Lindros trade negotiations a look back

Not looking at the trade that was completed, but the numerous other deals that teams contemplated and offered the Nordiques.

All courtesey of Full Spectrum by Jay Greenberg: The majority of info below were direct quotes from the following: Keenan, Farwell, Jay Snider, Ed Snider and Pierre Page.

June 11, nine days before the draft:

Aubut wanted Ricci, Brind'amour, Hextall, Duchesne, Huffman #1's in '92, '93 & '94 and either Forsberg or Slava Butsayev.

Aubut also wanted options on a number of other players including Claude Boivin for Herb Raglan and Dan Kordic and Steve Finn.

Flyers thought that Brind'amour needed to be kept.

Fast-forward to Tuesday, June 16th, the week of the draft.

10 of the NHL's 24 teams had contacted Quebec indicating interest, but according to Page 5 had dropped before arriving in Montreal for the draft.

Detroit had turned down Quebec's demand for Fedorov, Lidstrom, Chaisson, Lapointe, Cheveldae and draft picks.

Calgary offered cash, draft choices, Quebec's choice of MacInnis or Suter plus either Nieuwendyk or Reichel. The Flames dropped out when Quebec asked for more.

Montreal and NewJersey both also dropped out. By Friday it was down to Flyers, Rangers, Blackhawks and Leafs.

In all talks between the Flyers & Nords Ricci, Duchesne and Hextall were included.

Keenan wanted Lindros badly and was prepared to offer anything other than Roenick, but Wirtz refused to include any cash

Chicago's offer was Belfour, Larmer, Steve Smith in a 5 player, 7 pick offer. In return Chicago would get Lindros & three Quebec choices, including Quebec's #1, where Keenan planned to pick Kasparitis.

Quebec though the Chicago offer was the best, and only asked them for $5 million in cash. Wirtz refused to pay, and also didn't want to pay Lindros either.

Toronto had the cash, but not the players. Their offer included Felix Potvin, Wendal Clark, Dave Ellet, Berube multpile #1 picks and $15 million. Toronto would not include Gilmour, which killed the deal.

Aubut finally came to the Flyers and the deal was: Ricci, Hextall, Duchesne, Forsberg, Huffman, 7th overall pick in 92 & the #1 pick in 1993, as well as $15 million.

The Rangers offer Kovalev, Weight, Amonte, Vanbiesbrouck (James Patick would be substitued if Vanbiesbrouck a free agent refused to sign in Quebec), #1 picks in 93, 94 & 96, plus $12 million.

Since the Flyers had used the 7th overall pick in 1992 on Ryan Sittler, the Nordiques argued they neede a replacement.

Bertuzzi awarded them a 1994 #1 pick and Chris Simon.

Not looking at the trade that was completed, but the numerous other deals that teams contemplated and offered the Nordiques.

All courtesey of Full Spectrum by Jay Greenberg: The majority of info below were direct quotes from the following: Keenan, Farwell, Jay Snider, Ed Snider and Pierre Page.

June 11, nine days before the draft:

Aubut wanted Ricci, Brind'amour, Hextall, Duchesne, Huffman #1's in '92, '93 & '94 and either Forsberg or Slava Butsayev.

Aubut also wanted options on a number of other players including Claude Boivin for Herb Raglan and Dan Kordic and Steve Finn.

Flyers thought that Brind'amour needed to be kept.

Fast-forward to Tuesday, June 16th, the week of the draft.

10 of the NHL's 24 teams had contacted Quebec indicating interest, but according to Page 5 had dropped before arriving in Montreal for the draft.

Detroit had turned down Quebec's demand for Fedorov, Lidstrom, Chaisson, Lapointe, Cheveldae and draft picks.

Calgary offered cash, draft choices, Quebec's choice of MacInnis or Suter plus either Nieuwendyk or Reichel. The Flames dropped out when Quebec asked for more.

Montreal and NewJersey both also dropped out. By Friday it was down to Flyers, Rangers, Blackhawks and Leafs.

In all talks between the Flyers & Nords Ricci, Duchesne and Hextall were included.

Keenan wanted Lindros badly and was prepared to offer anything other than Roenick, but Wirtz refused to include any cash

Chicago's offer was Belfour, Larmer, Steve Smith in a 5 player, 7 pick offer. In return Chicago would get Lindros & three Quebec choices, including Quebec's #1, where Keenan planned to pick Kasparitis.

Quebec though the Chicago offer was the best, and only asked them for $5 million in cash. Wirtz refused to pay, and also didn't want to pay Lindros either.

Toronto had the cash, but not the players. Their offer included Felix Potvin, Wendal Clark, Dave Ellet, Berube multpile #1 picks and $15 million. Toronto would not include Gilmour, which killed the deal.

