Trade Rumors and Free Agent TalkTrade rumors, transactions, and free agent talk. Rumors must contain the word RUMOR in post title. Proposals must contain the word PROPOSAL in post title.
Which stats are those? The stats I see show that Kane has 100 pts more than Krejci in his career despite being 2 years younger.
Krejci is a nice 1b kinda center, but no way in Helsinki is his value equal to Kane's.
"2yrs younger" has no relevance to this post imo.
They both started as NHL "regulars" in 07-08, and Krejci played 25 games that season in the AHL. I also argue that their stats are skewered in favor of Kane slightly because Kane was thrust into the spotlight due to his draft position and the sad state of the Chicago franchise back then. While David Krejci started on Bostons 3rd line in a checking role. So imo the early career numbers certainly favor Kane for obvious reasons.
08-09 is a fair yr to start comparing because both players were at that point on a level playing field (both played full seasons in NHL, both played in a top-6 role.
So Kane is paid $6.5M per, Krejci $5.25,, Krejci is a natural center. Krejci 26yrs old, Kane 24yrs old.
The above stats show me that other than the 09-10 season where Kane smoked Krejci, their stats are very similar, Kane ofcourse with the slight edge. However this ofcourse doesnt take into account defensive responsibilities, +/- etc.
BUT please dont attempt to tell me Krejci's value is "nowhere close to Kane's".. thats bs. And Tim Thomas isn't the difference between the two. Maybe a 'B' level prospect or a 2nd round pick at best. Id guess it hinges on needs: Does Chicago feel comfortable w/ Kane playing out of position as their 2nd line center? Or would they prefer swapping him for a natural center? Does Boston feel Seguin is ready for center duty? If so then ofcourse they look to swap Krejci for an upgrade at wing.
I love it when people just pick stats that support their argument.
Ok do you REALLY want to get into an intangibles debate here between Krejci & Kane? Because that will only support my angle. Krejci is key PP, PK, +/- yada yada.
I'd love to hear your reasoning as to why Kane is far superior to Krejci
Ok do you REALLY want to get into an intangibles debate here between Krejci & Kane? Because that will only support my angle. Krejci is key PP, PK, +/- yada yada.
I'd love to hear your reasoning as to why Kane is far superior to Krejci
Almost 100 more points in only 22 more games.
Kane plays with no reliable scorer. Sharp is not one, he disappears for weeks at a time.
Top 10 passer
Has the ability to play RW and C
Superior Playoff Performer
Almost 100 more points in only 22 more games.
Kane plays with no reliable scorer. Sharp is not one, he disappears for weeks at a time.
Top 10 passer
Has the ability to play RW and C
Superior Playoff Performer
See my first paragraph in regards to the "100 more points".
Krejci plays w/ no reliable scorer, Lucic is not one, and Peverly isnt either.
Top 10 passer
Has the ability to play RW and C (which is his natural position)
Superior Playoff Performer (led the NHL in playoff scoring 2011)
Please try harder to convince me.
These guys are very close in value,, you're just bias because youre a Hawk fan.
See my first paragraph in regards to the "100 more points".
Krejci plays w/ no reliable scorer, Lucic is not one, and Peverly isnt either.
Top 10 passer
Has the ability to play RW and C (which is his natural position)
Superior Playoff Performer (led the NHL in playoff scoring 2011)
Please try harder to convince me.
These guys are very close in value,, you're just bias because youre a Hawk fan.
Kane scored 72 points as a rookie, led the team in that regard and was a major part of turning the team around to the tune of about 17 more points.
The only reason this is even entertained is because of Kane's down year playing with Brunette, who can't put the puck through a barn door, and learning and new position. Not to mention the awful power play.
Kane 52 pts in 51 games in the playoffs
Krejci 47 points in 59 games in the playoffs
Kane scored 72 points as a rookie, led the team in that regard and was a major part of turning the team around to the tune of about 17 more points.
The only reason this is even entertained is because of Kane's down year playing with Brunette, who can't put the puck through a barn door, and learning and new position. Not to mention the awful power play.
Kane 52 pts in 51 games in the playoffs
Krejci 47 points in 59 games in the playoffs
Please tell me how Krejci is superior there. ^
I never said Krejci is superior. I said their value is similar. I was responding to the posters who said Krejci is not on Kanes level value-wise. They are infact very similar.
His rookie season has no bearing on his value today. It's all above averages, and which direction a player is trending. Neither Kane nor Krejci are considered superstars in the NHL, and neither are franchise cornerstones. Both are very very good complimentary players however, theyre both more Robin than Batman however. Perhaps because of the 10 points per season advantage, maybe Boston tosses in a pick/ mid-prospect? Certainly not Tim Thomas.
I never said Krejci is superior. I said their value is similar. I was responding to the posters who said Krejci is not on Kanes level value-wise. They are infact very similar.
His rookie season has no bearing on his value today. It's all above averages, and which direction a player is trending. Neither Kane nor Krejci are considered superstars in the NHL, and neither are franchise cornerstones. Both are very very good complimentary players however, theyre both more Robin than Batman however. Perhaps because of the 10 points per season advantage, maybe Boston tosses in a pick/ mid-prospect? Certainly not Tim Thomas.
I think you fail to get the point when I bring that up. Kane has less of a bearing on the players around him as well as making many of them better. Do you think Patrick Sharp just got good out of the blue or something? Kane has shown the ability to consistently amass good numbers on lesser teams as well as good teams. Not to mention in the conference that has scored less, 3395 goals to 3150 this season.
Kane's one of the top RW's in the game where as Krejci isn't even the best center on his team. I can't see where that would gain equal value.
