The great Kadri vs Kerfoot debate thread.

[Martin Skoula]

In 2014/15, The top forwards in ice time were Kessel, JVR and Bozak and Kadri was 4th. Then Kessel was traded and in 15/16, Kadri got the most ice with Komarov and JVR close behind (Bozak a bit further down). The next season Kadri's ice time went down because Matthews arrived and took over the #1C spot. As I said in my post, sometimes you have to adjust ice time based on the team - if you're a good player on a really bad team, then you'll get more ice time then you would on a better team. That's why Kadri got a ton of ice time after Kessel left - he was the best forward on the team and as JVR/Bozak were no longer playing on a line with Kessel, there was no reason for them to get more ice than Kadri. Then as we acquired more talent, his spot in the pecking order dropped and his ice time went down. I believe in his last season with the Leafs, he was 5th in ice time among forwards behind (well, you know who was behind) and that's entirely logical as he was IMHO clearly the 5th best forward on the team.

Don't be fooled by Kadri's 45 points in 15/16. His SH% was near zero about 2 months into the season and he was on pace for 32 points even though he was playing fantastic. He played at a 55 point pace the rest of the way but make no mistake, he played great all season. Was it his best season? I don't know, it was right up there though and if it wasn't his best season, it damn close to it. For sure I'd put his play right up there with the next season when he put up 61 points.

Those first two months were a great example IMO of how the eye test is (sometimes) better than stats. I was watching every game and I KNEW Kadri was playing great despite the poor numbers and so did several others here (IIRC Zeke was one of them BTW). He was hitting a ton of posts etc., he was just completely snakebitten.

You've made me realize something that's important to be aware of though. In 2014/15 Kadri was behind Bozak and JVR in ice time but that was mostly due to the fact that those guys were playing on a line with Kessel. So linemates are something that can skew the numbers a bit and is something to be aware of. I suspect it's not an issue very often though as usually when one player is vastly superior to his linemates, He'll get extra time on special teams. The Leafs were so bad though that even though Kessel's linemates weren't that great, they were still among the best forwards on the team. And honestly, it's not like Kadri was a tier above Bozak/JVR either, those 3 were relatively close in value that season IMHO but yeah, since those two were on Kessel's line they got a bit more ice than Kadri.



You're right, I didn't do any analysis, that's completely fair. I just pointed out that there is a ton of analysis done by coaching staffs across the NHL and the results of that analysis is reflected in how much ice time players get.

Even if they were the exact same player at ES, if one is much better on the PP then he's more valuable isn't he? Special teams are a HUGE part of the game and ignoring them in any analysis would be a big mistake.

ES minutes for the last 3 seasons:

Season Kadri Kerfoot
17/18 14:40 10:57
18/19 13:35 12:45
19/20 13:31 13:15

You're right to point out that Kerfoot closed the ice time gap at ES last season. On the other hand, Kadri played about 2.5 minutes extra on the PP which is HUGE and clearly indicates that Kadri it still considered to be the superior player. Another thing to consider is that the Leafs had a LOT of injuries this season which probably led to Kerfoot getting more minutes when he was in the lineup. If the Leafs are healthier next season the my guess is that Kerfoot's minutes will go down, we'll see (hopefully).

BTW I forgot to mention that in addition to 3 NHL coaches who consider Kadri the superior player, there is also at least one GM who belongs on the list. The COL GM was OK with adding to Kerfoot to get Kadri, that speaks for itself.

My point is TOI is something that is mostly out of the player's control. Matthews put up 40 goals while playing good defense and Babcock only gave him 17 minutes a game and #2 PP minutes. The next year, Marleau played more minutes than Kadri, Nylander, Marner. This doesn't tell us anything other than Mike Babcock does Mike Babcock things for Mike Babcock reasons. No sane person would use this as evidence that "Mike Babcock obviously considers a 39 year old Marleau superior to Kadri" or "Mike Babcock considers Bozak to be a better PP player than Matthews" and actually agree with the sentiment.

Kadri wouldn't have much PP time under Keefe, Nylander took his PP1 spot finally and rightfully so. I don't care which of Kerfoot or Kadri is better on the PP, they'd be getting #2 unit scraps with Spezza and Kapanen. Is Kadri more "valuable" on the trade market because of his PP points? Sure, that's why Kadri returned a 60 point D at 50% retention on top of Kerfoot. We don't get any benefit from that surplus "value" because we don't have enough room on the PP to actually use it.

If you're deciding between two cars for a daily driver that you exclusively use to make a 20 minute commute to work every day, you pick the cheapest one that can get the job done, not the more expensive one that has an offroading kit that you're never going to use.

 

[LeafsNation75]

My point is TOI is something that is mostly out of the player's control. Matthews put up 40 goals while playing good defense and Babcock only gave him 17 minutes a game and #2 PP minutes. The next year, Marleau played more minutes than Kadri, Nylander, Marner. This doesn't tell us anything other than Mike Babcock does Mike Babcock things for Mike Babcock reasons. No sane person would use this as evidence that "Mike Babcock obviously considers a 39 year old Marleau superior to Kadri" or "Mike Babcock considers Bozak to be a better PP player than Matthews" and actually agree with the sentiment.

Kadri wouldn't have much PP time under Keefe, Nylander took his PP1 spot finally and rightfully so. I don't care which of Kerfoot or Kadri is better on the PP, they'd be getting #2 unit scraps with Spezza and Kapanen. Is Kadri more "valuable" on the trade market because of his PP points? Sure, that's why Kadri returned a 60 point D at 50% retention on top of Kerfoot. We don't get any benefit from that surplus "value" because we don't have enough room on the PP to actually use it.

If you're deciding between two cars for a daily driver that you exclusively use to make a 20 minute commute to work every day, you pick the cheapest one that can get the job done, not the more expensive one that has an offroading kit that you're never going to use.

Despite the signing of John Tavares and how it effected Kadri's play at even strength, he still played on the #1 power play line with Matthews, Tavares, Marner, and Rielly.

 

[Gary Nylund]

My point is TOI is something that is mostly out of the player's control. Matthews put up 40 goals while playing good defense and Babcock only gave him 17 minutes a game and #2 PP minutes. The next year, Marleau played more minutes than Kadri, Nylander, Marner. This doesn't tell us anything other than Mike Babcock does Mike Babcock things for Mike Babcock reasons. No sane person would use this as evidence that "Mike Babcock obviously considers a 39 year old Marleau superior to Kadri" or "Mike Babcock considers Bozak to be a better PP player than Matthews" and actually agree with the sentiment.

Kadri wouldn't have much PP time under Keefe, Nylander took his PP1 spot finally and rightfully so. I don't care which of Kerfoot or Kadri is better on the PP, they'd be getting #2 unit scraps with Spezza and Kapanen. Is Kadri more "valuable" on the trade market because of his PP points? Sure, that's why Kadri returned a 60 point D at 50% retention on top of Kerfoot. We don't get any benefit from that surplus "value" because we don't have enough room on the PP to actually use it.

If you're deciding between two cars for a daily driver that you exclusively use to make a 20 minute commute to work every day, you pick the cheapest one that can get the job done, not the more expensive one that has an offroading kit that you're never going to use.

(A)TOI out of the players control - yes and no. When I look at the Leafs numbers I noticed Marleau as well and your point is valid. There are some outliers/exceptions for sure but saying it's mostly out of the player's control is IMHO overstating it. Coaches get this right most of the time so the better the players are, the more ice they get. But yeah sometimes the coaches make mistakes, sometimes players are hurt, some players may be being saved for the playoffs and so on but for the most part, the players control their own destiny and ATOI tells us a lot.

