Rumor: Shattenkirk for Krejci?

[StLHokie]

But there is soo much more context within that. 2011-2013 Kelly and campbell with peverly and paille were used as shutdown lines along with bergy obv, dk was left to feast on other competition. In most of those years his zs% isn't as favorable as alot of other players on that list.

Also he had 3~ seasons before that with a 73 pt season there.

Ah you're helping me prove my point even more so. That stats are not everything! It is your own fellow poster that is living and dying by the statistics that put Krejci as a top 15 center in the league. Every other center that I have placed on those comparisons also has various context which do not make them completely represented by their stats. I am simply pointing out that there is a possibility that fans of opposing teams could not value Krejci as a top 15 center in the league.

 

[Spektre]

It's both amusing and disturbing half this thread has been about the validity of Krejci as a center. If Krejci was a Blue he'd be far and away their #1 center. Even if you put Krejci on last year's WCF Blues roster he's still far and away the #1 center.

There could be some concern over Krejci's health going forward. At least that's a valid concern. In all likelihood Krejci would nix any deal so speculation of the trade is probably a moot point. For crying out loud can we stop with the #1 not #1 goofiness?

 

[SteenMachine]

It's both amusing and disturbing half this thread has been about the validity of Krejci as a center. If Krejci was a Blue he'd be far and away their #1 center. Even if you put Krejci on last year's WCF Blues roster he's still far and away the #1 center.

There could be some concern over Krejci's health going forward. At least that's a valid concern. In all likelihood Krejci would nix any deal so speculation of the trade is probably a moot point. For crying out loud can we stop with the #1 not #1 goofiness?

What's even more weird is the idea that we "might" not want him, like there's a remotely better option or that his availability isn't entirely dependant on the Blues asking for him. Boston has no reason to move him, specifically, at all.

 

[bluetuned]

The talk about whether Krejci is really a top tier #1C outside of Boston came about in response to stuff like this:

A #1 center for a #3 defenseman isn't a good deal -- as desperate as Boston is for non-bottom pairing defensemen.

I don't think many of the Blues fans here really believe he's not a 1C on the Blues. He'd definitely be the best C on the Blues. But the same logic that says Shattenkirk is a #3 defenseman because he happens to play on the same team as Petro makes Krejci a #2 since he plays on the same team as Bergeron.

Krejci would be a 1C on at least 10 teams in the league, including the Blues. Shattenkirk would be a top pairing defenseman on a similar number of teams, including Boston.

 

[nmbr_24]

Ah you're helping me prove my point even more so. That stats are not everything! It is your own fellow poster that is living and dying by the statistics that put Krejci as a top 15 center in the league. Every other center that I have placed on those comparisons also has various context which do not make them completely represented by their stats. I am simply pointing out that there is a possibility that fans of opposing teams could not value Krejci as a top 15 center in the league.

There is also the possibility that teams do not value Shattenkirk as a top pairing guy because of his defensive game. I know I sure would never call him a #1 D. A #2 sure but Blues fans are telling us that he is a 3rd pairing guy if he is on the team next season and add to that he has one year left on his deal. Krejci has much more value than Shattenkirk does. I also think Krejci is a #1 center and not because of his stats but because I have watched him continually score at the pace he does while playing great defense and bringing his game to another level in the playoffs. That is why I think he is a #1 center, not because of stats and it is also why I don't think Shattenkirk is a #1D, because he just isn't that good at defense and a #1 defender has to have an all around game in my book.

 

[wintersej]

Ah you're helping me prove my point even more so. That stats are not everything! It is your own fellow poster that is living and dying by the statistics that put Krejci as a top 15 center in the league. Every other center that I have placed on those comparisons also has various context which do not make them completely represented by their stats. I am simply pointing out that there is a possibility that fans of opposing teams could not value Krejci as a top 15 center in the league.

By far, the biggest problem with the charts you posted is that the axis makes it seem like the difference between 49 CF% QoC and 51 CF% QoC is a big freaking deal. Intentionally, or not, its like its taken out of page 1 of "How to Lie with Statistics".

 

[Dr Danglefest]

The talk about whether Krejci is really a top tier #1C outside of Boston came about in response to stuff like this:



I don't think many of the Blues fans here really believe he's not a 1C on the Blues. He'd definitely be the best C on the Blues. But the same logic that says Shattenkirk is a #3 defenseman because he happens to play on the same team as Petro makes Krejci a #2 since he plays on the same team as Bergeron.

Krejci would be a 1C on at least 10 teams in the league, including the Blues. Shattenkirk would be a top pairing defenseman on a similar number of teams, including Boston.

