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

[Sojourn]

And what I am saying is that if someone is categorizing a player by the league he plays in is the "Gotcha". Check out Dano's stats before you make those statements...very good NHL numbers 69 games and 31 points and only 21 years old. So Dano for Montour or Theodore when he gets sent back down is fair for you then? AHL scrub for AHL scrub, but Dano has way more games in the show....that is a trend.

It's not a good trend though, because despite having more NHL games, he's still back in the AHL. I've checked Dano's stats. I've also noted that he's on his 3rd team now, and despite those numbers he hasn't been able to stick. Not with the same team, and not in the NHL.

And no, I wouldn't move Theodore for Dano. Dano is a forward. At 21 years of age he should be ahead of Theodore, if all things are equal. That is, he should be closer to being a regular NHL player. It's more uncommon for a defenseman to be NHL ready at 21 than it is a forward. The learning curve is steeper, and the responsibilities are greater. For a forward, at 21-22, I'd probably expect a good talent to start giving his team a very good reason to be playing him. A big exception to this being a power forward, since they usually need to develop more physically. I don't think that applies to Dano.

Bottom line? I feel 21 year old defenseman Shea Theodore is more promising than 21 year old Marko Dano. Developmentally, I think he's further ahead of Dano, when you consider their positions.

Edit: Montour is an entirely different discussion. Those arguments don't really apply to him, and he's very much a work in progress type of player. Good upside, dynamic offensively, but he's a risk for any team wanting to acquire him. I wouldn't expect Anaheim to get the best value for him, and as a result I wouldn't expect them to move him at this point in time. He's worth more to them, and they probably feel that his value will continue to increase. That may not happen, but they probably think it can.

 

[JetsHomer]

What's the answer to him being on his third team now?

So Dano would need to clear waivers if he went back the NHL and sent back to the AHL? That's how I'm understanding being waiver eligibility, so the Jets would lose him for nothing like I said early.

Dano was moved for Saad and Ladd, its not like he was moved for scrubs so your argument is very disingenuous.

Dano is in the AHL because he could go down without having to clear waivers. He is probably better than several Jets players, but those guys would probably be claimed on waivers so it's better to send Dano down until we suffer injuries

 

[Not Sure]

No shot. You're not getting Lindholm without moving Nylander or Marner. Plus if we trade Lindholm, there is no dire need to move Stoner. Absolutely no way would the Ducks take less value on Lindholm to move Stoner's contract.

I don't understand what's so hard to understand about this point. If they move Lindholm they want peak value, not to lose value just to dump cap. If they move Stoner it's to keep Lindholm, period. Fowler + Stoner for a package to keep Lindholm is a possibility, but moving Stoner isn't going to include Lindholm, unless the receiving team actually wants him for some reason.

 

[Stream*]

It's not a good trend though, because despite having more NHL games, he's still back in the AHL. I've checked Dano's stats. I've also noted that he's on his 3rd team now, and despite those numbers he hasn't been able to stick. Not with the same team, and not in the NHL.

And no, I wouldn't move Theodore for Dano. Dano is a forward. At 21 years of age he should be ahead of Theodore, if all things are equal. That is, he should be closer to being a regular NHL player. It's more uncommon for a defenseman to be NHL ready at 21 than it is a forward. The learning curve is steeper, and the responsibilities are greater. For a forward, at 21-22, I'd probably expect a good talent to start giving his team a very good reason to be playing him. A big exception to this being a power forward, since they usually need to develop more physically. I don't think that applies to Dano.

Bottom line? I feel 21 year old defenseman Shea Theodore is more promising than 21 year old Marko Dano. Developmentally, I think he's further ahead of Dano, when you consider their positions.

Edit: Montour is an entirely different discussion. Those arguments don't really apply to him, and he's very much a work in progress type of player. Good upside, dynamic offensively, but he's a risk for any team wanting to acquire him. I wouldn't expect Anaheim to get the best value for him, and as a result I wouldn't expect them to move him at this point in time. He's worth more to them, and they probably feel that his value will continue to increase. That may not happen, but they probably think it can.

So it sounds that you disagree with Dracom's comment about players in the AHL are there because they aren't good. You should really reply to his statements as opposed to pointing out that you have AHL players that are better, yet still in the AHL.

 

[Sojourn]

So it sounds that you disagree with Dracom's comment about players in the AHL are there because they aren't good. You should really reply to his statements as opposed to pointing out that you have AHL players that are better, yet still in the AHL.

I guess I didn't have the same takeaway from dracom's post.

My impression isn't that he was saying Dano sucks, but that Dano just hasn't shown enough yet to have enough value to be much of a sweetener in any deal. Isn't that how the entire sequence got started? It was replacing Dano with a prospect defenseman, and hoping that made the proposal more appealing.

 

[Stream*]

I guess I didn't have the same takeaway from dracom's post.

My impression isn't that he was saying Dano sucks, but that Dano just hasn't shown enough yet to have enough value to be much of a sweetener in any deal. Isn't that how the entire sequence got started? It was replacing Dano with a prospect defenseman, and hoping that made the proposal more appealing.

Strange how people define "hasn't shown enough". Dano at 21 played 69 games, scored 31 points is no not shown enough" but I have seen people value Ritchie at 20 and not near the same success as, trending upward and a top prospect. Strange.

 

[Sojourn]

Stanger how people define "hasn't shown enough". Dano at 21 played 69 games, scored 31 points is no not shown enough" but I have seen people value Ritchie at 20 and not near the same success as, trending upward and a top prospect. Strange.

Yeah, well, we can be hypocrites.

I don't value Ritchie too high at this point, if we're looking just at play, but he's also in that power forward category. I wouldn't trade him because I don't think we've really seen what he can do. He's still developing physically, and he needs to find that point where he is big and strong, but still has the mobility to play NHL hockey. He's like Montour. A work in progress.

