BeLeafing
Registered User
- Jun 5, 2017
- 2,165
- 3,447
Kerfoot is movable without having to take on salary, and I suspect that's the way the Leafs go if he is to be moved.
If Leafs go there, they get nothing except (structural) cap relief.
My variation, they get what's behind door #2 w/Strome, who is certainly no ? an upgrade and useful for upcoming cup run, May not be able to keep after next season; so what, if it comes to that. And if you can somehow finagle that with his concessions/your juggling, so much the better.
I doubt Strome takes a 1/2 year deal, and I also doubt he takes any discount. This is his year to cash in as much as he can coming off a 60 point season.
Totally reasonable to expect this, but what he wants bends, buckles and breaks in capitulation to the reality of what suitors can and will pay, which is obv strained by the flat cap due to covid.
There is at least hope a lot of this will be overcome by science some pt next yr and with that, overall global economic picture improves. That filters down to sports leagues. NHL in 1-2 yrs is much better market.
So Strome is not gonna be below 4 ish. But one year deal at 4 -- a step backward -- buys him chance to negotiate in a better market right after, not that much later [coupla steps forward, a profit].
Doubt Strome goes 1x4. That's just not a deal that makes a ton of sense for him and I'd think someone offers more.
The idea behind spending more on D is NOT that Kerfoot gets you that defenseman, but rather that the money gained by trading him for a smaller cap hit will.
Brodie/Wallmark is better than Strome/cheap D (say Liljegren) on the Leafs roster next season. And those 2 scenarios would cost around the same.
Your efforts to trade Strome to Toronto just make no sense. Other teams would be better fits.