Line Combos: Lines 2-4 (To start training camp/pre-season)

[Joe Sakic]

Kerfoot to me is still one of two things:
1) Exactly what he seems - a talented guy who will grow into a legitimate top 6 offensive role.
2) A career AHL player who has offensive talent but can't play a complete enough game to consistently make NHL rosters in an offensive role and isn't good enough defensively to play in the bottom 6.

I'm really hoping for 1, but the AHL has plenty of guys with good offensive abilities who can't stay in the NHL.

No way this is serious

 

[Makar to MacK]

No way this is serious

What is not serious about that post? You know what they say, opinions are like buttholes everybody has one.

 

[FreshFitted67]

Kerfoot really reminds me of this guy.....
Tyler Bozak at eliteprospects.com

Both come from the NCAA. Both got burnt out playing full NHL seasons.
Both can be productive at times and are very good passers.
Both can sense out potential opportunities.

However, I will say this...
Tyler and Alex are kind of defensive liabilities and they often get outmatched when playing as second line centres.... on a contending team, Alex and Tyler would be third line centres. Most second line centres in the NHL have more talent, size, physicality, intangibles, and defensive awareness.

But... like Tyler Bozak, Kerfoot is a “free wallet” meaning that we found him, out of nowhere, without drafting him or trading for him and we should be very happy we have him.

Definitely an NHLer

Probably better suited as a 3rd line Center, but I’m glad he’s playing for us, 2nd line or not...

Possibly our fourth best forward this year

 

[UncleRisto]

Stastny for Kerfoot+2nd.

 

[CobraAcesS]

Stastny for Kerfoot+2nd.

This has to be a main board thread now lol. Vegas fans haven't lived until some team wants your center for b level assets.

 

[MarkT]

No way this is serious

I know, right? I said something most people here disagree with, so I can't possibly be serious. No one in their right mind would have different viewpoints than the majority in this forum because everyone knows any time someone does that, eventually someone will come along and belittle that viewpoint and most will just dismiss it and refuse to actually address the viewpoint seriously.

 

[Clainer09]

I know, right? I said something most people here disagree with, so I can't possibly be serious. No one in their right mind would have different viewpoints than the majority in this forum because everyone knows any time someone does that, eventually someone will come along and belittle that viewpoint and most will just dismiss it and refuse to actually address the viewpoint seriously.

Big stretch to go from "a talented guy who will grow into a legitimate top 6 offensive role." which he is playing now and most of last year, to "career AHL player with offensive talent." Not sure what some of you watched last year but without the surprise rookie production of Kerfoot scoring 43 points, we may not have made the playoffs. He stepped up as well as he could when Mack went down for a couple weeks. He faded away near the end but so did every former NCAA player which I'm sure he's well aware of. I get that the AHL has lots of talented players that can't crack the big club but none of those guys have come in and posted a 43 point rookie campaign!

 

[returnofthemack29]

I know, right? I said something most people here disagree with, so I can't possibly be serious. No one in their right mind would have different viewpoints than the majority in this forum because everyone knows any time someone does that, eventually someone will come along and belittle that viewpoint and most will just dismiss it and refuse to actually address the viewpoint seriously.

No it’s just that all of your posts take the personality of a person who always has to be the contrarian. People have different opinions from the majority once in a while, but all of your posts seem to go against the popular opinion just because you enjoy riling things up and making yourself feel smarter than you actually are. Then you go and victimize yourself and blame everybody else for not taking you seriously. Jeez...I wonder why??

 

[flyfysher]

No it’s just that all of your posts take the personality of a person who always has to be the contrarian. People have different opinions from the majority once in a while, but all of your posts seem to go against the popular opinion just because you enjoy riling things up and making yourself feel smarter than you actually are. Then you go and victimize yourself and blame everybody else for not taking you seriously. Jeez...I wonder why??

This. And it's unnecessary.

 

[MarkT]

Big stretch to go from "a talented guy who will grow into a legitimate top 6 offensive role." which he is playing now and most of last year, to "career AHL player with offensive talent." Not sure what some of you watched last year but without the surprise rookie production of Kerfoot scoring 43 points, we may not have made the playoffs. He stepped up as well as he could when Mack went down for a couple weeks. He faded away near the end but so did every former NCAA player which I'm sure he's well aware of. I get that the AHL has lots of talented players that can't crack the big club but none of those guys have come in and posted a 43 point rookie campaign!

