Proposal: Anaheim-Toronto

Sojourn

Registered User
Nov 1, 2006
50,523
9,377
They shouldn't be.

Latest(rumoured) numbers from Lindholms ask have been well under 6M.

Why not? What if Murray feels that Lindholm's value is, say, $5.4m?

I understand that everyone here has their own opinion of what Lindholm is worth, and they are willing to throw money at him, but that's pretty easy to say when it isn't your money and you aren't involved in the negotiations.

There are a lot of things Murray has done that I don't like. Trying to get the best deal possible for Anaheim, in RFA negotiations, is not one of those things.
 

Mortimer Snerd

You kids get off my lawn!
Sponsor
Jun 10, 2014
58,945
31,454
Montour and Larsson are worth a 2nd?

I'd value them higher, currently, than I would the 1st.

Easily. If there is any GM in the league who has the cap to take on Stoner but would not do this deal he should be fired. Getting Larsson or Montour for only a 2nd plus a moderate cap dump is a steal.
 

Liferleafer

TSN Scrum Lurker
Feb 9, 2011
39,848
13,005
Easily. If there is any GM in the league who has the cap to take on Stoner but would not do this deal he should be fired. Getting Larsson or Montour for only a 2nd plus a moderate cap dump is a steal.

And considering Lou and company have recently been willing to take back Greening/Michalek/Laich in deals for a benefit....i can see them doing this as well.
 

BB88

Registered User
Jan 19, 2015
41,468
21,852
Why not? What if Murray feels that Lindholm's value is, say, $5.4m?

I understand that everyone here has their own opinion of what Lindholm is worth, and they are willing to throw money at him, but that's pretty easy to say when it isn't your money and you aren't involved in the negotiations.

There are a lot of things Murray has done that I don't like. Trying to get the best deal possible for Anaheim, in RFA negotiations, is not one of those things.

Then he needs to be fired, the season is already on and under 6M contract has pretty high steal potential.
He's the best young defenseman in the league.
 

Sojourn

Registered User
Nov 1, 2006
50,523
9,377
Then he needs to be fired, the season is already on and under 6M contract is screaming the word steal.
He's the best young defenseman in the league.

That just goes back to being an opinion, doesn't it?

I'm an Anaheim fan. I love what Lindholm has brought. I'm against paying him $6m+. He's not worth that yet. That's my opinion. It's just as valid as yours. :dunno:
 

Randy Randerson

Registered User
Jul 28, 2016
10,637
3,446
Hamilton
Why not? What if Murray feels that Lindholm's value is, say, $5.4m?

I understand that everyone here has their own opinion of what Lindholm is worth, and they are willing to throw money at him, but that's pretty easy to say when it isn't your money and you aren't involved in the negotiations.

There are a lot of things Murray has done that I don't like. Trying to get the best deal possible for Anaheim, in RFA negotiations, is not one of those things.

Agree, especially when the most recent comparable for Lindholm's contract is $5mil x 6years (Rielly) - that's a long term building block deal for the franchise
 

Sojourn

Registered User
Nov 1, 2006
50,523
9,377
So, the problem with signing Lindholm is the internal budget.....but they are going to buy out players to do it?

No, the problem with signing Lindholm is that he has been asking for more than Murray feels he is worth.

The actual cap is, potentially(likely) an obstacle, but the internal budget doesn't seem to be an issue right now. With the expansion coming, it looks like ownership is willing to spend to the cap.
 

McDonald19

Registered User
Sep 9, 2003
23,166
4,247
California
So, the problem with signing Lindholm is the internal budget.....but they are going to buy out players to do it?

The actual salary cap and icing a competitive roster has become more important than the internal cap.

But please provide a source that states Lindholm can't be signed because of internal budget set by a billionaire owner.
 

Randy Randerson

Registered User
Jul 28, 2016
10,637
3,446
Hamilton
This came up in another thread from a Ducks fan:

To Toronto:
Stoner (at full price)
1 of Larrsson/Montour/1st

To Ducks:
2nd

This gives the Ducks some cap flexability and gives Toronto a decent, albeit over payed, Dman as well as a future piece. I would prefer 1 of the players over the 1st, but would do any of them.

