Jump to content

[Speculation] Lindholm apparently rejects Canucks offer of 7x7 extension


Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, RupertKBD said:

Take it FWIW, but Elliotte Friedman says Lindy already has (or will shortly) declined the Canucks' offer.

 

Whatever you think of EF as a source, I'd bet that he's right on this one. I didn't think there was much of a chance it would be accepted.....

I'm confident we have a plan b in case he declines and can't get it done.

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, AlwaysACanuckFan said:

To me it's a no brainer, it ticks off an item off the grocery list. However is 7x7 enough. Boston offers 8x7 Lindholm probably takes Boston deal. 

We go $7m x 8. Same dollars in total.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, BPA said:

Not a bad offer.  I would have preferred $6-6.5M based on his past performances.  But that would probably be looked upon as a low ball offer.  His speculated next contract was $8M from other teams.  So $7M seems to be a reasonable compromise.  But I don’t think there will be any $$ left to grab a top 6 winger as well.


He makes Petey the new top six winger really.  I suspect Lindholm is playing centre most of the time in the regular season with Petey sliding onto his wing where he had a ton of success.

 

In the playoffs and when we hit rocky patches in the season it also gives flexibility to switch out to three solid lines.

 

We are still short a top six guy to improve the team but the front officer is going to be really hard pressed to maintain the same depth of roster this coming season in any regard.  Lots of guys overplayed their contract value last season and many of them are in for raises.

 

To really repair the forward group, you need to make the D worse and there aren’t a lot of “outs” for management to do both.

 

If they could move on from Mikheyev and Hronek and get value back, then sign 1-2 free agent D men we have a chance of improving.

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, RupertKBD said:

Take it FWIW, but Elliotte Friedman says Lindy already has (or will shortly) declined the Canucks' offer.

 

Whatever you think of EF as a source, I'd bet that he's right on this one. I didn't think there was much of a chance it would be accepted.....

 

That'd be fine, he could get more elsewhere, and likely a bigger role

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, AlwaysACanuckFan said:

I'm confident we have a plan b in case he declines and can't get it done.

 

It's only a guess, but it feels to me like if the team could re-sign Lindy, then Petey moves to the wing. If Lindy walks, Petey stays at center and the team looks for a winger to play with him...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Bob Long said:

So... Do we trade a 4th for Guentzels rights and go that way?

 

I like JG, but I think he's another one that will prove too expensive.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Bob Long said:

 

So... Do we trade a 4th for Guentzels rights and go that way?

 

It's appealing up front but probably limits our options in the bottom six and on D imo

 

Guentzel will probably cost 9+

 

If they go after Guentzel they'll need cost effective players elsewhere in the lineup

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, RupertKBD said:

 

It's only a guess, but it feels to me like if the team could re-sign Lindy, then Petey moves to the wing. If Lindy walks, Petey stays at center and the team looks for a winger to play with him...

How would Marchessault look with him? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lindholm @7 ? No thanks. Let him go 

Ehlers, Necas even Zegras as main replacement,

Add Toffoli and we re set at forwards.

Sign Tanev and Myers and we re in VERY good shape. 

 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7x7 is the most we can do. 
 

Buyout Mik and sign Toffoli who has had chemistry with both Petey and Lindholm(last good offensive year was with Toffoli) and boom we have a credible top 6 line with Petey on it that’s not the lotto line. 

  • Cheers 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, DexM94 said:

Lindholm @7 ? No thanks. Let him go 

Ehlers, Necas even Zegras as main replacement,

Add Toffoli and we re set at forwards.

Sign Tanev and Myers and we re in VERY good shape. 

 


So trade another top prospect and a 1st?

 

We’ve been down that road too many times, which is why we lack cheap depth.

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, DexM94 said:

Lindholm @7 ? No thanks. Let him go 

Ehlers, Necas even Zegras as main replacement,

Add Toffoli and we re set at forwards.

Sign Tanev and Myers and we re in VERY good shape. 

 

Go check out Ehlers’ playoff history, laugh hysterically for 40 minutes, and then come back.

 

also, zegras is awful at systems hockey 
 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The flexibility is key - play Lindholm and Petey together, or Petey on the Lotto line, or all 3 as separate centers. Impossible for teams to defend that mid-game. We can roll against deep forward units like Dallas, or shutdown top-heavy ones, or if we're pressing for a goal load up the Lotto line.

 

Can't do that if we just acquire Necas.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Coconuts said:

 

It's appealing up front but probably limits our options in the bottom six and on D imo

 

Guentzel will probably cost 9+

 

If they go after Guentzel they'll need cost effective players elsewhere in the lineup

 

We don't currently have much, if any, information about what JG would be willing to sign here for. But let's assume you're right that it's closer to 9m, and that Lindy would cost us 7-8m per.

 

Investing in either player would force us to make sacrifices elsewhere. So it's ultimately a q of priorities.

 

Lindy brings us a right handed center who can help with tough defensive matchups in playoffs.

 

JG could give us two excellent pairs (Mills-Boeser & Petey-JG) to build our top two lines around, and open up more options on our power play.

 

While I won't be disappointed if they resign Lindy, I can also see a strong argument for investing in JG over Lindy, even if that means sacrificing others, e.g. Joshua, to make up the difference.

 

Personally, I think what JG brings (and the holes he'd help fill) would justify letting Lindy & DJ go.

 

At the same time, I have faith in our management's ability to find cheaper-but-still-competent 3rd line pieces, to replace some of defensive responsibilities, faceoffs, or physicality we'd be losing if Lindy & DJ leave (perhaps not by one individual but in the aggregate).
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, MeanSeanBean said:

I've already previously spoke of this. It's a great idea in theory, but how does that work in practice if we don't have enough quality wingers to roll 3 lines. The idea of having 3 balanced lines is great, until Mikheyev and Lafferty are flanking your superstar young center.

Lafferty won't be resigned this summer, we have enough guys who can step in. Mikheyev, I'd like to see them move him, but even with 1 - 1.5 million retained, it's still a reach I think, but that's what I'm hoping for so we don't wind up with him on the books for another 4 years.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, HKSR said:

We go $7m x 8. Same dollars in total.

But less money per game played. And he has to play a year longer to get the same money.  If 2 employers came to you with those 2 offers, which would you take? 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...