Elias Lindholm | #23 | C/W

[DexM94]

On 2/6/2024 at 2:40 PM, kettlevalley said:

So they have him starting on Petey's wing and on PP1.  

 

Wonder if we see the other extreme at some point and they reallly spread it out.  

 

Pdg Miller Boeser

Suter Petey Mik

Lafferty Lindholm Hogs

Joshua Bleugar Garland

 

I dont think anyone else has THAT kind of depth.  

 

 

what depth ??? PDG, Mik, Sutter are not top 6 ! so 3 of your top 6 are bottom guy aven 13+ ones

 

we need our top two lines to play like top two lines, so :

Pettersson Lindholm Boeser

Hoglander Miller Garland

Joshua Blueger Mikheyev (if not traded)

diGuissepe Suter Lafferty

 

 

 

[Grinch]

[DownUndaCanuck]

Massively over-rated the last little while, he's been a very average top line center and very solid 2C ever since Gaudreau left and we're seeing why. Great two-way solid defender and very safe guy but he fits Tocchet's mould perfectly.

 

Really don't like him on Miller and Boeser's line though, he's sucking the offence right out of our stars. I'd try and play him with Petey again and on their wing give them Hoglander. Other option is to load up the Lotto line again and play Lindholm with Hoglander and someone like Suter or Mikheyev. Final option is to break up our 3rd line and scatter them amongst our stars...

[ngoway]

3 hours ago, DownUndaCanuck said:

Massively over-rated the last little while, he's been a very average top line center and very solid 2C ever since Gaudreau left and we're seeing why. Great two-way solid defender and very safe guy but he fits Tocchet's mould perfectly.

 

Really don't like him on Miller and Boeser's line though, he's sucking the offence right out of our stars. I'd try and play him with Petey again and on their wing give them Hoglander. Other option is to load up the Lotto line again and play Lindholm with Hoglander and someone like Suter or Mikheyev. Final option is to break up our 3rd line and scatter them amongst our stars...

 

While Lindholm hasn't provided instant offense, I wouldn't go as far as saying that he's "sucking the offence right out". He's only been with us for four games, so let's give him a chance to learn the systems and positions of where everyone will be. He's also been getting more chances to get shots, so I'd say jumping to those conclusions may be a bit quick.

He's been very good defensively, and has been getting better in the dot each game. I think a line of Hoglander - Pettersson - Lindholm would be worth a try at this point.

Edited February 12 by ngoway

[Alflives]

2 hours ago, DownUndaCanuck said:

Massively over-rated the last little while, he's been a very average top line center and very solid 2C ever since Gaudreau left and we're seeing why. Great two-way solid defender and very safe guy but he fits Tocchet's mould perfectly.

 

Really don't like him on Miller and Boeser's line though, he's sucking the offence right out of our stars. I'd try and play him with Petey again and on their wing give them Hoglander. Other option is to load up the Lotto line again and play Lindholm with Hoglander and someone like Suter or Mikheyev. Final option is to break up our 3rd line and scatter them amongst our stars...

Lindy has 2 goals in 4 games. That’s 49 goal pace while being super good defensively. What exactly are you going on about? 

[Boudrias]

13 hours ago, Alflives said:

Lindy has 2 goals in 4 games. That’s 49 goal pace while being super good defensively. What exactly are you going on about? 

I think his play has been just fine. Way to early to do any assessment. He had a goal yesterday if the hockey gods were any kinder. No worries here. 

[higgyfan]

16 hours ago, ngoway said:

 

While Lindholm hasn't provided instant offense, I wouldn't go as far as saying that he's "sucking the offence right out". He's only been with us for four games, so let's give him a chance to learn the systems and positions of where everyone will be. He's also been getting more chances to get shots, so I'd say jumping to those conclusions may be a bit quick.

He's been very good defensively, and has been getting better in the dot each game. I think a line of Hoglander - Pettersson - Lindholm would be worth a try at this point.

