News: Pagnotta - Lindholm interested in staying with Flames.

[DFF]

I don't think Huberdeau is over paid. He is one year removed from a 115 point season. He would have received 10 million or more from any team last year when he was extending. He had an off year on his off wing. He was almost a point per game player playing on his natural left side. He was being paid less than 6 million last year. This is the year he has to live up to his new contract.

Well at this moment, he is very overpaid unless he turns his career around

He is coming off a 50 pt season. No matter what excuse you come up with, nobody is going to pay 10.5M for that.

 

[Kahvi]

If Lindholm is willing to sign, why wouldn't the Flames have pulled the trigger yet?

I know that often both sides will haggle over the number, but if you are the Flames I'd think don't like 500k of AAV get in the way here. Lindholm is comfortable signing now but maybe next month he will change his mind. The Flames can be salvaged as a playoff team, but there's no hope if Lindholm walks. It all would fall apart and there would not even be a way to truly bottom out.

Annual salary is not the only thing to negotiate. NTC / NMC, signing bonuses, annual salary structure etc.
Lot's of things to negotiate, and that's just assuming they are somewhat close with years and annual salary but there's still a lot of details.

 

[Ledge And Dairy]

Well at this moment, he is very overpaid unless he turns his career around

He is coming off a 50 pt season. No matter what excuse you come up with, nobody is going to pay 10.5M for that.

You realize he hasn't played a single game on his contract yet right? Could easily argue the Flames traded for an incredibly underpaid player by your logic.

 

[DFF]

You realize he hasn't played a single game on his contract yet right? Could easily argue the Flames traded for an incredibly underpaid player by your logic.

What does it have anything to do with him making 10.5M now.
They didn’t trade for an underpaid player. They traded for a guy with a good contract but they have to sign or lose for nothing.

I don’t know why people are butt hurt

Huberdeau has a terrible contract if he doesn’t come back to his 100 pt pace

 

[Ledge And Dairy]

What does it have anything to do with him making 10.5M now.
They didn’t trade for an underpaid player. They traded for a guy with a good contract but they have to sign or lose for nothing.

I don’t know why people are butt hurt

Huberdeau has a terrible contract if he doesn’t come back to his 100 pt pace

That is so far from the truth. 5.9M for a 115 point player is not a "good contract," that's one of if not the best value contracts in the league. That's what the Flames traded for. They also absolutely had the option to flip him at the deadline or even right away for more futures. Him producing 55 points last year while also being a quite reliable defensively would make his 5.9M relatively fair value. If he continues to produce at that level on his new deal (unlikely) then yes that is one of the worst contracts in the league but if he even bounces back to a PPG then it's completely manageable. All Calgary really needs him to do is have similar production Wheeler did at the same age over the next 5 years, which was a near PPG. I think that is more than reasonable.

 

[Petes2424]

The Flames are already f***ed for the next decade, they have $23+ million tied in Huberdeau, Kadri and Weegar, if they sign Lindholm to a bad contract, they are a mediocre team for the next 10 years(so nothing new.)

What’s the alternative? Hope and prayer? He’s a Top 20 C in the NHL. Are you saying to trade him and cash in? Go back and look at big trades for star players. Very rarely does it work like it did for Ottawa in that SJ trade. The majority of the time, the team getting the top player wins that trade looking back. We know he’d still be a great player for at least 5 of those 7-8 years. You try to win during those years.

Too often the answer (on here) is to trade away 27-28 year old players. Look at the team who just won a Cup. They made some bold moves to bring in players in Lindholm’s situation. If he’s traded to let’s say Buffalo or Detroit, those teams become playoff contenders this year. Give their kids another year or two maturing, those teams are top teams in the league in 3 years with Lindholm. They’d then have Lindholm as a very important piece for a good 3-4 more years.

