Proposal: Ana cleaning house

MattyNew91

Registered User
Jul 5, 2018
126
22
Nonsense. A low first isn’t “a first”. It’s a low first and carries significantly less value than a first in the lottery. And Liljegren is spare parts. Kerfoot is definitely spare parts. Neither one of them carry much value. Kerfoot almost none. Dermott doesn’t carry a lot of value either. These are just throw in pieces to any large deal.

here you go for a counter Rackell and Manson at 50% retention for Nylander and Dermott.

Toronto has zero “great” prospects. You’ve got two good prospects in Sandin and Robertson. Liljegren is a meh prospect.

Honestly that is alot to give up sorry. We don't need Manson. These are not spare parts besides kerfoot. First off with this past draft the leafs prospect pool is solid. If you did some reading on the leafs prospects you will understand. Amirov we just drafted very good prospect and Topi Niemela was just awarded top defenseman at the world juniors and there's more prospects to talk about but moving on. Liljegren doubled his points last year from 15 points in 43 games to 30 points in 40 games. While playing top pair as a 20 year old. If you watch Dermott the kid will be a top 4 dman he won't get an opportunity unless someone gets hurt for us in the top 4. He's very poised with the puck makes smart plays offensively and defensively. He's not small but not big he's 6feet 205. Skates very well. But you guys are loaded on the left side but he can play the right side as well. With the 1st round pick not sure where you think your going to get a lottery pick when a team thats acquiring Rackell will be a playoff team. If you got a 1st+ Liljegren/Dermott + Engvall for Rakell 50% retained I'd say good trade for both sides. Similar to the Coleman trade. But even after all of this not sure the ducks have cap room to retain so not it works unless kerfoot is involved.
 
Last edited:

duckpuck

Registered User
Sponsor
Jul 10, 2007
2,481
2,548
I think the Ducks are stacked at forward prospects from Jones/Steel/Terry/Comtois/Zegras/Perreault/Lundestrom but other than Drysdale and Mahura... are pretty light on D.

Oilers are the opposite.. stacked with D prospects Broberg/Bouchard/Samorukov/Bear/Lagesson/Jones/Kemp (and lost Marino to the Pens because he wouldn't sign). At forward we only have Holloway (1.92 PPG in the NCAA) and Savoie really.

Your conflating quality and quantity.

Ducks have Fowler, Lindholm (assuming he's re-signs which I think is likely) and Drysdale as the backbone of their d for the next 5 years. Very solid, particularly when you add pieces like Manson, Hakanpaa (a huge pleasant surprise), Curran, Shat, Mahura, Larsson, Thrun, LaCombe and some other decent prospects. Obviously, you add a player like Broberg/Bouchard if you can, but short of that adding D is not a huge priority.

Conversely, the ducks have a ton of forward prospects, only one of which (Zegras) is really elite. Maybe Perreault, Colangelo, or Tracey make a jump, but that would be surprise. The rest of the guys you mentioned are middle 6 or bottom six guys. On top of that, they're likely not re-signing Rakell and Getz, Silf and Henrique are in decline.

For several years, the ducks have had trouble scoring goals. Getting elite goal scorers should be the priority going forward.
 

Deadly Dogma

Registered User
Sponsor
May 3, 2016
8,856
5,102
I'd probably do Engvall, Sandin and a 2021 1st. For Rackell at 50%.

Fare enough. Nice doing business with you.

Hyman-Matthews-Marner
Rackell-Tavares-Nylander

I hate losing Sandin, but by the looks of it I think our top 4 of Reilly, Brodie, Muzzin and Holl is set for a little while, so it's tough for Sandin to get there.
I wouldn't be willing to deal Sandin at all for Rakell.
1st+Engvall+SDA type thing,
If we have to deal any of the big prospects for Rakell I would rather go after some one else with a reasonable ask.
 

lwvs84

Registered User
Jan 25, 2003
4,050
2,759
Los Angeles, CA
I think the Ducks are stacked at forward prospects from Jones/Steel/Terry/Comtois/Zegras/Perreault/Lundestrom but other than Drysdale and Mahura... are pretty light on D.

Oilers are the opposite.. stacked with D prospects Broberg/Bouchard/Samorukov/Bear/Lagesson/Jones/Kemp (and lost Marino to the Pens because he wouldn't sign). At forward we only have Holloway (1.92 PPG in the NCAA) and Savoie really.