Aubut finally came to the Flyers and the deal was: Ricci, Hextall, Duchesne, Forsberg, Huffman, 7th overall pick in 92 & the #1 pick in 1993, as well as $15 million.

The Rangers offer Kovalev, Weight, Amonte, Vanbiesbrouck (James Patick would be substitued if Vanbiesbrouck a free agent refused to sign in Quebec), #1 picks in 93, 94 & 96, plus $12 million.

Since the Flyers had used the 7th overall pick in 1992 on Ryan Sittler, the Nordiques argued they neede a replacement.

Bertuzzi awarded them a 1994 #1 pick and Chris Simon.

Phili should have given Butsayev instead of forsberg!

Phili should have given Butsayev instead of forsberg!

Would Colorado have won any of those Cups with Butsayev? Probably not. Would the Western Conference have held the upper-hand for the last ten years or so (save the Devils, and Bolts last year)? Probably not. Would a Forsberg/Lindros combination (though oft-injured) ensured that the Flyers may have some more recent glory days? Wouldn't surprise me, though they still would have needed goaltending. :D

Detroit had turned down Quebec's demand for Fedorov, Lidstrom, Chaisson, Lapointe, Cheveldae and draft picks.

And THANK GOD for that.

Also, is ANYONE surprised Wirtz wouldn't pay the money?

i think the rangers deal would have been a pretty good one -and at the time maybe better. i wouldve taken beezer over hextall, and kovy, weight and amonte couldve had just as much impact as the philly trade. i know none of those guys are forsberg, but add them to sundin, nolan, and sakic and youve got an amazing squad. the ranger deal didnt have a stud defensemen (unless they lost the goalie) - so thats were it wouldve hurt them. they really needed an offensive dman to play with sakic and those guys on the pp. the philly trade helped the most because it offered what they needed at every position. and offensive dman, and a depth d. a physical 2/3rd line center and a gritty winger prospect -and what they needed the most...a top goalie. they filled out the whole team in one trade - without even factoring in forsberg. crazy to see what people offered for hyped prospects back then. what would crosby have brought back in those days? is crosby hype less than lindros hype because of the way the lindros trade panned out? i would assume so. its funny how times change.

crazy to see what people offered for hyped prospects back then. what would crosby have brought back in those days? is crosby hype less than lindros hype because of the way the lindros trade panned out? i would assume so. its funny how times change.

Lindros wasn't just a "hyped" prospect. He was better than Ovechkin and Crosby.

Before the trade Lindros had played in the 1991 Canada Cup, and didn't look out of place at all. Flattened and took Ulf Samuleson right out of the tourney.

Lindros was a top 5 player the moment he stepped on the NHL ice.

I remember hearing Neil Smith talk about the Rangers bid for Lindros. He said Aubut's demands were too high. Smith said part of the reason he didn't bid anymore was because at the time the Rangers were in 1st place. In the end it proved to be a good thing the Rangers didn't persue Lindros anymore because Kovalev helped lead them to a cup in 1994, despite his antics.

Is it too broad/ignorant to say that the real loser out of this whole scenario was Philly? (sorry John and other Flyers fans, not trying to troll) Quebec won the trade IMO, Rangers stayed out and got a cup, Montreal and NJ were just a few years away from cups too. The only possible benefactor I can think of, if we lived ina world where "what if's" happened, would be Chicago. Trading Belfour would have been tough but it happened anyways. Maybe things work out for the big E in Chicago. We'll never know...

I remember hearing Neil Smith talk about the Rangers bid for Lindros. He said Aubut's demands were too high. Smith said part of the reason he didn't bid anymore was because at the time the Rangers were in 1st place. In the end it proved to be a good thing the Rangers didn't persue Lindros anymore because Kovalev helped lead them to a cup in 1994, despite his antics.


The thing was the Rangers did persue Lindros, and they did make a deal with Quebec. The problem was Quebec had traded Lindros to the Flyers BEFORE they traded him to New York.

Aubut was nuts. he made the deal with the Flyers and then a few hours later the Rangers made a "better" offer and he accepted that as well. That's why the whole thing ended up in arbitration.

Is it too broad/ignorant to say that the real loser out of this whole scenario was Philly? (sorry John and other Flyers fans, not trying to troll) Quebec won the trade IMO, Rangers stayed out and got a cup, Montreal and NJ were just a few years away from cups too. The only possible benefactor I can think of, if we lived ina world where "what if's" happened, would be Chicago. Trading Belfour would have been tough but it happened anyways. Maybe things work out for the big E in Chicago. We'll never know...

I agree for the most part, but the Flyers really didn't end up "losers". When you factor everything into the mix, the Flyers made out pretty well.

They got Lindros for the period they had him. Now they have Johnsson, Kapanen and Brashear.