Calgary would be stupid to not try signing him. Even at $9 million. There’s still a lot of talent in Calgary. A couple of bold moves, who knows. Vegas didn’t make the playoffs last year with almost the same exact roster. A year later changing a coach, adding a couple of role players, and letting their 2 younger dmen mature more, they put on one of the most dominating playoff performances in recent memory.

You play to win. 90% of fans can care less about prospects over players like Lindholm. If it’s a disaster in 3 years, rethink things. They’d still be able to move him. Right now though? They have too many really good pieces to cash it all out.

 

[RasmusAndersson]

That is so far from the truth. 5.9M for a 115 point player is not a "good contract," that's one of if not the best value contracts in the league. That's what the Flames traded for. They also absolutely had the option to flip him at the deadline or even right away for more futures. Him producing 55 points last year while also being a quite reliable defensively would make his 5.9M relatively fair value. If he continues to produce at that level on his new deal (unlikely) then yes that is one of the worst contracts in the league but if he even bounces back to a PPG then it's completely manageable. All Calgary really needs him to do is have similar production Wheeler did at the same age over the next 5 years, which was a near PPG. I think that is more than reasonable.

Lol what? If 31 year old Blake Wheeler is your highest paid and best offensive player you are absolutely screwed.

Even if Hubes has 80 points the contract is doing more harm than good. Limits cap flexibility long term and only gets worse as he gets older. Imagine 38 year old Huberdeau being the highest paid player on our team.

I like Huberdeau and hope he bounces back, but that justification is absurd. Why would anyone wanna pay 31-39 year old Blake Wheeler 10.5 mil? Lol. I’m just hoping Conroy adds youth around him to so we can have some success in spite of his anchor contract

 

[Chips]

Interested in being paid it appears more than concern with the team.

Good position for him to be in. He may very well take less money to play with a better team, but might as well see how much he can get from the Flames if they feel desperate.

 

[super6646]

You realize he hasn't played a single game on his contract yet right? Could easily argue the Flames traded for an incredibly underpaid player by your logic.

The expectation was he would be a 10m dollar player… that’s why he got that kind of money. He barely lived up to the 5.9m he got last year, and that’s not where the bar has been set.

I agree with @RasmusAndersson, any winning will come in spite of the money he makes. Unless he’s pulling 100 pt seasons for the next 3-4 yrs it isn’t good enough. 10.5m for 80 pts is atrocious, especially for an offensive winger that brings nothing else to the table.

 

[Ledge And Dairy]

The expectation was he would be a 10m dollar player… that’s why he got that kind of money. He barely lived up to the 5.9m he got last year, and that’s not where the bar has been set.

I agree with @RasmusAndersson, any winning will come in spite of the money he makes. Unless he’s pulling 100 pt seasons for the next 3-4 yrs it isn’t good enough. 10.5m for 80 pts is atrocious, especially for an offensive winger that brings nothing else to the table.

I'm not arguing against the expectation but the fact is he still hasn't played a single game on his new deal yet. By all accounts last year was a very clear anomaly. Players don't just casually drop from 90-100 points a season to 50-60 points a season before 30 without some sort excuse.

If he can keep up the defensive aspect of his game from this last season then I think 80-90 points over the next 3-4 years is fine. It' not great but it's certainly not bad

 

[Petes2424]

If there’s a player to give an 8 year deal to at 29-30 years old, it would be Lindholm.

It’s funny on this site sometimes. When these Cs come up for new contracts, a lot of the time people seem to endorse that faster, quicker skater getting the 7-8 year deal, but players who aren’t as explosive, get the “he’ll never last that long” treatment.

It’s actually more the opposite. The big debate in this thread regarding Aho vs Lindholm, seemed to have more people thinking it is smarter giving Aho the contract. Understandable he’s a couple of years younger, but if he loses a step, he’s not the same player. That usually happens around 31-32 years old.

Lindholm has a much greater chance of being closer to the same player he is today, 8 years from now, than Aho does. Regardless of those 2-3 years in age difference.

