Rumor: Lindholm Mega Thread: All Rumors/Proposals Go Here

[Ducks Nation*]

I polished up my initial proposal.

LAK receives:

Bernier (1.95M retained by ANA), 2.2M
Rights for Lindholm

ANA receives:

Jack Campbell, 600K
Brayden MacNabb, 1.6M
1st, 2nd, and 3rd round picks (one each) to ANA at the draft year(s) of ANA's choosing, should Lindholm sign with LAK; 7th rounder for a failed negotiation

I'm pretty sure this polished proposal is not lopsided by now.

wtf.

 

[KevinRedkey]

Weber for Chabot? Just make it Doughty for Tryamkin

You literally just proved my point.
So stop pushing Sergachev for Lindholm. It's not even close.

 

[Boxscore]

How about Lindholm to DET for DeKeyser?

 

[Revelation]

And I'm sure someone could argue that Griffin Reinhart looked better on draft day. Or Dumba. Or Trouba. Or even Yakupov. Is that really an argument for Sergachev?

Anaheim had a number of other defensemen they could have chosen at the draft. A number of other players, even. Ones who were, arguably, better looking at the time of the draft. Anaheim picked Lindholm because they did their homework. See what studying gets you? If we could manipulate things so that Sergachev was drafted in 2012, there is no guarantee that he goes ahead of Lindholm. I actually think it's pretty unlikely that they would. They saw something they really liked in Lindholm. Seems to me that they were right.

The argument for Sergachev is really limited to potential, and that argument is pretty questionable given what Lindholm has shown. The monetary side is nice, but are you going to move your best defenseman for a player who might potentially be as good? I wouldn't.

Monetary side seems to be more than nice in this case since it's the reason Lindholm isn't suiting up right now.

Every situation is different. Rangers just traded Brassard for someone 4 years younger (like Sergachev v Lindholm) who might potentially be as good and another asset. They're still contending, maybe not all in but contending and clearly not rebuilding.

Bruins were contending (moreso than Ducks are) when they traded Kessel for futures. Not even prospects, complete futures. Don't think any Bruins fan would walk that trade back.

If Ducks decide to rebuild and cut salary, Lindholm for Sergachev + other good stuff could be very tempting. Especially if they have Lindholm type defensemen coming up. Though it seems like their D prospects are more high impact/less steady type.
Would you trade Fowler for Sergachev?

 

[Ducks Nation*]

How about Lindholm to DET for DeKeyser?

on top of Larkin? Maybe.

 

[Revelation]

You literally just proved my point.
So stop pushing Sergachev for Lindholm. It's not even close.

No, I just showed what a total strawman it was.

Sergachev >> Chabot

Lindholm << Weber

Ducks don't have Lindholm signed, Montreal traded their most valuable asset for Weber signed til forever. Situational context matters as well.

 

[Sojourn]

Monetary side seems to be more than nice in this case since it's the reason Lindholm isn't suiting up right now.

Every situation is different. Rangers just traded Brassard for someone 4 years younger (like Sergachev v Lindholm) who might potentially be as good and another asset. They're still contending, maybe not all in but contending and clearly not rebuilding.

Bruins were contending (moreso than Ducks are) when they traded Kessel for futures. Not even prospects, complete futures. Don't think any Bruins fan would walk that trade back.

If Ducks decide to rebuild and cut salary, Lindholm for Sergachev + other good stuff could be very tempting. Especially if they have Lindholm type defensemen coming up. Though it seems like their D prospects are more high impact/less steady type.

Would you trade Fowler for Sergachev?

Right now? No.

At a different point in time, I might.

I'm not sure Fowler is available right now. He's arguably been Anaheim's best player to start this season, and he's easily been their best defenseman.

And, regarding the Bruins trade, I think you need to consider that, at the time the trade was done, the value of the pick was uncertain. That turned into a 2nd overall pick. Boston may have been happy with the way it turned out, but I'm not so sure that Toronto was, when they saw Boston drafting Seguin 2nd overall. Call that a hunch.

 

[Revelation]

Right now? No.

At a different point in time, I might.

I'm not sure Fowler is available right now. He's arguably been Anaheim's best player to start this season, and he's easily been their best defenseman.

And, regarding the Bruins trade, I think you need to consider that, at the time the trade was done, the value of the pick was uncertain. That turned into a 2nd overall pick. Boston may have been happy with the way it turned out, but I'm not so sure that Toronto was, when they saw Boston drafting Seguin 2nd overall. Call that a hunch.

But you do agree that given the circumstances you could see yourself trading a better right now player still in his prime for a younger one with high end potential.

At the very least something like Sergachev + Lehkonen + ~ is fair value for Lindholm (depending on ~ but those are 2 very solid pieces addressing needs) likely to be a steal in the future and not an insulting offer for Lindholm given that he's unsigned and not playing.

