Proposal: Marner for Lindholm

[Sojourn]

Matthews being a number one center is about as sure as it gets. I get it he's a prospect but it's bot that hard to see how good he is when he's already dominated men in the Swiss League, World Championships and WCH. It's actually pretty easy to project. Will he top out at 70 points? 80 points? 100 points? I don't know but he's already a top player.

Notice I said elite #1 center. A #1 center could be Tyler Bozak, and it could be Joe Thornton.

And you're still missing the point. Marner isn't looking better than an elite #1 center. He's looking better than a rookie. Looking arguably as good, or better than him after 2 games is noteworthy, but hardly the "untouchable" label that some suggest it is.

At any rate, I have nothing left to contribute to this discussion. We wouldn't move Lindholm for Marner. He's a talented kid, but Lindholm is far, far more proven, and has tremendous upside of his own. He's a safer bet, in every way.

 

[Sojourn]

Nah they were. Sorry but you guys ain't innocent either. Leaf fans are more noticeable because of the population of Leaf fans on this site. But judging on your high horse like your fanbase, or any fanbase for that matter doesn't do the same thing is just plain ignorant.

Then I'm sure you can provide me all this evidence of over the top statements from Anaheim fans regarding Lindholm.

Never said we were innocent.

 

[buttman*]

And that is also premature. Then again, McDavid has played 46 more games than Marner in the NHL. While 48 games is not a sample size that can be used to make a declarative statement, it's a much better sample than 2 games.

It's not based on just 2 games. It's based on watching the kid for years. Those two games have just added to it.

 

[Gavy]

problem is Lindholm is not Doughty

Someone of you guys seem to be seeing things that aren't being said. Can you quote me where I said Lindholm is Doughty?

Funny how you say Lindholm is not Doughty but dont say Marner isn't Kane

 

[go4hockey]

Would Buffalo be idiots to not trade Eichel for Lindholm? How about McDavid for Lindholm? Marner was drafted right after those guys.

Leafs stick with Marner, no question.

McJesus>Eichel>>Marner. Marner will be good but number one defenseman are better and more important all while being much harder to find.

 

[Kelly]

Notice I said elite #1 center. A #1 center could be Tyler Bozak, and it could be Joe Thornton.

And you're still missing the point. Marner isn't looking better than an elite #1 center. He's looking better than a rookie. Looking arguably as good, or better than him after 2 games is noteworthy, but hardly the "untouchable" label that some suggest it is.

At any rate, I have nothing left to contribute to this discussion. We wouldn't move Lindholm for Marner. He's a talented kid, but Lindholm is far, far more proven, and has tremendous upside of his own. He's a safer bet, in every way.

Would you guys move Montour for Hunwick?

Obviously neither are comparable to a Marner/Lindholm -- but the logic is similar. Ducks would rather bet on Montour's potential than moving him for a bottom pairing defenseman now. Same with the Leafs, also adding the fact that

a) Marner is Hunter's guy
b) hometown kid
c) they've been preaching draft & develop ever since starting the rebuild, this would go against that
d) Lindholm is without a contract

I totally understand Duck fans not willing to accept this, Lindholm is your #1D, homegrown, and fills a huge need. But you need to look at from the Leaf pov as well. Players of Marner's ilk rarely get traded before they have a chance to prove themself, he's a special player and it's painfully obvious when watching him... that and the reasons I listed above, I doubt Leafs would ever consider this. I have heard rumors of how highly they thought of Marner at the draft, I doubt that has changed.

Values are definitely close, but both fanbases say no.

Then I'm sure you can provide me all this evidence of over the top statements from Anaheim fans regarding Lindholm.

Never said we were innocent.

I have better things to do, but there has been which is normal for high drafted players. All I'm saying is quit acting like Leaf fans are the only fans that do this.

 

[go4hockey]

It means people have no idea how good this kid is. No idea. The don't watch the games. Sure he's a good defenseman but Marner's ceiling is through the roof. He's arguably been better than Matthews and Matthews scored 4 goals in one game.

Leafs aren't going to trade that type of potential for anything short of McDavid or some ridiculous offer right now.

Lindholm would be a ridiculous offer and the Ducks would never do that.

 

[Sojourn]

Would you guys move Montour for Hunwick?

