Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

[proposal] Hampus Lindholm is a better trade target than Seth Jones.


Recommended Posts

[proposal] Hampus Lindholm is a better trade target than Seth Jones.

 

Make no mistake about it.  Seth Jones is better at hockey than Hampus Lindholm and that shouldn’t even be up for debate.  Now having said that, if I’m trading for a defenseman and NOT exploring the UFA market, I’m picking Hampus Lindholm over Seth Jones 10 out of 10 times......and here is why.

 

1) Beyond this coming season, Jones will demand a huge cap hit......even in a flat cap world.  We’re talking 9 million and north.  AP got 8.8 but he’s also older.  Vegas also has far greater tax advantages than Vancouver and so if we’re planning to get Jones, we’d better plan on paying him north of 9 million.....and the higher you pay someone, the more implications it has in terms of trying to keep an internal cap (ie will UFA’s on teams be more likely to take home town discounts?).   By comparison - Lindholm will likely cost between 6-6.5 million...maybe less.....which could then also have implication for keeping an internal cap for the entire team.

 

2) Trading for Jones will cost you Atleast one of Boeser, Miller, or Horvat as a starting point.  Don’t want to trade any of those guys?   Great!   Schmidt + 2021 1st + Podkolzin or “GTFO” would be Nashville’s response.   Jones is a superb talent, don’t get me wrong, but making a deal like that would almost be like robbing Peter to pay Paul (or robbing Pranesh to pay Parjeevan as us Hindus would say).  We can get into an endless semantical debate with regards to if it’s “worth it” or not, but I’m going to go ahead and say NO.  Too much of a sacrifice of depth and the Canucks aren’t in a position where they should be hemorrhaging their depth.

 

Lindholm however - I think Rathbone, a 2021 1st, and something minor gets it done.  And again - don’t get me wrong, I love Rathbone, but that’s definitely a deal that you do.  
 

3) Jones is a better all around defenseman than Lindholm, but Lindholm might be better defensively and might fit our needs better.   With Hughes and Schmidt here, the Canucks already have dmen that can rush the puck up ice and make a great first pass, etc.  Their biggest need however is a long term Edler replacement........which Lindholm would be!   
 

Want to get Schmidt playing like he did in Vegas?  Me too!  Put Schmidt on the right side and encourage him to join the rush and move the puck up ice while his left sided defensive minded partner, who is also a good skater and can contribute offensively, helps him out.   That’s where Lindholm comes in.  
 

So my stance is that IF the Canucks are exploring the trade market in terms of bolstering their defense, they should target Lindholm over Jones.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Eh, We still have this year till all the garbage is gone from the roster. I think boner showed too much promise, Plus the pick this year is a huge no. We need this kid, The 3 years of elc while we are on the rise will allow us to build a deeper team with good talent.

Free agency or schmidt like deal. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the attraction to Hampus would be not having to give up a first. 

 

A 2nd and a 3rd or something like that. Not sure that gets it done, but if not, I'd rather go for Jones.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, Patel Bure said:

[proposal] Hampus Lindholm is a better trade target than Seth Jones.

 

Make no mistake about it.  Seth Jones is better at hockey than Hampus Lindholm and that shouldn’t even be up for debate.  Now having said that, if I’m trading for a defenseman and NOT exploring the UFA market, I’m picking Hampus Lindholm over Seth Jones 10 out of 10 times......and here is why.

 

1) Beyond this coming season, Jones will demand a huge cap hit......even in a flat cap world.  We’re talking 9 million and north.  AP got 8.8 but he’s also older.  Vegas also has far greater tax advantages than Vancouver and so if we’re planning to get Jones, we’d better plan on paying him north of 9 million.....and the higher you pay someone, the more implications it has in terms of trying to keep an internal cap (ie will UFA’s on teams be more likely to take home town discounts?).   By comparison - Lindholm will likely cost between 6-6.5 million...maybe less.....which could then also have implication for keeping an internal cap for the entire team.