I just had a quick look at a couple more teams, For Boston the top 4 forwards by ice time per game are Marchand, Pastrnak, Bergeron followed by Krejci. For WSH it's Ovechkin, Backstrom, Oshie with Kuznetsov close behind. Makes sense right? I'm sure if I looked at all the teams I'd find some surprises but I suspect that overall, the pecking order would make complete sense. In fact I just looked at the Leafs again and the fact that Hyman is ahead of Nylander is a bit of a head scratcher but other than that it looks good. The order is Marner, Matthews, Tavares, Hyman, Nylander, Kapanen, Johnsson, Mikheyev, Kerfoot, Moore, Engvall ... looks pretty good. If you look at the exact numbers it makes even more sense. Like the gap between Marner and Matthews is 35 seconds, IMO probably more than it should be but from Nylander to Kapanen, the gap is over 2.5 minutes which makes complete sense as there is a substantial drop in player value at exactly that point. I'll say it again, ATOI tells us a lot.

I'm not saying ATOI tells the entire story mind you. From my (admittedly very superficial) investigation though, I can't think of a single stat that does a better job of telling us which tiers the players belong to. If anyone has anything better, I'd be curious to hear what it is.

I agree with you and I've said it before - I'm fine with the trade and agree that considering Kadri didn't excel in his role as the #3C, downgrading to Kerfoot isn't that big a deal. Saying that Kerfoot is straight up a better player than Kadri without even considering contracts or anything else, well I'll stand by my opinion that that's just ridiculous. And yeah ATOI backs that up, the gap between the two players isn't a massive one but the gap is there nevertheless.

 

[Martin Skoula]

(A)TOI out of the players control - yes and no. When I look at the Leafs numbers I noticed Marleau as well and your point is valid. There are some outliers/exceptions for sure but saying it's mostly out of the player's control is IMHO overstating it. Coaches get this right most of the time so the better the players are, the more ice they get. But yeah sometimes the coaches make mistakes, sometimes players are hurt, some players may be being saved for the playoffs and so on but for the most part, the players control their own destiny and ATOI tells us a lot.

I just had a quick look at a couple more teams, For Boston the top 4 forwards by ice time per game are Marchand, Pastrnak, Bergeron followed by Krejci. For WSH it's Ovechkin, Backstrom, Oshie with Kuznetsov close behind. Makes sense right? I'm sure if I looked at all the teams I'd find some surprises but I suspect that overall, the pecking order would make complete sense. In fact I just looked at the Leafs again and the fact that Hyman is ahead of Nylander is a bit of a head scratcher but other than that it looks good. The order is Marner, Matthews, Tavares, Hyman, Nylander, Kapanen, Johnsson, Mikheyev, Kerfoot, Moore, Engvall ... looks pretty good. If you look at the exact numbers it makes even more sense. Like the gap between Marner and Matthews is 35 seconds, IMO probably more than it should be but from Nylander to Kapanen, the gap is over 2.5 minutes which makes complete sense as there is a substantial drop in player value at exactly that point. I'll say it again, ATOI tells us a lot.

I'm not saying ATOI tells the entire story mind you. From my (admittedly very superficial) investigation though, I can't think of a single stat that does a better job of telling us which tiers the players belong to. If anyone has anything better, I'd be curious to hear what it is.

I agree with you and I've said it before - I'm fine with the trade and agree that considering Kadri didn't excel in his role as the #3C, downgrading to Kerfoot isn't that big a deal. Saying that Kerfoot is straight up a better player than Kadri without even considering contracts or anything else, well I'll stand by my opinion that that's just ridiculous. And yeah ATOI backs that up, the gap between the two players isn't a massive one but the gap is there nevertheless.

And Bryan Rust is ahead of Malkin on the Pens. Did Matthews suddenly become significantly better overnight once Keefe took over? His ATOI went way up despite nothing about his game changing at all.

Also you understand you went from comparing ATOI as a number to ATOI as a rank right? Trying to use the raw ATOI to prove something about Kadri vs Kerfoot on 2 different teams doesn't make any sense. Kerfoot was 8th in ATOI among forwards on the Leafs this year, Kadri was 7th last year. Comparing how many minutes a rookie Kerfoot played vs Kadri in his prime with #1 PP time makes absolutely 0 sense when talking about who would be a better 3C today.

