Proposal: STL - BOS, Shattenkirk, Pastrnak

[JoeIsAStud]

Pasta isn't going to score 60 this year, but he might within the next 3 years. He needs to be more selfish and shoot more

He is very likely to become a consistent 80+ point guy in the league as his passing is every bit as good as his shooting.

 

[PatriceBergeronFan]

Pastrnak is worth a ton more than Shattenkirk.

Spooner and a pick.

 

[BruinLVGA]

There is a reason you see a lot of proposals for Shattenkirk for a good roster player even though those are rare rather than futures. It is a good bet that Armstrong (Blues GM) won't trade Shattenkirk for futures. He often talks about looking for a "hockey-trade", ie one that makes both teams better this season. He talked about it incessantly with Oshie and we got Brouwer+junk. He has talked about it with Shatty in the past and all the rumored returns that have been discussed are contributors (Erikkson, Taylor Hall). I am sure there are many, many Blues fans that would love to get a good first and prospect rather than lose him for nothing. However, Armstrong would never hurt the team's chances this year to do so.

Also every fan thinks their talented prospect is slated to be elite. It doesn't always happen. Almost every team has a guy that many fans think is "untradeable" (for anyone except McDavid). Many Blues fans think it about Parayko or Fabbri or both. But there needs to be a dose of realism. Saying that Pastrnak is a 58 goal scorer because that's what he is pacing is laying it on a little deep. The OP's trade is obviously lopsided in favor of the Blues and Boston obviously wouldn't do that. There is no need to pump Pastrnak's tires incessantly or denigrate Shattenkirk and Blues fans. (this is more aimed at BruinsLVGA who needs to watch a game without his Bruins-tinted glasses). And one fan doesn't represent an entire fan base. Do you guys want to take credit for every proposal made by someone claiming to be a Bruins fan on this board?

Yeah, excepted I only ever thought that of Seguin and Pastrnak, no one else. I am a realist/pessimistic fella by nature.
I was worried that Pastrnak was too light and bumped off the puck or pushed over too easily. Fast forward to 2016/17: he now looks like the terminator - what did he eat in the off season, gunpowder and steel bars? - and besides his usual qualities (talent, speed, great shot, creativity, mobility, etc etc), he is now banging folks around and nearly impossible to remove from the puck.
And the results of that? He plays like a 15 year veteran, total confidence and swagger, every shift he is on the ice you know he is making things happen, he stepped into one of the best duo in the league and he managed to outshine them both. He is dominant. That is something that I never could say even of Seguin, including the season he led the Bruins in points.

I never said that he is a 58 goals scorer, you are lying. I said that's a 58 goals PACE. Many people are mathematically challenged and/or superficial and they might not understand the meaning of how impressive it is to pot 15 goals in 21 games. Putting it in a PACE context gives them a clearer idea. Grasped it now? Sydney Crosby is on pace for 70 goals. I don't think he is a 70 goals scorer either, if you were wondering.

I find it funny that you talk to me about watching games. How many Bruins games did you watch this year? What do you know about how GREAT Pastrnak is playing? I thought so.

 

[BruinLVGA]

That's not even advanced stats, that's basic shooting percentages that are not sustainable. I love Pastrnak, he's your version of Fabbri. IMO, he will end up being a consistent 30+ goal scorer. He'll probably get there this season, but if you think a 20+% shooting% is sustainable, then you haven't been paying enough attention to the numbers.

Where did I ever talk about shooting percentages and sustainability? YOU DID.

Furthermore, do you think that if a player is that dominant on the ice like I said countless times in this thread, that he could find a way to shoot a bit more? Knowing also that the Bruins are 2nd in the league in shots for, 1st in shot differential, and Pastrnak plays with a duo that is probably one of the best in the league...

I just wish all these STL fans would watch a game or two where Pastrnak plays. It would clear things up for you folks.

 

[Majorityof1]

I find it funny that you talk to me about watching games. How many Bruins games did you watch this year? What do you know about how GREAT Pastrnak is playing? I thought so.

I've watched about 5-6 Bruins games. So roughly 25% of the games Pastrnak has played this year. I know, I know, small sample size, how can I possibly have an opinion. 25% of something can't possibly be an indicator of how things will go over the whole. Like if there were a season comprised on 82 events, someone's pace over roughly 25% of those, say 21, would not be indicative of how they would do over the full 82. Because it is a small sample size.

 

[bleedblue1223]

Where did I ever talk about shooting percentages and sustainability? YOU DID.

Furthermore, do you think that if a player is that dominant on the ice like I said countless times in this thread, that he could find a way to shoot a bit more? Knowing also that the Bruins are 2nd in the league in shots for, 1st in shot differential, and Pastrnak plays with a duo that is probably one of the best in the league...

I just wish all these STL fans would watch a game or two where Pastrnak plays. It would clear things up for you folks.

You brought up the paces, it was someone else who said they weren't convinced that they were unsustainable. That was the quote I pulled and the person I responded to.

 

[Oberyn]

Where did I ever talk about shooting percentages and sustainability? YOU DID.

Furthermore, do you think that if a player is that dominant on the ice like I said countless times in this thread, that he could find a way to shoot a bit more? Knowing also that the Bruins are 2nd in the league in shots for, 1st in shot differential, and Pastrnak plays with a duo that is probably one of the best in the league...

I just wish all these STL fans would watch a game or two where Pastrnak plays. It would clear things up for you folks.

I've seen a few Bruins games and Pastrnak was very good. I don't see any Blues fan here disputing that. The only thing being mentioned is that his stat line is likely unsustainable as players don't typically end the season with a shooting percentage above 20%.

What exactly are we trying to clear up here? Pastrnak is a terrific young player, we all get that.

 

[BruinLVGA]

I've watched about 5-6 Bruins games. So roughly 25% of the games Pastrnak has played this year. I know, I know, small sample size, how can I possibly have an opinion. 25% of something can't possibly be an indicator of how things will go over the whole. Like if there were a season comprised on 82 events, someone's pace over roughly 25% of those, say 21, would not be indicative of how they would do over the full 82. Because it is a small sample size.

Your opinion was (not verbatim) "fans are always excited about their young players being elite, but they don't always become elite". A "the sky is blue, water is wet" type of thing: not exactly news. That's all.

I was and am talking about Pastrnak instead. If you watched 1/4 of his games this season, you should have pretty much a good idea of how he is playing. I see you are in Florida, did you watch him last night for example? What is your scouting report?
I hate to break it to you, but how he played last night is a reflection of how he has played on average this season and his numbers confirm it. He has been the Bruins best skater.
Now as I said, if he plays a full season, the likelihood of him putting up 35 goals and 60 points is extremely reasonable, IMO. The 58 goals 82 points PACE is not.

What is your opinion? What do you think Pastrnak will do? 50 games and 25 points, because the past two seasons it's what happened, so that's the sizeable enough sample? Do tell.

 

[BruinLVGA]

I've seen a few Bruins games and Pastrnak was very good. I don't see any Blues fan here disputing that. The only thing being mentioned is that his stat line is likely unsustainable as players don't typically end the season with a shooting percentage above 20%.

What exactly are we trying to clear up here? Pastrnak is a terrific young player, we all get that.

Just for crap and giggles, I looked at shooting percentages of the last few seasons of the leading top goal scorers in the league and they seem to be between 12% and 17%. So if Pastrnak has a 58.57 goals pace @ 20% shooting percentage, that translates to 35.14 goals @ 12% to 49.78 goals @ 17%. Not peanuts anyway. So when I said that I thought he would hit 35 goals, I think it was most appropriate. Actually on the bottom of the range.

The thing we are trying to clear was that Shattenkirk is not worth Pastrnak (cleared, thank God) and that Pastrnak, by any metrics, isn't just another remote hope as it seems to be the notion by many in this thread, thanks to his performance (hopefully this will be cleared soon too).

 

[stl76]

What do you think...



1. And yet, your first post - see bolded - seems to imply exactly that. #backpedaling

2. In other words, the whole Bruins team. As in maybe, they're all playing rather well and it's not just one major reason.

By the way... The Bruins are not only 5th in shots against... They are also 2nd best in shots for and are best in the league for shot differential... So, maybe, just maybe it isn't only Rask, is it now?... Maybe it's just that the Bruins are playing better than most teams out there. Whaddayaknow...

