Value of: (Stl-TB) Shattenkirk

[abel17]

Shatty+++
for
TJ+ sounds like a great deal

 

[tjs*]

From one side of your mouth your are talking about keeping TJ in case Stamkos goes down, on the other side of your mouth you are advocating trading Bishop.

Tonights game should be an indication of how impossible it is to account for injuries.

If you can't tell the difference between long term and the span of a few months then I can't help you.

I'll add that all these snide comments about imaginary "fallacies" or that I'm somehow talking out of both sides of my mouth are NOT a valid substitute for an intelligent response to the points I've made. You aren't fooling anybody.

Finally, though I suspect you'll still continue to ignore my points and make snide comments while contributing no original thought of your own, there's an enormous difference between the two scenarios you mentioned. Bishop is gone at the end of the season anyway, so trading him for another rental like Shattenkirk has zero ramifications beyond this season and can therefore be considered as an attempt to jump start what frankly looks like a failure of a season without impacting our future. What you propose, on the other hand, would create a massive longterm hole in exchange for exactly zero benefit beyond the next few months; again if you can't see the difference between the two or want to call my pointing that out "talking out of the other side of my mouth" then I see that further debate with you would just be a waste of my time.

 

[byrath]

As a Blues fan, part of me wonders what's going on here...does Tyler Johnson suck now, or what am I missing?

The other part knows that I've gotten used to lowball offers from fans not understanding that a deal would be based on Shatty agreeing to an extension 'in principle'. This seems fair to me given that TJ hasn't been as productive the past year and a half. Nagging injury could have been a factor there. Certainly 10x better than letting Shatty walk.

edit: Shatty for Bishop could interest me if we really can't make a decent trade for a Center ... and if we have a way to get rid of Allen.

 

[Rschmitz]

If you can't tell the difference between long term and the span of a few months then I can't help you.

I'll add that all these snide comments about imaginary "fallacies" or that I'm somehow talking out of both sides of my mouth are NOT a valid substitute for an intelligent response to the points I've made. You aren't fooling anybody.

Finally, though I suspect you'll still continue to ignore my points and make snide comments while contributing no original thought of your own, there's an enormous difference between the two scenarios you mentioned. Bishop is gone at the end of the season anyway, so trading him for another rental like Shattenkirk has zero ramifications beyond this season and can therefore be considered as an attempt to jump start what frankly looks like a failure of a season without impacting our future. What you propose, on the other hand, would create a massive longterm hole in exchange for exactly zero benefit beyond the next few months; again if you can't see the difference between the two or want to call my pointing that out "talking out of the other side of my mouth" then I see that further debate with you would just be a waste of my time.

Calling some of your arguments logical fallacies isn't an attempt to be snide, it's a fact that there are holes in your argument but it isn't a personal shot at you. Also, telling you this not to be snide, but for your benefit....you've built up quite a reputation for unbalanced arguments my friend.

I haven't ignored your points, in fact I agree with most of what you have said. You seem intelligent, you shouldn't need to get defensive. I've only replied to what I disagree with because that is where the actual discussion is. For instance, I agree with you that trading Bishop would be better than dealing TJ, but the injury reasoning I do not agree with. I guess it is natural to get defensive, perhaps I should do a better job of saying when I do agree.

You're your own man, I'm not going to try to convince you to "waste your time", just don't want you to get the wrong idea before you choose the path of self exile.

Getting back to actual hockey discussion. Trading TJ for three months of Shattenkirk isn't a net loss, because if Shattenkirk isn't retained we still have the extra cap space to retain some of the guys we would otherwise be losing. Not ideal, but something I would be ok with. It seems we both agree that trading Bishop for Shattenkirk would be better however.

 

[Bjornar Moxnes]

What about Johnson for Sam Bennett, or Backlund ++? Johnson is a RHS that we need, and he's from Spokane which I believe is closest to Calgary out of all NHL cities (Maybe closer to Vancouver? IDK), but I know culturally it's closest to Calgary.

