Mastodon
@Vancouver Canucks

[32 Thoughts @19:00] Friedge: Big Z willing to sign bit under what he can get in FA. Org close to that number but not there yet. Org willing get to the 7×7 range for Lindholm. Friedge doesn’t know if it’s enough. Time in van started rough but ended up enjoying it.



[32 Thoughts @19:00] Friedge: Big Z willing to sign bit under what he can get in FA. Org close to that number but not there yet. Org willing get to the 7×7 range for Lindholm. Friedge doesn’t know if it’s enough. Time in van started rough but ended up enjoying it.

by PaperMoonShine

10 Comments

  1. ScarvesOnGiraffes

    Even though he’s worth that figure, I just don’t think I’m comfortable giving Lindholm that type of money given our winger depth. How do we improve that if we’re giving Lindholm that much? I’d much rather reallocate that money to a top six LW

  2. TotesMyGoatse

    Unless it’s front loaded I don’t want 29 year olds on 7 year deals. He’s got 800+ games on him already, this doesn’t end well.

  3. intelligentx5

    If we had a choice between Lindy and a bit more for Guentzel, I think I take Guentzel and resign Blueger as 3C. We need pure top 6 talent. Not a crazy expensive 3C.

    Miller/Petey/Bluegers/4C

    Unless we find a slight upgrade on Teddy. But I really liked Teddy when he had decent line mates. 18pts in 20 games at one point. And then Joshua got hurt and he got relegated to having shit wingers.

  4. -GregTheGreat-

    Not sure why everyone is so hesitant about Lindholm at 7M. The alternative is giving up a haul to get Necas at like 7.5M (or other top six winger at equivalent prices) OR overpaying a different top six free agent winger at a similar age who also is less versatile. All three of Petey, Miller and Lindholm can shift to the wing or we can run them down the middle for insane centre depth

  5. 2BFrank69

    Lindholm isn’t worth more than that. See ya later 👋

  6. Initial-Ad-5462

    $7M is a lot, but you’d pay the same for wingers Necas or Guentzel, and signing Lindholm gives flexibility of making him 2C and loading up with the Lotto Line from time to time.

  7. CaptainIndoCanadian

    Paying Lindholm 7×7 is a risky one.

    Love the player, but you know you’re not getting that high end production. You get him, he has to be in the top 6, because you’re not getting a Petey winger. What do the lines look like? Petey at C is when he’s been at his best, so do you move Miller to the wing? Do you separate Brock and JT?

    He’s also 29, and his production has already dipped. You’re expecting him to get worse from here on out.

  8. berghie91

    Petey needs goddamn legitimate NHL linemates if we are paying him that kind of money

  9. carry-on_replacement

    Look, Lindholm was great in the playoffs, but Canucksarmy said it best. Lindholm wants the bag and he deserves to get it after getting lowballed for his prime years. We also shouldn’t dedicate so much money to our centers when our desperate need are top 6 wingers and depth defensemen.

  10. awayfromcanuck

    7×7 is an absolute steal for Lindholm. He can play C or W, plays on both special teams, plays on any of your top 3 lines and deepens your C depth down the middle … but can we actually afford that with the other holes in our lineup?

    We’d be tying up 33M in 4 forwards next season: Petey, Miller, Lindholm and Boeser. Not to mention Boeser is likely in for a bit of a raise. It’s 12M less than what Toronto is paying their core 4 but it’d be more than what Florida and Edmonton are each paying their top 4 forwards. Reinhart extension if he gets one will put them on par with us and Drais eventual extension will put them above us but that’s 2 seasons from now.

    Logically, we’d have to be looking at having to pay to move Mik and potentially trying to move Garland because we’d want the additional cap space to improve the back end. We cant have over 9M on just 2 players in the bottom 6.

Write A Comment