Tank Nation UNITE!!!

[Highlander]

Goal (trade Bernier)

Reimer
tandem thru the year of Bibeau or Gibson

I would make a serious bid on O'Conner from Boston U? 6'5" toronto boy

 

[Kin]

Hey, if they can sucker a team into the sort of trade the Leafs made for Kessel, all the better.

Hey, if they can sucker a team into the sort of trade the Leafs made for Raycroft, all the better.

Hey, if they can sucker a team into the sort of trade the Leafs made for Kurvers, all the better.

I always wonder, how come whenever all of this woe is me stuff is brought up about all the terrible trades the Leafs have made in the past how come nobody also mentions that the best player in Franchise history was essentially stolen from the Nordiques?

 

[rdowdall]

Hey, if they can sucker a team into the sort of trade the Leafs made for Kessel, all the better.

Hey, if they can sucker a team into the sort of trade the Leafs made for Raycroft, all the better.

Hey, if they can sucker a team into the sort of trade the Leafs made for Kurvers, all the better.

I always wonder, how come whenever all of this woe is me stuff is brought up about all the terrible trades the Leafs have made in the past how come nobody also mentions that the best player in Franchise history was essentially stolen from the Nordiques?

Even with the Doug Gilmour trade thrown in there, the Bad to Good ratio is still pretty high.

 

[Kin]

Even with the Doug Gilmour trade thrown in there, the Bad to Good ratio is still pretty high.

Is that based on really evaluating their trade record compared to anyone else's? Or is that just confirmation bias at work?

 

[rdowdall]

Even with the Doug Gilmour trade thrown in there, the Bad to Good ratio is still pretty high.

Is that based on really evaluating their trade record compared to anyone else's? Or is that just confirmation bias at work?

Little from column A, little from column B.  I'll go with lack of cups since 1967 Alex.

 

[Kin]

Little from column A, little from column B.  I'll go with lack of cups since 1967 Alex.

Seems to me that's probably better attributed to their relatively lousy draft record and being owned by a crazy person for a good chunk of that time.

 

[rdowdall]

Little from column A, little from column B.  I'll go with lack of cups since 1967 Alex.

Seems to me that's probably better attributed to their relatively lousy draft record and being owned by a crazy person for a good chunk of that time.

Hey, Harold Ballard was not crazy. He may have been a liar, a pig, an idiot, and crazy, but he was *not* a porn star!

I get what you are saying, and yes, if you went through trade by trade for the Leafs relative to some of the trades that other organizations made they probably aren't that bad off, but man they have made some bad deals over the years, and the Sundin deal was just so long ago.

 

[Kin]

I also think, for whatever it's worth, that the Biggs deal is different and it's not just because Biggs looks like a bust at this point. If Raycroft had been good, if Burke hadn't misjudged how good the Leafs would be, if Kurvers was better...all of those trades I think would be relatively defensible. Not great, no, and the inherent uncertainty in any trade makes them pretty bad but prospects get traded for players all the time. A pretty good offensive defenseman, which is what Kurvers was, for a first round pick? That sort of deal gets made almost every year.

On the flips side, I think that even if Biggs ends up a great prospect I still think the deal looks bad.

 

[TML fan]

What was the Biggs deal?

 

[Kin]

What was the Biggs deal?

Picks #30 and #39 for #22,

 

[Lynx]

Little from column A, little from column B.  I'll go with lack of cups since 1967 Alex.

Seems to me that's probably better attributed to their relatively lousy draft record and being owned by a crazy person for a good chunk of that time.

Hey, Harold Ballard was not crazy. He may have been a liar, a pig, an idiot, and crazy, but he was *not* a porn star!

I get what you are saying, and yes, if you went through trade by trade for the Leafs relative to some of the trades that other organizations made they probably aren't that bad off, but man they have made some bad deals over the years, and the Sundin deal was just so long ago.

Every team can make a list though. Vancouver giving away Cam Neely, Calgary with Brett Hull, Montreal and Patrick Roy, Winnipeg and Teemu Selanne etc etc.

The thing the Leafs need to do is finally, finally learn from the mistakes. Virtually 100% of the trades that would be on their list include trading picks and top prospects for quick fixes. In fact, off the top of my head I can't think of a trade I really regret that was centred around an established player (that wasn't a result of Ballard's antics of course). Some weren't great, but they don't make the list of franchise crippling moves.

 

[TML fan]

What was the Biggs deal?

Picks #30 and #39 for #22,

No good? Doesn't seem that bad to me.

 

[Kin]

No good? Doesn't seem that bad to me.

I think in terms of how likely you are to draft good players at those respective spots it's essentially trading fifteen dollars for ten dollars. Not the worst thing in the world, no, but still not a deal that the math supports.

 

[herman]

Easy solution going forward: do not trade picks or prospects for the next 3-5 years.

 

[TML fan]

No good? Doesn't seem that bad to me.

I think in terms of how likely you are to draft good players at those respective spots it's essentially trading fifteen dollars for ten dollars. Not the worst thing in the world, no, but still not a deal that the math supports.

I see what you're saying. It's basically gambling.

 

[Redleaf]

What was the Biggs deal?

Picks #30 and #39 for #22,

No good? Doesn't seem that bad to me.

Who was still available at #30 and #39?

 

[Kin]

Who was still available at #30 and #39?

A bunch of players better than Tyler Biggs for starters.

 

[TML fan]

The only reason I questioned it is because generally speaking when you make a trade like that it's to get a specific player. In this case I'm assuming that was the reason the Leafs did it, and Biggs was that player.

So, if the Leafs had done it to get a player like, say, Ryan Getzlaf, nobody would really look at it as a bad trade. In the case of Biggs one could look at it as more of a failure of the scouting department to recognize talent (or lack thereof). I guess the counter argument is that statistically you're not likely to get a really good player in that spot, but I still think an argument can be made that if you're really sure about a player at a higher spot, then it's worth the gamble.

In the case of Biggs, seems like a really bad bet.

 

[Al14]

The only reason I questioned it is because generally speaking when you make a trade like that it's to get a specific player. In this case I'm assuming that was the reason the Leafs did it, and Biggs was that player.

So, if the Leafs had done it to get a player like, say, Ryan Getzlaf, nobody would really look at it as a bad trade. In the case of Biggs one could look at it as more of a failure of the scouting department to recognize talent (or lack thereof). I guess the counter argument is that statistically you're not likely to get a really good player in that spot, but I still think an argument can be made that if you're really sure about a player at a higher spot, then it's worth the gamble.

In the case of Biggs, seems like a really bad bet.

Biggs was a great restaurant, not so good as a hockey player! 

 

[Kin]

So, if the Leafs had done it to get a player like, say, Ryan Getzlaf, nobody would really look at it as a bad trade. In the case of Biggs one could look at it as more of a failure of the scouting department to recognize talent (or lack thereof). I guess the counter argument is that statistically you're not likely to get a really good player in that spot, but I still think an argument can be made that if you're really sure about a player at a higher spot, then it's worth the gamble.

No, I think the counter argument would more be that I wouldn't care if it were Brian Burke or Ken Holland or Sam Pollock's ghost I don't think anyone is ever really going to be sure about a player drafted at #22. I don't think anyone in the history of the league has a real track record of being able to definitively look at prospects like that and separate the wheat from the chaff with any sort of reliability. When it comes to picks in the 20's and 30's, I don't think a GM should get married to any one player to that extent.