Aho depends a lot on his explosiveness and lateral quickness, creating space from the circles down. It’s fun to watch for sure, but he loses a step, he’s going to have to change his game considerably to remain a top player. Lindholm doesn’t have that issue. He’s your very typical European C, where Aho plays more like your North American skilled player.

 

[RasmusAndersson]

I'm not arguing against the expectation but the fact is he still hasn't played a single game on his new deal yet. By all accounts last year was a very clear anomaly. Players don't just casually drop from 90-100 points a season to 50-60 points a season before 30 without some sort excuse.

If he can keep up the defensive aspect of his game from this last season then I think 80-90 points over the next 3-4 years is fine. It' not great but it's certainly not bad

It’s not fine lol. It’s not only bad, it’s probably gonna be the worst contract in the whole league by the time Huberdeau is 35. You can’t ignore the back half of the contract.

Look around the league at all players making over 10 mil. Then, of the few other really really bad contracts (like Bobrovsky and Seguin), consider the fact that Huberdeau has at least double the term remaining. It’s soooo bad.

Or if you’re just arguing that it’s not that bad for the next 4 years that would still be wrong lol. Look at other players in his salary range. Seguin’s might be worse, maybe Tavares or Bobrovsky if they continuity to regress, probably Benn and Skinner too. And those are the other worst contracts in the league. Any way you slice it it’s very bad. Dallas has proven that you can win in spite of those anchor contracts, but that doesn’t mean it isn’t really bad and that any success we have will be in spite of that.

 

[I Hate Blake Coleman]

Enough of the cautious optimism bullshit. Like old milk, Huberdeau's contract already stinks.

 

[Fig]

The expectation was he would be a 10m dollar player… that’s why he got that kind of money. He barely lived up to the 5.9m he got last year, and that’s not where the bar has been set.

I agree with @RasmusAndersson, any winning will come in spite of the money he makes. Unless he’s pulling 100 pt seasons for the next 3-4 yrs it isn’t good enough. 10.5m for 80 pts is atrocious, especially for an offensive winger that brings nothing else to the table.

The issue is that there is conflation about Huberdeau in the past and what he has yet to do. He's fine at that production paid 5.9 AAV, but he's brutal at that production at 10.5 AAV. However, he hasn't played a single cent of that 10.5 AAV contract.

Flames fans have every right to be concerned his production continues to be crap at 10.5, but it hasn't happened yet. So anyone basically acting like last year he was paid 10.5 is incorrect.

10.5 AAV for 80 points isn't atrocious. You're setting the bar too high. That's a hair under PPG. At that rate it's about fair value. Gaudreau last year was paid 9.75 AAV and scored 74. A down year for him too. You'd hope that both exceed 90 points handily at those AAV though. Look at what Panarin is making while scoring 1.1 to 1.2 ish PPG average.

Pasta is going to make 11.25 a season while probably aiming for a similar PPG to Huberdeau. He's slightly younger and his PPG will have a higher goal to assist ratio. The going rate is just messed up now and expected rates are going to skyrocket.

This is why I've changed my perspective on Lindholm a little. We're better off overpaying our stars and key players 1-2 AAV vs overpaying plugs 1-2 AAV. This minute difference in the grand scheme of things is basically why we lost Gaudreau for nothing.

 

[super6646]

The issue is that there is conflation about Huberdeau in the past and what he has yet to do. He's fine at that production paid 5.9 AAV, but he's brutal at that production at 10.5 AAV. However, he hasn't played a single cent of that 10.5 AAV contract.

Flames fans have every right to be concerned his production continues to be crap at 10.5, but it hasn't happened yet. So anyone basically acting like last year he was paid 10.5 is incorrect.

10.5 AAV for 80 points isn't atrocious. You're setting the bar too high. That's a hair under PPG. At that rate it's about fair value. Gaudreau last year was paid 9.75 AAV and scored 74. A down year for him too. You'd hope that both exceed 90 points handily at those AAV though. Look at what Panarin is making while scoring 1.1 to 1.2 ish PPG average.