Yeah, but most of those forwards don't project as first liners. Zegras should be one, and hopefully one that can drive that top line. Perrault has the tools/skill/potential, but is too far away to be sure if he'll even be a top 6. Steel/Lundestrom/Terry are more likely 2nd/3rd liners and Jones probably a 3rd/4th liner (unless he can learn to finish). Comtois is trending up to potentially be a top liner or top 6 at least. And looking like a goal scorer, which is something the Ducks lack, with Perrault maybe being the only other scorer out of those. Terry, Zegras, Steel are more playmakers, Lundestrom until this season was looking more like a defensive forward, and Jones is looking more like an energy line guy.

On D, the Ducks have Lindholm and Fowler who (hopefully in Lindholm's case) will be around for a while still. Larsson seems to have that 3rd pair LD for now. Ducks also have Drysdale/Mahura/Thrun/Benoit/LaCombe at varying levels of talent coming up on D. Drysdale is likely the only top pair guy (but Lindholm should be there for 5-7 years if he's resigned).
 
  • Like
Reactions: duckpuck

McJedi

Registered User
Apr 21, 2020
10,315
7,101
Florida
Honestly that is alot to give up sorry. We don't need Manson. These are not spare parts besides kerfoot. First off with this past draft the leafs prospect pool is solid. If you did some reading on the leafs prospects you will understand. Amirov we just drafted very good prospect and Topi Niemela was just awarded top defenseman at the world juniors and there's more prospects to talk about but moving on. Liljegren doubled his points last year from 15 points in 43 games to 30 points in 40 games. While playing top pair as a 20 year old. If you watch Dermott the kid will be a top 4 dman he won't get an opportunity unless someone gets hurt for us in the top 4. He's very poised with the puck makes smart plays offensively and defensively. He's not small but not big he's 6feet 205. Skates very well. But you guys are loaded on the left side but he can play the right side as well. With the 1st round pick not sure where you think your going to get a lottery pick when a team thats acquiring Rackell will be a playoff team. If you got a 1st+ Liljegren/Dermott + Engvall for Rakell 50% retained I'd say good trade for both sides. Similar to the Coleman trade. But even after all of this not sure the ducks have cap room to retain so not it works unless kerfoot is involved.

Then don’t. But Toronto isn’t going to be able to turn meh and spare parts like Dermott, Kerfoot and Liljegren into anything of note. Adding them all together does nothing to increase the value of the offer. those guys don’t play for Toronto or play bit roles because they are not worthy of larger NHL roles.

if you move them, will be more of a change of scenery deal for underwhelming players off another roster.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Getz2noone

Zegs2sendhelp

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Jul 25, 2012
39,067
33,541
Honestly that is alot to give up sorry. We don't need Manson. These are not spare parts besides kerfoot. First off with this past draft the leafs prospect pool is solid. If you did some reading on the leafs prospects you will understand. Amirov we just drafted very good prospect and Topi Niemela was just awarded top defenseman at the world juniors and there's more prospects to talk about but moving on. Liljegren doubled his points last year from 15 points in 43 games to 30 points in 40 games. While playing top pair as a 20 year old. If you watch Dermott the kid will be a top 4 dman he won't get an opportunity unless someone gets hurt for us in the top 4. He's very poised with the puck makes smart plays offensively and defensively. He's not small but not big he's 6feet 205. Skates very well. But you guys are loaded on the left side but he can play the right side as well. With the 1st round pick not sure where you think your going to get a lottery pick when a team thats acquiring Rackell will be a playoff team. If you got a 1st+ Liljegren/Dermott + Engvall for Rakell 50% retained I'd say good trade for both sides. Similar to the Coleman trade. But even after all of this not sure the ducks have cap room to retain so not it works unless kerfoot is involved.
I’ve said it in a few threads, leafs have a solid prospect pool, considering where they’ve been drafting and the roster they currently have. They are in a position to make a big move or 2 at deadline to help hopefully bring a cup to Canada. Is that Rakell idk, personally I think they need more of a Gallagher type than a Rakell type.


As for kerfoot/dermott.... dermott wouldn’t be top 4, and we have so many decent lhd to fill in that 3rd pairing that dermott holds 0 value to us. Kerfoot would be another 3c on a team basically running 4 3cs. They arnt included in trades cause Anaheim would want them, they are included for cap purposes for Toronto. I could see something where a 3rd team is added to give a pick/prospect to Anaheim for dermott, but Anaheim has no use for dermott
 

MattyNew91

Registered User
Jul 5, 2018
126
22
I’ve said it in a few threads, leafs have a solid prospect pool, considering where they’ve been drafting and the roster they currently have. They are in a position to make a big move or 2 at deadline to help hopefully bring a cup to Canada. Is that Rakell idk, personally I think they need more of a Gallagher type than a Rakell type.


