2012 NHL Entry Draft

[lamajama]

I can't presume to speak for all of us who were less than thrilled with Rielly, but let me just sum up:

1.  I like the kid, I like the scouting report, and I am expect to be a big fan of his when he makes it to the club.
2.  P-o'd about the selection because we needed skilled forwards way more than another guy who is too similar in skills to Gardiner.  I would have rolled the dice on Grigorenko, but would have been happy with Forsberg.  Couldn't care less that they fell a little -- WE need that kind of player.
3.  Burke just needlessly complicates things every time he shoots his mouth off with his blustering bravado.  Seriously, if we had traded up somehow with EDM and then had gone ahead and picked Rielly, people justifiably would have wanted Burke's head.  If the consensus of our scouts was that Rielly is going to be better than either Yak or Gal, then we need new scouts.  Those comments just expose the club to needless ridicule.  But no, Burke simply cannot STFU....
4.  So while we are waiting for this kind to become the next Kris Letang -- and no joke, that would be great -- we had better hope that Colborne's wrist was what was holding him back.  And we'd better hope Schenn finally steps up (if he's not traded) or else we need to get a defensemen besides Gunnarsson who can, you know, actually play defense.

x 1.

IMO it's extremely hard to get an elite offensive player for your club without drafting them - or else as in Kessel's case, you give up the farm to acquire him and go sideways or even backwards to an extent.

I'm not saying Rielly will not be OK but as usual it's Blowhard's comments that are most annoying. As some have said here STFU. Your credibility is sorely lacking and declining every day. 

 

[Tigger]

Just assuming Burke is stretching the truth a bit, I don't see the harm. Other than in guys like you (not meant as an insult) who analyze every word he says, it's a meaningless statement.

Perhaps it was simply meant to make Rielly feel good. In which case, this is nice thing to do for a teenager.

Very true... I hadn't considered that.

I asked you earlier, who's tire is he pumping here...

 

[maplesyrup]

2.  P-o'd about the selection because we needed skilled forwards way more than another guy who is too similar in skills to Gardiner.  I would have rolled the dice on Grigorenko, but would have been happy with Forsberg.  Couldn't care less that they fell a little -- WE need that kind of player.

This is where I struggle with the negativity. Yes. We need this kind of player but just when exactly will Forsberg be ready to step in and be a top six NHL player. One year? Two years? If the player we need NOW isn't available in the draft then you have to try to get him somewhere else and just draft the BPA I think. - It's a long summer... Let's see what happens.

Sure, and of course I wish Burke every success in trading for what we need.  But he could have (potentially) gotten what we need for nothing.  We didn't need another puck mover, and I (and many others) would dispute that Rielly was the BPA when Grigorenko and Forsberg were still on the board.  He would have to be the BPA of those 3 by a country mile to justify what Burke did, and his absurd statement about have Rielly ranked #1 is just an ex post facto justification.

Again though, why don't we NEED another puck mover? We're not married to these players. They're moveable.

So we'll trade for the forwards we could've picked ourselves? What's the point of having it be out of our control?

Down the line if Rielly is great but not what we need and Grigorenko or Forsberg are great and exactly what those teams need then what are we to do?

Ask real nice? Drastically overpay?

Teams don't just trade because you want to. Look at what Columbus are asking for Nash. We'll be at the mercy of other teams (who we're competing against) to make the deal we need to be successful. Not a situation that's conducive to getting the maximum benefit for the team.

It works both ways... Other teams should want the best talent they can get too. High end D is never, ever any the less at a premium.   

 

[maplesyrup]

I asked you earlier, who's tire is he pumping here...

Nobody's but I do think Morrison knows a thing or two.

 

[bustaheims]

I would have thought it was July 1 but Bob McKenzie said Schultz becomes
a UFA today (Sat) at "3 PM" (not 100% sure of time).

I would suspect he signs rather quickly.

Let's hop we get another offensive D man.  8)

He's a UFA in that he's free to negotiate with anyone, but, he still can't sign until July 1st.

