Alexander Kerfoot — 2023–24 stats and season rank | IceSheet
Alexander Kerfoot
Nashville Predators·#14·Center · Shoots left
Age 32 · 5′11″ · 185 lb · Vancouver, BC, CAN
Season grade
Withheld
Incomplete data
Performance / 60−0.2414/82 GP
Games82T-2nd in NHL
Goals130.16/GP▲0.04T-215th in NHL
Assists320.39/GP▲0.12T-129th in NHL
Points450.55/GP…
5v5 xG share…
Avg TOI17:26…
/
Loading season standing and profile…
Season comparisons
Loading peer comparisons and model evidence…
Optional recent-history profile
Rolling Radar
Loading recent-history profile…
Loading model evidence…
Loading defensive evidence…
Shot locations
Loading canonical shot events…
Usage by situation
Loading usage…
Loading special teams…
T-159th in NHL
T-282nd in NHL
Not qualified · 2023–24 forwards
Needs 3 more covered appearances. Needs 62.5 more rated minutes. The app has checked scoring results for 14 of 44 appearances (31.8%); season standings require at least 90%. Scoring data cover less than 90% of recorded workload or could not be verified.
vs 0 qualified forwards
Percentiles appear once this player qualifies for season standings. The score breakdown is under How this is calculated.
How this is calculated
Score breakdown
Component
Weight
Scaled
Contribution
Offense
25%
−0.192
−0.048
Defense
25%
−0.418
−0.105
Chance creation
20%
−0.633
−0.127
Finishing
10%
0.183
+0.018
Assisting
20%
0.099
+0.020
Performance rate
−0.241
Per 60 rated minutes, over the scored appearances. Each component is scaled separately, then weighted; the contributions add to the performance rate at full precision, so rounded figures may differ.
Scoring
Season grade is the qualified peer percentile on the same letter bands as Game Grade — A+ ≥88, A ≥78, A− ≥68, B+ ≥58, B ≥50, B− ≥42, C+ ≥35, C ≥28, C− ≥22, D ≥15, F below 15 — and needs qualification plus at least 30 eligible peers. The letter describes this season’s performance, not permanent ability.
Comparisons
Rank and component percentiles compare this season’s qualified forwards on unrounded rates over every checked appearance; Game Grade compares one appearance with frozen historical games.
Component percentiles are never averaged into the score. Recent history is optional, from up to three completed prior seasons; small samples are provisional.
Coverage
Qualification: 17 covered appearances, 289.5 rated minutes, and 90% appearance and workload coverage. Minimums advance with league progress; valid low-sample results stay visible.
Rated minutes exclude play with a goalie pulled: 3.0 min excluded; official TOI 230.0 min.
Coverage: partial. Updated .
Method
Five weighted components add to the performance rate. Five-on-five offense and defense account for recorded teammates, opponents and game state, so shared on-ice results are not isolated individual ability. Finishing is scored against the shot model’s historical-shooter expectation and assisting counts primary assists plus half of secondary assists; both use the strength baseline, chance creation its positional baseline.
Legacy rating
Legacy season score: 13.2 / 100. The fixed exposure baseline is 50; this is separate from the season peer grade.
Rolling Radar
Recent NHL history, carried across seasons. The radar compares this broader profile with a fixed position-group reference.
Bands show position percentiles; axis labels show current rolling values.
Dashed outline: peer average in the fixed reference. Outside = above average; inside = below average. All axes point outward for stronger results.
Player value: 2.40 Peer range: 1.68 – 4.20 xGF/60
MeanAlexander Kerfoot
Lower Higher (better)
Player 2.40 · mean 2.54. Higher raw values rank higher.
Rolling profile against a fixed reference group
Fixed rolling-profile reference · 430 players. Values use the same history and smoothing as the radar.
History, sample sizes & calculation
Higher radar percentiles mean stronger recorded results against the fixed reference, including older seasons. These are separate from this season’s league percentile. Each player has a different amount of covered history. Weighted minutes and attempts give recent games more influence. “Prior” is the share contributed by a frozen league baseline: it is higher when a player has less evidence, and differs by metric because each uses its own smoothing strength. It is not a confidence score.
On-ice offense · xGF/60
48.5 weighted minutes · 80% prior
On-ice defense · xGA/60
48.5 weighted minutes · 89% prior
Chance generation · ixG/60
48.5 weighted minutes · 80% prior
Shot quality · ixG/attempt
5.0 weighted attempts · 83% prior
Finishing · goals above expected/60
5.0 weighted attempts · 89% prior
History through Oct 19, 2023. Recent games count more than older games. History carries across seasons and stays unchanged while inactive. On-ice results are shared; finishing describes results rather than established talent.
Recent scoring against his own season
Recent scoring against his own season
Loading recent games…
Loading splits…
Loading linemates…
Loading playoff games…
Loading game log…
Loading career ledger…
Every metric name opens its definition; the full list lives in Metrics.
Traditional statistics cover all situations. Supporting five-on-five analyses use completed games, raw adjustment and exposure from xG model v4. The two samples can differ.
An em dash means unavailable, not zero. A partial season remains partial. Where a panel reports evidence coverage, its rates use only the covered games. History never substitutes a different model, and a missing appearance interrupts a rolling model window.
Shot maps use the same shot model as Game Center and show which model version scored recent shots beside the rink. Older seasons can use earlier model versions. High danger means a model scoring probability of at least 0.20 on an unblocked attempt; for goalies, medium danger is 0.08 to 0.20 and low is below 0.08.
Special-team buckets include the wider recorded man-advantage and man-down states, read from the player’s own team; for a goalie, penalty kill means facing a power play. Their ranks need 100 recorded minutes and at least 30 qualified peers; below 100 minutes, penalty-kill percentiles are provisional. Playoff values have no ranks or percentiles. Team share is player ice time divided by team ice time in that situation, over the games the player dressed. Zone starts describe faceoff-started five-on-five shifts and exclude on-the-fly starts.
Penalties count events, including one for a double minor; bench and served-by roles are excluded, and victimless infractions have no drawn role. EPV added sums changes in the probability that the possessing team scores next; it is not standings points or an isolated player grade. Rolling windows never cross seasons or season types, and a missed game is not a zero-performance appearance. Career rates use summed counts and exposure, never an average of season rates; a missing contributing season withholds its career metric, and Performance begins in 2023–24.
Most often with Sean Durzi: 373 five-on-five minutes, 42.5% xG share together
Most often with Sean Durzi: 373 five-on-five minutes, 42.5% xG share together
Five-on-five · time together from shift charts (1,090:33 of his 5v5 ice time) · xG share together and apart
Teammate
Pos
TOI together
xG share together
GF–GA
CF%
Him without
Teammate without
Sean Durzi
D
372:49
42.5%
12–21
48.7%
47.9%
48.9%
J.J. Moser
D
330:22
49.3%
15–18
50.5%
44.9%
48.1%
Nick Schmaltz
C
324:10
51.4%
12–17
59.5%
43.9%
47.9%
Juuso Välimäki
D
285:59
51.2%
16–14
50.4%
44.3%
49.4%
Michael Kesselring
D
279:53
48.6%
14–16
52.8%
45.3%
47.5%
Clayton Keller
R
277:47
50.0%
11–16
57.6%
45.0%
48.4%
Michael Carcone
L
266:29
40.0%
15–7
45.0%
48.4%
46.1%
Mathew Dumba
D
256:51
44.6%
16–8
46.9%
46.7%
49.2%
Liam O'Brien
C
225:36
42.6%
17–10
41.9%
47.2%
49.0%
Jason Zucker
L
216:59
43.3%
12–12
46.6%
47.0%
52.7%
Troy Stecher
D
210:58
51.9%
12–5
51.9%
44.7%
48.6%
Travis Dermott
D
207:39
37.1%
10–8
43.6%
48.5%
47.4%
Without columns are five-on-five xG share apart: him on the ice without that teammate, and the teammate without him (with this club). Bars are centred on an even 50%.
Weak 0.54 individual expected goals per 60 (162nd of 209)
Weak 0.54 individual expected goals per 60 (162nd of 209)
45.6%153rd of 209
Weak 45.6% on-ice expected goal share at five-on-five (153rd of 209)
Weak 45.6% on-ice expected goal share at five-on-five (153rd of 209)
Weak 2.77 on-ice expected goals against per 60 (157th of 209)
Weak 2.77 on-ice expected goals against per 60 (157th of 209)
Defensive metrics
Five-on-five on-ice suppression; individual events in all situations.
Suppression
Player
Percentile
Rank
59.66
117 / 20944th
—
—
—
0.065
168 / 20920th
Puck management
Player
Percentile
Rank
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
Physical style
Player
Percentile
Rank
—
—
—
—
—
—
Context · not graded
Player value: 59.66 Peer range: 43.65 – 73.10 / 60
MeanAlexander Kerfoot
Lower (better)Higher
Player 59.66 · mean 59.12. Lower raw values are better.
