Brooks Elias Lindholm at Top of Rangers Wishlist; Siiiike! Dealt to Vancouver for the Moon and the Stars

[RichieNextel305]

Quote

But sources have indicated that is not the view from the executive suite. Indeed, we are told that the hierarchy — that includes chairman Jim Dolan and president/general manager Chris Drury — has intentions of diving into the deep end of the pool as March 8 approaches.

 

Quote

 

We’re told that Calgary’s pending free-agent center Elias Lindholm is at the top of the Blueshirts’ wish list and indeed had been even before Chytil was ruled out for the year. His name, according to a well-placed individual, has been at the forefront of internal discussions kind of the way Patrick Kane’s was last year … and even after the Rangers jumped the market to acquire Vlad Tarasenko nearly a month ahead of the deadline.

 

Lindholm, a 29-year-old Swede, is a top-six guy who would be playing down in the Rangers lineup but would give the club impressive depth down the middle. He is not the bruising checking center that I’d create for the Rangers if the league would give me an AI tool for that purpose, but he is a substantial player who would improve the team at five-on-five.

 

But Lindholm, whom the Flames may still try to keep with another offer on a contract extension, is expected to be the prize deadline rental property. Calgary surely will conduct a bidding war that would likely yield a first-rounder plus at least one legitimate prospect and perhaps a young, NHL-ready player.

 

 

Quote

It could take the first-rounder and, say, Kaapo Kakko. Or maybe the Flames would prefer Will Cuylle or Brennan Othmann. Maybe they’d want a second-rounder in addition. And though the Rangers could accommodate Lindholm’s $4.85 million cap hit, doing so would leave little to address other weaknesses so the cost would be even higher in order to get Calgary to retain 40 or 50 percent of the contract.

 

https://nypost.com/2024/01/30/sports/rangers-potential-plan-to-replace-filip-chytil-may-be-wrong-move/

 

Brooks seems to be against the move because he wonders if this is the year to go all-in, mostly predicated off of whether or not you’re going to get Shesterkin at his best. But given the age of this roster and how wide open the East is, the Rangers shouldn’t be afraid to make a move to help them moving into the playoffs. 
 

I have been advocating for Lindholm for weeks here. I know he’s likely the biggest chip at the deadline and may demand the biggest haul. He’s not having the best year of his life. Is he a true bonafide superstar? Probably not. But I disagree with Brooks stance on him. Like the Rangers, Lindholm has struggled lately offensively with 2 goals in 25 games. But I’m sure the trade chatter isn’t helping. And even if he isn’t producing at a 30-goal clip, he brings stability to the 3C spot that is badly, badly needed on this roster at the moment. And he plays in all situations.

 

I understand the cost to acquire, and that to me is what it boils down to. Brooks speculates a 1st plus higher prospect or young roster player. Specifically mentions Kakko, Cuylle or Othmann. I don’t see Drury dealing either of the last 2; they’re non-starters IMO. Especially for a rental. Kakko? I’d have guessed no until reports yesterday about him being out there in trade chatter. Ideally, I’d like to see Kakko on Lindholms line.

 

Regardless, interesting article. Lots of speculation. But what it dictates is that Drury is going to take a swing here. And I’m fine with that, as long as it’s within reason. I’m not dealing blue chippers like Othmann for rentals. But I’m interested in upgrading this roster. There is no runaway. If Shesterkin finds his game, this team can compete with anyone in this league. You need to operate under the assumption he will find his game. 
 

FWIW, Brooks mentions other potential cheaper options. Names like Henrique, Kuraly, Kunin and Hartman (who I would be all over if he actually were to be available). Mentions Jack Roslovic, but mentions him not moving to needle much. Also touches on Henrique being a worthy gamble if the price is right. But mentions Verbeek is a tough negotiator, and if the price on him is exuberant, it’s smart to just walk away. Juice isn’t worth the squeeze type of shit.

 

Drury will have options. And it appears he’s going to be exploring them all.

Edited February 1 by RichieNextel305

[Pete]

Not really a surprise, but it will really come down to what they're willing to part with.

 

Kakko, sure. I wouldn't be surprised if he became Sherangovich 2.0. Definitely wouldn't move Cuylle and probably would not want to move Othmann... I might be tempted to send Perrault if this guy was 27 and not going on 30 when next season starts.