 

[Tigger]

2.  P-o'd about the selection because we needed skilled forwards way more than another guy who is too similar in skills to Gardiner.  I would have rolled the dice on Grigorenko, but would have been happy with Forsberg.  Couldn't care less that they fell a little -- WE need that kind of player.

This is where I struggle with the negativity. Yes. We need this kind of player but just when exactly will Forsberg be ready to step in and be a top six NHL player. One year? Two years? If the player we need NOW isn't available in the draft then you have to try to get him somewhere else and just draft the BPA I think. - It's a long summer... Let's see what happens.

Sure, and of course I wish Burke every success in trading for what we need.  But he could have (potentially) gotten what we need for nothing.  We didn't need another puck mover, and I (and many others) would dispute that Rielly was the BPA when Grigorenko and Forsberg were still on the board.  He would have to be the BPA of those 3 by a country mile to justify what Burke did, and his absurd statement about have Rielly ranked #1 is just an ex post facto justification.

Again though, why don't we NEED another puck mover? We're not married to these players. They're moveable.

So we'll trade for the forwards we could've picked ourselves? What's the point of having it be out of our control?

Down the line if Rielly is great but not what we need and Grigorenko or Forsberg are great and exactly what those teams need then what are we to do?

Ask real nice? Drastically overpay?

Teams don't just trade because you want to. Look at what Columbus are asking for Nash. We'll be at the mercy of other teams (who we're competing against) to make the deal we need to be successful. Not a situation that's conducive to getting the maximum benefit for the team.

I guess that depends on how stuck you are on those two players, no one knows how they'll turn out, just like Rielly. I mean, hasn't the recent conversation been about trading, or not trading, Gardiner? Seems like a legit point that an asset is an asset to me, that and there was somewhat of a premium placed on defensemen in the early part of this draft.

I really don't think anyone can say for sure how it will turn out.

 

[Redleaf]

I would have thought it was July 1 but Bob McKenzie said Schultz becomes
a UFA today (Sat) at "3 PM" (not 100% sure of time).

I would suspect he signs rather quickly.

Let's hop we get another offensive D man.  8)

He's a UFA in that he's free to negotiate with anyone, but, he still can't sign until July 1st.

If he's already selected his team, we may get word of it today though.

 

[Tigger]

I asked you earlier, who's tire is he pumping here...

Nobody's but I do think Morrison knows a thing or two.

Well, I was talking about Morgan but maybe I could have been clearer.

 

[bustaheims]

If he's already selected his team, we may get word of it today though.

Unless his rights are traded, that's highly unlikely. It would raise a tampering red flag.

 

[Chev-boyar-sky]

2.  P-o'd about the selection because we needed skilled forwards way more than another guy who is too similar in skills to Gardiner.  I would have rolled the dice on Grigorenko, but would have been happy with Forsberg.  Couldn't care less that they fell a little -- WE need that kind of player.

This is where I struggle with the negativity. Yes. We need this kind of player but just when exactly will Forsberg be ready to step in and be a top six NHL player. One year? Two years? If the player we need NOW isn't available in the draft then you have to try to get him somewhere else and just draft the BPA I think. - It's a long summer... Let's see what happens.

Sure, and of course I wish Burke every success in trading for what we need.  But he could have (potentially) gotten what we need for nothing.  We didn't need another puck mover, and I (and many others) would dispute that Rielly was the BPA when Grigorenko and Forsberg were still on the board.  He would have to be the BPA of those 3 by a country mile to justify what Burke did, and his absurd statement about have Rielly ranked #1 is just an ex post facto justification.

Again though, why don't we NEED another puck mover? We're not married to these players. They're moveable.

So we'll trade for the forwards we could've picked ourselves? What's the point of having it be out of our control?

Down the line if Rielly is great but not what we need and Grigorenko or Forsberg are great and exactly what those teams need then what are we to do?

Ask real nice? Drastically overpay?

Teams don't just trade because you want to. Look at what Columbus are asking for Nash. We'll be at the mercy of other teams (who we're competing against) to make the deal we need to be successful. Not a situation that's conducive to getting the maximum benefit for the team.

