Re: Would you trade Krug?
posted at 2/12/2014 6:54 PM EST
In response to Fletcher1's comment:
In response to Don-Bruino's comment:
What's with all the "Keith killed us" talk?
Although, Keith, Kane, Sharp, Hossa and Seabrooke are substantial talents, none of them was individually responsible.
Except for maybe Hossa, they were healthier than the Bruins. Plus the Bruins shot themselves in the foot.
I'm not complaining, they won fair and square. I think a rematch, in the final, would reverse the result. I would bet on it without reservation.
I think I started that term, so I'll respond. Obviously it was a very close series and obviously both teams have a lot of different talent. With breaks and luck, the Bruins could have won the series. I think the Bruins matched up pretty well in most areas, even well enough to overcome Kane and Toews.
But Keith gave us fits. I hate to agree with Bookboy so much, but that smallish NCAA defensemen was the key difference to me... Seriously though, it was exactly what Book described. The Bruins just couldn't forecheck him effectively, they couldn't get into battles in the corner with him, and he seemed to avoid the all pressure so deftly that Chicago got clean break after clean break when he was out there. So much of their 'speed' seemed predicated on Keith starting the play in their zone so crisply. It seemed like he played half of the game every night, and he was a beast in the offensive zone too (and on special teams). I really think he had a huge impact on that series, albeit a more subtle one that Towes and Kane.
Book makes a good point. And yes Keith's subtleties had an affect.
And because of both points, should they meet again, Bruins will counter effectively beyond a shadow of a doubt. That is why I would gladly put money on it.