Speculation: The Quest to sign Lindholm: Part II

[Spawn]

Basically comes down to sending Thompson and Despres to LTIR for most of the season if their injuries keep them there, then sending down a few different cheap contracts to the AHL(Boll,Soresen, Larsson,Stoner). It's really the only way I can see Murray signing Lindholm without having to make a trade.

Sending all those players down do they have enough to fill out the minimum roster requirements?

 

[aj8000]

You're really not paying attention to the facts are you? The Ducks and Lindholm are still apart in terms of money. So that means there's no deal to be made yet. Since there's no deal to be made yet, Ducks aren't going to trade Fowler/Vats to clear space; since that will just give Lindholm's camp more leverage to ask for more. Until both sides have come to a agreement (remember they haven't yet), Lindholm isn't getting signed and a defensemen isn't getting traded.

You don't know if teams aren't taking cap space from us, that's just baseless conjucture. Murray has already stated he wants to get Lindholm signed without trading. So that means he's not actively looking at making a trade right now. Murray has been pretty reluctant in trading high valued pieces for cap dumps, so it's not crazy to wonder why we haven't dumped Stoner with a good prospect yet.

Yeah, that is the official line and I happen to not believe it. If the Ducks had the cap space, money would not have been an issue and Lindholm would have signed at the end of training camp like a couple of other RFAs did.

Murray is in it deep and has few options to get out of it without losing his shirt. Believe it or not, no team is going to take on cap space to help the Ducks unless they are getting a significant piece back from the Ducks. that significant piece is what Duck fans are not going to be happy with.

 

[Vipers31]

Yeah, that is the official line and I happen to not believe it.

All those sources presenting that aren't on the Ducks' payroll. There's nothing "official" about it. Those are considered "insider reports", not club press releases.

 

[aj8000]

And that exactly is that baseless conjecture. There is reports on them being apart. That's exclusively what's being reported. There's nothing stopping any McKenzie or Friedman to write that they have come to terms, but have to wait for the Ducks to make room. If they felt that was the case, they would run that. They don't. You going with an entirely unfounded different version of reality is your preference, but it deserves to be acknowledged as baseless conjecture.

Hey, you can believe what you want. I am not trying to convince you. I just happen to believe that if the ducks were not in cap hell, they would have made a deal already and currently are only trying to get Lindholm signed at a lower price (ie apart in price) because they have no choice because of the cap issue. Unfortunately, their options are starting to run out and they risk pissing Lindholm off which would not do the ducks any good.

 

[dracom]

Yeah, that is the official line and I happen to not believe it. If the Ducks had the cap space, money would not have been an issue and Lindholm would have signed at the end of training camp like a couple of other RFAs did.

Murray is in it deep and has few options to get out of it without losing his shirt. Believe it or not, no team is going to take on cap space to help the Ducks unless they are getting a significant piece back from the Ducks. that significant piece is what Duck fans are not going to be happy with.

So you are just not going to believe what the insiders who are highly respected have to say? That's your deal, but you're living in a different reality than everyone else, so you can't make claims that only fit your reality and not the one everyone else lives in.

I've never said we wouldn't have to make a trade that hurts to get Lindholm signed. I've only said we wouldn't trade Lindholm with a cap dump because there would be no point in trading Stoner at that point.

 

[aj8000]

All those sources presenting that aren't on the Ducks' payroll. There's nothing "official" about it. Those are considered "insider reports", not club press releases.

Those sources are based on "useless conjecture" as well. Do you really think that the parties involved are going to come out and tell the truth to the insiders? Unless Lindolm's team pulls a Trouba, I would take those insider reports with a grain of salt.

 

[aj8000]

So you are just not going to believe what the insiders who are highly respected have to say? That's your deal, but you're living in a different reality than everyone else, so you can't make claims that only fit your reality and not the one everyone else lives in.

I've never said we wouldn't have to make a trade that hurts to get Lindholm signed. I've only said we wouldn't trade Lindholm with a cap dump because there would be no point in trading Stoner at that point.

Yes, just like I figured there was a problem with Trouba earlier in the summer when 'sources" were saying it was just a negotiation. Insiders get told only what the parties want them to know. they are just pawns in the game of life like it or not.

 

[dracom]

Those sources are based on "useless conjecture" as well. Do you really think that the parties involved are going to come out and tell the truth to the insiders? Unless Lindolm's team pulls a Trouba, I would take those insider reports with a grain of salt.

