remove Kerfoot and Jackets would accept

Eh, it’s the home stretch of the season, and his true salary is only $750k (he’d cost less than Korpi). I’d do it, or even retain half and and ship him off to a team that needs F depth.

Jarmo has said he doesn't want to take on cap dumps, as we saw with the whole Boston situation. I dont think that has changed, and certainly not without good compensation.

Kerfoot isn't a cap dump. He plays to his value and comes off the books in a couple months. He's more cap ballast in trades

I mean, Kerfoot’s value aside, he’s not a player CBJ are going to keep long-term, and if he had the sort of trade value I think most TOR fans says he has, I’d imagine there would be a bigger market for him. If CBJ can convince somebody to take him on at retention, it’s the cherry on top, but it’s far from a given.

But yeah, I don’t see him as a cap dump in the way most people see it, considering he’d only wear a CBJ sweater for, what, a month? And again, his true salary is <$750k.

Unless Korpi’s market is bursting, I’d be willing to take that on in order to bump a 4th or 5th to a 3rd. Abruzzese is a lottery ticket who, worst case scenario, is AHL depth who can put up points for CLE.

the Leafs are trying to get rid of him for cap reasons. He obviously doesn't have much of a market as a rental and no team is going to give assets for him, which would make him a cap dump.

Agreed...he's pretty much neutral trade value....if a non-playoff team, CBJ in this example, likes the offer of a 3rd + Abruzeese I can't see them having an issue with also taking on Kerfoot. I don't think Kerfoot yields a return of any kind from a non-playoff team, nor do I think the leafs have to add a 'sweetener' to have him included.

Alternatively, I can see a playoff team giving anywhere from a 3-5th rounder or a b-list prospect to add him to their bottom 6 .

maybe to you he is....maybe to Jarmo he isn't since there is no long term commitment to him

Jarmo wouldn't take Craig Smith to facilitate a Gavy trade, i don't see him doing it here. Again Kerfoot holds no value to Columbus, we arent trying to get better for the rest of the season. The only way we would take him on is with payment for it, since he would be a pure cap dump to us. If you think he holds value, you should be able to trade him to a playoff team.

well...if you read my post from 2 comments up you'll see that I agree....Kerfoot has 0 value (not to be confused with negative value) to a non playoff team and maybe mid-round draft pick value for a playoff team.

Maybe Jarmo wouldn't take Smith because he wasn't thrilled with the Bruins' offer. Everything I heard is that Columbus thought they had a deal done with Boston but it was the Bruins who pulled chute and made the deal with Washington.

We won't ever know for sure.

he definitely has negative value to nonplayoff teams, you would have to pay to move him to those teams.

it's like talking to my children...good god.

Keep talking in certainties like you're an actual GM...looks real good on you.

NO...I don't think a non playoff team would actively trade for him. YES...I do think they'd be fine including him to make a trade work. The financial commitment owed to him is miniscule for any rationale GM to turn down an offer if they like the other assets in the deal

That hasn't really been borne out so far this deadline - a lot of the major deals have featured the buyer sending back cap to make things work. The Rangers sent back Sammy Blais' $1.525M in the Tarasenko deal, the Islanders sent Anthony Beauvillier's $4.15M to Vancouver, Washington had to absorb Craig Smith's expiring $3.1M, and San Jose had to take back Andreas Johnsson. Each of those trades featured retention on the main player *plus* cap being sent back.

If Jarmo's going to make that the hill he wants to die on this deadline, I think he's going to be underwhelmed by the return on what he's sending out.

and in each of those the teams were given additional compensation to take those contracts on, which indicates they have negative value, just like Kerfoot would.

What additional compensation did the Canucks get for taking Beauvillier? Horvat's value was pegged at a 1st + a prospect, which they got - but they also had to take 2x$4.15M of Beauvillier and retain 25% on Horvat this season with no extra compensation.

What additional compensation did the Blues get for Blais? Tarasenko fully retained & Mikkola brought back a 1st/3rd combo with a longshot prospect in Hunter Skinner. VT's fully retained value was thought to be a 1st, and a mid-round pick has been the going rate for a 3rd pair D. I find it hard to argue that Skinner, a guy who's spent half his year in the ECHL three years after he was drafted, is anything more than a random body thrown in for contract purposes.

Hathaway and Orlov got back a 1/2/3 combo with Craig Smith coming along. Orlov was double retained down, and I don't think you can really argue with him being worth a 1st/3rd at that rate? And if Tanner Jeannot was worth the package that Tampa gave him, I don't think you can argue that Hathway is worth a 2nd rounder three drafts away. Not sure where the compensation for Smith is here, either.

And with the Sharks deal, the Devils didn't give up any of their top prospects and only gave up one guaranteed 1st, while including Johnsson's cap and getting Meier fully retained. I don't see anything in that trade that strikes me as compensation for taking Mongo's $3.4M cap hit off the Devils' hands.

It's a flat cap world, and the teams in the playoff hunt are all mostly capped out. Taking back an expiring cap hit with whatever picks and prospects you're getting is part of doing business right now, and if you're going to pass on a mid-tier prospect and a 3rd rounder for your backup goalie because you demand that you get compensated for taking that cap back, then teams are going to find a different guy to focus on. You adjust to the trade market as it evolves, or you get shut out of it. It's pretty simple.