Confirmed with Link: Stars Re-sign: Esa Lindell [2 Years, $2.200M AAV]; Mark McNeill [1 Year, Two-way]

[LT]

Click to read more...

 

[LT]

Solid bridge deal, don't feel strongly about it one way or another.

 

[LT]

Mark McNeill also signs a one year, two-way deal. Rest of the terms weren't released.

Okay.

 

[Morry83]

Little steep for Lindell in my opinion, but not bad.

 

[Troy McClure]

It's not exactly a long-term commitment to Lindell, so there is still a "prove it" element at work here.

 

[Mr Misty]

I'm surprised that Lindell gets so much pushback. The numbers aren't good, the usage was too high, just abut all the criticism of him and his game I've read is totally based in fact. I just don't see how the expectations for him were based on the reality of last year.

Over 2m is a little more than I'd prefer but otherwise I'm pretty excited to see what the new coaches can make out of Lindell.

 

[93Crazed101]

I'm surprised that Lindell gets so much pushback. The numbers aren't good, the usage was too high, just abut all the criticism of him and his game I've read is totally based in fact. I just don't see how the expectations for him were based on the reality of last year.

Over 2m is a little more than I'd prefer but otherwise I'm pretty excited to see what the new coaches can make out of Lindell.

It's short term. Not like we have any cap trouble until 2 years from now.

 

[BigG44]

The only thing I'm surprised about is it being over $2. Nill traditionally negotiates bridge deals down to the nub. That's not the case here. He's almost always surprisingly lower than you would expect when a player has no leverage.

To me, that tells me they were happier than the average fan last season, and they expect him to play in a minimum Top 4 role if not paired with Klingberg again. As far as the actual number, based on usage it's not that bad, and it's within the right range. Like I said, I guess it's just I've grown more accustomed to him being a bulldog and getting numbers below what you would expect on a bridge.

 

[BigG44]

It's short term. Not like we have any cap trouble until 2 years from now.

A bridge contract doesn't help with cap issues in 2 years, it adds to them. Now, I think a bridge deal was the right contract to give Lindell so my only point is that it doesn't make sense to list this among the pros when talking about his contract.

The contract has been unconfirmed as far as I can tell, but 9 times out of 10 it's back-loaded. You're probably talking something like 1.5 and 2.9 or 1.7 and 2.7 ... something along those lines. That means as an arbitration eligible 25 year old with likely 3 years of experience playing 20+ minutes, he'll have a QO around $2.5+. Most quality players tend to see raises via arbitration over the QO.

 

[93Crazed101]

A bridge contract doesn't help with cap issues in 2 years, it adds to them. Now, I think a bridge deal was the right contract to give Lindell so my only point is that it doesn't make sense to list this among the pros when talking about his contract.

The contract has been unconfirmed as far as I can tell, but 9 times out of 10 it's back-loaded. You're probably talking something like 1.5 and 2.9 or 1.7 and 2.7 ... something along those lines. That means as an arbitration eligible 25 year old with likely 3 years of experience playing 20+ minutes, he'll have a QO around $2.5+. Most quality players tend to see raises via arbitration over the QO.

I get that, but the overpayment now isn't a problem. I agree it will be tricky two years from now, but I don't think you can give him a Klingberg like deal.

 

[BigG44]

I get that, but the overpayment now isn't a problem. I agree it will be tricky two years from now, but I don't think you can give him a Klingberg like deal.

Again ... I don't think it's a major over-payment, but yes, the more you pay a player now, the harder you make your life in a potential arbitration setting. So again, in reality there's no major issue with the deal, but paying a little more right now should never be characterized as no big deal. The reason teams fight against higher bridge deals is because they set such a precedence, and it directly impacts arbitration.

 

[93Crazed101]

Again ... I don't think it's a major over-payment, but yes, the more you pay a player now, the harder you make your life in a potential arbitration setting. So again, in reality there's no major issue with the deal, but paying a little more right now should never be characterized as no big deal. The reason teams fight against higher bridge deals is because they set such a precedence, and it directly impacts arbitration.

I honestly thought he'd want more than 2.2 based on the amount of minutes played, so it's harder for me to see it as a bad deal. But, I do see your point on arbitration.