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

Status
Not open for further replies.

Mitch nylander

One of the biggest fans from a bipolar fanbase
Jun 2, 2016
4,679
6,320
Jvr + gardiner + Johnsson/soshnikov/lindberg + hunwick for lindholm, stoner and a 3rd
 

Caesium

Registered User
Apr 13, 2006
7,525
184
Anaheim can fit exactly 0 extra players right now under the cap. Even if they trade Lindholm, they would need to dump two high cap players to fit whoever they get back for him.
 

tempest2i

Jigsaw Falling Into Place
Oct 25, 2009
9,118
91
Cowtown
Look, it's pretty clear this would be big news. I'm not sure why you're trying to argue otherwise, other than wishful thinking. A young talent like Lindholm available? If other sources could confirm what Murphy is saying, they would be all over it.

Those same sources have been reporting on the negotiations. By your argument, there is no reason to. This would be a much bigger deal than the negotiations. They would be reporting on it.

I think you vastly over estimate how much name recognition Lindholm has to the average hockey fan.

I'm sure we'll get some clarification on the this "Lindholm is on the trade market" rumor at some point early next week. Having him on the market is a lot like having Trouba on the market. It's pretty obvious there's some issues between the player/team and it's pretty obvious the price to get him will be astronomical.
 

Sojourn

Registered User
Nov 1, 2006
50,523
9,377
I think you vastly over estimate how much name recognition Lindholm has to the average hockey fan.

I'm sure we'll get some clarification on the this "Lindholm is on the trade market" rumor at some point early next week. Having him on the market is a lot like having Trouba on the market. It's pretty obvious there's some issues between the player/team and it's pretty obvious the price to get him will be astronomical.

The average hockey fan isn't the one who is listening to rumors from those sources. The average hockey fan is probably the one who watches the game, and that's about it. Your point falls well short. They aren't appealing to the average hockey fan. They're appealing to hockey fans. Period.

Lindholm being available would be some of the biggest news of this new season. And the off-season. You don't need name recognition for that. Do you remember the Schultz chronicles? Even fewer people would recognize his name, and yet the reporting was there. Constantly.
 

dracom

Registered User
Dec 22, 2015
13,807
10,028
Vancouver, WA
I think you vastly over estimate how much name recognition Lindholm has to the average hockey fan.

I'm sure we'll get some clarification on the this "Lindholm is on the trade market" rumor at some point early next week. Having him on the market is a lot like having Trouba on the market. It's pretty obvious there's some issues between the player/team and it's pretty obvious the price to get him will be astronomical.

Why is that obvious exactly? Last I heard the team is getting closer to a deal.
 

big ape

Registered User
Jan 28, 2011
781
118
Edmonton
Klefbom at 4.1 for 7 yrs.contract alone is very attractive.Would like to see the adds that ducks need to get er done.
 

Community

44 is Rielly good
Oct 30, 2010
6,984
1,984
The Darkest Timeline
Lindholm is greater then Rielly, Seriously doubt that you would do a JVR+Gardiner deal for Rielly so why would Bob Murray deal Lindholm for JVR+Gardiner and these other unnecessary pieces.

I'm not saying Anaheim should do this deal, but Toronto and Anaheim are in much different stages right now. It could make sense for ANA to trade youth for prime players (if the right pieces are going back to them), but definitely not the case for Toronto.

We aren't dealing with a value in a vacuum here and while I can understand them not wanting to trade Lindholm for this package, you can't act like the Leafs trading a signed Rielly on a rebuiliding team with capspace is the same situation as an unsigned Lindholm on a contending team with no capspace.
 

Random Forest

Registered User
May 12, 2010
14,636
1,331
I don't generally subscribe to "media ploy" theories, but I think this might be the case here. The Ducks know they are losing leverage every day Lindholm sits out and need to get this done asap. They don't have any remote interest in trading Lindholm but they need to get him back to the negotiating table quickly, so leaking rumors of him being available may be one of the few plays they have available right now to facilitate that.

I think we'll have a resolution soon that Ducks fans will be satisfied with. A Lindholm trade seems like a seriously remote possibility right now. There is pretty much no realistic deal that makes sense for the Ducks here anyway.
 

Viqsi

"that chick from Ohio"
Oct 5, 2007
55,977
35,736
40N 83W (approx)
How about some of the youngest high drafted players on ELC? Hanifin, Provorov, Werenski etc?