Gaudreau-Johnson-Chiasson/Oshie (Please dear force, let LV take Brouwer, and we sign Oshie) (LOL if we can somehow get Atkinson, we have the smallest top line in the league).
Versteeg-Monahan-Brouwer/Chiasson
Tkachuk-Backlund-Frolik
Ferland-Stajan-Hathaway

Giordano-Hamilton
Kulak-Brodie
Jokipakka-Andersson

Johnson
Gillies/Forsberg/Rinne (If Nasvhille decides to buy him out, I'd like to see the Flames signing him as a backup).

 

[bluemandan]

Honestly, I'm a bit hesitant on TyJo for Shattenkirk.

Although, in all fairness, Shattenkirk isn't signed for next season. If TyJo is the best center we can get, I can get on board.

I just think Shattenkirk is a much more established player, and you know what you are getting with him. TyJo has one great season, and a couple of seaons that aren't that much different from what the Blues have had with Backes and Stastny (playing styles aside).

Can a Lightning fan explain why he hit 70 points a few seasons back, but not really close since? Did he play a lot of first line minutes that season? Was that the year of the "triplets" line?

Speed and defensive abilities seem great. Size and points are a bit worrisome. I mean, Shattenkirk is currently outscoring TyJo....

 

[DFC]

Honestly, I'm a bit hesitant on TyJo for Shattenkirk.

Although, in all fairness, Shattenkirk isn't signed for next season. If TyJo is the best center we can get, I can get on board.

I just think Shattenkirk is a much more established player, and you know what you are getting with him. TyJo has one great season, and a couple of seaons that aren't that much different from what the Blues have had with Backes and Stastny (playing styles aside).

Can a Lightning fan explain why he hit 70 points a few seasons back, but not really close since? Did he play a lot of first line minutes that season? Was that the year of the "triplets" line?

Speed and defensive abilities seem great. Size and points are a bit worrisome. I mean, Shattenkirk is currently outscoring TyJo....

Honestly, he was just insanely good that year. Easily our best forward, wire to wire. He's shown flashes of that since, particularly in the playoffs, but he's yet to find the level of consistency he had that year. And injuries, with TJ, are always an issue. Even in that 70 point year, he likely would have cracked 80 had he not been injured around the all-star break, and played through it (he's not nearly the same player when you take his speed away). All that said, his wingers didn't exactly hurt. But part of the crazy chemistry they had was about Johnson's improved play.

This year I think it's a combination of inconsistency and linemates. He's good for 25 goals on his own, but he needs players around him who can finish in order to really start putting up points. He started the year looking lost, started to produce a little bit before the injury wave hit us, and now he's playing with two minor leaguers on his wing.

 

[MissouriMook]

What about Shattenkirk, Allen and Jaskin for TJ and Bishop ($950k retained)? Allen could benefit from a change of scenery and coaching, and the Bolts will eventually need to acquire a goalie with NHL experience under contract or control to expose in the expansion draft so they don't have to expose Vasi. If Vegas doesn't take him, he will be back in a 1B situation where he thrived in prior seasons. I'm sure Bishop would have no problem returning to his home town team. Blues probably need to add a pick or prospect.

 

[sfvega]

What about Shattenkirk, Allen and Jaskin for TJ and Bishop ($950k retained)? Allen could benefit from a change of scenery and coaching, and the Bolts will eventually need to acquire a goalie with NHL experience under contract or control to expose in the expansion draft so they don't have to expose Vasi. If Vegas doesn't take him, he will be back in a 1B situation where he thrived in prior seasons. I'm sure Bishop would have no problem returning to his home town team. Blues probably need to add a pick or prospect.

They could do so much better than that for giving up Bishop and TJ. I'm a Blues fan, and if we traded Jaskin, it would really make no difference. His value isn't really much in trade or on/off the team.

 

[Rschmitz]

What about Shattenkirk, Allen and Jaskin for TJ and Bishop ($950k retained)? Allen could benefit from a change of scenery and coaching, and the Bolts will eventually need to acquire a goalie with NHL experience under contract or control to expose in the expansion draft so they don't have to expose Vasi. If Vegas doesn't take him, he will be back in a 1B situation where he thrived in prior seasons. I'm sure Bishop would have no problem returning to his home town team. Blues probably need to add a pick or prospect.

Allen's contract simply makes him dead weight for us considering Vasi should be starting 60ish games next season. You'll have to do a lot better than this to get both TJ and Bishop.

 

[bleedblue1223]

Would Tampa rather do a Shattenkirk for Johnson trade or a Shattenkirk for Filppula trade with significant incentive to St. Louis to take Filppula?

 

[Rschmitz]

Would Tampa rather do a Shattenkirk for Johnson trade or a Shattenkirk for Filppula trade with significant incentive to St. Louis to take Filppula?

How much incentive? Filppula is having a great season

 

[LTIR Trickery]

Would Tampa rather do a Shattenkirk for Johnson trade or a Shattenkirk for Filppula trade with significant incentive to St. Louis to take Filppula?

Either one, but I don't know about significant incentive. He'd be second in scoring on your team, is generally productive anywhere you put him (leave him with a shooter), and his money isn't that bad comparatively if he can get back to about 50 points. I'd consider a reasonable addition.

 

[bleedblue1223]

What players would you have to leave exposed if Filppula doesn't have his NMC to be exposed in the draft?

 

[Spektre]

Callahan, Stamkos, Filppula, & Hedman have to be protected. The rest is up to TB.

 

[tjs*]

What players would you have to leave exposed if Filppula doesn't have his NMC to be exposed in the draft?

It's not as simple as that as we also have cap considerations to take into account. If we only look at who our best forwards are and assume that Filppula is moved or waives his NMC and that Callahan isn't traded or bought out, we would obviously protect Stamkos, Callahan, Kucherov, Drouin, Johnson, Palat, and Killorn.

However we're probably looking at having to offload three big contracts (not including Bishop who will walk as a UFA) in order to get under the cap; our likely options in that regard are Filppula, Callahan, Johnson, Palat, Drouin, Garrison, and Coburn (we obviously aren't moving Kucherov and unless we think his health will be an issue going forward I can't see us making Stralman a cap casualty over one of our other high priced defensemen.) Our defense is already a major point of weakness so I don't see us moving two veteran defensemen, and we obviously don't want to lose any more of our talented young forwards than we have to, so barring any major shakeup trades we're probably going to want to move one defenseman and two forwards.

As to who that would be, most of us figure Garrison will be the defenseman on his way out: not only is he more expensive with a shorter term than Coburn but he's also not having the greatest year (which is unfortunate as before this season it looked like he would fetch a nice return; with only a year left on his deal we should still be able to move him but we probably won't get much for him at this point unless he really turns things around in the second half of the season.) As to the forwards, in an ideal world we would move Flip and Callahan, but Callahan will be next to impossible to trade so we would have to buy him out. Which might well happen, but if not we're probably looking at losing Filppula and one of our young guys; what nobody seems to agree on is which young guy it will be.

So getting back to the original question, if we plan on moving Garrison, Filppula, and one of our young forwards, we obviously wouldn't want to protect that young forward only to trade him later - we'd ideally want to either trade him before the draft or possibly expose him and let Vegas take him in lieu of another player (depending on whether or not the return we could get for trading him would be better than the player we would protect by letting Vegas take him.) And that's all difficult to predict at the moment - we don't know which young forward we'd want to lose, which teams would make an offer for him or what those offers would be, or if Yzerman might shake things up even further by buying out Callahan or making a big trade involving people we didn't think would be moving.

 

[DFC]

It's not as simple as that as we also have cap considerations to take into account. If we only look at who our best forwards are and assume that Filppula is moved or waives his NMC and that Callahan isn't traded or bought out, we would obviously protect Stamkos, Callahan, Kucherov, Drouin, Johnson, Palat, and Killorn.

However we're probably looking at having to offload three big contracts (not including Bishop who will walk as a UFA) in order to get under the cap; our likely options in that regard are Filppula, Callahan, Johnson, Palat, Drouin, Garrison, and Coburn (we obviously aren't moving Kucherov and unless we think his health will be an issue going forward I can't see us making Stralman a cap casualty over one of our other high priced defensemen.) Our defense is already a major point of weakness so I don't see us moving two veteran defensemen, and we obviously don't want to lose any more of our talented young forwards than we have to, so barring any major shakeup trades we're probably going to want to move one defenseman and two forwards.

As to who that would be, most of us figure Garrison will be the defenseman on his way out: not only is he more expensive with a shorter term than Coburn but he's also not having the greatest year (which is unfortunate as before this season it looked like he would fetch a nice return; with only a year left on his deal we should still be able to move him but we probably won't get much for him at this point unless he really turns things around in the second half of the season.) As to the forwards, in an ideal world we would move Flip and Callahan, but Callahan will be next to impossible to trade so we would have to buy him out. Which might well happen, but if not we're probably looking at losing Filppula and one of our young guys; what nobody seems to agree on is which young guy it will be.

So getting back to the original question, if we plan on moving Garrison, Filppula, and one of our young forwards, we obviously wouldn't want to protect that young forward only to trade him later - we'd ideally want to either trade him before the draft or possibly expose him and let Vegas take him in lieu of another player (depending on whether or not the return we could get for trading him would be better than the player we would protect by letting Vegas take him.) And that's all difficult to predict at the moment - we don't know which young forward we'd want to lose, which teams would make an offer for him or what those offers would be, or if Yzerman might shake things up even further by buying out Callahan or making a big trade involving people we didn't think would be moving.

killorn will likely be exposed, and that'll be the other big contract out.

 

[bleedblue1223]

Is there a difference for Tampa fans in losing Killorn to expansion or trading Filppula and keeping Killorn? Or do both need to be moved for long-term cap health?

 

[garmonbozia]

Is there a difference for Tampa fans in losing Killorn to expansion or trading Filppula and keeping Killorn? Or do both need to be moved for long-term cap health?

Trading Filppula and keeping Killorn is preferable to losing Killorn to expansion. Between the two, Filppula doesn't have much impact on long-term cap health as he only has one more year on his deal. That one year remaining also means he is an easy buyout if there is no trade market for him between now and the expansion draft.

I think the term of Killorn's recent contract was a tell of Yzerman's commitment to keeping him around. He isn't untouchable in a trade. He might be exposed in the expansion draft for financial reasons. Overall though, I expect Killorn will still be on the Lightning at the start of next season racking up his consistent .5ppg in the streakiest ways possible.

Palat, Johnson, and Drouin contracts will determine the long-term cap health. Much like the Stamkos, Hedman, and Kucherov extensions this past past summer, I remain confident Yzerman finds a way to make it all fit together financially and all three of those impending extensions come in less than the average Lightning fan fears.

As for the Flip+ or Johnson for Shattenkirk question...it would depend on the plus. We don't view Filppula as a cap liability that needs a significant add, but, would certainly expect to add something to him in any deal for Shattenkirk. What'd you have in mind?

 

[DFC]

Trading Filppula and keeping Killorn is preferable to losing Killorn to expansion. Between the two, Filppula doesn't have much impact on long-term cap health as he only has one more year on his deal. That one year remaining also means he is an easy buyout if there is no trade market for him between now and the expansion draft.

I think the term of Killorn's recent contract was a tell of Yzerman's commitment to keeping him around. He isn't untouchable in a trade. He might be exposed in the expansion draft for financial reasons. Overall though, I expect Killorn will still be on the Lightning at the start of next season racking up his consistent .5ppg in the streakiest ways possible.