Pasta is going to make 11.25 a season while probably aiming for a similar PPG to Huberdeau. He's slightly younger and his PPG will have a higher goal to assist ratio. The going rate is just messed up now and expected rates are going to skyrocket.

This is why I've changed my perspective on Lindholm a little. We're better off overpaying our stars and key players 1-2 AAV vs overpaying plugs 1-2 AAV. This minute difference in the grand scheme of things is basically why we lost Gaudreau for nothing.

I’m not saying he’s being paid 10.5m last year though, I’m saying the expectation is he is that player. It is absolutely fair to judge from that bar.

As for your comparison, well it’s problematic imo. Gaudreau scored 74 pts on a team that scored 214 goals. Huberdeau scored 55 pts on a team that scored 260. One player factored into 35% of a team’s offence while the other was just 21%.

Massive difference, especially when your production is reliant on players putting the puck in the net. The flames didn’t have issues scoring, and outside of huberdeau everyone had seasons in line with their career averages. Columbus did have trouble scoring and was faced with injuries to key guys. One of those players played like a franchise star, the other was a mid tier second liner.

 

[PROUD PAPA]

lol instant massive overpay

not the same player without Gaudreau driving his line

Massive is a reach.
He’s a good player and decent value in the 7.5-8 range.

 

[Tkachuk Norris]

I’m not saying he’s being paid 10.5m last year though, I’m saying the expectation is he is that player. It is absolutely fair to judge from that bar.

As for your comparison, well it’s problematic imo. Gaudreau scored 74 pts on a team that scored 214 goals. Huberdeau scored 55 pts on a team that scored 260. One player factored into 35% of a team’s offence while the other was just 21%.

Massive difference, especially when your production is reliant on players putting the puck in the net. The flames didn’t have issues scoring, and outside of huberdeau everyone had seasons in line with their career averages. Columbus did have trouble scoring and was faced with injuries to key guys. One of those players played like a franchise star, the other was a mid tier second liner.

You realize you do this every year though right? And then the up and down flames tend to flip flop between challenging for the division and barely making the playoffs.

Like if someone looked at your posts they’d think the Flames were like Arizona the last decade.

It’s all about sample. Flames fans haven’t watched much Huberdeau, our perception of him is defined by the one season where he was out of sorts. This is a guy that was one of the most dominant players in the league offensively consistently. He just needs to be allowed to play his game and not get put into a box like Sutter had him. He will regress to the norm.

 

[Seanaconda]

I look at it more like that if they are your #1C are they going to drive you to a Cup? Be OK if you are strong elsewhere for a Cup? Actively hurt you in your quest for a Cup? Lindholm to me falls in category 2. If you are exceptional elsewhere you can do it, but he probably ain’t coming back with a Conn Smythe. There are a surprising amount of guys in the first category today.

Hmm there are maybe a lot but the last 4 cups albeit only two teams haven't had a center in the 1st category imo

 

[super6646]

You realize you do this every year though right? And then the up and down flames tend to flip flop between challenging for the division and barely making the playoffs.

Like if someone looked at your posts they’d think the Flames were like Arizona the last decade.

It’s all about sample. Flames fans haven’t watched much Huberdeau, our perception of him is defined by the one season where he was out of sorts. This is a guy that was one of the most dominant players in the league offensively consistently. He just needs to be allowed to play his game and not get put into a box like Sutter had him. He will regress to the norm.

Seems like a very simplistic solution to the problems he had. It isn't just about playing his game but the roster makeup and his fit around it. Again, outside of Huberdeau, everyone else on the team had career-average seasons. To me that screams more about the player than coach issue. Especially when we don't have the speedy players (imo) to utilize Huby's offensive gifts, I think "allowing him to play his game" just might not be possible with what we have.

And you talk about me "doing this year after year", but you are taking past results to come to a logically flawed conclusion. What the flames did in the past has no bearing on how they will do next season. Just because they were an up and down team before, that doesn't mean they will be next season. They might, but that would be a coincidence. Especially when there is so much turnover from the previous core.