Also the Wachovis Center was built on Lindros' shoulders. Snider had been trying to get a new arena built for nearly a decade, and couldn't secure the financing. As soon as Lindros was aquired, financing was aquired, because they were able to guaruntee that the Luxurxy Suite and Club boxes would be sold.

Having that new building allowed the Flyers to be one of the NHL's big money teams, and by having that building it later enticed Comcast Cable Co. to purchase the Flyers, which inturn gave them even more $$$$ to spend.

At the time of the deal the Flyers were clearly in the worst shape of any of the teams involved, Nords, Rangers, Blackhawks etc. etc.

I find this one trade the most interesting trade in NHL history. Of course I wasn't a fan at the time, and I've only been a fan for the past 10 years, but I could only imagine the waves it sent at the time.

A short book could be written on the topic of the trade and all the ramifications of the trade and what could have happened. It seemed like it reached out to so many teams, and others have pointed out that it has extended to every team in the league since the trade. It'd be a great subsection in an Eric Lindros book, which in itself would be interesting.

I always thought the Rangers offer looked more appealing at the time, but Dave Draper wanted Forsberg or Butsayev in the deal, so obviously he saw something -- not a big shock considering Forsberg was a first round pick in 1991, 6th overall.

I know it happens in every draft, but to think that Falloon, Lachance, and Aaron Ward were drafted above Forsberg... That's part of the reason I have a hard time putting much stock in the draft when you see those guys drafted higher like that.

I know it happens in every draft, but to think that Falloon, Lachance, and Aaron Ward were drafted above Forsberg... That's part of the reason I have a hard time putting much stock in the draft when you see those guys drafted higher like that.

When the Flyers originally drafted Forsberg 6th overall it was a bit of a shock. He was supposed to go much later in the first round, more like the 12-18 spots.

Also there was every reason to draft Lindros ahead of Forsberg, and if Lindros would have been healthy, he'd have had a better career than Forsberg.

When both players were at their best, Lindros was better.

When the Flyers originally drafted Forsberg 6th overall it was a bit of a shock. He was supposed to go much later in the first round, more like the 12-18 spots.

Also there was every reason to draft Lindros ahead of Forsberg, and if Lindros would have been healthy, he'd have had a better career than Forsberg.

When both players were at their best, Lindros was better.

Yeah, I know that Lindros had a whole other career before he racked up those concussions and started to flake out like now. I saw him a couple of seasons while he was at his peak still. I'm not commenting on the Forsberg - Lindros comparison as much as I am saying how much of a crapshoot the draft is when guys like Scott Lachance and Aaron Ward end up drafted higher than a guy like Forsberg.

On a side note, is it possible for a player in the mold of Eric Lindros to have a longer lasting career as dominant as he was playing that style of hockey? That game has to take a toll on his body, and while you can't blame the injuries that have hurt him most on it, it still makes me beg the question. The power forwards game is often sidelined by injuries, and barring concussions I wonder how long Lindros would have continued to be a top 5 player.

On a side note, is it possible for a player in the mold of Eric Lindros to have a longer lasting career as dominant as he was playing that style of hockey? That game has to take a toll on his body, and while you can't blame the injuries that have hurt him most on it, it still makes me beg the question. The power forwards game is often sidelined by injuries, and barring concussions I wonder how long Lindros would have continued to be a top 5 player.

I think power forwards can have long and successful career, but it does take more of a toll on the body than playing like a Joe sakic for example. Instead of a 20 year career, it might be more along the lines of 15 years.

Without the concussions Lindros still would have missed his 8-20 games a year, with various other injuries, but IMO he would have been among the games very best for 12-15 years.

As a Flyers fan John, would you make the trade again if you had the decision?

That's a lot of players and picks to give up for one man. I don't know if I would do it for Wayne Gretzky or Bobby Orr under the condition of knowing what they would do during their careers let alone doing it with the posibility of a player being injured or living up to his potential.

Gordie Howe consistently played in nearly all of his team's scheduled games. In fact, he did it 17 times before retiring for the first time after the 1970-71 season. And when Hartford joined the NHL for the 1979-80 season, Howe once again played in all 80 games at 51 years of age.

As a Flyers fan John, would you make the trade again if you had the decision?


Knowing what I know about Lindros' health ?? I wouldn't make the deal.

A few other things to think about however:

The orginal deal that the Flyers made, was far better for the Flyes than what ended up happening.

In the original deal we would have lost the 7th pick in 1992, which we used to take Ryan Sittler, a complete bust.

Because Aubut effed everything up, we were stuck with Sittler and had to give up a #1 in 1994 & Chris Simon.

IMO there is a very good chance that if the Flyers had that #1 pick in 1994, they would have used it in Mattias Ohlund. Quebec usde the Flyers pick to take Wade Belak, Ohlund was selected one pick later. Inge Hammarstrom the Flyer chief Euro scout had/has huge influence on whoe the Flyers draft (he pushed for Forsberg).

