HFBoards

HFBoards (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/index.php)
-   The History of Hockey (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/forumdisplay.php?f=126)
-   -   What If? Eric Lindros had stayed in Quebec (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/showthread.php?t=957953)

tony d 07-26-2011 11:27 AM

What If? Eric Lindros had stayed in Quebec
 
Watched the Eric Lindros trade feature on the NHL Network last night. It raised an interesting question. Let's say Lindros stays in Quebec, does that franchise still have the success it had after Lindros was traded? We know that with Lindros, Forsberg never goes to Quebec. Also would Quebec have stayed put had Lindros agreed to go there?

Interested to hear some of your thoughts.

TheRedressor 07-26-2011 11:46 AM

If my timeline is correct I believe Eric makes it to Colorado and spends most of his career there. Quebec had to move regardless of him playing there or not. I think Colorado would have been MORE dominant with a 1-2 punch of Sakic-Lindros than Sakic-Forsberg Plus

FrozenJagrt 07-26-2011 12:11 PM

If they don't trade Lindros, they may not get Roy.

Psycho Papa Joe 07-26-2011 12:14 PM

The Nords still move to Colorado, IMO.

Assuming they can still get Roy, the Av's would still win at least one cup IMO, but it would be a different makeup. One issue is whether they can still get Roy. The center piece of the deal from a Habs standpoint was Thibault, one of the best prospect goalies of the time, but the pick Quebec used to draft Thibault was acquired in the Lindros trade. Does Quebec have the package that's attractive to the Habs when Roy got dealt, or do the Habs instead go with the rumored Detroit package? Without Thibault, do the Habs instead go for Fiset, but insist on an upgrade on the Rucinski/Kovalenko aspect of the deal, weakening the Av's future top 2 lines? Who knows? Houle was an idiot, so for all be know, he takes Fiset, Kovalenko and Rucinski.

Skobel24 07-26-2011 12:30 PM

Lindros would complain after being relocated to Colorado.

tjcurrie 07-26-2011 12:46 PM

The biggest factor there would be if they still would have moved or not. None of us were on the inside so it's difficult to know for sure.

If they stayed: They definitely still would have been a contender. They wouldn't have been able to trade for Roy so they would have had to go another route. Maybe they sign Ed Belfour in '97 over my Stars ( unlikely ) and then the Stars don't win their Cup ? Who knows. But they still would have needed to go after a quality goaltender.

If they still moved: They likely still trade for Roy and definitely win Cups.

Psycho Papa Joe 07-26-2011 01:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tjcurrie (Post 35387445)
The biggest factor there would be if they still would have moved or not. None of us were on the inside so it's difficult to know for sure.

If they stayed: They definitely still would have been a contender. They wouldn't have been able to trade for Roy so they would have had to go another route. Maybe they sign Ed Belfour in '97 over my Stars ( unlikely ) and then the Stars don't win their Cup ? Who knows. But they still would have needed to go after a quality goaltender.

If they still moved: They likely still trade for Roy and definitely win Cups.

Actually reminds me of the fact Roy wasn't too far away from free agency eligibility back in 95. Chances are if he's dealt to a team other than the Av's, he would eventually sign in Colorado with his old buddy Pierre Lacroix.

tjcurrie 07-26-2011 01:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Psycho Papa Joe (Post 35388083)
Actually reminds me of the fact Roy wasn't too far away from free agency eligibility back in 95. Chances are if he's dealt to a team other than the Av's, he would eventually sign in Colorado with his old buddy Pierre Lacroix.

Quite possible.Maybe Philly signs or trades for Roy and they win a Cup ? Maybe Dallas goes after Roy and they win a Cup with him instead of Belfour ? Interesting to think of the different scenarios.

Bexlyspeed 07-26-2011 01:49 PM

i dont think the avs would have been as good with lindros. the nordiques not only got forsberg, they also got Mike Ricci, Ron Hextall, Chris Simon, Kerry Huffman, Steve Duchesne, a 1st round selection (Jocelyn Thibault) in 1993, a 1st round selection (later traded to the Toronto Maple Leafs, later traded to the Washington Capitals—Nolan Baumgartner) in 1994, and $15,000,000 cash.

Hextall became Uwe Krupp
Ricci became Alex Tanguay
the pick (and mats sundin) traded to the leafs was for Wendel Clark, who became Claude Lemieux
and the tibault pick became part of the deal to get Roy and Mike Keane

simon was pretty good for the avs

all in all i dont think they have the depth that made them so succesful withour the lindros trade.

rmchahn 07-26-2011 02:40 PM

He would have retired with a SC ring or two.

arrbez 07-26-2011 03:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bexlyspeed (Post 35389493)
the pick (and mats sundin) traded to the leafs was for Wendel Clark, who became Claude Lemieux

That's an interesting one there, and less convoluted than the Lindros scenario. Obviously Claude Lemieux played a part in Colorado's cup win in 1996. But imagine if they kept Sundin instead (keeping in mind that Sundin played RW very successfully early in his career)? Sundin and Forsberg together would have been terrifying stuff.

TheDevilMadeMe 07-26-2011 04:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bexlyspeed (Post 35389493)
i dont think the avs would have been as good with lindros. the nordiques not only got forsberg, they also got Mike Ricci, Ron Hextall, Chris Simon, Kerry Huffman, Steve Duchesne, a 1st round selection (Jocelyn Thibault) in 1993, a 1st round selection (later traded to the Toronto Maple Leafs, later traded to the Washington Capitals—Nolan Baumgartner) in 1994, and $15,000,000 cash.