You really think guys wouldn't check their facts to make sure there are correct? Why risk their careers because of a single player and what he wants for a contract? They've built their careers on be a legitimate insider source, they won't risk that for this one thing.

It's clear you only want to believe in a reality that works for your agenda, and nothing that matters in the real world.

 

[WhatTheDuck]

According to Cap Friendly Ana is here with cap:

CAP: $72,634,164
PROJECTED CAP SPACE: $365,836
that's with 46 contracts

Even if these #s are slightly off, Lindholm is $5.5M at a minimum
Assume Ana decides not to have an internal cap (usually 10% below cap or $64.8M)
You need to find $5M and be AT the capand with an internal budget your need to shed about $13.3M with current roster
I think your $2M is off by a bit, maybe you have other info we are not factoring?

Trading for $2M+ cap relief, sending down Stoner, Larsson and Sorenson leaves us just enough room to sign Lindholm once Thompson is placed on LTIR.

 

[dracom]

Yes, just like I figured there was a problem with Trouba earlier in the summer when 'sources" were saying it was just a negotiation. Insiders get told only what the parties want them to know. they are just pawns in the game of life like it or not.

So you know more than the insiders who have actual connections in the league? Ok then, believe in your reality where legit insiders risk their careers on this. I'm done with you.

 

[aj8000]

You really think guys wouldn't check their facts to make sure there are correct? Why risk their careers because of a single player and what he wants for a contract? They've built their careers on be a legitimate insider source, they won't risk that for this one thing.

It's clear you only want to believe in a reality that works for your agenda, and nothing that matters in the real world.

Well, then you should have the last laugh later when I am proved wrong.

What agenda do I have? I am just stating that the ducks have a serious cap problem, it is going to cost them to get out of it, and it is possible that the cost may end up being Lindholm.

 

[Vipers31]

Hey, you can believe what you want. I am not trying to convince you.

You should probably try, then. If you tried, you'd possibly be aware how unconvincing your attempts are.

I just happen to believe (...)

While people like to refer to hockey as a religion, that's not to be taken literally. You're free to have beliefs, and everyone else is free to identify them as baseless conjecture, or any other less forgiving synonym for belief.

Those sources are based on "useless conjecture" as well.

Ah, yes. Your word is as good as that of the most respected hockey journalists on the planet, with their given networks of sources deep within the game. How humble. (Also, I said "baseless", not useless. And unless you're suggesting they're downright frauds, they are certainly not baseless.)

Do you really think that the parties involved are going to come out and tell the truth to the insiders? Unless Lindolm's team pulls a Trouba, I would take those insider reports with a grain of salt.

Sometimes they talk directly if they're not too happy with a certain situation, sometimes they don't. I don't mind a grain of salt, I like to apply a grain or two myself to any such meal. But you're not taking a grain of salt. You're throwing out the soup because you don't like it and instead offer a story about a different hypothetical soup, which there are no traces of, unlike the soup you've just thrown out.

 

[aj8000]

So you know more than the insiders who have actual connections in the league? Ok then, believe in your reality where legit insiders risk their careers on this. I'm done with you.

My reality is insiders do not always know everything, they are given bits and pieces. Do you really think that the Ducks management is giving full disclosure to the so called insiders?

 

[aj8000]

You should probably try, then. If you tried, you'd possibly be aware how unconvincing your attempts are.


While people like to refer to hockey as a religion, that's not to be taken literally. You're free to have beliefs, and everyone else is free to identify them as baseless conjecture, or any other less forgiving synonym for belief.


Ah, yes. Your word is as good as that of the most respected hockey journalists on the planet, with their given networks of sources deep within the game. How humble.


Sometimes they talk directly if they're not too happy with a certain situation, sometimes they don't. I don't mind a grain of salt, I like to apply a grain or two myself to any such meal. But you're not taking a grain of salt. You're throwing out the soup because you don't like it and instead offer a story about a different hypothetical soup, which there are no traces of, unlike the soup you've just thrown out.

Whatever, you seem to be upset that I am not following along with what you believe. Therefore, if I am proved wrong make sure you get into this thread with a "I told you so" before the mods lock it.

 

[Vipers31]

Whatever, you seem to be upset that I am not following along with what you believe. Therefore, if I am proved wrong make sure you get into this thread with a "I told you so" before the mods lock it.

