Jump to content

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


Recommended Posts

7 minutes ago, RupertKBD said:

 

Yep....and it would likely be a consideration....I just don't think it's as big a consideration as you and Alf....

Having a right shot defensively minded centre will take the load off miller for D zone draws on his weak side. That allows miller to play more offensive minutes. Sure, he’s great both ends of the ice, but our club would be better off if he could spend more time in the O Zone. 
Garland for Pageau, if we don’t do the Lindy Hop. 
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, Bob Long said:

 

I mean maybe Manny has the secret sauce to this? it would be kind of amazing is he could bring this to the club. 

He'll be focused on Abby, but he has brought his skills to teaching guys faceoffs before. I don't expect he'll have much of anything on his plate to help in Vancouver other than schooling the prospects.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Mike Vanderhoek said:

 

I think the idea he could cost north of $ 8.5m per on a max term deal. I mean I get it but its a lot of money.

 

The age of the contract would look better as the years go on however. Just a gut feeling but I cringe thinking of injuries, he plays the right way though.

 

Maybe im just cheap lol

Ya it’s a big signing the injury age risk is higher for sure.

 

the upside he brings to the line up would be legit though and it’s hard to imagine him not levelling up our Pp and top 6 for the next 3-5 years for sure

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, elvis15 said:

Now is not the time to go cup crazy and think that if we can lock up a few key pieces we'll go again next year. We have some weaknesses and trying to do the status quo with less of the same won't do it. 

 

Giving Lindholm a substantial contract like this only comes close to working if he's the solution to missing scoring in our top six. That could mean playing with Pettersson and increasing scoring for others indirectly. If there looking at him as the 3rd line center at that price, I'd rather have Blueger and Joshua back.

We were an injured Demko away from getting at least to the Cup Final this year. Our window is wide open. 

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Alflives said:

Maybe SM could make the transition to playing the defensive role? But he’s still more than 60% o zone starts. Pageau is already a defensive player. He played ahead of Fat Wallet when the chips were down and the start was in the islander’s zone. 

 

He's also still under contract, which means you'd have to move assets to get him....

 

....and at $5 million per, he's be more expensive than Monahan, who's projected salary is just over $4 mil....

 

https://dobberhockey.com/2024/05/13/free-agency-2024-salary-projections-for-the-top-100-free-agents-2/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, RupertKBD said:

 

He's also still under contract, which means you'd have to move assets to get him....

 

....and at $5 million per, he's be more expensive than Monahan, who's projected salary is just over $4 mil....

 

https://dobberhockey.com/2024/05/13/free-agency-2024-salary-projections-for-the-top-100-free-agents-2/

Garland for Pageau. Contracts are almost identical. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Alflives said:

Having a right shot defensively minded centre will take the load off miller for D zone draws on his weak side. That allows miller to play more offensive minutes. Sure, he’s great both ends of the ice, but our club would be better off if he could spend more time in the O Zone. 
Garland for Pageau, if we don’t do the Lindy Hop.

 

So, you're going to give up Garland, just so we can have a RH center? :classic_huh:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Alflives said:

Garland for Pageau. Contracts are almost identical. 

 

I'm not sure why you're so eager to get rid of Garland, but I don't share that sentiment.

 

There are UFA centers available that won't cost us one of our best playoff performers.

  • Cheers 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, RupertKBD said:

 

So, you're going to give up Garland, just so we can have a RH center? :classic_huh:

Reallocate Garlands cap to a right shot, defensive centre who plays pk. Garland is a good player but he doesn’t play centre, or pp or pk. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Alflives said:

Reallocate Garlands cap to a right shot, defensive centre who plays pk. Garland is a good player but he doesn’t play centre, or pp or pk. 

 

We still lose Garland and I think that would be a mistake.

 

I also don't share your hard-on for JG Pageau. I think he's a pretty good player, but I wouldn't fuck up team chemistry just to get him....especially where there are UFAs available.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, RupertKBD said:

 

We still lose Garland and I think that would be a mistake.

 

I also don't share your hard-on for JG Pageau. I think he's a pretty good player, but I wouldn't fuck up team chemistry just to get him....especially where there are UFAs available.