I'm not a habs fan, I just think Lindholm-Weber would be a treat to look at and I don't see Anaheim contending with Carlyle so might as well go for a Rangers type retool where you get younger/cheaper/more assets but don't throw in the towel and fully rebuild. Like when the Flyers traded Richards and Carter but the pieces they still got back while being lesser still carried them and didn't set them back (Pronger retiring did), and right now they're way ahead because of those trades than they would be with Richards and Carter. Again if Lindholm was signed I wouldn't think teams would have a realistic change to pry him from Anaheim.

 

[KevinRedkey]

No, I just showed what a total strawman it was.

Sergachev >> Chabot

Lindholm << Weber

Ducks don't have Lindholm signed, Montreal traded their most valuable asset for Weber signed til forever. Situational context matters as well.

You forgot to take your homer glasses off.

This isn't "proof" that Lindholm is better than Weber, but I think it does a pretty good job of showing you it's not ">>" as you'd like to suggest.
http://hfboards.mandatory.com/showthread.php?t=2102795

 

[Sojourn]

But you do agree that given the circumstances you could see yourself trading a better right now player still in his prime for a younger one with high end potential.

At the very least something like Sergachev + Lehkonen + ~ is fair value for Lindholm (depending on ~ but those are 2 very solid pieces addressing needs) likely to be a steal in the future and not an insulting offer for Lindholm given that he's unsigned and not playing.

I'm not a habs fan, I just think Lindholm-Weber would be a treat to look at and I don't see Anaheim contending with Carlyle so might as well go for a Rangers type retool where you get younger/cheaper/more assets but don't throw in the towel and fully rebuild. Again if Lindholm was signed I wouldn't think teams would have a realistic change to pry him from Anaheim.

Given the current circumstances? Possible, and that younger player with high end potential would need to have actually begun to establish himself in the NHL. Sergachev is not that player.

If Lindholm were to request a trade, all bets are off. That's why I don't see the Hamilton trade as a good comparable. For Trouba, yes, but not for Lindholm. But requesting a trade changes things. I'm even willing to acknowledge that could happen, and maybe the relationship between Lindholm and Anaheim sours, and he wants out. That could happen. I really hope it doesn't. But unless it does happen, the player I'd want needs to be more established. They need to be someone who can step in and play now, at a fairly decent level, while also having that good upside.

I don't mean they need to be as good, or better than Lindholm either. That's a bit much to ask, and I don't think it's realistic. But it would need to be someone who comes close, and is also ready to contribute, or already contributing, in the NHL. By contribute, I mean as a potential top six, or top 4 talent. Immediately. But with the upside to be more than that(again, not asking for someone as potentially good as Lindholm, but I'd hope for realistic top pairing upside, at the least).

 

[KrisLetAngry]

Given the current circumstances? Possible, and that younger player with high end potential would need to have actually begun to establish himself in the NHL. Sergachev is not that player.

If Lindholm were to request a trade, all bets are off. That's why I don't see the Hamilton trade as a good comparable. For Trouba, yes, but not for Lindholm. But requesting a trade changes things. I'm even willing to acknowledge that could happen, and maybe the relationship between Lindholm and Anaheim sours, and he wants out. That could happen. I really hope it doesn't. But unless it does happen, the player I'd want needs to be more established. They need to be someone who can step in and play now, at a fairly decent level, while also having that good upside.

I don't mean they need to be as good, or better than Lindholm either. That's a bit much to ask, and I don't think it's realistic. But it would need to be someone who comes close, and is also ready to contribute, or already contributing, in the NHL. By contribute, I mean as a potential top six, or top 4 talent. Immediately. But with the upside to be more than that(again, not asking for someone as potentially good as Lindholm, but I'd hope for realistic top pairing upside, at the least).

Honestly that's realistic.

I could totally see a winnipeg anahiem 3 way trade.
Whatever team wants to give anahiem the price for Trouba which is slightly lower then lindholm.

This could work

 

[Sojourn]

Honestly that's realistic.

I could totally see a winnipeg anahiem 3 way trade.
Whatever team wants to give anahiem the price for Trouba which is slightly lower then lindholm.

This could work

I know that's been tossed around a bit, but I would be really surprised if Murray went for that. He's just exchanging one tough negotiation with another, only he would have to start from scratch with Trouba.

If Lindholm were moved, I feel confident that the return wouldn't require that sort of careful handling. Murray would want to fix his problems, not shift it to another player. Trouba's trade demand, because (at least, based on what I hear? is it wrong?) he wants to play on a certain side is probably not going to endear him to Murray either. Murray is pretty old-fashioned, and I think he'd consider that a character flaw, and an example of Trouba putting himself ahead of the team.

That's also one of my fears with the Lindholm negotiations. I'm worried that the relationship between Lindholm and Murray might sour, and Murray is the type of person who, even after everything is over and done with, he might hold a grudge. If you can't tell, I'm not the biggest fan of Bob Murray right now. It may just be the relationship between Lemieux and Murray sours, and I don't care too much about that.

 

[DudeWhereIsMakar]

I find Lindholm for Trouba would work out well, given that both teams can come to an agreement with the players being traded for one another.

I know, I know... this proposal was made before.

 

[HanSolo]

I find Lindholm for Trouba would work out well, given that both teams can come to an agreement with the players being traded for one another.

