Speculation: Kevin Shattenkirk for Rick Nash

[AbsolutCam]

With respect, amazing to me that some Rangers fans apparently wouldn't do this. Get rid of worst years of a good but aging winger's contract (the years you hate committing to), AND fill a difficult PPQB / PMD void with a much better player then they'll find elsewhere (even if just for one year), AND gain cap space flexibility. Should be such an easy decision if actually available.

 

[RangerGuru]

With respect, amazing to me that some Rangers fans apparently wouldn't do this. Get rid of worst years of a good but aging winger's contract (the years you hate committing to), AND fill a difficult PPQB / PMD void with a much better player then they'll find elsewhere (even if just for one year), AND gain cap space flexibility. Should be such an easy decision if actually available.

I'd probably do it, but most Ranger fans are in support of a full youth movement, letting Nash bounce back (pretty likely scenario, always been a solid goal scorer, struggled with injuries last year, still one of the more solid 2 way wingers) and instead then dealing him for younger guys / pick(s) either before the deadline or next offseason - probably would have to retain salary but that's fine

 

[Off Sides]

With respect, amazing to me that some Rangers fans apparently wouldn't do this. Get rid of worst years of a good but aging winger's contract (the years you hate committing to), AND fill a difficult PPQB / PMD void with a much better player then they'll find elsewhere (even if just for one year), AND gain cap space flexibility. Should be such an easy decision if actually available.

It's a divide among Ranger fans, some believe this team is still in some sort of contention window, and short term fixes are going to allow them to beat the rest of the teams in the East and also compete with whomever comes out of the West in the playoffs.

Others (like myself) believe they are now at best pretenders no matter what they do short term, and if they don't focus on the long term, the new window of mediocrity will be extended exponentially.

 

[Gardner McKay]

obviously people have discussed this on here but weirdly enough ive come across 2 articles today suggesting it again. .....

http://www.thehockeynews.com/blog/r...ok-at-a-potential-nash-for-shattenkirk-trade/

During a July 29th live chat with his readers, Jeremy Rutherford of the St. Louis Post-Dispatch acknowledged the speculation of the Blues shipping Shattenkirk to the Rangers for left winger Rick Nash. He didn’t dismiss the possibility of this deal taking place.

Rutherford notes the Rangers need to replace departed D-man Keith Yandle. He also cites Nash’s ties with Blues coach Ken Hitchcock, and the winger’s skills and veteran experience could help the Blues.

Given Nash’s $7.8-million annual salary-cap hit over the next two seasons, Rutherford believes the Rangers would have to retain some salary. He also suggests other players would have to be involved to make the deal work....

Larry Brooks shot this rumor down multiple times saying that the Rangers don't want to give Shattenkirk the type of extension he is looking for.

 

[SirPaste]

With respect, amazing to me that some Rangers fans apparently wouldn't do this. Get rid of worst years of a good but aging winger's contract (the years you hate committing to), AND fill a difficult PPQB / PMD void with a much better player then they'll find elsewhere (even if just for one year), AND gain cap space flexibility. Should be such an easy decision if actually available.

Not sure how much cap space they would actually save, Rangers would have to retain a decent amount of salary to make it work for the Blues capwise

 

[JT Kreider]

With respect, amazing to me that some Rangers fans apparently wouldn't do this. Get rid of worst years of a good but aging winger's contract (the years you hate committing to), AND fill a difficult PPQB / PMD void with a much better player then they'll find elsewhere (even if just for one year), AND gain cap space flexibility. Should be such an easy decision if actually available.

Would rather trade Nash for youth.

Something like Nash to Nash for Arvidsson, one of their almost NHL ready prospects and a 1st or a 2nd depending on how much we retain.

With or without Shattenkirk we're not Cup contenders. No more quick fix band-aid moves.

 

[Evocable Manager]

From a Blues perspective, this makes little sense. Rick Nash is 32 years old and this whole offseason has been set to get younger. We elected to not resign Backes and Brouwer due to contract demands and their age. We've turned to the new young core and we also have no need for another LW. If he can play RW, it'd make more sense but I stand by my first point that his age is not enticing considering what we've done as a organization this offseason.

Also, Nash is such a wildcard. Rangers would almost certainly need to to retain a lot of salary, and we don't know what Nash will bring. In 2014-15 he had 42 goals but shot at a ridiculous rate and surrounded that with two mediocre seasons (though last year he had a low shot percentage). At this point, I'm not expecting at 32 year old to do what he did when he was 25. Also, yes, he played for Hitch. But that really doesn't matter. Hitch will be around for 1 year and if your argument is that we're going 'all-in' for him, than I'd like to point to the fact we let two big playoff contributors last year walk for nothing.