On-ice attempts against per 60, including blocks.
Evidence coverage: high danger 36 of 82 games.
Discipline & puck management
Recorded season event counts · all situations
Penaltiesnet —
Taken —Drawn —
Puck eventsnet —
Giveaways —Takeaways —
Blocks
—
all situations
Hits
—
all situations
Both penalty counts cover 38 of 82 games with every drawn role recorded.
Average 4.83 power-play points per 60 (46th of 106)
Average 4.83 power-play points per 60 (46th of 106)
Power play
149:04 recorded ice time · peers need 100 minutes
Share of team PP
—
in games dressed
PP points
12
goals + assists
Unit xGF / 60
7.85
team without: —
Power play rates
Player
Percentile
Rank
4.83
46 / 10657th
—
—
—
7.25
99 / 1067th
1.43
78 / 10627th
7.85
68 / 10636th
—
—
—
Player value: 4.83 Peer range: 0.96 – 9.99 / 60
MeanAlexander Kerfoot
Lower Higher (better)
Player 4.83 · mean 4.53. Higher raw values rank higher.
Recorded goals plus assists per 60 in this scope; widened power-play and penalty-kill scopes.
Evidence coverage: goals 16 of 64 games · team time 38 of 82 games.
Penalty kill
212:33 recorded ice time · peers need 100 minutes
Share of team PK
—
in games dressed
SH points
3
goals + assists
Unit xGA / 60
10.14
team without: —
Penalty kill rates
Player
Percentile
Rank
10.14
71 / 778th
—
—
—
129.00
68 / 7712th
—
—
—
0.77
58 / 7725th
Player value: 10.14 Peer range: 4.84 – 10.94 / 60
MeanAlexander Kerfoot
Lower (better)Higher
Player 10.14 · mean 8.41. Lower raw values are better.
Raw on-ice expected goals against per 60; the Season metrics sample.
Evidence coverage: goals 15 of 77 games · high danger 15 of 77 games · team time 38 of 82 games.
17:26 TOI per game (12:31 at five-on-five · 1:49 PP · 2:36 PK)
17:26 TOI per game (12:31 at five-on-five · 1:49 PP · 2:36 PK)
Results vs expected
Five-on-five · what happened beside the chances created and allowed
Chances
Player
Percentile
Rank
2.32
131 / 20938th
2.77
157 / 20925th
45.6
153 / 20927th
Goals
Player
Percentile
Rank
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
Luck & variance
Player
Percentile
Rank
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
Context · not graded
Player value: 2.32 Peer range: 1.41 – 4.50 / 60
MeanAlexander Kerfoot
Lower Higher (better)
Player 2.32 · mean 2.50. Higher raw values rank higher.
Raw on-ice expected goals for per 60; the Season metrics sample.
5v5 goals
—
35 of 82 games
5v5 expected
39.8–47.4
xG for–against
EPV added
+2.31
82 attributed games · all situations
On ice vs off ice
Arizona's share with Alexander Kerfoot on the ice against the same team without him.
Share
On ice and off ice
On-minus-off gap in percentage points
xGF%
On ice 45.6% · Off ice unavailable
—
CF%
On ice 48.4% · Off ice unavailable
—
GF%
On ice unavailable · Off ice unavailable
—
On iceOff ice
Scale 40–65% · marker at 50% · right column is the on-minus-off gap in points
Hot 7 points in the last 10 games (0.70 per game vs 0.55 this season)
Hot 7 points in the last 10 games (0.70 per game vs 0.55 this season)
0.63 points per game at home · 0.46 away
0.63 points per game at home · 0.46 away
82 games · most recent vs EDM, W 5–2: 0 G, 1 A
82 games · most recent vs EDM, W 5–2: 0 G, 1 A
Shot map
All 162 attempts
Alexander Kerfoot
162 attempts14.88 xG13 G
Goal13Shot on goal90Missed shot59Blocked shot0Larger dot = higher xG
Shooting by zone
Hover a row to light it up · click to pin
Zone
Att
G
xG
Goal rate
Exp.
