McKenzie: Vancouver looking at Barrie

Cotton

Registered User
May 13, 2013
9,120
5,611
Dubas stuck with his team and I think that the was right move.

The trades available likely were lateral at best for the Leafs, stick with your guys and if they fail send a real message with off season moves.

Sitting on his hands was the wrong move, you either add if you're trying to compete or sell if you aren't. Now we'll lose Barrie for nothing while most likely missing the playoffs.

Glad we didnt trade for Barrie, would of made no sense, sounds like the Leafs wanted to hold onto him anyways

Dont think he would have cracked our top 6 anyways, maybe more competition with Fantomburg and Benn for the last spot

For a team, much like Toronto with Florida, that is only in a playoff spot because your competitors suck just as bad as you - I would think you would be game to add Barrie in order to try and outscore your issues.

Barrie is just a right side version of Hughes, and would easily be in your top 4. Take a look, Hughes to date compared to Barrie last season.

60 8 41 49 (22 PPP) 21:42 36blk 6hit 31/56 takeaway ratio. 6.2/5.5 CF and FF Rel%. 57.2% OZone starts. 57 on ice goals against.

78 14 45 59 (24 PPP) 21:47 98blk 48hit 28/41 takeaway ratio. 4.5/4.8 CF and FF Rel%. 64.1% OZone starts. 67 on ice goals against.

22 primary assists/ 19 secondary
3:56 PP TOI per game, 0 PK.

28 primary assists/ 17 secondary
4:03 PP TOI per game, 0 PK

Barrie similar.
 

ThatsSoSlavin

Registered User
Aug 23, 2018
789
647
I’d rather do nothing than sell future for this team. We’re too inconsistent to make noise in the playoffs so why would we send out next year first or sandin, Robertson or Lilly, to get eliminated in the first round?

Plus these prices were so high I probably would have been pissed with any return
 

AHLdepth

Registered User
Feb 17, 2020
635
877
Bob did say Stecher was on the table via a radio interview, but the Leafs wanted more

Genuine question. Could "on the table" legitimately means that Toronto asked for him but Vancouver said no? Because Benning has said flat out they did not want to trade him.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Cogburn

mydnyte

Registered User
Sep 8, 2004
14,977
1,682
Genuine question. Could "on the table" legitimately means that Toronto asked for him but Vancouver said no? Because Benning has said flat out they did not want to trade him.
no, thats not what 'on the table' means ...it means he was available
 

BobClarkesfrontteeth

Registered User
Feb 6, 2020
1,365
848
Parts unknown
Lol! Another keyboard warrior bites the dust!
Wrong again. Looks like your Leafs are stuck with Barrie.
I'm sure that you will be posting a mean culpa. But somehow I doubt it. :laugh::laugh::laugh:

Again I am a Flyer's fan. I really did want to see this trade happen as one fan base was going to be happy and one was going to be very sad. Both fan bases cry like babies.
Good to see you are still stalking me. Makes me fell wanted.
Very good for Vancouver fans that Benning didn't go full Benning on this one.
He resisted the urge. Maybe he is learning. So we can give him a win on this one. So in 39 trades he has won 5. Still a 10% winning percentage but at least that is not the teams winning percent this year.
 

Halla

Registered User
Jan 28, 2016
14,727
3,779
glad he remains a leaf if they really were only offered a 2nd/3rd kinda deal.

32pts in 41 games under Keefe. thats kinda good for a dman
 

Leaf Fans

Registered User
Sep 29, 2017
20,135
8,622
Again I am a Flyer's fan. I really did want to see this trade happen as one fan base was going to be happy and one was going to be very sad. Both fan bases cry like babies.
Good to see you are still stalking me. Makes me fell wanted.
Very good for Vancouver fans that Benning didn't go full Benning on this one.
He resisted the urge. Maybe he is learning. So we can give him a win on this one. So in 39 trades he has won 5. Still a 10% winning percentage but at least that is not the teams winning percent this year.
A win? We have Barrie.
 

BobClarkesfrontteeth

Registered User
Feb 6, 2020
1,365
848
Parts unknown
A win? We have Barrie.

And that is a total loss by Dubas. He has a player that is beyond a bad fit and had teams offering assets for him. Should have taken the assets. Barrie with the current way he is playing for the Leafs and how he fits has almost no value. Benning wins because he didn't over pay in assets.
 

Leaf Fans

Registered User
Sep 29, 2017
20,135
8,622
And that is a total loss by Dubas. He has a player that is beyond a bad fit and had teams offering assets for him. Should have taken the assets. Barrie with the current way he is playing for the Leafs and how he fits has almost no value. Benning wins because he didn't over pay in assets.
Nah, we win because we didn't trade him.
 

Rob Brown

Way She Goes
Dec 17, 2009
17,009
13,758
Honestly they already are pretty much f**k if Muffin is gone. Even more of a reason for them to have gotten assets back for Barrie.
Yep, but they were never going to sell while sitting in a playoff position. Things look more bleak with Muzzin gone, for sure.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad