Edit Avatar
  • png, jpeg
  • Recommended minimum size 800px by 800px
  • Maximum size: 1MB
Drag image to reposition


Roster Architect
Member Since
Mar 19, 2021
Forum Posts
Posts per Day
Forum Threads
Forum: Armchair-GM21 hours ago
Forum: Armchair-GMThu at 11:35 pm
Thread: HYMAN
Forum: Armchair-GMWed at 11:11 pm
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>MatthewsFan</b></div><div>I also have nothing bad to say about the deal either. I am talking about this organizations and apparently your valuation of Justin Holl like he is some unicorn that can’t be easily replaced.

Since he came to Toronto, Jake Muzzin has only played 90 5v5 minutes with Travis Dermott. Goals when they're on the ice together: 7-0 Leafs. Yes, incredible small sample, but you can’t tell me Dermott can’t provide the same value as Holl.

Holl wasn't even a defenceman in the NHL until he was 27 years old. Dermott is 24 years old and has played 208 career NHL games.

Justin Holl plays in the top four but is carried by Jake Muzzin. The Maple Leafs defence improved because they signed T.J. Brodie and Zach Bogosian. Not because of Justin Holl.

And lastly I don’t even believe Seattle takes either Dermott or Holl if left exposed. There were better options. If the Leafs went 7-3-1 IMO they’d still have there D plus McCann and Kerfoot. I could see Joey Anderson being there pick.

My frustration lies with the thought process of keeping this unit together after such a terrible collapse against MTL.

Because if they end up trading Kerfoot for an upgrade it better be worth Hallander, the 7th, plus Kerfoot and whatever else is added to get Player X.</div></div>

As I said in comment #9 and it was my response to your comment, I don't think Holl has the skill of a top 4 defenceman, but that's the role they use him in and he's proven effective in it. Dermott has showed signs of progress but isn't a top 4 guy either, there's too many defensive lapses in his game and a 90 minute sample size doesn't change that - go look at the situations the pair of Muzzin/Dermott was in and it'll likely show more.

A top 4 defenceman is harder to replace than a third line winger (McCann). Just because McCann can play centre, doesn't mean he should - he's actually not a good centre at all. There's no on in the organization to fill Holl's role so unless they sign a big defenceman in free agency, they're not filling that role. &amp; for a contending team with cap problems, a top 4 right handed defenceman isn't going to fit in. To me that says they're prioritizing defence over offence - how is that bad for this team? They're showing strides as progressing as a team, but Leaf fans are way too obnoxious about this kinda stuff. The smallest move there is and they make a huge deal out of keeping a team together that finished 6th overall, classic.

The teams fine as is, they didn't lose anything from last year. Now they can add to it to make it stronger.
Forum: Armchair-GMWed at 11:02 pm
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>JackAce91</b></div><div>I highly doubt Seattle is a stickler for which draft the picks come from.

As for Kerfoot, he was below replacement for the 2020-21 season with a WAR of a whopping 0.2. For the last 2 seasons, he was at about a 1.0 WAR.
Jared McCann on the other hand, had a 3.2 WAR this year and a 2.3 WAR. McCann has been very good both offensively and defensively for two straight seasons. Kerfoot had a very good offensive year last year, but was below replacement defensively this year and last year, while being below replacement offensively this year as well.

Take a look at the analytics. Look at the charts. Look at the tables. Look at whatever you want. They all say that McCann was the better player this year and by a very wide margin. So you tell me. Do you want another year of not getting past the first round, or to mix things up a bit and get a MUCH better player for your depth, which is already lacking.

Do your homework before you stubbornly decide to keep an extremely average guy over a very good player.</div></div>

I never said Kerfoot was better than McCann so how bout you learn how to read first there kid. For all the analytics you wanna post, where was McCann in the playoffs when his team needed him? 1 assist in 6 games doesn't look too good, wanna tell me he was still good though? As I also said, Kerfoot fills a role - that role is a 3rd line centre. And losing him is harder to fill than losing McCann. Just because McCann <em>can</em> play centre, doesn't mean he should. He's a winger. He hasn't performed well at centre.

Toronto didn't choose to protect Kerfoot over McCann and I never commented on that - again, learnt o read there kid. Toronto decided to protect Justin Holl over both of them because his positional role - which is a top 4 right handed defenceman - is tougher to fill. McCann was never on the roster, so they didn't lose a player of their current NHL team. They lost a prospect who would likely have never made the team and a 7th round pick that likely never sees the NHL, big ****ing whoop. The team finished 6th in the NHL and was 1 game away from the second round. To panic over a move where the team kept that roster together over a mediocre prospect and a nothing pick is ludicrous. Stop with the negative comments all the damn time for nothing, you're what defines Leafs fans like this. I couldn't care less if they pass the first round or not, but to say it was a bad move to not lose a single NHL player off their roster in exchange for virtually nothing is insane.

