The analytics say Weegar is better than Dermott too. Lets just be perfectly clear about that.

The fact Dubas didn't trade for him more than likely has to do with the fact Weegar didn't have a contract signed and the Leafs had 0 cap space to work with this summer rather than any ridiculous notion that his view on handedness came into play. Weegar signed for 3 mil in the tax friendly state of Flroida. Thats a contract that likely starts with a 4 if signed in Toronto and one the Leafs could never have maneuvered with.

Also wtf is this 'when players are of equal skill handedness doesn't matter'? How does that make any logical sense to you? If they are of equal skill but one is going to have worse results upon switching sides, the one playing on the correct side for his shot is always the better option...not counting contracts.

I don’t think Weeger is overrated, I think he’s a very solid top 4 guy and the going rate for cost controlled top 4 D is a first round pick+

Sure, he's a solid top 4 guys, but I just don't think he's worth a first, that's all. Also, I don't understand why he is in 50% of Toronto ACGM's.

That’s the going rate for a top 4 D whose cost controlled. His contract could be very favourable for years.

Ok, I don't see Toronto giving up a first for him.

Agree he’s turned into one of the best defensive defencemen in the league while the Pens got nowhere with JJ anchoring the whole team.



IIRC, there was maybe a 10 game stretch in which Dermott saw top 4 role when Rielly & muzzin we’re both injured. Ian Tulloch reported that even though his results regressed, they were still passable.

I have no idea why Dermott didn’t play over Ceci. Maybe Keefe dislikes him. But that’s even more reason to why they should’ve dealt him in that package for Weegar. It looks like a missed opportunity now that he can’t even crack the lineup.

Fair enough

I never said he was SO good. I just said that all the overhype on Weegar doesn't make him better. You mean how Ceci started there under Babcock? Then got injured pretty soon after Keefe took over? That Ceci? ... it's called experience. Babcock already had Ceci with Rielly so the communication was there. Dermott had the chemistry with Holl. Don't see how that's a hard concept to grasp.

If you don't think they care about it, sure think what you want. But I mean the evidence is there. The majority of the d-man they signed were left handed that can play the right side. They had the opportunity to move Dermott for Weegar already and turned in down. So I mean sure, honk they believe something totally opposite of what they've been doing

You mean like Dermott didn't have a contract either a g they wanted Johnsson too which woulda Fred's up the cap space to sign Weegar to what he signed for? ... yeah great logic.

Dermott they had control of, Weegar had (and filed for if you've forgotten) arb rights. You're also ignoring that a contract in Florida isn't the same as a contract in Toronto. A 3 mil contract in Florida is a 4 mil contract in Toronto. Johnsson alone wasn't enough to free up that space for Weegar. The space wasn't there, and the space definitely wasn't there for a contract that could have ended up larger out of arbitration.

People need to stop with this blah blah tax rate blah blah. 1 guy blows it up and everyone thinks it's a huge deal. What you forget about are 2 bigger factors:
1. Players playing in Canada are paid in US dollars so they actually receive more Canadian dollars.
2. Leafs can dish out bigger signing bonuses than almost (if not all) every other team in the league.

You also forget that Weegar is from Ontario. Maybe he would've loved playing for the Leafs and not cared about the tax difference. So if you're gonna sit there and just use the tax rate as your main point, you better not forget about the Canadian benefits too.

& you're also forgetting (as I said) that the offer Florida wanted was Johnsson AND Dermott. So $3.4M plus $875K is actually over the $4M if Weegar had demanded the tax difference, so again there's enough space.

I'm not gonna sit here and go round for round with you on this. It seems quite clear that if Dubas wanted a right handed guy, he could've had one multiple times. Believe what you want. At the end of the day I really don't care.

There's dozens upon dozens of examples of players choosing lower tax rate states and taking lower deals to do it. There's 1, singular, example of a player choosing Toronto because of hometown feels and a big signing bonus. If you think that somehow supports your argument .... well ....

You can add Johnsson and Dermott together to get the cap space you if want but you are forgetting that its at the very least a league minimum contract to replace the extra player as well. His 875k isn't going to Weegar, its going to a replacement and seeing as how Johnsson was a top 6 player, that replacement is probably making more than Dermott's 875k(see: Vesey's 900k). You've lost money trying to do this, not gained it.

Many players have signed with Toronto for various reasons, not just Tavares.

& extra player? What are you talking about? If Dermott and Johnsson for Weegar happened, Weegar replaces Dermott on the bottom pair, and there is no need to replace Johnsson as the guy they traded him for isn't even on the roster. But nice try.

Johnsson was an active player on the Leafs roster. Someone replaces him on the 20 man roster, whether that is Anderson or not. Not replacing Johnsson would be suggesting the Leafs are playing the season with 11 forwards and 6 defensemen on their roster any given night.

