Confirmed with Link: COL trades Barrie(50% retained)/Kerfoot/2020 6th to TOR for Kadri/Rosen/2020 3rd Part 2

Hejduk was absolutely soft. Sure he could withstand abuse in front of the net and on the cycle, but he never initiated contact and downright avoided it when possible. A player like Hejduk, who was so smart positionally and had such a good in tight shot and set of hands, did not need to be a physical player. I don't criticize him for this. But seriously, I can't think of any hit laid by Hejduk in his entire career. I still love him, though; my favorite player too.

I think you and I have a very, very different idea of what "soft" means. Just because a guy doesn't lay big hits doesn't mean he's soft. If Hejduk's soft, then over half the league is soft. Mikko Rantanen doesn't often initiate contact, he uses his size and strength to secure pucks and create space for himself, but he sure as hell ain't soft. Hejduk was just a smart player with very good positional sense, as you pointed out. He knew there were things he was good at and things he wasn't.

Joe Sakic never really laid any big hits, you really gonna tell me he was soft? He just relied more on speed than power in his game. Forsberg was the exact opposite.
 
I think you and I have a very, very different idea of what "soft" means. Just because a guy doesn't lay big hits doesn't mean he's soft. If Hejduk's soft, then over half the league is soft. Mikko Rantanen doesn't often initiate contact, he uses his size and strength to secure pucks and create space for himself, but he sure as hell ain't soft. Hejduk was just a smart player with very good positional sense, as you pointed out. He knew there were things he was good at and things he wasn't.

Joe Sakic never really laid any big hits, you really gonna tell me he was soft? He just relied more on speed than power in his game. Forsberg was the exact opposite.

The Avs have definitely had softer players than Hejduk. You listed a few like Grigorenko. But Hejduk would be in the bottom quarter for forwards today in terms of physicality. It wasn't his forte. This is of course from memory, but also from comments made by the commentators.
 
all of my memories of Kerfoot are the play dying on his stick whenever he rode shotgun with the two best players on the team

Okay, but we can say that about a lot of players who were inserted onto the top line and didn't click. Jost fits that description. Compher wasn't great either. Donskoi was pretty useless on there once his shooting came back down to earth, and even Calvert finally regressed a bit as well. I'm willing to bet Pierre-Edourard Bellemare wouldn't exactly be lighting the lamp if you just happened to line him up with Nathan MacKinnon either.

Kerfoot wasn't cut out to be a top line player. So what? Neither are any of those other guys. Yet somehow people remember Kerfoot as the only one who didn't click with MacKinnon.

FTR, Kerfoot was actually pretty good when on Soderberg's left wing.
 
The Avs have definitely had softer players than Hejduk. You listed a few like Grigorenko. But Hejduk would be in the bottom quarter for forwards today in terms of physicality. It wasn't his forte. This is of course from memory, but also from comments made by the commentators.
Laying big hits doesn't make a player tough.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pokecheque
Laying big hits doesn't make a player tough.

Hejduk was tough. Being soft doesn't mean you're not tough. All hockey players are tough and Hejduk was always in the scoring areas, so he was even tougher. But the fact is he didn't assert himself physically. He didn't Forsberg his way through people, protect the puck like Jagr (Rantanen?), or aggressively have people bounce off him (Sakic). Hejduk was probably strong enough for it, but he just didn't play that way. He avoided contact or absorbed hits softly. Still, a fantastic player.
 
Last edited:
Hejduk was tough. Being soft doesn't mean you're not tough. All hockey players are tough and Hejduk was always in the scoring areas, so he was even tougher. But the fact is he didn't assert himself physically. He didn't Forsberg his way through people, protect the puck like Jagr (Rantanen?), or aggressively have people bounce off him (Sakic). Hejduk was probably strong enough for it, but he just didn't play that way. He avoided contact or absorbed hits softly. Still, a fantastic player.
I mean he was a guy that was often in the dirty areas getting abused around the net to put the puck in the net. I mean he wasn’t Lindros out there, but he also wasn’t Grigorenko or Burakovsky out there. I get what your saying, but soft just isn’t something Hejduk was.
 
Hejduk was tough. Being soft doesn't mean you're not tough. All hockey players are tough and Hejduk was always in the scoring areas, so he was even tougher. But the fact is he didn't assert himself physically. He didn't Forsberg his way through people, protect the puck like Jagr (Rantanen?), or aggressively have people bounce off him (Sakic). Hejduk was probably strong enough for it, but he just didn't play that way. He avoided contact or absorbed hits softly. Still, a fantastic player.