 

2) Trading for Jones will cost you Atleast one of Boeser, Miller, or Horvat as a starting point.  Don’t want to trade any of those guys?   Great!   Schmidt + 2021 1st + Podkolzin or “GTFO” would be Nashville’s response.   Jones is a superb talent, don’t get me wrong, but making a deal like that would almost be like robbing Peter to pay Paul (or robbing Pranesh to pay Parjeevan as us Hindus would say).  We can get into an endless semantical debate with regards to if it’s “worth it” or not, but I’m going to go ahead and say NO.  Too much of a sacrifice of depth and the Canucks aren’t in a position where they should be hemorrhaging their depth.

 

Lindholm however - I think Rathbone, a 2021 1st, and something minor gets it done.  And again - don’t get me wrong, I love Rathbone, but that’s definitely a deal that you do.  
 

3) Jones is a better all around defenseman than Lindholm, but Lindholm might be better defensively and might fit our needs better.   With Hughes and Schmidt here, the Canucks already have dmen that can rush the puck up ice and make a great first pass, etc.  Their biggest need however is a long term Edler replacement........which Lindholm would be!   
 

Want to get Schmidt playing like he did in Vegas?  Me too!  Put Schmidt on the right side and encourage him to join the rush and move the puck up ice while his left sided defensive minded partner, who is also a good skater and can contribute offensively, helps him out.   That’s where Lindholm comes in.  
 

So my stance is that IF the Canucks are exploring the trade market in terms of bolstering their defense, they should target Lindholm over Jones.  

Jones doesn't play for Nashville.

  • Haha 1
  • Vintage 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hampus Lindholm is a UFA after this season.  No point forking out so much if he wants to come to Vancouver when we could just sign him (and trading blue-chip pieces is something that contenders do).

Also, given the state of the defense we should be adding, not taking youth and talent away from it.  Rathbone stays and we'll sign guys and let the bad contracts fall off the books then hopefully we'll make moves.  Par for the course for one season then gotta trust JB to use the cap well instead of shipping out quality top-end assets.  

Edited by Phil_314
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Pears said:

I’ll ask this again. We only have one RHD signed next season, so why would we want to give up premier assets for yet another LHD?

I kind of see where OP is coming from, Lindholm plays a cerebral kind of game that would complement Hughes and Rathbone (since they project more as Torey Krug type puck movers) and could pair well with Schmidt on a shutdown duo.  Schmidt's dual sidedness helps in this case, but my problem with it is the timing and context of his acquisition (via trade, when he could be signed in a couple months potentially) and the fit (possibly better to get more physicality).  For his role, I think handedness in this case would be a secondary issue.  

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Phil_314 said:

I kind of see where OP is coming from, Lindholm plays a cerebral kind of game that would complement Hughes and Rathbone (since they project more as Torey Krug type puck movers) and could pair well with Schmidt on a shutdown duo.  Schmidt's dual sidedness helps in this case, but my problem with it is the timing and context of his acquisition (via trade, when he could be signed in a couple months potentially) and the fit (possibly better to get more physicality).  For his role, I think handedness in this case would be a secondary issue.  

That’s a fair point, if Lindholm comes with an extension I’d be interested. I still think our main focus should be getting a top RD. Not necessarily Jones but someone like him. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rathbone could be a top 4 as soon as next season.

 

Our 2021 1st is #9 overall... that's another player that can help the team make the push 2-3 years later when our current core is in their prime.

 

I wouldn't pay that price for Lindholm. If it's Jones, I'd consider it.

 

But then, as you said, Jones may not be a great trade target. 

 

I'd rather sign a UFA RHD, keep Rathbone and 1st.

