right, they gave up Hallander and a 7th to keep it as is.

2 assets.
- senstroll

Plus the 1 asset seattle takes. which seems like the better asset over Kerfoot.

Ah well
the leafs.

Again, your examples you provide dont work with the reality.

Situation is you know Nessy is going to take a specific banana, so you trade two apples for another banana....a possibly more enticing banana.
More than likely Nessy, we'll take that more enticing banana that just cost you two apples.
So you made a nice trade to keep kerfoot....to keep the roster the same.

But we'll see in a few hours.
- Fakepartofme

This at least implies you get it.

Until, of course, you revert back to saying we gave up three assets in the expansion.

I think you’re all assuming ‘ol Nessy likes bananas in the first place.

Mornin’ everyone
- RickJames77

They are welcome to steal the grapes.

But they are a little moldy.

I think you’re all assuming ‘ol Nessy likes bananas in the first place.

Mornin’ everyone
- RickJames77

It's the Leafy way.

Exactly. Hallander and the 7th didn't require protecting. That much was a voluntary sacrifice.

Whether it was worthwhile or not is an entirely different debate. I think it was if they keep McCann. It's a waste just to keep Kerfoot, but that's just my opinion.

Good opportunistic trade, (frank)ed up on the protection list. 🤷🏻‍♂️
- joel878

Much easier to replace a forward than a d-man. Just think back to how you felt when Marincin was on the ice. The protection list was correct, Kraken may take Dermott at $875K and have Price in net. Having one of Kerfoot or McCann after the draft is also an ok scenario. Leafs will be adding a dman of significance soon IMO.

Hallander and the 7th is the cost of ending up with a viable 3rd line center on the team after Seattle takes one.

In that respect it is not a bad trade. It ends up being a better trade if the Kraken take Kerfoot. I somehow think the Kerfoot "leak" was intentional to create some buzz, and they are going to take McCann.

Good point, sounds like bs.

Frank Seravalli
@frank_seravalli
Early word is #SeaKraken are closing in on contracts with two UFA defensemen: Adam Larsson (EDM) and Jamie Oleksiak (DAL).
- winsix

This is total BS. they shouldnt get early dibs on FA's. Jesus.

Exactly. Hallander and the 7th didn't require protecting. That much was a voluntary sacrifice.

Whether it was worthwhile or not is an entirely different debate. I think it was if they keep McCann. It's a waste just to keep Kerfoot, but that's just my opinion.

Good opportunistic trade, (frank)ed up on the protection list. 🤷🏻‍♂️
- joel878

It's not a waste to keep Kerfoot if you think Kerfoot is worth more than Hallander and a 7th. Spoiler alert: He is.

So you're losing an asset no matter what. You pay next to nothing to acquire an asset that has roughly equivalent value to the asset you're already exposing because you've opted to protect other assets.

You will lose one of those assets.

Here's the thing to remember: The cost to acquire McCann was higher at any other point in history except right _now_ because Pittsburgh was about to lose him for nothing anyway. So they got something, we got a substitute 3C.

This is total BS. they shouldnt get early dibs on FA's. Jesus.
- Fakepartofme

That counts as their pick in the expansion draft. They can only pick one player from each team and unprotected RFA and UFA players can be negotiated with and taken as their expansion pick.

Hallander and the 7th is the cost of ending up with a viable 3rd line center on the team after Seattle takes one.

In that respect it is not a bad trade. It ends up being a better trade if the Kraken take Kerfoot. I somehow think the Kerfoot "leak" was intentional to create some buzz, and they are going to take McCann.
- Interloper

Oh totally....it was simply trolling to a fanbase that bites on everything.
I like Kerfoot, but it appears McCann is better, younger and cheaper

Hallander and the 7th is the cost of ending up with a viable 3rd line center on the team after Seattle takes one.

In that respect it is not a bad trade. It ends up being a better trade if the Kraken take Kerfoot. I somehow think the Kerfoot "leak" was intentional to create some buzz, and they are going to take McCann.
- Interloper

I would rather McCann (I think). I don’t know what the fancy stats say.

Much easier to replace a forward than a d-man. Just think back to how you felt when Marincin was on the ice. The protection list was correct, Kraken may take Dermott at $875K and have Price in net. Having one of Kerfoot or McCann after the draft is also an ok scenario. Leafs will be adding a dman of significance soon IMO.
- winsix

Isn't Dermott now making 1.5?

This at least implies you get it.

Until, of course, you revert back to saying we gave up three assets in the expansion.
- Leafs43

Again in the literal sense, we will give up 3 assets regarding expansion. Hallander, the 7th... And whoever Seattle picks, were all leaf property they gave up, lost, let go (however one wants to see it) as part of expansion. In the literal sense, 1+1+1=3.

That's the decision leaf brass made.

The part people are going by the wayside is the assertion that those 3 assets are cumulative. At the end of the day its not 1+1+1=3. It's 2 for 1.... And then lose 1. Two separate transactions.

Which is why I keep saying Hallander is moot at this point. He was not among their list of potential selections when it came time to submit the protection list. McCann was. How we got to that point is water under the bridge.

That counts as their pick in the expansion draft. They can only pick one player from each team and unprotected RFA and UFA players can be negotiated with and taken as their expansion pick.
- Monkeypunk

Not too shabby.