 

[Vipers31]

Stanger how people define "hasn't shown enough". Dano at 21 played 69 games, scored 31 points is no not shown enough" but I have seen people value Ritchie at 20 and not near the same success as, trending upward and a top prospect. Strange.

He is trending upward, unquestionably. What makes it far less strange is that Ducks fans aren't shopping him around HF to land a premier asset.

 

[Dr Johnny Fever]

Source? I don't think Overhardt and Trouba have spoken a word of truth about the whole situation, so I'm genuinely interested to see this.

I've followed this pretty closely and don't recall seeing or hearing anything from Trouba's camp suggesting they would never consider a bridge deal.

So because nothing has been said about a bridge deal by Trouba or his agent, we should just assume a proposal including Trouba signing a cheap bridge deal should be accepted as a given and the basis for a deal? That's hardly rational or realistic, but it does meet the fantasy of many jets fans.

 

[Whileee]

So because nothing has been said about a bridge deal by Trouba or his agent, we should just assume a proposal including Trouba signing a cheap bridge deal should be accepted as a given and the basis for a deal? That's hardly rational or realistic, but it does meet the fantasy of many jets fans.

Two high profile Overhardt clients who were at odds with their team during their ELC signed bridge deals before being traded (Turris, RyJo). Given that Trouba's issue is location, not money, it isn't unreasonable to suggest that he would consider a bridge deal as a way to facilitate a trade to a desirable team. The concept is actually logical and not far-fetched in the least. As December 1 approaches the Jets' leverage gets very high, as does that of any team willing to meet the Jets asking price in a trade. Trouba doesn't really hold much of a hand as the time goes by. Turris ended up signing a bridge deal about a week before Dec1. I won't be surprised if Trouba does the same, and is traded soon thereafter.

 

[Whileee]

He is trending upward, unquestionably. What makes it far less strange is that Ducks fans aren't shopping him around HF to land a premier asset.

Maybe because the Ducks need cheap forwards and don't have the cap space to trade young cheap players for a premier asset. In contrast, the Jets have a stack of young forward prospects and will need to trade from that surplus to fill other needs, and they have cap space to acquire a more established player.

 

[Dr Johnny Fever]

Two high profile Overhardt clients who were at odds with their team during their ELC signed bridge deals before being traded (Turris, RyJo). Given that Trouba's issue is location, not money, it isn't unreasonable to suggest that he would consider a bridge deal as a way to facilitate a trade to a desirable team. The concept is actually logical and not far-fetched in the least. As December 1 approaches the Jets' leverage gets very high, as does that of any team willing to meet the Jets asking price in a trade. Trouba doesn't really hold much of a hand as the time goes by. Turris ended up signing a bridge deal about a week before Dec1. I won't be surprised if Trouba does the same, and is traded soon thereafter.

No, all we know is that location is Trouba's highest priority. We have no idea how much money he will want and it is hardly out of the realm that he will want some kind of 5 or 6 year deal for north of $5M AAV like many of his peers seem to be getting.

You can hope he signs anything you want, but it doesn't make it a solid foundation for a deal. And besides, if the Ducks ever do decide to trade Lindholm they will just offer him up to the highest bidder, and not take on another headache like they have now. There is no reason on earth why the Ducks would ever trade Lindholm for Trouba for that reason alone. That is just jet fans' fantasies.

 

[Hunter368]

Two high profile Overhardt clients who were at odds with their team during their ELC signed bridge deals before being traded (Turris, RyJo). Given that Trouba's issue is location, not money, it isn't unreasonable to suggest that he would consider a bridge deal as a way to facilitate a trade to a desirable team. The concept is actually logical and not far-fetched in the least. As December 1 approaches the Jets' leverage gets very high, as does that of any team willing to meet the Jets asking price in a trade. Trouba doesn't really hold much of a hand as the time goes by. Turris ended up signing a bridge deal about a week before Dec1. I won't be surprised if Trouba does the same, and is traded soon thereafter.

You are correct, it's plausible. I doubt it happens but it is possible.

 

[Evil Little]

He is trending upward, unquestionably. What makes it far less strange is that Ducks fans aren't shopping him around HF to land a premier asset.

Him, and a 22 year old defenceman who happens to currently be better than Tobias Enström and Tyler Myers.

 

[dracom]

Dano was moved for Saad and Ladd, its not like he was moved for scrubs so your argument is very disingenuous.

Dano is in the AHL because he could go down without having to clear waivers. He is probably better than several Jets players, but those guys would probably be claimed on waivers so it's better to send Dano down until we suffer injuries

He's still been traded quite a few times for a young player, which isn't the greatest to keep his value up. Too me, it shows teams don't think that highly of him if he keeps getting traded off. We'll have to agree to disagree here.

Wouldn't waiver exempt be the correct term then? Doesn't matter now though. I made a mistake earlier suggesting he would need to clear waivers, thus why I suggest the Jets would lose him for nothing. So that's my bad.

I still don't think highly enough of Dano for him to be added to compensate the difference in Lindholm and Trouba.

 

[BrendanGallagher11]

The way duck fans drool about lindholm
You would think hes set to become the second coming of lidstrom

Smh

 

[paine]

The way duck fans drool about lindholm
You would think hes set to become the second coming of lidstrom

Smh

You don't trade a 22 year old #1 defenseman.

 

[dracom]

The way duck fans drool about lindholm
You would think hes set to become the second coming of lidstrom

Smh

Fowler + Montour for Gally

 

[Dr Johnny Fever]

The way duck fans drool about lindholm
You would think hes set to become the second coming of lidstrom

Smh

With the offers other fans make, you would think he was Andreas Lilja.