I don't think anyone is saying Kerfoot > Kadri overall as far as their careers go, he just does the 3C job (read: 13 ES minutes, no PP) as well as Kadri did, and arguably better in some aspects of defense (Kadri is much better at shadowing a single big threat, Kerfoot is smarter positionally).

 

[Gary Nylund]

And Bryan Rust is ahead of Malkin on the Pens. Did Matthews suddenly become significantly better overnight once Keefe took over? His ATOI went way up despite nothing about his game changing at all.

Don't know much about Rust, just looked it up, he's just over a PPG so I guess he's pretty good. He's only a few seconds a game ahead of Malkin who's 6 years older than him so perhaps that has something to do with it. I also said there were some outliers (as there are for every stat), if that's the most egregious case there is then that's not bad at all.

I also asked if there were any stats that do a better job. Do you have any ideas on that?

Also you understand you went from comparing ATOI as a number to ATOI as a rank right? Trying to use the raw ATOI to prove something about Kadri vs Kerfoot on 2 different teams doesn't make any sense. Kerfoot was 8th in ATOI among forwards on the Leafs this year, Kadri was 7th last year. Comparing how many minutes a rookie Kerfoot played vs Kadri in his prime with #1 PP time makes absolutely 0 sense when talking about who would be a better 3C today.

You might have missed it but I already mentioned that different teams can require some adjustment, also that different coaches do things differently (which explains your earlier question about Matthews BTW). I also pointed out that with Kadri/Kerfoot this really isn't an issue as they flipped teams and Kadri still got more ice time, last year is was a minute and 18 seconds per game but that went up to almost 3 minutes more per game this season.

I just put out all the data there was without thinking about it too much so if the rookie year bothers you then ignore it. The last two years are plenty, you get one year for both of them with each team and in both cases, Kadri played more.

I don't think anyone is saying Kerfoot > Kadri overall as far as their careers go, he just does the 3C job (read: 13 ES minutes, no PP) as well as Kadri did, and arguably better in some aspects of defense (Kadri is much better at shadowing a single big threat, Kerfoot is smarter positionally).

Why just look at 13 ES minutes and ignore PP? Not sure what you're arguing here, are you suggesting that we should only look at a small part of the big picture? Why would we do that? Also, if we were to compare almost any two players we would find that one will be "arguably better in some aspects" at something in almost all cases so not sure what to do with this observation of yours.

 

[zeke]

I don't understand the TOI discussion.

Kadri 13:30 es, 3:47pp, 0:07pk
Kerfoot 13:14 es, 1:15pp, 0:16pk

Why are we talking about what overall TOI means, when we know the only difference is on the PP?

The only question worth asking, in regards to TOI, is whether Kadri actually deserves that PP TOI.

I for one am glad he's not on our top PP unit anymore.

Of course, nobody should be ignoring the impact having triple the PP ice time has on offensive production, either.

 

[Martin Skoula]

Don't know much about Rust, just looked it up, he's just over a PPG so I guess he's pretty good. He's only a few seconds a game ahead of Malkin who's 6 years older than him so perhaps that has something to do with it. I also said there were some outliers (as there are for every stat), if that's the most egregious case there is then that's not bad at all.

I also asked if there were any stats that do a better job. Do you have any ideas on that?



You might have missed it but I already mentioned that different teams can require some adjustment, also that different coaches do things differently (which explains your earlier question about Matthews BTW). I also pointed out that with Kadri/Kerfoot this really isn't an issue as they flipped teams and Kadri still got more ice time, last year is was a minute and 18 seconds per game but that went up to almost 3 minutes more per game this season.

I just put out all the data there was without thinking about it too much so if the rookie year bothers you then ignore it. The last two years are plenty, you get one year for both of them with each team and in both cases, Kadri played more.



Why just look at 13 ES minutes and ignore PP? Not sure what you're arguing here, are you suggesting that we should only look at a small part of the big picture? Why would we do that? Also, if we were to compare almost any two players we would find that one will be "arguably better in some aspects" at something in almost all cases so not sure what to do with this observation of yours.

