A team acquiring Ekholm wants him playing at least 20 minutes a night. Move him to the top 4 somewhere.

Certainly not an underpayment. NSH's gaining good value here.

Just heads up, the re-sign conditions are not allowed anymore. They got banned in the new CBA.

I like it except for the "Additional Details". That would be 3 - 1st round draft choices when the Leafs win the Stanley Cup.

Granlund isn't necessary. He really doesn't make the Leafs that much better, because who does he bump. Leafs shouldn't trade Dermot,cause you have wait over two weeks for the returning (Ekblom) to even practice for the Leafs.
IMO it's a real overpayment for a 1.5 year rental, and a rental who isn't needed.

Then the expansion draft comes along and Seattle takes Ekholm because Brodie and Muzzin have NMCs. Add that to the transaction list lol.
All that for half a year of Ekholm? No thanks. Leafs will need their players on inexpensive contracts that can make an impact. Don't trade them all

They should be getting a 4/5 defenseman. One comfortable on the 3rd pair but can play top 4 in case of injuries. I think them trading Lehtonen is a pre cursor for a move like this.
Don't go crazy. Their top 4 D and top 6 forwards are pretty good
Last year the Jets got Demelo for a 3rd...a move like that is the better play

He bumps someone in the top six, most likely plays wing on the second line.

This is way too much for Ekholm. Like a crazy amount. Leafs did not give this much for Muzzin and I would argue he was/is a better player.

It's 2021. Granlund 10 points, minus 7 in 24 games doesn't made with the Leafs as an improvement.

You cited it's 2021 and then proceeded to mention +/-, so I stopped reading.

The leafs will be protecting 4F 4D 1G

th

Then tell me, who does replace that makes the Leafs better besides 4th liners. He's really a left winger who has been forced to play centre due to injuries.
I should stop reading these silly Grandlund posts, because of people are living in the past.

He plays next to JT and Nylander. Does alot of the small things for them, has good playmaking, and is responsible defensively. Does not cost you much in terms of assets and cap space. And is a clear improvement over Kerfoot. To your second point- again you are the person that referenced the new age and groundbreaking stat of +/-. I'm sorry us old-timers can't keep up with someone as avant-garde as you. Such brilliant and cutting-edge analysis, I don't even know what to do.

TooMalevolent....NotRevelant.

Atta boy, great retort. Not as sound of a argument that references a players +/- on a bad team- easily telling on yourself that you have not really watched the player you are critiquing- but a skilful reply nonetheless. Well done.