Did he? Or did he have natural growing pains most young players have.
Sutter is on the radio talking about how much Kerins has grown, how he trusts him to play against other teams top lines now, and how much he's improved defensively over the last two seasons but people seem to want to cling to an idea that Kerins can't be trusted.
I don't get why it seems to be the end of the world to try a different 4th line and take Lomberg out of the lineup.
We are already in last place, the team can't score goals, how much could it hurt to try something like Sharangovich - Kerins - Klapka or Sharangovich - Kerins - Zary as a 4th line for a couple games.
He looked lost. And his offence was kind of bolstered by some luck in his first game, making his stats line look gaudy. He became ineffective offensively and a liability defensively. I know it wasn't a long look but he clearly wasn't an NHLer then. Maybe he is now.
He looked lost. And his offence was kind of bolstered by some luck in his first game, making his stats line look gaudy. He became ineffective offensively and a liability defensively. I know it wasn't a long look but he clearly wasn't an NHLer then. Maybe he is now.
Player A First 5 games:
G1- 59.7% xGF
G2 - 83.5% xGF
G3 - 51.6% xGF
G4 - 16.1% xGF
G5 - 4.55% xGF
Player B First 5 games:
G1 - 43.4% xGF
G2 - 66.0% xGF
G3 - 69.12 xGF
G4 - 4.88% xGF
G5 - 11.5% xGF
Player A was Kerins, Player B was Kirkland - seems like Kirkland was given a much longer leash to work out of being lost when he struggled to start the season.
It was only really after those first 11 games that he started to not get his head caved in most nights.
Players need time to adapt to the NHL. You can't give a guy his first 5 NHL games. 3 of which were really good, 2 of which were bad, and then proclaim he's not an NHLer.
I thought Kerins looked really great at zone entries and zone exits, was good at creating chances in the offensive zone and getting good looks, he struggled a bit defensively and with board play - which honestly most young players do.
It's very much the low risk approach the Flames and most teams take with these things at times. They will play the guy that has no offensive upside because he's a bit better defensively and stronger on the boards, instead of playing the younger guy that has offensive talent who is learning to play defense at the NHL level.
Personally I think you can learn how to play defense, you generally can't learn how to be good in transition or at creating offense.
Last edited by SuperMatt18; 11-13-2025 at 02:58 PM.
Oh good, playing out of position on the wing again, he'll make a small mistake and Huska will throw him on the 4th line and get 6-7 minutes of ice time.
I say we give him AT LEAST three more games before we run him out of town with pitchforks.
Kerins is still in the ‘it’s their fault’ category.
If he succeeds the dummies should have seen it all the time and I told you so.
If he doesn’t the dummies aren’t handling him right.
He’ll have to go through a whole hype cycle to get to the pitchfork stage.
Kerins is still in the ‘it’s their fault’ category.
If he succeeds the dummies should have seen it all the time and I told you so.
If he doesn’t the dummies aren’t handling him right.
He’ll have to go through a whole hype cycle to get to the pitchfork stage.
I am unironically in support this stance.
__________________
I am a lunatic whose world revolves around hockey and Oilers hate.
Kerins is still in the ‘it’s their fault’ category.
If he succeeds the dummies should have seen it all the time and I told you so.
If he doesn’t the dummies aren’t handling him right.
He’ll have to go through a whole hype cycle to get to the pitchfork stage.
He's not That well liked.
A good number of posters in the "recall rory kerins" thread were not believers and some think he's a bust/not an nhler despite his 4 points in 5 games.
Personally I'm hoping this will be a feast of crow for the aforementioned unbelievers.
But pitchforks are already in a few back pockets, just waiting to tell me and others who championed the recall I told you so (and that the team knows exactly what its doing).
I think it's important not to cheer against a player because you thought he wasn't ready before and want to remain "right".
That's silly.
I saw some issues with Kerins coverage and foot speed in his first call up, and he tapered off in camp clearly ... but I hope he pops and they have found money with a 6th round pick.
Good for a team you're a fan of right?
And I think they should give a look to any players at or approaching waiver status to understand what they are losing in the future if they put them at risk.
The Following 11 Users Say Thank You to Bingo For This Useful Post:
And I think they should give a look to any players at or approaching waiver status to understand what they are losing in the future if they put them at risk.
This is the part that always drives me crazy.
Flames did it last year with Kerins (5), Morton (1), Kuznetsov (0) and Solovyov (5).
Those guys were all approaching waiver status and got no real looks and combined for 11 games.
But guys like:
Rooney (70), Bishop (6), Hunt (5), Duehr (16), Kirkland (21), Miromanov (44) combined for over 150 games.
Honestly I think you could even throw Hanley into that mix because he wasn't great in camp but was given time and then a great opportunity next to Weegar and then ended up being good but he wasn't good to start.
And they probably could have given Weegar or Andersson a night off when both clearly were playing very injured at times in the season.