Hextall became Uwe Krupp
Ricci became Alex Tanguay
the pick (and mats sundin) traded to the leafs was for Wendel Clark, who became Claude Lemieux
and the tibault pick became part of the deal to get Roy and Mike Keane

simon was pretty good for the avs

all in all i dont think they have the depth that made them so succesful withour the lindros trade.

Basically. The Lindros deal left the Avs with an abundance of assets, so much so that they had the advantage when any big name player was on the market - people have talked about how they probably wouldn't have had the assets to get Patrick Roy without the deal; I don't think they would have had the assets to get Rob Blake, either.

Bexlyspeed 07-27-2011 12:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by arrbez (Post 35393295)
That's an interesting one there, and less convoluted than the Lindros scenario. Obviously Claude Lemieux played a part in Colorado's cup win in 1996. But imagine if they kept Sundin instead (keeping in mind that Sundin played RW very successfully early in his career)? Sundin and Forsberg together would have been terrifying stuff.

i think for the playoffs they were better off with Claude Lemieux.

Bexlyspeed 07-27-2011 12:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe (Post 35394349)
Basically. The Lindros deal left the Avs with an abundance of assets, so much so that they had the advantage when any big name player was on the market - people have talked about how they probably wouldn't have had the assets to get Patrick Roy without the deal; I don't think they would have had the assets to get Rob Blake, either.

that's a great point, look at all the deadline deals they made (or close to the deadline): Fleury & Selanne come to mind instantly, but im sure there were a few more

Jules Winnfield 07-27-2011 12:04 AM

Instead of Scott Stevens wrecking Lindros, Konstantinov would've been wrecking him instead. :sarcasm:

Dave Karp 07-27-2011 01:26 AM

In THN's magazine The Great Debates special issue from a few years back they discuss this. The author writes back on Lindros' career as if he had stayed with the 'Nords. Don't recall the details but the gist was that he would've been more successful. I'll try to dig it up.

tjcurrie 07-27-2011 01:52 AM

Obviously a lot of the deals the Avs made with the assets they received helped out, but the Nords were a pretty good team as is and with the addition of Lindros, plus it's impossible to say what else they would have done afterwards to acquire pieces but they likely would have added, they had a real good shot. The goalie position would have been the main piece they needed to add.

Theokritos 07-27-2011 08:04 AM

Imagine the Avs with Lindros and Sundin instead of Sakic and Forsberg. Interesting vision.

McNuts 07-27-2011 09:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ace14 (Post 35386341)
If they don't trade Lindros, they may not get Roy.

Care to develop on that?

Canadarocks 07-27-2011 10:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dave Karp (Post 35411445)
In THN's magazine The Great Debates special issue from a few years back they discuss this. The author writes back on Lindros' career as if he had stayed with the 'Nords. Don't recall the details but the gist was that he would've been more successful. I'll try to dig it up.

That sounds really interesting! I hope you find it.

Psycho Papa Joe 07-28-2011 10:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by McNuts (Post 35416051)
Care to develop on that?

Read the thread.

ForsbergForever 07-28-2011 09:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Canadarocks (Post 35440359)
That sounds really interesting! I hope you find it.

I have this issue, it says if Lindros had stayed the Nords would not have moved due to his popularity and the success of the team...

I always like to ponder how this line-up would have done...

Nolan-Lindros-Sundin
Kamensky-Sakic-Kovalenko

The top line could have been a substitute Legion of Doom.

CHGoalie27 07-29-2011 08:03 PM

edit, oh yeah, no forsberg

Stephen 07-29-2011 08:35 PM

If Lindros had played for them, you'd be looking at a team including:

Sakic
Lindros
Sundin
Nolan
Kamensky
Kovalenko
Rucinsky
Young

with little depth on defense outside of an Adam Foote and some pitiful goaltending. The Lindros deal really fleshed out their ranks and allowed them to add guys like Duchesne and then populate their forward group with serviceable talent like Ricci and later Forsberg.

But who knows, maybe they steam roll offensively, or they trade a couple of those guys for defense and goaltending and still roll with Sakic and Lindros and Sundin up front.

Although I do have to say a Sakic-Lindros 1, 2 punch just doesn't sound right in terms of chemistry or cohesive playing style.

Mike Farkas 07-30-2011 02:34 AM

Further potential repercussions that can be thrown into the mix, perhaps...

In 1997, Joe Sakic signs that front-loaded offer sheet with the Rangers...do the Avs have the money to sign a UFA goalie (I'd assume that's the route they'd go) pay Lindros his big bucks and have all that capital up-front to keep Sakic? To further that point, in hypothetical fashion, they have to have generated a lot of revenue from winning the Cup in 1996 - which they likely do not do without Roy and the subbing of Forsberg for Lindros doesn't necessarily help them in the postseason.

Just throwing a tiny bit of a monkey wrench in the plans for Colorado's future domination (once they acquired a big time goalie, presumably).


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:50 AM.

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com, A property of CraveOnline, a division of AtomicOnline LLC ©2009 CraveOnline Media, LLC. All Rights Reserved.