Again, there was no cap dumped. The Wild prioritized depth over Fiala and moved his RIGHTS.

And that has absolutely zero to do with anything I just said, so I'll ask again. How is a player, who out performs his contract, is a good player and the team he is on CAN afford him, a cap dump?

Seems to me if a player who CAN be kept because his team can afford him and is good and affordable is still a cap dump, who isn't a cap dump. Is Nylander a cap dump? He out performs his contract, the Leafs can afford to keep him and he's a good player, is he a cap dump? Is Matthews a cap dump? The Leafs CAN keep him but if they wanted to go in a different direction, does that mean he's worthless? Your definition of a cap dump seems to make everyone a cap dump.

The wild trading Fiala to stay cap compliant would be like the leafs trading nylander to stay cap compliant. Nylander would not be a cap dump because he is a high end player regardless of the circumstances of his teams cap. Kerfoot is a cap dump because you can find equivalent players for less money on the free agent market. Simple as

Well we do still have Sandin to sign. Leafs could certainly move out Muzzin instead. He would cost assets in my opinion.

Your argument just makes zero sense. It's okay to gift jarmo with assets but dubas oh no. Kerfoot in a vacuum is worth far more than B prospect. But at this stage his value is low. I can't believe such a simple trade generates this much hoopla.

Wild get a good player for cheap. Leafs get some cap space and a young player for the marlies. It's win/win in my mind.

My point, more or less.

Bjorkstrand is a much better player than Kerfoot and will probably be a core piece for Seattle going forward. Kerfoot as averaged 12 goals per 82 games since joining the leafs. He is a two way 3rd liner penalty killer. Not comparable to Bjorkstrand

Yes, another thing you do when you're wrong. Call people trolls. I laid out the math quite clearly. Trolls rarely provide detailed stats to back up their argument. Marner, Matthews, Bunting, Tavares, Mikheyev and your defense equated for 234 goals. 75% of your scoring. You've already lost Mikeheyev. Spezza retired. You added Jarnkrok, but you're still looking at a net loss. Moving Kerfoot causes a bigger issue. This isn't rocket science.

And your math was massively flawed. As is your attempt to troll. Have fun with your elementary math buddy.

LOL Adding up your top six scoring forwards and your defense is flawed math? Oooook, bud. You have a nice day.

So if he counts as zero against the cap why didn't they keep him?

I already tried to explain his QO would be held against the cap. They moved him because they could not afford him. Not this season and not in the future. He was a good player but since teams knew he had to be moved for cap reasons he only had a modest return.

Love how you keep avoiding bjorkstrand since he was under contract at the time.

If a player is performing up to or exceeding their contract value they will not cost assets to move. That's not saying they will get full value though.

If they can afford him, then moving him for cap flexibility doesn't make him a cap dump. Why would they move him if it isn't in a hockey trade (or at least trade him at a reduced value) , if they can afford him? They won't be attaching assets to move him because they aren't over the cap nor does he carry negative value.

With Sandin unsigned, the Leafs could move on from someone else and keep him like you suggested, but assuming that the Leafs (not Leaf fans on CF) are actually trying to move him, getting a useful player at a discounted rate isn't farfetched and perhaps they actually get good value for him as well.

Both Kapanen and Johnsson were cap casualties in 2020. Johnsson returned Joey Anderson which is similar to the mock trade by the OP, while Kapanen was moved in a multi-player trade but it's safe to say he returned a 1st at least. The Leafs couldn't afford them because they signed Brodie and resigned Kerfoot if I recall correctly.

But can you? The only player with more points than kerfoot is Kessel. He can't play centre or kill penalties. You also don't know what their contract asks are. Wild certainly aren't looking to hand out more than 1 year in term. If those players will willing to sign with the wild on their terms wouldn't they already be under contract?

They didn't move him for flexibility. As someone else pointed out, they basically prioritized to not have dump actual money to keep him.

I thought it was a pretty modest return that helped both teams.

You either can't seem to grasp the difference or simply don't want to in order to support your argument.

I wouldn't give up a B-level prospect for Kerfoot, vacuum or no vacuum. Period.

He's good, be he's not that good.

Bjorkstrand is a better player than Kerfoot, and he only got back a 3rd and 4th round picks in next year's draft.

Beckman as a B-level prospect is probably worth about a mid 2nd rounder right now.

I'm not seeing the reason why Minnesota should be giving up that good of a prospect for a player that should return less than Bjorkstrand did.

And Kerfoot doesn't do a damn thing for the Wild that both Hartman and Eriksson-Ek don't already do. So acquiring him would be redundant anyway. I'd rather keep Beckman, and use that cap space on something else.

It's flawed in the sense that very few bottom 6's scored 80+ goals. Almost none. But because TO's top 6 scored soooooo much, that makes it bad somehow. That's why it's flawed.

Beckmann is worth a 2nd rounder but a 50 point nhler isn't worth anything? Lol.

No Beckmann is probably somewhere in the neighbourhood of a 4th.

Again, your reading comprehension is not great. I said clear as day that it's not BAD, but it's also not GOOD. It's OK and now you've lost two players in Mikheyev and Spezza. Adding Jarnkrok helps cushion that blow a little above the loss of Spezza, but if you lose Kerfoot it causes a bigger issue. You now would have BAD depths scoring.

It's impossible to grasp an argument when you change your tune every response.

I've stayed quite consistent.

I was talking about Kerfoot not Fiala. Guerin said that signing Fiala wasn't going to work, he essentially said they couldn't afford him, of course they could have made moves to accommodate his new cap but long-story short Minn couldn't afford him, and in an ideal situation where Sandin signs, the Leafs can’t afford Kerfoot. That doesn't mean that the Leafs won't get good value for Kerfoot, or a reduced value. They certainly won't be adding anything to dump him though, since at worst case they waive him to become compliant and someone will claim him. Kerfoot has a M-NTC and not a lot of teams have cap space, so it's no surprise that there hasn't been a trade IF he is being shopped. On waivers though anyone team who wants can claim him, and I'm sure Arz would love his contract, and Chi, and Ana would too since they could flip him around deadline.

Clear as day you said they have a depth scoring issue. And moving Kerfoot is bad. Does Colorado have a depth scoring issue. Their bottom 6 scored less than 70 goals. Once again you are moving the goal posts changing your tune and insulting everyone who points it out. Reading comprehension isn't the problem here. Your "elementary math" and writing skills seem to be at fault. Saying one thing, meaning another and then saying it's clear as day says it all really. Someone who isn't trolling doesn't just spew nonsense only to change it every 5 minutes

Yes, Kerfoot is worthless that has been consistent but why he is changes every response.

Dude, LAST season your depth scoring was OK. You LOST Mikheyev and Spezza. That's now caused an issue. Moving Kerfoot makes it worse.