Player Discussion Torey Krug III

[missingchicklet]

Carlson has looked good in the playoffs, but his defense over the past few years has been nothing to write home about. He has put up a lot of points this season setting up Ovi, so I guess there's that. I think Washington will likely re-sign him. If not, then the Bs need to stay far away. Sinking a bunch 0f money and term into a 28 year-old defender who is not anything special in his own zone is exactly what the Bs do not need to be doing.

 

[Over the volcano]

Absolutely nothing wrong with it.

Krug was not good in the playoffs against the East’s best, but he was far from the only one.

Krug’s playoffs ended over two weeks ago and there are still only two defensemen in the league who have produced more since.

If that goes against the “philosophy” of the teams defense we are in for some dark days ahead

 

[GloryDaze4877]

Krug’s playoffs ended over two weeks ago and there are still only two defensemen in the league who have produced more since.

If that goes against the “philosophy” of the teams defense we are in for some dark days ahead

There’s more to playing defense than scoring points.

 

[TwineTickler]

I'll toss in another concern.

The development time-frames of the young LD in the organization (Zboril/Lauzon/Vaakainen/Sherman) vs. the UFA contract statuses of both Chara and Krug.

It's funny that just two summers ago all the talk here was finding a RD to bridge the gap until McAvoy and Carlo were ready, and now it appears they need a LD instead to do the same thing.

If any of those young D could step up in October and claim a regular spot on this team, this all would go away.

But with Krug's NTC kicking in on July 1 they may not have time to wait and see if that plays out and need to make a proactive move now.

I think they are going to move him this offseason, potentially pre draft/draft day, most likely pre July 1, but definitely before the start of next year but I don't think the no move clause is that big of a deal. It's only 8 teams he can't be moved to. Limits the options a bit, but still a lot to work with.

 

[JoeIsAStud]

There’s more to playing defense than scoring points.

But a well rounded defense contains a variety of players who can contribute in different ways. Sure you love to have 6 Charlie McAvoy's, but get real

I love what Carlo and Miller bring to the team, but if you had 6 of them you have a bad defensive unit

Krug is very valuable to a strong defensive unit for Boston. He bring skills that no one else on the team does, and dealing him means you might improve one area of the game, but you are likely substantially downgrading another. If I am looking to upgrade, I'd rather move Gryz, as then you have a chance to substantially upgrade in more than one area.

 

[Over the volcano]

There’s more to playing defense than scoring points.

But its part of the equation, right? Just trying to bring some substance to the discussion. I mean they got bounced from the playoffs when they couldn’t put up 2goals/game against Tampa after game one. Generating offense is and was a pretty big need. . .

Krug finished the playoffs with 3g 9a and 12 pts In 11 games

The rest of Boston’s defense combined for 4g 12a and 16 pts in 61 games

 

[GloryDaze4877]

But a well rounded defense contains a variety of players who can contribute in different ways. Sure you love to have 6 Charlie McAvoy's, but get real

I love what Carlo and Miller bring to the team, but if you had 6 of them you have a bad defensive unit

Krug is very valuable to a strong defensive unit for Boston. He bring skills that no one else on the team does, and dealing him means you might improve one area of the game, but you are likely substantially downgrading another. If I am looking to upgrade, I'd rather move Gryz, as then you have a chance to substantially upgrade in more than one area.

But its part of the equation, right? Just trying to bring some substance to the discussion. I mean they got bounced from the playoffs when they couldn’t put up 2goals/game against Tampa after game one. Generating offense is and was a pretty big need. . .

Krug finished the playoffs with 3g 9a and 12 pts In 11 games

The rest of Boston’s defense combined for 4g 12a and 16 pts in 61 games

Of course you need all kinds to have an effective team D.

I’m not advocating dealing Krug, I love him as a player, and think he’s a key guy for the Bruins. However, I also think that there was a reason for the criticism levied by Neely. He didn’t just do that off the cuff.

It seems that they think that Krug’s offense doesn’t offset his size limitations and deficiencies defensively and in his own end? I’m not agreeing or disagreeing, just trying to figure out where they are going with this.

 

[DKH]

There’s more to playing defense than scoring points.

