Nick Foligno is not a leaf

[Zanks]

Now if we could turn Ritchie into Evander Kane (retained). Hooooo man... Kase + Kane for Foligno cap...

 

[666]

It's all fun and games, but it cost us a 1st round pick.

Dubas trades away our 1st every year and gets nowhere. Higher management should prevent him from doing it. All it does is close our window sooner, and he doesn't care because if he gets fired he's not dealing with the repercussions of 5+ years without a 1st round pick.

The Pens have had one first rounder in the last 9 years that has played for them and it was Kap. I don't know who they got for their first rounders but they did get 2 cups in there.

 

[Divine]

Yeah now your just really stretching things. Again terrible logic. So you were okay with having a useless Marleau at what 6 million? I'm glad Dubas is the GM then. Thats a Lou mistake that Dubas had to fix, but sure lets blame Dubas there too.
Yeah Mearleau was the result of Lou. You are actually blaming Dubas for that? Hilarious.

Please the Muzzin trade is fantastic. You somehow think thats a bad deal but you are wrong there too.

So you're saying we couldn't make the playoffs without those trades?

I'd rather 3 first round exits and 3 top 20 prospects than 3 first round exits and 0 1st round prospects.

Obviously you think we couldn't make the playoffs without trading our 1st round picks, which would be on Dubas.

Lou had no problem making the playoffs without trading our 1st round picks.

 

[stickty111]

So you're saying we couldn't make the playoffs without those trades?

I'd rather 3 first round exits and 3 top 20 prospects than 3 first round exits and 0 1st round prospects.

What does that have to do with anything? You completely changed the argument and I think I know why, but anyways.
Dubas literally did those trades to improve the team, and only one of those trades is bad and thats the Foligno. You are somehow pulling other things and twisting them to blame Dubas for them.

Yes and I would rather have an extra first round pick instead of the previous GM signing a near 40 year old for over 6 million, which costed us that first.

 

[Divine]

What does that have to do with anything? You completely changed the argument and I think I know why, but anyways.
Dubas literally did those trades to improve the team, and only one of those trades is bad and thats the Foligno. You are somehow pulling other things and twisting them to blame Dubas for them.

I am saying his trades have yielded 0 results. That is indisputable. When will you be able to hold our GM accountable for delivering 0 results yet diminishing our farm system/prospects?

He traded 3 consecutive first round picks and it resulted in 3 consecutive 1st round exists. You support the cost of the 1st round exits, I do not.

He also traded Kadri for a Barrie rental which was as bad as the Foligno trade, if not worse.

If we went on 3 consecutive cup runs, I would support them, but they did not. This is a results based league.

 

[stickty111]

I am saying his trades have yielded 0 results. That is indisputable. When will you be able to hold our GM accountable for delivering 0 results yet diminishing our farm system/prospects?

He traded 3 consecutive first round picks and it resulted in 3 consecutive 1st round exists. You support the cost of the 1st round exits, I do not.

If we went on 3 consecutive cup runs, I would support them, but they did not. This is a results based league.

Again you changed up the argument.
First you assigned blame to Dubas for things not even his fault. Imagine blaming him for Lou's signing. When will you hold the other GM accountable for putting Dubas in a tough situation?
If your main point is he hasn't gotten results yet with the team, then yes I completely agree. The moves were good and still are except for one, but results matter yes.
Prospect pool diminished? Yeah agree to disagree there, but I'm not in the mood to explain that again.
I'm done here.

 

[acrobaticgoalie]

I am saying his trades have yielded 0 results. That is indisputable. When will you be able to hold our GM accountable for delivering 0 results yet diminishing our farm system/prospects?

He traded 3 consecutive first round picks and it resulted in 3 consecutive 1st round exists. You support the cost of the 1st round exits, I do not.

He also traded Kadri for a Barrie rental which was as bad as the Foligno trade, if not worse.

If we went on 3 consecutive cup runs, I would support them, but they did not. This is a results based league.

Our farm system isn't diminished at all lol. We have a very good prospect pool even without drafting high.

