Well, because unless they move Rask the only real way to make this happen is to Move one of those guys. There are also multiple reports that they are trying or at least listening to offers on both.

To answer your questions on why would they wave :
- Nobody really wants to play where they are not wanted. Most guys who have NTC's end up waiving. Some don't, most do. Plus you know the team trading for you wants you. So Ego, pride, call it what you will.
- Krejci's NMC goes to half the teams next off season. I am certain there are teams on that list he would not want to go to under any circumstance. Let's say there are 10 cities he would actually want to play in. From a very outside point of view The Original 6 and then 4 more of personal preference. That leaves 5 places he cannot eliminate, that he has no desire to go to. That might not be a risk he is willing to take. If they agree to deal him somewhere he wants to go opposed to somewhere he cannot eliminate.
- Backes - Same deal, although his is more limited. He seems like a pride guy though & also has to know he would be a buyout candidate.

Especially when Families factor in. Just an example that was brought up a lot before Hanafin was traded. Do you think Krejci's family would rather live in Sunny Raleigh or Calgary? His Wife is from NH and might not want to hop on a six hour flight to see her family. I don't know they would, I am sure he and his family have places they like more than others, just like every person does, but having a say could be worth waiving a year early. Cost of living could also factor in... next contract etc...

IF they were to sign Tavares, Krejci would be gone next off season to clear money to sign kids. There is almost no scenario which he wouldn't be gone. Especially with JFK, Frederic & Studnicka coming up and seeming like they would be viable as 3rd line guys by then.

They could do some things to have all three down the middle, but Krejci might not be all that on board as a 3rd line center as well. If he does want another contract he would need to put up numbers.

Yes, I agree, but this is somewhat different (certainly in Krejci's case) than telling a player "Hey, you suck, we hate you. Now waive your NTC so you can leave." Krejci doesn't suck, and the Bruins' message to him wouldn't be one of "We don't want you here." It's "We can't afford to have you here" which is ENTIRELY different. Why is it Krejci's responsibility to help the team out of cap mismanagement? He's spent more than a decade in this organization, and he'd be leaving to go to a team that likely wouldn't have nearly as good a chance of competing for the Cup as Boston would (if they sign JT).



So clearly this is all speculation on your part about where he would or wouldn't want to go. The idea that he would waive his NMC to go "where he wants" assumes that the team he'd want to go to would also actually want him, and would be able to make a deal for him.

The problem with all this is that Krejci has already said where he wants to go:
http://www.metrowestdailynews.com/article/20140908/BLOGS/140907114

Twice.

https://www.masslive.com/bruins/index.ssf/2016/04/boston_bruins_injuries_david_krejci_to_have_hip_surgery_plans_to_return_to_czech_republic_after_cont.html

He wants to stay in Boston, and then when his contract is up he wants to go home to the Czech Republic. There is no way he is waiving his NMC to go anywhere and upset the comfortable life he's got in Boston. As for the following season, yes, he could block a trade to half the league. He could still really screw with the Bruins plans to trade him with that kind of power. He could announce to any team trying to trade him that he would retire if they did trade for him. You think teams would even dare risking assets in a trade for him at that point? Either way, spending 2 years vs 3 in a new city is a better proposition no matter how you slice it, so the Bruins will undoubtedly have to wait until next year to trade him.



THE BRUINS CANNOT BUYOUT DAVID BACKES' CONTRACT. Please! Go and use the buyout calculator on this site and see what would happen if they did. They would get better relief from burying him in the minors at that rate.

And as unlikely a scenario it would be for Krejci to waive his NMC this year, it seems even more unlikely that Backes would waive his to leave a Stanley Cup favorite (if they sign JT) when he has never even competed for the Cup in his career! I don't actually believe he would waive his NMC to go back to St. Louis (or Minnesota, as others have suggested). And he certainly wouldn't be waiving it to go to some crapbag team that would take him on as a salary dump. I do agree that the "pride" thing plays a bigger role with Backes than Krejci, because it seems crystal clear Backes hasn't lived up to his contract with the Bruins. And there is more of an argument to be made that he "sucks" than there is with Krejci.



I generally agree, although I would rather they make that decision a year from now instead of right this very moment. Maybe one of Donato, Heinen, McAvoy, Carlo etc have a really bad season that tanks their value and the Bruins come away with a cheaper contract than we are thinking right now. If they sign Tavares, keep Krejci this year, and do the Backes trade I suggested, they would have 15M in cap space going into the 2019 offseason. That also assumes the cap stays where it, which is highly unlikely. The Bruins also have leverage with all of those players in that they are all RFAs, none of whom have arbitration rights. Look at what the Lightning did with Kucherov in his last contract. They force fed him an AAV that made him end up being a real steal, only because they literally had no more money left to give after re-signing Stamkos. But nobody talks about Kucherov being a malcontent because of it. He's just looking to maximize his value on his next contract. So why wouldn't the Bruins be able to do something like that? The way people talk, it's like they think the Bruins will be obligated to pay Donato and Heinen 5M each or something. I'd be shocked if they got more than 3M AAV in their next contracts, and even that would be generous for a guy like Donato who would have only had 1.25 years in the league.

If the Bruins do find themselves in the 2019 offseason still with Krejci on the books and needing cap space, they could buyout Krejci's contract. When you're done looking at the Backes scenario, check that one out too. That is way more financially feasible.

I don't think they will buyout either, as they both have some value. Backes hasn't been as bad as everyone says and for all the heat krejci takes, he is still a #1 center on 1/3rd of the teams in the league. I could be wrong, but Krejci only said anyhting about going back to CZECH republic to end his career once, and DJ Bean was referencing that. At the time, he was not married and did not have kids. He also mentioned it in context to winning many cups. Here is what he said.

"In seven years from now, if we’ll have what we’re trying to achieve, then it’s going to be an easier decision to go back home. I’ve always wanted to finish my career back home in my hometown....But that’s the reason why I signed here. I believe we can win [the Stanley Cup] not once, but more times. So, it’s just up to us here and you know, we’ll see what happens. So, seven years is a long way from now and I don’t want to think too much ahead.”

not exactly concrete. He was married shortly after signing contract and now has a young child. Things change.

I guess we'll see.

You asked why, I gave you reasons. I am not saying it will happen, but it could. It's not that ridiculous.

And, I wasn't making any assumptions on where he would end up. I gave you a random scenario on how something could play out. Within in that assumptions on how things could play, yes. Maybe he would be fine with going to 15 places, but I think a safe assumption is people in general would like to have more control, so in this scenario 10 options would be better. If your place of employment said give me 10 places we could move you or give me 15, am wrong to assume the 10 would include your TOP choices. I really don't think he has as much power as you. Half the league still leaves a lot of teams. He is a good player most teams would want. Bruins eat 2m and sent a zboril (example) with him. They could get a 1st rd pick back. 2 years @5.25m is a good deal for him.

Again - when was the last time you really heard about a guy holding his team hostage. Yes it happens (Elder) but it's rare. It's not about doing anyone favors, it's human nature to want to be where you are wanted. I know they wouldn't sell it that way, but it is what it is. If your work was looking to hire your replacement and asking you to take a lesser role, you'd probably be ok as with it if your competitor stole you away.

I literally provided you with the links to BOTH times lol? So thanks for reading my post.

What you quoted was when he signed his contract in 2014. He spoke about it again to DJ Bean after the 2015-2016 season (AFTER he was married with a kid). Here is the link to that...........:
https://weei.radio.com/blogs/dj-bean/david-krejci-respects-pavel-datsyuks-decision-plans-finish-career-czech-republic



You did, and I'm saying your reason's are not convincing at all. Bottom line, if someone forced you to bet all you had that Krejci would waive his NMC this year if the Bruins sign JT, would you honestly bet yes? For me, it would be a hard no. And yes it is pretty ridiculous. Krejci waiving his NMC is more ridiculous to me than any of the scenarios floating around out there (including signing JT, which is also pretty ridiculous).