I've already addressed that exact argument made by Foppberg - he had a ridiculously high shooting percentage. If his defensive game remains poor (or worse) and if his offensive numbers drop off, I could easily see him being sent down to the AHL and never really getting back to where he is now. As I've said multiple times, I hope that doesn't happen, but I see it as a realistic possibility. And the reason I see those two extremes as the likeliest options is I don't see Kerfoot as an effective bottom 6 player. To me it's either top 6 or bust for him.

No it’s just that all of your posts take the personality of a person who always has to be the contrarian. People have different opinions from the majority once in a while, but all of your posts seem to go against the popular opinion just because you enjoy riling things up and making yourself feel smarter than you actually are. Then you go and victimize yourself and blame everybody else for not taking you seriously. Jeez...I wonder why??

"all of my posts" sure. Whatever you say
Honestly, one of my least favourite things about posting on forums (in general) is when people like you think they know who I am and what my motives are and treat me accordingly. Consider for a moment that I'm more genuine in these forums than I am anywhere else in my day to day life and then see what kind of person you are for saying what you have just said to me. You accuse me of victimizing myself while at the same time insulting my intelligence, calling me a liar, calling me a troll, and saying people are justified for not taking my posts seriously. Try looking in a mirror for a minute the next time you get the urge to write a post like this.

Edit: Adding one thing. I find it especially hilarious that you'd accuse me of being always contrarian as I have an argument in another thread where I'm defending the position shared by probably 95% of the people on these forums.

 

[McMetal]

There's no way Kerfoot will be an AHLer. Regression, sure, but not "never touches NHL ice again" kind of regression. I think the worst case for him is one of those guys who is top six on a bad team but not somebody you want on a championship roster. Those kind of journeyman top sixers are everywhere in the NHL.

 

[MarkT]

There's no way Kerfoot will be an AHLer. Regression, sure, but not "never touches NHL ice again" kind of regression. I think the worst case for him is one of those guys who is top six on a bad team but not somebody you want on a championship roster. Those kind of journeyman top sixers are everywhere in the NHL.

Okay, but those journeymen top 6 guys tend to be at least serviceable defensively, no? Either that or they're riding on a few past seasons of being good. Kerfoot has one that could potentially be based on luck. He wasn't good defensively last season and if his offense disappears (what if he gets equally unlucky this season?) and his defensive skills don't improve, then I don't see how he can keep a spot on the roster. I assume another team or the Avs would give him another shot at some point if the worst happened, but there's no guarantees he'd get a legit shot to regain his offensive form. So for me the key thing is his defensive ability. If he's a defensive liability, the only thing that keeps him in an NHL lineup is his offensive ability, and if isn't able to produce there, then his roster spot disappears too. I hope none of that happens.

 

[returnofthemack29]

I've already addressed that exact argument made by Foppberg - he had a ridiculously high shooting percentage. If his defensive game remains poor (or worse) and if his offensive numbers drop off, I could easily see him being sent down to the AHL and never really getting back to where he is now. As I've said multiple times, I hope that doesn't happen, but I see it as a realistic possibility. And the reason I see those two extremes as the likeliest options is I don't see Kerfoot as an effective bottom 6 player. To me it's either top 6 or bust for him.



"all of my posts" sure. Whatever you say
Honestly, one of my least favourite things about posting on forums (in general) is when people like you think they know who I am and what my motives are and treat me accordingly. Consider for a moment that I'm more genuine in these forums than I am anywhere else in my day to day life and then see what kind of person you are for saying what you have just said to me. You accuse me of victimizing myself while at the same time insulting my intelligence, calling me a liar, calling me a troll, and saying people are justified for not taking my posts seriously. Try looking in a mirror for a minute the next time you get the urge to write a post like this.

Edit: Adding one thing. I find it especially hilarious that you'd accuse me of being always contrarian as I have an argument in another thread where I'm defending the position shared by probably 95% of the people on these forums.

Dude this is a forum. It’s not that deep! I didn’t insult you as an actual person. As you said, I don’t know you. I was just stating my opinion of the persona that you display while posting here. You can disagree with me and that’s ok. It just seems that you can’t handle criticism and start lashing out at anybody who doesn’t like your take, so it makes any continued discussion with you unenjoyable and, therefore, fruitless.

