drewjenks

Membre depuis
18 aoû 2017
Équipe préférée
Maple Leafs de Toronto
Anniversaire
12 sep 1995
Messages dans les forums
1697
Messages par jour
1,66
Sujets de discussion
166
Forum: Armchair-GM14 mai à 14 h 13
Forum: Armchair-GM28 avr à 1 h 45
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Hockeytor15</b></div><div>Tell me how his stats are even near similar to Kerfoots?</div></div>

<strong>Alex Kerfoot - First 2 NHL Seasons</strong>

14:09 = Average Ice Time
157 = Games Played
34 = Goals Scored
51 = Assists
85 = Points

0.217 = Goals / Game <strong>(Loss)</strong>
0.325 = Assist / Game <strong>(Win)</strong>
0.541 = Points / Game <strong>(Win)</strong>
2.304 = Points / 60-Min <strong>(Win)</strong>

-------------------------

<strong>Conor Garland - First 2 NHL Seasons</strong>

13:36 = Average Ice Time
115 = Games Played
35 = Goals Scored
22 = Assists
57 = Points

0.304 = Goals / Game <strong>(Win)</strong>
0.191 = Assist / Game <strong>(Loss)</strong>
0.495 = Points / Game <strong>(Loss)</strong>
2.186 = Points / 60-Min <strong>(Loss)</strong>

-----------------------

<strong>"Tell me how his stats are even near similar to Kerfoots?"</strong>

Seems like you're looking for conflict where there isn't any:

- Garland is clearly the better goal scorer.
- Kerfoot is clearly the better play-maker.
- Kerfoot has an edge in points per game.
- Kerfoot has an edge in points per 60 min.
- Both players were 23 in their first season.
- Both players were 24 in their 2nd season.
- Both players are 5'10 and close to 170 lbs.
- Kerfoot plays at C while Garland plays RW.

I didn't even say Kerfoot's stats were better (even though there's an argument for it).
I said their stats are similar, which is true (even if we add in Kerfoot's current season).

I should also note that Pierre Engvall's rookie stats are similar to Garland's rookie stats.
Engvall is younger than Garland as will (he's also 6'5, kills penalties and can play center).
Engvall could very well end up being as good or better than Garland in the near future.

And buying out a contract like Kessel's would likely net Toronto a 2nd round pick (or better).
Factor that in and Toronto would giving up <strong>Kerfoot + Engvall + 2nd + 2nd + 3rd</strong> for Garland.
Why give up 2 similar players (two of Toronto's best 3rd line center options) plus 3 high picks?

<strong>I'd 100% take Garland over Kerfoot straight up, but I stand by my comments.</strong>