As for kerfoot/dermott.... dermott wouldn’t be top 4, and we have so many decent lhd to fill in that 3rd pairing that dermott holds 0 value to us. Kerfoot would be another 3c on a team basically running 4 3cs. They arnt included in trades cause Anaheim would want them, they are included for cap purposes for Toronto. I could see something where a 3rd team is added to give a pick/prospect to Anaheim for dermott, but Anaheim has no use for dermott

I don't see a fit there either like you said the leafs more grit in the players they look to acquire. It is more so explaining that the leafs have a good prospect pool what 1st round pick the ducks would get in the sense a late first not a lottery pick. That liljegren and dermott are quality players not spare parts.
 
Last edited:

MattyNew91

Registered User
Jul 5, 2018
126
22
Then don’t. But Toronto isn’t going to be able to turn meh and spare parts like Dermott, Kerfoot and Liljegren into anything of note. Adding them all together does nothing to increase the value of the offer. those guys don’t play for Toronto or play bit roles because they are not worthy of larger NHL roles.

if you move them, will be more of a change of scenery deal for underwhelming players off another roster.

I agreed with you that kerfoot is someone who doesn't have a lot of value. Since the ducks don't have a lot of cap they can't retain much salary hence kerfoot in the deal. But I'm going to have to disagree with how you value Liljegren and Dermott. I'm not going to go into further detail into that I explained my reasoning in my last post so no need to do it again. I dont see a fit here as the Leafs need grittier guys that can chip in goals, not more skill. I just don't see a fit between the 2 teams. I was just explaining if that trade was going to happen those would be the pieces involved. I dont see it happening so I would say move on to another player.
 

leafsfan2point0

Registered User
Jun 8, 2011
1,833
2,098
I'd be okay with trading Liljegren, would not be surprised when he becomes a top 4 rhd on another team. But you have to give to get. No to trading Sandin, he has top pair potential.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CatchyTune

DudeWhereIsMakar

Bergevin sent me an offer sheet
Apr 25, 2014
15,597
6,620
Winnipeg
Gibson to Colorado. Been saying this forever that it'd be an excellent trade which would make the Avalanche an undeniable contender.
 

Zegs2sendhelp

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Jul 25, 2012
39,067
33,541
Gibson to Colorado. Been saying this forever that it'd be an excellent trade which would make the Avalanche an undeniable contender.
It’s been discussed but idk that the avs need to pay that price for a goalie, the goalies they have arnt bad

realistically We’d want

newhook
1st
1 of their goalies (cap purposes/we’d still need a goalie)
Timmins/helloson/barron

big price idk if it’s worth it for the avs at all
 
Last edited:

Anaheim4ever

Registered User
Jun 15, 2017
8,825
5,401
I'd be willing to trade Jones.

We could lose Jones to the expansion draft if they decide to protect Henrique or Milano over him but if they don't trade Manson and choose to protect Manson Seattle probably picks Mahura or Larsson.
Expansion draft protection spots:
Rakell, Silf, Lundestrom, Terry, Steel, Heinen, Henrique

Lindholm, Fowler, Manson

Gibson

Contract converts to a NTC in 2020-21 season meaning he can be exposed: Kesler.
Exempt from the expansion draft: Comtois.
Expiring contracts not needing to be protected: Getzlaf, Hakanpa
 

McJedi

Registered User
Apr 21, 2020
10,315
7,101
Florida
I agreed with you that kerfoot is someone who doesn't have a lot of value. Since the ducks don't have a lot of cap they can't retain much salary hence kerfoot in the deal. But I'm going to have to disagree with how you value Liljegren and Dermott. I'm not going to go into further detail into that I explained my reasoning in my last post so no need to do it again. I dont see a fit here as the Leafs need grittier guys that can chip in goals, not more skill. I just don't see a fit between the 2 teams. I was just explaining if that trade was going to happen those would be the pieces involved. I dont see it happening so I would say move on to another player.
Then play them. Play Dermott and Liljegren in consistent nhl roles. Until you do that, they are just stalled and underwhelming former 1st round picks. I suspect they could fetch a similarly underwhelming former first round pick(s) in a change of scenery deal. But a Rackell? Are you huffing paint? Rackell is a bona fide top six forward. He’s got a couple 30 goal seasons and nice contract. He’s worth far far more than a few stalled prospects that were once upon a time 1st rounders that can’t carve out nhl roles. And Toronto asked for 50% retention on top of that. 50% on an already good contract. Wtf!

