Confirmed with Link: Lindholm signs 6 year 29.1 million dollar contract

Lunatik

Normal is an illusion.
Oct 12, 2012
56,176
8,337
Padded Room
He's no sniper, but Bennett seemed in my opinion to be able to do weird and random finishes when he was asked to be a net front presence. IMO, it was just weird shades of Gelinas (but perhaps comparison is tainted by his playoff no goal). I seemed to recall him doing well in front of the net as he is a bit of a battler, but I don't recall Gully playing him there often. This with some of his early goals being Joe Colborne specials...

Let's just say I hope him being a good finisher when paired with Lindholm is less fantasy and more reality.
Bennett should improve this season, but after last year, I am hard pressed to call him a good finisher. He missed so many glorious scoring opportunities
 
  • Like
Reactions: Fig

Lunatik

Normal is an illusion.
Oct 12, 2012
56,176
8,337
Padded Room
To put this contract into perspective, Adam Henrique, a very comparable player just got a million more per year than Elias
 

FerklundCGY

Registered User
Jul 3, 2017
1,894
1,966
Bennett is a good finisher and Lindholm a play maker. Those two theoretically could become a strong pairing together.

Bennett scored 5 goals lower than his expected 5v5 goals (15.01).

Bennett is fantastic at creating individual chances but he sucks at finishing them. Definitely would not call him a good finisher.

If his shot improves and his luck changes for the better (his oiSH% and PDO are incredibly low), then he'll be in for a big season
 
  • Like
Reactions: Fig

Lunatik

Normal is an illusion.
Oct 12, 2012
56,176
8,337
Padded Room
Not really fair to compare RFA contracts to UFA extensions
Why not? Most of the years on Lindholm's contract are UFA years too, he gave up 4 UFA years. Henrique only gave up 5 and will be 34 when his deal ends. What will be more valuable? Lindholm's UFA years from age 25-29, or Henrique's from age 29-34? I'd put my money on Lindholm.
 

SKRusty

Napalm
Jan 20, 2016
2,611
1,062
Why not? Most of the years on Lindholm's contract are UFA years too, he gave up 4 UFA years. Henrique only gave up 5 and will be 34 when his deal ends. What will be more valuable? Lindholm's UFA years from age 25-29, or Henrique's from age 29-34? I'd put my money on Lindholm.

To add to this the league has moved to a under 35 mentality where all the value in a players potential especially forwards is in that 27-31 range. There will be a few outliers but the bulk of players today start falling off starting at 32. Tre has yet to dropped the ball in regards to RFA's.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Johnny Hoxville

Johnny Hoxville

The Return of a Legend
Jul 15, 2006
37,549
9,343
Calgary
Definitely, there’s no question that this deal ensures that Lindholm’s prime years should be locked up with the Flames. If he becomes a 60pt player, you’re talking about a 7 million dollar UFA.
 

crackdown44

Cold milk cools down hot food
Dec 1, 2017
4,493
5,517
Why not? Most of the years on Lindholm's contract are UFA years too, he gave up 4 UFA years. Henrique only gave up 5 and will be 34 when his deal ends. What will be more valuable? Lindholm's UFA years from age 25-29, or Henrique's from age 29-34? I'd put my money on Lindholm.

Because UFAs can walk and RFAs are under team control during negociations? I’m not disputing that Lindholm’s contract is better value, I’m disputing the comparison.

It’s like saying “wow I can’t believe we gave James Neal 5.75 but locked up Lindholm for 6 years at 4.875”. Better value but UFAs get more because they’re on the open market
 

Dack

Registered User
Jun 16, 2014
3,911
3,544
I'd like to see him used as a center and play with Tkachuk.

I honestly wouldn't mind lines like these.

Gaudreau-Monahan-Ryan/Czarnik
Tkachuk-Lindholm-Neal
Bennett-Backlund-Frolik
?-Jankowski-Ryan/Czarnik

I'd also like Shore signed as a cheap 4th liner but I'm doubtful that happens now.
 

Volica

Papa Shango
May 15, 2012
21,391
11,074
I'd like to see him used as a center and play with Tkachuk.

I honestly wouldn't mind lines like these.

Gaudreau-Monahan-Ryan/Czarnik
Tkachuk-Lindholm-Neal
Bennett-Backlund-Frolik
?-Jankowski-Ryan/Czarnik

I'd also like Shore signed as a cheap 4th liner but I'm doubtful that happens now.

