Proposal: Stl/nyr

[StevenDean]

If a deal was available involving Shattenkirk and McDonagh. I'd be fine with Shattenkirk+(+) for just McDonagh

Shattenkirk has more value than McDonagh so without other pieces you likely won't be able to get the deal to work.

 

[bleedblue1223]

Shattenkirk has more value than McDonagh so without other pieces you likely won't be able to get the deal to work.

No he doesn't.

 

[Dbrownss]

Shattenkirk has more value than McDonagh so without other pieces you likely won't be able to get the deal to work.

Maybe if he had 5yrs on his deal but in no realm does he hold more value right now. It honestly makes zero sense to trade McDonagh. I only mention him because he wasn't listed as an untouchable by the GM last month

 

[FlipFlopPavelski]

McDonoguh and Nash I'd say to acquire those two elite players. Add in a pick or prospect and it's a deal

 

[StevenDean]

Maybe if he had 5yrs on his deal but in no realm does he hold more value right now. It honestly makes zero sense to trade McDonagh. I only mention him because he wasn't listed as an untouchable by the GM last month

Shattenkirk is a better hockey player, is right handed which is more valuable, and is the same age. The only downside is the one year left on his contract vs the three years McDonagh has. St. Louis will not take a weaker player in a straight up trade for Shattenkirk before the season even starts. Maybe in January you can get more but for now Shattenkirk is worth more. Period.

 

[bfaust30]

Stl-Nyr

Shattenkirk- Nash @6 + Adam Huska good goalie prospect

 

[bleedblue1223]

Don't want Nash and don't need goalie prospects.

Also don't need another Blues/Rangers thread when there are already a few open.

 

[bleedblue1223]

Shattenkirk is a better hockey player, is right handed which is more valuable, and is the same age. The only downside is the one year left on his contract vs the three years McDonagh has. St. Louis will not take a weaker player in a straight up trade for Shattenkirk before the season even starts. Maybe in January you can get more but for now Shattenkirk is worth more. Period.

I take McD over Shattenkirk.

 

[bernmeister]

I don't really think the Rangers should trade for Shattenkirk. If he gets to free agency, then pursue him, but if I was in charge of them, I'd take the risk and see if another team trades and signs him. If that happens, oh well, but for what the trade would cost the Rangers, it really wouldn't be worth it. The Rangers won't get him for Nash and if they keep trading youth and/or 1sts/2nds, then they are not going to have a successful "next core".

Agreed, and that's why currency offered was Stepan and Zuc, not Kreider/Miller, etc

It continues to appear that if players offered are not going to be insulting, my suggestion of something around
just Nash - 2 years, and if he is subpar, Rangers add
for
just Shattenkirk, expiring rental, if he does not extend AND/or we have to protect in expansion draft (I think can be avoided if Shatty just waits as UFA), then Blues add

 

[bleedblue1223]

Agreed, and that's why currency offered was Stepan and Zuc, not Kreider/Miller, etc

It continues to appear that if players offered are not going to be insulting, my suggestion of something around
just Nash - 2 years, and if he is subpar, Rangers add
for
just Shattenkirk, expiring rental, if he does not extend AND/or we have to protect in expansion draft (I think can be avoided if Shatty just waits as UFA), then Blues add

Nash simply doesn't fit. The most realistic deal from our standpoint is a deal with Shatty and Stepan.

For Nash to even work a little bit, you'd have to take Lehtera. Nash's cap hit does not work this season and the season after, we have Steen, Berglund, and Parayko as big players to sign.

 

[Dbrownss]

Shattenkirk is a better hockey player, is right handed which is more valuable, and is the same age. The only downside is the one year left on his contract vs the three years McDonagh has. St. Louis will not take a weaker player in a straight up trade for Shattenkirk before the season even starts. Maybe in January you can get more but for now Shattenkirk is worth more. Period.

Shattenkirk is not better then McDonagh. He offers more offense but that's it.

 

[bluetuned]

Shattenkirk is not better then McDonagh. He offers more offense but that's it.

Yup. McDonagh > Shattenkirk. A top pairing of McDonagh and Petro would be ridiculous. Sigh.

 

[bernmeister]

Nash simply doesn't fit. The most realistic deal from our standpoint is a deal with Shatty and Stepan.

For Nash to even work a little bit, you'd have to take Lehtera. Nash's cap hit does not work this season and the season after, we have Steen, Berglund, and Parayko as big players to sign.

