Confirmed with Link: Kruger 3 year, $9.25m extension

[FinnFan8]

You cannot compare a minutes crunching shot blocking d'man like Hammer to a 4C who cannot score but is good on draws though it hardly helped last year on his POOR +/-...meaning that IF you cannot be positive at ES or even just be even but quite a negative...then winning draw.s in the d-zone and not completely shutting down
the opposition thereafter when you CANNOT offset that by scoring enough to counter it back to zero...MEANS you are not worth keeping as a 4C.

NOW we hear sp much also about KKruger's great possession stats..but AGAIN if you CANNOT convert in such possession "greatness" then you have Squandered your possession advantage into uselessness.You must impact positively...and in the overall ES game he posted a significant negative for such a supposedly great possession guy. AND so whatever you like about him is overcome by simply that..his net benefit is Negative...so not worth $3 million as a 4C for that. .If he cannot put up enough points to offset the goals against on his ES shifts, then he must be perfect in not allowing any scoring again st on those shifts. .and of course he is not that perfect ..A.nd so he is a NET negative by a significant enough margin as to wipe out any argument that his good attributes deserve that pay scale..Sorry but the NET benefit has to justify the salary.

NOW IF the argument is...well we do not have a better replacement even at the same money..then Blame Stan but do not tell.me Kruger is worth that amount of pay
HE has to.impact a game more positively than he did last season.

If you say
.well. it was an off year for Kruger...he will be better thus season..to which I counter he had better be. .else Stan will look like a fool for paying a 4C that kind of dough when our team.cap is so much a problem every year

Kruger makes OTHER players into great possession players or great +/- players by letting them start in the other team's defensive zone.

Kruger gets tough defensive zone starts against opposing top players. In doing so, he will inherently get some minuses. But if we invent the "Kruger plus" wherein the hawks score on the shift following Kruger's line successfully forcing a faceoff in the opponent's zone, I think we'd see his effect a little more clearly and his "Kruger +/-" increase. There's a stat I'd hate to compile, but I'm sure that's what the Hawks see in him.

 

[ndgt10]

Kruger has a change up for a wrist shot. Terrible

 

[hockeydoug]

He has to replicate the results separate from Hjalmarsson.
He hasn't been spectacular without being on the ice with the shutdown pair. The knock on him shouldn't be points, it should be what he's not done on his own.

The problem with many of the shot numbers, particularly the relative QoC and QoT (the ones that make him look like a defensive beast) is that they don't account for almost half his shifts being out there with a top defensive pair that willingly lets a team not worry about defending.

He's still relatively unknown without a top pair type against good competition. I'm not sure why there's so much confidence he'll be able to replicate the defensive results with an increased workload (more shifts against good scoring lines without a top dpair).

 

[Blackhawks]

The sensitive white knights are out

4 assists in 40+ games is pathetic I dont care how good you are defensively...

 

[Blackhawks]

Hammer is garbage too. He only scores like 4 points a year.

Thats a D man last time I checked bud, their job is mainly "DEFENCE"

What a truly pathetic attempt of an argument!

 

[x Tame Impala]

Well why would he not still be trotted out there with hjalmarsson? What's changed from before?

 

[ozzzie19]

Well why would he not still be trotted out there with hjalmarsson? What's changed from before?

It's not that he won't be out there with our top defensive D pair, the point is that it's hard to parse out his contribution versus the top defensive D pair's contribution when they are always out there when he is as well.

 

[hockeydoug]

Well why would he not still be trotted out there with hjalmarsson? What's changed from before?

The roster changed. He's going to get more shifts. The depth struggles more in various areas and he's going to likely drop under 40% (5 on 5) with Hjalmarsson. The goal differential per 60 with him on the ice has gotten worse from 3 and 4 years ago and his shifts with the top shutdown pair have dropped the last 3.

Most of his possession numbers (the relative value of which declines by the year since everybody likely uses some of the related data) are very good, but the holes in those numbers are starting to show up in other areas. He has to be more than the 4c he has been for that cap hit if this team is going to do much against better teams in the spring.