Palat, Johnson, and Drouin contracts will determine the long-term cap health. Much like the Stamkos, Hedman, and Kucherov extensions this past past summer, I remain confident Yzerman finds a way to make it all fit together financially and all three of those impending extensions come in less than the average Lightning fan fears.

As for the Flip+ or Johnson for Shattenkirk question...it would depend on the plus. We don't view Filppula as a cap liability that needs a significant add, but, would certainly expect to add something to him in any deal for Shattenkirk. What'd you have in mind?

I don't see us finding a way to protect Killorn. I think that contract was signed with the expansion draft in mind. Yzerman doesn't like giving term. Alex Killorn got the 3rd longest contract Yzerman has ever handed out, the only longer ones being to Stamkos and Hedman. I agree that it's a tell, but I think it's a tell that Yzerman doesn't expect the contract to be on the books next year.

Sad to see Killorn go, but I'd be surprised if he's on the roster next year. And then, after the expansion draft passes and no one's panicking over protection slots anymore, we can trade Filppula for a pretty solid return (so long as he remains at his current level of play throughout the year).

All that said, I don't think we can afford to trade a center right now. Yeah, Shattenkirk would fill a hole, but by trading a C we'd be opening up an even bigger one. Neither Namestnikov or Point look capable of taking over for either Flip or Johnson right now. We're struggling now, definitely, but I don't see how we could tread water until Stamkos returns if we lose either of these guys.

 

[Rschmitz]

I don't see us finding a way to protect Killorn. I think that contract was signed with the expansion draft in mind. Yzerman doesn't like giving term. Alex Killorn got the 3rd longest contract Yzerman has ever handed out, the only longer ones being to Stamkos and Hedman. I agree that it's a tell, but I think it's a tell that Yzerman doesn't expect the contract to be on the books next year.

Sad to see Killorn go, but I'd be surprised if he's on the roster next year. And then, after the expansion draft passes and no one's panicking over protection slots anymore, we can trade Filppula for a pretty solid return (so long as he remains at his current level of play throughout the year).

All that said, I don't think we can afford to trade a center right now. Yeah, Shattenkirk would fill a hole, but by trading a C we'd be opening up an even bigger one. Neither Namestnikov or Point look capable of taking over for either Flip or Johnson right now. We're struggling now, definitely, but I don't see how we could tread water until Stamkos returns if we lose either of these guys.

The assumption is this deal happens at the deadline, which changes things

 

[DFC]

The assumption is this deal happens at the deadline, which changes things

I'm not sure that it does, unless we get news that Stamkos is close to returning. Or maybe if Namestnikov or Point look like they can handle a top-six C role by then.

 

[Rschmitz]

I'm not sure that it does, unless we get news that Stamkos is close to returning. Or maybe if Namestnikov or Point look like they can handle a top-six C role by then.

The trade deadline is only a week or two off from when Stamkos is scheduled to return

 

[DFC]

The trade deadline is only a week or two off from when Stamkos is scheduled to return

I thought his return date was a lot more vague than that? 4-6 months leaves a lot of room. I wouldn't move forward on the assumption we're going to get him back before the playoffs.

 

[Brock Radunske]

I think these two teams make great trade partners, and a win-win trade can be made.

Best pieces available:
Tyler Johnson
Alex Killorn
Valterri Filppula
J Drouin
Jason Garrison
Slater Koekkoek
Vladamir Namestnikov
Futures


A trade centered around Tyler Johnson and Jason Garrison for Shattenkirk I think would be great for both sides, with other pieces moving to smooth out the value. Lightning can retain 50% on Johnson to make #'s work.

Lightning get a right handed PMD who is a perfect fit on the PP. Blues swap the extra top 4 RHD for a top 4 LHD on a good contract, and get a great center under team control.

Trading Tyler Johnson while Stammer is out?
Not having your top-2 centers and your star goalie under-performing is a recipe for disaster in a suddenly competitive East.