Worst trade in NHL histroy.

Worst trade in NHL histroy.

It's not even close. It wouldn't be among the 100 worst deals in NHL history.

One thing that often gets overlooked is the money involved, in terms of the percentage of payroll covered by it, is equivalent to something like a $40 million payment today.

It's not even close. It wouldn't be among the 100 worst deals in NHL history.

Im sorry but Peter Forsberg straight up for Lindros would still be a rip off for the Avalanche.

Dam if we didnt trade Forsberg we could have had atleast 2 cups by now. :cry:







Here's to Richards and Carter. :yo:

Im sorry but Peter Forsberg straight up for Lindros would still be a rip off for the Avalanche.

Did you start watching hockey in 2001?

Dam if we didnt trade Forsberg we could have had atleast 2 cups by now. :cry:


Not necessarily true at all.

Did you start watching hockey in 2001?

No smartass I've been watching for over 10 years, and Petr Forsberg is the best player in the NHL besides Jarome Iginla.

No smartass I've been watching for over 10 years, and Petr Forsberg is the best player in the NHL besides Jarome Iginla.

I highly doubt that you have been watching hockey for that long, Lindros was an absolute force, and was a much better player than Forsberg could ever be. He could do anything and everything.

Besides Jerome Iginla... well I shouldn't be suprised, most Flames fans can't spell their best players name.... they have only had 6 months to learn it.... I mean they are life long fans....

The stakes were just so high all the way back then. WHen the stakes are that high, there's bound to be someone to lose. It really was an interesting time.

I didn't realize the financial boost it gave the Flyers. That puts a whole new spin on it. The flyers have been a big money team for a long time now. I remember sometime in the mid 90's hearing how the Flyers were big spenders with a 45 million dollar salary :eek: . How things have changed.

The Forsberg vs Lindros debate is an interesting one, but I think I would have to take Lindros in his prime. As people said he could do it all. The only thing that Lindros never sold me on was his leadership abilities. If he hadn't been thrusted into the role of "the next one" maybe things would have been different. I had heared stories that he wasn't much of a captain, but I don't know if that's fair. I think Eric would have benefited a great deal from having someone like a Yzerman or Sakic on his team. Let the leaders lead, let Eric be great.

The Chicago aspect of this is really interesting aswell. imagine if the Nords had Belfour on their team. They may have pulled it off in 1995. The team stays put and a dynasty is set. If they stay, Patrick Roy never goes to Quebec and is traded somewhere else which leads to a new powerhouse. Crazy

So many possibilities...

Maybe if Lindros had gone to the Rangers instead of the Flyers (as he was so close to doing) he could have developed better leadership skills with Mark Messier as his tutor. Who knows what Lindros could have accomplished with the Moose showing him the reigns.

This will be a tradee that will always be a source for debate on lindros vs forsberg. Someone correct me if im wrong here but IIRC at the time the deal was done i heard that it was not a sure thing that forsberg was even going to come over and play in the NHL and that he was contemplating staying over in sweden and that was a reason why he was included in the deal. As far as healthwise both player have had serrious injury problem over their career lindros with concussions and forsberg with the ankles the spleen and a shoulder problem i believe. both are truly great players who sadly we never really got to see full potential due to injures

Worst trade in NHL histroy.


What??? Not even close. It was a good trade AT THE TIME...you cant go back 5, 10 years later and talk about if the trade was bad....things WILL obviously happen in those years and unforunttely Lindros did get hurt...you cant PREDICT that when making the trade. If Lindros was that INJURY-PRONE at the time of the Trade THEN that would be the worst trade but it wasnt. Jeeze


FOR EXAMPLE LETS SAY: Lindros turned into the #1 player in the league..never got hurt won 4 cups with the Flyers....the players that were sent to Quebec never got traded away from the team....6 years after the trade there was a horrible accident which injured all the players in a car accident or something (GOD FORBID)..all of them turned into just average 2nd,3rd and 4th liners after it...you cant then say...WOW WHAT A HORRIBLE TRADE QUEBEC MADE.

The problem was Marcel Aubut gave the Flyers permission to speak to Eric Lindros after having refused to give any team permission to speak Carl Lindros.The Flyers wanted to speak with Lindros before making the deal.The arbitrator ruled the phone call was deciding factor

What??? Not even close. It was a good trade AT THE TIME...you cant go back 5, 10 years later and talk about if the trade was bad....things WILL obviously happen in those years and unforunttely Lindros did get hurt...you cant PREDICT that when making the trade. If Lindros was that INJURY-PRONE at the time of the Trade THEN that would be the worst trade but it wasnt. Jeeze


FOR EXAMPLE LETS SAY: Lindros turned into the #1 player in the league..never got hurt won 4 cups with the Flyers....the players that were sent to Quebec never got traded away from the team....6 years after the trade there was a horrible accident which injured all the players in a car accident or something (GOD FORBID)..all of them turned into just average 2nd,3rd and 4th liners after it...you cant then say...WOW WHAT A HORRIBLE TRADE QUEBEC MADE.