It appears from the rumour mill that we are trying to move Garlsnd. Likely it’s to clear his cap so we can use that savings to bump more important players, but it could be to bring in a guy to fill an area of need. We shall see. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Alflives said:

It appears from the rumour mill that we are trying to move Garlsnd. Likely it’s to clear his cap so we can use that savings to bump more important players, but it could be to bring in a guy to fill an area of need. We shall see. 

 

First I'm hearing of that. Can you post a source for that?

 

Last I saw, the scuttlebutt was that the team was looking to add a scoring forward. It doesn't make much sense to trade one away, just so you can sign another.....unless it's some kind of big upgrade. JGP is not that....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, R3aL said:

okay okay salary cap is 88M confirmed we all thought 87.7 so we can up EL offer to 

 

7.3 x 7 

 

🥸

Boston will likely go 8.5 x 7. So we will need to get to 7.45 x 8. So close! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, RupertKBD said:

 

We still lose Garland and I think that would be a mistake.

 

I also don't share your hard-on for JG Pageau. I think he's a pretty good player, but I wouldn't fuck up team chemistry just to get him....especially where there are UFAs available.


what we don’t realize is that Alf isn’t an interstellar crash landing on our planet, but more so an exiled cast off because he has no belief in community and chemistry.

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, RupertKBD said:

 

First I'm hearing of that. Can you post a source for that?

 

Last I saw, the scuttlebutt was that the team was looking to add a scoring forward. It doesn't make much sense to trade one away, just so you can sign another.....unless it's some kind of big upgrade. JGP is not that....

Been reported on 650 multiple times. We are trying to move both Garland and Mik. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, RWJC said:


what we don’t realize is that Alf isn’t an interstellar crash landing on our planet, but more so an exiled cast off because he has no belief in community and chemistry.

And an old drunk bastard. Don’t forget that! 🤣

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
6 minutes ago, Alflives said:

It appears from the rumour mill that we are trying to move Garlsnd. Likely it’s to clear his cap so we can use that savings to bump more important players, but it could be to bring in a guy to fill an area of need. We shall see. 


image.gif.1e44ed15612699a0842832e4287c4aca.gif
 

jk

Edited by RWJC
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Alflives said:

Been reported on 650 multiple times. We are trying to move both Garland and Mik. 

 

Well I don't get listen to that station, but there's zero mention of that when I look online. In fact every single article concerning Garland and a trade is from 2023....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, RupertKBD said:

 

Well I don't get listen to that station, but there's zero mention of that when I look online. In fact every single article concerning Garland and a trade is from 2023....

650 is available on the Internet. They pretty much talk hockey all day on weekdays. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Alflives said:

650 is available on the Internet. They pretty much talk hockey all day on weekdays. 

 

Beside the point. If I can find zero mention of these "rumors" online, I have to doubt their sources.....

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
10 minutes ago, RupertKBD said:

 

Beside the point. If I can find zero mention of these "rumors" online, I have to doubt their sources.....

https://www.sportsnet.ca/650/canucks-central/the-open-the-latest-on-lindholm-and-zadorov/
 

Listen at about 34 minutes. The guys talk about it. This is just one taste. They talk a lot about moving Garland for cap. Here they connect Garland to an Elliott Friedman rumour. 

Edited by Alflives
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Alflives said:

https://www.sportsnet.ca/650/canucks-central/the-open-the-latest-on-lindholm-and-zadorov/
 

Listen at about 34 minutes. The guys talk about it. This is just one taste. They talk a lot about moving Garland for cap. Here they connect Garland to an Elliott Friedman rumour. 

 

The whole thing is 34 minutes. I listened starting at 32 minutes and they were talking about the Utah hockey team....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, RupertKBD said:

 

The whole thing is 34 minutes. I listened starting at 32 minutes and they were talking about the Utah hockey team....

Whoops. The Garland stuff is at about 15 min. I listen to this station all day. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Alflives said:

Whoops. The Garland stuff is at about 15 min. I listen to this station all day. 

 

Yeah...I just listened to it. The rumor from Elliotte was that the Canucks were trying to "move salary". He didn't mention any players. The guys on the podcast were guessing as to who those guys might be. Not really a rumor, IMO...

 

BTW: They also mentioned Boeser.....

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...