Thank you for the cordial and informative exchange.
feel free to suggest your final for Shatty - Stepan.

As for Nash, when I get a chance to look at what top offer is vs. what is involved in taking on Lehtera, I'll get back to you, though at this point my expectation is if we don't have a good enough return on Nash, we keep him, get his #s up, revisit it at the trade deadline.

 

[bleedblue1223]

Thank you for the cordial and informative exchange.
feel free to suggest your final for Shatty - Stepan.

As for Nash, when I get a chance to look at what top offer is vs. what is involved in taking on Lehtera, I'll get back to you, though at this point my expectation is if we don't have a good enough return on Nash, we keep him, get his #s up, revisit it at the trade deadline.

I'd say, Shattenkirk immediately extended would be equal to Stepan. If he isn't extended, then conditional picks.

Holding onto Nash and seeing if he bounces back would be best for you guys. Either his value soars or tanks, and that's a risk that if I was the GM, I'd take. If it tanks, so be it.

 

[bernmeister]

I'd say, Shattenkirk immediately extended would be equal to Stepan. If he isn't extended, then conditional picks.

Holding onto Nash and seeing if he bounces back would be best for you guys. Either his value soars or tanks, and that's a risk that if I was the GM, I'd take. If it tanks, so be it.

Agreed, assuming a higher bid does not present itself for either side, which is less likely assuming as we must Shattenkirk remains a rental.

edit add:
the key to this deal for NY is while we see some ballpark balance of Stepan $ for Shatty long term wash, we need to get over on the expansion draft.

If we acquire KS and we can rely that immediately after the season he is UFA and we can trust him to just wait until the day after expansion then we punch his ticket, no prob, we are all good.

However, if there is some fine print restriction we are not aware of, then we want to take our chances and wait and see if he will read between the lines and do that anyway end of next year.

Is there any special condition on a club who has previously had the player turning UFA vis-a-vis the expansion draft? Can they wait until after the draft, assuming the player is willing, and THEN extend him?

thanks to anyone who can clarify that.

Please suggest the conditional picks/details and I will respond later.

 

[Vincenzo Arelliti]

I like the idea of a Shattenkirk-McDonagh swap. While I'd love to get Stepan, getting McDonagh would solidify our defense for the forseeable future.

McDonagh Pietrangelo
Bouwmeester Parayko
Gunnarsson Edmundson/Schmaltz

Edmundson can be full-time left-side after we dump Bouwmeester in the expansion draft, and that's not even counting any of our high-level d-prospects.

 

[RangerGuru]

I like the idea of a Shattenkirk-McDonagh swap. While I'd love to get Stepan, getting McDonagh would solidify our defense for the forseeable future.

McDonagh Pietrangelo
Bouwmeester Parayko
Gunnarsson Edmundson/Schmaltz

Edmundson can be full-time left-side after we dump Bouwmeester in the expansion draft, and that's not even counting any of our high-level d-prospects.

I'm sure you would

McDonagh would not be available, and especially not for a 1 year rental of a lesser defenseman. Yes we need RHD but dealing the one rock solid D we have for one is not the smart move

 

[QJL]

I put McDonagh and Shattenkirk at about equal, and probably put Shatty ahead of McDonagh because of handedness and offensive production. I also rank Schwartz higher than Stepan due to age, offensive production, and a tie at defense.

McDonagh+Stepan+

for

Shattenkirk and Schwartz

Even then, I don't think the Blues do this, as we now have too many centers and dmen (however, they are much better and deeper) and not enough offense (wingers/OFDs).

Blues need left D and centers. They do this trade without the +. Rangers don't. Stepan > Schwartz and McDonagh > Shattenkirk

 

[Davimir Tarablad]

Stepan > Schwartz

Nope

 

[Mac n Gs]

Can we focus on a trade for Scmaltz instead?

 

[bluetuned]

Blues need left D and centers. They do this trade without the +. Rangers don't. Stepan > Schwartz and McDonagh > Shattenkirk

Stepan is a decent 1st / good 2nd line center signed for 5 more years at 6.5M. Schwartz is a good 1st line winger signed for 5 more years at 5.35M. He's also 2 years younger. They're both solid two-way players.

The value of a center is higher than the value of a winger, but I'd say that's largely negated by Schwartz's age, higher offensive upside, and his cheaper contract.

McDonagh is better than Shattenkirk though, no arguments there.

 

[bleedblue1223]

Can we focus on a trade for Scmaltz instead?

Buchnevich.