But he didn't...

In the end, the Lindros trade is why we will never see a deal like that again.

McPhee in Washington was looking for the same kind of return for Ovechkin... and he would have been stupid not to... just like 29 other GM's would have been stupid to give that kind of return for AO.

Same with Crosby.

The best prospect ever was traded for a huge package, and based on everything since then, he wasn't even the best player in the deal.

My guess is, you'll never see that kind of a trade again. At the time it looked good, but as we've seen, you just never know!!!

No smartass I've been watching for over 10 years, and Petr Forsberg is the best player in the NHL besides Jarome Iginla.

First of all Iginla isn't the best player in the NHL and Lindros was much better than Iginla when both are at their primes.

I highly doubt that you have been watching hockey for that long, Lindros was an absolute force, and was a much better player than Forsberg could ever be. He could do anything and everything.

Besides Jerome Iginla... well I shouldn't be suprised, most Flames fans can't spell their best players name.... they have only had 6 months to learn it.... I mean they are life long fans....

His name is spelt Jarome dumb ass not Jerome. How could you doubt I have watched hockey for that long you don't even know me son.

His name is spelt Jarome dumb ass not Jerome. How could you doubt I have watched hockey for that long you don't even know me son.

We inferred that you don't know much about hockey by doubting Lindros' absolute dominance in the mid to late 90s.

His name is spelt Jarome dumb ass not Jerome. How could you doubt I have watched hockey for that long you don't even know me son.

How is Iginla the best player in the league when he has had only 3 years of success as a player and led his team to success 1 year whereas Lidstrom, Brodeur and Sakic have all had 10+ years of sucess and have had led their teams to Stanley Cups. I doubt you've watched hockey for 10 years if you base a player's worth on what he has done in the past season or two.

Lots of younger fans really don't remember the Lindros of the early 90's. Give me a healthy Lindros over anybody in the NHL today. Bar none. Until the injuries mounting, he was matching the hype. He sucked as a leader, but as a player he was the total package. Hit like Scott Stevens, scored like Jagr and was a stand-out in the face-off circle.

It ended up being a 'bad trade' in retrospect, but that is what happens when you sell the farm for one player and that player gets hurt.

His name is spelt Jarome dumb ass not Jerome. How could you doubt I have watched hockey for that long you don't even know me son.

Well lets see Lindros was playing with men when he was 18 years old and not only did he play with the men, he fit in quite well, and actually in my view played better than a large number of the men. When he first started playing in the league he was the best young player I have ever seen, yes he was better than Ilya Kovalchuk, Dany Healtley, and yes he was better than Forsberg. Lindros could hit, fight, score, pass, he could see the ice better than msot anyone in the league at the time (Gretzky and Lemieux are really the only two that I felt were better than Lindros at the time). If you even watch the 1997/98 playoffs you would see that Lindros took a team that had Garth Snow!! as a goaltender to the finals. If you put any solid goaltender on that team and Lindros would have a couple of Stanley Cups in my view, and that is why I am not a big fan of Clarke as a GM, he never really addressed his teams number 1 need until recently, and then I think Esche suprised most everyone in being able to play as well as he did but that is not the disscussion at the moment.

I will honestly say that Lindros is one of the top 5 players that I have ever seen in my lifetime in his prime, the same can not be said about Forsberg.

Really the best testiment to Lindros's greatness can be seen in the hockey news putting him as a top 100 player of all time in 1998 or 99 but just because of how good he was at the time. He was the complete package, and could beat the opposition by running them over, speeding past them, or using some great moves.

Really Lindros was so good he only had two weak spots his head, and his parents, who affected his attitude in quite a negative way from all accounts.

Sorry about the Jarome thing, I really don't know why I thought it was Jerome.

If Chicago had made the trade with Belfour then they would have had Hasek as their number 1 goalie instead of trading him to Buffalo which they did about 6 weeks after the 1992 draft. That in itself might have changed a thing or two for Chicago in the mid to late 90's.
OR if Chicago had produced a deal which INCLUDED Hasek, Quebec might have won the cup before they even left Quebec since the "Dominator" was already in full effect by the 1993-1994 season (he was incredible in the 1994 p-off's). So if they won in 1994 or 95 would they have left QC? Which also makes me think about where Roy might have gone in 1995? One way or another a trade that big can actually effect the entire league for YEARS. It really is something to ponder. Thanks to JFF for posting all those proposals, I'd forgotten alot of those offers.

