[Rumour] Chris Johnston: Lindholm is interested in staying

[indes]

Without Lindholm we're ####ed. No #1C and none in the wings is not a good look now or going forward. Unless the flames win the lottery (LOL) we won't even see a 2024 first round center until probably 2027, potentially becoming an impact player in 2029. That could be 6 years with Kadri as our #1 center.

Maybe it sounds far fetched but how long was it from Nieuwy to Monahan? It would be much different if we had some high level C prospects but we don't. We also aren't likely to making any top 10 picks soon.

#1Cs or potential #1Cs are also incredibly difficult to trade for. Don't see the upside to Lindholm leaving through any means. I mean it could be moot if Lindholm or Hanifin are traded for a blue chip C but I haven't heard any rumblings about that happening.

[Hackey]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

Everything sucks. Nothing is good. The future is bleak. The present is misery. There is no hope.

How do you manage?

Sent from my SM-G986W using Tapatalk

Use the block feature if my posts bother you that much. Wah.

[Hackey]

Originally Posted by indes

Without Lindholm we're ####ed. No #1C and none in the wings is not a good look now or going forward. Unless the flames win the lottery (LOL) we won't even see a 2024 first round center until probably 2027, potentially becoming an impact player in 2029. That could be 6 years with Kadri as our #1 center.

Maybe it sounds far fetched but how long was it from Nieuwy to Monahan? It would be much different if we had some high level C prospects but we don't. We also aren't likely to making any top 10 picks soon.

#1Cs or potential #1Cs are also incredibly difficult to trade for. Don't see the upside to Lindholm leaving through any means. I mean it could be moot if Lindholm or Hanifin are traded for a blue chip C but I haven't heard any rumblings about that happening.

No one is trading a blue chip prospect for either. Only way I could see you flipping them for something similar is if you strategically traded with a team with potential to have an underwhelming season and their 1st ended up being top 10. Similar to the Avs and Sens trade. Would the Flames even make a trade like that though? Probably not.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by Hackey

Use the block feature if my posts bother you that much. Wah.

I think he’s just asking how you manage. Such a miserable outlook must be tough.

[shutout]

Originally Posted by Hackey

Use the block feature if my posts bother you that much. Wah.

[TheIronMaiden]

Originally Posted by indes

Without Lindholm we're ####ed. No #1C and none in the wings is not a good look now or going forward. Unless the flames win the lottery (LOL) we won't even see a 2024 first round center until probably 2027, potentially becoming an impact player in 2029. That could be 6 years with Kadri as our #1 center.

Maybe it sounds far fetched but how long was it from Nieuwy to Monahan? It would be much different if we had some high level C prospects but we don't. We also aren't likely to making any top 10 picks soon.

#1Cs or potential #1Cs are also incredibly difficult to trade for. Don't see the upside to Lindholm leaving through any means. I mean it could be moot if Lindholm or Hanifin are traded for a blue chip C but I haven't heard any rumblings about that happening.

I think the idea is that we will suck. The Flames can't rebuild properly unless they get a few cracks at top five draft picks.

[The Yen Man]

I'd argue the biggest difference between Vegas and Calgary are two things out of their control, arena and geographical location affecting UFA's desire to sign there. In terms of cap management and prospect management, Vegas is probably even worse position than the Flames. They got lucky with Adin Hill. Had he turned out to be Markstrom 2 and Oilers beat them, would we still be singing their praises?

[SuperMatt18]

People underestimate how much luck and timing plays a role into winning a Stanley Cup and going on a run.

Sure some teams are powerhouses...Tampa Bay being the one example.

But honestly other recent champions like Washington, St.Louis, Vegas and to a lesser extend Colorado had a lot go right to be able to win their cups.

[The Yen Man]

I mean, Vegas had to turn to their 3rd string goalie to bail them out in the playoffs. They got REAL lucky Adin Hill was able to have a great stretch at the right time.

Edit: And this is why, last year, the only part I was miffed about was Sutter stubbornly sticking with Markstrom when he clearly struggled against the Oilers. Put Vladar in, and what's the worst that can happen? They lose still lose in 5? Give Vegas credit, they are quick to make adjustments when things aren't working, and won't let stubborness drive their decisions.

[Winsor_Pilates]

Originally Posted by dino7c

Flames won the division twice...only Calgary and Vegas have won the Pacific since Vegas entered the league

Are we pretending the 2 biggest reasons for that didn't leave & this is the same team?
If we still had those guys; yes we'd still be a contender and have every reason to run it back hoping this is the year they break through.
But that ship has sailed... we aren't Vegas people.

[blankall]

Originally Posted by The Yen Man

I mean, Vegas had to turn to their 3rd string goalie to bail them out in the playoffs. They got REAL lucky Adin Hill was able to have a great stretch at the right time.

Edit: And this is why, last year, the only part I was miffed about was Sutter stubbornly sticking with Markstrom when he clearly struggled against the Oilers. Put Vladar in, and what's the worst that can happen? They lose still lose in 5? Give Vegas credit, they are quick to make adjustments when things aren't working, and won't let stubborness drive their decisions.

To be fair to Vegas, they are used to playing with 3rd, and even 5th string goalies. I have never seen an organization eat through so many goalies. They were trying to plug that hole with older, and thereby more injury prone, players but still....Vegas going with a 3rd string goalie is something they are 100% prepared for and part of the plan.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by SuperMatt18

People underestimate how much luck and timing plays a role into winning a Stanley Cup and going on a run.

