Rumor: Is Travis Dermott being shopped around?

[Namikaze Minato]

Yep. The word “untouchable “ was even used when he first broke into the league.

Does that bother you? Does your fanbase not run around proclaiming Mantha (who you claimed a better goalscorer than Nylander), Zadina, and Frk, etc. as untouchables? I remember Tomas Jurco being the next Gaborik and Danny Dekeyser being a #1 right handed defenceman before he finished his first season but I'm sure its just "Lol LEAFS Fans"

None of that has anything to do with this thread, this is about the possibility of moving one of Dermott or Holl.

 

[34]

I feel like every player Leafs nation over hype eventually gets kicked out of town. Holl is next. Bunting after a decent year and improvements next year will be shipped in year 4.

Overhyped? Talk about a hypocritical comment to make. Zack Hyman plays in Toronto and Oilers fans cry that he is no good and not an NHL player…then he goes to the Oilers for money reasons and now he is first line player and playing for Team Canada.

The Toronto hate is real.

 

[seanlinden]

No it doesnt. Because you could have made the trade and protected Kerfoot with the 7-3-1 route and let them take one of Holl or Dermott who are both arent playing well and are currently being shopped 10 games into the season. It just proves how stupid it was to make the trade and expose the player to "protect" Kerfott and Holl only to shop Holl a few months later after being a healthy scratch.

Protect Matthews, Marner, Tavares, Nylander, Kerfoot, McCann, a 7th forward, Rielly, Muzzin, Brodie and Campbell,

Expose Holl and Dermott.

Justin Holl was a regular top 4, right shot, defenceman with size playing successfully on our shutdown pairing for $2m with term remaining. Last year was the first in many years that the Leafs D wasn't a problem / area of concern.

Losing Justin Holl was simply not a consideration / option for the Leafs at the time.

You can disagree with whether the Leafs should have taken the approach of committing to Holl.... but once they made / accept that decision, the McCann-Hallander swap was actually quite shrewd.

Kerfoot may have been a favourite target many fans this summer, but the reality is, Toronto was coming off a playoff loss where their #2C went down 10 minutes into the series. Kerfoot was a big reason why Toronto was able to go up 3-1 in the series, and why they were 2 OT losses away from moving on. Obviously the Leafs wanted to go heavy shut-down with their 3rd line in David Kampf, but they likely recognized the importance of having a "backup" #2 centre in the lineup.

If the Leafs had asked Seattle to "take Hallander and a 7th, but leave Kerfoot alone" -- they would have likely been hung up on. By trading for McCann, they were able to accomplish exactly that.

It's a galaxy brain move, but they looked at the situation, realized that there's going to be a lot of quality left-shot, 2-way defencemen available, so Dermott wasn't likely to get picked. They weren't prepared to lose Holl, they didn't want to lose Kerfoot so they went out and made sure that the Kraken have another viable option, and if they still decide on Kerfoot, well then the Leafs have an instant-replacement in McCann.

If Toronto was intent on keeping both McCann & Kerfoot, then yes, an argument could have been made that they should have gone 7-3-1; but the reality is, they couldn't afford to keep both. To put it another way, the difference between Kerfoot & McCann was likely viewed as negligible compared to the expected difference that losing Holl was going to create.

 

[McDoused]

Not to sound like a complete jerk but now that the leafs have plugged 2 rookie defenceman into their lineup, what's the long term plan? They are both RFAs next season and will likely command raises assuming they play well.

 

[TheHelmet]

Holl isnt performing too great right now.

 

[TheNewEra]

will take either dermott or holl

 

[McDoused]

Overhyped? Talk about a hypocritical comment to make. Zack Hyman plays in Toronto and Oilers fans cry that he is no good and not an NHL player…then he goes to the Oilers for money reasons and now he is first line player and playing for Team Canada.

The Toronto hate is real.

Hyman single handedly beat the Oilers a couple times last year. Most fans wished we had a guy like that on our team.

Only reason people mention Hyman as having team canada considerations is because he plays on a line with McDavid already.

 

[Knies iT]

Knowing what you should probably know by now about him, maybe committing to Holl wasn't such a sharp plan. It seemed like a clear failure to properly acknowledge what this 29 year old defenseman actually is.

How difficult would it be for a defenseman to 'perform well' playing behind one of Toronto's scoring lines? Even re-signing Bogosian could've bridged that gap had all of Sandin, Lilegren or Dermott failed to do so.

They 'replaced' McCann with two years of Ritchie at $2.5m. And those poorly spent dollars add up quickly.