Other thoughts: Though his attitude (agent?) has always bothered me, Lindros really was something special, particularly from 94-97. I'd always prefer that pugnacious edge over Forsberg's style (though he is tough) even though I believe Forsberg has better stick skills than Lindros. To me it's nearly impossible to say who is definitively better in their prime--other than personal preference it depends on the team you have or the one you are building.

Lindros in his prime was one of the most dominant hockey players I've ever seen.

Same with Crosby.

The best prospect ever was traded for a huge package, and based on everything since then, he wasn't even the best player in the deal.

My guess is, you'll never see that kind of a trade again. At the time it looked good, but as we've seen, you just never know!!!


I dunno...Im sure some GM out there is willing to give up A LOT for Sidney. Maybe not players but maybe 3 first round drafts picks, a good prospect and maybe another 2nd round pick. People dont learn from the past....some do but not all...im sure there will be at least one GM come next year putting it all out to try to get what could be the best player since Gretzky.

I dunno...Im sure some GM out there is willing to give up A LOT for Sidney. Maybe not players but maybe 3 first round drafts picks, a good prospect and maybe another 2nd round pick. People dont learn from the past....some do but not all...im sure there will be at least one GM come next year putting it all out to try to get what could be the best player since Gretzky.

A little off topic, but every couple of years it seems like there is the "best player since Gretzky". Maybe it's just the year to year hype, but I remember Joe Thornton, Vincent Lecavlier, and Jason Spezza all being touted as the next great one. All great players in their own right, but it seems like at least once every 3-4 drafts is the next great one.

A little off topic, but every couple of years it seems like there is the "best player since Gretzky". Maybe it's just the year to year hype, but I remember Joe Thornton, Vincent Lecavlier, and Jason Spezza all being touted as the next great one. All great players in their own right, but it seems like at least once every 3-4 drafts is the next great one.

Agreed, it's a lot of hype. Lindros was different though. He played in the Canada Cup after he was drafted, but before he was traded. Lindros was a top 5 player in the NHL the moment he stepped on the ice, day 1.

Lindros at an early age was so much better than Thornton, LeCavalier etc. Lindros if not for injury would have lived up to the hype. A healthy Lindros is a no doubt about it top 10 player in NHL history, and chances are he's pushing the top 5.

Agreed, it's a lot of hype. Lindros was different though. He played in the Canada Cup after he was drafted, but before he was traded. Lindros was a top 5 player in the NHL the moment he stepped on the ice, day 1.

Lindros at an early age was so much better than Thornton, LeCavalier etc. Lindros if not for injury would have lived up to the hype. A healthy Lindros is a no doubt about it top 10 player in NHL history, and chances are he's pushing the top 5.

Yeah, I understand your point, but like I said it was a little off topic and more in relation to Sid Crosby than Eric Lindros. Then again, we haven't seen Crosby in a compareable situation as Lindros did with the Canada Cup. If this goes long enough and Crosby goes to Europe, I'll be curious to see how he performs.

No doubt if a player, however old they are, performs at the top level of the league they are unique.

Agreed, it's a lot of hype. Lindros was different though. He played in the Canada Cup after he was drafted, but before he was traded. Lindros was a top 5 player in the NHL the moment he stepped on the ice, day 1.


That is a huge exagerration. He took 3 years to really hit his stride. He wasn't even a Calder trophy finalist in his rookie year.

That is a huge exagerration. He took 3 years to really hit his stride. He wasn't even a Calder trophy finalist in his rookie year.

He was on pace for 55 goals and 100 points in his rookie year as he scored 41 goals and 75 points in 61 games. Had he not been injured for those 20 games, 100 points would've won him a Calder. I think he his stride pretty fast. He scored 97 points in 65 games in his second year and had he played a full season, it would be a 125 point season.

In his first two seasons, he scored 158 points in 126 games.
Wayne Gretzky, in the same two seasons scored 195 points in 126 games.

Gretzky was 31-32 years old, so that wasn't all that old. He only managed to score 54 goals in those 126 games though and Lindros scored 85 goals!

That is a huge exagerration. He took 3 years to really hit his stride. He wasn't even a Calder trophy finalist in his rookie year.

He wasn't a Calder finalist because he missed 20 games due to injury, which he also did his 2nd year.

By his 2nd year he's averaging 1.5 ppg, right at the top of the league. Then add in the fact he was by FAR the most dominating physical presence in the NHL, he was a top 5 player without a doubt.

The difference in the 3rd season is that he finally stayed healthy and played the full season, also the Flyers built some pieces around him and they made the playoffs.

He was on pace for 55 goals and 100 points in his rookie year as he scored 41 goals and 75 points in 61 games. Had he not been injured for those 20 games, 100 points would've won him a Calder.

Against Teemu Selanne's 76 goals and 132 points? You have got to be kidding. Joe Juneau and Felix Potvin also put up monster seasons that year as rookies.