 

That UFA RHD may not be as good as Lindholm but he doesn't have to be. We just need a guy that can defend well and support Hughes to do his magic.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Phil_314 said:

I kind of see where OP is coming from, Lindholm plays a cerebral kind of game that would complement Hughes and Rathbone (since they project more as Torey Krug type puck movers) and could pair well with Schmidt on a shutdown duo.  Schmidt's dual sidedness helps in this case, but my problem with it is the timing and context of his acquisition (via trade, when he could be signed in a couple months potentially) and the fit (possibly better to get more physicality).  For his role, I think handedness in this case would be a secondary issue.  

Hughes is comparable to Morgan Rielly or maybe even Brian Leetch 

 

Rathbone, on the other hand, reminds me of Krug. You're correct about that. For the right side, we've got Schmidt who should play on the first pairing and we've got Myers, who is a #4 or #5 kind of defender. That's where he's at his best, like he was in Winnipeg. Hamonic should be a great discount to play with Hughes, I feel like that'll be a better pairing for next year. Then we've got the third pairing which will include either Jack Rathbone or Olli Juolevi. So, for the first pairing we either bring in a LHD like Lindholm or OEL, although OEL would be a huge mistake. Or we bring in a RHD like Niklas Hjalmarsson, who I think would be a great fit here. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, morrissex95 said:

Hughes is comparable to Morgan Rielly or maybe even Brian Leetch 

 

Rathbone, on the other hand, reminds me of Krug. You're correct about that. For the right side, we've got Schmidt who should play on the first pairing and we've got Myers, who is a #4 or #5 kind of defender. That's where he's at his best, like he was in Winnipeg. Hamonic should be a great discount to play with Hughes, I feel like that'll be a better pairing for next year. Then we've got the third pairing which will include either Jack Rathbone or Olli Juolevi. So, for the first pairing we either bring in a LHD like Lindholm or OEL, although OEL would be a huge mistake. Or we bring in a RHD like Niklas Hjalmarsson, who I think would be a great fit here. 

Yikes. Let's hope Hughes is more like Leetch than Rielly. If Hughes is like Rielly, we aren't getting out of first round ever like Toronto.... uhhh wait.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Pears said:

That’s a fair point, if Lindholm comes with an extension I’d be interested. I still think our main focus should be getting a top RD. Not necessarily Jones but someone like him. 

That was the idea that I had in mind (HL coming with an extension via sign and trade).

 

Also - To your earlier question, Schmidt is left handed but greatly prefers the right side.  I also think that Hamonic has expressed a willingness to re-sign here since he wants to stay in Western Canada and so that should address our RD issue.  Here is the defense that I had in mind:

 

Lindholm-Schmidt

Hughes-Myers (or Hughes-Hamonic)

Juolevi-Hamonic (or Myers)

 

@BCNate - I meant CBJ, had a mental lapse.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Phil_314 said:

Hampus Lindholm is a UFA after this season.  No point forking out so much if he wants to come to Vancouver when we could just sign him (and trading blue-chip pieces is something that contenders do).

Also, given the state of the defense we should be adding, not taking youth and talent away from it.  Rathbone stays and we'll sign guys and let the bad contracts fall off the books then hopefully we'll make moves.  Par for the course for one season then gotta trust JB to use the cap well instead of shipping out quality top-end assets.  

My idea behind the Lindholm trade is that if we traded for him, it would be a sign and trade type arrangement (ie Lindholm is signed long term prior to being traded to Vancouver).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Patel Bure said:

That was the idea that I had in mind (HL coming with an extension via sign and trade).

 

Also - To your earlier question, Schmidt is left handed but greatly prefers the right side.  I also think that Hamonic has expressed a willingness to re-sign here since he wants to stay in Western Canada and so that should address our RD issue.  Here is the defense that I had in mind:

 

Lindholm-Schmidt

Hughes-Myers (or Hughes-Hamonic)

Juolevi-Hamonic (or Myers)

 

@BCNate - I meant CBJ, had a mental lapse.

 

 

Fair enough.  I wouldn’t pay any premium assets unless it’s for a RHD.  I get where you are going with this though.  Manson is who I’d go after from the ducks.

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...