Torey Krug is having a historic season

This was written 6 weeks ago

 

[Dr Hook]

Torey Krug is having a historic season

This was written 6 weeks ago

But that was written before he got shoved around in the playoffs and revealed how much of a liability he really is

 

[wintersej]

How does the expansion draft effect Krug? He will be a pending UFA when the draft happens. Do you resign him and use your 3rd protection slot on him? (McAvoy, Carlo). I think Vaakanainen will be exempt. But Zboril, Lauzon and Gryz won't be. If the top 4 is Vaak+McAvoy+Krug+Carlo I reckon thats fine.

 

[Pia8988]

Leave him as UFA and get a free protection slot?

 

[Absurdity]

How does the expansion draft effect Krug? He will be a pending UFA when the draft happens. Do you resign him and use your 3rd protection slot on him? (McAvoy, Carlo). I think Vaakanainen will be exempt. But Zboril, Lauzon and Gryz won't be. If the top 4 is Vaak+McAvoy+Krug+Carlo I reckon thats fine.

Krug will be exempt from the expansion draft so the Bruins could use the 3rd protection slot on Zboril, Lauzon, or Grzelcyk if any of them are still a part of the organization by then.

 

[wintersej]

Krug will be exempt from the expansion draft so the Bruins could use the 3rd protection slot on Zboril, Lauzon, or Grzelcyk if any of them are still a part of the organization by then.

Krug will be a pending UFA so it would be dumb for Seattle to take him, but he won't be exempt. Unless the Bruins re-sign him, then he would have to be protected. Do the Bruins re-sign him? If they do want to re-sign him, Vaakanainen better be ready to be #1 LD after next season because Krug/McAvoy/Carlo would be taking up the protection slots. If you want to add a Brodin or Hanifin or Klefbom without moving Krug, you either are not re-signing Krug or the expansion draft gets even messier.

Just another part of the calculus.

 

[wintersej]

Leave him as UFA and get a free protection slot?

I saw this mentioned as a possibility last draft... but did anyone actually pull off the "wink wink" we will leave you exposed and the re-sign you the next day?

 

[JOKER 192]

But its part of the equation, right? Just trying to bring some substance to the discussion. I mean they got bounced from the playoffs when they couldn’t put up 2goals/game against Tampa after game one. Generating offense is and was a pretty big need. . .

Krug finished the playoffs with 3g 9a and 12 pts In 11 games

The rest of Boston’s defense combined for 4g 12a and 16 pts in 61 games

He was also the only D to play on 1st wave PP so it stands to reason doesn't it?

 

[JOKER 192]

To me, any way you slice it, at least one of Krug or Grizz has to go. I think it should be Krug for the following reasons,
More trade value. Grizz's trade value is low at this point.
Makes more $$ (bigger cap hit, it's all about the cap hit these days)
Grizz can probably fill in for most of what Krug did.
Grizz is better on D, better skater, better IQ.
Krug's NTC kicks in July 1st which could cause problems in the next draft if they have to protect him like it or not.
If they can sign Grizz to a 5/6 year deal at a reasonable sum it becomes a no-brainer.
Bruins will need to shed some salary on the D corps with Carlo and Mac both coming up for a raise the following season .

 

[Absurdity]

Krug will be a pending UFA so it would be dumb for Seattle to take him, but he won't be exempt. Unless the Bruins re-sign him, then he would have to be protected. Do the Bruins re-sign him? If they do want to re-sign him, Vaakanainen better be ready to be #1 LD after next season because Krug/McAvoy/Carlo would be taking up the protection slots. If you want to add a Brodin or Hanifin or Klefbom without moving Krug, you either are not re-signing Krug or the expansion draft gets even messier.

Just another part of the calculus.

You are right. If the same draft rules apply, Seattle only needs to select 20/26 players that will be under contract at the start of their season.

The Bruins wanting to re-sign Krug or not I think is a valid question to bring up. Krug will be 29 when he becomes a UFA and will most likely want to cash in. Will the Bruins be willing to give Krug a 6-8 year contract worth $6M+ AAV? In my opinion, I wouldn't if I were Sweeney. I put Krug in the same category as Shattenkirk. Both are offensively gifted defensemen, but signing those kind of players for top defenseman dollars isn't great value in my opinion. I think the Bruins will have to eventually move on from Krug. The question is, can the Bruins capitalize on his value and get a return for Krug that will make them better next season? If not, I think the Bruins should keep him for 1 more season and assess the team's defense at the trade deadline or move him during next year's offseason with 1-year left on his deal.

I'm not sure if Vaakanainen will stay in Europe or not for this upcoming season, but if he does, I do not believe the Bruins will have to worry about his status in the expansion draft.