Goals vs expected
G−xG
Right circle
11
2
0.7
18.2%
6.5%
+1.3
Left circle
8
1
0.2
12.5%
2.1%
+0.8
Outer slot
8
1
0.6
12.5%
7.3%
+0.4
Below goal line
4
0
0.2
0.0%
4.1%
−0.2
Point
20
0
0.3
0.0%
1.5%
−0.3
Inner slot
70
8
8.7
11.4%
12.4%
−0.7
High slot
41
1
4.2
2.4%
10.3%
−3.2
All zones
162
13
14.9
8.0%
9.2%
−1.9
Finishing evidence. Scoring 8.0% on chances vs 9.2% expected (−1.2 points), with the largest shortfall in the high slot.
Sorted by goals minus expected goals. Goal rate is goals per unblocked attempt against the expected rate.
Shot profile
Context · not graded
On-net rate
63.6%
103 of 162 attempts on goal
Slot share
68.5%
111 from the inner or high slot
Average distance
23.4 ft
from the centre of the net
Rebound attempts / 60
0.80
19 this season · all situations
Shot types
162 attempts
Type
Share
Sh%
G−xG
Wrist
48.8%
13.5%
−0.2
Tip-in
22.2%
13.0%
−0.1
Backhand
8.6%
11.1%
−0.1
Slap
6.8%
0.0%
−0.9
Snap
6.2%
16.7%
−0.3
Deflected
4.9%
20.0%
+0.1
Other
2.5%
—
−0.2
Share is context, not a grade. Sh% counts shots on goal only.
High-danger chances
Model goal probability ≥ 0.20
Conversion21.4%−5.3 pts vs expected
Actual21.4%
Expected26.8%
Attempts
14
8.6% of these attempts
Goals
3
23% of all goals
Expected goals
3.7
0.27 xG per attempt
G−xG
−0.7
below model
Usage by situation
Ice time, share of team ice time, scoring and scoring rate, with where shifts start.
Scope
TOI/GP
Team share
G
A
P
P/60
Five-on-five
12:31
—
8
21
29
1.69
Power play
1:49
—
2
10
12
4.83
Penalty kill
2:36
—
2
1
3
0.85
Other
0:30
—
1
0
1
1.46
All situations
17:26
—
13
32
45
1.89
Where the 45 points come from · All situations
Goals13 · 0.55/60
Primary assists— · —/60
Secondary assists— · —/60
Zone starts — offensive of OZ + DZ
Offensive —Neutral —Defensive —
Shifts
— a game · — average
Zone starts: five-on-five · Shifts: all situations
Faceoffs
All situations · zones are read from his side of the draw · values only; no peer ranks yet
Win %
47.8%
412 of 862 draws
Draws per game
10.51
82 games
Offensive zone
49.2%
315 draws
Defensive zone
47.4%
331 draws
Power play
45.2%
124 draws
10 NHL seasons: 647 games, 309 points
10 NHL seasons: 647 games, 309 points
Totals cover all situations; rates are five-on-five.
Elite90+Strong70–89Average30–69Weak10–29Poor<10Bar length is the peer percentile, so longer is always better · tick at the 50th
Player value: 1.69 Peer range: 0.13 – 3.50 / 60
MeanAlexander Kerfoot
Lower Higher (better)
Player 1.69 · mean 1.57. Higher raw values rank higher.
Recorded five-on-five goals plus assists per 60 minutes.
How to read these comparisons
Player values are recorded season results. Peer averages are arithmetic means of qualified players in the selected group; each row uses the same peers for its average and rank. Ranks use unrounded values, with tied players sharing a rank and the next rank skipped. Lower xG against ranks better. Bar colours are the five performance tiers; context rows are blue and not graded. Differences from the average describe the season, not isolated player impact.
Goals above expected is the raw goals-minus-xG rate, without the shrinkage used in the older finishing comparison. On-ice measures include teammates, opponents and deployment. These recorded metrics describe different quantities from the adjusted Season score components beside them.
Skaters need 20 appearances and 300 five-on-five minutes; quality and finishing also need 75 unblocked attempts. Early in a season these minimums scale down with games played so far. At least 30 peers must qualify. Playoff ranks are withheld. A reviewed axis whose own evidence fails is withheld and shown with its reason rather than ranked. These workload rules do not express statistical confidence.
Position uses the NHL listed primary position available now; it does not establish historical position or actual deployment. Broad groups are forwards, defence and goalies. This version uses the current model’s covered games only.
Season vs reference
Per game · all situations
Metric2023–24ReferenceDiff
0.160.12+0.04
0.390.27+0.12
0.550.39+0.16
1.261.62-0.37
Reference: 2022–23 · 82 games.
Each game against his own season
Points in each game, coloured by how good the game wasTrailing 10 games, per gameSeason 0.55