I know, I know... this proposal was made before.

Based on what? If we can't get Hampus signed why would Trouba be easier?

 

[Number1RedWingsFan52]

I polished up my initial proposal.

LAK receives:

Bernier (1.95M retained by ANA), 2.2M
Rights for Lindholm

ANA receives:

Jack Campbell, 600K
Brayden MacNabb, 1.6M
1st, 2nd, and 3rd round picks (one each) to ANA at the draft year(s) of ANA's choosing, should Lindholm sign with LAK; 7th rounder for a failed negotiation

I'm pretty sure this polished proposal is not lopsided by now.

Lol get real in what world would LA be able to afford to pay Lindholm $6+ Million Lindholm might take less to stay in Anaheim but that doesn't mean he will elsewhere this is horrendous for Anaheim that doesn't get you Lindholm and LA sure doesn't have the cap to fit Lindholm.

 

[goonybird]

Boucher, Lappin, Merrill and a 3rd

 

[Number1RedWingsFan52]

I find Lindholm for Trouba would work out well, given that both teams can come to an agreement with the players being traded for one another.

I know, I know... this proposal was made before.

How do you figure? Been hearing that Bob Murray is trying to get Lindholm signed to the Seth jones/Ristolainen deal and that's pretty much what Trouba is seeking as well so how would it be any easier to get a deal done for Trouba then say Lindholm. Lindholm wants to play in Anaheim Trouba for Lindholm makes zero sense unless another decent winger is going to Anaheim.

 

[Number1RedWingsFan52]

Boucher, Lappin, Merrill and a 3rd

Try more like Zacha++ And Anaheim doesn't need D coming back so no use for Merrill.

 

[KrisLetAngry]

I know that's been tossed around a bit, but I would be really surprised if Murray went for that. He's just exchanging one tough negotiation with another, only he would have to start from scratch with Trouba.

If Lindholm were moved, I feel confident that the return wouldn't require that sort of careful handling. Murray would want to fix his problems, not shift it to another player. Trouba's trade demand, because (at least, based on what I hear? is it wrong?) he wants to play on a certain side is probably not going to endear him to Murray either. Murray is pretty old-fashioned, and I think he'd consider that a character flaw, and an example of Trouba putting himself ahead of the team.

That's also one of my fears with the Lindholm negotiations. I'm worried that the relationship between Lindholm and Murray might sour, and Murray is the type of person who, even after everything is over and done with, he might hold a grudge. If you can't tell, I'm not the biggest fan of Bob Murray right now. It may just be the relationship between Lemieux and Murray sours, and I don't care too much about that.

Anahiem isn't getting Trouba in my scenario

 

[Weezeric]

How would a 3-way trade between Arizona, Winnipeg and Anaheim with the Main pieces being lindholm, trouba and domi sound?

 

[Ducks in a row]

How would a 3-way trade between Arizona, Winnipeg and Anaheim with the Main pieces being lindholm, trouba and domi sound?

Not good. Trouba we don't want for Lindholm. Domi is a solid young forward but he ain't close to what we would want if we are trading Lindholm.

 

[Revelation]

Based on what? If we can't get Hampus signed why would Trouba be easier?

Trouba's sticking point is that he wants to play on his on side and has Byfuglien/Myers as RD in Winnipeg already. So he'd probably agree to come in way cheaper at like a ~3.5 million bridge deal, especially if he gets to live in Anaheim over Winnipeg (and rumors about him wanting to be in US are true)

 

[Weezeric]

Not good. Trouba we don't want for Lindholm. Domi is a solid young forward but he ain't close to what we would want if we are trading Lindholm.

So, there's basically no forward that would possibly be available that you would trade lindholm for? Domi had 52 points last year as a rookie...

 

[Sojourn]

Anahiem isn't getting Trouba in my scenario

But then Anaheim is getting the lesser asset, who also has diminishing value. Trouba has already requested a trade. If Anaheim isn't interested in signing him, they basically have a player who will just sit and do nothing until someone is willing to trade for him. They can't play him. He's un-signed. That's assuming he doesn't request a trade again, because he isn't playing.

That's a pretty crappy position to intentionally put yourself in. You're taking lower value on Lindholm, right at the start, and then putting yourself into a situation where you could see Trouba's value continue to decline. That's a great deal for Winnipeg. They get the better player, and they get terrific value for a player who requested a trade. It doesn't seem like a good deal for Anaheim.

Edit: I also don't really like the fact Myers is somehow keeping Trouba off his preferred side. Myers is a good defenseman, but I don't think he's so good that he should push Trouba down the depth chart, unless Trouba just hasn't been as good as him, and that isn't really encouraging to me.

 

[inthe6ix]

Is Lindholm really that much better than Fowler or Vatanen? I always figured him to be the #2 or 3 D-man on the Ducks.

You'd think he is the next incarnation of Orr the way he's talked about in his thread.

Granted I've only seen a couple of Ducks games with him last season, but he doesn't seem that far ahead of Trouba talent-wise, IMO.

And Trouba is arguably the 3rd or 4th D-man behind Buff, Toby and Myers.