I'm not upset, at all, and I certainly don't care enough about your beliefs to go for any "I told you so" post-fact. I wouldn't even really know what to tell you, then. Whether you're grasping things out of thin air now doesn't require later confirmation.

We know we're in a tough spot. We know we'll have go give up something. There's disagreement about just how costly it would be to get rid of a guy like Stoner, or how much the Ducks would be willing to shed such a contract. There's an overwhelming expectation among Ducks fans that there will be a deal that stings. Nothing about that is news. There's reasonable debate about what assets it will cost us. And then there is a few people with baseless conjecture and stories about beliefs that have to extend beyond that and try to create additional drama, for no reason.

 

[Apotheosis]

Ducks fans; if the Leafs took on Stoner's contract, would Montour be on the table?

 

[Vipers31]

Ducks fans; if the Leafs took on Stoner's contract, would Montour be on the table?

From what read, the consensus is "no". I'm also in that camp.

 

[dracom]

Ducks fans; if the Leafs took on Stoner's contract, would Montour be on the table?

I would say yes, but I know I'm in the minority.

 

[aj8000]

I'm not upset, at all, and I certainly don't care enough about your beliefs to go for any "I told you so" post-fact.
There's reasonable debate about what assets it will cost us. And then there is a few people with baseless conjecture and stories about beliefs that have to extend beyond that and try to create additional drama, for no reason.

Sure you are not upset. The last sentence says otherwise. If you want to keep taking shots at me that is fine, I really do not care one way or another.

I still think you underestimate the value of cap space and the willingness of teams to take it on during a time that the salary cap is likely stagnant.

 

[Vipers31]

Sure you are not upset. The last sentence says otherwise.

You're not very good at that kind of thing. The sentence says that I identify those people. My emotions when being presented with such cases is purely your imagination, which we have already more than adequately covered.

If you want to keep taking shots at me that is fine, I really do not care on way or another.

It's not shots. It is baseless conjecture. You virtually admitted to it, just named it "belief"s, which doesn't make any material difference. Acknowledging that the aforementioned beliefs do not have a base is not a shot, but a summary of the conversation.

I still think you underestimate the value of cap space and the willingness of teams to take it on during a time that the salary cap is likely stagnant.

That much is possible. It's not like I'm expecting Murray to just rob his way out of this one. It's going to sting, on some level, depending on the way he procedes. Trading a guy like Fowler would sting immensely for the team, but there obviously wouldn't be a shortage of teams loving to take that kind of salary on, and given that there wouldn't be too much of a reason to believe the value would be too bad for a player of his quality. If he tries the "pay someone to take Stoner route", we'll see where he slots in on the Bickell/Bolland scale.

 

[haseoke39]

Serious question: What would Bob Murray be waiting on at this point, specifically?

- Is there an IR avenue that he can't fully take advantage of yet?

- Is there some trade avenue that maybe other teams won't take until they hit a particular timeline?

- Is he waiting for Lindholm to fold in mid-November when he starts to sense his season in jeopardy?

I just wonder what the best working theory is on what would justify the hold-up. On this board at least, we're really arguing exactly the same stuff as we were arguing in May, just with more certainty. Going past December 1st seems entirely plausible to me, unless there's some trigger point in time Murray is aiming towards.

 

[Sojourn]

We have more information about the contract negotiations, and they are closer.

 

[Vipers31]

Going past December 1st seems entirely plausible to me, unless there's some trigger point in time Murray is aiming towards.

That's a slightly weird statement, considering that December 1st would be the ultimate trigger point, itself. Not just for him, but for Lindholm himself, as well. A contract like Kucherov's isn't purely a sign of outrageous grace, but also a reflection of the given leverage for RFAs.

 

[KrisLetAngry]

We have more information about the contract negotiations, and they are closer.

This is good.

But he can't sign until moves get made either LTIR or trade or both

 

[Sojourn]

This is good.

But he can't sign until moves get made either LTIR or trade or both

That's absolutely true, but at the same time moves can't be done until they are ready to sign. Unless it's strictly LTIR related, which is possible, but that can be done retroactively. I think people forget that those moves, whatever they are, will likely leave Anaheim a little short handed until Lindholm is available. They want to shorten that period of time as much as possible.

Realistically, we should expect a lot to happen in a very short period of time. We shouldn't see a lot of moves over a more drawn out span.