Against Teemu Selanne's 76 goals and 132 points? You have got to be kidding. Joe Juneau and Felix Potvin also put up monster seasons that year as rookies.

Well I don't think that Lindros would win the Calder that year, but I do think he would have recieved a great deal of consideration as the runner up, actually scratch that he would have been the runner up, I can guarentee you for that. He was a much more complete player than Juneau and while Potvin was great that year I think that Lindros was just that much better. I watched some old hockey movies this past weekend, and there was one clip of Lindros just pushing over some NHL players who themselves were not small. One was off a faceoff where he just ran over the other guy knocking him over like we would knock over a child, it was so very impressive, especially for such a young player.

Not necessarily true at all.


Err sorry I meant if we traded Slava Butsayev instead of Forsberg. 1 2 of Lindros and Forsberg, dam.

I dont understand how the majority of you seem to be saying that Lindros in his prime is easily a much better player than Forsberg in his. It is true that Lindros was an absolutely dominant force in the mid 90s (trust me I was witness to it many times being a fan of the Rangers), but how can the same not be said about Forsberg? Lindros had a slight physical edge over Forsberg and Forsberg had a slight edge over Lindros when it comes to stickhandling/finesse stuff. Both were dominant in different ways.

The only solid argument I can see one coming up with is that QUE/COL has had two excellent lines so Maybe Forsberg wasnt keyed on by defenses as much as Lindros was, but this is by no means concrete evidence.

I dont understand how the majority of you seem to be saying that Lindros in his prime is easily a much better player than Forsberg in his. It is true that Lindros was an absolutely dominant force in the mid 90s (trust me I was witness to it many times being a fan of the Rangers), but how can the same not be said about Forsberg? Lindros had a slight physical edge over Forsberg and Forsberg had a slight edge over Lindros when it comes to stickhandling/finesse stuff. Both were dominant in different ways.

The only solid argument I can see one coming up with is that QUE/COL has had two excellent lines so Maybe Forsberg wasnt keyed on by defenses as much as Lindros was, but this is by no means concrete evidence.

If Forsberg had such an edge with the finesse stuff, why did Lindros crush his point production? In his day, Lindros was one of the top scoring players (per game) of all time.

Perhaps you didn't see much of Lindros in the mid-90's, but those who did have little doubt he was better than Forsberg. Only edge I give Forsberg would be defensive.

If Forsberg had such an edge with the finesse stuff, why did Lindros crush his point production? In his day, Lindros was one of the top scoring players (per game) of all time.

Perhaps you didn't see much of Lindros in the mid-90's, but those who did have little doubt he was better than Forsberg. Only edge I give Forsberg would be defensive.

Forsberg was also better in the playoffs.

Forsberg was also better in the playoffs.

Not pre-injury he wasn't. Lindros had 53 points in 43 games, carrying his team all the way to the Stanley Cup finals. Forsberg may have the Cups, but he was not the reason they won either of them. He was no better than the Av's 3rd to 5th best player during the first run. The second they won without him completely. Without Forsberg, the Avs were still a great team.

Little side story here - but still on topic

Peter Forsberg actually owns the Nordiques jersey that Lindros wore on draft day

there was a story about Peter in a swedish newspaper a couple of weeks ago and there he told the Lindros story
He also mentioned that he' got a lot of jerseys, about 250-300

he's top 3 and why:

Wayne Gretzky - cause he's still the best ever
Michael Jordan - he's a legend in Basketball, huge to have a jersey
Eric Lindros - the rookie jersey


They did this article because Forsberg got a signed Tottenham jersey (he's a big fan of the English soccer club) and somehow they noticed that he has a lot of jerseys at home


here's the story in Swedish with some pictures
http://www.aftonbladet.se/vss/sport/story/0,2789,557399,00.html

Not pre-injury he wasn't. Lindros had 53 points in 43 games, carrying his team all the way to the Stanley Cup finals. Forsberg may have the Cups, but he was not the reason they won either of them. He was no better than the Av's 3rd to 5th best player during the first run. The second they won without him completely. Without Forsberg, the Avs were still a great team.And what did he do in that finals?

Forsberg also didn't have Carl Lindros.

Not pre-injury he wasn't. Lindros had 53 points in 43 games, carrying his team all the way to the Stanley Cup finals. Forsberg may have the Cups, but he was not the reason they won either of them. He was no better than the Av's 3rd to 5th best player during the first run. The second they won without him completely. Without Forsberg, the Avs were still a great team.

Forsberg's playoff numbers are more consistent, and he's never been as thoroughly shut down as Lindros was by Lidstrom and Konstantinov.

People are getting forgetful.

Yes, Lindros was shut-down by the Wings. But what happened? The Wings entire gameplan was centered around shutting down Lindros. When he took the ice, he had 5 guys who did nothing but try to keep him from scoring. Lindros came up short.