Might be getting too lost in the weeds with semantics here, but personally I use the phrase "soft" when there's a perceived lack of toughness.

Not toughness as in fighting, or physical play, or hitting, but more in terms of grit and determination to play through contact consistently in the dirty areas.

ROR is on one end of the spectrum and someone like PAP is on the other. Neither are particularly physical players or guys that will drop the gloves.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CobraAcesS
The way I see it, RoR is soft and PAP is softer. Hejduk was a bit softer than RoR.
 
Okay, but we can say that about a lot of players who were inserted onto the top line and didn't click. Jost fits that description. Compher wasn't great either. Donskoi was pretty useless on there once his shooting came back down to earth, and even Calvert finally regressed a bit as well. I'm willing to bet Pierre-Edourard Bellemare wouldn't exactly be lighting the lamp if you just happened to line him up with Nathan MacKinnon either.

Kerfoot wasn't cut out to be a top line player. So what? Neither are any of those other guys. Yet somehow people remember Kerfoot as the only one who didn't click with MacKinnon.

FTR, Kerfoot was actually pretty good when on Soderberg's left wing.

All the other players were injury fill-ins. None of them were really expected to be great on MacKinnon's wing and were moved off it as soon as better players came off the injury list. Kerfoot on the other hand was put on MacKinnon's wing even when everyone was healthy. He was clearly expected by the team to perform like a top line winger even if it was just in a complimentary role.
 
You must have a terrible imagination then.
I just don't think we will ever see eye to eye here. I understand that you like him, but I rewatched the playoff series from last year and the amount of chances he never capitalised on was... lets say...overwhelming. He made Martin Jones look like an actual starting goaler and we all know that Jones has to be one of the worst - I am more disappointed that we didn't beat the Sharks in that series. I don't think Kerfoot is or was void of talent, but he just looks like he plays beyond his elements at times in the NHL. Again, this is my own personal theory backed by nothing except rhetoric, but because he's loaded and has a Harvard degree he looks like he plays hockey more as a hobby than an actual job to survive.
 
I just don't think we will ever see eye to eye here. I understand that you like him, but I rewatched the playoff series from last year and the amount of chances he never capitalised on was... lets say...overwhelming. He made Martin Jones look like an actual starting goaler and we all know that Jones has to be one of the worst - I am more disappointed that we didn't beat the Sharks in that series. I don't think Kerfoot is or was void of talent, but he just looks like he plays beyond his elements at times in the NHL. Again, this is my own personal theory backed by nothing except rhetoric, but because he's loaded and has a Harvard degree he looks like he plays hockey more as a hobby than an actual job to survive.

Again, I don't know what you're expecting from a capable, but not elite, bottom six forward drafted 150th overall. Why does all this scrutiny fall on Kerfoot and not on, say, Nieto? Did he "play beyond his elements," as you put it? Um...yeah. That's the point. He's a perfectly good complementary depth forward who had to play much higher in the Avalanche lineup than he should have because the team had no depth up front to speak of. Why was the narrative so harshly rewritten on this guy? Avs fans loved him when he first arrived.

Here's my theory: I think he scored some insanely lucky goals to start his NHL career (again, one of them was so lucky, even he and Landy laughed about it watching the replay) but he was also putting himself in good position to score those lucky goals. But that threw expectations WAY outta whack afterwards. He's not a great finisher, I don't know why you're acting so frustrated about that when that was never his forte, and people were even saying so at the time. He's very good at skating the puck out of the defensive zone and can make some decent passes, also does reasonably well scrapping in front of the net and battling for pucks. Beyond that, what in hell do you want out of a depth forward the Avalanche acquired for literally nothing?

BTW, say what you will about him, but Martin Jones isn't a horrible playoff goalie. He made plenty of Avs players look bad, and he also outplayed Marc-Andre Fleury on a few nights in the following round. The Avs lost that round because they weren't quite good enough (a questionable offside review call didn't help matters, but also, GET THE f*** OFF THE ICE GABE). The only bad thing I can recall Kerf doing in that series was having the audacity to lose his skate blade when blocking a Brent Burns shot.
 
Again, I don't know what you're expecting from a capable, but not elite, bottom six forward drafted 150th overall. Why does all this scrutiny fall on Kerfoot and not on, say, Nieto? Did he "play beyond his elements," as you put it? Um...yeah. That's the point. He's a perfectly good complementary depth forward who had to play much higher in the Avalanche lineup than he should have because the team had no depth up front to speak of. Why was the narrative so harshly rewritten on this guy? Avs fans loved him when he first arrived.