 

[JoeIsAStud]

To me, any way you slice it, at least one of Krug or Grizz has to go. I think it should be Krug for the following reasons,
More trade value. Grizz's trade value is low at this point.
Makes more $$ (bigger cap hit, it's all about the cap hit these days)
Grizz can probably fill in for most of what Krug did.
Grizz is better on D, better skater, better IQ.
Krug's NTC kicks in July 1st which could cause problems in the next draft if they have to protect him like it or not.
If they can sign Grizz to a 5/6 year deal at a reasonable sum it becomes a no-brainer.
Bruins will need to shed some salary on the D corps with Carlo and Mac both coming up for a raise the following season .

Mac will get paid next year, I am much less concerned about Carlo's next contract, It will be more than it is right now, but it won't be megabucks

I really don't have any interest in giving Grizz a 5/6 year deal. Sure maybe you can get him for under 3 million on a long term deal, but I am not sold on him as a guy I want for the next half dozen years. 5-6 year deals shoild be reserved for elite players, not just every guy who comes along

Not buying for a second that Griz can fill in for most of what Krug can do. He is like Krug in that he is limited and can be physically overmatched, but he doesn't have the same offensive insincts/game as Krug

 

[JOKER 192]

I would admit that expecting

Mac will get paid next year, I am much less concerned about Carlo's next contract, It will be more than it is right now, but it won't be megabucks

I really don't have any interest in giving Grizz a 5/6 year deal. Sure maybe you can get him for under 3 million on a long term deal, but I am not sold on him as a guy I want for the next half dozen years. 5-6 year deals shoild be reserved for elite players, not just every guy who comes along

Not buying for a second that Griz can fill in for most of what Krug can do. He is like Krug in that he is limited and can be physically overmatched, but he doesn't have the same offensive insincts/game as Krug

I would admit that expecting Grizz to be as good as Krug offensively may be stretch , at least for next season if not always but Grizz is better defensively. Both are giving up size but Grizz is quicker in every way than Krug and I think his offensive shortcomings will be compensated by his better D. I said it before Nelly said publicly , you are never gonna win it all with both of these guys. It may even be a stretch to do it with one.
Now I get the concern on Grizz long term, so I make it clear , he's a 6/7 and will be slotted as such and paid as such. Oh, and no NTC.

 

[wintersej]

I would admit that expecting


I would admit that expecting Grizz to be as good as Krug offensively may be stretch , at least for next season if not always but Grizz is better defensively. Both are giving up size but Grizz is quicker in every way than Krug and I think his offensive shortcomings will be compensated by his better D. I said it before Nelly said publicly , you are never gonna win it all with both of these guys. It may even be a stretch to do it with one.
Now I get the concern on Grizz long term, so I make it clear , he's a 6/7 and will be slotted as such and paid as such. Oh, and no NTC.

Is Grizz better at all in his own end? I think he is likely a better puck mover. And he uses his speed in the neutral zone to PREVENT having to play D at a high level. But I wonder how much of this "he is better defensively" comes from him being a bottom pairing D playing against lower quality of competition.

Look at Krug's numbers as he has gained more responsibility against harder competition (by CF/60 every year Krug has had to face more offensive minded players despite maintaining high offensive zone start percentage...he has been given offensive zone starts, but with less regard to who is lining up on the other side).

Year	GA/60 at 5 on 5
17-18	2.23
16-17	2.19
15-16	1.92
14-15	1.87
13-14	1.67

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

In the last two seasons he has played more as a true top 4 guy and while his Corsi numbers have remained excellent, his actual +/- and GF% have gotten closer to 50/50 despite being fed offensive zone starts. You don't need to give him the treatment he got in his first three seasons, but maybe his responsibility needs to step back from where is has been the last two.

 

[wintersej]

You are right. If the same draft rules apply, Seattle only needs to select 20/26 players that will be under contract at the start of their season.

The Bruins wanting to re-sign Krug or not I think is a valid question to bring up. Krug will be 29 when he becomes a UFA and will most likely want to cash in. Will the Bruins be willing to give Krug a 6-8 year contract worth $6M+ AAV? In my opinion, I wouldn't if I were Sweeney. I put Krug in the same category as Shattenkirk. Both are offensively gifted defensemen, but signing those kind of players for top defenseman dollars isn't great value in my opinion. I think the Bruins will have to eventually move on from Krug. The question is, can the Bruins capitalize on his value and get a return for Krug that will make them better next season? If not, I think the Bruins should keep him for 1 more season and assess the team's defense at the trade deadline or move him during next year's offseason with 1-year left on his deal.