 

Drury has been reluctant to part with prospects, a lot of his deals have just been around picks. I think that's a really smart strategy because picks are just lottery tickets and cupboards can be stocked when they have their fire sale. Trading players that they have developed like Cuylle and Othmann would be a shame. 

[Vodka Drunkenski]

Fireable offense if he trades one of those two guys for a rental that won’t even lead to a Cup

Edited January 31 by Vodka Drunkenski

[RichieNextel305]

22 minutes ago, Pete said:

Not really a surprise, but it will really come down to what they're willing to part with.

 

Kakko, sure. I wouldn't be surprised if he became Sherangovich 2.0. Definitely wouldn't move Cuylle and probably would not want to move Othmann... I might be tempted to send Perrault if this guy was 27 and not going on 30 when next season starts.

 

Drury has been reluctant to part with prospects, a lot of his deals have just been around picks. I think that's a really smart strategy because picks are just lottery tickets and cupboards can be stocked when they have their fire sale. Trading players that they have developed like Cuylle and Othmann would be a shame. 

Agreed with here. Maybe differ on opinion on Perrault, who I view extremely highly, but yeah, spot on.

 

I don’t see Drury moving Cuylle or Othmann. They’re staples for today and for tomorrow, both of them.

 

There are intriguing names out there. Going to be interesting to see which route we go. Or, which routes we go. I wouldn’t be surprised if there was more than one move at the deadline.

Edited January 31 by RichieNextel305

[jsm7302]

We had our most recent success when we didnt pursue the top name TD target but actually addressed depth issues with Copp and Vatrano.

 

Going after Lindholm is the mistake. Multiple smaller swings would be worthwhile.

[Pete]

1 minute ago, RichieNextel305 said:

Agreed with here. Maybe differ on opinion on Perrault, who I view extremely highly, but yeah, spot on.

 

I don’t see Drury moving Cuylle or Othmann. They’re staples for today and for tomorrow, both of them.

 

There are intriguing names out there. Going to be interesting to see which route we go.

I view moving Perrault for Lindholm similarly to the Stars trading Iginla for Nieuwendyk in a sense that you're giving up a player who's going to be really good for a really long time in exchange for a couple of kicks at a Cup.

 

The Stars were thinking short-term and the Flames longer term and everybody was probably satisfied with the outcome. 

 

Not something I would want to do, but something I would understand if they did. 

[RichieNextel305]

1 minute ago, jsm7302 said:

We had our most recent success when we didnt pursue the top name TD target but actually addressed depth issues with Copp and Vatrano.

 

Going after Lindholm is the mistake. Multiple smaller swings would be worthwhile.

It depends. Lindholm, when going, answers our questions at 3C and then some. It’s not as if he doesn’t fit, it’s just a matter of what it may take to acquire the player. There has to be a line in the sand somewhere that isn’t crossed.

 

That said, other options do exist too.

[Valriera]

Maybe we just suck and shouldn’t do this 

 

im actually not interested in this deal if it’s a rental. If the intention is to sign the player, different story but you need to move miller in this deal or separate deal in the offseason since we can afford both, and then you also probably need to dump goodrow somewhere. That does make our team substantially better for a few more years but it will cost parting with Miller. That said, Miller will fetch whatever the cost of acquisition of lindholm is probably, so if that’s the plan then I’m down.

 

if we’re just gonna pay for a few months of this guy then idk 

Edited January 31 by Valriera

[RichieNextel305]

1 minute ago, Valriera said:

Maybe we just suck and shouldn’t do this 

Listen, the last little bit may have blinded us the same way the start may have blinded us too.

 

I think the answer is somewhere in the middle. Which still equates to a playoff team, likely with home ice for at the very least the first round of the playoffs.

 

There are questions abound about players who will be here. Can Mika get going? Can Igor get going? Can they play with structure again? Can they find consistency up and down the lineup?

 

Unfortunately, the commitments made to the players here and the fact that the East is wide open likely leans this answer to be a loud yes. That isn’t to say Drury goes drunken cowboy and empties the cupboard here. But he needs to take a swing. Because if the questions end up breaking the Rangers way and we get bumped because there were no reinforcements added to a team that has holes, that’s just as an egregious decision.