Don't think so linear. Learn some hockey. Goodnight kid.
Forum: Armchair-GMWed at 9:35 pm
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>MatthewsFan</b></div><div>That’s where we differ, I would like to see this move as Hallander and a 7th to keep Kerfoot but knowing that this organization values Justin Holl more than Kerfoot and Jared McCann combined is something I don’t agree with.

If Kerfoot is still moved, the value must exceed Hallander+7th, or this is an lose no matter how you look at it.

They still have Kerfoot yes, but when you acquire McCann, you protect him over the guy that happens to play 4D. Saying Hallander+7th is the loss is not a good way of looking it. The Leafs made a poor decision valuing Holl over McCann/Kerfoot from an asset value perspective.</div></div>

I think that's exactly where you look at it the wrong way..

You mention "asset value perspective" well, taking out the players names, what's harder to replace in the league right now: a 3rd line winger/centre, or a top 4 right handed defenceman? If they lose Holl, that leaves a massive whole on defence and they have no one in the organization to fill that spot. If you wanna sign a top 4 defenceman in free agency, well they're highly overpriced - look what Oleksiak and Larsson just got - so now you're adding a cap inflation to a team that's already cap strapped. If anything, this is proper asset value management because Dubas isn't allowing himself to spend too much on a player to fill a spot from a player the lose for nothing.

I honestly have nothing bad to say about the deal and any Leafs fan shouldn't either. Too many people on here look for the negative and when a GM thinks outside the box he's ridiculed instead of acknowledged for his creativity. Dubas and management liked their roster enough from last season that they didn't wanna lose anyone off it for free, and didn't feel comfortable of paying the price of a top prospect plus more to protect it. They did exactly what they wanted to do, goal achieved. Dubas got creative. Props to him.
Forum: Armchair-GMWed at 7:41 pm
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>MatthewsFan</b></div><div>Ok I’ll bite.
<strong>Who on this team was worth protecting that you need the spend a 1st and a 3rd to protect? Kerfoot? Holl? Dermott? Anderson? </strong>

Either make the McCann trade and go 7-3-1 or don’t.

If you don’t make the trade you still can go 8 skaters, lose Kerfoot plus his cap hit, and still have Hallander and the 7th.

Unless they are planning on using Kerfoot in the top 6 this year, going after McCann was awesome. Not going 7-3-1 to protect just Holl was a mistake.</div></div>

Thanks for making my point exactly - no one on the exposed list is worth a 1st and a 3rd to additionally protect (not to mention Toronto doesn't have those picks so it becomes a top prospect then). &amp; that's exactly what Dubas thought that it wasn't worth it - but that was Seattle's price. If Dubas didn't meet it, than Seattle takes who they want. &amp; Kerfoot proved to be a valuable depth piece that can perform in the playoffs. So instead of giving up a 1st and a 3rd (or equivalent value that Seattle wanted), Dubas gave up a prospect that's worth maybe an early 3rd, and a 7th to get someone that he though Seattle would take, this not losing anyone from his roster. So would you rather paying a 1st and a 3rd or a 3rd and a 7th to keep your roster in tact that just finished 6th overall? I know which one smart GM's would pick.

As for losing Kerfoot or Holl, you're thinking too linear - as most users on here do. If they lose Kerfoot, it's also losing a 3C that plays a solid 2way game. How do you plan to replace that? There's not one in free agency that can do the same job for cheaper, and a trade will cost more than a 1st and a 3rd (which would have been the price to protect Kerfoot) - so you're either paying Seattle to let Toronto keep Kerfoot or you're paying more to find his replacement. Same goes for Holl - you think losing a top 4 defenceman (not Holl's skill but that's his role on Toronto) is gonna come cheaper than Hallander and a 7th? You absolutely nuts if you think it would. Defence options in free agency would cost far more than Holl's $2M cap hit, and a trade would be an insane price. So what option is there for a top 4 defence in that situation?

Kerfoot may be trade bait this off-season so it's worth keeping him around for that too. His contract is enticing because he makes less than his cap hit so for teams that have a lower budget he's more valuable - and with Toronto's connection to Arizona with Garland and Kuemper, Kerfoot could very well be a piece in that trade for them.

Bottom line is that it's much smarter to give up the value of a 3rd and 7th than a 1st and 3rd to keep your roster the same - McCann was never on the roster. His play won't be lost and won't affect the team. People just can't give GM's credit for thinking outside the box every now and then, but this was actually one of the smarter moves a GM has pulled off in awhile.
Forum: Armchair-GMWed at 7:04 pm