Bring on an expansion team in Toronto, fack these leafs.

I would rather McCann (I think). I don’t know what the fancy stats say.
- RickJames77

I think most people would rather McCann. He's likely the pick. I had heard that Francis likes Kerfoot - but that was before the Leafs grabbed McCann, and I had never heard how much be values Kerfoot in comparison to McCann. Just about every analyst and hockey fan thinks Seattle will take McCann.

Isn't Dermott now making 1.5?
- bobbyisno1

yes correct

This at least implies you get it.

Until, of course, you revert back to saying we gave up three assets in the expansion.
- Leafs43

oh FFS.

If they keep McCann...it was for sure. Nice plan.
If they lose McCann.....not worth it at all. They had an opportunity to free up some cap space and missed
- Fakepartofme

I thought you liked Kerfoot at 3.5? If they lose McCann then that is what they traded Hallander and the 7th for ...to keep that player and cap hit.

Or am I wrong and he's a bad cap hit?

Hallander and the 7th is the cost of ending up with a viable 3rd line center on the team after Seattle takes one.

In that respect it is not a bad trade. It ends up being a better trade if the Kraken take Kerfoot. I somehow think the Kerfoot "leak" was intentional to create some buzz, and they are going to take McCann.
- Interloper

McCann > Kerfoot

Much easier to replace a forward than a d-man. Just think back to how you felt when Marincin was on the ice. The protection list was correct, Kraken may take Dermott at $875K and have Price in net. Having one of Kerfoot or McCann after the draft is also an ok scenario. Leafs will be adding a dman of significance soon IMO.
- winsix

Dermott is at 1.5 now, and I'd say the chances Seattle picks him are somewhere between slim and none. They already have two of their options ticked off, and there are a million better options than Dermott.

So while I don't disagree with your evaluation regarding forwards and defenceman... In this particular scenario, supply and demand may have made that go the other way.

They were not going to take Holl at 2 million to be their 8th D... Where as McCann makes their top 12 forwards all day every day.

Again in the literal sense, we will give up 3 assets regarding expansion. Hallander, the 7th... And whoever Seattle picks, were all leaf property they gave up, lost, let go (however one wants to see it) as part of expansion. In the literal sense, 1+1+1=3.

That's the decision leaf brass made.

The part people are going by the wayside is the assertion that those 3 assets are cumulative. At the end of the day its not 1+1+1=3. It's 2 for 1.... And then lose 1. Two separate transactions.

Which is why I keep saying Hallander is moot at this point. He was not among their list of potential selections when it came time to submit the protection list. McCann was. How we got to that point is water under the bridge.
- joel878

Yes, its pretty simple to see.

Not too shabby.

Bring on an expansion team in Toronto, fack these leafs.
- Fakepartofme

It makes sense when you think about it. It’s kind of hard to build an expansion team that is cap compliant or within your cap parameters, if you don’t know what kind of contract the guy is on.

Frank Seravalli
@frank_seravalli
·
12m
Early word is #SeaKraken were focused in on one player from #GoBolts lot: Yanni Gourde.

Not entirely clear how tonight will work. Teams wondering if he's the only Tampa player heading to Seattle? Could change. But sense is Gourde will be a Kraken before night is done.
@DFOHockey

Again in the literal sense, we will give up 3 assets regarding expansion. Hallander, the 7th... And whoever Seattle picks, were all leaf property they gave up, lost, let go (however one wants to see it) as part of expansion. In the literal sense, 1+1+1=3.

That's the decision leaf brass made.

The part people are going by the wayside is the assertion that those 3 assets are cumulative. At the end of the day its not 1+1+1=3. It's 2 for 1.... And then lose 1. Two separate transactions.

Which is why I keep saying Hallander is moot at this point. He was not among their list of potential selections when it came time to submit the protection list. McCann was. How we got to that point is water under the bridge.
- joel878

He is talking value.

If they take Mccann the Leafs essentially payed Hallinder and a 7th to keep Kerfoot instead of a 1st and 3rd.

Which they can then flip for assets post expansion draft.

The whole point is after the expansion draft the Leafs will either come out with the player they traded for or will remain with the same roster they had 5 days ago without Hallinder.

They want to keep Holl...before and after that. With knowing this do you make the Mccann trade? Yes

It's not a waste to keep Kerfoot if you think Kerfoot is worth more than Hallander and a 7th. Spoiler alert: He is.

So you're losing an asset no matter what. You pay next to nothing to acquire an asset that has roughly equivalent value to the asset you're already exposing because you've opted to protect other assets.

You will lose one of those assets.

Here's the thing to remember: The cost to acquire McCann was higher at any other point in history except right _now_ because Pittsburgh was about to lose him for nothing anyway. So they got something, we got a substitute 3C.
- Monkeypunk

So... If they expose Holl, and protect Kerfoot and McCann, is it possible to say that at some point over the summer well after expansion, Kerfoot is worth more than Holl? Because that's where it becomes not so clear cut.

I can't emphasize this enough, in my eyes... The Hallander thing went out the window when they acquired McCann. Hallander was not a leaf asset when it came time to submit the protection list, McCann was.

Protecting both at that point was the better angle for me, because you secure the asset you've traded for, you have Kerfoot and his 3.5 in cap space to play with after the fact.