 

He's a great addition to the team.  He hasn't had the time to 'gel' with various linemates,

as he's only been with them for a short period of time.  His offence when he is with

players that shoot the puck at the net, so he can (expertly) deflect/tap it behind the goalie.

I'n not sure about Hogs, as he tends to be more of a lone rider, but Pete has a great shot

and should start using it more.  The Pizza guy might be effective on that line; solid defence,

good passer, good along the boards; scrounging for the puck, etc.

 

It usually takes a bit of time for a new player to adjust to the system and develop chemistry

with his line.

[TUSK v2.0]

15 minutes ago, higgyfan said:

 

He's a great addition to the team.  He hasn't had the time to 'gel' with various linemates,

as he's only been with them for a short period of time.  His offence when he is with

players that shoot the puck at the net, so he can (expertly) deflect/tap it behind the goalie.

I'n not sure about Hogs, as he tends to be more of a lone rider, but Pete has a great shot

and should start using it more.  The Pizza guy might be effective on that line; solid defence,

good passer, good along the boards; scrounging for the puck, etc.

 

It usually takes a bit of time for a new player to adjust to the system and develop chemistry

with his line.

He has not even played in front of the Home crowd yet. I am certain you guys will all inspire him!

[ngoway]

31 minutes ago, higgyfan said:

 

He's a great addition to the team.  He hasn't had the time to 'gel' with various linemates,

as he's only been with them for a short period of time.  His offence when he is with

players that shoot the puck at the net, so he can (expertly) deflect/tap it behind the goalie.

I'n not sure about Hogs, as he tends to be more of a lone rider, but Pete has a great shot

and should start using it more.  The Pizza guy might be effective on that line; solid defence,

good passer, good along the boards; scrounging for the puck, etc.

 

It usually takes a bit of time for a new player to adjust to the system and develop chemistry

with his line.

 

Haha pizza boy being Di Giuseppe I'm assuming? I don't mind giving Di Giuseppe a try with Pettersson and Lindholm, but I think Hoglander would still be a better fit. Hoglander is quick on the forcheck and can help Pettersson and Lindholm retrieve the puck, and can then let them take over. Hoglander has also shown he has offensive skill in him too and I'd say more than Di Giuseppe.

[farinush]

Lindholm’s success will be tied to Pettersson’s and that’s not necessarily a bad thing. Lindholm will never be the flashy or aggressive guy driving a line. He needs an aggressive f1 and a play-driving f2, like he had in Calgary. If those conditions are satisfied, he will amplify the line and make everyone’s lives easier. Hogs has already proven how an effective, puck retrieving f1 can be for Lindholm. If Petey can consistently make strong plays, Lindholm will always be in the right spot at the right time. In Calgary, he had Tkachuk (aggressive forechecker) and Gaudreau (line driver) and he was able to make both of them better. 
 

This is a line that will need some time to gel and all 3 links must fulfill their roles at the highest level. In 15-20 games, this could be our best line by far. 

[NHL97OneTimer]

Hogs is really standing out as a player that could play with either BB & JT or with EP & EL.  I do like having two decent FO guys on each of the top 2 lines though, so Hogs with EP & EL makes good sense right now.  Plus I love that Hogs can fetch the puck and get in front of the net while EP can do his thing.

 

Mikheyev on the fourth line is where things get interesting and I can see him traded by the summer if not sooner.

[Artemus]

On 2/11/2024 at 4:51 PM, Alflives said:

Lindy has 2 goals in 4 games. That’s 49 goal pace while being super good defensively. What exactly are you going on about? 

 

 

Alf, I agree with your sentiments about this player, but maybe not with your arithmetic, unless on Melmac the elite hockey league plays a 98 game regular season.!!!

 

 

[AK-19]

56 minutes ago, Artemus said:

 

 

Alf, I agree with your sentiments about this player, but maybe not with your arithmetic, unless on Melmac the elite hockey league plays a 98 game regular season.!!!

 

 

If he was wrong before, he's correct now . Currently on pace for 50+ goals.

[Strawbone]

13 hours ago, NHL97OneTimer said:

Hogs is really standing out as a player that could play with either BB & JT or with EP & EL.  I do like having two decent FO guys on each of the top 2 lines though, so Hogs with EP & EL makes good sense right now.  Plus I love that Hogs can fetch the puck and get in front of the net while EP can do his thing.

 

Mikheyev on the fourth line is where things get interesting and I can see him traded by the summer if not sooner.

 

Now that Mik's best attribute (fast skating) seems to be diminished, I think replacing him with an in-shape Kessel would benefit the team. It would take away from the PK a bit, but we do have Lindholm there now doing an excellent job.

[-AJ-]

57 minutes ago, AK-19 said:

If he was wrong before, he's correct now . Currently on pace for 50+ goals.

 

Only if you take 4 goals in 6 games. Over the season, he has 13 goals in 55 games, on pace for 19 goals. If you instead take his current rate with the Canucks and pro-rate it over the final 27 games, you get 18 goals in those games for a total of 31 goals. Realistically, he probably finishes in the low 20s in goals.

[-AJ-]

This is very likely a ridiculous conflation of correlation and causation, but the Canucks are 4-4-1 since the ASG and since acquiring Lindholm. Not a terrible record, but not great either. Look for people to start blaming Lindholm for struggles if we continue to be mediocre soon. Calling it now. Personally, I believe it's partially poor play, and perhaps also a bit of the dreaded PDO regression (though I haven't actually checked our PDO lately).

 

Checking our games since the ASG, we still have quite a few games at or above 10% shooting percentage, so that end of PDO appears to remain strong with the exception of the Boston game as well as the Avalanche and Jets games where Georgiev and Hellebucyk stoned us. Demko has had a few stinkers here and there, but is generally doing very well. DeSmith has played in two games since the ASG and has been pretty bad in both. Small sample, but if he struggles as a backup to end the year, that could place a bit more burden on Demko to play an extra game or two down the stretch.

[Nucker67]

1 hour ago, -AJ- said:

Look for people to start blaming Lindholm for struggles if we continue to be mediocre soon.

 

You make a good point, Lindholm has been underwhelming considering what the Canucks gave up for him. 

[DownUndaCanuck]

Not sure how a light isn't being shone on Lindholm yet. He's playing as our 3rd line center right now and still trash. 6 points in 12 games and a minus 5 on the best team in the league is atrocious. Hate to say it but I can see why some people think he's an anchor or cancer for the team.

 

Calgary are 7-3-0 since getting rid of Lindholm, and most of those are huge games against top teams including Boston twice.

Vancouver are 5-5-2 since acquiring Lindholm.

 

What I find laughable is that people think he's an 8M Selke-nominee. Are you kidding? Blueger is outplaying him right now. These last few games he looks like our worst center to be honest. Suter and Blueger are better. Tocchet puts him on a line with anyone and he sucks the life out of them. He played him with Petey - they combine for a -8 against Boston. He plays him with Miller and Boeser and suddenly no surprise they go completely quiet. No surprises but Tocc takes Lindholm off Miller's line the last couple of games and look at JT explode. Now Lindholm is on Garland's line and suddenly our highest-energy player has the worst game of his year.

 

Sure, I get he's great defensively and has made some nice plays on the PK, and does well at faceoffs, but come on. We paid a premium for a guy who should be a top line center and he's our 3C right now. He's bringing zero offence and if anything, sucking the offence out of the lines he's on. For his current cap it's not too bad (but close), but for the price we paid and what people are thinking he should be extended for it's a joke. He's essentially a checking 3C and no more right now. I don't care about his once-off 40G season playing with two superstars, he couldn't replicate anything like that playing with our All stars.

 

Not sure how long people want to wait to scrutinize him but after 10 games I think we can see he's really not the real deal at all.

 

Just quietly, meanwhile look at the much cheaper Monahan who essentially cost half as much as Lindholm, sure isn't as strong defensively, but has 6 goals in 9 games with Winnipeg.

