I'm not giving up Lind for Kerfoot.

Anaheim deal is fine but Manson should come extended. Otherwise I'll pass.

Vancouver needs a 3C and Toronto has one that fits. The value is fine. Leafs traded Johnsson for Joey Anderson so it's a comparable deal that works for both teams.

As for Manson, Cancouver would have a year to talk about a deal with him. The big thing for Vancouver is getting Eriksson off the books. If Manson came with an extension the price likely doesn't have Eriksson being moved in the deal, which doesn't work for Vancouver.

The whole point of Forsberg is to be the backup so that Gustavsson gets more reps as the AHL starter. If Gus looks good he might jump up at the deadline, but I doubt Forsberg gets dealt before then. Much like his name, Daccord is just okay, and not ready for full time NHL duty. Not to mention all our goalies were decimated by injuries this year (Murray is especially injury prone).

I think Gustavsson showed he's more than ready for NHL action this year. If the value is there to move Forsberg (which this is an extreme overpay) I think Ottawa is dumb to not consider it. With all their cap space they have if their plan ends up being to play Gustavsson in the minors, they can sign a back up for 1 year and still have the assets from a Forsberg deal. Seems like a no brainer there

Idk if I was talking to you about this earlier, but I don't really like Kerfoot as a 3C option for Vancouver. I don't think he's a great fit given his playstyle and strengths; he would be miscast for his role on the team. We should be able to do better, even if we have to wait until next offseason.

Benning already let Toffoli walk after giving up assets for him. He won't get away with it again. Negotiating it beforehand would drive the price up so he doesn't have to do that, but he better be committed to retaining him.

Did you miss the murray being injury prone part? We can’t have gustavsson be our #2, he’ll likely then be the starter at some point and that’s not ideal, he’s supposed to be our long term starter, not ruined at 23 by being forced into too big of a role too early. Being solid for a 9 game stretch does not make you NHL ready and he’ll see a lot more rubber as the AHL starter than the NHL backup, which is more important right now. Signing forsberg just to trade him and sign another backup makes no sense either lol

VAN is looking for a matchup/shutdown 3C to take some of the defensive burden off of Horvat, Kerfoot doesn't fit that bill.

Those are some odd numbers for Hughes and petey. Hamonic is not willing to take a discount this time around unfortunately

For an extreme overpay for Forsberg you're putting way too much value on him. There's better goalies in free agency to sign. If you could have a better goalie and have more picks, you do it. That seems pretty common sensed.

Kerfoot actually does fit that bill. It's why he played the role this season for Toronto and it seemed to work out pretty good for them..

They're based on comparables at those terms. Hughes gets McAvoy's comparison with slightly more pay, and Petey gets Aho's. Many people are saying Barzal for him, but I think it's a bad idea to give both Hughes and Petey the same term. Giving Petey a hybrid bridge/term deal at slightly more makes sense so they can be more flexible when they need new contracts.

Hamonic has no value to many other markets. He's already clearly stated that he wants to play in western Canada do that limits the amount of teams to 4 at best. Edmonton and Calgary don't need him, so now it's down to 2 teams - Winnipeg and Vancouver. There's not gonna be much of a bidding war for him in the first place. He was paid $1.25M this season and performed mediocre at best. A raise likely isn't in the cards for him, but if he won't take a slight pay cut it's whatever, there's enough cap space to give him $250K more - not a big deal.

Okay but then we get to the argument that an extreme overpay would not be offered for a guy frequently on the waiver wire just because he makes league min. Might as well trade a 7th for Stalock, or sign a guy like Comrie/Gillies/Johansson/Domingue/Wedgewood/Hogberg if you want a meh league min backup.

Hamonic has already said he won’t limit himself to Western Canada this time around.

