Anders Lindback for 2014-15 [and other Possible Backups]

jameswrjobe53

Registered User
Jul 11, 2010
2,060
0
ODU, Norfolk, VA
docs.google.com
Personally, I would have no problem resigning Lindback to a 2-way contract at league minimum or inviting him to training camp.

We just do not truly know whether Gudlevskis or Vasilevskiy are ready to back-up Bishop, and rushing our prospects is not the smartest idea if they are not up to the task.

Thoughts?

(And this is if we could not find some other FA backup to consider)

[note: Whats the status of Janus]
 
Last edited:

MattM92

Registered User
Dec 8, 2010
6,925
516
FL
Personally, I would have no problem resigning Lindback to a 2-way contract at league minimum or inviting him to training camp.

We just do not truly know whether Gudlevskis or Vasilevskiy are ready to back-up Bishop, and rushing our prospects is not the smartest idea if they are not up to the task.

Thoughts?

(And this is if we could not find some other FA backup to consider)

My vote is no.
 

2MinutesforGiraffing

angelsil on safari
Apr 2, 2013
1,707
0
Tampa
Nope. Team doesn't seem to have confidence in him. His numbers haven't even been acceptable for a backup the past 2 seasons. I won't debate all the reasons why he might be sub .900, but the reality is that he has been both this season and last.

I'd rather bring in a short-term vet backup while Kristers/Vasi get some experience in 'Cuse.
 

Lord Stan 2020

Elite fan
Jun 29, 2013
12,270
896
New Port Richey Fl
www.facebook.com
My vote is no.

What he said only option with this guy to me is bury in echl. He is not ready and the team quits on him everytime he plays so honestly? I will give anyone and I mean anyone a shot over him at this time.

Is not all his fault but the team quits. They play like lost school kids when in net and he makes one bad non save they fall apart.

That is not repairable imho. In time sure like 2 years from now just not right now. We have seen it too often. Bishop has some mistakes we bounce back.

They lost confidence in him and faith and once that trust is broken IE MARTY we see the responses and I for one am not putting that all on Lindback. Is just what I see and I don't have a solution and to me is a dammed shame.
 

FinnLightning26

Death and no taxes
Sep 16, 2007
7,249
3,032
Lapland
No, I wouldn't bring him back even for league minimum. There are a few options for our backup for next season in the UFA. I would take Montoya, Greiss, Peters, McElhinney or even Emery and Bryzgalov before Lindbäck.
 

2MinutesforGiraffing

angelsil on safari
Apr 2, 2013
1,707
0
Tampa
No, I wouldn't bring him back. There are a few options for our backup for next season in the UFA. I would take Montoya, Greiss, Peters, McElhinney or even Emery and Bryzgalov before Lindbäck.

You have no idea how bad I want Bryzgalov on the team. Not for his play, mind you. The entertainment factor is humangous beeeg.
 

HoseEmDown

Registered User
Mar 25, 2012
17,470
3,690
I thought I was the only one.

If they feel Gudlevskis can be the backup to Bishop then I see why not let him work on his game in Syracuse? Vasilevskiy, if he comes over gets the majority of the starts, Lindback gets spot starts plus when Bishop gets hurt we can bring Lindy up and keep Vasilevskiy starting. Only way to get him at league minimum is not qualify him, hope no one else offers him and then offer him but not sure he'd even take that.

Greiss, Bryz, Peters aren't much of an upgrade and Montoya has been garbage till this season, there isn't a real backup option who'll be a massive improvement we can get on the cheap.
 

ThunderBuddy

Registered User
Apr 20, 2014
310
0
Nope. Team doesn't seem to have confidence in him. His numbers haven't even been acceptable for a backup the past 2 seasons. I won't debate all the reasons why he might be sub .900, but the reality is that he has been both this season and last.

I'd rather bring in a short-term vet backup while Kristers/Vasi get some experience in 'Cuse.
This. Team's lack of trust in his capabilities won't change anytime soon. He had his chance, he couldn't deliver and it's time to move on.

We have plenty of G prospects and I'm completely fine with acquiring a veteran backup for this transitional period.
 

FinnLightning26

Death and no taxes
Sep 16, 2007
7,249
3,032
Lapland
I thought I was the only one.

If they feel Gudlevskis can be the backup to Bishop then I see why not let him work on his game in Syracuse? Vasilevskiy, if he comes over gets the majority of the starts, Lindback gets spot starts plus when Bishop gets hurt we can bring Lindy up and keep Vasilevskiy starting. Only way to get him at league minimum is not qualify him, hope no one else offers him and then offer him but not sure he'd even take that.

I don't think he wants to be in AHL at this point of his career. If he can't get a NHL spot, I would think he comes to Europe. Also can't see him wanting to stay here. I would imagine he hasn't had a good time here either this season so it would be better for both parties to go their seperate ways.
 

DFC

Registered User
Sep 26, 2013
47,172
23,279
NB
Personally, I would have no problem resigning Lindback to a 2-way contract at league minimum or inviting him to training camp.

We just do not truly know whether Gudlevskis or Vasilevskiy are ready to back-up Bishop, and rushing our prospects is not the smartest idea if they are not up to the task.

Thoughts?

(And this is if we could not find some other FA backup to consider)

You're right. Those are uncertainties. The one KNOWN thing is that Lindback is NOT capable of backing up Bishop. In the case of Lindback vs. two uncertain goalies, I'll take an uncertainty.
 