Because Kadri would not get PP minutes here anymore. 3Cs do not normally get PP minutes. If we only had 4 good PP players, Kerfoot would get more minutes on it as he did when we had injuries. It's not Kerfoot's fault he isn't better on the PP than Matthews, Tavares, Marner, Nylander, and Rielly/Barrie. Just like it's not Kadri's fault that the Avs don't have any elite offensive players outside of MacKinnon, Rantanen, and Makar. You're going to bring up Babcock using Kadri on the PP, but again this is the same guy who thought that Komarov deserved more minutes than Marner, Marleau deserved more minutes than just about everyone, and Bozak was a better PP player than a guy with 40 goals. Nylander should have been on PP1 over Kadri a long time ago. Kadri would get 14 minutes a night under Keefe, there is no room for him unless he is converted into a winger to cover the Johnsson injury.

Our 3C went from 7th to 8th in ATOI, this does not represent a noticeable drop off in quality or how much coaches trust him or whatever you're trying to push.

You're trying to tell me that a jeep is better than my daily driver because the jeep can go offroading, despite the fact that I keep telling you I have no opportunity or intention to go offroading. Your response is that you have a buddy with a jeep and he takes it offroading all the time, so it's a better vehicle even though it's more expensive and doesn't change the quality of my commute (the only thing I need my car for) whatsoever.

 

[Koolboss]

Do centers have be good on faceoffs?

 

[Gary Nylund]

Because Kadri would not get PP minutes here anymore. 3Cs do not normally get PP minutes. If we only had 4 good PP players, Kerfoot would get more minutes on it as he did when we had injuries. It's not Kerfoot's fault he isn't better on the PP than Matthews, Tavares, Marner, Nylander, and Rielly/Barrie. Just like it's not Kadri's fault that the Avs don't have any elite offensive players outside of MacKinnon, Rantanen, and Makar. You're going to bring up Babcock using Kadri on the PP, but again this is the same guy who thought that Komarov deserved more minutes than Marner, Marleau deserved more minutes than just about everyone, and Bozak was a better PP player than a guy with 40 goals. Nylander should have been on PP1 over Kadri a long time ago. Kadri would get 14 minutes a night under Keefe, there is no room for him unless he is converted into a winger to cover the Johnsson injury.

Source? I don't see how you would know this and it doesn't make any sense to me at all. His last season with the Leafs Kadri was the #3C and he got PP minutes, not sure why things would be any different this season. He's also better than Kerfoot who gets PP minutes so yeah, not sure where you're getting this idea from.

I call BS. The last time Kadri got less than 16 minutes QTOI was the 2011-12 season. Sorry but this makes no sense at all either.

Our 3C went from 7th to 8th in ATOI, this does not represent a noticeable drop off in quality or how much coaches trust him or whatever you're trying to push.

You're trying to tell me that a jeep is better than my daily driver because the jeep can go offroading, despite the fact that I keep telling you I have no opportunity or intention to go offroading. Your response is that you have a buddy with a jeep and he takes it offroading all the time, so it's a better vehicle even though it's more expensive and doesn't change the quality of my commute (the only thing I need my car for) whatsoever.

Sorry, you lost me there. Perhaps it would help if you told me what it is that we're discussing here. It sounds like you're trying to argue with me about something so perhaps you could tell me what it is you disagree with.

These are my opinions:
Kadri is a better player than Kerfoot.
You seem to agree with that, am I wrong?

In a #3C role for the Leafs, going from Kadri to Kerfoot so far doesn't seem like much of a downgrade, I'm completely fine with the trade.
You seem to agree with that, am I wrong?

Judging players by ATOI isn't flawless. You've pointed out some of the flaws and TBH, I'm not sure what your point is because those are flaws I've already mentioned so I beat you to it.
We agree there, no question about it.

So ... if we disagree about something, please tell me what it is or prehaps we should just agree to agree. What have I missed?

ATOI isn't perfect but it looks pretty good to me. Again, if anyone can offer a single stat that carries more weight, I've yet to hear it. Do you have any any suggestions?

