Toggle sidebar

Confirmed Trade: [TOR/PHI] Scott Laughton (50% retained), 4th round pick, 6th round pick for Nikita Grebenkin, cond. 2027 1st round pick

  • Xenforo Cloud has upgraded us to version 2.3.6. Please report any issues you experience.
  • We are currently aware of "log in/security error" issues that are affecting some users. We apologize and ask for your patience as we try to get these issues fixed.
TMLegend said:
Trading the 2026 first for Laughton is terrible.
Click to expand...
It's going to be the 32nd overall pick, who cares....:sarcasm:

I'm fine with this deal. Yes, Philly wins. But we're also better than we were for this year + next. 50% retention is big as well. He's not a pure rental, for a team that's in win now mode I'm ok with it.

Big price to pay but he'll be impactful and fills a big hole for us.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ClarkSittler
I wouldn't trust Treliving to run a pop-up, donation-for-charity lemonade stand. I don't need to see the final details to know he gave too much.
 
Retention and the extra year is nice. It wasn't for any of the Leafs top prospects like the rumored ask so that's a positive. Would have preferred to not use the 1st but that's bidding wars for help at C
 
These are the trades you have to make when you have a contending team ready to win now. A conditional first isn’t helping in the next 3 years. Hefty price but worth it
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sundinisagod
Duthie just said on TSN that it's a 2027 1st not a 2026 which is true is surprising I figured it would be a 2026 1st.

TSN also has it listed as conditional I wonder what the condition is, I bwt it's top 10 protected
 
  • Like
Reactions: uncleben
1st for Laughton at 50% is at or below market value this deadline it seems.

Grebenkin if he hits completely is a 3rd/4th line energy type.

4th and 6th round picks are meh. Though Grebenkin was drafted with a 5rh.
 
I would've preferred a more offensive-minded 3rd line C considering we've struggled with scoring in recent playoffs and our top 6 has enough defensive minded players thst we don't need to create a 3rd line to be used as a pure match-up line.

Having said that, I think the price is a bit high, but it's basically a 1st for Laughton with 50% retention. I think in a non-sellers market his value is closer to a 2nd + sweetener so not terrible. Given other trades that have occurred, I think it's fair for a buyer (definitely not a win at this point).

I thought there was conditions on the 1st so we'll see if that's any importance or not.
 
  • Like
Reactions: The Management
1741370897742.png


Brad gets his guy. Should have been an impact defenseman.
Laughton used to be pretty good, always seems to get an inordinate number of breakaways.
 
Not a Leafs fan, but if I was - I wouldn't like how much they paid.

That said - If they win in the playoffs it won't matter. Too early to judge.
 
Bounces R Way said:
View attachment 989032

Brad gets his guy. Should have been an impact defenseman.
Laughton used to be pretty good, always seems to get an inordinate number of breakaways.
Click to expand...

I love these posts. Which impact dman? be specific and what both teams agree on for the price.

Leafs have lost the last 3 years because they can't score goals in the playoffs. That is factual. It has never been an issue of keeping the puck out even with suspect goaltending
 
At least they have another year and the guy is only 30. Dubas would trade all our picks for UFAs on an annual basis

Happy that our top 3 prospects are still in the organization
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Ad

Ad

Top Bottom