 

[Fig]

I’m not saying he’s being paid 10.5m last year though, I’m saying the expectation is he is that player. It is absolutely fair to judge from that bar.

As for your comparison, well it’s problematic imo. Gaudreau scored 74 pts on a team that scored 214 goals. Huberdeau scored 55 pts on a team that scored 260. One player factored into 35% of a team’s offence while the other was just 21%.

Massive difference, especially when your production is reliant on players putting the puck in the net. The flames didn’t have issues scoring, and outside of huberdeau everyone had seasons in line with their career averages. Columbus did have trouble scoring and was faced with injuries to key guys. One of those players played like a franchise star, the other was a mid tier second liner.

Sure, but Gaudreau wasn't shuffled to RW and told to completely change his game last year. In Sutter's first season, Gaudreau scored 49 in 56GP. Is that ratio closer to 35% or 21%? Gaudreau went to a different team but was allowed to play his own style. Huberdeau went to a new team but had to play a totally new style. That's why there's lots of optimism he will bounce back to around 90 points which would be considered regression to the mean.

Lindholm and Markstrom are also expected to do the same. Both are down after the birth of their kids. Gaudreau is also down as of last year which also coincides with the birth of his kid.

 

[Mobiandi]

Signing Lindholm gives us 4 untradeable contracts and puts us in San Jose territory.

This team isn’t contending for a cup in the next 3 years. Trade him

 

[Haatley]

Signing Lindholm gives us 4 untradeable contracts and puts us in San Jose territory.

This team isn’t contending for a cup in the next 3 years. Trade him

Who are these 4 players that are untradable?

Please tell me you aren't including Weegar on that list LOL

 

[Mobiandi]

Who are these 4 players that are untradable?

Please tell me you aren't including Weegar on that list LOL

Kadri, Huberdeau, Markstrom. (Lindholm)

 

[DJJones]

Kadri, Huberdeau, Markstrom. (Lindholm)

Why would we trade Lindholm and Huberdeau?

Markstrom only has 3 years left and hopefully a cheap replacement coming up. Kadri... I'd be shocked if he doesn't "retire" when he's ~35/36.

If Huberdeau and Lindholm are our worst contracts I'll be fine with that. Teams fall off because they stop developing players successfully. That'll be true for us as well. You go 5 years without finding a top 6/top 4 guy and you are going to suck.

San Jose's big problem wasn't having old guys. It was giving up prospects for them. Stutzle and Norris would look great on that team. They have no one on the team under 25 doing anything. That's years and years of bad asset management and development. It's not Vlasic's fault.

Could just as easily look at Dallas and wow, vets getting paid don't destroy your team if you can actually develop players.

San Jose Sharks Draft History at hockeydb.com

www.hockeydb.com

Like this is just rough. Norris is the only player that's done something since Meier and they traded him.

 

[HighLifeMan]

Seems like a very simplistic solution to the problems he had. It isn't just about playing his game but the roster makeup and his fit around it. Again, outside of Huberdeau, everyone else on the team had career-average seasons. To me that screams more about the player than coach issue. Especially when we don't have the speedy players (imo) to utilize Huby's offensive gifts, I think "allowing him to play his game" just might not be possible with what we have.

Huberdeau, Kadri, Lindholm, and Mangiapane collectively scored 57 goals and 121 points less points than they did the previous season. They all struggled to a large degree at times.

Allowing Huberdeau to play his game is absolutely the most simplistic solution. You don't try and change a point per game (+) guy after paying him 80+M dollars. He needs to be deployed and utilized as a 10M dollar player and he might just have a chance at producing at that level. You can't tell him to play a risk averse game while giving him middling second line minutes, on his off-wing, with a revolving door of relatively poor teammates and expect him to produce as a superstar. He was set up for failure by a dinosaur coach who was too stubborn to admit he was wrong, and we all know it.