This makes no sense. Are you buying or selling?

As for the trade values. For both trades, rentals don't return that type of value. Lindholm doesn't get a top 3 pick even with #16 attached, and Nylander doesn't get remotely that much

While this certainly isn’t the worst Lindholm to CBJ proposal that I’ve seen on here, 3rd overall isn’t going anywhere. I’d expect back the LA first rounder, Sillinger, and another sweetener.

As for the Nylander deal, you’re giving up far too much here.

I did the Lindholm trade for pick 3 because that idea has been circulating around the Flames community for a little bit so I wanted to see what it could look like. Not sure if it’s insanely realistic. I think the Nylander trade is quite a bit, but considering what Bertuzzi and other wingers have gone for, I thought this was relatively realistic but also pleasing for Leafs fans lol. I can imagine the flames doing a retool like this after the season they had, and Conroy saying they wanted to “change the core a little bit”.

I think CBJ could definitely give up the 3rd pick since Gaudreau and Laine are both a little older now, they want to speed up their rebuild so they can support them and I think Lindholm could be a great centre to them since he and Johnny have good chemistry.

As for the Nylander trade, yes it’s pretty unrealistic but I wanted to please leafs fans. You could easily take out Poirier or Ruzicka or the 2nd.

Yea Nylander trade is unrealistic, wanted to make sure leafs fans were happy lol. I think the Lindholm trade could be made if Lindholm extends immediately like the Chucky trade. But I did the Lindy trade because the idea of him for 3rd overall has been circulating. Thought it would be fun to try it and see what it could look like. Also I guess you could call it a rebuild

I just really don’t see 3rd overall moving. Carlsson or Fantilli will be cornerstone pieces for years to come. They could help very soon for very cheap too.

I think something along the lines of just an expiring Lindholm for the LA 1st, Sillinger, and another pretty solid sweetener is pretty fair and realistic.

Yea, that’s completely fair. But in my opinion I would consider trading it for a developed 1C and a bit if I were CBJ, especially considering their situation and the age of their stars. But yea 3rd overall is extremely valuable. It would be a large gamble for CBJ to assume Lindholm could produce the way he did in 21-22. But your argument is completely valid.

Nothing about Lindholm is similar to Chucky. Tkachuk signed an 8 year extension with Calgary, and then was immediately traded to Florida. This is because Calgary was the only team that could sign Tkachuk to an 8 year extension.

That is not true for Lindholm, or Nylander. Both players are able to sign 8 year extensions after being traded to their new team. Thus their trade value is purely as 1 year rentals and nothing more.

The idea was proposed by a random person on SportsNet that apparently doesn't understand how trade negotiations work

3rd OA is absolutely available, just not for Lindholm. As Jarmo has said, if there's a u25 1C that can be extended for 8 years available then he would trade the pick. Otherwise, they're going to use it on that kind of player.

FLA could sign Tkachuk to 8 yrs after the trade since they had his extension rights. The situation in this trade would be similar. Not sure if Tkachuk extended before the trade or after. But either way, signed by FLA or CGY it could be 8 years, it wasn’t an offer sheet and Chucky wasn’t a free agent.

No they couldnt. The rules were changed in the last CBA update during Covid. A team must own a players rights prior to the TDL of the final year of their contract to sign them to an 8 year extension.


As for Tkachuk you can view right here that his current contract was signed by the Calgary Flames. Again this was specifically because Florida was not legally allowed to sign him to an 8 year deal and so they paid premium for him to come with an extension already in place

I.e. Only Pettersson 😅

They couldn’t trade his RFA rights to FLA for them to sign him for 8yrs?

That's what the above rule states yes. That is why Fiala only signed for 7 years after being traded to LA

Oh ok thanks! I didn’t know that.