I haven't really seen any Ducks fans respond as to what they think about the deal, more in defense of Larsson&Montour being worth more than a 2nd (which obviously they are)

From the leafs side I could get behind this, we could use another high upside D prospect especially from the Right side or that 1st rounder could be either used on a faller (Konecny, Julien Gauthier, German Rubtsov type) or to trade down for additional picks if someone really wants an available player (seems to be a go-to move for our management group). I don't think the 1st+Stoner is enough because that's probably only like a 10-15 place jump from our 2nd, but one of the prospects could do it
 

Liferleafer

TSN Scrum Lurker
Feb 9, 2011
39,848
13,005
The actual salary cap and icing a competitive roster has become more important than the internal cap.

But please provide a source that states Lindholm can't be signed because of internal budget set by a billionaire owner.

The only source i have is that the Ducks are currently playing....and Lindholm is not. If, as you say, there aren't cap issues....one would think he'd be signed.
 

Sojourn

Registered User
Nov 1, 2006
50,523
9,377
The only source i have is that the Ducks are currently playing....and Lindholm is not. If, as you say, there aren't cap issues....one would think he'd be signed.

That argument is a fallacy. Both sides still need to agree to a contract salary and term.
 

McDonald19

Registered User
Sep 9, 2003
23,166
4,247
California
Then why haven't we done anything? We put Despres on LTIR, yet still no Lindholm signed.

I was pushing this idea before Despres was put on LTIR, but since that happened and still no signed Lindholm, there must be something we're not seeing that is keeping that idea from working.

They are getting closer on salary.

They are bridging a gap that was as big as 2 mil per at one point (Ducks at 5, Lindholm at 7).
 

McDonald19

Registered User
Sep 9, 2003
23,166
4,247
California
I haven't really seen any Ducks fans respond as to what they think about the deal, more in defense of Larsson&Montour being worth more than a 2nd (which obviously they are)

From the leafs side I could get behind this, we could use another high upside D prospect especially from the Right side or that 1st rounder could be either used on a faller (Konecny, Julien Gauthier, German Rubtsov type) or to trade down for additional picks if someone really wants an available player (seems to be a go-to move for our management group). I don't think the 1st+Stoner is enough because that's probably only like a 10-15 place jump from our 2nd, but one of the prospects could do it

Basically the Ducks are selling a very good prospect for a 2nd round pick.

Larsson and Montour are NHL ready, the 2nd round pick has a 50/50 chance of helping Anaheim in 5 years.
 

Advanced stats

Registered User
May 26, 2010
11,689
7,621
Montour/Larsson+Stoner

For

3rd + c prospect and this leafs fan is all on board.

Our second could be quite valuable though. No offering it.

Or take your pick of our bottom pairing dmen or Martin, Holland, michalek.
 

WHOneedsSOX

Registered User
Mar 1, 2015
5,460
3,073
Trades, buyouts next summer (Bieksa, Stoner). Get the contract done worry about that later.

Hard to worry about it later though when every team knows you're desperate to shed salary. You can't just keep Despres and Thompson on LTIR forever if they're healthy.
 

Liferleafer

TSN Scrum Lurker
Feb 9, 2011
39,848
13,005
Basically the Ducks are selling a very good prospect for a 2nd round pick.

Larsson and Montour are NHL ready, the 2nd round pick has a 50/50 chance of helping Anaheim in 5 years.

My proposal was more to benefit the Ducks with Stoner's cap while giving the Leafs a future piece. If, as you say, the Ducks don't need that space...then it doesn't make sense for them.
 

caliamad

Registered User
Mar 14, 2003
4,442
423
Visit site
Basically the Ducks are selling a very good prospect for a 2nd round pick.

Larsson and Montour are NHL ready, the 2nd round pick has a 50/50 chance of helping Anaheim in 5 years.

Theodore yes, larsson maybe, Montour we can't say that.

I still would give up any of them unless Toronto gives us their first.

Our first and third or equivalent propsect for their 2nd? He'll yeah.
 

Randy Randerson

Registered User
Jul 28, 2016
10,637
3,446
Hamilton
Basically the Ducks are selling a very good prospect for a 2nd round pick.

Larsson and Montour are NHL ready, the 2nd round pick has a 50/50 chance of helping Anaheim in 5 years.

The benefit back would be cap/budget relief with Stoner, presumably to sign Lindholm

Agree that both of those prospects are worth more than a 2nd in isolation, just wondering if that financial relief is worth anything to Ducks fans? Toronto is in a position to provide that relief over the next 2-3 years so it would make sense for us if we could add to our D prospect corps
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad