TheTakedown
Puck is Life
- Jul 11, 2012
- 13,689
- 1,480
TheTakedown
Puck is Life
- Jul 11, 2012
- 13,689
- 1,480
Ah, not again with this...
seriously. As a Rangers fan, Stepan reminds me of Krejci a lot. Solid, reliable, not flashy, but always gets it done. He is, in fact, a #1C... Sure, he isn't Seguin, but that's another discussion.
(All this being said, I think I prefer a Spooner + 1st basis for a deal over sending out Krejci)
STL fan in MN
Registered User
- Aug 16, 2007
- 7,255
- 4,300
As a Blues fan, I'd definitely be interested in something around an extended Shatty for Krejci. BOS would have to take back some additional salary for it to work (probably Berglund since Lehtera a bad contract but Bergy has some value so maybe some lesser asset would then be added on Boston's side to even it out...something like a mid round pick...but that's minor details IMO). The basis for a deal is there IMO.
The question I have for Bruins fans is, with Krejci having a NMC and thus the ability to reject any trade, is there a logical reason as to why he would waive that to be traded to STL? Why would he want out of BOS? Unless he's willing to waive his clause, this talk is moot IMO.
The question I have for Bruins fans is, with Krejci having a NMC and thus the ability to reject any trade, is there a logical reason as to why he would waive that to be traded to STL? Why would he want out of BOS? Unless he's willing to waive his clause, this talk is moot IMO.
BruinLVGA
CZ Shadow 2 Compact: finally here!!!
Another poster saved me the time to have to type it. Look below, last post I quoted.
You read the thread with a ton of posts (many by me) giving a ton of reasons why Krejci is undoubtedly a #1, top 15 center. Find any fact why he is not though. You won't find any.
Exactly.
Last edited:
BruinLVGA
CZ Shadow 2 Compact: finally here!!!
Same feeling I have when a bunch of St Louis fans come here and rehash this BS of an opinion, over and over.
Mind you, if they would bring ANY valid argument why they think that, I would be OK with it. But it's pretty much always a statement thrown out there, with no supporting facts whatsoever. The one lone (failed) try so far was a "but Savard was ahead of him, Bergeron is ahead of him, so he is a #2", promptly neutralized by "so Malkin has never been a #1 center?", meaning that a team CAN have TWO legit #1 centers. Boston has exactly that.
Imagine the reactions from St Louis fans if I for example would say "Pietrangelo is not a top D" (of course he is, I am using it only as an example). Why? Because I prefer <insert bunch of names>, no facts brought to support this. I thought so...
Last edited:
BruinLVGA
CZ Shadow 2 Compact: finally here!!!
No reason. As a matter of fact, not only he spent his entire career in Boston, but he also became a father recently. There's no indication whatsoever he would want out of Boston at all.
On the contrary, he also has a 1 year old girl (I think actually it's her first birthday tomorrow), I doubt that he would want to up and leave with his brand new family.
bleedblue1223
Registered User
- Jan 21, 2011
- 52,083
- 15,130
You are not understanding what I've said. Did Jeff Carter become a #1 center on his own? No he didn't, and he is a similar tier center to Krejci IMO, Carter is just a goalscorer and Krejci is a playmaker. They are unproven as a true #1 on a team. Krejci has had Savard and Bergeron, while Carter has had Richards and Kopitar, and he was not as effective in Columbus.
It's the fact that he is unproven in that role, just as Shattenkirk has been being sheltered by Pietrangelo. Saying that this logic applies to Malkin is not looking at it reasonably because everyone views him as a top 5 center or a top 10 forward. Krejci reasonably is in the 20-25 range of centers, similar to Shattenkirk on the defensive side. You can pull statistics without a big sample size that would show Krejci over guys like Giroux or Getzlaf or whoever, but reasonably looking at him, he is in the 20-25 range.
Similar to Carter, who I consider to be on the same tier, the question remains, is Krejci able to perform at the same level as a true #1 or is he best suited to be in a tandem 1A/1B situation? Similar to Shattenkirk, he is unproven in that aspect. Krejci would immediately become our best center, and I'd welcome him, but the idea that Shattenkirk is a huge risk in becoming a #1 and Krejci is not, is wrong.
The idea that having another top center to partner with does not have an impact on your effectiveness is also wrong. It creates for easier matchups and situations because the opposition can't load up on one guy.
This all started because Boston posters said Shattenkirk wasn't a #1. The same logic applies to Krejci if you believe that about Shattenkirk.
