nihilz Posted May 28, 2012 Share Posted May 28, 2012 "Montreal picks third and Toronto goes fifth, obviously the rivals have identified the same group of players likely to go in the Top 5. Here's an idea, since compensation is no longer allowed for poaching coaches or executives, maybe Montreal flips picks with the Leafs as part of a bigger package that secretly covers off the inconvenience Toronto is dealing with in losing Dudley, a key member of the Maple Leafs management and draft team? Just a thought and purely my own." Will never listen to this guy or take his opinion seriously again. What a tool. Such a irrational statement. He would NEVER make this kind of comment if it were FLA & TB swapping executives. I think the Dudley|Timmins combo has Dregs shaking in his lil Leafs undies. Dregs lost lots of stock with me on this. Serious Marinaro moment for someone who usually garners lots of respect with his professionalism. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commandant Posted May 28, 2012 Share Posted May 28, 2012 Dregs is Nonis' brother in law... working as a puppet for the Leafs organization is ridiculous. Sorry Dregs, but the Leafs get no compensation... not unless we get 4x as much from the Lightnign for taking Brisebois, Boucher, and his two assistants. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bbp Posted May 28, 2012 Share Posted May 28, 2012 Ridiculous... I got a laugh out of it though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Machine of Loving Grace Posted May 28, 2012 Share Posted May 28, 2012 That would be compensation. Only question you have to ask is what Anaheim received for losing two GMs to Toronto. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Habsfan Posted May 31, 2012 Share Posted May 31, 2012 As much as I think this was a dumb statement by Dregs, I still like to listen to him. He just had a brain fart! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hankhab Posted May 31, 2012 Share Posted May 31, 2012 Thats the stupidest thing i've ever heard come out of that mans mouth. If Dudley was bound by contract to the leafs and they didn't want to let him go, then they have that right. If not, then what are people whining about? Did 2 or 3 of our bright coaching candidates leave that way, with the Habs blessing? It happens all the time, and I have to say, I haven't read anything about Burke complaining, so this must be a fan/media issue? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
habscout Posted June 1, 2012 Share Posted June 1, 2012 I usually like hearing Dreger's comments, but yeah he's *really* Toronto biased. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fromage Posted June 4, 2012 Share Posted June 4, 2012 Wouldn't be the first time. Montreal traded a conditional thingy for the rights to Mats Sundin. When the negotiations fell thru(thus the conditional trade was null), Montreal STILL gave Toronto Grabovski... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Machine of Loving Grace Posted June 4, 2012 Share Posted June 4, 2012 Wouldn't be the first time. Montreal traded a conditional thingy for the rights to Mats Sundin. When the negotiations fell thru(thus the conditional trade was null), Montreal STILL gave Toronto Grabovski... I like how a second round pick is considered nothing today. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dlbalr Posted June 4, 2012 Share Posted June 4, 2012 I like how a second round pick is considered nothing today. Plus Pateryn; I'm not sure he'll be an NHL'er but he should at least be a good piece to have in Hamilton. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlueKross Posted June 4, 2012 Share Posted June 4, 2012 Plus Pateryn; I'm not sure he'll be an NHL'er but he should at least be a good piece to have in Hamilton. I believe the Sundin deal and the Grabovski deal were separate deals, not related as suggested in that earlier thread. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dlbalr Posted June 4, 2012 Share Posted June 4, 2012 I believe the Sundin deal and the Grabovski deal were separate deals, not related as suggested in that earlier thread. They're related to an extent, Grabovski was supposed to be a part of the Sundin deal had a contract been reached. The actual trade was struck after the July 1st deadline passed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commandant Posted June 4, 2012 Share Posted June 4, 2012 Wouldn't be the first time. Montreal traded a conditional thingy for the rights to Mats Sundin. When the negotiations fell thru(thus the conditional trade was null), Montreal STILL gave Toronto Grabovski... A 2nd and Pateryn (a 5th drafted just days earlier) was what we got for Grabovski. Considering the kid was a prospect, out of favour with the team, abandonned the team and took off on a flight to LA to talk to his agent, and didn't have a role, a 2nd + 5th was a decent return. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlueKross Posted June 4, 2012 Share Posted June 4, 2012 Wouldn't be the first time. Montreal traded a conditional thingy for the rights to Mats Sundin. When the negotiations fell thru(thus the conditional trade was null), Montreal STILL gave Toronto Grabovski... Thanks Dlbair/ didn't realize connection. The above statement was incorrect and that' s what I was trying to get at. Even though we moved Grabovski ultimately for Pateryn and a second, we didn't actually end up giving anything up for talking to Sundin. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.