[-AJ-]

7 hours ago, DownUndaCanuck said:

Not sure how a light isn't being shone on Lindholm yet. He's playing as our 3rd line center right now and still trash. 6 points in 12 games and a minus 5 on the best team in the league is atrocious. Hate to say it but I can see why some people think he's an anchor or cancer for the team.

 

Calgary are 7-3-0 since getting rid of Lindholm, and most of those are huge games against top teams including Boston twice.

Vancouver are 5-5-2 since acquiring Lindholm.

 

What I find laughable is that people think he's an 8M Selke-nominee. Are you kidding? Blueger is outplaying him right now. These last few games he looks like our worst center to be honest. Suter and Blueger are better. Tocchet puts him on a line with anyone and he sucks the life out of them. He played him with Petey - they combine for a -8 against Boston. He plays him with Miller and Boeser and suddenly no surprise they go completely quiet. No surprises but Tocc takes Lindholm off Miller's line the last couple of games and look at JT explode. Now Lindholm is on Garland's line and suddenly our highest-energy player has the worst game of his year.

 

Sure, I get he's great defensively and has made some nice plays on the PK, and does well at faceoffs, but come on. We paid a premium for a guy who should be a top line center and he's our 3C right now. He's bringing zero offence and if anything, sucking the offence out of the lines he's on. For his current cap it's not too bad (but close), but for the price we paid and what people are thinking he should be extended for it's a joke. He's essentially a checking 3C and no more right now. I don't care about his once-off 40G season playing with two superstars, he couldn't replicate anything like that playing with our All stars.

 

Not sure how long people want to wait to scrutinize him but after 10 games I think we can see he's really not the real deal at all.

 

Just quietly, meanwhile look at the much cheaper Monahan who essentially cost half as much as Lindholm, sure isn't as strong defensively, but has 6 goals in 9 games with Winnipeg.

 

I think I'm willing to concede that he's been a pretty distinct disappointment so far in these 12 games, but not that he won't turn it around at any point. Hronek looked pretty "meh" in his 4 games last year, but was a totally different guy at the start of this year.

 

That said, as painful as it is, if he doesn't ever show any signs of turning it around throughout the end of the season or the playoffs, I'd be okay with just letting him go, as much as that might hurt given what we paid for him.

[ngoway]

7 hours ago, DownUndaCanuck said:

Not sure how a light isn't being shone on Lindholm yet. He's playing as our 3rd line center right now and still trash. 6 points in 12 games and a minus 5 on the best team in the league is atrocious. Hate to say it but I can see why some people think he's an anchor or cancer for the team.

 

Calgary are 7-3-0 since getting rid of Lindholm, and most of those are huge games against top teams including Boston twice.

Vancouver are 5-5-2 since acquiring Lindholm.

 

What I find laughable is that people think he's an 8M Selke-nominee. Are you kidding? Blueger is outplaying him right now. These last few games he looks like our worst center to be honest. Suter and Blueger are better. Tocchet puts him on a line with anyone and he sucks the life out of them. He played him with Petey - they combine for a -8 against Boston. He plays him with Miller and Boeser and suddenly no surprise they go completely quiet. No surprises but Tocc takes Lindholm off Miller's line the last couple of games and look at JT explode. Now Lindholm is on Garland's line and suddenly our highest-energy player has the worst game of his year.

 

Sure, I get he's great defensively and has made some nice plays on the PK, and does well at faceoffs, but come on. We paid a premium for a guy who should be a top line center and he's our 3C right now. He's bringing zero offence and if anything, sucking the offence out of the lines he's on. For his current cap it's not too bad (but close), but for the price we paid and what people are thinking he should be extended for it's a joke. He's essentially a checking 3C and no more right now. I don't care about his once-off 40G season playing with two superstars, he couldn't replicate anything like that playing with our All stars.

 

Not sure how long people want to wait to scrutinize him but after 10 games I think we can see he's really not the real deal at all.

 

Just quietly, meanwhile look at the much cheaper Monahan who essentially cost half as much as Lindholm, sure isn't as strong defensively, but has 6 goals in 9 games with Winnipeg.