When you move a player in your top 20, someone takes him place on the ice every night and that player earns at least the league minimum of $700,000. In other words, moving Johnsson doesn't create $3.4m in room, it creates 2.7m and the replacement players minimum salary. In the case of the Leafs this season, Vesey replaced him for $900,000 making that $3.4m an actual $2.5m.

🤦🏻‍♂️

What you don't see is that the Leafs already replaced Johnsson with guys like Vesey, Thornton, Simmonds, Barabanov, etc. Guys that they already signed and a trade of Johnsson wouldn't have affected that.

Jesus. You make my brain hurt. Sorry, I'm done with this conversation now.

When the trade of Johnsson and Vesey happened doesn't matter, we are looking at the cap. Moving Johnsson's 3.4m off the cap creates an empty spot in the top 20. He was replaced on the ice by Vesey and his 900k. I'm sorry that basic math makes your brain hurt.

Here, math isn't your strong point so I'll make a visualization for you:

Here are the Leafs lines.

Thornton - Matthews - Marner
Johnsson - Tavares - Nylander
Mikehyev - Kerfoot - Hyman
Simmonds - Spezza - Barabanov

Rielly - Brodie
Muzzin - Holl
Dermott - Bogosian

Vesey (we'll call Vesey the 21st man since you seem to think him being acquired already somehow matters)

Now the Leafs trade Johnsson and Dermott for Weegar, their caps balancing out:

Thornton - Matthews - Marner
[replacement] - Tavares - Nylander
Mikehyev - Kerfoot - Hyman
Simmonds - Spezza - Barabanov

Rielly - Brodie
Muzzin - Holl
Weegar - Bogosian

Vesey


You see, it doesn't matter that Vesey was already acquired. You still have that hole you have to fill. If you use Vesey to do it, you just don't have a 21st man. You could be arguing to do that but playing with only a 20 man roster isn't a risk NHL teams take and the Leafs would have lost Dell by now to do it. It still costs the at minimum $700,000 to replace Johnsson with another skater whether that skater was already acquired or not. Thats the cost you are trying to say doesn't exist.

You literally put Vesey in that spot which is where he is anyways. I don't see how that's hard to comprehend. & he's under $1M so he's easy to fit in the cap.

Goodbye.

and to do that, the Leafs don't have a 21 man roster. They are stuck with a 20 man and lose Dell to waivers. You still cost the Leafs that close to league minimum player, it was just the 21st man. Now you are just ignoring that NHL teams dont run 20 man rosters ... ever.

You don't have to have a 21 man roster. Especially with the taxi squad this season, you'll see a lot of 20 man rosters for cap reason.

They actually wouldn't lose Dell to waivers. As per NHL guidelines for the upcoming seasons, if a team is carrying less than 3 goalies on their active roster, sending a goalie to the taxi squad does not require waivers. Dell would be exempt from waivers if they were to send him down. Thus not causing an issue with the cap or losing a goalie (he probably wouldn't be claimed anyways). It's why they're most likely waiting to send him down.

But since you can't seem to read properly, I'll highlight this part:

I'm not going round for round with you on this anymore. I'm done with this conversation with you. Goodbye.

Demonstrably false. Not a single team is running a 20 man roster right now.



Demonstrably false. Goalies are subject to the same waiver rules as everyone else even though teams are forced to carry 3. Notice how Edmonton's and Winnipeg's 3rd goalies both got claimed off waivers.

Its like you don't pay attention at all.

It's like you can't read at all.

Goodbye. Stop quoting me.

I'm just correcting the obviously incorrect things you are trying to pass off, like goalies suddenly don't require waivers even though we just saw 2 get claimed yesterday, for anyone else who might be reading. You're welcome to stop replying whenever you want. No one is forcing you to.

"To keep healthy players in net to let the games go on, teams must have three goaltenders available among the 29 players on their active roster and taxi squads."

https://www.google.ca/amp/s/www.tsn.ca/nhl-taxi-squads-to-help-teams-stay-on-ice-during-2020-21-season-1.1575447%3ftsn-amp

Right from TSN. As I said, teams must have at least 3 goalies available between the active roster and taxi squad. If they don't, sending one to the taxi squad does not expose him to waivers.

Toronto currently has Andersen and Campbell on the active roster. Hutchinson is in the minors at Marlies camp (when their season officially starts). So after the AHL season starts in February, Dell can be placed on the taxi squad and not exposed to waivers.

No where in what you quoted does it say they are exempt from waivers. In fact the only spot where 'waivers' shows up in the article is where it says all players going to the taxi squad must clear them. Teams must have 3 goalies on their rosters but the 3rd goalie is still subject to waivers before going to the taxi squad. We have seen evidence of this when Edmonton lost Forsberg to Carolina and Winnipeg lost Comrie to New Jersey. We have 2 actual examples from a few days ago of what you are saying not being true. Dell is subject to the exact same waivers Forsberg and Comrie were exposed to and doesn't stand a chance of make it through them, hence Toronto leaving him on their NHL roster for now.