Jump to content

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


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, MeanSeanBean said:

Man.. that's quite the deal. Kinda doubt it's even enough to get it done, but more then I'd personally be wanting us to spend on him. I'm really mixed on this, I hope he holds off and signs for money. Unless he can come back and show he can work with Petey next year, I hate the idea of spending 7m on a 3C

Would Lindy be our 3C though? If we are out in Guentzel and Nescas maybe the contingency is keeping Lindy to play 2C and having Petey play on his wing? Having Miller, Petey, and Lindy as centres sure creates a lot of flexibility for Tocchet. 
If Lindy can get 56 mil from the Bruins (8 mil x 7) maybe we go 7 mil x 8? Keeps our cap a bit lower. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, Nucker67 said:

So, they want to pay a #3C $7,000,000 a season until he's 36?  

 

 

With the rising cap, in 3 years most 3rd line centers will make 7 mil

Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, Nucker67 said:

So, they want to pay a #3C $7,000,000 a season until he's 36?  

 

 

On the Bruins and other clubs interested in Lindy he’s their 1C. We have two fabulous centres already in Petey and Miller. But both those guys are great wingers too. So either could play wing making Lindy our 2C. 
7 mil x 8 years is a good deal for a 2C. 

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, RupertKBD said:

I think I'm with the majority here....I'm good with the deal, but I doubt Lindy is.

 

As someone already mentioned, Boston wants him badly (according to various rumors I've read) so I doubt 7x 7 wins the bidding war....

 

all depends on where he wants to raise his family. Boston isn't where I'd choose, thats for sure. Is Boston going to be as competitive as the Canucks over his next contract as well? 

 

He really shouldn't know what Boston is willing to do either, at least at this point unless Boston is tampering. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, HKSR said:

Exactly.  Besides, 6 years from now, the upper cap limit will very likely be in the $100M range.  A $7M contract at that point is equivalent to a $5.85M contract today. 

 

This is true, but I worry about what kind of production you're getting out of a 36 year old player at that point. 30-35 points? 

If we had a player this year making $5.85 million and putting up 30ish points our fanbase would lose it's mind. 

  • Haha 1
  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, stawns said:

 

I think people have to accept treading water with the roster this season and hoping they overachieve again.  They're not going to solve their issues in one off season

I think it's a possibility we over achieved and could see a small step back, but I don't think we should accept that. Based off Allvins comments at the end of season presser, he sure as shit won't accept that.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Blitz-Pix said:

 

This is true, but I worry about what kind of production you're getting out of a 36 year old player at that point. 30-35 points? 

If we had a player this year making $5.85 million and putting up 30ish points our fanbase would lose it's mind. 

We don't know that though.  He could still be putting up 45 to 50 points, which wouldn't be the end of the world.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If Lindholm is signed by Canucks 1 of JT Miller and E. Pettersson have to move to wing. You can NOT pay 7m or more for a #3C that is just stupid!

 

I wonder if Canucks offer Hoglander with Mikheyev to a team like Chicago to take Mik's full cap hit. I also wonder why we are trying to add a top 6 F when we have a 4.95m winger name Garland? If Garland isn't going to be used in top 6 I would trade him, I like him but that cap hit is just too high for a 3rd liner.

  • Cheers 2
  • ThereItIs 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, MeanSeanBean said:

I think it's a possibility we over achieved and could see a small step back, but I don't think we should accept that. Based off Allvins comments at the end of season presser, he sure as shit won't accept that.

 

Well, in a salary cap world, with as many rfa/ufa as they have, it might not matter what they want to accept 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Bob Long said:

all depends on where he wants to raise his family. Boston isn't where I'd choose, thats for sure. Is Boston going to be as competitive as the Canucks over his next contract as well? 

 

He really shouldn't know what Boston is willing to do either, at least at this point unless Boston is tampering. 

 

Yeah, it depends on a lot of factors, money only being one of them.

 

I don't really know what is most important to Lindholm, so your guess is as good as mine. That being said, I'd rather raise a family in Boston, rather than Miami, or Dallas....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Having the skill of Lindholm at 2C and 3C is a good thing. It raises the ceiling/bar on talent and means we're commited to being good. 

 

Front load the contract with higher guaranteed $ and make him moveable in the latter half of the contract. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, MeanSeanBean said:

I think it's a possibility we over achieved and could see a small step back, but I don't think we should accept that. Based off Allvins comments at the end of season presser, he sure as shit won't accept that.


Did we overachieve or did we underachieve previously based on poor roster construction and inexperienced coaching?

 

Nobody can say one way or another at this point. Proper depth and proper structure to their game could have been the difference.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
25 minutes ago, HKSR said:

We don't know that though.  He could still be putting up 45 to 50 points, which wouldn't be the end of the world.

 

True but we don't know that he'll be getting 45-50 points either....I haven't checked what the average points totals are for a 36 year old players (So I'm only guessing)

Miller will be in the same spot...we'll have two 36 year old centers that year. We'd be in big trouble if they were 2nd or 3rd line centers IMO.

Just a guess, but you could be paying Miller $8 and Lindy $7 million to center your 3 and 4th lines...which means their not getting top 6 minutes

or playing on your PP. That's why I'm guessing 30(ish) points.

 

Quite frankly any good player we sign to a 7 year contract (that's 28-30) is kinda going to put us in that situation regardless.

Guentzel, Lindy, Zads and so on. In a perfect world we could sign someone in the 4-5 year range, Wishful thinking though.     

 

Edited by Blitz-Pix
Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, DeNiro said:


That’s the biggest thing right? Flexibility.

 

Regular season we can load up lines to create offense. In the playoffs with tighter checking it’s a huge advantage to have three solid centers.

 

Good to have players that have strong games to fall back on. Even when Lindy wasn’t going offensively he was winning draws and playing good two way hockey. I’d feel more comfortable going long term in a player like that than one who is strictly an offensive minded player.

 

Good points about flexibility. His versatility also provides more depth and stability. 

  • ThereItIs 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, MeanSeanBean said:

Man.. that's quite the deal. Kinda doubt it's even enough to get it done, but more then I'd personally be wanting us to spend on him. I'm really mixed on this, I hope he holds off and signs for money. Unless he can come back and show he can work with Petey next year, I hate the idea of spending 7m on a 3C

He's more than a 3C though. Historically, he's been a 1 or 2C on teams, it's just how we were utilizing him last season. Ideally for next year, I'd like to see 3 balanced lines sharing the workload, plus a 4th line. With our travel schedule, we really need a balanced approach to offense.

  • ThereItIs 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...