[Signing] Lindholm signs 6-year / $29.1M contract ($4.85M AAV)

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

I agree.

But I was offering the only likely scenario where Brouwer gets bought out this summer. The buy out period is currently closed. We only get a new window if player-initiated arbitration results in someone being awarded a contract.

None of Hathaway, Kulak or Jankowski are going to command big money - so the most likely scenario that sees us needing to clear that space via buy out is Hanafin.

Though I'd be happier if we convinced someone to take Brouwer at 50% retained in exchange for a player to be named and a promise to just forget to name any player.

I am not sure that's correct. I think they can buy out a contract as long as there are any arbitration filings (and can do so within 48 hours of 3 days after the last ruling or settlement).

https://www.silversevensens.com/2015...efresher-guide

The second is a window related to arbitration, and it carries some extra restrictions. For this window to open, the team has to have a player that filed for arbitration. This window opens on the third day after the team's last arbitration is concluded (or settled, if it doesn't make it to a hearing) and is open for 48 hours. There are also restrictions on which players can be bought out - First, the player has to have been on the reserve list as of the last trade deadline (so no buying out that off-season signing you regret until the next trade deadline). Second, there is a minimum cap value for a contract to be eligible for this - $2.75m AAV initially, but the value goes up based on the average league salary each year. The notable absence in those restrictions is that it has nothing to do with who went to arbitration, any player who meets those two restrictions can be bought out. There's one last catch, though - this can only be done three times by each team. Not three times per year - three times over the entire length of the current CBA.


This suggests that as long as any player files (which obviously a few have), it doesn't matter if you go all the way through or settle outside of arbitration. You just have to wait until the arbitration contracts are all dealt with.

ETA: beaten to this explanation. I think that they buy out Brouwer only if they need the room for a long term Hanifin deal.

[TheScorpion]

Stone shouldn't be moved. He reminds me of Kris Russell in a way that he passes the eye test while having mediocre underlying numbers -- except that Stone is also bigger, more physical, and has a hard (if inaccurate) shot. In my opinion, he shouldn't be taken out of the lineup to make room for a guy like Andersson... Kulak should be.

[flamesfan1297]

Really happy with this contract. Came in cheaper than I expected and good term. I'd bet this looks like a steal after years 2

[Vinny01]

Originally Posted by Niemo

There should be takers if we retain 1.5MM on Brouwer hopefully...... I dont think we move Stone. I feel hes underrated. Only guy that can step up if there is an injury.

I wonder if Vancouver would take him at $3M per? Matches the money for Roussel and Beagle and they seem to be targeting 30+ “character” guys

[N-E-B]

I like the deal. Personally I don’t think Lindholm is worth much more than what he got, so I can’t say it’s a home run or anything. It’s a fair and good deal for both sides.

[SeeGeeWhy]

Will this make backlund redundant?

[ricardodw]

Originally Posted by Vinny01

I do hope the Flames do find a way to dump Brouwer or buy him out.

Here are the deals I would hope for

Hanifin 7 years x $5.5M
Jankowski 4 years x $2.5M
Kulak 2 years $750k
Hathaway 1 year $500k

Flames would need to shed $1.5M or so to make that happen. Buying out Brouwer makes it doable.

The one thing I really hope happens is locking up Hanifin long term.

Nit picking but if Hathaway signs the qualifying offer he is at $715 k

[Classic_Sniper]

Originally Posted by Bingo

He doesn't have to get any better or worse to make that contract market.

The fact that he's 23 and has all of his contract years in the period of time where players generally don't hit a wall is key. What is going to make a useful middle six forward that scores 45 points consistently while also playing a role on the PK, PP and 3 on 3 hit a wall between ages 23 and 29?

Brouwer isn't a good comparison.



Careful with "people" as I'd call that a small minority, and unlikely the person you're debating this with.

The Backlund contract was "market" as well, but does come with a lot of 30s so it's a different concern.

Fair enough. He can certainly play in a lot of different situations which reduces risk, but to me, there's inherent risk in trading for a player who found success on a different team and is then expected to do the same for another team.

Was he potentially over utilized and put in favorable positions and will he have the same opportunities with the Flames? He's averaged over 18 minutes a game with the Hurricanes in the last few seasons which would have put him 4th on the Flames in minutes. I'm not sure he'll get the same minutes here which could potentially drop his production. That's where I feel uncertain about Lindholm. But with the $4.85M deal he just signed along with no trade/movement clauses, that certainly makes it all the more palatable for me.

[GreenLantern2814]

Originally Posted by TheScorpion

Stone shouldn't be moved. He reminds me of Kris Russell in a way that he passes the eye test while having mediocre underlying numbers -- except that Stone is also bigger, more physical, and has a hard (if inaccurate) shot. In my opinion, he shouldn't be taken out of the lineup to make room for a guy like Andersson... Kulak should be.

I agree with this. I'd much rather deal Kulak for something a little more interesting than what Stone could fetch. I think Stone is underated around here - he's not a perfect player, but he has a set of skills that nobody else in the organization does.

Every other year this team drafts some massive guy in the hopes he'll turn out. People hope we're getting the next Chara.

Michael Stone is what it looks like when those guys hit. If Keegan Kanzig had been as good as Michael Stone, he'd be a here.

Stone doesn't destroy guys, but he's better than anyone on this roster at breaking up the cycle down low and sealing his man against the boards. He has the size and strength to erase most guys from the play.

I feel confident predicting that at no point in the season will Michael Stone's 16 quality minutes a night be the reason the Flames aren't performing to expectations.