Maybe he's going to take that next step defensively now that he's in what should be his prime. I just see too many assumed projections based on circumstances that will not be replicated with the roster they have right now.

 

[JaegerDice]

He has to replicate the results separate from Hjalmarsson.
He hasn't been spectacular without being on the ice with the shutdown pair. The knock on him shouldn't be points, it should be what he's not done on his own.

The problem with many of the shot numbers, particularly the relative QoC and QoT (the ones that make him look like a defensive beast) is that they don't account for almost half his shifts being out there with a top defensive pair that willingly lets a team not worry about defending.

He's still relatively unknown without a top pair type against good competition. I'm not sure why there's so much confidence he'll be able to replicate the defensive results with an increased workload (more shifts against good scoring lines without a top dpair).

It's true, since the 2012-2013 season (which I think we all agree is when Kruger truly became the real shut-down guy, regardless of Bolland's eventual descent back to the 4th line because he couldn't hack it as a 2C), Hammer has split the bulk of his time evenly between the top line and the '4th line' (really the 3rd line by TOI and deployment). Toews and Hossa since 2012-2013 have actually seen a slightly larger percentage of their 5v5 minutes with Hammer (roughly 45%) than has Kruger (roughly 42%)...all rounded to the nearest minute, didn't feel like doing the conversion of 60ths to 100ths in order for the perfect percentage.

In those minutes with Hammer, Toews started 53.5% of the time in the offensive zone and had a 1.75 GA/60. Hossa started 54.1% of the time in the offensive zone and had a 1.58 GA/60 with Hammer. And finally Kruger starts 22.3% of the time in the offensive zone with Hammer, and had a 1.87 GA/60.

You can probably eyeball how much bigger the percentage difference in toughness of starts is compared to the change in GA/60, but in case you cant:

There's a 58% difference between Kruger's OZS% with Hammer and Toews' OZS% with Hammer. There's a 6.5% difference in GA/60 between them with Hammer.

There's a 59% difference between Krugers OZS% with Hammer and Hossa's OZS% with Hammer. There's a 15.5% difference in GA/60 between them with Hammer.

So if Hammer were carrying a disproportionate amount of the defensive load in Kruger's zone starts, I fail to see how Toews and Hossa aren't being granted the full scale of that benefit when THEY play with Hammer, and do so further away from their own net.



As far as Kruger having difficulty with zone starts and the shutdown role away from Hammer, well that's just patently false.

As previously stated, Kruger spends roughly 42% of his 5v5 minutes with Hammer, and 58% of them away from Hammer.

Once again, in his time with Hammer (1156 minutes), he starts 22.3% of his shifts in the offensive zone, and has a GA/60 of 1.87.

In his time away from Hammer (1524 minutes), he starts 29.1% of his shifts in the offensive zone, and has a GA/60 of 1.88.


Now, if you want to argue that Kruger has to prove that he can shave off that 0.01 GA/60 without Hammer, ok.... but I'd argue that's being a little picky.

Obviously, none of this includes Kruger's PK play.

All numbers via stats.hockeyanalysis.com.

 

[hockeydoug]

It's not that he won't be out there with our top defensive D pair, the point is that it's hard to parse out his contribution versus the top defensive D pair's contribution when they are always out there when he is as well.

This is exactly what I was getting at.
I think he's a statistical beneficiary of a unit when it's out there together. It's a great fit, when they're together and it has benefits that roll through the rest of the lineup.

Now that the roster has changed significantly, again, and he's making more it's a different dynamic. I don't think the numbers are going to play out the same relative to team performance. Too many leaps are needed to project the same defensive results.

 

[FinnFan8]

The sensitive white knights are out

4 assists in 40+ games is pathetic I dont care how good you are defensively...

I'm not saying Kruger shouldn't be able to put up more points. I was responding to Fiddy's comment that he was a poor possession player.

