manson isnt even an upgrade on Holl at this point, let alone one to cover that much of a value difference, especially with him being on an expiring contract

What about Tippet instead of Comtois here

I'd immediately do the Florida deal, but they likely decline. It might work without Tippett.

Make the picks in the Laine deal the picks traded for and the Ducks should do it. Like this, they shouldn't do it.

Manson shouldn't get that high of a return.



We get it: You dislike Manson. But he's an upgrade over Holl. It's not a night and day difference, but he is better. I'm however not saying this is fair value (minus a 2nd and Anderson is more likely).

Very much looking forward to Verbeek’s first move

You know, i feel like you and @pleasebanmeformyowngood should just start your own “Manson ain’t dat good” website, so that you won’t have to worry about posting it 50 times a day here😊

You’d think people would get the hint!

we get it, you think manson is good because reasons, but he is not better

yeah, and maybe people making manson to the leafs agms can make a "manson r gud" website instead of posting them here 50x a day

Never said he was "good". The last few years haven't been great. But he's been better this season and he's definitely better than Holl. You just say something like "Manson sucks" because reasons and never elaborate further. But this discussion is useless. You won't change your opinion, I won't change mine.

He isnt better than holl though, people keep saying that and never elaborate further. So why should i?

Unfortunately 95% of people on this site fall into one of 2 categories. They are hopeless homers who think all the players on their team are the best and those you only know players based on public perception and reputation. That makes it very difficult to have rational conversations on here.

I would like to say, I don't think Manson is terrible, I just haven't seen anything to make me think he's an improvement over Holl. And if we are moving a 1st or Robertson, I would want a decent upgrade for 2 RD. Manson isn't that.

Haha dude you are that homer, perfect example is Holl. He was a healthy scratch this year. Manson is much better and maybe it’s not analytics ( which I have no idea about ) but it’s proven that it’s not the most important thing. Sure it helps a bit. But Leafs must get stronger on the backend.

Nope, Leafs easily accept. We would love to have Josh Manson over a 5th/6th defensemen like Holl

if Holl is a 5th/6th defenceman than Manson is a 7th

I am a homer because I say Holl has been better and can back that up with analytics. And your retort is Manson is better because you say so. That's it. Why is he better? Because it's proven? How? Yeah Holl had a bad stretch to start but he's been back to himself since Christmas. This is just how it goes on here though, opinion is law, evidence doesn't matter and reputation is everything.

How many people on here see Colin Miller as an upgrade when he has been a healthy scratch on the past 3 teams he's played on including Buffalo who are much worse than TO. But he's better because people say so.

Your right, all the analyst who have played in the NHL or have been around the game a long time think Mason is better than Holl, BUT you don't and think that puck possesion is the whole game now. You must be right.
I am not one of those people on Colin Miller, but I am with Manson whi is better than Holl and would be a nice #4 D.
Holl can fit in the 5-6 role and would be great at it.
I actually love reading your comments becasue they are such homer based it wild and funny.

the analytics show that Manson is the better defenseman at even strength.

XEVO
Manson: 2
Holl: -1.1

xEVD
Manson: 1.8
Holl: 2.1

In Toronto Manson's numbers would get better, while Holl's would be worse in Anaheim.

Manson could be a decent pickup, I don't deny that in a vacuum however, is he worth a good prospect and a 1st? I am not so sure. And as for the analysts you are talking about, they almost entirely look at everything by reputation alone.