I'm not saying we should look at ATOI and ignore everything else. First of all there should be a rel ATOI stat (like rel corsi numbers), that would add context for sure. I am saying that if we were to come up with some formula to look at various stats and decide how much weight to give to each different stat, ATOI should be given a ton of weight, perhaps more weight than any other stat. Note the word "perhaps", I think it's an interesting question, I'd love to hear it if anyone can suggest something better but ... so far nobody's come up with anything better which makes me think I might be right, ATOI might be the single most important stat to consider when evaluating players.

As I said before, coaches evaluate players every day. They do so with tons of resources and tons of help and their results are reflected by ATOI. Their highly paid to do their jobs and most of the time they get it right, that's what makes ATOI such a powerful tool for player evaluations - it basically tells you what grade they got from the coach. And sometimes the coaches make mistakes (like Babcock with Marleau) so it's important to understand that sometimes mistakes are made and also there is some variation from team to team which means it would be helpful to have some sort of rel ATOI stat but other than that, ATOI rocks!

Do centers have be good on faceoffs?

No but it certainly helps. Faceoffs aren't as important as some people think but they are still obviously a part of the big picture and should not be ignored when evaluating centres. Kerfoot's weird, he went from 56% last season to 46.9% this season, Kadri definitely has a substantial edge over him there. I did notice that as one of the many omissions missing from Zeke's "analysis", it's certainly not the only one.

 

[Gary Nylund]

I don't understand the TOI discussion.

Kadri 13:30 es, 3:47pp, 0:07pk
Kerfoot 13:14 es, 1:15pp, 0:16pk

Why are we talking about what overall TOI means, when we know the only difference is on the PP?

Not clear that that's the only difference but even if it is, PP is part of the overall picture wo why would we ignore it?

The only question worth asking, in regards to TOI, is whether Kadri actually deserves that PP TOI.

I for one am glad he's not on our top PP unit anymore.

Of course, nobody should be ignoring the impact having triple the PP ice time has on offensive production, either.

Kerfoot - 65 games 28 points 35 point pace
Kadri - 51 games 36 points 58 point pace

That's a whopper of a difference there. What we do know for sure is that all the coaches/teams these guys played for prefer Kadri to Kerfoot on the PP. You might want to consider that they may have very good reasons for this. Or not, up to you.

 

[zeke]

PP time since Keefe took over:

Unit 1

Marner 3:13 (7.71p60)
Matthews 3:03 (7.36p60)
Tavares 3:00 (6.69p60)
Barrie 2:57 (4.32p60)
Nylander 2:54 (6.42p60)


Unit 2

Rielly 1:23 (3.61p60)
Hyman 1:05 (5.84p60)
Spezza 1:03 (7.60p60)
Kapanen 0:57 (2.72p60)
Kerfoot 0:51 (1.55p60)


Colorado

Unit 1

MacKinnon 4:06 (6.56p60)
Landeskog 3:48 (4.38p60)
Kadri 3:46 (3.43p60)
Makar 3:44 (5.34p60)
Rantanen 3:28 (5.75p60)

Unit 2

Girard 2:24 (4.62p60)
Burakovsky 2:21 (4.83p60)
Donskoi 2:08 (2.16p60)
Compher 2:06 (2.17p60)
Jost 1:41 (2.64p60)



Kadri would be on the 2nd unit here (losing near 3 minutes of ice time as a result), and should have been 2nd unit for each of the previous 2 years here too, except we had the only coach in hockey that didn't stack his top pp unit. He arguably should be 2nd unit on the avalanche, too, though maybe he keeps that last top unitnspot over Burakovsky due to faceoffs.

 

[ACC1224]

This thread perfectly sums up this place. Take a stance and fight it to death with as many twisted and made up ‘proofs’ you can think of. Never Surrender!

 

[zeke]

Not clear that that's the only difference but even if it is,

How is this not clear?

Kadri 13:30 es, 3:47pp, 0:07pk
Kerfoot 13:14 es, 1:15pp, 0:16pk

PP is part of the overall picture wo why would we ignore it?

