Speculation: The Quest to sign Lindholm: Part II

[aj8000]

http://thehockeywriters.com/cam-fowler-or-hampus-lindholm-anaheim-ducks-face-critical-decision/

"The Anaheim Ducks are backed into a corner, and it seems the only way out is a very uncomfortable decision."

 

[dracom]

Hmm, I have been saying there is another issue going on that is all, based on the latest tweet, it appears that I may be right. I am not sure on his credibility but this may be smoke and where there is smoke...

Relax this is just a discussion forum guys

I love that you take that tweet seriously, yet Bob is just a red herring. Seriously, you obviously want to stir up drama to try and get a Trouba for Lindholm deal to work on here, but it's not going to happen. When someone actually reliable says there's a problem between the two clubs, and Lindholm wants out, then we can talk. But that's not happening right now.

http://thehockeywriters.com/cam-fowler-or-hampus-lindholm-anaheim-ducks-face-critical-decision/

"The Anaheim Ducks are backed into a corner, and it seems the only way out is a very uncomfortable decision."

Ah yes, the most trusted news site for hockey rumors out there.

 

[aj8000]

Other then Trouba i would say none.

One would think it would be the best way for both teams (assuming the Ducks are now willing to trade Lindholm) to maintain their value of the players by swinging a deal with each other.

The Ducks will not get a better offer than Trouba for Lindholm +/- bits and pieces to allow the ducks to sign Trouba from any other team

 

[aj8000]

I love that you take that tweet seriously, yet Bob is just a red herring. Seriously, you obviously want to stir up drama to try and get a Trouba for Lindholm deal to work on here, but it's not going to happen. When someone actually reliable says there's a problem between the two clubs, and Lindholm wants out, then we can talk. But that's not happening right now.



Ah yes, the most trusted news site for hockey rumors out there.

Where there is smoke...

And by the way, no one said Lindholm wanted out. My point is there is another reason why Lindholm is not signed other than the salary gap between them. It most likely the cap issue. You can take offense to my posts if you like but if you think about it, you will realize I am right.

Trusted or not, the points the article makes are legit. The ducks have a problem and need to find a way out of it.

 

[dracom]

Where there is smoke...

Again, you're trying to pass off Murphy's tweet as something serious, yet when the most trusted news source we have for rumors says something about how close the two are to agreeing to a deal, it's just a red herring. Give it up dude.

 

[Maukkis]

Lindholm and Stoner for Trouba and Dano makes sense. Another prospect can be swapped in if needed.

 

[Ducks in a row]

Lindholm and Stoner for Trouba and Dano makes sense. Another prospect can be swapped in if needed.

A unsigned defenseman who wants a lot of money doesn't make sense for Anaheim.

 

[aj8000]

Again, you're trying to pass off Murphy's tweet as something serious, yet when the most trusted news source we have for rumors says something about how close the two are to agreeing to a deal, it's just a red herring. Give it up dude.

I am saying I am not the only person seeing that there is an issue, I have no idea how credible that guy is (and I said so in my original post) but I am sure it is not a far stretch that the Ducks are considering if trading Lindholm is the right way to go.

You do not like my speculation; how about you tell me how the ducks are going to sign Lindholm? Do you want me to hold you to the same criteria that some of the ducks fans expect from me that you cannot speculate on who will be traded from the ducks and to whom?

 

[Maukkis]

A unsigned defenseman who wants a lot of money doesn't make sense for Anaheim.

The irony is strong in this one.

 

[dracom]

I am saying I am not the only person seeing that there is an issue, I have no idea how credible that guy is (and I said so in my original post) but I am sure it is not a far stretch that the Ducks are considering if trading Lindholm is the right way to go.

See, you continue to push something that isn't there while ignoring the actual information we have as a red herring because it doesn't fit your narrative. Murphy is a hack, who doesn't actually have sources. This is the guy who said the Bruins were going to OS Trouba. He doesn't actually know anything, yet you're trying to say since he thinks there some unknown tension between the two clubs, then you were right and the Ducks want to trade Lindholm.

And trading Lindholm is the right way to go? Really? Jeez dude...

 

[Number1RedWingsFan52]

Lindholm and Stoner for Trouba and Dano makes sense. Another prospect can be swapped in if needed.

How do you figure, Considering that Trouba and Lindholm are seeking pretty much the exact same kind of money. Bob Murray might as well just sign Lindholm and then deal with the consequences later.

 

[Ducks in a row]

The irony is strong in this one.

Re-signing Lindholm who we drafted 6th overall and developed vs. trading him for a worse defenseman that wants a lot of money makes no sense.

 

[Stej]

To Ducks fans scoffing at Trouba+ for Lindholm and cap dump, does your opinion change if Trouba was signed to a 2 year bridge at about $3m? Doesn't that give you incredible flexibility dollar-wise, plus decent on ice value for Lindholm?

 

[aj8000]

See, you continue to push something that isn't there while ignoring the actual information we have as a red herring because it doesn't fit your narrative. Murphy is a hack, who doesn't actually have sources. This is the guy who said the Bruins were going to OS Trouba. He doesn't actually know anything, yet you're trying to say since he thinks there some unknown tension between the two clubs, then you were right and the Ducks want to trade Lindholm.

And trading Lindholm is the right way to go? Really? Jeez dude...

I will ask again, how are you going to sign Lindholm then? You feel my speculation is crap, so tell me how the ducks are going to get out of this mess? Lets say 5.5 million per year? or do you want the home town discount to make it easier for you at 5 million per year?