1. Not backpedaling, trying to explain my position and understand where the other poster is coming from. It's called having a reasonable mature discussion. You should try it some time

2. Do you not think Rask is a major reason why the Bruins have are third in GA/g? Where did I say the Bruins were not playing well? The reason I asked the other poster what he was trying to say exactly is because simply posting the Bruins are 5th in shots against seemed to imply that their defense is is at least top 10 in the league which I don't think is true. I think the reason for thief shot differentials is a mix of their coaching/system, their defensesive forwards, their defense, and Rask. Obviously they are playing well, nobody is saying they are not FFS. However Rask having the 4th highest save % in the league right now at nearly 940% is a huge reason why their team GA/g is so high. How is saying this somehow insulting to you? Is the condescending tone really necessary?

For the record the OP was not made by a Blues fan as far as I can tell so no need to go on disparaging our entire fan base.

Another Shattenkirk thread going so well so far...

 

[Oberyn]

Just for crap and giggles, I looked at shooting percentages of the last few seasons of the leading top goal scorers in the league and they seem to be between 12% and 17%. So if Pastrnak has a 58.57 goals pace @ 20% shooting percentage, that translates to 35.14 goals @ 12% to 49.78 goals @ 17%. Not peanuts anyway. So when I said that I thought he would hit 35 goals, I think it was most appropriate. Actually on the bottom of the range.

The thing we are trying to clear was that Shattenkirk is not worth Pastrnak (cleared, thank God) and that Pastrnak, by any metrics, isn't just another remote hope as it seems to be the notion by many in this thread, thanks to his performance (hopefully this will be cleared soon too).

35 goals is a very plausible number for Pastrnak to hit this season and I wouldn't be surprised to see him hit it.

Nobody ever said Pastrnak was a "remote hope" in this thread. Saying his production is unsustainable isn't a shot at him, it's just being realistic. You're taking people's posts and twisting them into something they're not.

 

[wintersej]

Boston/STL threads were not this kind of crap show in the offseason or last season. I think it's best to move on as the OP is obviously not going to happen.

I'd love Shattenkirk, but I am just not sure how it works anymore. Carlo has really changed things in Boston. Now, again, I would love Shattenkirk... but enough to pay Kevan Miller or Adam McQuaid to sit on the bench? Enough to block the teams #1 pick last season from getting a roster spot? And give up an important piece or two?

 

[BruinLVGA]

1. Not backpedaling, trying to explain my position and understand where the other poster is coming from. It's called having a reasonable mature discussion. You should try it some time

2. Do you not think Rask is a major reason why the Bruins have are third in GA/g? Where did I say the Bruins were not playing well? The reason I asked the other poster what he was trying to say exactly is because simply posting the Bruins are 5th in shots against seemed to imply that their defense is is at least top 10 in the league which I don't think is true. I think the reason for thief shot differentials is a mix of their coaching/system, their defensesive forwards, their defense, and Rask. Obviously they are playing well, nobody is saying they are not FFS. However Rask having the 4th highest save % in the league right now at nearly 940% is a huge reason why their team GA/g is so high. How is saying this somehow insulting to you? Is the condescending tone really necessary?

For the record the OP was not made by a Blues fan as far as I can tell so no need to go on disparaging our entire fan base.

Another Shattenkirk thread going so well so far...

Insulting? Insulting is seeing an entire team, billed by many to be a guaranteed bottom dweller because "on paper names don't sound sexy enough", perform splendidly to be one of the best defensive team in the league and hear, yet AGAIN for the 4597244775 time, by fan number 345665491233 of XYZ team - YOU in this case - come and say/infer/imply: "That's only on Rask".
THAT is reducing a team playing very solid hockey to 1 individual. Stats don't point to that at all, so saying/inferring/implying that it is a one man show IS insulting.

Even when you say "their defense is at least top 10 in the league which I don't think is true", it sounds a little condescending.
How do you measure where a defense stands? By their PERFORMANCE. And, by any metrics, they have performed like a "top 10 defense". Actually more "top 5". A miracle? Divine intervention? Players performing like their lives depended on it? Who cares. But the FACT is that they're so far doing it. So credit is due where it's due. Instead you choose to ignore data/facts (heck, even the eye test. I don't think that there's one Bruins fan that could complain about the fervor with which the team plays this season) and just say "they're not a top 10 defense". A fan of a team with a 2.76 goals against per game, 69 goals given up (Bruins 2.19, 57) too.

Tell me, would you find all this a bit insulting and condescending, were you in my shoes?

 

[Majorityof1]

Your opinion was (not verbatim) "fans are always excited about their young players being elite, but they don't always become elite". A "the sky is blue, water is wet" type of thing: not exactly news. That's all.

I was and am talking about Pastrnak instead. If you watched 1/4 of his games this season, you should have pretty much a good idea of how he is playing. I see you are in Florida, did you watch him last night for example? What is your scouting report?
I hate to break it to you, but how he played last night is a reflection of how he has played on average this season and his numbers confirm it. He has been the Bruins best skater.
Now as I said, if he plays a full season, the likelihood of him putting up 35 goals and 60 points is extremely reasonable, IMO. The 58 goals 82 points PACE is not.

What is your opinion? What do you think Pastrnak will do? 50 games and 25 points, because the past two seasons it's what happened, so that's the sizeable enough sample? Do tell.

I did not watch the game. I am in Central Florida, that is Lightening country. Panthers are in Miami. But I am a Blues fan. I have the NHL package, so I get all the games. I have watched Boston a lot more than Florida or other teams because I like Backes and wanted to see how he does. My focus was on him, not scouting Pastrnak.

From what I have seen, Pastrnak is great. He is quick and elusive. Really good shot and good offensive instincts to be in the right place. He can create for himself, but I don't think he is elite at doing so in a crowd. I am not sure about his defensive game. Seems decent, but he seems sheltered (odd playing with Bergeron). Offensively, he does much better with open ice (PP/3v3). Bulking up, as you said, addressed this weakness in his game (although not completely). He was smallish and could get knocked off the puck. Much improved there, but I'd be concerned about stamina. It looks like he is carrying a good bit of weight for his frame. He is also getting more minutes than ever and has never played 80 games. If he can carry that weight effectively over the long haul, he has really high potential. I don't think he can this year, and he will fade down the stretch. I'd predict 30-30 (maybe a few more goals, few less assists) based off his fast start and quality linemates getting him assists down the stretch. That's an awesome season for a 20 year-old but not near the pace he is setting.

Anyway, pretty basic scouting report based on the small sample size. It'll be interesting to see how he does down the stretch. I wouldn't bet against him being an elite scorer. My only concern is if he can maintain his bulk and stamina. I'd love to have him on the Blues but don't see a trade that would be fair and agreeable to all.

 

[Montecristo]

Yeah, excepted I only ever thought that of Seguin and Pastrnak, no one else. I am a realist/pessimistic fella by nature.
I was worried that Pastrnak was too light and bumped off the puck or pushed over too easily. Fast forward to 2016/17: he now looks like the terminator - what did he eat in the off season, gunpowder and steel bars? - and besides his usual qualities (talent, speed, great shot, creativity, mobility, etc etc), he is now banging folks around and nearly impossible to remove from the puck.
And the results of that? He plays like a 15 year veteran, total confidence and swagger, every shift he is on the ice you know he is making things happen, he stepped into one of the best duo in the league and he managed to outshine them both. He is dominant. That is something that I never could say even of Seguin, including the season he led the Bruins in points.

I never said that he is a 58 goals scorer, you are lying. I said that's a 58 goals PACE. Many people are mathematically challenged and/or superficial and they might not understand the meaning of how impressive it is to pot 15 goals in 21 games. Putting it in a PACE context gives them a clearer idea. Grasped it now? Sydney Crosby is on pace for 70 goals. I don't think he is a 70 goals scorer either, if you were wondering.

I find it funny that you talk to me about watching games. How many Bruins games did you watch this year? What do you know about how GREAT Pastrnak is playing? I thought so.

