I can see the wallmark trade happening but the weegar trade not so much. Weegar has more value then dermott so it would probs be a 2nd going to florida and a 3rd or 4th coming to toronto

You do realise it is the same trade right? The same one that is all over CF?
Weegar ~= Dermott (who's age and potential make up the difference)
Wallmark < Kerfoot
Toronto is retaining salary (but not cap hit) so that adds value

Therefore Florida sweetens the pot.

BUT REMEMBER, THIS IS ALL ONE TRADE EXECUTED A FEW DAYS APART GOD WHY DOES NO ONE EVER READ THE DESC! I AM LITERALLY JUST RE-WRITING WHAT I PUT THERE

ya IDK a lot about the leafs, but I do know Dermott is better than Weegar age wise and potential wise

Is the twist florida getting bent over?

I like it. Especially with the Leafs getting the 2nd. We've seen what Dubas and Co. can do in the draft and with how deep this one is I think they could bring home some good players in the 2nd round (or maybe even move up if there's somebody they really like in the late 1st).

I understand it, I like it

The part of the trade that is intriguing isn't Florida's interest in Dermott - it's their interest in Kerfoot. Now that they moved Trocheck, they are desperate for a 2C on the cheap. I think Weegar holds slightly more value than Kerfoot, but they also can't afford to go without a defenseman in return, and TOR could use a center in return. Given Wallmark can handle 3C, and Dermott is an alright replacement, it's those extra pieces that really make this trade work.

In short, as of now this trade only makes sense to Toronto's needs. Add the other two guys and it appeals to both teams.

What other 2 guys?

Edit: Nvm, you were referring to Wallmark and Dermott, I was just confused because they are in posted trade.

If you honestly think that then you don't have a clue as to what you are talking about.

I disagree on your valuation. Kerfoot is a middle 6 centre that can play the wing whereas Wallmark is a 3C. Considering Florida's needs I'd say that makes Kerfy more valuable, not less.

Currently it is Dermott for Weegar. Dermott is a downgrade on defense, and the pick is a decent add but not what florida wants. TOR needs RD, and FLA needs C, and overall more defense. Here they don't get that C and they don't get an upgrade on defense.

With the two guys (Wallmark and Kerfoot) that typically populate this trade idea, now Toronto gets the RHD they need, at the cost of a slight downgrade on 3C (however also a cap savings of about 1.75M). Florida gets the center they need too, albeit at a slight downgrade of defense.

Florida pays to downgrade their defense?

? The trade is Weegar + Wallmark + 2nd for Dermott + Kerfoot + 5th. Just done at separate times.

They aren't downgrading their defence all while getting younger and they upgrade their centre position. This is fairly simple player evaluation it shouldn't be this hard for you.

No. They pay to make up the difference in the gap between Kerfoot/Wallmark compared to Weegar/Dermott. Also for the fact that the Leafs are retaining actual dollars.

EDIT: was that Wallmark - Kerfoot deal always part of this thread? I didn't notice it before. Why is it done separately?

And the defense they’re getting work better too. They’re flipping sides, so now the spot where the other one once was is filled by a guy of the right hand. Weegar played with Ekblad on his left side, but is RHD, and Dermott ended up on the right side most of the time but is a LHD. It’s a good D swap (amidst the other few pieces added)

It is all one trade, just done on separate days so that the Leafs pay Kerfy's bonus on July 1st and the Leafs get the pick for this years draft. The trade is literally:

Weegar
Wallmark
2020 2nd


Kerfoot (1 mil salary retained - not caphit)
Dermott
2020 5th

Yes. Please read the desc

No reason to be a dick, I didnt see the second trade was also to florida. I dont really see the twist then as thats near identical to what everyone else has been proposing

Oh, sorry, I only saw the Weegar + 2nd for Dermott and 5th trade lol, whoops - my mistake.

It's good, especially since the owners want pay cuts in FLA. Perhaps a tad too in depth to be likely though?

I believe the solution is to read the description before you comment next time

That's two of us who didn't see that 2nd trade... Capfriendly playing us? I am certain I only saw one trade.

I also am pretty sure I only saw one to start with, he may have published then finished it on accident

Pro tip: Reading the description and looking at all the trades is sometimes helpful. Keep that on the down low, though, not a lot people realize that. The twist is the timing of the trades and the fact that they are done separately.