Toggle sidebar

Leafs and Sabres Almost Swapped Picks at 2012 Draft

  • Xenforo Cloud will be upgrading us to version 2.3.5 on March 3rd at 12 AM GMT. This version has increased stability and fixes several bugs. We expect downtime for the duration of the update. The admin team will continue to work on existing issues, templates and upgrade all necessary available addons to minimize impact of this new version. Click Here for Updates
The fact that we not only got Rielly, but Finn in the second round makes me glad we didn't do the trade ... I really like Finn's game, he could be a gem in the second

Would rather trade MacA for a first in this year's draft .. Tons of talent it seems
 
GordieHoweHatTrick said:
Forget Malcolm Subban. Kid still has a long ways to go. It's not certain he'll be a starter in the league
Click to expand...

Malcolm Subban is freaking overrated. Long long way to go before he even becomes NHL capable, let alone starter material.

Not every goalie pick in the first round = Carey Price.
 
I wouldn't do it. Even still, Grigs was ranked high so maybe they take him at 5. Then who do we get? Or Forsberg? Then Caps take Grigs at 11. Then we'd lose big time.

Though at 21, we'd likely take Subban IMO. Who knows though
 
But seriously now...when is Behind The Draft 2012 going to be released? Loved watching the last one.
 
Drew311 said:
Is it just me, or wouldn't the 5th overall pick have been enough to get #12 and #21? Throwing in #35 seems like an overpayment from the Leafs.
Click to expand...

No I'm right with ya on that one, when I was watching I thought pretty much the same thing, I was like that seems like a bit much for #12 and #21, adding #35 seems like overkill.
 
gregor said:
Interesting. I hadn't thought of it that way.

I'm pretty sure what he meant was that for Grigs to slip to him it would take 5 dmen from a certain point to go ahead of him. Speaking for myself, I know I was counting dmen at the draft before Buffalo picked because it meant one of Grigs, Forsberg, or edit:Faksa would then be guaranteed to fall to us.
Click to expand...

This is how I took it.
But pretty sure he said in order for us to get one of our guys.
Obviously if 5 D were picked you guys are very likely to get at least one of Grigorenko or Girgensons
 
I would think Burke would have taken Tom Wilson or Cody Ceci at 12 and Gaunce or Finn at 21 had Rielly not been available and the Leafs traded down.

I would have taken Grigorenko at 12 and Subban at 21.
 
BleedsToronto said:
I can't believe Grigorenko went so late
Click to expand...

It's the whole lazy Russian narrative that got him. If he was Canadian or born in the US like Galchenyuk, he'd have been top 5. I really wish we had traded into the top 10 for a 2nd pick and taken him, although, I do know it's easier said than done.
 
Kessly Snipes said:
Yes, so thats is them saying that our player was Rielly and we wanted to get him at #5.
Click to expand...

I don't think Burke thought the other teams had him ranked at 1.
Burke said he would have taken him at 1.

Do I believe that? IDK.. But Burke is ballsy enough to do it.
 
Wonder if Rielly would have been there at 12? If so we probably would have drafted Rielly and Finn with those two picks.
 
gregor said:
Interesting. I hadn't thought of it that way.

I'm pretty sure what he meant was that for Grigs to slip to him it would take 5 dmen from a certain point to go ahead of him. Speaking for myself, I know I was counting dmen at the draft before Buffalo picked because it meant one of Grigs, Forsberg, or edit:Faksa would then be guaranteed to fall to us.
Click to expand...

I watched it again, and you're probably right. I just wasn't listening closely enough the first time through.
 
Ruki said:
5 and 35 for 12 and 21? No thanks. Very happy Rielly was still on the board when we picked (although, at the time, I was pulling for Forsberg)
Click to expand...

I heard today the Leafs and Canucks almost had a deal at the draft until Lou nixed it.
 
i think Burke wanted to move to garuntee he got Finn. They kept saying how he had Finn ranked around 10 if im not mistaken. So, the question is more around is the player we got at 12 gonna make up for the player at 5
 
That's unbelievable; we're incredibly fortunate that didn't happen. The Leafs end up with an exceptional player at 5; then an incredible steal at 35.

It also adds validity to how much they wanted Rielly; when willing to move down if he is off the board. They would have made the trade; even if one of the top 4 were there instead.
 
Drew311 said:
Is it just me, or wouldn't the 5th overall pick have been enough to get #12 and #21? Throwing in #35 seems like an overpayment from the Leafs.
Click to expand...

Yeah that's what I was thinking. It took us 3 picks to go from 7 to 5 in 2008... :laugh:
 
BayStBullies said:
That's unbelievable; we're incredibly fortunate that didn't happen. The Leafs end up with an exceptional player at 5; then an incredible steal at 35.

It also adds validity to how much they wanted Rielly; when willing to move down if he is off the board. They would have made the trade; even if one of the top 4 were there instead.
Click to expand...

I'm surprised the 5th wouldn't have gone for the 12th, 21st and a 4th or something and that we had to throw in the 35th too. Dumb Leafs.
 
BertCorbeau said:
The fact that we not only got Rielly, but Finn in the second round makes me glad we didn't do the trade ... I really like Finn's game, he could be a gem in the second

Would rather trade MacA for a first in this year's draft .. Tons of talent it seems
Click to expand...

Yeah I'd be all over that too. But we should have dumped him last spring.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom