Yeah that's not the same thing as trying to tell me that Kerfoot has no value, because Kerfoot is a top 6 forward, Miller is a better top 6 forward, but Kerfoot is a top 6 forward.
Kerfoot is not the dump here that's Ritchie
Proposal: TML & Canucks
- Thread starter Funk21
- Start date
Yeah that's not the same thing as trying to tell me that Kerfoot has no value, because Kerfoot is a top 6 forward, Miller is a better top 6 forward, but Kerfoot is a top 6 forward.
Kerfoot is not the dump here that's Ritchie
ToDavid
Registered User
- Dec 13, 2018
- 4,151
- 5,223
| EV Points | ||
| Alexander "Cap Dump" Kerfoot | 28 | |
| J.T. "Worth 15 First Round Picks" Miller | 24 |
kanucks25
Chris Tanev #1 Fan
Aren't Kerfoot's most common linemates Nylander and Tavares?
I'm not trying to crap on Kerfoot but Miller has been dragging around slugs all season.
Pretty much every other forward is having a down year except Garland but for some reason they literally never play on the same line.
Boondock
Registered User
- Feb 6, 2009
- 5,780
- 2,390
So you are pointing out how ignorant looking at 1 stat in isolation is? At one point this season Garland had more 5 v 5 points than McDavid
Most canuck fans haven’t said kerfoot is a cap dump. We have said he has 0 value to us so you’re dumping him on us.
Why would the Canucks trade their best trading chip to Toronto when the 2nd most valuable piece coming back is a 27 year old 3C at 3.5M that would never crack more than 40 points on this Canucks team next season. Not to mention 40 points is being generous. He probably doesn’t even crack 30 on this Canucks team next season if they went into a rebuild/retool.
That’s not even mentioning how the topic of him being a cap dump is still very debatable imo. As one poster pointed out almost half his points are secondary assists on goals by one of torontos 4 stars.
He’s a low low end 2C, slightly above average 3C. A guy that will put up 35-45 points of given that 2C role or 25-35 points in a 3C role. If you have him in a 2C role, you’re definitely at best a team fighting for a wildcard spot.
Last edited:
Alex Kerfoot's most common linemates at 5 on 5: John Tavares and William Nylander
JT Miller's most common linemates at 5 on 5: Tanner Pearson and Brock Boeser
Alex Kerfoots most common linemates last season: Ilya Mikheyev and Alex Nylander
Alex Kerfoots most common linemates 2 seasons ago: John Tavares and Ilya Mikheyev
1 guy has been playing this season with ppg players, the other guy has been playing with 2 guys that combined have only 2 points more than John Tavares and 3 points more than William Nylander
So what you were trying to say is, if you have ppg players, you can have them carry Kerfoot to be a 50 point player. If you replace 1 of those 2 with another 30 point player, Kerfoot goes down to being a 30 point player.
JT Miller though, is a ppg player no matter who he plays with
Last edited:
Out pacing him playing with Matthews, Marner, Tavares and Nylander. Pettersson's had a rough year, and seems to be turning the corner though, so I'm excited to see how he totals at years end. 13 of Kerfoots assists are secondary from those four players as well. Dickinson was brought in as our shut down C too (that role is changing now, but the whole team is in flux), so Kerfoot's deployment doesn't really make things better or worse here. I am acting like that isn't a lot because we don't need assists, roster LW or C, or 3.5 million in cap space for something we have through other players. He has no place in Vancouver, even with Miller leaving in this scenario. He might be a fine complimentary player, but that doesn't give him value when he's returning more cap then the much better player he's being traded for. His inclusion is to "level" cap, he has very little relative value to the receiving team, and has nothing but a contrived spot on the team...that's a cap dump. His value to us is lower then his 3.5 million dollar cap hit. That's not to say other teams consider him the same way, but we have no cap space, we have no spot for him without displacing someone, he has no value as a player to us and comes with a big price tag. His services are better used elsewhere.
How is he ranked 37th? 5 on 5 away from the top players on a team is a very narrow, narrow field to pull from. If he's ahead of those players, why not try to pry Pastrnak or Kane off of their teams for him? Because I can promise if he's included as a large part of the return for any of the last list of players you mentioned, their reaction will likely be stronger than mine. Hell, given his performance the previous two seasons, that first list is mostly beyond reach for Kerfoot as well, barring something of huge value being attached.
I've called him a cap dump, as far as Vancouver is concerned. I don't represent every Canucks fan, but yes, he has 0 value to us, he's been included to even cap space, and we have no Kerfoot shaped hole on our roster...that is the definition of a cap dump. Again, strictly looking at the Canucks. We are not going out to move an asset for Kerfoot. I don't know that we'd be able to take him for free, both from a roster and a cap stand point, without shuffling our roster and potentially losing other assets, that we'd want compensation for. That screams cap dump to me.
He's having a great year, playing with guys much better then he would be here, and his previous two seasons not playing with the high end players as often as he has been, he has had 21 and 29 points the previous two seasons. I agree, his production will drop like a stone playing on Vancouver's third line.
Jumptheshark
Rebooting myself
Kerfoot, the player, has no value to us.
I've explained how I've come to my hot take that Kerfoot is a cap dump (to us), in his previous history of production, team needs, no role on his new team, no place on his new team, cap space and use in the trade.
Kerfoot could be very valuable to another team. Or the Leafs. He has value there. He has no value to the Canucks, and is simply 3.5 million in cap space that we need elsewhere. Trying to argue that we should make room for him, or he could be a good fit, is hammering a square peg into a round hole.
Ritchie is a cap dump, yes, for largely the same reasons, but exacerbated because of his lower production. We don't want him, we don't have room (roster and cap wise) for him, he has a cap hit that we should be using elsewhere, his previous production is actually better over the previous two seasons but not significantly better over who we'd have to force out of the line up, and he doesn't bring a skill we need or are lacking.
Even assuming your evaluation on Kerfoot is accurate... a 1st + 2nd + 2nd is absolutely nowhere close to enough for Miller.
Then factor in that Kerfoot absolutely isn't worth a 2nd round pick and Ritchie is a negative value cap dump and it's even worse.
Hoglander
I'm Höglander. I can do whatever I want.
For Pete's sake. How about the Leafs just trade Kerfoot to somebody else, so we can put this Kerfoot to Van nonsense to bed? The whole focus of trading Miller would be about getting the best picks and prospects we can, not watering down the return so we can help out other teams.
Aren't we usually screaming at each other in these Miller threads? Well, I'm happy we're on the same side on this point.
It's not really a matter of "being discerning" or not... but rather, sacrificing quality for specificity. Yes, we know more about the prospects, but you're still years away from these guys making meaningful contributions at the NHL level, and have a really limited view as to what the team needs are.
I don't believe K'Andre Miller or Braden Schneider would be "in play" for JT Miller". I think NY looks at their D, drools, and says to themselves we're not touching it beyond a guy like Libor Hajek... maybe Nils Lundqvist... I think they've identified their "Trade Chips" as their 1st round pick, most definitely Kravtsov, maybe Brennan Othmann or Nils Lundqvist, and other, lesser prospects. The team is under no panic or pressure to make a future-compromising move.
Every pick or prospect likely to be offered to Vancouver is a project in some way.
I get not wanting to take the risk on Kravtsov, especially with having experienced Trymakin... but realistically, that's the asset that the Rangers are most likely wanting to use, and they can be selective. They're in no rush.
What, specifically in terms of outcome / return do you hope to achieve by keeping him past the deadline?
So lets say that the "other significant piece" is a conditional 2023 pick based on how far the Rangers go... and instead of Dermott, the Leafs offer is basically the same, but with Ritchie & Retention.
Who do you think is more likely to be a better NHL player? Robertson or Kravtsov?
If the answer is Robertson, is he "better enough" to justify the theoretical downgrade in 1st round pick this year, and the next year downgrade of having Ritchie + 50% of Miller's salary, versus presumably nothing or maybe a Patrick Nemeth.
The teams out there have more variety in their available prospects and assets, and while Amirov is a great prospect, I don't even know if he's the best that would be available, let alone if one of those guys fits the holes in our depth chart.
Fair, but Pagniotta, who I don't care for but has more weight in rumour discussion then either of us, has them in play, potentially. Lundqvist wouldn't be a bad pick up, but I agree, Amirov would be a better pick up then Kravtsov or Othmann for us. I disagree that they are the only choices though. Miller at 2.625 for this season and next could appeal to a lot of teams in or near a playoff position, so Toronto and New York couldn't possibly be the only teams interested.
I wouldnt want to give him up in the deal. Jt Miller is an excellent player who we would love to have, but the price to get him I think is just to much for the leafs.
Killer Orcas
Registered User
Um if I recall correctly didn't Kerfoot spurn the Canucks to sign with Avs out of college?? That and the fact he's not a need for us yah Canucks don't need him thanks. We need picks and RHD. Especially trading our best trade chip Miller.
Again, when a team is shopping for futures, the depth chart really isn't a consideration relative to the overall upside of the prospect(s) themselves. I cannot hit this point hard enough.
Would love to hear alternative suggestions that don't involve NY or Toronto.
Boondock
Registered User
- Feb 6, 2009
- 5,780
- 2,390
If the significant other piece is a conditional pick and Kravtsov or Robertson are the only prospects offered, I wait until the off season when teams have more cap flexibility or next years trade deadline when Miller will still net a 1st and prospect. The only reason to trade Miller now is to get the additional assets for the second playoff run and if that isn't accounted for in the return then the Canucks keep Miller. Names like Nemeth and Ritchie are only there for cap reasons by the other team - Canucks aren't retaining and taking on additional salary for a return of a late 1st and Robertson or Kravtsov - Dermott is a bottom pairing guy, so useful on an NHL roster but not a valuable asset in a Miller trade.
I would make the Miller trade with the Rangers for 1st, (one of) Schneider/Lundkvist, Kravtsov - if that isn't the type of return than keep him until the off season and re-visit.
I have some concerns about Robertson. Yes he has a ton of skill, but 2 years of development have been hampered by injury. He is undersized which makes the injury concerns even more real and he only plays the wing. The one position the Canucks have young players at. I also have concerns with the lack of maturity shown by Kravtsov, so if he's the best prospect coming back, I wouldn't be interested.
To each their own. Toronto has a number of high end forwards, so I understand not wanting to give up prime assets (on low cap hits) to acquire him.
Thats exactly it. Would love Miller on the leafs, he'dprobably make our top 6 the best in the NHL, but losing the pieces necessary to aquire him would hurt us badly considering our cap.
Who do you hope to get in the off-season? Or at the deadline?
How often do Robertson-calibre prospects, plus a 1st round pick, trade for pure rentals? Even if you believe that's realistic, is it worth all the risk, also knowing getting a draft pick and prospect that are a likely a year younger and year further away from meaningful contributions.
I've seen so many posters say 'we'll just wait", but with no actual plan as to how that's a better solution?
Rutherford has on two occasions said we're "retooling". I'm not convinced we are looking at strictly long term futures. However we fundamentally disagree on your point. If we have 4 or 5 LW prospects we expect to blossom, we don't need to go and take an offer for another LW prospect if there are other, comparable options out there.
Tampa Bay, Anaheim or Los Angeles if they decide to jump in with both feet, Boston, Vegas, Colorado, Washington, Pittsburgh, Minnesota, Calgary...I mean any team in or fighting for a playoff position that has a top six player presumed to be leaving via trade or UFA, or simply has a hole. Will they offer something we want or need? Well, one way to find out.
Otherwise, we could just keep him. What he brings to our team isn't worth throwing off the team for the first offer either, if our minimum isn't met. We could push things back to the draft or even next deadline too.
Ad
Latest posts
-
-
-
Pre-Game Talk: Countdown thread to 24-25 Season Main Camp (T - 19 days)- Latest: Estimated_Prophet
-
-
LD Lane Hutson - Boston University, NCAA (2022, 62nd, MTL) - Part 2- Latest: CanadienShark
Upcoming events
-
Preliminary Final Brisbane Lions vs Geelong Cats - MCG, MelbourneWagers: 5Staked: $1,759.00Event closes- Updated:
-
-
-
-