If you're going to comment on a team you don't follow, do your research.

They couldn't have "re-signed" Bogosian instead because Bogosian refused to play in Canada again due to the national/provincial COVID restrictions. Exposing Holl would mean letting go of 50% of your PK D before knowing what Liljegren could do at this level.

If I am going to protect an asset, i'd rather it be the one that plays the more important position. A #5 RHD is far more valuable on the market than a middle/bottom six winger in McCann (unsustainable sh% but continue to act like he's an actual top six player). McCann pulled Hallander in trade, who is looking like a bust at the AHL level, after having arguably the most productive year of his career. Holl likely returns a 2nd rounder or equivalent in value.

Now the Leafs are left with a 2m RHD trade chip that they can use to alleviate cap and either improve their forward depth anyways (which you are suggesting McCann would do), or recoup futures. Oh the horror.

 

[34]

Holl isnt performing too great right now.

He has not been playing.

 

[phillipmike]

Justin Holl was a regular top 4, right shot, defenceman with size playing successfully on our shutdown pairing for $2m with term remaining. Last year was the first in many years that the Leafs D wasn't a problem / area of concern.

Losing Justin Holl was simply not a consideration / option for the Leafs at the time.

You can disagree with whether the Leafs should have taken the approach of committing to Holl.... but once they made / accept that decision, the McCann-Hallander swap was actually quite shrewd.

Kerfoot may have been a favourite target many fans this summer, but the reality is, Toronto was coming off a playoff loss where their #2C went down 10 minutes into the series. Kerfoot was a big reason why Toronto was able to go up 3-1 in the series, and why they were 2 OT losses away from moving on. Obviously the Leafs wanted to go heavy shut-down with their 3rd line in David Kampf, but they likely recognized the importance of having a "backup" #2 centre in the lineup.

If the Leafs had asked Seattle to "take Hallander and a 7th, but leave Kerfoot alone" -- they would have likely been hung up on. By trading for McCann, they were able to accomplish exactly that.

It's a galaxy brain move, but they looked at the situation, realized that there's going to be a lot of quality left-shot, 2-way defencemen available, so Dermott wasn't likely to get picked. They weren't prepared to lose Holl, they didn't want to lose Kerfoot so they went out and made sure that the Kraken have another viable option, and if they still decide on Kerfoot, well then the Leafs have an instant-replacement in McCann.

If Toronto was intent on keeping both McCann & Kerfoot, then yes, an argument could have been made that they should have gone 7-3-1; but the reality is, they couldn't afford to keep both. To put it another way, the difference between Kerfoot & McCann was likely viewed as negligible compared to the expected difference that losing Holl was going to create.

You act like Holl would have been taken for sure. And if he was, that a side deal preventing Seattle from taking Holl was prohibited. A GM sees value in his players and knows how to retain that value.

Dubas either saw the value and miscalculated or didn’t see the value which is a miscalculation.

Many many poster said what the hell was Dubas thinking trading for a player and not protecting him to protect Holl. Holl started the season very well but towards the end many saw he couldn’t play top 4 minutes for a full season plus playoffs. If he couldn’t do that in a shortened season with minimal travel in the weakest division, then why would he do it for the first time approaching 30 in the hardest division in the league over 82 games?

We are seeing he couldn’t do it last season and so far early on he is sitting on the bench and the team is winning games without him. Too bad the GM didn’t.

 

[Man Bear Pig]

Not to sound like a complete jerk but now that the leafs have plugged 2 rookie defenceman into their lineup, what's the long term plan? They are both RFAs next season and will likely command raises assuming they play well.

I suppose the plan is to keep them in the lineup. They're outplaying vets like Holl, who's been atrocious. That being said, Holl can still be a pretty good player as he's shown before. His head isn't in it right now for whatever reason. I'm not sure why Dermott would be dealt, he's been his usual #4/#5 type. Solid, unspectacular and a good depth dman.

 

[seanlinden]

You act like Holl would have been taken for sure. And if he was, that a side deal preventing Seattle from taking Holl was prohibited. A GM sees value in his players and knows how to retain that value.

Dubas either saw the value and miscalculated or didn’t see the value which is a miscalculation.

Many many poster said what the hell was Dubas thinking trading for a player and not protecting him to protect Holl. Holl started the season very well but towards the end many saw he couldn’t play top 4 minutes for a full season plus playoffs. If he couldn’t do that in a shortened season with minimal travel in the weakest division, then why would he do it for the first time approaching 30 in the hardest division in the league over 82 games?