 

We aren’t perfect. No one is right now. But this is a team that if the switch is on, we can beat any team in this league. And Drury has to operate, at least one more time, as if Shesterkin finds his game and the consistency issues will hopefully resolve themselves. Because if not, then the summer is a whole different bowl of wax.

[Pete]

7 minutes ago, Valriera said:

Maybe we just suck and shouldn’t do this 

 

im actually not interested in this deal if it’s a rental. If the intention is to sign the player, different story but you need to move miller in this deal or separate deal in the offseason since we can afford both, and then you also probably need to dump goodrow somewhere. That does make our team substantially better for a few more years but it will cost parting with Miller. That said, Miller will fetch whatever the cost of acquisition of lindholm is probably, so if that’s the plan then I’m down.

 

if we’re just gonna pay for a few months of this guy then idk 

You have to assume he's going to be a rental for us. They just don't have the cap. Even if you moved the players everybody suggests, goody, Miller, etc... You would have to move them and not take back any salary, but then of course you have to replace them... And someone is going to give Lindholm more than Trocheck got... Too rich for this team's blood.

 

Their solution at Center needs to come in at the same price point as Chytil, or less.... And frankly that would even be tough because if he ever becomes healthy enough to play over the next three seasons, they're going to have to take him off LTIR. 

[Bugg]

Seen this speculation bubble up. May be it's nothing, but looks like there's gonna be a parting of ways. Heard "2nd hand" this kid works his ass off in the gym and is a real student of the game, to the point he has told off other players who don't work as hard. Obviously issues are Zegras is probably out injured through mid-March and perhaps not the physical force this team needs. Checks a lot of boxes; young talented dynamic center. Local kid who, while not taking a discount, would probably love to be here. If this gets offered, might be inclined to deal one of the jewels in the prospect box.

 

https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/mlb/best-landing-spots-for-ducks-trevor-zegras-amid-trade-speculation/ar-AA1n9w4n

[Phil]

The only way Lindholm makes any sense is with an extension to push Trocheck to the third line and build a deep core down the middle. I'm not interested in renting Lindholm at any price, least of all for Cuylle, Othmann, or even Kakko.

[RangersIn7]

3 minutes ago, Phil said:

The only way Lindholm makes any sense is with an extension to push Trocheck to the third line and build a deep core down the middle. I'm not interested in renting Lindholm at any price, least of all for Cuylle, Othmann, or even Kakko.

If your feeling is that he has to come here and sign an extension, I get it. 
But they can’t afford him. 
He’s 29, and he’s gonna want 7 years and big dollars.

Which is something that they probably shouldn’t get into. 
 

Plus there’s also zero trade protection on his contract, so Calgary can simply trade him to the highest bidder. 

[RichieNextel305]

10 minutes ago, Phil said:

The only way Lindholm makes any sense is with an extension to push Trocheck to the third line and build a deep core down the middle. I'm not interested in renting Lindholm at any price, least of all for Cuylle, Othmann, or even Kakko.

If Trocheck continues to play with Panarin, then Lindholm, even if he stayed (very doubtful) is your 3C.

Across his career, granted Trocheck has been in the league 5 more years, but Trocheck averages 59 points per season while Lindholm averages 56. While Lindholm has had the best individual season of the 2 (only 1 of the 2 who has cracked 80 points), they’re not that far off. Lindholm helps in a lot of ways. We don’t *need* him to be a 2C. We just need him to play his game on whatever line he is on. It’s not as if we’d be giving him Ryan Hollweg and Donald Brashear to play with. He would in all likelihood be with Cuylle and someone like Kakko, provided he is still here.

 

Panarin has played his best with Trocheck. It took a year to find chemistry. I’m not toying it. They’re both having career years. 
 

Only other way is if you long term, potentially, view Lindholm as a more valuable long-term asset than Zibanejad, which is a whole different discussion. But as it stands, even if Lindholm is added and somehow manages to stay, he is 3C IMO. Which is fine, because that’s tremendous depth. I get the argument that Trocheck profiles more as what you’re saying; Lindholm is in the same boat though if you ask me.