By saying pastrnak is on a 58 goal pace the implication is that you think is value is that of a 58 goal scorer, whether you intended it or not. I'm on your side as a Bruins fan that pastrnak should not be traded for shattenkirk but it's not a laughable trade proposition. It's slanted towards St. Louis but its not laughable. I watch the Bruins a ton and the blues infrequently, and shattenkirk is a good dman. He would instantly become the Bruins most talented. I think realistically a much more balanced deal would be parayko for pastrnak, although I don't see either side willing to trade those pieces away. To be honest the shattenkirk to Boston trade idea should be dead. I assume they offered St. Louis #29 and spooner this offseason, were countered with pastrnak +1st, and the proposal died right there. St. Louis will likely just hold on to shattenkirk throughout the season and lose him for nothing, which is what playoff teams do with expiring contracts. They don't try to get value for them because they have cup aspirations, even if fans always have an eye on the future. Gms and coaches can't constantly be thinking about next year.

Pastrnaks age and early season success certainly look promising and definitely make him very valuable in a trade. But just because you don't want to see him traded and the Bruins likely won't trade him doesn't mean proposals on this board for him should be met with such hostility. The value is off shattenkirk for pastrnak, the counter is parayko for pastrnak which lines up value wise, both teams say no, and we move on.

 

[BruinLVGA]

I did not watch the game. I am in Central Florida, that is Lightening country. Panthers are in Miami. But I am a Blues fan. I have the NHL package, so I get all the games. I have watched Boston a lot more than Florida or other teams because I like Backes and wanted to see how he does. My focus was on him, not scouting Pastrnak.

From what I have seen, Pastrnak is great. He is quick and elusive. Really good shot and good offensive instincts to be in the right place. He can create for himself, but I don't think he is elite at doing so in a crowd. I am not sure about his defensive game. Seems decent, but he seems sheltered (odd playing with Bergeron). Offensively, he does much better with open ice (PP/3v3). Bulking up, as you said, addressed this weakness in his game (although not completely). He was smallish and could get knocked off the puck. Much improved there, but I'd be concerned about stamina. It looks like he is carrying a good bit of weight for his frame. He is also getting more minutes than ever and has never played 80 games. If he can carry that weight effectively over the long haul, he has really high potential. I don't think he can this year, and he will fade down the stretch. I'd predict 30-30 (maybe a few more goals, few less assists) based off his fast start and quality linemates getting him assists down the stretch. That's an awesome season for a 20 year-old but not near the pace he is setting.

Anyway, pretty basic scouting report based on the small sample size. It'll be interesting to see how he does down the stretch. I wouldn't bet against him being an elite scorer. My only concern is if he can maintain his bulk and stamina. I'd love to have him on the Blues.

Good report. The only parts that I don't agree with this re sheltering because with Bergeron you are pretty much guaranteed it can't be.
Then I am surprised about the stamina comment, because I think that Pastrnak, at 20 + with the help of the medical staff is probably on a pre established regimen that is targeted at avoiding such highs and lows + he has low mileage in this league. So I am rather optimistic about the stamina aspect.
But as I said, good report.

 

[Dbrownss]

By saying pastrnak is on a 58 goal pace the implication is that you think is value is that of a 58 goal scorer, whether you intended it or not. I'm on your side as a Bruins fan that pastrnak should not be traded for shattenkirk but it's not a laughable trade proposition. It's slanted towards St. Louis but its not laughable. I watch the Bruins a ton and the blues infrequently, and shattenkirk is a good dman. He would instantly become the Bruins most talented. I think realistically a much more balanced deal would be parayko for pastrnak, although I don't see either side willing to trade those pieces away. To be honest the shattenkirk to Boston trade idea should be dead. I assume they offered St. Louis #29 and spooner this offseason, were countered with pastrnak +1st, and the proposal died right there. St. Louis will likely just hold on to shattenkirk throughout the season and lose him for nothing, which is what playoff teams do with expiring contracts. They don't try to get value for them because they have cup aspirations, even if fans always have an eye on the future. Gms and coaches can't constantly be thinking about next year.

Pastrnaks age and early season success certainly look promising and definitely make him very valuable in a trade. But just because you don't want to see him traded and the Bruins likely won't trade him doesn't mean proposals on this board for him should be met with such hostility. The value is off shattenkirk for pastrnak, the counter is parayko for pastrnak which lines up value wise, both teams say no, and we move on.