 

I think most of us will agree that we were hoping for more offense from Lindholm. I am still hopeful that he'll find some more offense as I've heard his shot is one of his greatest assets. I haven't seen him use that too much consistently, so I would like see him start to use it more.

 

What I won't agree with is this constant need for Canucks fans to overdramatize the team or players. Do we really feel the need to complain about something always just because the team isn't winning every single game? In this case, do we really feel the need that we need to put a player under the microscope and really emphasize the negatives because he's not providing all the offense we hoped for?

 

I get the fact that we traded some good assets for the player, but the fact is that we have a rare opportunity here to really push for a good playoff run, and we needed to add to do so. Again, I'll agree that Lindholm hasn't fully lived up to what I was hoping for, but we can't argue the fact that he does make the team better. I also don't think the comparison that Blueger is playing better than Lindholm is true either. Summarizing Lindholm's play just as a checking line centre isn't a fair assessment. He's making good defensive plays because he's very aware and is usually in the right spot in the defensive zone. He's also on the third line because that line has been struggling since Joshua got hurt and Tocchet has said a few times already that they're trying to balance out the bottom six. 

 

I will agree though that Lindholm does need to show more to prove he'd be worth anything near that 8m cap hit. But come on, why do we have to be so negative?

[DownUndaCanuck]

If he does continue to hover around a 40 point pace (which is laughable by the way) and somehow finishes the season a minus player on the best +/- team in the league by a mile, how much does his next contract cost?

I know there's more to Lindholm than just a one-40G season flash in the pan, he really should be a good 60 point second line center on most decent teams. That being said, does his agent play the game of signing a cheap one year "show-me" type deal, especially with a talented team like the Canucks? Right now he's playing his worst hockey in forever, amazing but he's producing even less points than with Calgary.

 

If there's a one year, 6M deal on the table, I think we go for it and move some pieces around to get it done. It'll be interesting if it really comes down to keeping Lindholm or Blueger. Blueger could ask for 2-3M easily but Lindholm has potential to bounce back. Obviously 7-8M takes us way out of the bidding, but if he doesn't get that on the open market (and in all honesty based on his garbage play, he really shouldn't and I'll be surprised if any stupid team does offer him Bo/JT money), then you might see him circle back for a cheaper deal. Honestly even a 5.5M deal would be fair for him and if that's the case, that's Kuzmenko's money.

 

It'd be nice if he turns it on in the playoffs but so far I haven't seen any promising signs from him, but if he ends the season pretty much the same as now, we've certainly got a chance at signing him. Then again though, if he's just going to be a sluggish 40-50 point center costing us 6M, would we rather just keep Blueger at less than half the price?

[ngoway]

1 hour ago, DownUndaCanuck said:

If he does continue to hover around a 40 point pace (which is laughable by the way) and somehow finishes the season a minus player on the best +/- team in the league by a mile, how much does his next contract cost?

I know there's more to Lindholm than just a one-40G season flash in the pan, he really should be a good 60 point second line center on most decent teams. That being said, does his agent play the game of signing a cheap one year "show-me" type deal, especially with a talented team like the Canucks? Right now he's playing his worst hockey in forever, amazing but he's producing even less points than with Calgary.

 

If there's a one year, 6M deal on the table, I think we go for it and move some pieces around to get it done. It'll be interesting if it really comes down to keeping Lindholm or Blueger. Blueger could ask for 2-3M easily but Lindholm has potential to bounce back. Obviously 7-8M takes us way out of the bidding, but if he doesn't get that on the open market (and in all honesty based on his garbage play, he really shouldn't and I'll be surprised if any stupid team does offer him Bo/JT money), then you might see him circle back for a cheaper deal. Honestly even a 5.5M deal would be fair for him and if that's the case, that's Kuzmenko's money.

 

It'd be nice if he turns it on in the playoffs but so far I haven't seen any promising signs from him, but if he ends the season pretty much the same as now, we've certainly got a chance at signing him. Then again though, if he's just going to be a sluggish 40-50 point center costing us 6M, would we rather just keep Blueger at less than half the price?