Obviously neither are comparable to a Marner/Lindholm -- but the logic is similar. Ducks would rather bet on Montour's potential than moving him for a bottom pairing defenseman now. Same with the Leafs, also adding the fact that

a) Marner is Hunter's guy
b) hometown kid
c) they've been preaching draft & develop ever since starting the rebuild, this would go against that
d) Lindholm is without a contract

I totally understand Duck fans not willing to accept this, Lindholm is your #1D, homegrown, and feels a huge need. But you need to look at from the Leaf pov as well. Players of Marner's ilk rarely get traded before they have a chance to prove themself, and the reasons I listed above, I doubt Leafs would consider this.

Values are definitely close, but both fanbases say no.



I have better things to do, but there has been which is normal for high drafted players.

That comparison is absurd, and the logic isn't similar at all. Lindholm isn't a 3rd pairing defenseman.

 

[Kelly]

That comparison is absurd, and the logic isn't similar at all. Lindholm isn't a 3rd pairing defenseman.

Yes as I spelled out in that post. Montour also isn't Marner.

 

[Nightrain]

Actually a pretty reasonable proposal but both teams are very reluctant to pull the trigger.

Anaheim only does it if they believe the cap says they have to.

Toronto only does it if they really believe that they need to balance the team ala Hall for Larson.

 

[Sojourn]

Yes as I spelled out in that post. Montour also isn't Marner.

That doesn't make the comparison less ridiculous. Marner vs. Lindholm are two young players with high upside. Did Hunwick travel back in time? He's a veteran player, and established as what he is, which isn't anything special.

This proposal isn't a young talent for a mediocre veteran player. It's a young, skilled talent for a young, already proven to be good, and still very talented player. The logic isn't similar.

 

[Semantics]

It's not based on just 2 games. It's based on watching the kid for years. Those two games have just added to it.

Exactly, it's confirmation.

Some of us considered him an easy #3 in the draft, and didn't think it was impossible for him to end up better than Eichel. But any time that sentiment was voiced around here people would rip the person apart. A head NHL scout said the same thing before the draft, but most around here are too closed minded for that to hold any weight. Everything has to be black and white. Doesn't seem so crazy now, right? Those of us who've supported him all along are going to make sure the rest of the board never hears the end of it after all the disrespect he's gotten.

The next test is for him to be sustain this level of play over 82 games and once teams tighten up a bit more defensively. But I think he can. His endurance is great and he's going to be playing way less minutes than he did in junior. And he still has so much to learn about how to play at this level.

 

[wintersej]

I think Marner might be the Leafs best player over the next 10 years. Including Matthews.

(Conversely, I think Nylander will be disappointing compared to projections)

I don't think the value is super off, but don't think either team touches it unless Lindholm decides he doesn't want to play in Southern California...which there has been no reason to think that is the case.

 

[LuckyDucky]

It's not based on just 2 games. It's based on watching the kid for years. Those two games have just added to it.

Which is great, but junior success doesn't always equate to NHL success. He may very well develop into a top 10 player, he may not. My point is that it's too early to tell.

 

[scan15*]

Someone of you guys seem to be seeing things that aren't being said. Can you quote me where I said Lindholm is Doughty?

Funny how you say Lindholm is not Doughty but dont say Marner isn't Kane

Lindholm been in the league for 3 years. Most have a good idea of the level he will reach in the NHL. A really good, possibly top 10, defenseman.

Marner hasn't had his 3 years yet. As of now, the sky(Kane) is the limit. Of course, after a year or two, we will have a better understanding of what type of player he is.

 

[snipes]

Leafs are probably happy continuing with the core they have. But they definitely don't laugh away the offer.

Lindholm is an absolute beast. I doubt ANA makes this deal either.

 

[scan15*]

That comparison is absurd, and the logic isn't similar at all. Lindholm isn't a 3rd pairing defenseman.

Ducks would rather bet on Montour's potential than moving him for a bottom pairing defenseman now.

That was the relevant point. If you still don't get it, then there's no point going into it any further.

 

[buttman*]

Exactly, it's confirmation.

