Sorry once you added Ritchei ir is a no

No way the Leafs would want to add Boeser though. He is the last thing they need.

If this trade had the 2 extra 1sts and Robertson + another prospect like it should have, then I could understand you being annoyed. But come on. You actually think Toronto would not slam dunk getting Boeser for 20% of his value? That 2nd is just to offload Ritchie.

No thanks from Vancouver. Leafs can't do this cap-wise.

Effectively you are saying Boeser for the leafs first. Since that second is to take Richies contract.

You would have to add the likes of Robertson or make it 2 first and like Kerfoot.

also makes no sense for the Leafs to want Boeser, miller I can see. Since he'd provide A TON more for the return.

2 extra firsts, Robertson +? Umm no. Leafs are dumb but nobody will give that. My point, though was that he is not what they need to add. They need size and defence, besides how could they handle adding that much salary?

Boeser is worth three pieces.

Eating Ritchie is worth one piece also. My point was that if you wanted to justify saying no way, it would have to be some pile like that.

You saying no to your team hijacking the Canucks with a deal like the offered one isn't reasonable. Even if Brock isn't what you need. You could just flip him for what you want.

Again my point was they wouldn't trade for him and there are ways to get rid of Ritchie. 3 pieces maybe? But your idea of 2 firsts and our top prospect is ridiculous.

Robertson is like 4th on your depth charts now with his serious injury issues.

If this was Robertson from year 1 I would probably agree but I certainly think that's roughly the price of a top line (second line on TO) player with team rights.

No he is still one of the top. People say Niemela, Knies etc but have no real clue. So like you said second line on TO, should they spend the assrts and cash for that when they need to.focus on D? Muzz and Holl look terrible and there is no defensive depth after them. That type of player is not on their radar at all.

Once again I'm not saying Boeser fills a need. I'm saying the offer posted is so ridiculously undervalued that you would have to say yes regardless and then reevaluate.

Well I guess we disagree, I would spend all my time looking for a good dman and other make a trade to make a trade and then reevualate later...especially if the first is in play.

We're not even talking about the same thing. It's kinda ridiculous.

You want a D, yeah I know. so what's easier. Trying to pile Ritchie and two picks, or say Boeser for a D man and picks.

If this deal was offered to you EVEN IF the ONLY GOAL was a D man, you do this and now you have better leverage to get that D.

Isn't close.

Sigh, no we're not talking about the same thing and yes it is ridiculous. My very first reply was that he does not fill a need. That was my point and my only point.

You came in an said Robertson and 2 extra firsts which I said is ridiculous and it is. I never commented on doing the trade and then flipping, I have never once commented on it. I am not sure why you are going on about that. Would I take a risk on that? I dunno but would try to trade for a d without flipping players because there is always a risk that you could lose out and then be stuck with another high priced player that doesn't help and again no first round pick.