Actually we don't have a quote of Poile actually saying that, it's simply something someone has said he said. In a later interview he also laughed at the statement and then stated he had zero intention of trading Forsberg.Poile stated that there are three untouchables- Ellis, Josi & Rinne. Apparently everyone else is on the table (obviously some more than others.) As far as Duchene and johansen I think they’re stuck. No one is taking on those deals.
No, I am saying the Leafs havent made the offer ( a Leaf fan on the board anyway) so it is not entirely up to Nashville to accept; moteover, in my opinion it is to much to pay for that return. I also dont admit that they are negative because I dont belive that they are.So you are saying unless they agree to take these guys the Leafs don't make the offer. So you yourself admit they are negative value.
It is not that he is hated. It is just a guy outside of the core that many Leaf fans woyld be willing to give up to accomedate a salary comming back. He is usualy packaged with a first and top prospect. While some Leaf fans don't like him, most do.is any player hated more by his fanbase than Kerfoot
Literally a part of every deal they propose
is any player hated more by his fanbase than Kerfoot
Literally a part of every deal they propose
I'll be the third guy to respond because I guess we need to drive the point home.is any player hated more by his fanbase than Kerfoot
Literally a part of every deal they propose
Exactly. I would be severely disappointed if the team got a 1st, Robertson, and Liljegren for Ekholm. Because the Preds simply should not be trading Ekholm, period. It doesn't help that a late 1st in a weak draft isn't much, and Liljegren isn't any better or a different type of defenseman than several we already have in our system. Robertson is a good prospect. But just not enough for me to give up Ekholm for. Poile would be a fool to trade him. Poile may very well be a fool, however.Preds fans have no consensus on what the team should do at this point. There are some that don't want to trade Ekholm (and want to extend him) so for them the asking price is astronomical. I don't know that the ask is intended to be remotely realistic. It's also probable some posters are going to be severely disappointed no matter the return.
Does help with your expansion draft plans. Otherwise you'd need to protect 4D and only 4F.Agreed, but Ekholm is also significantly more valuable than Muzzin was at the time, since we can easily re-sign Ekholm for our team below market value. We have no pressure or desire to trade Ekholm. You're coming after him under different circumstances, so the price needs to be significantly higher. Just because you stole Muzzin doesn't mean you get to do it again that easily.
Nic Robertson isn't happening.
Counter offer 1:
Toronto:
LHD Ekholm
W/C Granlund (@50%)
4th round pick 2021 (NSH)
Nashville:
1st round pick 2021 (TOR)
LW/RW Amirov
RHD Liljegren
C/LW Kerfoot
Counter offer 2:
Toronto:
LHD Ekholm (@48%)
W/C Granlund (@25%; retained 50% by Chicago first, then 50% of the 50% by Nashville)
Nashville:
1st round pick 2021 (TOR)
2nd round pick 2022 (TOR)
LW/RW Amirov
RHD Liljegren
Chicago:
3rd round pick 2021 (TOR) for retaining initial 50% of Granlund contract (actually retained salary =792k)
No, we only have 2F we want to protect at this point. Maybe 3 if you count Kunin.Does help with your expansion draft plans. Otherwise you'd need to protect 4D and only 4F.
Maybe true but in dealing Ekholm you'd get futures that are expansion draft exempt while being able to protect more of your players that I'd think he'd want to if he could. Definitely not something close to pushing for an Ekholm deal but it is a benefit; Nashville could make it out of the expansion draft loosing bread crumbs if they did deal Ekholm for something worthwhile. I do expect them to get a better deal than the Muzzin trade but not significantly unless someone really pays up.No, we only have 2F we want to protect at this point. Maybe 3 if you count Kunin.
Of course, that's the fan consensus, however. Poile again may have other strange thoughts. But to us it's a no-brainer that we go 4F-4D. The expansion draft should have zero effect on our decisions.
The second one is a lot better than the first, since Kerfoot isn't involved. And I think we prefer Amirov to Robertson anyway. Next, find a way for us to retain less on Ekholm, and replace Liljegren with a different/better asset since we are already full up on RD. It's moving in the right direction. Maybe just waive Kerfoot or trade him to some other team for something if you think you can get positive value for him elsewhere, then use that cap space so that we retain less. I don't know who you have available to switch Liljegren to, but keep in mind we are full up on smaller PMD and smaller players in general. You guys seem to have a lot of smaller prospects. Maybe just make it the 2022 1st so we can pick our own if there isn't one who fits available in your system.Nic Robertson isn't happening.