 

[Divine]

Again you changed up the argument.
First you assigned blame to Dubas for things not even his fault. Imagine blaming him for Lou's signing. When will you hold the other GM accountable for putting Dubas in a tough situation?
If your main point is he hasn't gotten results yet with the team, then yes I completely agree. The moves were good and still are except for one, but results matter yes.
Prospect pool diminished? Yeah agree to disagree there, but I'm not in the mood to explain that again.

I did not change my argument. I said he had traded 3 1st round picks and yielded 0 results.

Diminished prospect pool? Definitely. You can't argue that. You can argue that he did the best he possibly could with the picks available to him, and it would still be diminished because it could have been better, hence, diminished.

 

[Divine]

Our farm system isn't diminished at all lol. We have a very good prospect pool even without drafting high.

It is literally impossible to trade away draft picks and not have your prospect pool diminished unless they were traded for other draft picks or prospects.

Diminished just means to make smaller/less. I don't know what you think it means.

 

[Seras]

He was a desired rental at the time.

It's crazy how trades can be judged better or worse long after they take place, it's almost like we got to see how it worked out...

 

[GrizzGreen]

Hyman will prove the same

wrong

 

[Divine]

He was a desired rental at the time.

It's crazy how trades can be judged better or worse long after they take place, it's almost like we got to see how it worked out...

That's the risk you take with a trade. Management judges deals after the results present themselves.

If you could only judge a trade or signing the day of, and not the subsequent results, no one would ever be fired.

If you constantly make trades that seem good at the time, but have negative results on your team over time, should you be eligible to be fired for taking that risk?

Obviously the person who makes the trade is taking the risk it will work out, if it doesn't, they should suffer the consequences.

 

[acrobaticgoalie]

It is literally impossible to trade away draft picks and not have your prospect pool diminished unless they were traded for other draft picks or prospects.

Diminished just means to make smaller/less. I don't know what you think it means.

Every year, pretty much every Cup contending team makes trades at the deadline to acquire depth or impact players to bolster their team going into the playoffs. It isn't exclusive to us.

We haven't really had less picks. Sure we only had 3 picks last year but we made 12 the year before and have made 30 selections over Dubas' 4 drafts. Thats an average of over 7 picks per draft. Even without picking in the 1st round, we have scouted and selected extremely well. Robertson, Niemela and Knies likely all go in the 1st round in a re-draft. Sandin likely becomes a top 15-20 pick in a re-draft. Abramov, Abruzzese, Ovchinnikov, Miettinen, Tverberg, Holmberg and maybe even Hirvonen and Kral go higher. Tverberg is playing like a 1st rounder and we got him in the 7th. Many others have been doing well like Kokkonen, Rindell, Villeneuve and Koster as well. We have also made some nice FA prospect signings like Steeves, Gogolev, Kallgren and Douglas recently.

If our pool was diminished, we would have a very bare pool with nothing looking like its coming down the pipeline like what we have left over from the Hunter or Burke drafts. By comparison, look at teams like the Islanders who have made 24 selections in the last 4 drafts and have no stand out prospects other than Raty. Or the Penguins who have made 19 selections in the past 4 drafts and their best prospects are Poulin and maybe Hallander who was ranked as what, our 12th best prospect when we had him? That is what diminished pools look like

 

[Divine]

Every year, pretty much every Cup contending team makes trades at the deadline to acquire depth or impact players to bolster their team going into the playoffs. It isn't exclusive to us.

We haven't really had less picks. Sure we only had 3 picks last year but we made 12 the year before and have made 30 selections over Dubas' 4 drafts. Thats an average of over 7 picks per draft. Even without picking in the 1st round, we have scouted and selected extremely well. Robertson, Niemela and Knies likely all go in the 1st round in a re-draft. Sandin likely becomes a top 15-20 pick in a re-draft. Abramov, Abruzzese, Ovchinnikov, Miettinen, Tverberg, Holmberg and maybe even Hirvonen and Kral go higher. Tverberg is playing like a 1st rounder and we got him in the 7th. Many others have been doing well like Kokkonen, Rindell, Villeneuve and Koster as well. We have also made some nice FA prospect signings like Steeves, Gogolev, Kallgren and Douglas recently.