 

[McMetal]

Okay, but those journeymen top 6 guys tend to be at least serviceable defensively, no? Either that or they're riding on a few past seasons of being good. Kerfoot has one that could potentially be based on luck. He wasn't good defensively last season and if his offense disappears (what if he gets equally unlucky this season?) and his defensive skills don't improve, then I don't see how he can keep a spot on the roster. I assume another team or the Avs would give him another shot at some point if the worst happened, but there's no guarantees he'd get a legit shot to regain his offensive form. So for me the key thing is his defensive ability. If he's a defensive liability, the only thing that keeps him in an NHL lineup is his offensive ability, and if isn't able to produce there, then his roster spot disappears too. I hope none of that happens.

Offense-only wingers are everywhere in the NHL, I don't see why Kerfoot can't make it as one. And that's kind of the whole reason a lot of those journeyman top sixers don't make it on good teams, because they only bring points. On a bad team without a full top six, a player like that is great, but for a real contender, they don't have room for him in the top six and he doesn't fit well in the bottom six.

Not that I'm saying that's what Kerfoot will be, because I really hesitate to bet against him after the season (and preseason) he had. But there is absolutely precedent for a player with Kerfoot's floor having a long NHL career.

 

[MarkT]

Dude this is a forum. It’s not that deep! I didn’t insult you as an actual person. As you said, I don’t know you. I was just stating my opinion of the persona that you display while posting here. You can disagree with me and that’s ok. It just seems that you can’t handle criticism and start lashing out at anybody who doesn’t like your take, so it makes any continued discussion with you unenjoyable and, therefore, fruitless.

Um, yes, this is a forum, which means there are real people writing the words you see. I'm not a "persona", I'm a person. When you state your opinion of a person on a forum, you're stating your opinion of that real person unless they've made it clear that they're playing a character or not saying what they really mean. Are you playing a character here? If so... why?

Also, in what universe is "No way this is serious" legitimate criticism? I'm all for people disagreeing with my opinion and trying to find holes in my logic or making counter arguments - that's great. But dismissing my opinions as not being serious, trolling, or just being contrarian to make myself seem smart (?) - I see those as attempts to get me to shut up, not criticisms or disagreements.

 

[henchman21]

Kerfoot could easily be Gagner 2.0... a player that can produce offense when in the right role, but a player no team really wants. There was a lot of positives in his preseason and I hope he proves a lot of people wrong including myself.

 

[MarkT]

Offense-only wingers are everywhere in the NHL, I don't see why Kerfoot can't make it as one. And that's kind of the whole reason a lot of those journeyman top sixers don't make it on good teams, because they only bring points. On a bad team without a full top six, a player like that is great, but for a real contender, they don't have room for him in the top six and he doesn't fit well in the bottom six.

Not that I'm saying that's what Kerfoot will be, because I really hesitate to bet against him after the season (and preseason) he had. But there is absolutely precedent for a player with Kerfoot's floor having a long NHL career.

I highlighted the key part. There's no guarantee Kerfoot will be able to consistently produce points at the NHL level. He did last season, but that's not a guarantee of future success.

But I'm not saying what Kerfoot will be either and I'm not betting against him. My money (if I were forced to bet) is on him being legit.

 

[returnofthemack29]

Um, yes, this is a forum, which means there are real people writing the words you see. I'm not a "persona", I'm a person. When you state your opinion of a person on a forum, you're stating your opinion of that real person unless they've made it clear that they're playing a character or not saying what they really mean. Are you playing a character here? If so... why?

Also, in what universe is "No way this is serious" legitimate criticism? I'm all for people disagreeing with my opinion and trying to find holes in my logic or making counter arguments - that's great. But dismissing my opinions as not being serious, trolling, or just being contrarian to make myself seem smart (?) - I see those as attempts to get me to shut up, not criticisms or disagreements.

You’ve seen Catfish, right? This is the internet...people misrepresent who they are all the time!! You can’t really be this naive! We don’t know anything about a poster besides their username and the little information that they may share, and even that might not be true. I’m not playing a character, I’m just not so naive that I take what everybody posts and their true motives at face value.

Have you thought about maybe I don’t know...not replying to every post?? Maybe some people see that it’s bothering you and are responding like that on purpose or maybe they don’t have the time or need to have an in-depth debate with you and would rather just make a short response about how ridiculous your notion is. You know that it’s ok if somebody disagrees with you and responds in a way that you don’t find conducive. Just like everything else on the internet, pick and choose what you believe warrants your time and attention. On your part, it’s just a waste of time to criticize people how they choose to respond to you. This is an anonymous forum on the internet...I suggest to stop taking things so seriously!