Kerfoot - 65 games 28 points 35 point pace
Kadri - 51 games 36 points 58 point pace

That's a whopper of a difference there. What we do know for sure is that all the coaches/teams these guys played for prefer Kadri to Kerfoot on the PP. You might want to consider that they may have very good reasons for this. Or not, up to you.

Nobody is ignoring it.

But kadri should never have had a pp slot over Nylander before, and no surprise that our PP is better now that Nylander is in that slot. Maybe you prefer the coach that kept marleau on the #1 pp unit.

Meanwhile, Colorado's PP is worse this year with kadri on it, and Burakovsky has been much more productive than him on the 2nd unit. And hey, Kerfoot was also much more productive than him on the 2nd unit last year (2:04, 5.93p60).

Maybe Kadri is better on the PP than kerfoot, even though kerfoot has actually been more productive per minute there. Maybe the coaches are right to keep kadri on their top unit even though he's been the weakest link on both and their PPs have been better without him. I won't even fight that. But even if they're right about that, Kadri on these leafs would be on the 2nd unit, the same as Kerfoot, losing all of his apparent TOI advantage.

 

[Gary Nylund]

How is this not clear?

Kadri 13:30 es, 3:47pp, 0:07pk
Kerfoot 13:14 es, 1:15pp, 0:16pk

Nobody is ignoring it.

But kadri should never have had a pp slot over Nylander before, and no surprise that our PP is better now that Nylander is in that slot. Maybe you prefer the coach that kept marleau on the #1 pp unit.

Meanwhile, Colorado's PP is worse this year with kadri on it, and Burakovsky has been much more productive than him on the 2nd unit. And hey, Kerfoot was also much more productive than him on the 2nd unit last year (2:04, 5.93p60).

Maybe Kadri is better on the PP than kerfoot, even though kerfoot has actually been more productive per minute there. Maybe the coaches are right to keep kadri on their top unit even though he's been the weakest link on both and their PPs have been better without him. I won't even fight that. But even if they're right about that, Kadri on these leafs would be on the 2nd unit, the same as Kerfoot, losing all of his apparent TOI advantage.

I don't think it's a good use of my time to take a deep look into this since you're shown yourself to be ahem, selective in the numbers you use in an attempt to justify your bias. If you think that you know better than all these NHL coaches then write Keefe a letter or something. You never know, maybe he'll listen to you and your advice will be the last little thing that pushes the Leafs over the top this season.

 

[Dekes For Days]

He's also better than Kerfoot who gets PP minutes so yeah, not sure where you're getting this idea from.

It's already been shown to you that Kadri does not produce better than Kerfoot on the PP.

ATOI isn't perfect but it looks pretty good to me.

It's not. It's actually pretty horrible.

Again, if anyone can offer a single stat that carries more weight, I've yet to hear it.

Why are you exclusively looking for a "single stat"?

I don't think it's a good use of my time to take a deep look into this since you're shown yourself to be ahem, selective in the numbers you use in an attempt to justify your bias.

You keep ignoring every time he counters your claims, and you refuse to answer, but you call him selective? Pot, meet kettle.

 

[hotpaws]

Why are you exclusively looking for a "single stat"?

he isn't

 

[Dekes For Days]

he isn't

According to him, you're wrong:

if anyone can offer a single stat that carries more weight

 

[hotpaws]

According to him, you're wrong:

your twisting his post

your wrong ,,, again

 

[Gary Nylund]

It's already been shown to you that Kadri does not produce better than Kerfoot on the PP.

If you say so, you're certainly entitled to your opinion. Me personally, I'm not convinced and neither are the people who coach these players.

It's not. It's actually pretty horrible.

Then it shouldn't be hard for you to tell me some stats that should carry more weight. Take your time, let me know what you find. So far nobody's had any suggestions, perhaps you'll be the first.

Why are you exclusively looking for a "single stat"?

LOL. I've never said I'm looking for such a thing. You have a vivid imagination, perhaps you should devote your time to something where that's an asset, it's certainly not helping you here.

