lmao no chance seattle trades mccann for kerfoot but that would look OP

Read description.

I edited it saying it would look OP - i did forget to read it at first mb lol

No worries, I understand!

Yeah it would be OP for sure, imagine how much better it would’ve worked out for the leafs.

They protected Holl and left Kerfoot and McCann exposed.

It wasn't between McCann and Kerfoot.

If I remember correctly, there were two options of protecting players:
1) 8 Skaters (Any position)
2) 7 Forwards and 3 Defencemen

So basically we decided to go with option 1) for the purpose of protecting Justin Holl (going 4 forwards 4 d). Then we traded for McCann because we didn't want to lose Kerfoot (who was still exposed). This is up there as the worst decision Kyle Dubas made as GM. The Kadri trade was really bad, but the actual idea of trading him wasn't, and was something that had to be done. Protecting Holl over McCann was completely unnecessary and objectively made the team worse.

Dubas' main reasoning at the time was that he didn't see how they could replace what Justin Holl brought to the team with his cap hit. (It's important to remember that most teams in the league were in cap hell at the time, so I can see why he may have overvalued Holl at the time). However, even if Holl was as good as Dubas thought he was, then it shows that Dubas clearly had an inability to recognize pro-talent in the NHL. If he can't find someone that can replicate what Justin Holl brings to the team (so badly that he has to let go of a 30 goal scorer), then how should he be deemed capable of finding other talented players? He then went on to spend 5.8 million dollars between Nick Ritchie and Petr Mrazek, lol.

When he signed the core 4, it became even more important to find talent in cheaper players. Dubas, in his time as GM, only found 'cheaper talent' in Mikheyev and Bunting. The biggest issue was never necessarily giving too much money to 4 players, but more-so that he just wasn't able to consistently find those cheaper players that can fill out the bottom-six. So many other teams were able to find guys like that: Valeri Nichushkin, Carter Verhagae, Mackenzie Weegar, Devon Toews, Chandler Stephenson, the list goes on.

Sorry for rambling. I just hated this move it made no sense then and even less sense now. There has to be some explanation. Maybe the trade was only going to be made by pittsburgh if the Leafs decided to protect Holl (idek why Pittsburgh would do that but who knows).

/\
Like he said!

There's a couple of steps further worth taking . . . What if Toronto had gone the typical expansion route (7F - 3D - 1G) and protected both Kerfoot and McCann (and probably Engvall as the 7th?), exposing Holl and Dermott as likely the most attractive targets. THEN, instead of letting Hyman walk, Toronto extends him at 5.5 million (rather than Edmonton) instead of signing any number of players like Ritchie, Kase, Kampf or Mrazek . . . I haven't crunched the cap numbers, or considered extensions for other players or what goalie they would have been able to afford to tandem with Campbell . . . but man, what a forward group! (thinking, of course, that they'd still bring in Bunting that off-season).

Problem is that expansion year, they would have needed to get a defender since Holl was the likely target, and I also think they would have been above the cap with Kerfoot and McCann.

Yeah, retaining Hyman was probably a little far-fetched, but they definitely could have kept McCann over signing Ritchie or Kase, IMO.

In additional hindsight---being 20/20 that it is---I think it's clear now that Holl is very replaceable!

But c'est la vie, I can't complain. . . . Worked out great for Seattle!

Yeah losing kerf of holl would’ve been fine if we kept McCann. I think it may have been dubas’ worst move as GM

Can't remember exactly, but I highly doubt we would've been over the cap since we gave nearly 6 million dollars to Ritchie and Mrazek. Had we kept McCann (who was 2.9 million at the time), safe to say we would have been fine. And if we couldn't extend him, then we could have just flipped him. Not to mention Holl wasn't even in the starting lineup for game 1 against the Lightning in 2022. Time showed it was a stupid move.

Idk I don't think the Leafs would have been able to get a guy for 2M that they were comfortable taking. Not protecting McCann wasn’t a mistake just unfortunate that Francis didn't take the more expensive Kerfoot. Only reason McCann was made available to the Leafs was because he was as good as gone.

Would have been interesting if McCann was selected from Pittsburgh instead of Tanev, perhaps Francis would have selected Kerfoot as well instead as of Holl.

Yeah, keeping McCann would have made it less likely to extend Hyman. Can't say Dubas did anything wrong there. He pretty much completely replaced his production with an 900k dollar forward for two seasons.

Mrazek was getting signed either way, he was supposed to be the safety net if Campbell left. I think Mrazek was Dubas' worst move since signing him. Like him or not Holl was filling a top 4 role for Toronto.

Also, Leafs didn't even have cap that they spent on Richie I don't think. Pretty sure Mikheyev got injured which allowed them to stay under the cap for opening night.

Pittsburgh messed up with exposing McCann in tge first place but I think they had to protect Carter over him due to trade protection but not sure.

Another thing I don't understand is that Dubas would have to 100% sure Holl would have been selected if he were exposed. Like, why wouldn't he try going 7-3, expose both Holl and Kerfoot, and hope Francis selected Kerfoot? Then you essentially have replaced Kerfoot with McCann while keeping Holl. Dubas must have felt that Seattle was very high on Kerfoot since they literally acquired McCann for the purpose of protecting him. So maybe they would have selected Kerfoot over Holl anyways.

Maybe. Either way, the difference between Ritchie and McCann for that one season was ~400k. Mrazek was an awful move, but wasn't as bad as the other two I mentioned simply because of how he was able to get out of the contract. I just think leaving McCann exposed was completely unnecessary, even if you wanted to keep Holl tbh. They probably still could have found a way.

Well McCann and Kerfoot both essential filled the same role but McCann was the better shooter, so if they took Kerfoot, then he would have still had McCann.

If Francis took Holl, and left Dubas with Kerfoot and McCann, there would have been a roster imbalance there, and the Leafs would have been trading for a Dman from a position of weakness, assuming they could have found one.

Also, I can't remember if it's the case or not but the protection lists might have been already submitted at the time of the trade which is why Rutherford traded him for Hallander.

Sure. But that's something I would have been willing to deal with if it meant keeping a 25 year old 30-40 goal scorer on a 2.9 million dollar contract who expires as an RFA.

He might have never scored that much in Toronto, especially playing in a reduced role.