Kruger's lines can cycle the puck and eat time in the offensive zone and try to score. In the eyes of Hawks coaching staff, if at the end of Kruger's shift the faceoff is back in the Hawk's end of the ice, Kruger has failed. If he puts a weak shot on net, forces the goalie to freeze the puck and lets lines 1A or 1B jump over the boards with an O-zone start, Kruger gets an attaboy. Fancy plays and long shots that miss the net wind up back on your end of the ice, and Kruger isn't going to take those chances. Doesn't mean he shouldn't a little more often when he sees an opening, but he knows where his priorities lie.

 

[JaegerDice]

Thats a D man last time I checked bud, their job is mainly "DEFENCE"

What a truly pathetic attempt of an argument!

The idea that a forward's strength can't be defensive play ranks up there with the people who claim that defensmen like Karlsson aren't valuable for their offensive talent cause 'that's not their job' on the idiot scale.

How about we all just worry about what players are contributing to GOAL DIFFERENTIAL, which, at the end of the day, is what actually wins games. And Kruger does one hell of a job of minimizing goals against under insanely disadvantaged scenarios so that our top-end, highly paid talent can ideally benefit from his sacrifice and make use of the advantaged positions and scenarios if affords.

 

[hockeydoug]

It's true, since the 2012-2013 season (which I think we all agree is when Kruger truly became the real shut-down guy, regardless of Bolland's eventual descent back to the 4th line because he couldn't hack it as a 2C), Hammer has split the bulk of his time evenly between the top line and the '4th line' (really the 3rd line by TOI and deployment). Toews and Hossa since 2012-2013 have actually seen a slightly larger percentage of their 5v5 minutes with Hammer (roughly 45%) than has Kruger (roughly 42%)...all rounded to the nearest minute, didn't feel like doing the conversion of 60ths to 100ths in order for the perfect percentage.

In those minutes with Hammer, Toews started 53.5% of the time in the offensive zone and had a 1.75 GA/60. Hossa started 54.1% of the time in the offensive zone and had a 1.58 GA/60 with Hammer. And finally Kruger starts 22.3% of the time in the offensive zone with Hammer, and had a 1.87 GA/60.

You can probably eyeball how much bigger the percentage difference in toughness of starts is compared to the change in GA/60, but in case you cant:

There's a 58% difference between Kruger's OZS% with Hammer and Toews' OZS% with Hammer. There's a 6.5% difference in GA/60 between them with Hammer.

There's a 59% difference between Krugers OZS% with Hammer and Hossa's OZS% with Hammer. There's a 15.5% difference in GA/60 between them with Hammer.

So if Hammer were carrying a disproportionate amount of the defensive load in Kruger's zone starts, I fail to see how Toews and Hossa aren't being granted the full scale of that benefit when THEY play with Hammer, and do so further away from their own net.

First, zone starts on there own without a factoring the competition doesn't equate to difficulty or ease very well to me. His line, like many coaches' 4th lines, will often just be killing time with the bottom pair against other bottom pairs and this is reflected in the game logs in playoff series. He's better than their 4C and that's why I've always liked him. I just don't believe looking at ZS is a genuine way to assess defensive effectiveness or difficulty of workload.

Second, I'm not comparing to Hossa or Toews. They deployed and defended against completely differently. I'm trying to separate Kruger from the rest of the team, relative to the competition. Hjalmarsson draws the top competition. Kruger draws that competition but he's with Hjalmarsson and I don't see a statistical relationship (without cherry picking numbers) that says he's going to be as statistically effective without HJalmarsson out there with him. If a weaker unit is out there, Kruger isn't out there with Hjalmarsson and his numbers are good because he's been better than his opposite slot.

As far as Kruger having difficulty with zone starts and the shutdown role away from Hammer, well that's just patently false.
As previously stated, Kruger spends roughly 42% of his 5v5 minutes with Hammer, and 58% of them away from Hammer.

Once again, in his time with Hammer (1156 minutes), he starts 22.3% of his shifts in the offensive zone, and has a GA/60 of 1.87.

In his time away from Hammer (1524 minutes), he starts 29.1% of his shifts in the offensive zone, and has a GA/60 of 1.88.

You're missing my point.

We have one huge difference in how we see zone starts. I don't weigh them heavily.