 

[Gary Nylund]

According to him, you're wrong:

Exactly! Not a single stat that exclusively tells the whole story, just a single stat that should be given more weight then total ATOI.

As in out of possible stats out there, nobody's been to offer even one single one that's better than ATOI.

Post 384 I said this, I guess you missed it.
I'm not saying we should look at ATOI and ignore everything else

I hope that helps.

 

[Dekes For Days]

If you say so

It's not me saying so. It's just the reality of the situation.

Then it shouldn't be hard for you to tell me some stats that should carry more weight.

No single stat can tell the whole picture. TOI tells you opportunity information (though not even that very well when you don't separate game states). It doesn't tell you how those players actually did in those minutes, or why they got them. What a player does is much more important in evaluating player quality.

 

[Gary Nylund]

It's not me saying so. It's just the reality of the situation.

No single stat can tell the whole picture. TOI tells you opportunity information (though not even that very well when you don't separate game states). It doesn't tell you how those players actually did in those minutes, or why they got them. What a player does is much more important in evaluating player quality.

Yes!! One single stat doesn't tell the whole story, that's even more common ground for us, how delightful.

As far as why they got the minutes, I think we do know that. That's the coaches decision and they give more minutes to who they believe to be the better players because they want to win games. I think that's pretty much it unless there are injuries or players are being rested for the playoffs and such, let me know if you think I've missed anything.

And again, if you can think of any stat that is even more useful then ATOI, do let me know. Thanks!

 

[Dekes For Days]

As far as why they got the minutes, I think we do know that. That's the coaches decision and they give more minutes to who they believe to be the better players because they want to win games.

Except that's not true in most instances, as you've been shown. Across teams (especially) and within teams, countless factors affect TOI, aside from player quality. Even if it was what you claimed, your logical fallacy is: appeal to authority. Your stat essentially boils down to a bad estimation of one guy's opinion. We all know Babcock was stupid and hurt this team with his distribution of TOI, you've acknowledged that specifically Babcock's TOI distribution doesn't align with player quality in many instances, yet you're somehow using it exclusively to evaluate player quality in this instance, based solely on the fact that it aligns with your pre-conceived opinion.

Once again, what a player does in his minutes is much more important than how many he gets.

 

[Gary Nylund]

Except that's not true in most instances, as you've been shown. Across teams (especially) and within teams, countless factors affect TOI, aside from player quality. Even if it was what you claimed, your logical fallacy is: appeal to authority. Your stat essentially boils down to a bad estimation of one guy's opinion. We all know Babcock was stupid and hurt this team with his distribution of TOI, you've acknowledged that specifically Babcock's TOI distribution doesn't align with player quality in many instances, yet you're somehow using it exclusively to evaluate player quality in this instance, based solely on the fact that it aligns with your pre-conceived opinion.

Once again, what a player does in his minutes is much more important than how many he gets.

Either you don't know that the word "most" means or this is a typo. Let me know, thanks.

I'm basing my opinion on all NHL coaches, not sure where you got the idea that it was just Babcock.

I'm all for having a discussion but having to constantly correct your reading comprehension errors is honestly getting tiresome. I don't mean to complain or anything but I've lost count of how many times you've completely misread what I've posted and it's getting to be a bit much.

And I know I've asked you this before but unless I missed it, you never answered so I'll ask again - why are you constantly giving me grief? This thread is about Kadri vs Kerfoot, you and I agree that Kadri is the better player, Zeke seems to be the ONLY person who doesn't agree so why don't you take this up with him?

 

[zeke]

I don't think it's a good use of my time to take a deep look into this since you're shown yourself to be ahem, selective in the numbers you use in an attempt to justify your bias. If you think that you know better than all these NHL coaches then write Keefe a letter or something. You never know, maybe he'll listen to you and your advice will be the last little thing that pushes the Leafs over the top this season.

By "all these coaches" you mean 2 coaches. And one of them is the same coach who also put Marleau and Johnsson and Hyman on the top PP unit instead of Nylander.

And I don't have to write a letter to Keefe, since he instantly put Nylander on the top unit, like any sensible coach would.