It works both ways... Other teams should want the best talent they can get too. High end D is never, ever any the less at a premium. 

When was the last time a young D-man was dealt for 2 1st's and a 2nd?

Talented forwards are generally moved for a fair bit more.

 

[Tigger]

I'm not saying Rielly will not be OK but as usual it's Blowhard's comments that are most annoying. As some have said here STFU. Your credibility is sorely lacking and declining every day.

Yes, because telling someone you don't know but call Blowhard to STFU oozes credibility.

 

[bustaheims]

With their last pick in this year's draft, the Leafs take Viktor Loov.

 

[maplesyrup]

2.  P-o'd about the selection because we needed skilled forwards way more than another guy who is too similar in skills to Gardiner.  I would have rolled the dice on Grigorenko, but would have been happy with Forsberg.  Couldn't care less that they fell a little -- WE need that kind of player.

This is where I struggle with the negativity. Yes. We need this kind of player but just when exactly will Forsberg be ready to step in and be a top six NHL player. One year? Two years? If the player we need NOW isn't available in the draft then you have to try to get him somewhere else and just draft the BPA I think. - It's a long summer... Let's see what happens.

Sure, and of course I wish Burke every success in trading for what we need.  But he could have (potentially) gotten what we need for nothing.  We didn't need another puck mover, and I (and many others) would dispute that Rielly was the BPA when Grigorenko and Forsberg were still on the board.  He would have to be the BPA of those 3 by a country mile to justify what Burke did, and his absurd statement about have Rielly ranked #1 is just an ex post facto justification.

Again though, why don't we NEED another puck mover? We're not married to these players. They're moveable.

So we'll trade for the forwards we could've picked ourselves? What's the point of having it be out of our control?

Down the line if Rielly is great but not what we need and Grigorenko or Forsberg are great and exactly what those teams need then what are we to do?

Ask real nice? Drastically overpay?

Teams don't just trade because you want to. Look at what Columbus are asking for Nash. We'll be at the mercy of other teams (who we're competing against) to make the deal we need to be successful. Not a situation that's conducive to getting the maximum benefit for the team.

It works both ways... Other teams should want the best talent they can get too. High end D is never, ever any the less at a premium. 

When was the last time a young D-man was dealt for 2 1st's and a 2nd?

Talented forwards are generally moved for a fair bit more.

Young high end D-men get dealt for equivalent forwards all the time. The Goligoski/Neal trade is the last one I remember off hand. 

 

[Tigger]

If he's already selected his team, we may get word of it today though.

Unless his rights are traded, that's highly unlikely. It would raise a tampering red flag.

For some reason I thought he was free to negotiate after the 24th and could sign on July 1.

But yeah, barring a trade of rights that's exactly what it would be.

 

[Kin]

It works both ways... Other teams should want the best talent they can get too. High end D is never, ever any the less at a premium. 

That's just not true. Good offensive defensemen are frequently available for reasonable costs. A pretty good one got dealt yesterday for a second round pick. #1 centres are almost never available and always cost a ton.

 

[maplesyrup]

It works both ways... Other teams should want the best talent they can get too. High end D is never, ever any the less at a premium. 

That's just not true. Good offensive defensemen are frequently available for reasonable costs. A pretty good one got dealt yesterday for a second round pick. #1 centres are almost never available and always cost a ton.

You can't be talking about an aging, injury-riddled Visnovsky with just one year left on his deal, can you?

 

[Kin]

You can't be talking about an aging, injury-riddled Visnovsky with just one year left on his deal, can you?

...who scored 68 points a season ago? I sure can.

 

[maplesyrup]

#leafs head scout Dave Morrison says they've already talked to Ryan Rupert's twin brother Matt about attending development camp. #sndraft

 

[Etiam Vultus]

#leafs head scout Dave Morrison says they've already talked to Ryan Rupert's twin brother Matt about attending development camp. #sndraft

What are the rules for signing an undrafted player?

 

[Bender]

I find it funny that the main reason some of you are pissed is because you were married to the idea of drafting one of the forwards. I will laugh if Grig ends up being this years Nikita Filatov.