The more I weigh it, although I think stacking down the middle is the way to go, I think this'll be the result:

Gaudreau - Monahan - Lindholm
Tkachuk - Backlund - Neal
Bennett - Ryan - Frolik
? - Jankowski - Czarnik

hoping that ? can be Klimchuk, Mangipane, etc etc. Someone who earns the role instead of someone who's paid 4.5 million and just gets it.
 

Savoie92

Registered User
Jul 5, 2012
1,136
360
Regina
I like this deal a lot. Right now its market value. With the cap going up this will be well below market value. If he can jell with Monahan and Gaudreau or with Tkachuk and Backlund, this deal will look even better to the point that id consider it a steal hopefully within the first half of his contract
 
  • Like
Reactions: Johnny Hoxville

Flames Fanatic

Mediocre
Aug 14, 2008
13,329
2,888
Cochrane
I'm really hoping on Czarnik being even Gourde lite, if he can put up 35-40 points in a middle six role we are so blessed with line combo options.
 

Fig

Absolute Horse Shirt
Dec 15, 2014
12,955
8,449
Bennett should improve this season, but after last year, I am hard pressed to call him a good finisher. He missed so many glorious scoring opportunities

Bennett scored 5 goals lower than his expected 5v5 goals (15.01).

Bennett is fantastic at creating individual chances but he sucks at finishing them. Definitely would not call him a good finisher.

If his shot improves and his luck changes for the better (his oiSH% and PDO are incredibly low), then he'll be in for a big season

Yeah, I guess my info is off. But I do have hopes he can get back that net front presence and help out on more goals.
 

SKRusty

Napalm
Jan 20, 2016
2,611
1,062
Love the wing options but kinda weak down the middle. Though Bennett could fix that.




Our Zuccarello would suffice, thanks.

Bennett should improve this season, but after last year, I am hard pressed to call him a good finisher. He missed so many glorious scoring opportunities

Bennett scored 5 goals lower than his expected 5v5 goals (15.01).

Bennett is fantastic at creating individual chances but he sucks at finishing them. Definitely would not call him a good finisher.

If his shot improves and his luck changes for the better (his oiSH% and PDO are incredibly low), then he'll be in for a big season

OKG -- BENNETT will NOT be playing C for the foreseeable future. Get over it. Everyone else has moved on and it is time you stop the insanity. He simply is not a capable C at this point in his career so why not root for him to become the best winger possible.

Bennett's largest short coming is his lack of hockey IQ therefore he needs a couple really strong players around him to guide him. Sam's biggest success came playing with Backlund and Frolik because the savvy vets could essentially tell him where to be at all times. He needs that experience around him to be sucessful. With Sam's other incredible talents he can be very effective but he needs that experience surrounding him.

A line of Chucky - Janko - Lindholm and Johnny- Mony- Neal would give Calgary 3 very good lines. Janko played very well with Johnny so the upgrade on talent with Chucky and Lindholm could be down right scary.

That said the depth on the Flames is insane this year I can't wait to see how things shake out.
 

The Gnome

Registered User
May 17, 2010
4,678
740
Calgary
We don't even need Bennett at C

Monahan
Lindholm
Backlund
Janko

He's not a better C than any of these guys. I mean if Monahan was a 3rd line winger i'd get it, but he's a solid 1C for this team.
 

crackdown44

Cold milk cools down hot food
Dec 1, 2017
4,493
5,517
I’m not crazy about Janko being shoved down to the 4th line. I think I’m a bit higher on him than most but I’d like to see him remain at C and play no lower than 3rd line. I know he’s older but last year was his rookie season. I feel he has the assets and the hockey sense to breakout once his consistency comes around.

Love the added depth but I hope it doesn’t bury him
 

DCDM

Da Rink Cats
Mar 24, 2008
38,094
6,426
Calgary
I’m not crazy about Janko being shoved down to the 4th line. I think I’m a bit higher on him than most but I’d like to see him remain at C and play no lower than 3rd line. I know he’s older but last year was his rookie season. I feel he has the assets and the hockey sense to breakout once his consistency comes around.

Love the added depth but I hope it doesn’t bury him
I think it's more likely we see:

Monahan
Backlund
Janko
Ryan

With Lindholm having the ability to take RH faceoffs on whatever line he plays on.
 

