HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > Trade Rumors and Free Agent Talk
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Trade Rumors and Free Agent Talk Trade rumors, transactions, and free agent talk. Rumors must contain the word RUMOR in post title. Proposals must contain the word PROPOSAL in post title.

VAN - STL: Shattenkirk for sale?

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
11-26-2012, 05:42 PM
  #1
Bo Hunter
Registered Schmoozer
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 650
vCash: 50
VAN - STL: Shattenkirk for sale?

Hey Blues fans, would Shattenkirk be available for an upgrade on LD? I've seen Blues fans looking for a partner for Pietrangelo from time to time.

As the basis for a deal would Edler (VAN) for Shattenkirk be a good starting point? Add pieces on either side as need be. This is not EXACTLY how I would see a deal working out. I do believe Edler is the more valuable player, but I am very aware that his contract is expiring.

The Canucks could use a RD - they could move Garrison into the top 4 on the left side where he belongs, and an Edler - Pietrangelo pairing looks real nice to me.

Let me know what you think! And again, ADD PIECES AS NECESSARY.

Bo Hunter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-26-2012, 05:45 PM
  #2
Vankiller Whale
Bow down
 
Vankiller Whale's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 26,131
vCash: 1675
Depends on the piece coming with him for me to say yes from a Vancouver standpoint. I don't know that STL would be comfortable in adding unless they were positive they could re-sign him though.

Vankiller Whale is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-26-2012, 05:52 PM
  #3
SirPaste
Use The Schwartz!
 
SirPaste's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: STL
Posts: 8,895
vCash: 50
I dont think Shattnekirk is for sale per say but if the price was right he could be moved. Im a huge Edler fan and would love to get him on the Blues but I dont think I would give up Shattenkirk for him with his contract set to expire.

SirPaste is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
11-26-2012, 05:52 PM
  #4
rumrokh
Jake the Snake Man
 
rumrokh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 6,350
vCash: 500
Short answer: No.

Long answer, you've provided yourself: Edler's contract is expiring. If the trade somehow included a contract for Edler at a price the Blues can handle, then the discussion begins. But at that point, wouldn't Vancouver just keep him? This only gets started in some extreme fantasy land in which Edler wants out of Vancouver and they orchestrate a sign-and-trade.

If there is no new contract for Edler, something around Edler and Kesler for Shattenkirk and Berglund, perhaps, but we're way in fantasy land at this point. Both teams would probably balk at that.

rumrokh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-26-2012, 05:55 PM
  #5
Vankiller Whale
Bow down
 
Vankiller Whale's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 26,131
vCash: 1675
Quote:
Originally Posted by rumrokh View Post
Short answer: No.

Long answer, you've provided yourself: Edler's contract is expiring. If the trade somehow included a contract for Edler at a price the Blues can handle, then the discussion begins. But at that point, wouldn't Vancouver just keep him? This only gets started in some extreme fantasy land in which Edler wants out of Vancouver and they orchestrate a sign-and-trade.

If we pretend there is no new contract for Edler, something around Edler and Kesler for Shattenkirk and Berglund, perhaps, but we're way in fantasy land at this point. Both teams would probably balk at that.
The Blues would take that and run really, really fast. There's no way we give up the two best players in a trade like that, regardless of contract status.

I don't see Edler moving unless a team is willing to value him as if he would re-sign with them.

Vankiller Whale is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-26-2012, 05:56 PM
  #6
Vladys Gumption
Moderator
Trap City
 
Vladys Gumption's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: St. Louis, MO
Country: United States
Posts: 10,925
vCash: 500
I'm going to have to politely say thanks but no thanks. Trading Shattenkirk for Edler fills one hole and opens up another. I'm of the opinion that Roman Polak is more than capable of being a solid second pairing option, but breaking up the Russell-Polak pairing is not a good idea. Long story short, without an extension in place there's no chance the Blues give up any major pieces for Edler. If he is signed, I don't see Vancouver trading him, and the price would be too high anyway.

Vladys Gumption is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
11-26-2012, 05:57 PM
  #7
NYVanfan
Registered User
 
NYVanfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 6,184
vCash: 50
so,
extended Edler>Shattenkirk, but
UFA to be Edler<Shattenkirk
is that the concensus?

i admittedly dont know that much about Shattenkirk, but he looks pretty good w back to back 40-pt seasons at only 23 YO..

I'd love to get the whole Avs pkg, and find a way to get Stewart too...

maybe Edler w extension plus Raymond for Shatt / Stewart?

NYVanfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-26-2012, 05:57 PM
  #8
rumrokh
Jake the Snake Man
 
rumrokh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 6,350
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vankiller Whale View Post
The Blues would take that and run really, really fast. There's no way we give up the two best players in a trade like that, regardless of contract status.
I disagree. Contract status is crucial, especially for a team like the Blues, who cannot spend like Vancouver can. Edler would leave and they'd be left with Kesler for Shatty and Berglund. The Blues' defense takes a huge blow for a moderate center upgrade. Value in exchange for a giant risk. Vancouver gets a lot back for an exiting Edler. Otherwise, you'd have to fill the trade with weird conditional picks which are not going to motivate either side, both of whom will insist on currently valuable players. At that point, Vancouver is just going to unload Edler for picks and/or prospects to the east.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vankiller Whale View Post
I don't see Edler moving unless a team is willing to value him as if he would re-sign with them.
And that's never going to happen. Which is fine, and a great reason why this trade is really bizarre.

rumrokh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-26-2012, 06:01 PM
  #9
Virtanev
★★★
 
Virtanev's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Country: Canada
Posts: 40,199
vCash: 50
Sorry but no. Shattenkrik doesn't have the physical nor defensive tools that Edler posses. Yes I understand Edler is a UFA to be, but he's simply the better player at this point plain and simply. Only way we trade Edler to the Blues is if both Shattenkrik and Oshie are coming are way, and that's never happening.

Virtanev is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
11-26-2012, 06:01 PM
  #10
Bo Hunter
Registered Schmoozer
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 650
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by rumrokh View Post
I disagree. Contract status is crucial, especially for a team like the Blues, who cannot spend like Vancouver can. Edler would leave and they'd be left with Kesler for Shatty and Berglund. The Blues' defense takes a huge blow for a moderate center upgrade.
To be fair, as of now, Kesler is a massive upgrade on Berglund. Perhaps Berglund progresses and Kesler regresses, but there's no way you can say that right now, Berglund is almost as good as Kesler. That's where you would put Backes - almost as good as Kesler. As of RIGHT NOW, Berglund is a significant step back from both of them.

Bo Hunter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-26-2012, 06:07 PM
  #11
rumrokh
Jake the Snake Man
 
rumrokh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 6,350
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Deirmoc View Post
To be fair, as of now, Kesler is a massive upgrade on Berglund. Perhaps Berglund progresses and Kesler regresses, but there's no way you can say that right now, Berglund is almost as good as Kesler. That's where you would put Backes - almost as good as Kesler. As of RIGHT NOW, Berglund is a significant step back from both of them.
I wouldn't say MASSIVE, but otherwise, I agree. I didn't even come close to saying Berglund was almost as good. I don't think we need to get into a semantic debate, just be aware that "moderate" is between "small" and "massive."

I'd honestly rather have Backes than Kesler - I think if you swap teams, Backes outscores Kesler. Plus, he's the Blues' captain. Anyway, I think Shatty and Berglund as a package have more value than Kesler does. If you want Shattenkirk for an unsigned Edler, you need to improve the Blues and not just for a fraction of one year. Add more from either side to even it out, I'm not saying that value is unimpeachably equal or anything like that, but who is Vancouver going to give up in a deal based around Shatty and unsigned Edler that improves the Blues?


Last edited by rumrokh: 11-26-2012 at 06:13 PM. Reason: clarity
rumrokh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-26-2012, 06:24 PM
  #12
NYVanfan
Registered User
 
NYVanfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 6,184
vCash: 50
i love how this thread is full of
"the only way is if ...... and that's never happening"

from St Loo's perspective I gues the Q is how big a need is that partner for Pietro, or can you afford to go with what you have and let the others develop?

from Van's perspective, it's only feasible if we feel Edler's likely to leave as UFA, as extended Edler = 'massive overpayment' ....and if he's walking the value is a fraction ...

I hope when and if they get this damn lockout done that Gillis makes extending Alex as high a priority as dealing with his keeper situation

I still think Ballard could be a useful left side dman for the Blues, but dont think the return is big enough ...

maybe Ballard & 2nd for Stewart? (i know, ive poked around that idea already ...)

NYVanfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-26-2012, 06:40 PM
  #13
SirPaste
Use The Schwartz!
 
SirPaste's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: STL
Posts: 8,895
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYVanfan View Post
i love how this thread is full of
"the only way is if ...... and that's never happening"

from St Loo's perspective I gues the Q is how big a need is that partner for Pietro, or can you afford to go with what you have and let the others develop?

from Van's perspective, it's only feasible if we feel Edler's likely to leave as UFA, as extended Edler = 'massive overpayment' ....and if he's walking the value is a fraction ...

I hope when and if they get this damn lockout done that Gillis makes extending Alex as high a priority as dealing with his keeper situation

I still think Ballard could be a useful left side dman for the Blues, but dont think the return is big enough ...

maybe Ballard & 2nd for Stewart? (i know, ive poked around that idea already ...)

As stated in numerous threads we have no interest in Ballard.

SirPaste is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
11-26-2012, 06:42 PM
  #14
bleedblue1223
OMAHA!!!
 
bleedblue1223's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 23,736
vCash: 130
Trading Shattenkirk for Edler would create a bigger hole on the right side than we currently have on the left. We at least have a couple NHL capable left-handed defenders in Cole and Fairchild to go along with Jackman and Russell, we only have 3 NHL capable right-handed defenders; Pietrangelo, Shattenkirk, and Polak.

None of those 3 will be moved.

bleedblue1223 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-26-2012, 06:55 PM
  #15
eklunds source
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Ed Snider's basement
Posts: 8,269
vCash: 500
Trading Edler for Shattenkirk? The Canucks are trying to compete now, not in 3-5 years.

eklunds source is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-26-2012, 07:31 PM
  #16
NYVanfan
Registered User
 
NYVanfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 6,184
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by eklunds source View Post
Trading Edler for Shattenkirk? The Canucks are trying to compete now, not in 3-5 years.
except that shatt's had two 40 pt seasons already ... hardly 3-5 years away

NYVanfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-26-2012, 07:50 PM
  #17
Vladys Gumption
Moderator
Trap City
 
Vladys Gumption's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: St. Louis, MO
Country: United States
Posts: 10,925
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYVanfan View Post
i love how this thread is full of
"the only way is if ...... and that's never happening"

from St Loo's perspective I gues the Q is how big a need is that partner for Pietro, or can you afford to go with what you have and let the others develop?

from Van's perspective, it's only feasible if we feel Edler's likely to leave as UFA, as extended Edler = 'massive overpayment' ....and if he's walking the value is a fraction ...

I hope when and if they get this damn lockout done that Gillis makes extending Alex as high a priority as dealing with his keeper situation

I still think Ballard could be a useful left side dman for the Blues, but dont think the return is big enough ...

maybe Ballard & 2nd for Stewart? (i know, ive poked around that idea already ...)
Yea...Ballard for Stewart isn't happening. Ballard makes too much money for what he currently is, and the Blues are a budget team. If, and that's a huge if, the season starts, I'd bet my bottom dollar you'll see Ian Cole lining up with Petro. He can't possibly be any worse than Colaiacovo, and management is going to want to give him a chance to prove himself over a full season.