 

Edited January 31 by RichieNextel305

[Phil]

12 minutes ago, RichieNextel305 said:

If Trocheck continues to play with Panarin, then Lindholm, even if he stayed (very doubtful) is your 3C.

Across his career, granted Trocheck has been in the league 5 more years, but Trocheck averages 59 points per season while Lindholm averages 56. While Lindholm has had the best individual season of the 2 (only 1 of the 2 who has cracked 80 points), they’re not that far off. Lindholm helps in a lot of ways. We don’t *need* him to be a 2C. We just need him to play his game on whatever line he is on. It’s not as if we’d be giving him Ryan Hollweg and Donald Brashear to play with. He would in all likelihood be with Cuylle and someone like Kakko, provided he is still here.

 

Panarin has played his best with Trocheck. It took a year to find chemistry. I’m not toying it. They’re both having career years. 
 

Only other way is if you long term, potentially, view Lindholm as a more valuable long-term asset than Zibanejad, which is a whole different discussion. But as it stands, even if Lindholm is added and somehow manages to stay, he is 3C IMO. Which is fine, because that’s tremendous depth. I get the argument that Trocheck profiles more as what you’re saying; Lindholm is in the same boat though if you ask me.

 

 

I guess it works either way, but having seen what Lindholm can do with really talented players (Tkachuk-Gaudreau year), I'd be really, really tempted to move him up with Panarin and try to build a really hard-to-play-against third line of like Cuylle-Trocheck-Kakko (or someone else if he's traded).

 

But I totally get it and I agree — you don't fuck with happy. Tro-Panarin has been the most reliable duo all year.

[LindG1000]

10 minutes ago, RangersIn7 said:

If your feeling is that he has to come here and sign an extension, I get it. 
But they can’t afford him. 
He’s 29, and he’s gonna want 7 years and big dollars.

Which is something that they probably shouldn’t get into. 
 

Plus there’s also zero trade protection on his contract, so Calgary can simply trade him to the highest bidder. 

 

It depends what the guy wants, because he's going to age reasonably well.

 

If he wants Trocheck's deal, yeah, let's go. If he wants to be paid like a 40/40 guy because he did it once two years ago, no dice. I do wonder if he gets too much more on the open market, too - a lot of teams aren't sitting on a ton of cap here.

[RichieNextel305]

2 minutes ago, Phil said:

 

I guess it works either way, but having seen what Lindholm can do with really talented players (Tkachuk-Gaudreau year), I'd be really, really tempted to move him up with Panarin and try to build a really hard-to-play-against third line of like Cuylle-Trocheck-Kakko (or someone else if he's traded).

 

But I totally get it and I agree — you don't fuck with happy. Tro-Panarin has been the most reliable duo all year.

For sure, I see the point. I just think Lindholm is as capable of playing that role as Trocheck. Maybe he’s not as much of a pest, but he is hard to play against when he plays his game.

[RangersIn7]

Just now, LindG1000 said:

 

It depends what the guy wants, because he's going to age reasonably well.

 

If he wants Trocheck's deal, yeah, let's go. If he wants to be paid like a 40/40 guy because he did it once two years ago, no dice. I do wonder if he gets too much more on the open market, too - a lot of teams aren't sitting on a ton of cap here.

My guess would be… and it’s just a guess, he will want at least what Trochek is getting if not more. So yeah, I don’t think your guess is off by too much, if at all. 

 

Thats not bad if it goes that way.

 
The kicker though is what you mentioned.

 He’s got a 40-goal season to his credit. And it’s recent too.

It wouldn’t shock me at all if he went to market this summer and got $50 million from someone and he and his agent know that too. 
 

Also, he may have the intent of just going to market no matter what. 

[Long live the King]

2 hours ago, Pete said:

You have to assume he's going to be a rental for us. They just don't have the cap. Even if you moved the players everybody suggests, goody, Miller, etc... You would have to move them and not take back any salary, but then of course you have to replace them... And someone is going to give Lindholm more than Trocheck got... Too rich for this team's blood.

 

Their solution at Center needs to come in at the same price point as Chytil, or less.... And frankly that would even be tough because if he ever becomes healthy enough to play over the next three seasons, they're going to have to take him off LTIR. 