 

[MarkT]

You’ve seen Catfish, right? This is the internet...people misrepresent who they are all the time!! You can’t really be this naive! We don’t know anything about a poster besides their username and the little information that they may share, and even that might not be true. I’m not playing a character, I’m just not so naive that I take what everybody posts and their true motives at face value.

Have you thought about maybe I don’t know...not replying to every post?? Maybe some people see that it’s bothering you and are responding like that on purpose or maybe they don’t have the time or need to have an in-depth debate with you and would rather just make a short response about how ridiculous your notion is. You know that it’s ok if somebody disagrees with you and responds in a way that you don’t find conducive. Just like everything else on the internet, pick and choose what you believe warrants your time and attention. On your part, it’s just a waste of time to criticize people how they choose to respond to you. This is an anonymous forum on the internat...I suggest to stop taking things so seriously!

Dude, I've been on the internet since the internet was a thing. I know what I'm doing. I know the full range of what people are capable of online. But I also know that it's possible, especially on forums, to treat people with respect because a forum is usually a place where everyone posting has shared interests. Maybe, by criticizing people who don't show respect, I can help make this place better. Maybe not, but it's worked in other places.

But anyway, I think we've derailed the thread enough...

 

[The Abusement Park]

Okay, but those journeymen top 6 guys tend to be at least serviceable defensively, no? Either that or they're riding on a few past seasons of being good. Kerfoot has one that could potentially be based on luck. He wasn't good defensively last season and if his offense disappears (what if he gets equally unlucky this season?) and his defensive skills don't improve, then I don't see how he can keep a spot on the roster. I assume another team or the Avs would give him another shot at some point if the worst happened, but there's no guarantees he'd get a legit shot to regain his offensive form. So for me the key thing is his defensive ability. If he's a defensive liability, the only thing that keeps him in an NHL lineup is his offensive ability, and if isn't able to produce there, then his roster spot disappears too. I hope none of that happens.

You’re describing PA Parenteau basically. And he was in theeague for awhile.

 

[MarkT]

You’re describing PA Parenteau basically. And he was in theeague for awhile.

Parenteau was in the league for exactly as long as he put up points.

 

[returnofthemack29]

Dude, I've been on the internet since the internet was a thing. I know what I'm doing. I know the full range of what people are capable of online. But I also know that it's possible, especially on forums, to treat people with respect because a forum is usually a place where everyone posting has shared interests. Maybe, by criticizing people who don't show respect, I can help make this place better. Maybe not, but it's worked in other places.

But anyway, I think we've derailed the thread enough...

LOL...sure bud. Please be our guiding light! Hahaha freaking Gandhi over here!

 

[henchman21]

PAP was never really on a good team, and if that somehow happened, that good team didn't want to keep him. These PAP/Gagner sorts of players stick around the league because even the bottom teams need players who can score and there is value to that in the NHL. I do that if Kerfoot flames out here, that will be why... a guy who can pop in 30-40+ points with regularity, but you don't want for other reasons. My hope is that Kerfoot finds a way to be impactful overall so he is wanted in other roles, even if the scoring doesn't change much (though odds are it would).

 

[The Abusement Park]

Parenteau was in the league for exactly as long as he put up points.

Which is basically what your saying about Kerfoot. If he continues to score points he will be an NHL player. The biggest question surrounding Kerfoot is can he be a legitimate top 6 player in the league or not. I have questions on whether he can or not, but I don’t think he’ll flame out the AHL. I think he either becomes a legit top 6’er or a PAP/Ganger top 6’er on bad teams.

Or he can just quit playing hockey all together and probably make more money with his degree from Harvard than playing pro sports.

 

[MarkT]

Which is basically what your saying about Kerfoot. If he continues to score points he will be an NHL player. The biggest question surrounding Kerfoot is can he be a legitimate top 6 player in the league or not. I have questions on whether he can or not, but I don’t think he’ll flame out the AHL. I think he either becomes a legit top 6’er or a PAP/Ganger top 6’er on bad teams.

Or he can just quit playing hockey all together and probably make more money with his degree from Harvard than playing pro sports.

Yup