Counter offer 1:
Toronto:
LHD Ekholm
W/C Granlund (@50%)
4th round pick 2021 (NSH)
Nashville:
1st round pick 2021 (TOR)
LW/RW Amirov
RHD Liljegren
C/LW Kerfoot
Counter offer 2:
Toronto:
LHD Ekholm (@48%)
W/C Granlund (@25%; retained 50% by Chicago first, then 50% of the 50% by Nashville)
Nashville:
1st round pick 2021 (TOR)
2nd round pick 2022 (TOR)
LW/RW Amirov
RHD Liljegren
Chicago:
3rd round pick 2021 (TOR) for retaining initial 50% of Granlund contract (actually retained salary =792k)
The second one is a lot better than the first, since Kerfoot isn't involved. And I think we prefer Amirov to Robertson anyway. Next, find a way for us to retain less on Ekholm, and replace Liljegren with a different/better asset since we are already full up on RD. It's moving in the right direction. Maybe just waive Kerfoot or trade him to some other team for something if you think you can get positive value for him elsewhere, then use that cap space so that we retain less. I don't know who you have available to switch Liljegren to, but keep in mind we are full up on smaller PMD and smaller players in general. You guys seem to have a lot of smaller prospects. Maybe just make it the 2022 1st so we can pick our own if there isn't one who fits available in your system.
Toronto:
Ekholm (no retention - you get the space by dumping Kerfoot elsewhere)
Granlund (50% retention)
Nashville:
1st Rnd 2021 (tor)
1st Rnd 2022 (tor)
Amirov
2nd Rnd 2022 (tor)
I have never made a trade proposal.Leafs fans in trade proposals:
They are the definition of negative value in a hockey trade.
=
Take them out and they accept the deal.
Muzzin was on the 2nd pairing in LA at the time. GOOD ... yes, but at the time of the Muzzin compared to todays Ekholm ... Ekholm brings more.
He’s literally the only medium Salary player we have to offer in a trade.... I’m quite a fan of him actually but realize if you’re bringing in money than money has to go out. Dudes still worth a 2nd and a 3rd at minimum.is any player hated more by his fanbase than Kerfoot
Literally a part of every deal they propose
And I think by extension... really NO TEAM should be in a position to give the asking price for Ekholm. Because we KNOW in Nashville that we can keep him for a below-market-value contract for the next 6.5 years. No team in any other city knows that. I just don't see how that gap can be meaningfully bridged.Honestly I don't think the Leafs are in a position to give the asking price for Ekholm especially when he would be joining an already good and clogged LD corps. I'd rather just focus on getting a #2 LW for Tavares and Nylander. Also for the record Kerfoot is in nearly every offer for Leafs trades because he is the easiest chunk of money to move around on our roster while still having some value.
And I think by extension... really NO TEAM should be in a position to give the asking price for Ekholm. Because we KNOW in Nashville that we can keep him for a below-market-value contract for the next 6.5 years. No team in any other city knows that. I just don't see how that gap can be meaningfully bridged.
I don't agree with that, of course. If you have good players, keep good players. Ekholm is our best defenseman this year and wants to stay here. I mean, I'd be all over trying to trade Ellis instead, of course. Whether that's even on the table or not, I have no idea. But it shouldn't affect how we value Ekholm. He's our #2 D, and has been our best this year, and shows no signs of slowing down, so if you can lock that up, you lock it up. We're going to feel a lot more pain from the Ellis and Josi deals than we are ever going to feel from extending Ekholm IMHO.I think it would be absolutely stupid to keep signing guys into their mid to late 30s when we're already not good. They're going to get worse and we're just going to continue to get worse.
Well if Ekolm gets traded then Nashville is essentially admitting to a retool or that they wouldn't have been able to resign Ekholm. He seems to me the type of guy you sign to a 4 or 5 year contract at roughly 5 million/season after this contract is up but right now he should be worth a good futures haul just not one likely to blow you away. Remember, Erik Karlsson got traded for esentially a 1st rounder and a few decent players that weren't top tier prospects or players but are easily NHL calibre. OTT got lucky in that case that the pick turned out to be the 3rd or 5th overall in that draft but I feel like the return will be closer to that then multiple 1sts or a 1st + multiple high ranking prospects.And I think by extension... really NO TEAM should be in a position to give the asking price for Ekholm. Because we KNOW in Nashville that we can keep him for a below-market-value contract for the next 6.5 years. No team in any other city knows that. I just don't see how that gap can be meaningfully bridged.