You’re insanely overvaluing your two guys if you think they’d fetch that. Aim way lower. Way lower.

the Avs don’t need either guy. But if they did for sake of an argument on value, I wouldn’t even trade a Nukushkin or Calvert for Dermott. Wouldn’t do Jost either. Liljegren? Wow. Even less.
 

MattyNew91

Registered User
Jul 5, 2018
126
22
Then play them. Play Dermott and Liljegren in consistent nhl roles. Until you do that, they are just stalled and underwhelming former 1st round picks. I suspect they could fetch a similarly underwhelming former first round pick(s) in a change of scenery deal. But a Rackell? Are you huffing paint? Rackell is a bona fide top six forward. He’s got a couple 30 goal seasons and nice contract. He’s worth far far more than a few stalled prospects that were once upon a time 1st rounders that can’t carve out nhl roles. And Toronto asked for 50% retention on top of that. 50% on an already good contract. Wtf!

You’re insanely overvaluing your two guys if you think they’d fetch that. Aim way lower. Way lower.

the Avs don’t need either guy. But if they did for sake of an argument on value, I wouldn’t even trade a Nukushkin or Calvert for Dermott. Wouldn’t do Jost either. Liljegren? Wow. Even less.

First off Dermott not a first round pick and not sure how you think Liljegren is a bust or hasn't panned out when he's 21 yrs old, so you have no knowledge of these players. When you are a seller trading away roster players your getting picks and prospects or a young player like dermott. Your getting assets back that have potential nothing is a for sure thing. You can't play guys if there is no spot for them but doesn't mean their not good assets. So calm down I don't think we're good trading partners either way. Since this started I was saying what the trade could look like. Rackell had a 30 goal season 4 years ago thats not that recent and with the cap situation it's tough for contending teams to afford his cap hit even if its reasonable. So cool your jets we have our own opinions and we don't agree it's ok. We move on not that big of a deal. Oh and ya im not huffing paint.
 

Zegs2sendhelp

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Jul 25, 2012
39,067
33,541
First off Dermott not a first round pick and not sure how you think Liljegren is a bust or hasn't panned out when he's 21 yrs old, so you have no knowledge of these players. When you are a seller trading away roster players your getting picks and prospects or a young player like dermott. Your getting assets back that have potential nothing is a for sure thing. You can't play guys if there is no spot for them but doesn't mean their not good assets. So calm down I don't think we're good trading partners either way. Since this started I was saying what the trade could look like. Rackell had a 30 goal season 4 years ago thats not that recent and with the cap situation it's tough for contending teams to afford his cap hit even if its reasonable. So cool your jets we have our own opinions and we don't agree it's ok. We move on not that big of a deal. Oh and ya im not huffing paint.


I think the problem is we have a lot of players that are already in the same situation as Dermott... were over packed on left side, hence why Liljegren is more appealing to us.

And a trade for rakell isnt what toronto fans think... its what the league thinks... i think most pro scouts that watching players to potentially go for are going to watch rakell and think ya hes still got it. There would definetly be a big market for rakell, specially if we retain him down to 1.9-2.0. Pretty much every team in the league can find a way to fit that contract into their team.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MattyNew91

Gliff

Tank Commander
Sponsor
Sep 24, 2011
15,776
10,051
Tennessee
What would you want for Fowler? A first and solid prospect? Something like that

Another top 3 defensemen signed long term.
Seriously though, Cam is the only top 4 defensemen signed longer then next year. If they lose Hampus and they trade Fowler then they are going to be screwed after next year.

He isn’t available.
 

Captain97

Registered User
Jan 31, 2017
7,610
7,175
Toronto, Ontario
It depends if you need retention, if you need us to take cap back etc.

Ideally wed like to bring back
1st + forward or RHD prospect

Do you think the Ducks would do something like:

1st

One of Brook or Harris (lefty but plays RD)

Armia (ufa, cap purposes. Can be flipped at the deadline, probably for a 2nd +)

For

Rakell at 50%
 

Zegs2sendhelp

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Jul 25, 2012
39,067
33,541
Do you think the Ducks would do something like:

1st

One of Brook or Harris (lefty but plays RD)

Armia (ufa, cap purposes. Can be flipped at the deadline, probably for a 2nd +)

For

Rakell at 50%

Canadians def have a ton of good pieces in a rakell trade imo. Montreal, boston, calgary, toronto, and aves are teams id expect to really look hard at rakell.
 

mriswith

Registered User
Oct 12, 2011
4,139
7,282
When do Ducks fans think the rebuild is over/time to contend for a cup is? My view of their timeline is dimmer than what I'm seeing in this thread from their fans.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->