And one final point on this (even though THN sucks), it's interesting to recall how few players wanted to waive their NMCs during the expansion draft. That speaks volumes about how likely it is Krejci would waive his NMC.
http://www.thehockeynews.com/news/article/why-we-can-t-blame-players-who-refuse-to-waive-no-movement-clauses

The first link did not work. I did read it and clicked the hyperlink of DJ Bean and neither took me to the interview. After reading, I still don't think it's set in stone. "but no matter when or how, if I'll be 36 or 38 or 39,... 39 is four years after his current contract. Makes it seem like when he can't play in the NHL anymore.

As for the waiving for an expansion team. That is different, and I think the city makes a difference. Vegas WAS a tough sell. I viewed it as another desert team. They don't seem to be, but lets see where they are in a few years. Also, the major reason they were relevant? Fleury waived his NTC from a perennial Stanley cup team.

Would I bet everything? of course not, but would you have bet the Bruins would as relevant as they are after Julien's last two years, or Vegas would make it to the finals.

It's not ridiculous at all. There are reports the Bruins are looking to move them and the Bruins are on Tavares short list. I agree it probably won't happen, I think he stays in NY, but there is a fairly decent chance.

Arthur staple a writer for the atlantic and former NYI beat guy reported Bruins are on his list. There are also many reports about Krejci and Backes.

The number one reason you seem to not want to accept is his ability to dictate where he goes. Like he could say, fine, but I only want to go to... I would say they could make a deal with just about any team

Fleury waived his NTC to go to Vegas to be able to be a starter again. He was hardly doing anyone but himself a favor, and could position himself now for a lucrative contract extension - something that would never have happened if he remained backup to Murray. I don't think that example is applicable.

If you could find me a scenario (I've tried looking over the last hour, and couldn't find one), of a player waiving his NTC to be traded off of a Cup contending team (something I think we both agree the Bruins would be if they signed Tavares) to one that is not contending, then I'll concede the argument. Otherwise, all these "reports" are coming from people who haven't got a clue like Jimmy Murphy or like Andy Strickland, who sounds like a plant for Backes' camp; they all sound like BS. The Bruins must have another plan if they are actually going to sign Tavares (maybe moving Krug for picks/prospects), because I 100% do not believe either player would waive their NMC to be taken off the Bruins in that scenario.

And just to clarify, I know that the Bruins are on the list that Staple and LeBrun have reported on to meet with Tavares. I'm saying the prospect of signing JT is ridiculous. The Bruins seemingly have the least incentive of any of the teams he's meeting with to lure him away from Long Island.

Sorry, I don't mean to keep harping on this, but another thing I just thought of that Krejci could do, if the Bruins tried to trade him next offseason to a team he doesn't want to go to - he could announce his retirement, take a nice little 2 year vacation to the Czech Republic and get paid a crapton of money to play there, then when he's 35, return to North America and seek out a new contract with whomever he wants.

My point is that with an NMC, a partial NTC, and his age, Krejci has all the leverage in the world and the Bruins have virtually none, and Krejci has never expressed anything other than a desire to play in Boston, and then go back to the Czech Republic. That's why I've always believed that if the Bruins were to part ways with Krejci after 2018-2019, they would do so via buyout. At least from that perspective it would look like the organization is doing him a favor by paying out some portion of that contract vs ramrodding him via trade to a team he doesn't want to go to and force him to retire.

If he retires, the money comes off the books. Helping the Bruins. I guess the return value would theoretically hurt them, but the reasoning would be to sign Tavares, so that's a win without anything coming back for him.

I also don't see the Krejci situation being all that much different than the Fleury situation. Krejci could definitely benefit from playing a 1st line role somewhere opposed to a 3rd line role. Lets say Tavares comes here, because really the need for him to waive hinges on Tavares. Krejci will have a much reduced role. He puts up 35-40 pts because he'll likely getting less Ice time and playing with less skilled/NHL ready players. No he won't completely disappear, but it would be pretty amazing if he still put up the 50-60pts. That would drastically effect his next contract. It's the difference between 3 years and 9m and 3 years and 15-18m. Good comparables will be Stastny and Bozak - Look at what Koivu got. In addition would you rather pay one of the two guys mentioned or even Thornton 5-6m for 4-5 years (less term for thornton) or 3@7.25 for Krejci. Teams, and good ones/contenders would be interested in him. I only used Carolina as a team because A) they need a #1 center and B) That's a team everyone was trading him too.