 

If they sputter out of the playoffs again, trade Kreider give is money to Lindholm. 

[Br4d]

I'd watch the results the first week or two after the break.

 

This team has been very inconsistent for 2 months now.  That may just be who they are and in that case you want to trade old for young not the other way around.

[Pete]

40 minutes ago, RichieNextel305 said:

If Trocheck continues to play with Panarin, then Lindholm, even if he stayed (very doubtful) is your 3C.

Across his career, granted Trocheck has been in the league 5 more years, but Trocheck averages 59 points per season while Lindholm averages 56. While Lindholm has had the best individual season of the 2 (only 1 of the 2 who has cracked 80 points), they’re not that far off. Lindholm helps in a lot of ways. We don’t *need* him to be a 2C. We just need him to play his game on whatever line he is on. It’s not as if we’d be giving him Ryan Hollweg and Donald Brashear to play with. He would in all likelihood be with Cuylle and someone like Kakko, provided he is still here.

 

Panarin has played his best with Trocheck. It took a year to find chemistry. I’m not toying it. They’re both having career years. 
 

Only other way is if you long term, potentially, view Lindholm as a more valuable long-term asset than Zibanejad, which is a whole different discussion. But as it stands, even if Lindholm is added and somehow manages to stay, he is 3C IMO. Which is fine, because that’s tremendous depth. I get the argument that Trocheck profiles more as what you’re saying; Lindholm is in the same boat though if you ask me.

 

 

28 minutes ago, Phil said:

 

I guess it works either way, but having seen what Lindholm can do with really talented players (Tkachuk-Gaudreau year), I'd be really, really tempted to move him up with Panarin and try to build a really hard-to-play-against third line of like Cuylle-Trocheck-Kakko (or someone else if he's traded).

 

But I totally get it and I agree — you don't fuck with happy. Tro-Panarin has been the most reliable duo all year.

I agree that it likely comes down to playing style. For the role in visioned for the third line, you probably want Trocheck there.

 

I would definitely try Elias with Bread to start.  You can always move it back. I'd be wondering about the chemistry between Elias and KK as well. I don't think trading KK is the answer, I think fixing him is. The problem is when he's not playing with Zib, he's playing with the scrubs. Hard to imagine anybody having much success with Brodzinski. What would Laf be doing on that line? Or anybody without an elite skill set? 

[Pete]

Just now, Br4d said:

I'd watch the results the first week or two after the break.

 

This team has been very inconsistent for 2 months now.  That may just be who they are and in that case you want to trade old for young not the other way around.

Did you even read the OP? They are going all in.

[Br4d]

Just now, Pete said:

Did you even read the OP? They are going all in.

 

That doesn't mean it's the right move.  Zibanejad and Kreider are a year further out than they were last season and they weren't good enough last season even with Tank and Kane added to the mix.  We had 3 solid lines and a decent 4th line after the deadline and we still crapped out.

 

Yes, the players blamed the coaches at the end but they also said they were waiting around for Tank and Kane to be the difference and that should tell us all we need to know about this core.

[LindG1000]

15 minutes ago, RangersIn7 said:

My guess would be… and it’s just a guess, he will want at least what Trochek is getting if not more. So yeah, I don’t think your guess is off by too much, if at all. 

 

Thats not bad if it goes that way.

 
The kicker though is what you mentioned.

 He’s got a 40-goal season to his credit. And it’s recent too.

It wouldn’t shock me at all if he went to market this summer and got $50 million from someone and he and his agent know that too. 
 

Also, he may have the intent of just going to market no matter what. 

 

Maybe so!

 

It's straight up forecasting and speculation, so it may be useless, but it can be helpful to think of it this way: where would he go and get 7m a year? Gotta look at the 2024 cap space situations, and it's a lot of really bad teams, or teams that don't really have the kind of space (like, Vancouver has 31M in cap space, but they need to give EP a new deal and they need four defenders).

 

He might be advised to take between 5.5 and 6.5 unless he wants to join a rebuild.

[Pete]

9 minutes ago, Long live the King said:

 

If they sputter out of the playoffs again, trade Kreider give is money to Lindholm. 

I would do this but I'm not sure the Rangers would.