It will be the same thing this year for guys like Stromgren, Grushnikov, and maybe some others that will require waivers next year. Get them games this year to know what you got.
Flames did it last year with Kerins (5), Morton (1), Kuznetsov (0) and Solovyov (5).
Those guys were all approaching waiver status and got no real looks and combined for 11 games.
But guys like:
Rooney (70), Bishop (6), Hunt (5), Duehr (16), Kirkland (21), Miromanov (44) combined for over 150 games.
Honestly I think you could even throw Hanley into that mix because he wasn't great in camp but was given time and then a great opportunity next to Weegar and then ended up being good but he wasn't good to start.
And they probably could have given Weegar or Andersson a night off when both clearly were playing very injured at times in the season.
It will be the same thing this year for guys like Stromgren, Grushnikov, and maybe some others that will require waivers next year. Get them games this year to know what you got.
Possibly a counter argument that exposure at the NHL level makes them more likely to be claimed? Just a thought.
Player A First 5 games:
G1- 59.7% xGF
G2 - 83.5% xGF
G3 - 51.6% xGF
G4 - 16.1% xGF
G5 - 4.55% xGF
Player B First 5 games:
G1 - 43.4% xGF
G2 - 66.0% xGF
G3 - 69.12 xGF
G4 - 4.88% xGF
G5 - 11.5% xGF
Player A was Kerins, Player B was Kirkland - seems like Kirkland was given a much longer leash to work out of being lost when he struggled to start the season.
It was only really after those first 11 games that he started to not get his head caved in most nights.
Players need time to adapt to the NHL. You can't give a guy his first 5 NHL games. 3 of which were really good, 2 of which were bad, and then proclaim he's not an NHLer.
I thought Kerins looked really great at zone entries and zone exits, was good at creating chances in the offensive zone and getting good looks, he struggled a bit defensively and with board play - which honestly most young players do.
It's very much the low risk approach the Flames and most teams take with these things at times. They will play the guy that has no offensive upside because he's a bit better defensively and stronger on the boards, instead of playing the younger guy that has offensive talent who is learning to play defense at the NHL level.
Personally I think you can learn how to play defense, you generally can't learn how to be good in transition or at creating offense.
There's a lot of difference between seeing a rookie or sophomore struggle at the NHL level and sending him down for more pro seasoning and seeing a guy with a ton of AHL experience struggle and thinking there's no more seasoning to get in the AHL, so lets see what more NHL time does.
There's a lot of difference between seeing a rookie or sophomore struggle at the NHL level and sending him down for more pro seasoning and seeing a guy with a ton of AHL experience struggle and thinking there's no more seasoning to get in the AHL, so lets see what more NHL time does.
If Kerins was 19 then sure but he was already 22 with over 100 AHL games at that point.
Why not give the young guy with more upside and more long term potential for your team more NHL time to see what that does.
I do truly believe that at some point if you want young players to continue developing, you need to get them in the NHL to take that next step of development. Even if it comes with growing pains and more risk.
If you're looking to contend I think it's a tougher equation and you can prioritize a safer veteran - but if you're in the middle of a re-tool or re-build or whatever we want to call it - it should be a no brainer that the tie goes to the younger player you drafted instead of the older guy that you signed as a farm tweener contract.
I'll use this example. Hanley was a great story last year. He started kind of poor but after 10 games or so his play started to improve and then really was great once he was paired with Weegar.
Great story...but are we 100% sure that somebody like Solovyov or Kuznetsov couldn't have had similar progression as Hanley did last year if they were given the same opportunity and leash to develop. Hanley had a slow start, only played 12 games prior to Jan 1, but was given a second shot. Maybe if those minutes went to the younger player, then instead of having a 34 year old stop gap as a fixture in your top 6, you'd have a 23 or 24 year old that is filling that spot?
Last edited by SuperMatt18; 11-13-2025 at 04:40 PM.
The Following User Says Thank You to SuperMatt18 For This Useful Post:
At first I hoped to cry about him being buried on the 4th line, but now he's playing in the top 6 so I'm working up a take about how we're blowing it with him by setting him up to succeed with the best linemates and creating fictional scenarios about his inevitable benching and demotion back to the AHL.
Sure it may sound exhausting but as someone who hates himself more than I hate the team I cheer for I'm willing to put in the work. No days off and all that.
Last edited by ResAlien; 11-13-2025 at 04:56 PM.
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to ResAlien For This Useful Post:
But pitchforks are already in a few back pockets, just waiting to tell me and others who championed the recall I told you so (and that the team knows exactly what its doing).
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bingo
I think it's important not to cheer against a player because you thought he wasn't ready before and want to remain "right".
That's silly.
Is that happening in other threads? I don’t really see any signs of it here.
I would think everyone is excited to see what he can do and if he’s further along in his development and finally ready to stick in the NHL. Nothing but upside.