There isn't a realistic package that gets #55.


I will also stress Shattenkirk doesn't get Pastrnark

 

[BruinLVGA]

By saying pastrnak is on a 58 goal pace the implication is that you think is value is that of a 58 goal scorer, whether you intended it or not. I'm on your side as a Bruins fan that pastrnak should not be traded for shattenkirk but it's not a laughable trade proposition. It's slanted towards St. Louis but its not laughable. I watch the Bruins a ton and the blues infrequently, and shattenkirk is a good dman. He would instantly become the Bruins most talented. I think realistically a much more balanced deal would be parayko for pastrnak, although I don't see either side willing to trade those pieces away. To be honest the shattenkirk to Boston trade idea should be dead. I assume they offered St. Louis #29 and spooner this offseason, were countered with pastrnak +1st, and the proposal died right there. St. Louis will likely just hold on to shattenkirk throughout the season and lose him for nothing, which is what playoff teams do with expiring contracts. They don't try to get value for them because they have cup aspirations, even if fans always have an eye on the future. Gms and coaches can't constantly be thinking about next year.

Pastrnaks age and early season success certainly look promising and definitely make him very valuable in a trade. But just because you don't want to see him traded and the Bruins likely won't trade him doesn't mean proposals on this board for him should be met with such hostility. The value is off shattenkirk for pastrnak, the counter is parayko for pastrnak which lines up value wise, both teams say no, and we move on.

Negative. Pastrnak value as a 58 goals scorer would be the day he scores 58 goals in a season, if it ever happens.

You know, I think that parting with Pastrnak would be a mistake of biblical proportions. It would be Seguin 2.0. I think that what we have in the pipeline on D looks very promising. I don't think we have anything as high profile as him on forwards.

 

[Montecristo]

There isn't a realistic package that gets #55.


I will also stress Shattenkirk doesn't get Pastrnark

And Bruins fan say there isn't a realistic deal that gets #88. So we are on the same page here

 

[StLHokie]

Because it isn't my job to point out Shattenkirk's pace. And in any case a 58 goals pace is a tad more significant than a 60 points pace for a defenseman, because a significant number of D get close to or (or surpass) 60 points. 58 goals would be a top 2-3 goals in the past 15 seasons.

In the last 6 seasons, only 6 defenseman have hit the 60 point mark. Half of those players also have a Norris. The other 3 are Letang, Burns, and Josi.

That's actually scored points, not stats based on an assumed (but very unlikely) pace. But keep trying to trash Shattenkirk....

 

[kdog82]

!!!! I feel dumb.

Cut and pasted this from a conversation at another site weeks ago. Didn't notice. My bad.

Pastrnak just turned 20 years of age. Are you watching what he is doing to the league? Everybody want to talk about Laine, Matthews, Marner and other young guns (and rightfully so) but Pastrnak is right up there.

That being said, he's not going anywhere especially for a soon to be UFA

 

[burstnbloom]

That's not even advanced stats, that's basic shooting percentages that are not sustainable. I love Pastrnak, he's your version of Fabbri. IMO, he will end up being a consistent 30+ goal scorer. He'll probably get there this season, but if you think a 20+% shooting% is sustainable, then you haven't been paying enough attention to the numbers.

This is true, but some context is necessary. His career shooting percentage is 14.7, so if you normalize for that, his expected goals so far is 10.5 goals. If you normalize that to 82 games, his expected goals would be 41 Goals. So while your point stands up and is well taken, his performance is still elite when you normalize for expected outcomes.

 

[bleedblue1223]

This is true, but some context is necessary. His career shooting percentage is 14.7, so if you normalize for that, his expected goals so far is 10.5 goals. If you normalize that to 82 games, his expected goals would be 41 Goals. So while your point stands up and is well taken, his performance is still elite when you normalize for expected outcomes.

No doubt, and that's why he won't be traded, and a much better argument for why he won't be traded.

 

[Number1RedWingsFan52]

His cap hit drops to 4 million FYI.

Wrong salary drops to $4 million, The cap hit always stays the same.

 

[bleedblue1223]

Wrong salary drops to $4 million, The cap hit always stays the same.

Salary becomes cap hit at age 40.