Um. Werenski's start has been so ludicrously over-the-top awesome that it would be the height of insanity to move him now. That's like asking Leafs fans if they're up for moving Auston Matthews. He's been that good.

If you want to talk Jackets defensemen, Ryan Murray might be doable. He's not on an ELC, but he is on a very affordable bridge contract. That said, we'd be absurdly tight against the cap and wringing every little bit we can out of Clarkson's LTIR credit, which is... somewhat less than ideal. And there's obviously those (IMO massively overblown, but :dunno: ) worries about his ability to stay healthy.

Technically Savard would also be available, but he's not really good enough to be in a Lindholm discussion, and he's over $4m/year.
 

big ape

Registered User
Jan 28, 2011
781
118
Edmonton
Why are we sending the better defensemen to a divisional rival that has McDavid again?

Contract
The add to Klef (which i would like to see)
Klef is no slouch Getting top minutes is big and young.
Divisional rival is a issue ,but isn't that rare
Who knows where Klef's game goes could be as good possibly even better.That's why the add for me wouldn't be to substantial (a 1st at most) Contract alone makes it very hard for the oilers to want to move him.
 

Pennaduck

Registered User
Aug 17, 2016
738
264
Pennsylvania
Bob McKenzie ‏@TSNBobMcKenzie 6m6 minutes ago
Simon Despres ($3.7M AAV) was put on LTIR yesterday by ANA. Gives Ducks some more financial flexibility

for what it's worth. not sure how to properly post a tweet but its legit
 

dracom

Registered User
Dec 22, 2015
13,807
10,028
Vancouver, WA
Contract
The add to Klef (which i would like to see)
Klef is no slouch Getting top minutes is big and young.
Divisional rival is a issue ,but isn't that rare
Who knows where Klef's game goes could be as good possibly even better.That's why the add for me wouldn't be to substantial (a 1st at most) Contract alone makes it very hard for the oilers to want to move him.

Again, why are we helping the Oilers? Lindholm is a superior player to Klefboom and it's not even close. When was the last time a team traded a player of Lindholm's caliber to a divisional rival? Let alone one with the stacked forward core as the Oilers?

So we should take a worse player and a small plus because Klef is already signed and MIGHT end up being better than Lindholm maybe? Hard pass. If we have to trade Lindholm, he would most likely go east.
 

dracom

Registered User
Dec 22, 2015
13,807
10,028
Vancouver, WA
Bob McKenzie ‏@TSNBobMcKenzie 6m6 minutes ago
Simon Despres ($3.7M AAV) was put on LTIR yesterday by ANA. Gives Ducks some more financial flexibility

for what it's worth. not sure how to properly post a tweet but its legit

Nah man, it's just a red herring. :sarcasm:
 

Sojourn

Registered User
Nov 1, 2006
50,523
9,377
I'd just like to point out that Despres doesn't really have name recognition, and the average Canadian fan has no reason to be interested in this. I'm not sure why McKenzie is reporting it.
 

oilwave

Registered User
Jan 15, 2011
1,323
196
Edmonton
Again, why are we helping the Oilers? Lindholm is a superior player to Klefboom and it's not even close. When was the last time a team traded a player of Lindholm's caliber to a divisional rival? Let alone one with the stacked forward core as the Oilers?

So we should take a worse player and a small plus because Klef is already signed and MIGHT end up being better than Lindholm maybe? Hard pass. If we have to trade Lindholm, he would most likely go east.

I mean I think this rumour is totally false and you just sign Lindholm. But if it was true Anaheim inevitably would get a worse player back. Anaheim would be the team with no leverage and nobody would have an incentive to trade an equal, signed defenceman they are familiar with for Lindholm. The only teams that would be interested would be those getting an upgrade.
 

Viqsi

"that chick from Ohio"
Oct 5, 2007
55,977
35,736
40N 83W (approx)
Bob McKenzie ‏@TSNBobMcKenzie 6m6 minutes ago
Simon Despres ($3.7M AAV) was put on LTIR yesterday by ANA. Gives Ducks some more financial flexibility

for what it's worth. not sure how to properly post a tweet but its legit
Unless his career is done (hopefully not, that would be unfortunate), I don't think that helps with a Lindholm signing.
 

Sojourn

Registered User
Nov 1, 2006
50,523
9,377
Unless his career is done (hopefully not, that would be unfortunate), I don't think that helps with a Lindholm signing.

It buys them time, and gives them more time to expand their options. That's very helpful.

It's temporary, or at least we hope it is, but it's still helpful.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Ad

Ad