- png, jpeg
- Recommended minimum size 800px by 800px
- Maximum size: 1MB
Aug 26, 2020
Posts per Day
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>ChiHawk</b></div><div>I generally post ideas for conversation. In the case of Landeskog he likely isn't going anywhere and I get that. In the case of Lindholm, 75% he is leaving Anaheim and widely discussed by the professional analysts as players likely to be traded in the offseason or TDL next year. As a 1 year rental, for a guy that's not a superstar in flat cap world, it is my opinion and echoing what i saw on The Athletic, Anaheim doesn't get more then a mid 1st and 3rd rounder or the equivalent. All I am doing is translating that into young players that can help rebuild a bottom feeder organization that is in a complete rebuild and addressing their needs as such with a top 6 center and bottom 6 defensive center both of which Anaheim needs.
Happy to consider your perspective but you've not added any real concrete examples or logic or reasoning and instead have simply saying Anaheim will re-sign Lindholm or be traded for more. Why? Any examples? Why would Lindholm stay? Why would they re-sign a guy going on 29 years old to a long term deal when they are going to be the youngest team in the league? What do you think Lindholm is worth for a 1 year rental?
Healthy debates and discussions are just that, healthy and gives two people the opportunity to understand different perspectives. However, just saying "no" or "not enough" or "he will re-sign" is unsubstantiated opinion with no logic or reasoning which too many people on forums in general do and why Capfriendly specifically has rules try to enforce a healthy discussion or debate with logic and reasoning and avoid this. As a longer term member and active one, we encourage discussion and different perspectives supported by sound logic and reasoning not just "no" or "won't happen". You don't have to agree with another person's perspective but don't say "anaheim won't consider" and be dismissive of a person's perspective without explaining yourself...it's frankly lazy and worse yet not worth your time in responding to people if someone is willing to engage with logic, reasoning, and examples to support it.</div></div>
That’s precisely what I’m doing, discussing. Like I said previously, ANA probably wants to resign him and probably wants draft capital. None of that implies Lindholm will resign but rather that the Ducks want him to resign. That’s what matters in a trade, the team’s objectives.
I think the Ducks will want to resign one of Lindholm or Manson and Id rather have Lindholm. Pair him with Drysdale as he develops but the Ducks should be getting better sooner rather than later but I don’t think Strome is under team control (3 more seasons) until that time so this is kind of a waste of assets for ANA. And I’m high on Strome, I’d like to work out a deal to swap him and Greenway from MIN.
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Salzy</b></div><div>100% agree with you. But I would argue since they overdrafted him that makes it even less likely they move him so soon after picking him.
If he was being shopped I could see so many teams lining up for him, to the point this offer doesnt even get looked at (Even though it already doesnt get considered). Minny, Buffalo, Detroit, Anaheim, San Jose, Edmonton, Toronto, Columbus, I could probably list 25 teams that would be kicking the tires on Hayton, and no doubt in my mind at minimum 10 teams offer a package with the value of a first rounder +
Minny does seem like almost a perfect fit though</div></div>
Totally agree about holding on to him to save face. The big change is that Armstrong is a scout and if he can get picks, I think that’s worth more to him than facing constant scrutiny about that one reach pick that isn’t doing what they want. I don’t think MIN gives up a 1st outright for him but a pick swap situation might be in the cards as part of a larger package. They have 2 firsts now and I fully expect them to gain a 3rd after the Dumba trade.