Here's my theory: I think he scored some insanely lucky goals to start his NHL career (again, one of them was so lucky, even he and Landy laughed about it watching the replay) but he was also putting himself in good position to score those lucky goals. But that threw expectations WAY outta whack afterwards. He's not a great finisher, I don't know why you're acting so frustrated about that when that was never his forte, and people were even saying so at the time. He's very good at skating the puck out of the defensive zone and can make some decent passes, also does reasonably well scrapping in front of the net and battling for pucks. Beyond that, what in hell do you want out of a depth forward the Avalanche acquired for literally nothing?

BTW, say what you will about him, but Martin Jones isn't a horrible playoff goalie. He made plenty of Avs players look bad, and he also outplayed Marc-Andre Fleury on a few nights in the following round. The Avs lost that round because they weren't quite good enough (a questionable offside review call didn't help matters, but also, GET THE f*** OFF THE ICE GABE). The only bad thing I can recall Kerf doing in that series was having the audacity to lose his skate blade when blocking a Brent Burns shot.

Kerf was pretty bad in the playoffs, Poke.

Honestly I doubt the Avs pull the trigger on the Kadri deal if Kerfoot puts up 9, or 10 points in 12 playoff games. I think the fact that he was MIA in the post-season made it easier for Sakic to include him in the Kadri deal.

I agree with you on expectations though, maybe they were just too high for him in Colorado, because he is still a reasonable depth forward piece.
 
Kerf was pretty bad in the playoffs, Poke.

Honestly I doubt the Avs pull the trigger on the Kadri deal if Kerfoot puts up 9, or 10 points in 12 playoff games. I think the fact that he was MIA in the post-season made it easier for Sakic to include him in the Kadri deal.

I agree with you on expectations though, maybe they were just too high for him in Colorado, because he is still a reasonable depth forward piece.

I don't agree with that. They pull the trigger on that deal even if Kerfoot has a stellar playoff run. It was time to move on, and I have no issue with that. They got as much as they could ask for out of him, got better players to replace him, and traded him for a very nice return. Meanwhile, he lands himself a pretty nice payday. Everyone walks away happy. Well, everyone except for some guys on this board (not you) apparently.

I honestly don't recall him being a big factor in the playoffs but I also don't recall him being a huge liability either. Obviously would've been nice had he finished stronger, but what can ya do? Thankfully Jost stepped up after a not-great regular season.
 
I think Kerfoot filled a hole when he arrived, and performed above expectations. He was also quite lucky. His shooting percentage was unsustainable. I agree with Pokecheque that it probably raised expectations causing some frustration when his flaws became more obvious. He was a good passer and was pretty good on the pp, where he had some calmness. In fact, I remember a lot of people here were impressed by his composure on the pp and talked about how he helped settle things down. I agree that his play dipped in the playoffs last year, and that he was guilty of some pretty glaring turnovers. I think his main issue was that he had a top-six skillset, but that he was not good enough to perform consistently in a top six role. That is how I remember him. In this sense, he reminds me of PAP in that he could ride shot gun with a star player for a while, but not consistently. So his limit was as a fill-in top six player, which is pretty much how he was used if my memory serves me right. I really do not think he was worse that other players asked to play above their level like Ghetto, PAP and Calvert.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nihiliste
In the playoffs Kerfoot played with a lot of energy and did get robbed on a few chances, but obviously the production was not there.

On the other hand, with the exception of his assist on Mikko Rantanen's overtime goal against the Flames, I'll need to check the tape to confirm if Carl Soderberg actually dressed in the 2019 playoffs.
 
Kerfoot was an ok player, and quite talented, but he was just a bit too one dimensional (didn't shoot and was only average at best defensively) and a little too soft.

The stretch run and the playoffs showed he could be muscled around and thrown off his game like Gaudreau. Just without the whining.

I don’t have anything against Kerfoot, he served his purpose here and he’ll have a decent career elsewhere.

But every time somebody tries to convince me he’s a valuable defensive forward, as if he isn’t one of the most purely offensively-oriented players to coast through the Avs’ roster in recent years, I hate him a little more, bit by bit.
 
The devils guys hate Will Butcher more than we hate Kerfoot. We won the "trade" and then won the trade

There's a number of recent college UFA's who became a big deal on their rookie seasons but it didn't last more than one season.... Butcher, Vesey, Kerfoot...I wonder if Fox is next.
 
  • Like
Reactions: McMetal

Ad

Ad