Anglesmith

Setting up the play?
Sep 17, 2012
46,441
14,715
Victoria
Why not? Most of the years on Lindholm's contract are UFA years too, he gave up 4 UFA years. Henrique only gave up 5 and will be 34 when his deal ends. What will be more valuable? Lindholm's UFA years from age 25-29, or Henrique's from age 29-34? I'd put my money on Lindholm.
Let's put it this way. If there really is no difference between being a UFA vs. being an RFA, why even make the distinction of "UFA years?"

The fact of the matter is that being restricted is a big factor in earning power. Just like selling a house. If there's only one buyer, you're not likely to get fair market value. If there are several buyers, you're likely to get more than fair market value.

A player is forced to negotiate with one team, and if they can't come to terms, it has a significant impact on their career. Even in the case of arbitration rights, a player can't compare their situation to that of UFAs like Henrique, so there really is no way for them to justify why they should be paid as if there is a bidding war.
 

Flames Fanatic

Mediocre
Aug 14, 2008
13,329
2,888
Cochrane
Let's put it this way. If there really is no difference between being a UFA vs. being an RFA, why even make the distinction of "UFA years?"

The fact of the matter is that being restricted is a big factor in earning power. Just like selling a house. If there's only one buyer, you're not likely to get fair market value. If there are several buyers, you're likely to get more than fair market value.

A player is forced to negotiate with one team, and if they can't come to terms, it has a significant impact on their career. Even in the case of arbitration rights, a player can't compare their situation to that of UFAs like Henrique, so there really is no way for them to justify why they should be paid as if there is a bidding war.

I think that's an over simplification though.

Deals like this absolutely go up in actual money more if you are buying UFA years, more so than if it was just more money to increase term imo.
 

The Gnome

Registered User
May 17, 2010
4,678
740
Calgary
It's a solid signing. One of the benefits of having a young core. With the way he's shaped team, I'm sure Tre understands that negotiating with RFAs is better than trying to plug holes every year through UFA
 

Anglesmith

Setting up the play?
Sep 17, 2012
46,441
14,715
Victoria
I think that's an over simplification though.

Deals like this absolutely go up in actual money more if you are buying UFA years, more so than if it was just more money to increase term imo.
Well yes, it's a factor when comparing RFA contracts. UFA years are valuable specifically because the player would likely make more money in those years as a UFA, which brings the whole conversation full circular, doesn't it?
 

Lunatik

Normal is an illusion.
Oct 12, 2012
56,176
8,337
Padded Room
@crackdown44 LindyoLicoykd have gone to arbitration and chosen the two year arbitration settlement if he wanted.

@Anglesmith Lindholm could negotiate with whomever he wanted, the Dlames just have the right to match, Lindholm passed on that to elect arbitration. And as I stated above he could have accepted a 2 year arbitration settlement and gone to UFA in 2020.

Also RFA and UFA years are things because fans keep parroting the terms. This day in age, a RFA with arbitration and offersheet rights, aren't much different than UFAs in the dollars they earn
 

Anglesmith

Setting up the play?
Sep 17, 2012
46,441
14,715
Victoria
@Anglesmith Lindholm could negotiate with whomever he wanted, the Dlames just have the right to match, Lindholm passed on that to elect arbitration. And as I stated above he could have accepted a 2 year arbitration settlement and gone to UFA in 2020.

Also RFA and UFA years are things because fans keep parroting the terms. This day in age, a RFA with arbitration and offersheet rights, aren't much different than UFAs in the dollars they earn

The existence of offer sheets does not equate to a lack of restriction. In the case of an offer sheet, the offering team must pay assets to acquire the player, which in itself sets that situation apart from being a UFA, without going into all of the other complications which lead to offer sheets being practically non-existent in the NHL.

And as I said, arbitration is not capable of getting you a deal comparable to a UFA deal, because UFA deals are not able to be used as comparables.

Whether RFA or UFA, term is appealing to players as it removes the risk of not getting paid if they get hurt. It also increases the dollars they earn in the short term due to "buying UFA years."

No matter how you slice it, RFAs are at an unfavourable bargaining position compared to UFAs. That difference is reflected in case studies like Lindholm/Henrique, but also in the fact that the NHL arbitration rules specifically forbid them to be compared in an official sense. There isn't really any valid argument to the contrary.

If you see a GM paying an RFA UFA value (and there are examples like Draisaitl), that GM is an idiot.
 
  • Like
Reactions: crackdown44

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->