This isn't even semantics. You just flat out made incorrect statements - many of which you still refuse to acknowledge and address. Being correct and accurate isn't "nonsense". It should be the bare minimum, and it's pretty easy to do.
Yes, they re-signed him for an extremely low 800k - well below his level of play, well below what he could have gotten on the open market, and a price that is fully buriable if necessary.
But what you actually said was they traded draft picks for "39 year old Giordano". That is false. 38-year old Giordano was traded for, at 50% retention, and 38 year old Gordano played for us.
We also received Blackwell in the trade - a piece that, despite being reminded multiple times, you are repeatedly leaving out when discussing it.
Once again, we did not trade two 2nds and a 3rd for Giordano. We traded two 2nds and a 3rd for Giordano with 50% retention and Blackwell. And no, that is not the equivalent of trading our 3 best prospects. That is a wildly twisted way of discussing the trade. Those prospects are currently worth significantly more than their original draft position.
This would be like looking at failed past draft choices from the 2nd and 3rd round and claiming that we didn't trade anything at all because those specific past picks didn't hit. That's not how this works. 2nd and 3rd round picks have an established value, and that value is not the best draft picks taken from that round.
Was Detroit trading a Zetterberg every time they traded a 7th round pick? Or how about a Datsyuk every time they traded a 6th?
Did Tampa trade 2 Vasilevskys for Hagel this trade deadline?
If you believe any 2nd or 3rd round pick that Dubas gets is equivalent to these top prospects, then you would have to believe that Dubas is the best drafter in the history of the league. Is that how you feel?
The opportunity cost was not "doubling up on their top prospects", and our prospect pool did not take a "massive hit". The cost was two 2nds and a 3rd for Giordano (50% retained) and Blackwell, which is a decent price, and not that short-term when we are getting 2 additional years out of Giordano at a great cap hit. I'm not sure why you started continuously describing Giordano - a solid defenseman who won a Norris a few years ago, who has maintained extremely well through older ages, and who would have gotten significantly more on the open market - in exclusively negative ways once he was acquired by and re-signed with Toronto.
Do you believe every team that acquires a rental or older player has made a complete failure of a trade? Why do you only talk like this in regards to Toronto - who spent less futures than their rivals at the trade deadline?
You've talked pretty favourably about Florida lately. Have you taken a look at what they did this past trade deadline, and what their prospect pool and draft pick selection looks like in coming years?