Some of us considered him an easy #3 in the draft, and didn't think it was impossible for him to end up better than Eichel. But any time that sentiment was voiced around here people would rip the person apart. A head NHL scout said the same thing before the draft, but most around here are too closed minded for that to hold any weight. Everything has to be black and white. Doesn't seem so crazy now, right? Those of us who've supported him all along are going to make sure the rest of the board never hears the end of it after all the disrespect he's gotten.

The next test is for him to be sustain this level of play over 82 games and once teams tighten up a bit more defensively. But I think he can. His endurance is great and he's going to be playing way less minutes than he did in junior. And he still has so much to learn about how to play at this level.

We live near and my son trains at the same place he did/does. I have seen Mitch for years. I knew he was the real deal prior to his draft. He is that good.

I have seen other first and second round picks through the years. I remember a few that I scratched my head about and said 'he has no business' being drafted let alone in the 1/2 -- but they got drafted. They are now intructors with no NHL resume.

I am not basing my assesment on 2 games -- I am basing it off seeing Mitch do things (against men at times) that I have not seen any other player do. This does not make him the best ever -- I have never seen Gretzky up close and personal -- and Gretz was lightyears better. My point is I have said for a long time this kid is the real deal. I believe it then and I believe it now.

I think you can even go into his pre-draft thread and find me saying just that. I said the same thing about Max Domi when he was young. Everyone said he's a Domi -- I said he's nothing like his father and arguably the best player his age.

So yeah, two games, shame games. Kid is good. Real good. Doesn't make anyone else bad. Including Lindholm, teammate etc. but he does deserve praise and can be elite if all goes well.

 

[Sojourn]

Ducks would rather bet on Montour's potential than moving him for a bottom pairing defenseman now.

That was the relevant point. If you still don't get it, then there's no point going into it any further.

And it isn't relevant to the discussion of Lindholm and Marner.

It's relevant to a completely different discussion, sure, but betting on Marner's potential instead of Lindholm isn't at all similar to betting on Montour's potential vs. Hunwick. Lindholm is 22 years old. Any argument you make about betting on a young player's potential applies to Lindholm.

It doesn't apply to Hunwick. Or do you not "get" that?

 

[Magic Man]

Marner has a full ELC and may already be the Leafs best player. Lindholm is a hold out for a cash strapped Ducks team who is strong on the blue line. There is value in that.

 

[buttman*]

Which is great, but junior success doesn't always equate to NHL success. He may very well develop into a top 10 player, he may not. My point is that it's too early to tell.

It's not too early to tell. That's what scout's get paid for. It's a projection. I stand by it. I don't like the Kane comparison because they are different players but Marner can be a PPG player in the NHL.

 

[buttman*]

Marner has a full ELC and may already be the Leafs best player. Lindholm is a hold out for a cash strapped Ducks team who is strong on the blue line. There is value in that.

That has nothing to do with it. Kapanen has a full ELC but that trade is an easy yes from the Leafs.

 

[scan15*]

And it isn't relevant to the discussion of Lindholm and Marner.

It's relevant to a completely different discussion, sure, but betting on Marner's potential instead of Lindholm isn't at all similar to betting on Montour's potential vs. Hunwick. Lindholm is 22 years old. Any argument you make about betting on a young player's potential applies to Lindholm.

It doesn't apply to Hunwick. Or do you not "get" that?

My god, this is getting ridiculous.

POTENTIAL

Is that simple enough for you.

 

[Nithoniniel]

Ducks would rather bet on Montour's potential than moving him for a bottom pairing defenseman now.

That was the relevant point. If you still don't get it, then there's no point going into it any further.

The thing is that between Lindholm and Marner there is a much more noticeable difference in how established the former is, compared to the difference in upside.

On the other hand, Montour is not much worse than Hunwick right now and his upside is vastly better.

It was a very, very bad comparison, and the point would have been better made by not using the example at all.

 

[Sojourn]

My god, this is getting ridiculous.

POTENTIAL

Is that simple enough for you.

Yeah, still not getting it. Potential vs. potential. One player is simply more established at this point.

I suppose you should try again. Tell me again how Hunwick vs. Montour is relevant to this.

The thing is that between Lindholm and Marner there is a much more noticeable difference in how established the former is, compared to the difference in upside.

On the other hand, Montour is not much worse than Hunwick right now and his upside is vastly better.

It was a very, very bad comparison, and the point would have been better made by not using the example at all.

There it is.