We are seeing he couldn’t do it last season and so far early on he is sitting on the bench and the team is winning games without him. Too bad the GM didn’t.

That was the general consensus.... $2m top 4 defenceman is generally more appealing than a $3.5m middle-6 forward. Furthermore, nobody knew if Seattle was going to go the route of "best players for them", or "let's hurt everyone the most". Most importantly, it was a risk that the Leafs could not afford to take.

Yes, many posters thought "what the hell is Dubas thinking trading for a guy that you don't protect". Those people did not comprehend the level at which Dubas and co were operating at. Every team must lose 1 guy -- Dubas made a trade so that he'd lose Hallander instead of Kerfoot. In a roundabout way, he traded Hallander & a 7th for Kerfoot. The price for a side-deal was egregiously expensive and also one that the Leafs could not afford.

Justin Holl was quite effective in 68 games in 19-20. He's had a rough start to the year forsure, maybe he was playing above his head the last 2 years, maybe he's simply having a rough start. Even today, nobody really knows that.

The only component of the expansion draft one can really question is whether the Leafs were correct in valuing Holl based on his play over the previous 2 seasons. If you accept his valuation based on the last 2 years performance, then the Leafs were absolutely correct in not being prepared to risk losing him.

 

[Toronto makebeleifs]

Hm, It would make sense to at least LISTEN on both dermott and holl. Though, with the emergence of both lilly and sandin this is the first time in a long time the leafs can cycle 7 nhl capable defenceman. Injuries will come and depth will come in handy. I dont see any other defenceman in the leafs system that can step in and be even replacement level, yet (menell is close). So, short of a dumb offer with a player (lw ideal) that has decent upside; I do doubt that any deal for holl or dermott is made. That is unless, of course, the leafs 18 wheeler off a cliff at some point.

 

[Apex Predator]

I have already explained many times back when it happened why this logic is flawed, and makes all of this seem worse than it actually is. I am not beating that dead horse again.

It is not very hard to understand the logic as to why the Leafs decided to do what they did, and why it was logically the right move (even now). Dubas explained it in a presser as well. If you are still confused, then go back to the threads of when it happened and you should be able to figure it out.

you know it’s okay to admit that it was a wrong move? If the leafs do end up moving one of Holl or a Dermott over the next little bit then it was a wrong move.

You can argue for either opinion and be right when it went down at the time. With some hindsight and IF the leaf do trade one of them it turns out they made the wrong move protecting Holl. They can use the extra forward depth that McCann could have provided as the bottom 2 lines don’t bring little offense.

 

[belair]

That was the general consensus.... $2m top 4 defenceman is generally more appealing than a $3.5m middle-6 forward. Furthermore, nobody knew if Seattle was going to go the route of "best players for them", or "let's hurt everyone the most". Most importantly, it was a risk that the Leafs could not afford to take.

Yes, many posters thought "what the hell is Dubas thinking trading for a guy that you don't protect". Those people did not comprehend the level at which Dubas and co were operating at. Every team must lose 1 guy -- Dubas made a trade so that he'd lose Hallander instead of Kerfoot. In a roundabout way, he traded Hallander & a 7th for Kerfoot. The price for a side-deal was egregiously expensive and also one that the Leafs could not afford.

Justin Holl was quite effective in 68 games in 19-20. He's had a rough start to the year forsure, maybe he was playing above his head the last 2 years, maybe he's simply having a rough start. Even today, nobody really knows that.

The only component of the expansion draft one can really question is whether the Leafs were correct in valuing Holl based on his play over the previous 2 seasons. If you accept his valuation based on the last 2 years performance, then the Leafs were absolutely correct in not being prepared to risk losing him.

Most of those people wouldn't be in the situation Dubas and company are in when it comes to cap management. I personally don't see him as a person in an enviable position. I don't view him as an overly intelligent manager.

Fact of the matter is that the main decision was to protect Holl over the forwards. And I don't think it's much of a stretch to say that it was a poor one.

 

[belair]

If you're going to comment on a team you don't follow, do your research.

They couldn't have "re-signed" Bogosian instead because Bogosian refused to play in Canada again due to the national/provincial COVID restrictions. Exposing Holl would mean letting go of 50% of your PK D before knowing what Liljegren could do at this level.

If I am going to protect an asset, i'd rather it be the one that plays the more important position. A #5 RHD is far more valuable on the market than a middle/bottom six winger in McCann (unsustainable sh% but continue to act like he's an actual top six player). McCann pulled Hallander in trade, who is looking like a bust at the AHL level, after having arguably the most productive year of his career. Holl likely returns a 2nd rounder or equivalent in value.