It's an overpay because Vancouver is also moving Beagle who is an LTIR cap dump in case he comes back from injury. & Forsberg proved himself after he was claimed by Ottawa. He wasn't on waivers due to his play last season. Waivers was different last year and it was a bunch of Humber crunching due to COVID. It wasn't a regular waiver year

I saw you mention a couple times that the return is an overpay for Forsberg. It's not a Forsberg trade, it's a Beagle cap dump. And assuming he does come off of IR you're paying the going rate of a 2nd for a 3m cap dump. Obviously this 2nd is a little higher than the TB 2nd that Ottawa is getting next year for eating the 3m from Tampa so a bit of an overpay. But a 2nd for Beagle leaves us with Forsberg for a 5th really isnt an overpay at all given his play and the fact that he earned himself a contract.

When Beagle himself is worth like a 4th - 5th round pick so there's already a 3 round overpay there, Forsberg didn't prove THAT much to prove he's worth equal to a 3 round increase.

Goalies don't go for that much in general, especially back ups. Rittich went for a 3rd which was considered a steep price. Dubnyk went for essentially a 5th (Pateryn was just a contract spot in the deal), Johansson went for a 6th, etc. So what makes Forsberg so much more valuable than them?

So call it Forsberg = 5th, and then Ottawa gets a high 2nd for taking on Beagle. That's more than fair for Ottawa.

Anaheim isn't a charity, so taking Eriksson off your hands should cost you your 2021 second. Manson would cost you another second and a good prospect, not a guy who would never make the 90 miles from San Diego to Anaheim because Brayden Tracey, Blake McLaughlin and Jack Kopacka are all better.

Lmao.

The charity here is actually Vancouver. The deal breaks down like this:
Eriksson for Kesler (Anaheim wins that deal regardless of how bad Eriksson is, at least he can play. More on that in a minute).
1st round pick and Gadjovich for Manson (Anaheim wins value, Vancouver gets the better player)

A 1st round pick is already an overpayment for Manson, getting a good prospect is just a bonus. Saying that all those prospects are better is just your opinion, Gadjovich offers a different style that compliments Anaheim's prospects skill better - so it's a better fit.

As for Eriksson for Kesler - this is where Vancouver is basically donating here and being the charity more than Anaheim is. Eriksson has a cap hit of $6M but is only owed $4M in real money ($1M signing bonus and $3M base salary). Chances are this type of deal is made after the signing bonus is paid, so Anaheim only pays $3M for a player that they'll actually use. Where has Vancouver receives Kesler who won't play ever again and is LTIR bound. When on LTIR, a team only gets the relief of the amount of contract that's over $81.5M so Anaheim would need to spend right to the upper limit to get his full relief if you're gonna argue cap space, which A sheik very likely doesn't do this season. In terms on money, Kesler is owned $6.675M in base salary, so it's to be paid out over the course of the season. Since he's injured and I'm 99% sure his contract is insured (just haven't checked on that), the team only pays 20% of his contract. That means the team pays $1.335M to Kesler. While yes that's lower than Eriksson's $3M, in terms of business it's smarter to oh a guy $3M to actually play rather than $1.335M to sit at home. For a low budget team like Anaheim, it would seem way smarter to pay a player to play, rather than not. Where as Vancouver is more profitable so they can afford to pay a player not to play.

So I fail to see how "Anaheim is a charity" here when in terms of value, Anaheim is far from losing this deal.

Did it work for them? come on

Kerfoot was part of the line that shut McDavid out for 3 straight games.

Toronto finished 1st in the division.

Playoffs was different if that's what you're referring to. Kerfoot was moved up to take Tavares' spot and needed to be more of an offensive player and he ended up being one of Toronto's top 3 players in the series.

So did it work for them? ... yeah it worked for them.

McDavid doesnt get shutdown, he takes nights off.
Toronto finished 1st on the backs of their elite talent, and a weak division, not kerfoot.

yes had a great playoffs, cause he didnt shut down anyone, cause he isnt a defensive minded player.

plain and simple the 2nd and/or 3rd and/or prospects can be better used on a proven player for 3LC, not someone who pretends to play it, partly based on lack of any other options.

Lmao.

Arguing that trading Josh Manson (with $1 million retention, no less), an actual NHL player (and not a bad one, at that) for two non-roster anchors and a second-half first-round draft pick in 2022 is an exchange that favors Anaheim is a contention unsupported by fact or logic.