Facts and reasoning have definitely been posted by multiple Blues posters. If you're going to disagree with them fine. You're entitled to your opinion. But don't act like nobody has posted this stuff. We have.
Close the thread. This is stupid.
This deal just makes too much sense for either team ,Krecji injects more skill into their top 6 at center,and Shatty gives the Bruins more of what they have lacked the last two seasons which is skill on the blueline.Getting the dollars to work is the probable holdup .Iam calling this deal to happen ,and it will be a good hockey deal when it does
BruinLVGA
CZ Shadow 2 Compact: finally here!!!
Krejci is anything but unproven on the Bruins in a #1 spot. NOW Bergeron is probably considered unanimously the #1 of the two, but it has not been a thing for that long. You make it sound like Savard passed the torch to Bergeron, so to speak, with Krejci being simply a byproduct of having Bergeron as the top center. You just need to go back a couple of years and things looked completely different.
From 2008-09 to 2013-14, Bergeron outproduced Krejci ONCE (yeah, I know points are not everything. Bergeron is a monster in everything he does, but Krejci is not just a decorative plant either. On the contrary). And TWICE, Krejci lead the entire league in playoffs points (find me anyone else on your 20-25 center list that has done this). How can all this make one NOT proven in a #1 role?
So high was he considered by the Bruins brass that in 2012-13, they chose him over Seguin when they understood that no team can afford to roll THREE #1 centers in the cap era. I know, that turned out a blunder, but that's because Seguin took the next step up (and because of what happened to the assets we got back for him...), not because Krejci was misjudged.
PS: I don't believe anything about Shattenkirk. I haven't seen enough games of him to make an eloquent case either way. However I have seen every game Krejci played and I do know what I am talking about. Not sure you can say the same, being a STL fans quite a ways away from Boston (I think).
Refresh my memory then, because I remember none. I especially would like someone, anyone, to refute (with facts, that is...) the idea that a center who puts up top 10-15 numbers for centers, while being responsible defensively + being able to dictate the game's pace & while also stepping up big time when things matters (see playoffs) is not a true #1 center and, according to some, might not even be top a 25-30 center (!!!).
Last edited:
The argument is that Krejci may not be able to sustain his success without a player like Savard or Bergeron in front of him to carry the big defensive minutes. No one is arguing that Krejci has offensive ability, but can he do as well when playign against teams shut down lines? To refute this, you need to post Krejci's stats with Bergeron/Savard in the Bruins lineup, vs his stats with them in the lineup.
The only problem is that Bergeron has played almost the maximum number of games every year over the past few seasons, so there is no way to compare. Hence why Blues fans are cautious about dubbing Krejci a #1 center.
The biggest argument against Krejci is whether or not he can put up similar numbers when taking the blunt of the heavy matchups. Take a look at this quality of competition chart. Check out where Krejci ranks in comparison to the vast majority of other top 10/15 centers.
His comparables in terms of QOC were Crosby (who has proven that he can play without Malkin and still be the best player in the world) and Stamkos, who really is arguably a top 15 center in the league right now. Every other center is playing much tougher minutes night in and night out than David Krejci.
Those are relative numbers to the team. If you look at Raw QOC, Krejci has the lowest out of the entire group by a pretty significant margin.
The general trend is that with harder competition, points decrease. So you can't keep using Krejci's point count as the end all be all of discussion regarding the player. If he puts up those numbers while facing equivalent competition, then sure. He's definitely a bonafide #1 center. But so far he hasn't. THat's not to say he can't either, but its the exact same situation when looking at Shattenkirk's numbers.
BruinLVGA
CZ Shadow 2 Compact: finally here!!!
I am going to take a closer look at your reply tomorrow because here it's 1AM. Anyway, quick question... Is there a particular reason why, to prove your point, you chose:
A) the worst season in the past 10 years by the Boston Bruins, where everyone had a down year
and
B) David Krejci's worst season - excepted for his rookie season - where he only played 47 games (31 points...) for a serious injury and was a shade of himself because of that?
A) the worst season in the past 10 years by the Boston Bruins, where everyone had a down year
and
B) David Krejci's worst season - excepted for his rookie season - where he only played 47 games (31 points...) for a serious injury and was a shade of himself because of that?
bearcountry17
Registered User
The argument is that Krejci may not be able to sustain his success without a player like Savard or Bergeron in front of him to carry the big defensive minutes. No one is arguing that Krejci has offensive ability, but can he do as well when playign against teams shut down lines? To refute this, you need to post Krejci's stats with Bergeron/Savard in the Bruins lineup, vs his stats with them in the lineup.