Yzlamic Preacher*

Guest
You're right. Those are uncertainties. The one KNOWN thing is that Lindback is NOT capable of backing up Bishop. In the case of Lindback vs. two uncertain goalies, I'll take an uncertainty.

Until there is certainty.

Yeah no dice on Anderp. I honestly think he doesn't fit our system. Maybe its Frantz Jean maybe it isn't. The only thing for sure is that the experiment failed.
 

DFC

Registered User
Sep 26, 2013
47,172
23,279
NB
Also, Bryzgalov has probably played his way out of our price range. He had a good season, considering a lot of it was played behind Edmonton's D. And his worse season was as good as either of Lindback's seasons in Tampa. He'd be a very capable backup. But my guess is someone will want him as a bridge starter, similar to his situation in Minny.
 

BoltSTH

Registered User
Sep 4, 2008
2,417
765
Tampa
To all the other 29 teams: Lindback is an amazing goalie who can carry your team. He can be had for only a 2nd. :)

Internal: Bye Bye
 

Yzlamic Preacher*

Guest
You know just thinking about it. Did anyone else notice that the softies Anderp was letting in were exactly the same of any goalie that Frantz Jean has touched in the last however long he has been here. Seriously its actually uncanny how similar everything is.
 

dbieon12

Vinik-Brisebois-Cooper
Jul 22, 2010
5,505
1,018
I thought I was the only one.

If they feel Gudlevskis can be the backup to Bishop then I see why not let him work on his game in Syracuse? Vasilevskiy, if he comes over gets the majority of the starts, Lindback gets spot starts plus when Bishop gets hurt we can bring Lindy up and keep Vasilevskiy starting. Only way to get him at league minimum is not qualify him, hope no one else offers him and then offer him but not sure he'd even take that.

Greiss, Bryz, Peters aren't much of an upgrade and Montoya has been garbage till this season, there isn't a real backup option who'll be a massive improvement we can get on the cheap.

But we'd probably be paying $2M/yr for an AHL backup.

I'm personally fine with either:
- Bring in another veteran if it makes everyone feel more secure. Just imagine if Bishop goes down for a longer period of time next season - we wouldn't want Lindback and Gudlevskis may not be ready for that workload.
- Use Bishop and hope he stays healthy and keep Gudlevskis as backup (20 games), Vasilevskiy playing in Syracuse.
 

The Macho King

Back* to Back** World Champion
Jun 22, 2011
48,776
29,312
I love that everyone is pointing out how "uncertain" Gudlevskis or Vasilevskiy would be as a back up as a mark in Lindback's favor. Lindback is a certainty - that's the problem.

This was overly inclusive. "Everyone" being those that are supporting re-signing Lindback.
 
Last edited:

FDfranklin

868686
Jan 21, 2013
4,846
0
tumblr_lumraaPklZ1r0ojhto1_250.gif
 

HoseEmDown

Registered User
Mar 25, 2012
17,470
3,690
But we'd probably be paying $2M/yr for an AHL backup.

I'm personally fine with either:
- Bring in another veteran if it makes everyone feel more secure. Just imagine if Bishop goes down for a longer period of time next season - we wouldn't want Lindback and Gudlevskis may not be ready for that workload.
- Use Bishop and hope he stays healthy and keep Gudlevskis as backup (20 games), Vasilevskiy playing in Syracuse.

He'll only be making close to 2mil if we qualify him. If he says he wants to go to Europe I'm sure we qualify him to just hold his rights. If he wants to stay and is willing to make league minimum we don't qualify him, he becomes a FA, and hope no one signs him before we can renegotiate a new deal.
 

jameswrjobe53

Registered User
Jul 11, 2010
2,060
0
ODU, Norfolk, VA
docs.google.com
You're right. Those are uncertainties. The one KNOWN thing is that Lindback is NOT capable of backing up Bishop. In the case of Lindback vs. two uncertain goalies, I'll take an uncertainty.

I love that everyone is pointing out how "uncertain" Gudlevskis or Vasilevskiy would be as a back up as a mark in Lindback's favor. Lindback is a certainty - that's the problem.

This was overly inclusive. "Everyone" being those that are supporting re-signing Lindback.

Yeah makes sense. Haven't really thought it like that. We are certain Lindback sucks but uncertain whether Gudlevskis or Vasilevskiy can play up. Fair points.

What if we signed someone like Clemmensen or Theodore for one year?

EDIT: Whats the status on Jaroslav Janus?
 
Last edited:

Ad

Upcoming events

  • Toulouse vs Montpellier
    Toulouse vs Montpellier
    Wagers: 3
    Staked: $246.00
    Event closes
    • Updated:
  • Hoffenheim vs RB Leipzig
    Hoffenheim vs RB Leipzig
    Wagers: 4
    Staked: $8,351.00
    Event closes
    • Updated:
  • Torino vs Bologna
    Torino vs Bologna
    Wagers: 3
    Staked: $810.00
    Event closes
    • Updated:
  • Luton Town vs Everton
    Luton Town vs Everton
    Wagers: 4
    Staked: $1,010.00
    Event closes
    • Updated:
  • Getafe vs Athletic Bilbao
    Getafe vs Athletic Bilbao
    Wagers: 1
    Staked: $10.00
    Event closes
    • Updated:

Ad

Ad