I see coaches trying to exploit a situation or just hold a shift to rotate for better matchups. In other words, I don't care much about ZS locations. I care about the WHO and WHEN for a shift start, not the WHERE when relating player performance. Defensive players or offensive players are obviously better suited for situations that better fit their respective skill sets. In this case, I'm having a tough time seeing Kruger as being statistically effective with a larger workload against tougher competition. That doesn't make Kruger a bad player, it just makes it more difficult to justify the cap hit.

Kruger can't take offensive loads, so there's no reason to deploy him offensively but he can defend well. Most of the time when he's not with Hjalmarsson, he's not against GOOD competition. That's why I don't see those numbers above as a good indicator of what he'll be able to do. That's why I'm skeptical of projecting his numbers into an increased workload.

He beats other 4Cs at his respective job. No question about that and statistically that doesn't require much digging. He's not getting paid to be a 4C anymore, that's the potential problem I'm seeing going into next year carrying his cap hit.

He's not going to get as many easy assignments or tough ones with good help anymore. If he does get as many easy assignments, he's wasting capspace. If he struggles in the tougher role, he's wasting capspace. I don't see the numbers making a strong argument that he will or won't be wasting capspace next year and that's why I'm bringing this up.

Obviously, if they're able to replicate lines similar to 15' or 14' with rookies and plugins, Kruger slots as a 4C and everything is great because so many other players are outplaying their cap hits. It was worth keeping him in the slot, over payment or not, if that's the case and all my concerns float away with the clouds through the rainbows.

 

[JaegerDice]

Ok, well this is one debate we're going to have to just agree to accept we have different eye-tests on, because I don't know of a public source that allows me to cross-reference WOWY comparisons with QoC scores based on either CF or TOI.

Personally speaking, I see Kruger matching up against top 6 players pretty much every game and through the playoffs, whether he has Desi and Shaw on his wings against the Getzlaf line in the Anaheim series, or against the Johnson AND Stamkos lines at times in Tampa, or the year before, when he was the guy being fed the Carter line with Smith and Brandon ****ing Bollig on his wings.

He's been eating horrific starts against top competition with a rotating cast of support (and whatever the hell you want to call Bollig).


If you think he's getting the bulk of his time in the Dzone against bums on the bottom lines, and you think he can only handle top competition when Hammer is behind him well, that's your opinion, I guess. I can't imagine any scenario where Q risks wins by separating his best shutdown center and his best shutdown D just to see who handles the tough load better without the other over the course of an 82 game sample.

 

[Marotte Marauder]

Many of those D zone assignments/matchups are not by design but the result of an icing call.

Just like when Kruger's opps ice the puck, Kruger come off and Toews/Kane come on. That doesn't meant the opps chose that matchup, they got stuck with it.

 

[DisgruntledHawkFan]

Getting your opponent to ice the puck is a good thing.

 

[Hawkaholic]

Getting your opponent to ice the puck is a good thing.

Getting your opponent to ice the puck (especially against Krugers line) is a good thing

 

[Bubba88]

just another reason why Krüger and his line work well...

 

[RememberTheRoar]

JJ professing his love to Kruger today:
http://www.hockeybuzz.com/blog.php?post_id=78942

 

[JaegerDice]

JJ professing his love to Kruger today:
http://www.hockeybuzz.com/blog.php?post_id=78942

He's right on the first two counts, but even as a huge fan of Kruger and somebody perfectly happy with his contract, I wouldn't expect a ton of offense from him. That's just not his skill set, and even if it were, I'm not sure a guy who has spent the bulk of his developing years buried in the defensive zone can magically reset back on whatever offensive role trajectory he may have had at 20 years old.

And that's fine. Pay for players with a significant impact on goal differential. That doesn't necessary have to be by way of raw point production.

Quite frankly, when Kane is starting every shift in the offensive zone and getting matched up as much as possible as weaker competition, somebody on the roster is going to have to take all the defensive zone starts he leaves on the table.

That could be Toews, who could handle it but would see his career average offense drop as a result of being buried more often in the defensive zone, or you can pay a guy who's incredibly good at soaking up top 6 competition in the Dzone and flipping the ice.