
Exp:
Default

https://twitter.com/user/status/1711814113658044598
Tkachukwagon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-10-2023, 12:42 PM   #8805
Ashasx
Franchise Player
 
Ashasx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dino7c View Post
Horvat had 70 points last season...his previous high being 61 and got a handsome return with a 8.5M contract attached

Lindholm is a better all around player...had 64 points in his terrible year under Sutter
I'm not disagreeing with anything you've written here. I'm just pegging the value I see Lindholm bringing to this team.
Ashasx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-10-2023, 12:43 PM   #8806
dino7c
Franchise Player
 
dino7c's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Exp:
Default

I am only debating the "immovable object" talk

teams would love to have him at 8.5, he will be making that plus somewhere next year I would bet the farm
you don't think CBJ would want Lindholm at that price? let alone the Flames having to pay to move him lol
__________________
GFG
dino7c is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-10-2023, 12:45 PM   #8807
Saqe
#1 Goaltender
 
Saqe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Exp:
Default

The problem again is paying multiple 30 year olds for eight years based on their prime years of production. The contracts get riskier as they age and you can realistically expect diminishing returns on the back half of those deals, if not earlier. Heck, we just saw Huberdeau have a disaster of a season and he just turned 30.
Saqe is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Saqe For This Useful Post:
Old 10-10-2023, 12:55 PM   #8808
Ashasx
Franchise Player
 
Ashasx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dino7c View Post
I am only debating the "immovable object" talk

teams would love to have him at 8.5, he will be making that plus somewhere next year I would bet the farm
you don't think CBJ would want Lindholm at that price? let alone the Flames having to pay to move him lol
I just can't really be more clear than yes, I think Lindholm is a negative value contract at 8.5x8.

And this team is loaded with these contracts. I think whether the Flames want to compete or rebuild, it is the wrong contract to sign.
Ashasx is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Ashasx For This Useful Post:
Old 10-10-2023, 01:00 PM   #8809
Harry Lime
Franchise Player
 
Harry Lime's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Exp:
Default

This is going back a ways, but if I remember correctly the main sticking point was that Lindy wanted trade protection, and for the Flames the back half of that contract having protection was a non-starter. That was reported sometime in the summer.
__________________
"By Grabthar's hammer ... what a savings."
Harry Lime is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-10-2023, 01:01 PM   #8810
Hockey_Ninja
 
Hockey_Ninja's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Cleveland, OH (Grew up in Calgary)
Exp:
Default

I’d honestly be shocked if Hanifin signed instead of Lindy. I always felt like both were gonna be traded
__________________
Just trying to do my best
Hockey_Ninja is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-10-2023, 01:06 PM   #8811
Tkachukwagon
Powerplay Quarterback
 
Tkachukwagon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2019
Exp:
Default

https://twitter.com/user/status/1711816518118638051

Comtois released from PTO with Vegas
Tkachukwagon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-10-2023, 01:10 PM   #8812
dino7c
Franchise Player
 
dino7c's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ashasx View Post
I just can't really be more clear than yes, I think Lindholm is a negative value contract at 8.5x8.

And this team is loaded with these contracts. I think whether the Flames want to compete or rebuild, it is the wrong contract to sign.
Well you are wrong IMO

CBJ would pay for him and give him 8.5 right now for example
__________________
GFG
dino7c is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to dino7c For This Useful Post:
Old 10-10-2023, 01:18 PM   #8813
Ashasx
Franchise Player
 
Ashasx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dino7c View Post
Well you are wrong IMO

CBJ would pay for him and give him 8.5 right now for example
I guess I'm just projecting out for a contract that wouldn't begin until 2024/2025, but I'm not denying Lindholm's trade value right now.

But I think we're kinda getting lost in the weeds here at this point.
Ashasx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-10-2023, 01:18 PM   #8814
OILFAN #81
Everyone's Favorite Oilfan!
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: San Jose, California
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dino7c View Post
Well you are wrong IMO

CBJ would pay for him and give him 8.5 right now for example
CBJ and other teams with cap space/not playoff teams would pay for him yes I agree but contending teams, etc wouldn't for that price. Colorado wouldn't take on a contract like that for that player for example, imo. Just because teams like CBJ would trade for him doesn't mean a contract like 8.75 x 8, 9 x 8 or 9.3 x 8 would be right though.
OILFAN #81 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-10-2023, 01:18 PM   #8815
dustygoon
Franchise Player
 
dustygoon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Bay Area
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tkachukwagon View Post
I would want out too given how they handle medical conditions. Next they will be using leaches on Boeser's bad knee.
__________________
.
"Fun must be always!" - Tomas Hertl
dustygoon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-10-2023, 01:21 PM   #8816
Bonded
Franchise Player
 
Bonded's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dino7c View Post
I am only debating the "immovable object" talk

teams would love to have him at 8.5, he will be making that plus somewhere next year I would bet the farm
you don't think CBJ would want Lindholm at that price? let alone the Flames having to pay to move him lol
I don’t think too many teams trade for Horvat
Bonded is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-10-2023, 01:27 PM   #8817
dino7c
Franchise Player
 
dino7c's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by OILFAN #81 View Post
CBJ and other teams with cap space/not playoff teams would pay for him yes I agree but contending teams, etc wouldn't for that price. Colorado wouldn't take on a contract like that for that player for example, imo. Just because teams like CBJ would trade for him doesn't mean a contract like 8.75 x 8, 9 x 8 or 9.3 x 8 would be right though.
For the 100th time I am arguing the "negative value" take

So you agree, Lindholm at 8.5 would have value.
__________________
GFG
dino7c is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-10-2023, 01:31 PM   #8818
Major Major
First Line Centre
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dino7c View Post
For the 100th time I am arguing the "negative value" take

So you agree, Lindholm at 8.5 would have value.
Depends what he does this year. If he has a repeat of last season, I doubt he gets much more than 7x7. He does worse? May be on a show me deal like Hall.
Major Major is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-10-2023, 02:01 PM   #8819
dustygoon
Franchise Player
 
dustygoon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Bay Area
Exp:
Default

This is a strange debate. If another team had room in its structure to acquire a player with an 8.5mm x 8 year deal attached, then i guess a trade could happen.

But its effectively untradeable even if the player isn't underperforming because no teams can digest that.
__________________
.
"Fun must be always!" - Tomas Hertl
dustygoon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-10-2023, 02:06 PM   #8820
Paulie Walnuts
Lifetime Suspension
 
Join Date: Sep 2022
Exp:
Default

Lindholm in Calgary has been a 0.88 player. Do we seem him continue on that path and is that worth 9 million plus for the next 8 years?

He has shown he can't carry his own line, but he can be a very good complimentary piece on a line. That's the issue I think its hard to figure out.

He has value to us for sure as he fills a hole, but at 9 plus for 8 more years that's a tough one.
Paulie Walnuts is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:47 AM.

Calgary Flames
2024-25




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright Calgarypuck 2021 | See Our Privacy Policy