What people forget is that Lindros still finished as the league's leading post-season scorer. To add to that, he showed his importance by the fact that with Lindros silent, the Flyers were inept. Getting shelled defensively, couldn't score for crap and swept in 4.

Lindros carried that team on his back in a way Forsberg has never done. Forsberg may not have been shut down like that, but he never was the 1-man-army like that either. He has always had Sakic and Roy helping him shoulder the burden. Put Forsberg with Hextall/Snow and Brindy, he doens't even get to play Detroit.

Forsberg's playoff numbers are more consistent, and he's never been as thoroughly shut down as Lindros was by Lidstrom and Konstantinov.

Konstantinov never played against Lindros in that Finals series. Everyone was expecting the Wings to match-up Konstantinov and his partner against Lindros.

Instead Bowman decided to use Lidstrom & Murphy. It ended up working perfectly, using smarts/ finesse was the better option, as a more physical defenseman ala Konstantiov routinely got destroyed by Lindros.

Konstantinov never played against Lindros in that Finals series. Everyone was expecting the Wings to match-up Konstantinov and his partner against Lindros.

Instead Bowman decided to use Lidstrom & Murphy. It ended up working perfectly, using smarts/ finesse was the better option, as a more physical defenseman ala Konstantiov routinely got destroyed by Lindros.

Konstantinov did show up on the PK. But Lidstrom played against Lindros at even strength with Murphy, although Lids was more instrumental than Murph in shutting down Lindros. The same way he shut down Bertuzzi with Olausson as his partner, while the press were fixated on the non-existent Chelios-Bertuzzi matchup.

Konstantinov did show up on the PK. But Lidstrom played against Lindros at even strength with Murphy, although Lids was more instrumental than Murph in shutting down Lindros. The same way he shut down Bertuzzi with Olausson as his partner, while the press were fixated on the non-existent Chelios-Bertuzzi matchup.

Konstantinov rarely was out against Lindros in that series but he managed to be on the ice for every one of the 6 goals the Flyers scored during that series.

For the series Lindros was on ice for all 6 Flyers goals scored and 7 goals against.

Worst trade in NHL histroy.
The Ballard era Leafs had at least 50 that were worse.

I know it happens in every draft, but to think that Falloon, Lachance, and Aaron Ward were drafted above Forsberg... That's part of the reason I have a hard time putting much stock in the draft when you see those guys drafted higher like that.

I think teams were still a bit hesitant about drafting a european back then (despite Sundin going #1 earlier). Scouting wasn't what it is now. The eastern block had just started opening up. Looking back, Forsberg should have gone higher. He was as dominating in the Junior World Championships as any player (his records are insane) and he was great in the SEL.

But that's what is good about drafting in the NHL. It is much harder to draft 18 year olds than 20 year olds so there is a huge skill (and luck, it has to be said) element to scouting and drafting.

And those that said Lindros was better at the draft than Ovechkin and Crosby (will be) I have to agree. He was a monster back then as a 18 year old and when in the NHL he was fantastic. Great combination of strength and skill. If it wasn't for the flaw of looking down when crossing the blue line, we would definately all have a very different view of his career.

I think teams were still a bit hesitant about drafting a european back then (despite Sundin going #1 earlier). Scouting wasn't what it is now. The eastern block had just started opening up. Looking back, Forsberg should have gone higher. He was as dominating in the Junior World Championships as any player (his records are insane) and he was great in the SEL.

Actually is was a bit of a shocker when Forsberg was picked 6th overall, he was expected to go much later in the first round.

Also his dominant WJC, with the 31 points happened in 92-93, after he was drafted.

Actually is was a bit of a shocker when Forsberg was picked 6th overall, he was expected to go much later in the first round.

Also his dominant WJC, with the 31 points happened in 92-93, after he was drafted.

Forsberg came second in scoring the year before he was drafted, ahead of Lindros, Kovalev etc. While not as scaringly impressive as the year after he definately had proved himself pre-draft, in Sweden and Internationally.

Where he was expected to go only shows the imperfect nature of scouting and drafting.

It is a bit hard to find great online sources for World Junior Championships, but here are a few from TSN:
1992 http://www.tsn.ca/World_jrs/feature.asp?fid=3804
1993 http://www.tsn.ca/World_jrs/feature.asp?fid=990

Actually is was a bit of a shocker when Forsberg was picked 6th overall, he was expected to go much later in the first round.

Also his dominant WJC, with the 31 points happened in 92-93, after he was drafted.

Maybe, but the Canucks were ready to draft him 7th overall. On draft day, everyone thought the Flyers were going to go with a big physical Alex Stojanov as opposed to a finesseful Forsberg. Vancouver was ready to draft Forsberg at 7th and even had a custom jersey made up for him.

I completely agree with JCD.

Lindros from the 90s was miles ahed of Forsberg