The only problem is that Bergeron has played almost the maximum number of games every year over the past few seasons, so there is no way to compare. Hence why Blues fans are cautious about dubbing Krejci a #1 center.
The biggest argument against Krejci is whether or not he can put up similar numbers when taking the blunt of the heavy matchups. Take a look at this quality of competition chart. Check out where Krejci ranks in comparison to the vast majority of other top 10/15 centers.
His comparables in terms of QOC were Crosby (who has proven that he can play without Malkin and still be the best player in the world) and Stamkos, who really is arguably a top 15 center in the league right now. Every other center is playing much tougher minutes night in and night out than David Krejci.
Those are relative numbers to the team. If you look at Raw QOC, Krejci has the lowest out of the entire group by a pretty significant margin.
The general trend is that with harder competition, points decrease. So you can't keep using Krejci's point count as the end all be all of discussion regarding the player. If he puts up those numbers while facing equivalent competition, then sure. He's definitely a bonafide #1 center. But so far he hasn't. THat's not to say he can't either, but its the exact same situation when looking at Shattenkirk's numbers.
Is there a way you could do this for more than one season? 47 games is a pretty small sample size and in 14-15 Krejci's main linemate, Lucic, had a rough year and his RW was a revolving door of rookies and AHL players. Do his 2013-14 and 15-16 usage stats look similar?
Philly85*
I Ain't Even Mad
- Mar 28, 2009
- 15,845
- 3
lol, you know people can sarcastically or jokingly use slang words no matter how old they are, doesn't make them less of a person
The argument is that Krejci may not be able to sustain his success without a player like Savard or Bergeron in front of him to carry the big defensive minutes. No one is arguing that Krejci has offensive ability, but can he do as well when playign against teams shut down lines? To refute this, you need to post Krejci's stats with Bergeron/Savard in the Bruins lineup, vs his stats with them in the lineup.
The only problem is that Bergeron has played almost the maximum number of games every year over the past few seasons, so there is no way to compare. Hence why Blues fans are cautious about dubbing Krejci a #1 center.
The biggest argument against Krejci is whether or not he can put up similar numbers when taking the blunt of the heavy matchups. Take a look at this quality of competition chart. Check out where Krejci ranks in comparison to the vast majority of other top 10/15 centers.
His comparables in terms of QOC were Crosby (who has proven that he can play without Malkin and still be the best player in the world) and Stamkos, who really is arguably a top 15 center in the league right now. Every other center is playing much tougher minutes night in and night out than David Krejci.
Those are relative numbers to the team. If you look at Raw QOC, Krejci has the lowest out of the entire group by a pretty significant margin.
The general trend is that with harder competition, points decrease. So you can't keep using Krejci's point count as the end all be all of discussion regarding the player. If he puts up those numbers while facing equivalent competition, then sure. He's definitely a bonafide #1 center. But so far he hasn't. THat's not to say he can't either, but its the exact same situation when looking at Shattenkirk's numbers.
Way to deceptively cherrypick stats from the season Krejci was injured. I'd give you the benefit of the doubt, except you literally had to change to the season before manually as the generator defaults to 2015-16.
Of Top 30 NHL Centers By Points, Minimum 40 Games (info via http://www.puckalytics.com):
13th in Points
18th in Points / 60
24th in Primary Points / 60
7th in 1st Assists / 60
28th in Goals / 60
4th in % of Team TOI
19th in % of Team (On Ice) Goals For
20th in Corsi For %, Relative
20th in Goals For %, Relative
19th in Goals Against %, Relative
16th in FOW % - 50.1%
All of this represents a very good, but not necessarily "elite" center. He gets a ton of minutes against very good competition. He doesn't drive possession like the best. He doesn't create his own chances like the best. His defensive metrics are solid but not spectacular. He's medicore on the faceoff dot.
Now... He's also 30 and likely at his peak as a player or just past it. He's just had a 2nd hip surgery. He's never been the only stud center on his own team. He's signed well into the period when most players start declining significantly to a substantial, though not unreasonable contract.
I like Krejci quite a bit. I would like to have him on the Blues. He would be our best center. I can also pick 20 or more centers I'd rather have (but cannot, obviously) given all of these circumstances:
Crosby
Malkin
Kopitar
Bergeron
Seguin
Toews
Pavelski
Tavares
Backstrom
Duchene
Couture
Getzlaf
Giroux
Stamkos
Monahan
Kuznetzov
Mackinnon
Barkov
Eichel
McDavid
13th in Points
18th in Points / 60
24th in Primary Points / 60
7th in 1st Assists / 60
28th in Goals / 60
4th in % of Team TOI
19th in % of Team (On Ice) Goals For
20th in Corsi For %, Relative
20th in Goals For %, Relative
19th in Goals Against %, Relative
16th in FOW % - 50.1%
All of this represents a very good, but not necessarily "elite" center. He gets a ton of minutes against very good competition. He doesn't drive possession like the best. He doesn't create his own chances like the best. His defensive metrics are solid but not spectacular. He's medicore on the faceoff dot.