Now the Leafs are left with a 2m RHD trade chip that they can use to alleviate cap and either improve their forward depth anyways (which you are suggesting McCann would do), or recoup futures. Oh the horror.

I mentioned Bogosian as an off-the-cuff option because I don't think it's overly difficult to replace Holl's minutes with someone who doesn't drown with the assignment. 'Positional value' doesn't really help a team on the ice.

When it comes to their options moving forward it'll be interesting to see how other teams value these assets knowing moving either of them helps Toronto's cap situation.

 

[HockeyVirus]

Not to sound like a complete jerk but now that the leafs have plugged 2 rookie defenceman into their lineup, what's the long term plan? They are both RFAs next season and will likely command raises assuming they play well.

They will get bridge deals. Likely in the 1 -1.5 AAV range each for maybe 2-3 years? After Campbell is signed, they will likely be dealt with next. Sandin is playing PP2 so he won't put up a ton of points but has been very good. Liljegren has played his way into the into 4 and was paired with Rielly last night so... They could be complicated negotiations but they don't have arbitration rights and have like a season of games.

They don't have much for leverage.

 

[ToDavid]

Liljegren has played his way into the into 4 and was paired with Rielly last night so...

I think you're jumping the gun a bit. He played 50 seconds with Rielly last night which is likely entirely just overlap on shift changes. He is firmly on the third pair and likely will be all season. Granted, they're definitely playing more than Keefe has typically deployed his third pair in the past, so he seems to trust them.

 

[Apex Predator]

Most of those people wouldn't be in the situation Dubas and company are in when it comes to cap management. I personally don't see him as a person in an enviable position. I don't view him as an overly intelligent manager.

Fact of the matter is that the main decision was to protect Holl over the forwards. And I don't think it's much of a stretch to say that it was a poor one.

I just don’t understand why some can’t admit it’s looking like the wrong decision and leafs would be better of 7-3-1.

 

[HockeyVirus]

I just don’t understand why some can’t admit it’s looking like the wrong decision and leafs would be better of 7-3-1.

Using hindsight, it was the wrong move potentially based on a 10 game sample size. That doesn't mean the decision made no sense and it wasn't thought out at the time.

 

[Apex Predator]

Using hindsight, it was the wrong move potentially based on a 10 game sample size. That doesn't mean the decision made no sense and it wasn't thought out at the time.

im sure it was thought out and at the time I think either side could be right at that time. This is only based if they do trade one of Holl and Dermott and then you can say it was wrong decision.

 

[TheGoldenJet]

Toronto's roster decisions haven't made a ton of sense dating all the way back to the Tavares signing.

Aka the dubious era of Blunder Boy Kyle Dubas.

 

[TheGoldenJet]

He has not been playing.

That’s because he sucks and has been picking up healthy scratches.

 

[phillipmike]

That was the general consensus.... $2m top 4 defenceman is generally more appealing than a $3.5m middle-6 forward. Furthermore, nobody knew if Seattle was going to go the route of "best players for them", or "let's hurt everyone the most". Most importantly, it was a risk that the Leafs could not afford to take.

Yes, many posters thought "what the hell is Dubas thinking trading for a guy that you don't protect". Those people did not comprehend the level at which Dubas and co were operating at. Every team must lose 1 guy -- Dubas made a trade so that he'd lose Hallander instead of Kerfoot. In a roundabout way, he traded Hallander & a 7th for Kerfoot. The price for a side-deal was egregiously expensive and also one that the Leafs could not afford.

Justin Holl was quite effective in 68 games in 19-20. He's had a rough start to the year forsure, maybe he was playing above his head the last 2 years, maybe he's simply having a rough start. Even today, nobody really knows that.

The only component of the expansion draft one can really question is whether the Leafs were correct in valuing Holl based on his play over the previous 2 seasons. If you accept his valuation based on the last 2 years performance, then the Leafs were absolutely correct in not being prepared to risk losing him.

you can keep saying that “obviously it was the right move at the time” when clearly it wasn’t when it questioned at the time and less than a few months later, Holl is a healthy scratch and they are shopping both he and Dermott.

Obviously the evaluation was incredibly off base.

 

[The Podium]

im sure it was thought out and at the time I think either side could be right at that time. This is only based if they do trade one of Holl and Dermott and then you can say it was wrong decision.

You realize youre not accounting for the return on Holl/Dermott? If they get a more valuable package than McCann was it the wrong move?