[red sky]

Originally Posted by ricardodw

Nit picking but if Hathaway signs the qualifying offer he is at $715 k

How does this signing compare to what Cane's model was predicting?

[btimbit]

Originally Posted by SeeGeeWhy

Will this make backlund redundant?

Maybe in a few years but for now it's looking like it will make Frolik expendable if he doesn't have a bounce back year

[Vinny01]

Originally Posted by ricardodw

Nit picking but if Hathaway signs the qualifying offer he is at $715 k

Yeah I was not aware of that but wild have no problem moving on from Hathaway but if they buy out or trade/retain on Brouwer they can still squeeze Hathaway in while giving Hanifin the long term deal

[Classic_Sniper]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

How many 23 year old, 5th overall picks that made the NHL in their 1st year, and are career .50 PPG, with 374 games under their belt, regress at the age of 24?

I'll wait while you try to think of one.

Comparing him to Brouwer and Raymond is laughable.

Even comparing him to Backlund is a bit of a stretch, considering their ages. But if you want to, it's Backlund's contract that would be the more worrisome, considering his age. And I am not concerned about Backlund's contract.

I would like to see a 4 handle on Lindholm's contract too, but that's unlikely, unless it is 5 years or shorter. If it's 6 years or longer, there is no way it will have a 4 handle.

Like I stated to Bingo, for me, the questions that I have for Lindholm is the risk in trading for a player who found success on a different team and is then expected to do the same for another team. Was he potentially over utilized and put in favorable positions to have success and will he have the same opportunities with the Flames?

He's averaged over 18 minutes a game with the Hurricanes in the last few seasons which would have put him 4th on the Flames in minutes. I'm not sure he'll get the same minutes here which could potentially drop his production.

That's where I feel uncertain about Lindholm. But with the $4.85M deal he just signed along with the lack of no trade/movement clauses, that certainly makes the deal all the more palatable for me as he can be easily moved if everything goes south for whatever reason.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by Vinny01

I do hope the Flames do find a way to dump Brouwer or buy him out.

Here are the deals I would hope for

Hanifin 7 years x $5.5M
Jankowski 4 years x $2.5M
Kulak 2 years $750k
Hathaway 1 year $500k

Flames would need to shed $1.5M or so to make that happen. Buying out Brouwer makes it doable.

The one thing I really hope happens is locking up Hanifin long term.

I don't see any way that happens. Hanifin has less to hang his hat on at this point than Lindholm does, plus he has more RFA years left.

Probably a bridge for $3M or less (likely less), or a longer term deal in the low to mid 4s. A 7 year number for Hanifin at this stage would probably be in the $4.35 - $4.5M range. But I doubt very much that he would want to sign that. So probably a bridge.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by Vinny01

Yeah I was not aware of that but wild have no problem moving on from Hathaway but if they buy out or trade/retain on Brouwer they can still squeeze Hathaway in while giving Hanifin the long term deal

Honestly, Hathaway can stay or go, the Flames could end up with 15 forwards under contract, and if your team is improving its got to be guys like Hathaway that are pushed off of your roster.

[the2bears]

Originally Posted by Classic_Sniper

Like I stated to Bingo, for me, the questions that I have for Lindholm is the risk in trading for a player who found success on a different team and is then expected to do the same for another team. Was he potentially over utilized and put in favorable positions to have success and will he have the same opportunities with the Flames?

He's averaged over 18 minutes a game with the Hurricanes in the last few seasons which would have put him 4th on the Flames in minutes. I'm not sure he'll get the same minutes here which could potentially drop his production.

That's where I feel uncertain about Lindholm. But with the $4.85M deal he just signed along with the lack of no trade/movement clauses, that certainly makes the deal all the more palatable for me as he can be easily moved if everything goes south for whatever reason.

But really, what risk? You mention minutes, but if he's doing well he'll get minutes. Should they target players who've done bad for another team? I'm not getting your concern... it's pretty standard to see someone perform on another team and covet them in a trade.

[TheScorpion]

Brouwer to Vancouver would've been an intriguing option before free agency. I honestly can't see them taking another one of those guys -- but then again, with Benning, you never know.

I don't think Brouwer is as bad as we like to say around here -- I honestly think it's just been a really awful fit here -- but he sure doesn't have much value.

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by TheScorpion

Stone shouldn't be moved. He reminds me of Kris Russell in a way that he passes the eye test while having mediocre underlying numbers -- except that Stone is also bigger, more physical, and has a hard (if inaccurate) shot. In my opinion, he shouldn't be taken out of the lineup to make room for a guy like Andersson... Kulak should be.

If you move Stone, it is not so much to make room for Andersson, as I agree with you that he is better than Kulak. It is to create flexibility for possible in season deals.

And whereas trading Stone at least gets you back an asset, buying out Brouwer creates a liability for an extra two years.

[EldrickOnIce]

Originally Posted by SeeGeeWhy

Will this make backlund redundant?

I see Backlund as a fantastic mentor.
I don't care where from, it's hard to adjust to life away from 'home'. Having a guy like Backlund around may do really good things for Lindholm going forward.

[the2bears]

Originally Posted by TheScorpion

Brouwer to Vancouver would've been an intriguing option before free agency. I honestly can't see them taking another one of those guys -- but then again, with Benning, you never know.

I don't think Brouwer is as bad as we like to say around here -- I honestly think it's just been a really awful fit here -- but he sure doesn't have much value.

We need a younger, better Brouwer to join the league. Then we trade our Brouwer to Benning. That's the only way I see this working.