Not to mention value wise, Shattenkirk could definitely get something better than Nash. At this point, Nash has minimal value. For New York (I'm not full educated, so bare with me) wouldn't you want to hold onto Nash, hope he bounces back and then trade him for some futures at the deadline or next offseason? To me, seems better than trading him for Shattenkirk who won't completely turn your team around.

I'd rather trade Shattenkirk for futures. Nash is simply not needed and too big a risk.

 

[TGWL]

See Shattenkirk, Kevin.

Really though, I dont see Nash being worth a lot next offseason.

Why not? We already have the cap space we needed for this year, so trading him isn't a real need. If Nash scores 25 goals, and we retain half, you don't see teams being interested in that next season?

 

[Esq]

Makes no sense from the Blues' perspective.

 

[aufheben]

This doesn't make sense for either team.

 

[vipernsx]

Im curious on the calculus of Nash likely, potentially being worth more than Shattenkirk.
1. Nash has had injuries in two of the past 3 seasons, why are you so sure a bounce back year is likely to occur and another injury filled season is not?
2. He was 30 when he scored 42, he is 32 now and will be 33 when you trade him. How many players score more as a 33 year old as a 30 year old? Sure some do, but I wouldnt be placing money on it. Ask Carolina. Shattenkirk is 27 and has been as consistent as the come over the past 3 seasons.
3. Nash is due $7-someodd million, limiting the number of teams who can even afford him. Shattenkirk is due $4.25 this year.
4. They are both UFAs and would need to be in the right situation to re-sign with the team that trades for him. Dont see much advantage for either player's value there.

There is very little certainty in your scenario. But be my guest, bet big on a 32 year old scorer with a yuge contract.

It's August so I'll bite....

If he does have another under performing season then you're effectively at the same spot you are now and lose nothing. If he bounces back, you're ahead. The Rangers have the roster spots and the cap space so waiting a year loses nothing.

They're not both UFAs, Shatty has 1 year remaining, Nash has 2. Two could be better or worse depending on the scenario. Rangers have the ability to retain quite a bit this year and possible even for next, This could open up options.

Nash has salary and a M-NTC which limits the number of teams that he can be moved to. Shatty has limited the number of teams that he'll resign with, reportedly only 4, which is limiting interest in him. No one wants to pay the hefty price that St. Louis wants for a rental.

In the past 3 season Taylor Hall has scored 67 goals, in the past two he's scored 40. He's a young player signed long term and was moved for another young player signed long term.

In the past 3 season Rick Nash has scored 83 goals, in the past two he's scored 57. He's a veteran player signed short term and Shatty is a veteran player signed short term. The value seems to be about right.

I'd probably do it, but most Ranger fans are in support of a full youth movement, letting Nash bounce back (pretty likely scenario, always been a solid goal scorer, struggled with injuries last year, still one of the more solid 2 way wingers) and instead then dealing him for younger guys / pick(s) either before the deadline or next offseason - probably would have to retain salary but that's fine

Agreed, this is the best case scenario.

Makes no sense from the Blues' perspective.

This doesn't make sense for either team.

There isn't a team in the league that couldn't benefit from adding a 30+ goal scorer. Most teams could use a RH-PMD. The only thing in shorter supply then both of these is a true #1 pivot.

 

[Hictor Vedman*]

Oh, this again?

The Rangers are the reverse Toronto Maple Leafs. They get all the players that they want, sign them to outrageous contracts, they never work out, they get rid of them, and repeat the process. Whereas Toronto... well, they just repeat the process of striking out. It's fairly amusing, really.

 

[KreiderHouseRules*]

Larry Brooks shot this rumor down multiple times saying that the Rangers don't want to give Shattenkirk the type of extension he is looking for.

While true, Brooks is merely a mouthpiece for the organization.

He doesn't actually have "inside sources." They literally hand-feed him whatever they want him to write.

I think NYR would be big players for a UFA Shattenkirk, but after the Yandle debacle, I think they'd be weary of trading anything of value for that kind of defenseman right before he needs his big payday.

There's a huge difference between paying Shattenkirk and paying Shattenkirk right after trading valuable assets to acquire him.

And contrary to HF hivemind, Nash is still a very good player. Only Stamkos and Ovechkin scored more than him one season ago. He's still valuable and the less term left, the more valuable he is as a trade chip.

 

[Igor Shestyorkin]

Can Nash play RW?

He's as good at RW as he is LW.

 

[Infinitum Vitae*]

when Stamkos signed in Toronto, Shattenkirk was overheard saying he wants to go home too

New York isn't a rebuilding team.

 

[Number1RedWingsFan52]

Don't see Armstrong have any interest in Nash even if Gorton was willing to retain half off. Don't see both clubs doing this deal.

 

[Eric Sachs]

New York isn't a rebuilding team.

Players don't always run home at first opportunity, rebuilding team or not.

Toronto fans now realize that and it's humorous looking back at how certain they were with Stamkos going there. Rangers fans aren't nearly as smug but the level of certainty is approaching a critical point.

and New York is pretty ****ing close to a rebuilding team and certainly will be moving in that direction by this time next year. Almost all Rangers fans agree, terminology aside.

 

[Lion Hound]

If Sather was still running the show and calling the shots I do believe that this deal would have happened at the draft.

For the Rangers, I don't think its the right move. There will be interest at the deadline this year for Rick Nash. Of course, they might not actually be sellers at the deadline either but if they are in the middle of the pack at that time I do think Nash will be moved for prospects/picks and maybe a cap dump coming in.

Lots of talk that Shattenkirk wants to play for the Rangers. If he really wants to be in NY then as a free agent the two sides should be able to make a deal happen.

 

[Off Sides]

If Shattenkirk really wants to be a Ranger he can take less than market value.

I have seen Drury, Redden, Richards, Nash, MSL, E Staal, Dan Boyle, all want to be Rangers to various degrees, and the Rangers in most occasions pay above market value by trade or by signing to make it happen. It leads to varying degrees of good and bad but it ends up looking pretty bad given the other options, like just saying something to the effect of, here is the set limit, if that is not enough, so be it.

 

[topshelf15]

Think the blues would like a top 6 center back ,rather than a winger .Not 100% sure though

 

[ottawa]

This.

People forget Nash scored 42 goals a season ago.

A bounce-back season re-ups his value and likely nets NYR a younger, potentially better package than pending-UFA Shattenkirk. And by all accounts, it's likely Shattenkirk signs in NYR after this season anyway.

People didn't forget. It doesn't fit their narrative.

None of us forgot he scored 42 goals...just the memories of his poor playoff showings outshadow the 42-goal season.

 

[PemIceKing]

The Rangers are the reverse Toronto Maple Leafs. They get all the players that they want, sign them to outrageous contracts, they never work out, they get rid of them, and repeat the process. Whereas Toronto... well, they just repeat the process of striking out. It's fairly amusing, really.

Well the Leafs have a new hitting coaches and are hitting home runs regularily now. Ottawa seems to be following the Leafs old model and it is really quite amusing actually.

 

[topshelf15]

Well the Leafs have a new hitting coaches and are hitting home runs regularily now. Ottawa seems to be following the Leafs old model and it is really quite amusing actually.

We are using the exact same template that has been the envy of your town for quite some time ,we dont live in the basement for decades.With nothing to show for it ,we draft and develop our team .And try to push for the playoffs .In hopes of having the right mix for silver.If we dont then we draft and develop some more.

 

[AbsolutCam]

The Rangers were just a 101 point team who lost in the playoffs to the eventual Cup champs. They have a roster that about 2/3 of the league would love to have. The idea that they are going to be trading Nash for futures at the trade deadline is pretty far-fetched in this neutral's opinion.... I don't know of many playoff teams that would ever do that, and the Rangers certainly aren't the type to do that.

Even if that was a realistic plan, they could just as easily (probably more easily) trade Shattenkirk at the trade deadline for same or better futures.

This is all academic anyway because the Blues never do this.

 

[Off Sides]

The Rangers were just a 101 point team who lost in the playoffs to the eventual Cup champs. They have a roster that about 2/3 of the league would love to have. The idea that they are going to be trading Nash for futures at the trade deadline is pretty far-fetched in this neutral's opinion.... I don't know of many playoff teams that would ever do that, and the Rangers certainly aren't the type to do that.

Even if that was a realistic plan, they could just as easily (probably more easily) trade Shattenkirk at the trade deadline for same or better futures.

This is all academic anyway because the Blues never do this.

I am hoping the Rangers see what their 101 point season really was last year, Lundqvist's save % early on and the wins that came from it is misleading to what they really were once that normalized.