 

[aj8000]

How do you figure, Considering that Trouba and Lindholm are seeking pretty much the exact same kind of money. Bob Murray might as well just sign Lindholm and then deal with the consequences later.

He cannot sign Lindholm without a cap dump. If the jets take the cap dump of stoner they can sign Trouba. Dano cost them nothing if he is in the A. Without a cap dump, the Ducks cannot sign Lindholm.

 

[Zegs2sendhelp]

To Ducks fans scoffing at Trouba+ for Lindholm and cap dump, does your opinion change if Trouba was signed to a 2 year bridge at about $3m? Doesn't that give you incredible flexibility dollar-wise, plus decent on ice value for Lindholm?

I think if lindholm is in fact available, chances are we are not trading him to a team in the western conference that would potentially take a playoff spot away unless there is a huge over payment.

Most likely hed be heading east, and I'm guessing teams like buffalo detroit boston and Toronto would be bidding on him. I also don't know if I'm buying the equal defencemen part... I think we should look for a solid top 4 in his own end to play with vatanen or fowler, and then a good forward/forward prospect to go along with it. I just cant see us trading him in the west if we do trade him unless the team is paying an amount the fan base isn't going to like.

 

[Maukkis]

Re-signing Lindholm who we drafted 6th overall and developed vs. trading him for a worse defenseman that wants a lot of money makes no sense.

No, no, no. You're moving the goalposts here. You quite literally said "an unsigned defenseman who's seeking for a lot of money", which is basically what Lindholm is.

Calling it here, Lindholm makes no sense for the Ducks. All poaching attempts are welcome.

 

[Maukkis]

Re-signing Lindholm who we drafted 6th overall and developed vs. trading him for a worse defenseman that wants a lot of money makes no sense.

No, no, no. You're moving the goalposts here. You quite literally said "an unsigned defenseman who's seeking for a lot of money makes no sense", which is basically what Lindholm is.

Calling it here, Lindholm makes no sense for the Ducks. All poaching attempts are welcome.

 

[Stej]

I think if lindholm is in fact available, chances are we are not trading him to a team in the western conference that would potentially take a playoff spot away unless there is a huge over payment.

Most likely hed be heading east, and I'm guessing teams like buffalo detroit boston and Toronto would be bidding on him. I also don't know if I'm buying the equal defencemen part... I think we should look for a solid top 4 in his own end to play with vatanen or fowler, and then a good forward/forward prospect to go along with it. I just cant see us trading him in the west if we do trade him unless the team is paying an amount the fan base isn't going to like.

I've never understood that logic myself, but I respect your opinion if that's how you feel.

 

[Ducks in a row]

To Ducks fans scoffing at Trouba+ for Lindholm and cap dump, does your opinion change if Trouba was signed to a 2 year bridge at about $3m? Doesn't that give you incredible flexibility dollar-wise, plus decent on ice value for Lindholm?

Get Trouba signed then he will be more attractive piece in a trade. We could trade for him and he could still be causing problems to get signed. Lindholm + cap dump for Trouba signed + then at least talking about it wouldn't be so bad as it is now. Even then I would rather trade Lindholm out east.

 

[Brock Radunske]

Lindholm and Stoner for Trouba and Dano makes sense. Another prospect can be swapped in if needed.

I think they'd want a signed defenseman back

 

[dracom]

I will ask again, how are you going to sign Lindholm then? You feel my speculation is crap, so tell me how the ducks are going to get out of this mess? Lets say 5.5 million per year? or do you want the home town discount to make it easier for you at 5 million per year?

Depends a lot on how severe Despres concussion is. If he's seriously hurt, he might be done playing hockey completely. Then we just put him on LTIR with Thompson, move some ELC contracts down and re-sign Lindholm. Which seems to be what Murray wants to do since it's been reported that he wants to get Lindholm re-signed without making a trade.

If that isn't an option, then someone like Stoner probably gets traded with a high value piece back (1st/Montour/Larsson) to move him. Then we put Thompson on LTIR since he's supposed to be out until the TDL anyways, move ELC around and re-sign Lindholm.

There are ways to make it work, it just hurts us a lot to do so.

I would love to see how trading Lindholm is the right choice though, according to you. Probably our best, second best defensemen and only 22 years old. So trading him hurts us now and in the future. Would love to hear your reasoning as to why we should trade him though.

 

[Stej]

Get Trouba signed then he will be more attractive piece in a trade. We could trade for him and he could still be causing problems to get signed. Lindholm + cap dump for Trouba signed + then at least talking about it wouldn't be so bad as it is now. Even then I would rather trade Lindholm out east.

I completely agree that Trouba would have to be signed to a Ducks-friendly deal to even be considered an option. Fortunately Chevy might have the leverage to make that happen if Trouba wants to play in the NHL in the next 5 years.

I understand the out east thing but I don't agree with the logic if you can get a better deal in the west (particularly if it's in the other division).

 

[Maukkis]

I think they'd want a signed defenseman back

I mean, how can they expect to get a signed top defenseman for an unsigned top defenseman? How does that make sense for the other team? They have to add, no question about it.

(yes, I know what you're thinking about me being a Jets fan, but this is what Ducks fans have said to us, so...)

 

[Ducks in a row]

No, no, no. You're moving the goalposts here. You quite literally said "an unsigned defenseman who's seeking for a lot of money makes no sense", which is basically what Lindholm is.

Calling it here, Lindholm makes no sense for the Ducks. All poaching attempts are welcome.

Re-signing Lindholm makes sense it makes sense to re-sign your good players. Trading him for another defenseman who is unsigned doesn't. Accept it and move on instead of trying to start something.