Yup well said, any notion otherwise is silly and ripe with homerism. You can argue contracts, age and stats effecting value sure, but to say that Krejci doesn't immediately become the 1st line Center on St Louis or The Shatty doesn't immediately become dare I say the #1 Dman on the Bruins is just plain silly. From a Bruins standpoint as that's where my loyalties lie, For all the complaining about Chara slowing and no longer being a #1 and Krug (whom I think incredibly highly of so I don't mirror these views) lacking the defensive side of the game to be a top pairing Dman, how can Bruins fans argue Shattenkirk isn't a step up from either of these 2 who are currently our top 2?

Personally the only reason why I wouldn't pull the trigger on a deal is Shattenkirks contract. If something could be pre negotiated then idk man that's a pretty damn even trade, after that... I'm just not sure I'm able to pull the trigger due to my respect for Krejci and what he means to this team but it wouldn't have anything to do with value

 

[PatriceBergeronFan]

The talk about whether Krejci is really a top tier #1C outside of Boston came about in response to stuff like this:



I don't think many of the Blues fans here really believe he's not a 1C on the Blues. He'd definitely be the best C on the Blues. But the same logic that says Shattenkirk is a #3 defenseman because he happens to play on the same team as Petro makes Krejci a #2 since he plays on the same team as Bergeron.

Krejci would be a 1C on at least 10 teams in the league, including the Blues. Shattenkirk would be a top pairing defenseman on a similar number of teams, including Boston.

I have no idea where the issue with my post comes from. In the exact post you quote here I mentioned Krejci as a #1 center, rather than an elite All Star center.

I would not trade Krejci for Shattenkirk with or without an extension, unless the Bruins receive an additional asset!

Yup well said, any notion otherwise is silly and ripe with homerism. You can argue contracts, age and stats effecting value sure, but to say that Krejci doesn't immediately become the 1st line Center on St Louis or The Shatty doesn't immediately become dare I say the #1 Dman on the Bruins is just plain silly. From a Bruins standpoint as that's where my loyalties lie, For all the complaining about Chara slowing and no longer being a #1 and Krug (whom I think incredibly highly of so I don't mirror these views) lacking the defensive side of the game to be a top pairing Dman, how can Bruins fans argue Shattenkirk isn't a step up from either of these 2 who are currently our top 2?

Personally the only reason why I wouldn't pull the trigger on a deal is Shattenkirks contract. If something could be pre negotiated then idk man that's a pretty damn even trade, after that... I'm just not sure I'm able to pull the trigger due to my respect for Krejci and what he means to this team but it wouldn't have anything to do with value

Simply because he'd be our best defenseman (debatable with Chara, even now) does not mean you pay the price of a #1 defenseman.

In his last ten playoff games he played less than 20 minutes per game in seven. That isn't someone who can carry our top pairing.

Krejci can carry a top line at least.

The Bruins need a Boychuk more than a Shattenkirk anyways.

 

[b in vancouver]

Personally I wouldn't trade Krejci for Shattenkirk. I simply think Krejci impacts the game more and holds much more value.
For a few years I thought he'd be a perfect fit in St. Louis given his playoff track record and their need for some playoff success but it would cost more than Shattenkirk. If Krejci were on the block I think a few teams (including St. L.) would pony up more.

No problem with something like Spooner +
Don't think Boston can afford to give up their one-two punch (them plus Eriksson and Marchand nearly carried them to the playoffs) just to add a decent defence man - as it'll just be too much heavy lifting for Bergeron even with the addition of Backes. Boston has a hole at RHD for sure, but they've also bled so much talent up front that losing any of Bergeron, Krejci or Marchand would really hurt.

 

[Speed Shooter]

So in any hypothetical trade for Shattenkirk, wouldn't STL be forced to dump bodies/not take any players back?

Generalfanager.com currently has them at 51 contracts -- and that's not including the return of Sobotka which would put them at 52.

Outside of trading people off their roster, how do they get that number down to 50 by Opening Night?

Doesn't that lend itself to moving roster players (like Shattenkirk + more) for a package of prospects/picks?

 

[Treb]

So in any hypothetical trade for Shattenkirk, wouldn't STL be forced to dump bodies/not take any players back?

Generalfanager.com currently has them at 51 contracts -- and that's not including the return of Sobotka which would put them at 52.

Outside of trading people off their roster, how do they get that number down to 50 by Opening Night?

Doesn't that lend itself to moving roster players (like Shattenkirk + more) for a package of prospects/picks?

Kyrou, Musil, Dunn, Opilka contracts would all slide AFAIK if they don't play 11 games in the NHL.

 

[67Blues]

So in any hypothetical trade for Shattenkirk, wouldn't STL be forced to dump bodies/not take any players back?

Generalfanager.com currently has them at 51 contracts -- and that's not including the return of Sobotka which would put them at 52.

Outside of trading people off their roster, how do they get that number down to 50 by Opening Night?

Doesn't that lend itself to moving roster players (like Shattenkirk + more) for a package of prospects/picks?

They would move out some of the contracts that are on the Chicago Wolves or lower. There are people on that list that I've never really heard of and have zero shot at the NHL. Cannon Fodder to fill the roster.