If our pool was diminished, we would have a very bare pool with nothing looking like its coming down the pipeline like what we have left over from the Hunter or Burke drafts. By comparison, look at teams like the Islanders who have made 24 selections in the last 4 drafts and have no stand out prospects other than Raty. Or the Penguins who have made 19 selections in the past 4 drafts and their best prospects are Poulin and maybe Hallander who was ranked as what, our 12th best prospect when we had him? That is what diminished pools look like

The difference is the teams you listed had playoff success.

The Leafs did not. You have to earn the right to blow draft picks to 'make a run'. A team that can't get past the first round shouldn't be making a run in the first place.

How are we a cup contending team that can't win the first round? There's 16 of those every year.

 

[Clark4Ever]

He was a desired rental at the time.

It's crazy how trades can be judged better or worse long after they take place, it's almost like we got to see how it worked out...

I was jacked when we acquired him as well but even then, most of us felt that the price was too steep.

If Foligno was able to stay healthy, contribute and re-signed with us as a productive player, the trade would have been palatable.

 

[acrobaticgoalie]

The difference is the teams you listed had playoff success.

The Leafs did not. You have to earn the right to blow draft picks to 'make a run'. A team that can't get past the first round shouldn't be making a run in the first place.

How are we a cup contending team that can't win the first round? There's 16 of those every year.

This conversation is about whether or not we have a diminished pool to which I showed that its not and I gave you 2 examples of playoff teams who have diminished pools. We are a contender based on the fact that we are one of the top regular season teams the last 5 years and are expected to go deep. Just because we've choked it away a few times doesn't change that we are considered a contending team and are expected to go deep.

So you think that if the Leafs are top 5 in the standings going into the playoffs, that we shouldn't trade draft picks to bolster our lineup because they haven't won a round even though we have a good pool?

I've never heard someone say that you shouldn't add to your lineup going into the playoffs until you've won a round. Every playoff team adds depth.

 

[LEAFANFORLIFE23]

The trade didn't bother me at time time, doesn't bother me now.

The draft is a crapshoot at the best of times but last years draft couldn't even be scouted.

You are never going to see me complain about trading a draft pick in a draft that couldn't even be scouted

 

[AllDay28]

Now do Taylor Hall

 

[saffronleaf]

You have to respect him for shutting down the Leafs' offense in two consecutive postseasons.

 

[AcerComputer]

I don't recall many wanting to sign him. He looked done in his short run with us. Buyers remorse set in pretty quickly.

 

[The Professional]

Nick Foligno is not a leaf

Of course not, he is a person. Do you think Nick Foligno grew from a tree or something? What a strange thread.

 

[axlrose87]

I don't recall many wanting to sign him. He looked done in his short run with us. Buyers remorse set in pretty quickly.

I think most leaf fans wanted him resigned.
Not at the amount Boston paid him (3.8 million), but Leafs fans definitely wanted him back.
It now appears that he should be reading stories to his grandchildren from a rocking chair. Not still playing in the nhl lol.

 

[ACC1224]

I think most leaf fans wanted him resigned.
Not at the amount Boston paid him (3.8 million), but Leafs fans definitely wanted him back.
It now appears that he should be reading stories to his grandchildren from a rocking chair. Not still playing in the nhl lol.

Yep fans did and so did Dubas. Lucky escape

 

[Doublerum1975]

I think most leaf fans wanted him resigned.
Not at the amount Boston paid him (3.8 million), but Leafs fans definitely wanted him back.
It now appears that he should be reading stories to his grandchildren from a rocking chair. Not still playing in the nhl lol.

Not this fan I wanted his brother

 

[Rogue Leader]

Would have been better had they dodged the first bullet and he was never a Leaf in the first place.

Well said my friend! And he is wrong about Hyman. Too much cap for us, but worth every penny for the Oil!