HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Metropolitan Division > Carolina Hurricanes
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Lindholm

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
11-07-2013, 08:51 PM
  #101
spockrock
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 412
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by bluedevil58 View Post
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nZcRU0Op5P4


Lindholm being sent down is a dead giveaway that he is not ready for the NHL. So much for drafting an impact now kind of player eh?
OMG! SHOULD HAVE DRAFTED NICH!!! FIRE JR!!! SHOOT ME PLEASE!!! KILL ME NOW!!!

give me a freaking break, the kid is 18. expecting an 18yr old not named crosby or ovechkin to be an immediate impact player is ridiculous.

conversely, taking jr at face value on any prospect is equally ridiculous.

spockrock is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-07-2013, 08:51 PM
  #102
halleJOKEL
strong as brickwall
 
halleJOKEL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Raleigh
Country: United States
Posts: 6,539
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by bluedevil58 View Post
I never said he was a bust. I said he is not an impact now draft pick which is what this team desperately needs. We are near the Cap and are still not winning. That is concerning.
the NHL is not a league where drafting players that can compete now is a thing that you do

like really

not even close

halleJOKEL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-07-2013, 08:53 PM
  #103
Lazyking
Never Forget
 
Lazyking's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Connecticut
Country: United States
Posts: 3,737
vCash: 500
The only Cane to do that was Skinner.. and Staal right?

Lazyking is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-07-2013, 09:07 PM
  #104
TheOllieC
Tampa Ba(ndwagon)y
 
TheOllieC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Columbus, OH
Country: United States
Posts: 8,960
vCash: 625
Quote:
Originally Posted by bluedevil58 View Post
How exactly does he have more potential?
Lindholm's ceiling is higher than Monahan's

TheOllieC is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
11-07-2013, 09:09 PM
  #105
semin4captain
Registered User
 
semin4captain's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 11,615
vCash: 500
People think Lindholm has more potential because the first 15 games of a player's career very rarely determines the final product. Some people don't have their opinions swayed by tiny sample sizes. Weren't you constantly complaining about not drafting Nichushkin because he's an "impact now player"? It was all about Nichushkin and I don't recall you saying a word about Monahan, but now that he has scored 7 goals (on a completely unsustainable 20.6% shooting percentage) he's the guy we should have drafted.

http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/sh....php?t=1457873

Don't see any mention of the great Sean Monahan there.

semin4captain is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-07-2013, 09:11 PM
  #106
bluedevil58
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 1,494
vCash: 500
I did not say that. I am unhappy with what we did with our 1st round pick. We should have traded down for a power forward and then take things from there. Look....there is no way JR can predict who we pick now and who we don't. However, with being near the cap we have to win plain and simple. There is no excuse.

bluedevil58 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-07-2013, 09:13 PM
  #107
semin4captain
Registered User
 
semin4captain's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 11,615
vCash: 500
"An impact now player was what was needed during the draft. We should have gone with Nich. "

semin4captain is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-07-2013, 09:27 PM
  #108
spockrock
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 412
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by bluedevil58 View Post
I did not say that. I am unhappy with what we did with our 1st round pick. We should have traded down for a power forward and then take things from there. Look....there is no way JR can predict who we pick now and who we don't. However, with being near the cap we have to win plain and simple. There is no excuse.
no team was willing to trade up for the 5. it was very clear we needed and wanted a defenseman. boston may have been offering seguin, as one rumor had it, but i doubt the offer was just seguin for the 5th pick. it's been reported we offered buffalo the 5 for 8 and sekera but obviously no dice there. what we needed out of the draft was a top 4 defenseman via trade somehow. we got that.

you evidently expected the 2nd coming of gretzky in super russian prospect form. lindholm, if he meets expectations, should be the perfect compliment to skinner one day.

spockrock is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-07-2013, 10:14 PM
  #109
halleJOKEL
strong as brickwall
 
halleJOKEL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Raleigh
Country: United States
Posts: 6,539
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by bluedevil58 View Post
I did not say that. I am unhappy with what we did with our 1st round pick. We should have traded down for a power forward and then take things from there. Look....there is no way JR can predict who we pick now and who we don't. However, with being near the cap we have to win plain and simple. There is no excuse.
wtf are u talking about?

traded down for a power forward?

**** now i've heard everythign

halleJOKEL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-07-2013, 10:24 PM
  #110
Lazyking
Never Forget
 
Lazyking's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Connecticut
Country: United States
Posts: 3,737
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by bluedevil58 View Post
I did not say that. I am unhappy with what we did with our 1st round pick. We should have traded down for a power forward and then take things from there. Look....there is no way JR can predict who we pick now and who we don't. However, with being near the cap we have to win plain and simple. There is no excuse.
just being near the cap doesn't mean the Canes have enough good players to win. You say there is no excuse but even if we got a Crosby like player with the fifth pick, we'd probably still be a bubble team.

Lazyking is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-07-2013, 10:50 PM
  #111
TankClerval
Fifth Line Center
 
TankClerval's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 1,425
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by bluedevil58 View Post
I did not say that. I am unhappy with what we did with our 1st round pick. We should have traded down for a power forward and then take things from there. Look....there is no way JR can predict who we pick now and who we don't. However, with being near the cap we have to win plain and simple. There is no excuse.
Hey, look, now we're the Maple Leafs!

--hank

TankClerval is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-08-2013, 05:55 AM
  #112
Boom Boom Anton
Registered User
 
Boom Boom Anton's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,700
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheOllieC View Post
Yup. Lindholm has higher potential than Monahan for example. I would have been PO'ed if JR took Monahan and Lindholm was still on the board.
I'm not sure if I agree with that. I think (and thought back then if you go read some of the posts) that Monahan was being underrated a bit on this board back during the draft and I would have been fine with the Canes drafting either of them. He's a different type of player than Lindholm, but I was convinced that the Canes were going to draft Monahan.

I'm not saying either of these guys will reach the same level as the guys I am comparing them to, but Monahan reminded me of a Toews type player (solid 2 way player with some scoring) and Lindholm more of a Backstrom type (more of a playmaker but also solid 2 ways).

I don't follow prospects nearly as much as others on these boards, so I couldn't say really which one has higher potential, but to me, either one would have been a good pick at that spot.

Boom Boom Anton is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-08-2013, 06:45 AM
  #113
spockrock
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 412
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by halleJOKEL View Post
wtf are u talking about?

traded down for a power forward?

**** now i've heard everythign
We definitely addressed the power forward thing with signing Gerbe to his "entry level contract"

Now we just need to RAGE!!! over Cam Ward and Ruutu, then maybe we could bring back some real players line Whitney and Cole...

spockrock is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-08-2013, 07:28 AM
  #114
daikan
sad times
 
daikan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Göteborg
Country: Sweden
Posts: 2,532
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to daikan
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lazyking View Post
The only Cane to do that was Skinner.. and Staal right?
Except Staal was not an impact player in his rookie year. It wasn't until after he'd played the offseason in Lowell that he turned into one.

daikan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-08-2013, 07:37 AM
  #115
Elsker
Registered User
 
Elsker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 109
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by daikan View Post
Except Staal was not an impact player in his rookie year. It wasn't until after he'd played the offseason in Lowell that he turned into one.
As noted above, Eric had only 11 goals and 31 points in 81 games his first year.

But after the lockout year spent in Lowell (26-51-77), where he dominated, he had his monster 100-point Cup-winning season.

Elsker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-08-2013, 07:44 AM
  #116
Joe McGrath
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 6,370
vCash: 500
I'm not sure how many times I need to say this but the NHL draft is not like the NBA or NFL drafts. Guys are very rarely actual impact players in year 1 because they are 18 years old. What's the average of impact players at 18 per year, 2? Maybe 3? And they're usually only impact players because their team sucks.

Joe McGrath is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-08-2013, 08:04 AM
  #117
daikan
sad times
 
daikan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Göteborg
Country: Sweden
Posts: 2,532
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to daikan
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elsker View Post
As noted above, Eric had only 11 goals and 31 points in 81 games his first year.

But after the lockout year spent in Lowell (26-51-77), where he dominated, he had his monster 100-point Cup-winning season.
Yes. I mean, I think the point was that draftees almost never step right into the NHL and contribute as 18-year-olds, and I agree with that point (or was trying to, anyway).

daikan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-08-2013, 08:49 AM
  #118
rocky7
Tell itlikeit Isn't!
 
rocky7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: God's country
Posts: 3,464
vCash: 500
I could be wrong but it was JR that started this 'help now', 'impact player' talk by saying Lindholm was just that. JR was indicating strongly that Lindholm would be a major contributor in the line-up this year. from there people were penciling him in as the 3rd line center and content.

everyone knew they needed to go out and get an NHL caliber forward for the bottom six. they didn't. it was expected by most that Lindholm and Skinner would be handling 3rd line duties and the 4th line could be made up of AHL tweeners. most were o.k. with that. now, Lindholm is in Charlotte and AHLers are playing through-out the line-up. Lindholm is 18 and shouldn't have been relied on in the first place. all drafts and rookies are pretty much the same. a big risk. they went the safest route they could and went on to promote the pick. we'll see how it all shakes out.

if they wanted 'help' now they should have traded the pick somehow. I would have been fine with that. I don't think they tried that hard to play it that way though.

also, they needed to grab someone in free agency or make a trade to help now. to have relied on the draft pick was the mistake. I think everyone, management and fans, expected Lindholm to be that guy. right or wrong.

rocky7 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
11-08-2013, 08:58 AM
  #119
Blueline Bomber
1st Overall Pick
 
Blueline Bomber's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 24,804
vCash: 500
I think Lindholm could have helped out immediately, but his early season injuries put a damper on that.