You’re wrong on timing. Contrary to your assertion that “Chances are this type of deal is made after the signing bonus [due Eriksson] is paid,” the only conceivable justification for it is to relieve Anaheim of the burden of protecting Manson in the expansion draft. So Anaheim would still be responsible for paying Eriksson his full $4 million in compensation for 2021-2022.

You’re wrong on money. Manson is due $4,450,000 and Kesler $1,335,000 for a total of $5,785,000. Your deal has Anaheim paying Manson $1.1 million and Eriksson $4 million, for a “savings” of $685,000. And that’s not taking into account the useless mouth.

You’re wrong on player value. The egregious fallacy in the first half of your argument for this trade, that Eriksson is “a player that they’ll actually use” so that Anaheim would benefit from having him consume a roster spot (which Kesler doesn’t), is that (a) we wouldn’t, and (b) he wouldn’t. Eriksson appeared in 7 games for the Canucks last year and, with Maxime Comtois, Max Jones and Isac Lundestrom ahead of him on the depth chart at LW (and that’s assuming we trade Rickard Rakell, or move him to RW), and Alex Volkov perhaps getting time on his natural side, and Sonny Milano and Nic DesLauriers and perhaps Dan Heinen vying for playing time there, Eriksson would not be a beneficial addition to the Anaheim roster at all; he’d spend the entire season in San Diego. As a result, Anaheim would pay the same cap penalty for burying his cap hit as Vancouver is exposed to now: $4,875,000 for no on-ice value whatsoever.

The fallacy in the second half of your argument for this ill-considered trade, that Jonah Gadjovich and the future first have some value to the Ducks, is similarly obvious on an objective basis. Aside from the LWs mentioned in the previous paragraph, Anaheim has Brayden Tracey, Blake McLaughlin and Jack Badini in the pipeline, all of whom are better prospects than Gadjovich. So your assertion that “Anaheim adds a power forward prospect that would complement their skilled players for years to come” is just an effort to sound like a knowledgeable pundit when in reality it is nothing more than silly puffery. (In all likelihood, Anaheim probably wouldn’t offer him a renewal when his one year with San Diego was up.) The same applies to your contentions about Manson’s draft-pick value. To begin with, he’s clearly worth a current-year second and a good prospect, and postponing a pick means you have to provide additional compensation for each year. You intuit this by making the pick a second-half pick in the first round of the 2022 draft or an unconditional (i.e., could be much, much higher) pick in the 2023 draft. But even if you think that a first-round pick for him is an overpay in isolation, the fact that the Ducks would be trading one year of a useful player now for no years of any useful player until at least 2023 is sufficient basis for Anaheim to get better value. In short, Anaheim won’t be trading Manson for less than a 2021 second and a better prospect than Gadjovich.

Finally, making snide comments about Jim Benning or using juvenile expressions like “lmao” or “lmfao” is a dead giveaway of immaturity. If you want your opinions to be taken seriously by knowledgeable and experienced readers, you should grow out of it.

I’m not saying that it isn’t fair! I’d accept this from Ottawa’s end. Forsberg is replaceable.

Just wanted to establish that it really isn’t an overpay. Beagle is a pure cap dump. If his contract was 1m instead of 3m he might have been worth those late picks that you mentioned but much like the Paquette and Coburn dump Ottawa took on last year, an okay player on a bad contract is negative value for you. A 2nd is fair to dump him. If you want to do a 5th for forsberg it’s not ideal but also not the end of the world from Ottawa’s perspective.

After Beagle's signing bonus is paid, he's only owed $1.2M. And considering he'll be on LTIR for the season likely, his team only pays 20% of that and the rest is covered by insurance. Getting a 2nd round pick for that is a very high price.

So it is an overpay when Forsberg is properly valued at a 5th, and then it's a high overpay for a an LTIR guy. Marc Staal was traded with a 2nd and had a much higher cap hit, so Beagle at only a $3M cap hit shouldn't cost that but I overpaid to make it worth it on Ottawa's side.