Sure some teams are powerhouses...Tampa Bay being the one example.

But honestly other recent champions like Washington, St.Louis, Vegas and to a lesser extend Colorado had a lot go right to be able to win their cups.

Huge turnover from their last appearance in the finals (or even conference finals) with 6/10 of their top producers aged 30+ and their third-string goalie putting on the best goaltending performance in the entire playoffs.

But apparently, they're the model of a contender and the Flames couldn't possibly be close.

Hockey fans are obsessed with re-writing history to act like every winner and every star was one in the making and everybody knew it. Guys like O'Reilly weren't good enough to win it all, and then he did, and then he always was. Teams like Vegas get all the luck in the world (and go however many million over the cap) and they're suddenly the model contender, just like Tampa, just like Colorado, etc.

That's why it's never a bad thing to wait and see and, if the team is close, going for it.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by SuperMatt18

People underestimate how much luck and timing plays a role into winning a Stanley Cup and going on a run.

Sure some teams are powerhouses...Tampa Bay being the one example.

But honestly other recent champions like Washington, St.Louis, Vegas and to a lesser extend Colorado had a lot go right to be able to win their cups.

Washington and Colorado were both top teams in the years preceding the Cup wins - the Capitals won back-to back Presidents trophies the two seasons before they won the Cup, while the Avs finished 3rd, 2nd, and 2nd overall in the NHL before they won. Vegas had sustained success in the regular season and playoffs before they won it, including two division titles, a President’s Trophy, three conference finals, and a Cup finals.

Yes, you need good fortune to make it through the hazards of a four-round playoff run. But teams that win the Cup almost always have a recent pedigree as an elite team. Championships like the Blues are the exception, not the norm.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by The Yen Man

I mean, Vegas had to turn to their 3rd string goalie to bail them out in the playoffs. They got REAL lucky Adin Hill was able to have a great stretch at the right time.

Edit: And this is why, last year, the only part I was miffed about was Sutter stubbornly sticking with Markstrom when he clearly struggled against the Oilers. Put Vladar in, and what's the worst that can happen? They lose still lose in 5? Give Vegas credit, they are quick to make adjustments when things aren't working, and won't let stubborness drive their decisions.

I didn't expect Vegas to compete this year. Mainly because of goaltending but also I didn't think Eichel would rebound.

Hill was a lot like Kipper. Used out of necessity but looking at his background, no reason to be that shocked that he did well.

[DJones]

I just hate the waiting. Either sign and lets get on with it. Or lets retain half on Lindholm/Backlund/Hanifin and take a year off to retool.

Completely different years ahead depending if he re-signs.

[Redrum]

Originally Posted by SuperMatt18

People underestimate how much luck and timing plays a role into winning a Stanley Cup and going on a run.

Sure some teams are powerhouses...Tampa Bay being the one example.

But honestly other recent champions like Washington, St.Louis, Vegas and to a lesser extend Colorado had a lot go right to be able to win their cups.

That's why it would be great to build a team that consistently makes the playoffs, instead of every other year with worse odds.

[howard_the_duck]

Originally Posted by SuperMatt18

People underestimate how much luck and timing plays a role into winning a Stanley Cup and going on a run.

Sure some teams are powerhouses...Tampa Bay being the one example.

But honestly other recent champions like Washington, St.Louis, Vegas and to a lesser extend Colorado had a lot go right to be able to win their cups.

There's no denying luck. But I'd way sooner build my franchise on the model of the teams that are consistently in the conversation and have seen some repeatable playoff success. When you're in that category, spending draft picks/prospect capital makes all the sense in the world to maximize your window.

The lightning-in-a-bottle exceptions happen, but 'get in and anything can happen' isn't an advisable strategy.

Broken record, but behaving like a small market franchise would be a wonderful approach right about now.

[Hackey]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

I think he’s just asking how you manage. Such a miserable outlook must be tough.

Not really. It's just sports. And I think what I said was completely valid and reasonable. How much of the Flames failures last year was on the coach and how much was on the players? And if they have a similar season this year then that's pretty disheartening considering the contracts and age of players. Last year was a pretty boring season. Just means I don't watch as often. I will still continue to hope they start running things with a bit more emphasis on being elite not just average.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

Washington and Colorado were both top teams in the years preceding the Cup wins - the Capitals won back-to back Presidents trophies the two seasons before they won the Cup, while the Avs finished 3rd, 2nd, and 2nd overall in the NHL before they won. Vegas had sustained success in the regular season and playoffs before they won it, including two division titles, a President’s Trophy, three conference finals, and a Cup finals.

Yes, you need good fortune to make it through the hazards of a four-round playoff run. But teams that win the Cup almost always have a recent pedigree as an elite team. Championships like the Blues are the exception, not the norm.

Sure, but in hindsight, with any winner, you can make the case that they were elite for a while.

If the Flames went on a run, it would be pretty easy to say they have won 2 division titles in the last 5 years, have strong depth, and a goalie that has gotten Vezina votes.

The difference between winning and good, but not enough playoff success, is very marginal, and usually includes a hot goalie

[Hackey]

The Flames are about 50% in making the playoffs in the last decade and the Caps were like 90% before winning the Cup. The Caps won their division like 80% of the time. The Flames are probably like 30%. Caps won the Presidents Trophy the 2 years before the Cup. We also don't have the leagues greatest goal scorer ever. We don't have a number 1 dman like Carlson. Lindholm is no Kuznetsov in his prime. Maybe he's a Backstrom. I think we're squinting pretty hard to see these teams as comparable.