Not sure how else they can squeeze

it has to be engvall or Kerfoot i think, as much as i dont like holl he just doenst give you enough space really and Keef loves him to much also. that is why we gave up McCann in the expansion draft.

holl looks way faster this year too, he"ll be a big part of our blue line, we need him more than kerfoot imo.

It's going to be ZAR, not Simmonds

Engvall or Holl dont allow you to have 19 skaters, even though hes the best of the lot, Kerfoot has to go, or the team will struggle to ice a team (or overplay their top 7 players constantly).

Leafs arent hurting for offense, never do, but the age on defense or over-reliance on Sandin/iljegren who have never played top 4 minutes or 70+ games, makes Holl more important than Kerfoot.

I agree.

For the last couple seasons, NHL caliber blueline depth has been an issue with the Leafs, and now having 7, there is a knee jerk reaction to move one of them to get under cap. Holl isn't a big flashy name, but is economical and efficient in his game, and just underrated. Sure, there are better out there, but there are worse. Moving Holl will simply recreate a wheel where you Dubas will be hunting for D depthbat the deadline..... just like last year.

Which brings us to Kerfoot or Engvall.

Kerfoot is completely versatile, plays 200 feet, and can play centre - which seems to matter. Now, I am not sure if we get the 2021-22 Kerfoot this year, but his sample size is large enough to suggest he is a defensively reliable and good for 40 points.

Engvall is a bit more of an enigma - a player who has the size to play a heavy game (but really doesn't), his transition game is fantastic, skates well, and defends well, and plays centre in a pinch. What he can do offensively is anyone's guess. Did he catch lightening in a bottle last year, or has he finally found his game?

Overall, I move Kerfoot, and here is why.

1. He is a Swiss Army knife in the line up, and Dubas signed a second one in Järnkrok. He too can play up the line up and play centre. And just like Kerfoot, better on the wing.

2. Kerfoot has priced himself out of Toronto, guaranteed. Engvall at this point maybe has not. If he repeats his season from last year, there maybe a similar contract in line. Retaining Engvall is more likely than retaining Kerfoot.

3. Kerfoot nets a better return. We know Kerfoot is worth a 2nd, and we know we won't get that. Engvall on the market maybe nets a 3rd under equal, non cap related circumstances. The cap pinch drives that price down. Knowing a move has to be made, I would move the player that will garner the best asset possible.

4. The sudden emergence of Malgin and the somewhat expected showing of Robertson...... neither player is someone I would exactly want in my bottom 6. But, in the top 6 could thrive - and we have seen evidence of that.neither player ar this stage has the defensive capabilities of Kerfoot, but certainly the offense is there. Leafs fans have seen Roberston in a more limited role, and the results have been luke warm. Going back a couple.years, we can say the same for Malgin. Imo, neither player is really suited to replace Engvall in the bottom 6, (and ZAR is a great 4th line option if someone thinks he is it). But, to replace Kerfoot in the top 6? Yeah..... I could see it.

Certainly not the easiest decision to male here folks, but long.term, thinking through the process, it's Kerfoot.