Vladys Gumption is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
11-26-2012, 07:50 PM
  #18
The Note
Unable To Even
 
The Note's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: STL
Country: United States
Posts: 3,051
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by eklunds source View Post
Trading Edler for Shattenkirk? The Canucks are trying to compete now, not in 3-5 years.
Shattenkirk could step in and immediately help. He has two back to back 43 pt. seasons, it's not like he's some unproven prospect

The Note is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
11-26-2012, 07:50 PM
  #19
Vladys Gumption
Moderator
Trap City
 
Vladys Gumption's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: St. Louis, MO
Country: United States
Posts: 10,925
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by bleedblue1223 View Post
Trading Shattenkirk for Edler would create a bigger hole on the right side than we currently have on the left. We at least have a couple NHL capable left-handed defenders in Cole and Fairchild to go along with Jackman and Russell, we only have 3 NHL capable right-handed defenders; Pietrangelo, Shattenkirk, and Polak.

None of those 3 will be moved.
Couldn't agree more. We've got quality defenseman, but after the starting six almost zero depth.

Vladys Gumption is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
11-26-2012, 07:53 PM
  #20
StringerBell
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 10,000
vCash: 500
I know Cole's a lefty, but I vaguely recall reading he's proficient on both sides. Is that right or am I confusing him with someone else?

StringerBell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-26-2012, 07:57 PM
  #21
bleedblue1223
OMAHA!!!
 
bleedblue1223's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 23,736
vCash: 130
Quote:
Originally Posted by StringerBell View Post
I know Cole's a lefty, but I vaguely recall reading he's proficient on both sides. Is that right or am I confusing him with someone else?
He can get get by on the right, but it would throw all of our pairings off. Jackman needs a PMD to be successful, which is why he is so successful with Shattenkirk. Russell and Polak played extremely well together, but when Jackman and Polak are together, it's a disaster. I don't think Jackman and Cole would work out either.

bleedblue1223 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-26-2012, 08:01 PM
  #22
bleedblue1223
OMAHA!!!
 
bleedblue1223's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 23,736
vCash: 130
The need for Pietrangelo's partner has been blown way out of proportion. He performed, and the team performed great with Colaiacovo and Huskins as his partner. The trouble against the Kings was because Pietrangelo was playing with a sprained MCL. Even if we get Edler and Pietrangelo went down to an injury, we would still would have been screwed in that series. Pietrangelo's pairing will always be great no matter who he is with as long as he is healthy.

bleedblue1223 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-26-2012, 08:01 PM
  #23
Crumblin Erb Brooks
Registered User
 
Crumblin Erb Brooks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Grenyarnia
Country: United States
Posts: 3,385
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by eklunds source View Post
Trading Edler for Shattenkirk? The Canucks are trying to compete now, not in 3-5 years.
I do love what Edler brings, but Shatty isnt that far behind him overall. He put up 43 points on a Hitchcock coached team, his transition game is really good and is a very good power play defenseman. His puck control is also impressive, he really plays to the saying that the best defense is a good offense.

Crumblin Erb Brooks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-26-2012, 08:07 PM
  #24
ginner classic
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Kitsilano
Posts: 7,025
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by bleedblue1223 View Post
The need for Pietrangelo's partner has been blown way out of proportion. He performed, and the team performed great with Colaiacovo and Huskins as his partner. The trouble against the Kings was because Pietrangelo was playing with a sprained MCL. Even if we get Edler and Pietrangelo went down to an injury, we would still would have been screwed in that series. Pietrangelo's pairing will always be great no matter who he is with as long as he is healthy.
Not a dire need, but hey if you can grab a first paring D-man, maybe in UFA, you do it. The big hole is a first line center. Tons of assets on the wings. Lots of youth. Just need to parlay some of those assets into Getzlaf (or similar) and maybe upgrade that #1LD spot, and good for a cup.

ginner classic is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
11-26-2012, 10:11 PM
  #25
Oshie97
Registered User
 
Oshie97's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 2,480
vCash: 500
Sorry the risk of Edler walking is greater than the difference between the two. I'm more than content on keeping Petro and Shatty on the right then moving on to get a top pairing left d. I think we just keep what we have and give Cole a shot, playing with Petro might be exactly what he needs to develop. It worked with Pronger and MacInnis.

Oshie97 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:17 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2015 All Rights Reserved.