I think you fail to get the point when I bring that up. Kane has less of a bearing on the players around him as well as making many of them better. Do you think Patrick Sharp just got good out of the blue or something? Kane has shown the ability to consistently amass good numbers on lesser teams as well as good teams. Not to mention in the conference that has scored less, 3395 goals to 3150 this season.
Kane's one of the top RW's in the game where as Krejci isn't even the best center on his team. I can't see where that would gain equal value.
lets be real kane is not a 90 point player nor is he a 85 kane at time cant even be found on the ice in long period of times he has done nothing of late to earn that title and we all have seen how he is off the ice ..... real mature guy the bruins are fine with krejci
They both started as NHL "regulars" in 07-08, and Krejci played 25 games that season in the AHL. I also argue that their stats are skewered in favor of Kane slightly because Kane was thrust into the spotlight due to his draft position and the sad state of the Chicago franchise back then. While David Krejci started on Bostons 3rd line in a checking role. So imo the early career numbers certainly favor Kane for obvious reasons.
08-09 is a fair yr to start comparing because both players were at that point on a level playing field (both played full seasons in NHL, both played in a top-6 role.
So Kane is paid $6.5M per, Krejci $5.25,, Krejci is a natural center. Krejci 26yrs old, Kane 24yrs old.
The above stats show me that other than the 09-10 season where Kane smoked Krejci, their stats are very similar, Kane ofcourse with the slight edge. However this ofcourse doesnt take into account defensive responsibilities, +/- etc.
BUT please dont attempt to tell me Krejci's value is "nowhere close to Kane's".. thats bs. And Tim Thomas isn't the difference between the two. Maybe a 'B' level prospect or a 2nd round pick at best. Id guess it hinges on needs: Does Chicago feel comfortable w/ Kane playing out of position as their 2nd line center? Or would they prefer swapping him for a natural center? Does Boston feel Seguin is ready for center duty? If so then ofcourse they look to swap Krejci for an upgrade at wing.
I don't think it's ever fair for someone to start arbitrarily deciding to count some games and not others. They've played a similar number of career games. Reducing the sample size is never a helpful thing, and arbitrarily doing it because you think it is more "fair" is just adding bias.
Secondly, even if we take your stats.... Kane smokes him. That's a difference of 30 goals in only 4 seasons. And 48 pts in 4 seasons. There's no slight edge here.
That's like saying these 2 players have had similar numbers the last 4 seasons:
Player A: 17,g 25 a 42 pts
9 11 20
30 32 62
26 35 61
Total 82g 103a 185
Player B: 17g 15a 32
9 17 26
14 20 34
15 32 47
Total 55g 84 139
These 2 players have similar differnces (27 g, 46a) over the 4 year span.
So I guess Nick Foligno is pretty comparable to Milan Lucic.
I never said Krejci is superior. I said their value is similar. I was responding to the posters who said Krejci is not on Kanes level value-wise. They are infact very similar.
His rookie season has no bearing on his value today. It's all above averages, and which direction a player is trending. Neither Kane nor Krejci are considered superstars in the NHL, and neither are franchise cornerstones. Both are very very good complimentary players however, theyre both more Robin than Batman however. Perhaps because of the 10 points per season advantage, maybe Boston tosses in a pick/ mid-prospect? Certainly not Tim Thomas.
I'll take the player who averages 7 more goals and 11 more assists a season then.
lets be real kane is not a 90 point player nor is he a 85 kane at time cant even be found on the ice in long period of times he has done nothing of late to earn that title and we all have seen how he is off the ice ..... real mature guy the bruins are fine with krejci
NHL's site has only one 90+ point RWer and it's Claude Giroux, who IIRC played center most of the year.
After that, there was no 85+ point RWer this year.
Despite having off-season wrist surgery that obviously affected his shot and being on one of the worst PP's in the league, he put up 66 points... good for 10th in the league for RWers with Teemu Selanne.
He's only 23, is nearly a PPG player in 5 years in the NHL and has serious talent... I don't know how you couldn't consider him a top RWer in the NHL.
Edit: Oh, and how he is off the ice is greatly exaggerated. Wasn't the one who punched the cab driver, yet gets called out on that all the time. Took pictures with some 5's in Vancouver, and he has an alcohol problem. More of the same this past year. I'm sure there's plenty of NHLers who do the exact same thing... but Kane has a reputation and isn't as keen in keeping his profile low. So he's obviously a problem
I never said Krejci is superior. I said their value is similar. I was responding to the posters who said Krejci is not on Kanes level value-wise. They are infact very similar.
His rookie season has no bearing on his value today. It's all above averages, and which direction a player is trending. Neither Kane nor Krejci are considered superstars in the NHL, and neither are franchise cornerstones. Both are very very good complimentary players however, theyre both more Robin than Batman however. Perhaps because of the 10 points per season advantage, maybe Boston tosses in a pick/ mid-prospect? Certainly not Tim Thomas.
You could probably argue they are wrong to do so, but pretty sure Chicago still considers Kane a franchise cornerstone.
I'd say Kane is more valuable than Krejci, but not so much so that I'd send Thomas or Seidenberg along in the deal, not even with a 2nd round pick as a return.
I'd offer Krejci + a prospect (Caron, Knight, Krug, etc.) and a pick for Kane.
I'd say Kane is more valuable than Krejci, but not so much so that I'd send Thomas or Seidenberg along in the deal, not even with a 2nd round pick as a return.
I'd offer Krejci + a prospect (Caron, Knight, Krug, etc.) and a pick for Kane.
I think the value between Krejci and Kane has to include the trending down of Kane's stats. As well as the off-ice issues associated with Kane, regardless of their validity. I DO think Kane is worth more, but I don't think it's as vast as others are thinking. Krejci will be an undervalued 60-65 point center for his entire career.
With all that said, I still think we should work something out around Thomas & Sharp.