Now... He's also 30 and likely at his peak as a player or just past it. He's just had a 2nd hip surgery. He's never been the only stud center on his own team. He's signed well into the period when most players start declining significantly to a substantial, though not unreasonable contract.
I like Krejci quite a bit. I would like to have him on the Blues. He would be our best center. I can also pick 20 or more centers I'd rather have (but cannot, obviously) given all of these circumstances:
Crosby
Malkin
Kopitar
Bergeron
Seguin
Toews
Pavelski
Tavares
Backstrom
Duchene
Couture
Getzlaf
Giroux
Stamkos
Monahan
Kuznetzov
Mackinnon
Barkov
Eichel
McDavid
Last edited:
Way to deceptively cherrypick stats from the season Krejci was injured. I'd give you the benefit of the doubt, except you literally had to change to the season before manually as the generator defaults to 2015-16.
Yeah I realized that I'd misclicked that after I posted it. Sorry. Was he injured from 2011-2014 too?
Because his charts look largely the same. You cannot judge a players worth based on one year of performance.Here are his charts since 2011-2012
2012-2013
2013-2014
His performance this past season was more on par with what you would expect from a first line center, but he is far from doing it year in and year out. It also makes sense that this past year could have been his career year so to say, and there is little likelihood that he will continue to improve when his age will soon start becoming a factor. You cannot judge a player based on a one year sample size.
BruinLVGA
CZ Shadow 2 Compact: finally here!!!
Way to deceptively cherrypick stats from the season Krejci was injured. I'd give you the benefit of the doubt, except you literally had to change to the season before manually as the generator defaults to 2015-16.
This settles the argument.
Yeah I realized that I'd misclicked that after I posted it. Sorry. Was he injured from 2011-2014 too?
Here are his charts since 2011-2012
2012-2013
2013-2014
His performance this past season was more on par with what you would expect from a first line center, but he is far from doing it year in and year out. It also makes sense that this past year could have been his career year so to say, and there is little likelihood that he will continue to improve when his age will soon start becoming a factor. You cannot judge a player based on a one year sample size.
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.
So 1st, obviously, in previous years when the Bruins were a contender and were rolling 4 lines, Krejci could get an easier go at it. He clearly has proven that he can be just as effective with more difficult assignments as he did just this past season as a creaky old 29 year old.
2nd, and more importantly, QoC stats between opponents that are CF 49% and 51% are so negligible as to be pointless. QoT would probably be more useful context here. And the Zone Start data (which favors Krejci) is also more interesting.
2nd, and more importantly, QoC stats between opponents that are CF 49% and 51% are so negligible as to be pointless. QoT would probably be more useful context here. And the Zone Start data (which favors Krejci) is also more interesting.
STL fan in MN
Registered User
- Aug 16, 2007
- 7,255
- 4,300
Thanks. That's what I figured. So all of this bickering on if Krejci is a #1 or #2 is pretty pointless. He's very unlikely to agree to a trade regardless. That said, count me as a Blues fan that considers him a #1 (although not an elite #1) and would value him higher than Shatty.
Dbrownss
Registered User
- Jan 5, 2014
- 31,359
- 8,734
Alberta_OReilly_Fan
Bruin fan since 1975
there is an argument that opposition doesnt have 2 premium shutdown lines... so your second unit usually gets better matchups.
messier behind gretzky for example... but then messier became number 1 and thrived because the number 2 center gets less offensive zone time... lower quality wingers... less feature on the pp.
weve seen yzerman and federov in detroit both be mvp... sakic and forsberg in colorado... so obviously teams can have 2 number ones but it does play a role.
for what its worth bergeron centers the checking line and krecji gets the top wingers. krejci runs the pp. krejci is the defacto number 1 center on the team that went to the finals twice. krecji was the playoff scoring leader.
you cant name 15 better centers in the league over the past 5 years without exposing your lack of hockey knowledge.
all that said, teams have to manage cap... need a balanced team...
as a bruin fan id rather have a top pair dman for the next 6 years than krejci.
is shattenkirk the right guy? he might be the best available guy. its a trade worth considering if the price is acceptable for a contract extension.
