Value of: Kevin Shattenkirk at Trade Deadline

[HolyJumpin]

Ok, I sincerely doubt that the Blues are going to let Kevin Shattenkirk walk away from the team. There will be a trade made at the very worst. So, assuming that he won't hit the market what are people willing to part with?

Please, please, please don't come in here to say that your team is just going to pick him up in Free Agency. It's annoying and unwanted. Because the Blues are going to let another player walk.

Click to read more...

 

[Bluesguru]

I seriously think Armstrong is arrogant enough to keep Shattenkirk and ride this out to the end. If I had to bet, that's what I would bet on, that Shattenkirk ends up walking. No deal period. Armstrong blew it on draft day, that was his best chance and the best time to make a deal. IMO he blew it.

 

[A Loyal Demidog]

Ok, I sincerely doubt that the Blues are going to let Kevin Shattenkirk walk away from the team. There will be a trade made at the very worst. So, assuming that he won't hit the market what are people willing to part with?

Please, please, please don't come in here to say that your team is just going to pick him up in Free Agency. It's annoying and unwanted. Because the Blues are going to let another player walk.

If Petry (MTL) is willing to waive his NMC (and if Shattenkirk is willing to sign a contract with MTL): Petry + prospect + 1st 2017 for Shattenkirk?

 

[Bluesguru]

I'll play along for fun. I'd love to get James Van Reimsdyk from Toronto. Maybe there's a chance Toronto would want to rent Shattenkirk for the playoffs and unload JVR since he'll only have 1 more year left on his current deal? If we could swing that, I'd love it. But I'm negative on Doug Armstrong so I'm not expecting anything.

 

[Rebuilt]

Blues will need Shattenkirk for the playoffs. I find it difficult to believe he will be traded.

 

[SensNation613]

I'll play along for fun. I'd love to get James Van Reimsdyk from Toronto. Maybe there's a chance Toronto would want to rent Shattenkirk for the playoffs and unload JVR since he'll only have 1 more year left on his current deal? If we could swing that, I'd love it. But I'm negative on Doug Armstrong so I'm not expecting anything.

Leafs say no. They aren't making the playoffs this season so it would be a terrible move on their part.

 

[Vikke]

Can't see him traded, unless it's a great package coming back.
They'll need him if they want to compete in the playoffs.

 

[dkollidas]

Well... a random thought.

Maybe he plays out the year, they can't come to a deal, and wait till after the expansion draft to trade his negotiating rights before UFA period begins. Sabres offer Evander Kane for negotiating rights to Shattenkirk?

Or even at the deadline if the Blues feel they need more muscle up front, could have a deal centered around Kane. If it doesn't work out for the Blues they can walk away after one year .

 

[Raccoon Jesus]

Blues will need Shattenkirk for the playoffs. I find it difficult to believe he will be traded.

This.

Unless the Blues think they aren't contenders--doubtful--there's no point in trading Shattenkirk as it hurts them this year.

I know in fantasy GM land it's foolish to let any player walk without maximizing an asset (man, you didn't win the cup, you could have gotten a first for him!), but in REAL GM land, you don't get the benefit of either that sort of hindsight or projected lack of confidence: "well it's likely we won't win the cup this year so trade this awesome player." No, you go for it with said awesome player and let the internet critics do their worst.

 

[rumrokh]

Blues will need Shattenkirk for the playoffs. I find it difficult to believe he will be traded.

He was great two playoffs ago, but was mediocre at best last season and playoffs. And despite racking up a bunch of powerplay points this year, his overall play has been pretty bad. He's not the type of player who is strictly expendable, but he's coming up on a season and a half of subpar performance. The Blues don't need more inconsistency and lack of performance at even-strength. It doesn't make sense to deal him for picks, but if they can get an impact player for him right this second, they should.

 

[SteenMachine]

Shattenkirk being moved has a lot more to do with who's asking. There has to be an obvious need for him, not just an improvement to the team he ends up on. There also has to be something that makes Armstrong feel like he didn't throw him away. (He can be wrong and do exactly that, it just has to fulfill some minimal requirement of his and he'll be satisfied with the negotiating instead of the net result.)

I don't think Armstrong will be able to bring in anything close to what the Blues need to be a better team without Shattenkirk's PP presence, so it'll be another weird trade like Ryan Miller where he doesn't address top 6 centers at all.

If he can't find another UFA 1 for 1 where he doubles down on LWs (forcing someone to center will clearly work -this- time) or get an "experienced" backup goalie to go with some questionable futures pieces. Then I think he just rides it out through the playoffs and assumes his cap space will be its own reward.

 

[Sky04]

Why wouldn't they just keep him for the playoffs as a contender? Barring a huge overpayment or upgrade in another area. Jesus this board has a fascination with "losing assets for nothing".

 

[Sky04]

This.

Unless the Blues think they aren't contenders--doubtful--there's no point in trading Shattenkirk as it hurts them this year.

I know in fantasy GM land it's foolish to let any player walk without maximizing an asset (man, you didn't win the cup, you could have gotten a first for him!), but in REAL GM land, you don't get the benefit of either that sort of hindsight or projected lack of confidence: "well it's likely we won't win the cup this year so trade this awesome player." No, you go for it with said awesome player and let the internet critics do their worst.

Why is this so hard to understand for people?

 

[Tryblot]

Why wouldn't they just keep him for the playoffs as a contender? Barring a huge overpayment or upgrade in another area. Jesus this board has a fascination with "losing assets for nothing".

St. Louis is a worse team than last year IMO. I don't see them coming close to winning a Cup this year and to lose Backes and Shattenkirk in back to back years with no Cup is just awful asset management.

 

[Machinehead]

Rangers fans: *offers garbage for Shattenkirk*

Blues fans: "lol that's awful"

Rangers fans: "whatever, we'll just sign him for free lol"

K, got that out of the way. Everyone good? Ok carry on.

 

[Dbrownss]

St. Louis is a worse team than last year IMO. I don't see them coming close to winning a Cup this year and to lose Backes and Shattenkirk in back to back years with no Cup is just awful asset management.

The whole west is a dung pile this year. Unless othe teams take big strides. Its conceivable the Blues can at least make the WCF again. Armstrong has to balance the benefits of that vs the best offer for Shattenkirk. If said offer is a late 1st+pocket lent, then its understandable that he values the post season success.

 

[shpongle falls]

This.

Unless the Blues think they aren't contenders--doubtful--there's no point in trading Shattenkirk as it hurts them this year.

I know in fantasy GM land it's foolish to let any player walk without maximizing an asset (man, you didn't win the cup, you could have gotten a first for him!), but in REAL GM land, you don't get the benefit of either that sort of hindsight or projected lack of confidence: "well it's likely we won't win the cup this year so trade this awesome player." No, you go for it with said awesome player and let the internet critics do their worst.

That's a great point. Your avatar is hilarious btw.

Although as others have said it would kinda suck to lose Backes for nothing this year and then Shattenkirk next year back to back like that, but I fear that's what will end up happening unless Armstrong gets blown away with an offer he can't refuse at the trade deadline, sometimes GM's make some desperate moves at the trade deadline. Who knows.

 

[shpongle falls]

Rangers fans: *offers garbage for Shattenkirk*

Blues fans: "lol that's awful"

Rangers fans: "whatever, we'll just sign him for free lol"

K, got that out of the way. Everyone good? Ok carry on.

Glad that's out of the way now.

 

[BlueDream]

After letting Backes and Brouwer walk (and it's not like Brouwer really matters at all but we traded Oshie for him so that's basically another guy that we let go for nothing), the Blues really can't let Shattenkirk walk. Need to get something for him.

However, he is a very good player that helps the Blues. Anyone who says he's been bad outside of the powerplay really has no idea what they're talking about. Maybe they're expecting him to be a shutdown stalwart defensively but then that's their issue. Shattenkirk has played the same for basically the 6 years he's been here. He's one of the more consistent players on the team, you at least know what you're going to get. If someone is shocked that he makes some boneheaded defensive players, they haven't paid any attention at all to the kind of player he is. He's a puck-mover that creates offense from the point, and he's good at it. Those are valuable.

 

[Mathew Barzal]

I guess it's common knowledge and I've been living under a rock but why is Shattenkirk leaving again?

 

[Alluckks]

I guess it's common knowledge and I've been living under a rock but why is Shattenkirk leaving again?

I think it is a combination of the Blues already having a good amount of $$$ committed to their blueline and young guys needing raises soon. Also rumors that he wants to test free agency?

 

[Xerloris]

He's a free agent after this year and his price tag doesn't really fit with the Blues anymore.

 

[BlueDream]

Basically can be summed up like this: Our RHD are Pietrangelo, Parayko and Shattenkirk. Instead of paying one of them $6 million to play on the 3rd pairing, it makes a lot more sense to spread the wealth and try to improve the team at another position.

 

[10coach*]

If Petry (MTL) is willing to waive his NMC (and if Shattenkirk is willing to sign a contract with MTL): Petry + prospect + 1st 2017 for Shattenkirk?

Jeff ****ing Petry has a NMC?

 

[rumrokh]

After letting Backes and Brouwer walk (and it's not like Brouwer really matters at all but we traded Oshie for him so that's basically another guy that we let go for nothing), the Blues really can't let Shattenkirk walk. Need to get something for him.

However, he is a very good player that helps the Blues. Anyone who says he's been bad outside of the powerplay really has no idea what they're talking about. Maybe they're expecting him to be a shutdown stalwart defensively but then that's their issue. Shattenkirk has played the same for basically the 6 years he's been here. He's one of the more consistent players on the team, you at least know what you're going to get. If someone is shocked that he makes some boneheaded defensive players, they haven't paid any attention at all to the kind of player he is. He's a puck-mover that creates offense from the point, and he's good at it. Those are valuable.

He's been worse than I've come to expect and he has seemed a lot less engaged/aggressive in the offensive zone at even-strength, too. He's absolutely a valuable player, but he's sloppier than before and he's gone from being a puck-mover who can also rush the puck some to being more of a powerplay specialist.

But, after all, I really have no idea what I'm talking about. You know, sometimes several people can know what they're talking about and all have very different opinions. We're talking analysis here, not facts or even logic. It's not like I said something ridiculous like he's bad on the powerplay and only racks up points there because of the rest of the team.