I don't want to assume I know where he would play but STL, COL, CBJ, NSH & MIN (+NYR, MTL and DET because of prestige) seem like they could be on his list, not all but some, and would have interest in him. No players express interest in playing for other teams while on their current team. so you are the one assuming he wouldn't be going to a contender. Again, For the teams who aren't on Tavares list, Krejcji isn't a horrible plan B/bridge player. Plus (I think) given his playoff record, many teams would be interested in adding him for a run if he waived and went to a team that fell out of it and get a decent return, much like statsny.

I think you are wrong about the leverage thing. 100%. They are pretty even. IF, Krejci wants to take a hard stance they simply ship him off to #15 on his list. in 11 months. I am not saying he says, sure trade me anywhere, but he might say, I'll waive for the right situation - can you try these 5 teams. Then he has a say. 15 teams is a lot.

why would Strickland be a plant if Backes wasn't ok with it or willing to waive?

If Krejci is phased out in Boston it 100% hurts his next contract. This assumes Tavares, so Bergeron and Tavares are your 1/2, Krejci will lose production. Yes, he has some control this year, but it shifts in the following, so a compromise can be had, Is it worth cutting off your nose to spite your face for a year? He realistically has one good contract left. No, it won't be north of 7, but if he has three 50 point seasons he could get 5.5/6m for 3 years, then he goes back home. Yes, he can play hardball, but so can the Bruins next year.

Really? You're going to compare being a backup goaltender (where you literally don't even see the ice 60/82 games) vs starter to being a 3C vs 2C? The two situations couldn't be less comparable? I don't understand why you're treating playing on the 3rd line as some sort of banishment or curse, or "phase out" as you later say, for Krejci. Didn't JVR score 30+ goals this year playing on the 3rd line? How many points has Kessel put up in his career in Pittsburgh playing on the 3rd line. CHRIS F***** KELLY scored 20 goals as a 3C, and he was utter garbage offensively! Nothing in your response considers the benefits to Krejci of playing on the 3rd line (better defensive matchups for example), and given the examples I just cited, I would absolutely expect a 50+ pts season from Krejci if he was playing 3C behind Tavares and Bergeron.



As I said in a previous post, all Krejci has to do if the Bruins try to trade him in the 2019 offseason is have his agent leak all over the place to the press that he plans on retiring if the Bruins trade him. Nobody in the league would touch him at that point. At best, the Bruins could only hope to beg a team to take the contract by offering some asset in return. In which case, the Bruins would be better served by simply buying out his contract.

You yourself pointed out Krejci spoke about returning to the Czech Republic in the context of having won one or more Cups with Boston. So again I ask you, why would he want to waive his NMC to leave a team he wants to win a Cup with for a team less likely to win the Cup? He's not cutting off anything. There is money to be made playing hockey besides just the NHL. Euros are a real currency lol. Whether he plays in the NHL or in Europe, he will still be paid a lot of money, so your argument about setting himself up for a better contract makes zero sense to me.

There is no Chance he puts up 50pts as the third line center. Can you find me another 3rd line center who did that? Yes, the situations with him and Fleury are similar. Not the same, no but both depend on playing time and production. Someone would take a flyer on him especially as a dump because IF he actually retires the money comes off the books. The Bruins would need to lose a prospect, but it could easily happen. Nathan Horton was traded, Pronger, Savard and those guys still got paid, but didn't count against the cap. There is virtually no risk and high reward for trading for him.

Why is the team he could be traded to less likely to win the cup? You also contradict yourself heavily. Euros are real money!?! but he want to win Cups? can't do both last time I checked. He could get traded to a contender and be a #1 center, not a 2. He is the #1 on CBJ, maybe STL, Nashville (yes he had outproduced johansson for three straight years! - Imagine what Krejci could do with Forsberg on his wing?

I am talking about him going to a contender and getting a contract so he can win another cup. If he doesn't do it this year. He is gone next against his will. He has no power. Fine float retirement. Ship him off to team 15 and and b level prospect for a 3rd or 4th rounder. Salary dump. If you retire, nobody pays you, go back to CZECH and a team traded a 3rd oor 4th for a decent prospect. No Harm no foul.