He had no training camp and no preseason, and his first couple games were on the 4th line. Very hard to be an impact player in those circumstances.

Lindholm and Skinner might have worked, but as soon as Lindholm was starting to look comfortable, Skinner got injured. That's why I'm not too worried about sending Lindholm down and probably why Muller said we'd see him again in a couple weeks. When Skinner's healthy, we'll give that combination a shot.

Blueline Bomber is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
11-08-2013, 08:58 AM
  #120
Joe McGrath
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 6,370
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by rocky7 View Post
I could be wrong but it was JR that started this 'help now', 'impact player' talk by saying Lindholm was just that. JR was indicating strongly that Lindholm would be a major contributor in the line-up this year. from there people were penciling him in as the 3rd line center and content.

everyone knew they needed to go out and get an NHL caliber forward for the bottom six. they didn't. it was expected by most that Lindholm and Skinner would be handling 3rd line duties and the 4th line could be made up of AHL tweeners. most were o.k. with that. now, Lindholm is in Charlotte and AHLers are playing through-out the line-up. Lindholm is 18 and shouldn't have been relied on in the first place. all drafts and rookies are pretty much the same. a big risk. they went the safest route they could and went on to promote the pick. we'll see how it all shakes out.

if they wanted 'help' now they should have traded the pick somehow. I would have been fine with that. I don't think they tried that hard to play it that way though.

also, they needed to grab someone in free agency or make a trade to help now. to have relied on the draft pick was the mistake. I think everyone, management and fans, expected Lindholm to be that guy. right or wrong.
Other than Terry and Bowman, who are these AHLers all throughout the lineup? Skinner comes back and it's only Bowman. This team has the LEAST amount of AHL tweener types since '06 unless you count the goalie who is only there because of injuries.

Joe McGrath is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-08-2013, 09:08 AM
  #121
tarheelhockey
Global Moderator
 
tarheelhockey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: The Triangle
Country: United States
Posts: 36,146
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by rocky7 View Post
everyone knew they needed to go out and get an NHL caliber forward for the bottom six. they didn't.
Dvorak?

I do agree that JR needs to lay off the comments about players having a roster spot before they even have a game under their belt. He said it about both Welsh and Lindholm, and put undue pressure on both of them.

tarheelhockey is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
11-08-2013, 09:33 AM
  #122
halleJOKEL
strong as brickwall
 
halleJOKEL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Raleigh
Country: United States
Posts: 6,539
vCash: 500
lindholm is clearly an elite talent

he is 18, moving here from europe, and has been consistently injured since rookie camp, not to mention the (now mentioned multiple times by multiple people) differences between the nhl, nba, and nfl drafts (stop trying to draw comparisons ughhh you are so dumb)

he sucks ass and is a bust

halleJOKEL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-08-2013, 09:57 AM
  #123
What the Faulk
The Real Swede Shady
 
What the Faulk's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: North Carolina
Country: United States
Posts: 30,640
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goodafternoon View Post
Will Lindholm be a rookie next year if he spends the rest of his season in Charlotte?
Yep. I believe the cutoffs are 6 games in consecutive years (or maybe just 2 separate years?) or 25 games in one year constitutes your rookie season. He'll be in year 2 of his ELC regardless.

But he'll be back in Carolina before Christmas.

What the Faulk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-08-2013, 10:02 AM
  #124
Joe McGrath
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 6,370
vCash: 500
Isn't there some kind of cut off (I think I heard 40 games) that delays unrestricted free agency a year? Or am I just making that up?

Joe McGrath is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-08-2013, 10:07 AM
  #125
DaveG
Mod Supervisor
How's the thesis?
 
DaveG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Durham NC
Country: United States
Posts: 33,488
vCash: 562
Quote:
Originally Posted by tarheelhockey View Post
Dvorak?

I do agree that JR needs to lay off the comments about players having a roster spot before they even have a game under their belt. He said it about both Welsh and Lindholm, and put undue pressure on both of them.
I'd say Gerbe too, those are two exceptional UFA signings IMO, at least for what we got them at. Not sure how to count Malhotra since that was essentially a tryout for the NHL team as a PTO.

But I couldn't agree more with the bottom part there. Based on the guys he's said over the years have roster spots cemented heading into a season we should be rolling with a core of Jaro Svoboda, Pavel Brendl, Jeremy Welsh, Jeff Heerema, Zac Dalpe, Zach Boychuk, and Drayson Bowman right now. Funny how only one of those guys is on the roster... as a 4th line role player.

DaveG is online now   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:18 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2015 All Rights Reserved.