I'm not sure if Vaakanainen will stay in Europe or not for this upcoming season, but if he does, I do not believe the Bruins will have to worry about his status in the expansion draft.

I do think next year is a "go for it" year. Kids are still cheap. Vets are still good. Dealing Krug next summer when someone can re-sign him probably makes some sense. Of course, then he has a NTC which *could* complicate things. If Krug wants market value, I don't think re-signing him is wise. So, do you want to self-rent Krug for the next two years? Do you want to move him next offseason and risk him using his NTC? Or, do you want to move him this offseason to try to get someone you will want to protect?

 

[JOKER 192]

Is Grizz better at all in his own end? I think he is likely a better puck mover. And he uses his speed in the neutral zone to PREVENT having to play D at a high level. But I wonder how much of this "he is better defensively" comes from him being a bottom pairing D playing against lower quality of competition.

Look at Krug's numbers as he has gained more responsibility against harder competition (by CF/60 every year Krug has had to face more offensive minded players despite maintaining high offensive zone start percentage...he has been given offensive zone starts, but with less regard to who is lining up on the other side).

Year	GA/60 at 5 on 5
17-18	2.23
16-17	2.19
15-16	1.92
14-15	1.87
13-14	1.67

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

In the last two seasons he has played more as a true top 4 guy and while his Corsi numbers have remained excellent, his actual +/- and GF% have gotten closer to 50/50 despite being fed offensive zone starts. You don't need to give him the treatment he got in his first three seasons, but maybe his responsibility needs to step back from where is has been the last two.

Well, it's debatable if he's a better defender but defense doesn't necessarily need to played in your own end. The best Defense is offense.
Grizz is quicker, shiftier, more mobile and less prone to giveaways.In short he get's the puck out. He does benefit from lower competition but let's not forget he doesn't even have a full season under his belt. There is room for growth here.

I think it's clear that Krug needs to take a step back as you say. He on the other hand has 400 games under his belt, not likely to grow from this point. There in lies the problem, he's a 3rd liner with PP skills . A 5M 3rd liner is a luxury no team can afford in a cap world IMO.

 

[JoeIsAStud]

Well, it's debatable if he's a better defender but defense doesn't necessarily need to played in your own end. The best Defense is offense.
Grizz is quicker, shiftier, more mobile and less prone to giveaways.In short he get's the puck out. He does benefit from lower competition but let's not forget he doesn't even have a full season under his belt. There is room for growth here.

I think it's clear that Krug needs to take a step back as you say. He on the other hand has 400 games under his belt, not likely to grow from this point. There in lies the problem, he's a 3rd liner with PP skills . A 5M 3rd liner is a luxury no team can afford in a cap world IMO.

Except for the fact the Bruins could very easily afford to keep him in that role next year. It might not be possible to keep the following year, but this coming season is not an issue

 

[JOKER 192]

True, but I think his highest vlaue is right now. His value is not likely to rise going forward. I'm not proposing trading him for a bucket of pucks. I think you can upgrade by adding a sweetener or two to Krug and bring back a D that can play both sides of the ice . A little less Offense and a lot more Defense.
This is not a fire sale, I think we have assets to make a deal.

 

[Ratty]

Except for the fact the Bruins could very easily afford to keep him in that role next year. It might not be possible to keep the following year, but this coming season is not an issue

I would admit that expecting


I would admit that expecting Grizz to be as good as Krug offensively may be stretch , at least for next season if not always but Grizz is better defensively. Both are giving up size but Grizz is quicker in every way than Krug and I think his offensive shortcomings will be compensated by his better D. I said it before Nelly said publicly , you are never gonna win it all with both of these guys. It may even be a stretch to do it with one.
Now I get the concern on Grizz long term, so I make it clear , he's a 6/7 and will be slotted as such and paid as such. Oh, and no NTC.

The NTC should not be an impediment to moving Krug, though I'm not advocating they do so.

I'm certain that DS, if he were so inclined, could find a dance partner from among the 23 remaining franchises.

For years until Krug's arrival, this board was pining for that elusive "puck moving defenseman" Now we have had that luxury for a few seasons. Continue to pair him with a stay at homer and Torrey will continue to fill his valuable role.