Not worth it for Toronto. With one injury to any of those top 6 defenceman they'd be screwed. Depth is needed in playoffs - 1 or 2 different guys isn't gonna change anything, especially with giving up Robertson.

The Leafs played the Ducks yesterday and dummied them. Manson and Rackell certainly didn't lool like upgrades over anyone we had in the game.

Before anyone says "they gave up the lead" the game should have been completely out of reach after the 1st but Gibson was terrific. A couple of unlucky plays made it seem closer than it was but make no mistake TO dominated that game.

Manson is on the covid list and did not play, also both players would be an upgrad. Would you not take Gibson over Soup?

Not entirely fair because, as the OP has already pointed out, Manson made no impression on you because he wasn't on the ice, but your last point is well taken: Toronto dominated that game and except for an unlucky own goal in the first, this game would never have gone to overtime.

A frequent theme in one Toronto fan's recent posts is that the Maple Leafs have had a recent bad streak of giving up leads. That happens from time to time even with good teams; I remember Bryan Trottier once explaining that the two-goal lead is probably the easiest to give up because once you get that "bumper" goal, there's a tendency to relax because you think that the game is under control and then that's exactly what lets the other team back into the game. In my experience, it's better to be the team with the lead than the team chasing it.

Manson for a first and change or a second and one of those two prime prospects would be sensible as a "get-acquainted" move with a guy you'd like to sign in the off-season; whether it's worth that cost is another issue. One thing I am pretty sure about is that it makes no sense to discard Holl while acquiring Manson because there's the (admittedly) small chance that Manson DOESN'T re-sign with Toronto; then where are you?

I just don't see Manson as a difference maker. He's not been better than Holl. On this site, half the people on here see the Leafs core as overrated and unable to win and at the same time the depth is barely NHLers. Which makes no sense. How can the core be overrated, the depth filled with AHLers and yet the team is a top 5 team? At some point people should start giving credit where it's due. Is Holl an all-star? No, not at all, but he's certainly been a good player for a couple of years now. Is Dermott a top flight player? Nope, but he's been an above average 3rd pairing guy who does far more good than bad. Is Engvall a star? No but he's absolutely way above average defensively. These are facts that just can't be disputed without being just bias against the Leafs. But this site isn't real life so half the people on here will comment on every Leafs post saying the depth is all crap and worth nothing while guys who literally are awful (Chiarot) are massive upgrades over guys who are playing much better and have much better results. This makes rational discussion essentially impossible.