Credit expansion alone does not cause economic crises. Economic crises are endogenous. We have always had them, under every monetary system, and we always will. They are the result of men being fallible and the economic problem being hard. The result is misallocations of capital which result in real losses to the society as a whole.
Yes, excessive credit creation can contribute to such misallocations. No, they do not cause them, in the specific sense that removing credit creation (not actually possible anyway) would not remove the effect - and in the sense that credit creation can operate without such misallocation necessarily resulting.
The operating mechanism is, mispricings induce misallocations of real capital. Credit facilitates reallocations of capital. The combination of temporarily misaligned prices (especially for long dated capital assets) and rapid credit expansion, can move lots of capital to poor uses rapidly, and temporarily make those moves appear justified.
Those effects could only be removed if (1) prices never changed, preventing eventual falsification of the price signals reacted to or (2) capital never moved, preventing reallocation to worse configurations. Either would also destroy economic freedom and the adaptability of the economy to new conditions, and with it would destroy economic growth and prosperity.
Economic crises are not removable, and attempt to prevent them by attacking economic liberties destroys liberty and prosperity without securing any meaningful economic security. Hayek already understood this. We put up with crises as the inevitable byproduct of other men's freedom. Liberty has costs. You have no right to perfect economic security. It cannot be achieved, and the things being sacrificed in its name are more valuable than it is, anyway.