 

Doesn't make much sense to me to compare Lindholm and Blueger. Lindholm should be a top 6 forward, and Blueger is a bottom 6 forward. Blueger has done well in his role and would be good to retain if both sides agree to something reasonable, but Blueger would not be able to fill Lindholm's spot.

 

While 12 games is a good sample size, I still think it's best to see how he plays out the season and playoffs before jumping to such harsh critics. At this point Lindholm is definitely not causing the team any harm and has always been very good defensively which will be very important down the stretch and in the playoffs. Like you said about Lindholm's offense that scoring 40 goals isn't a fluke. Lindholm clearly has skill and just needs to figure it out a bit more.

[kilgore]

I remember another time, when a different management, thought it would be a good idea to bring in a declining Swedish veteran, put him with one (or two) other premier Swedes , and that would somehow elevate all of them. 
That experiment didn’t last long. And the difference there was we didn’t give up the kind of assets we did this time to try that.

 

i know it’s a long way off to see how Brzustewicz and that 1st round pick turns out. Not to mention if Kuz finally adapts better to what’s required to play well in the NHL. So it’s easy to write it off in the present, but that is a huge package to give up. 
 

And with that price paid, GuentzelI is off the market. And so too Tanev most likely. I sure hope this doesn’t turn around to bite them in the ass. 
 

At least he’s not already signed to a six year deal. I hope like hell he starts to pick it up closer to the playoffs. If he doesn’t, and we let him walk, it will be the worst trade so far in JR’s tenure.

[Attila Umbrus]

11 minutes ago, kilgore said:

I remember another time, when a different management, thought it would be a good idea to bring in a declining Swedish veteran, put him with one (or two) other premier Swedes , and that would somehow elevate all of them. 
That experiment didn’t last long. And the difference there was we didn’t give up the kind of assets we did this time to try that.

 

i know it’s a long way off to see how Brzustewicz and that 1st round pick turns out. Not to mention if Kuz finally adapts better to what’s required to play well in the NHL. So it’s easy to write it off in the present, but that is a huge package to give up. 
 

And with that price paid, GuentzelI is off the market. And so too Tanev most likely. I sure hope this doesn’t turn around to bite them in the ass. 
 

At least he’s not already signed to a six year deal. I hope like hell he starts to pick it up closer to the playoffs. If he doesn’t, and we let him walk, it will be the worst trade so far in JR’s tenure.

 

It's a lot to give up for a rental player. But it's also a nice contingency plan to have in your back pocket in case Petey walks.

 

At the end of the day however, if Petey signs, and we can get Lindholm at a decent price we are very set on our Center position for a few years. Not a bad issue to have.

 

I haven't minded the way Lindholm has played. He's playing like a 60 point center. If his asking price comes down to earth I would way rather retain him and trade away Garland or Mik...

 

I was on the fence about Garland this year, but now with Joshua down it's clear he's the one that's been mixing the drink on that line. If we shed Garland and Miks contracts that will give us some good flex room.

[DownUndaCanuck]

12 hours ago, ngoway said:

 

Doesn't make much sense to me to compare Lindholm and Blueger. Lindholm should be a top 6 forward, and Blueger is a bottom 6 forward. Blueger has done well in his role and would be good to retain if both sides agree to something reasonable, but Blueger would not be able to fill Lindholm's spot.

 

While 12 games is a good sample size, I still think it's best to see how he plays out the season and playoffs before jumping to such harsh critics. At this point Lindholm is definitely not causing the team any harm and has always been very good defensively which will be very important down the stretch and in the playoffs. Like you said about Lindholm's offense that scoring 40 goals isn't a fluke. Lindholm clearly has skill and just needs to figure it out a bit more.

 

I know, but Blueger and Lindholm are surprisingly close in a lot of categories. They basically play the same role (defensive center who can kill penalties) and are scoring at the same clip almost exactly - 40 point pace over an 82 game schedule. Lindholm plays a lot more minutes with better wingers though, but does have a much better faceoff %. 

 

We should be comparing Lindholm to Miller and Petey, not Blueger, but here we are.