Player Discussion Kevin Shattenkirk

[Hunter Gathers]

Sitting Shattenkirk and not Staal....****ing crime against humanity. Quinn already being stupid.

They should both be scratched.

 

[DanielBrassard]

Sitting Shattenkirk and not Staal....****ing crime against humanity. Quinn already being stupid.

This is the problem I have with it. Holding Shattenkirk accountable is fine, but Quinn should also be willing to bench Staal when the time comes. Otherwise he looks like he's playing favorites. Claesson should be in the lineup over him anyway.

 

[Edge]

I think the expectation is that Shattenkirk has more to give and can/should be better.

I don't think that exists for Staal.

 

[True Blue]

The term "sheltered" should be permanently banned from all hockey discussions. It's only use to make "maximizing a players ability" sound like a negative.

Which also allows to keep the narrative that he is a top pairing defenseman. To which the never ending rebuttal is that one cannot be a top paring defensemen if you are kept away from the opposition's top players.

Are you saying that by maximizing his offensive abilities, that he should not be on the ice at the end of games when the lead is being protected? Wouldn't you want to expand your lead then?

 

[True Blue]

That's not sheltering a player. Second pair D are not sheltered.

Hell, most third pair D aren't even sheltered.

Purposely being kept away from the ice during defensive zone draws and purposely being kept away from the opposition's better offensive players is the definition of being sheltered.

 

[DanielBrassard]

I think the expectation is that Shattenkirk has more to give and can/should be better.

I don't think that exists for Staal.

Shouldn't he be sitting then?

 

[haohmaru]

This is patently false. Shattenkirk got to STL four seasons before Parayko did.

What are we arguing here? "Low 4?"

I'll put it another way, Shattenkirk, at best, is a 2nd pairing defenseman and a high end power play specialist.

 

[nevesis]

I think the expectation is that Shattenkirk has more to give and can/should be better.

I don't think that exists for Staal.

Difference being, Shattenkirk is coming off knee surgery and hasn't even been given enough time between camp and the start of the season to get into any real rhythm. Sure, he's been terrible for where he should be but he can only go up.

There is no up for Marc Staal is a liability every second he's out there.

 

[Off Sides]

Maybe if they lower the expectation bar for everyone, everyone can play.

 

[Tawnos]

Shouldn't he be sitting then?

Depends on the reason he’s in the lineup.

 

[Edge]

Shouldn't he be sitting then?

In reality, he should probably be in the stands.

But I also think at this point the priority is to potentially light a fire under a player who is expected to play a bigger role on this team.

I'm also in the camp that is not keen to shift one of our RDs over to the left side.

 

[Machinehead]

What are we arguing here? "Low 4?"

I'll put it another way, Shattenkirk, at best, is a 2nd pairing defenseman and a high end power play specialist.

You're entitled to that opinion, but he's rarely be used as a powerplay specialist or a #4.

 

[Edge]

Difference being, Shattenkirk is coming off knee surgery and hasn't even been given enough time between camp and the start of the season to get into any real rhythm. Sure, he's been terrible for where he should be but he can only go up.

There is no up for Marc Staal is a liability every second he's out there.

I think that kind of answers the question right there.

There is no up for Staal.

But there is a potential up to lighting a fire under Shattenkirk and showing the team that Quinn isn't afraid to bench anyone --- not just the marginal players.

Certainly a calculated risk. But I'll venture a guess that Quinn gives more value to sending a longer-term wake up call, than removing a liability that is going to exist with or without a benching.

 

[Machinehead]

Purposely being kept away from the ice during defensive zone draws and purposely being kept away from the opposition's better offensive players is the definition of being sheltered.

Ok, but that doesn't really happen to Shattenkirk.

When they were both on the Blues, Pietrangelo's competition played 45 seconds more per game than Shattenkirk's competition.

A "sheltered" D sees a reduction in competition of 2-3 minutes, not 45 seconds.

You generally won't find a top 4 D that sees a 2-3 minute reduction because sheltering top 4 D is a myth. They simply play too much.

 

[haohmaru]

You're entitled to that opinion, but he's rarely be used as a powerplay specialist or a #4.

I think we're talking past each other, so I'll digress.

2nd pairing guy who excels on the PP.

 

[Machinehead]

I think we're talking past each other, so I'll digress.

2nd pairing guy who excels on the PP.

That's not how you described him earlier.

 

[Hunter Gathers]

Shouldn't he be sitting then?

He should be released.

 

[DanielBrassard]

In reality, he should probably be in the stands.

But I also think at this point the priority is to potentially light a fire under a player who is expected to play a bigger role on this team.

I'm also in the camp that is not keen to shift one of our RDs over to the left side.

They wouldn't have to shift one of the RD's. I think Claesson is a better player than Staal and he is certainly more mobile that's for sure. I understand why Quinn might feel he needs to motivate Shattenkirk or whatever, but if the reason he doesn't feel the need to sit Staal is because he doesn't have the expectations that Staal has the capabilities to be better then that's concerning considering he has better players in the press box.

 

[Machinehead]

Depends on the reason he’s in the lineup.

Boy would I love to hear that reason.

 

[Hunter Gathers]

In reality, he should probably be in the stands.

But I also think at this point the priority is to potentially light a fire under a player who is expected to play a bigger role on this team.

I'm also in the camp that is not keen to shift one of our RDs over to the left side.

Agreed. I think that Shatty can be motivated to play better.

We all know that Staal literally cannot play better.

Benching Staal does nothing. He should be benched regardless or released. Benching Shatty and you hope to get something from it. I get the idea.

I still want Staal released.

 

[Tawnos]

Boy would I love to hear that reason.

Go find the discussion on why Staal has an A. I think it was the last roster building thread. I don't really believe that Staal is in the lineup to provide high quality minutes.

 

[Machinehead]

Go find the discussion on why Staal has an A. I think it was the last roster building thread. I don't really believe that Staal is in the lineup to provide high quality minutes.

Don't feel like going down the "play awful players for token leadership" rabbit hole today.

 

[Tawnos]

Don't feel like going down the "play awful players for token leadership" rabbit hole today.

That's why I said read that discussion, because honestly it doesn't need to be re-hashed.

 

[True Blue]

Funny you mention Yandle, because he's pretty much an all-situations guy now. Matter of fact, you could argue he's a shutdown guy.

Dude, really? Yandle is a shut down defenseman??

 

[Edge]

They wouldn't have to shift one of the RD's. I think Claesson is a better player than Staal and he is certainly more mobile that's for sure. I understand why Quinn might feel he needs to motivate Shattenkirk or whatever, but if the reason he doesn't feel the need to sit Staal is because he doesn't have the expectations that Staal has the capabilities to be better then that's concerning considering he has better players in the press box.

Personally, I think it's very possible that the Staal moment is coming, but it wasn't Quinn's first choice from a psychological standpoint.

I don't think Quinn does things rashly or based on pure emotion. If I were to venture a guess, I still think he's trying to send a message to the rest of the team, more than he is trying to put a bullet in Old Yeller --- for now.