Our historical context is losing Backes and Brouwer in FA, and then changing course and dealing Shatty at the deadline... and then making the WCF for the first time in over 15 years in the process. That’s your precedent. And we didn’t deal Shatty for somebody that was better than him (at the time) in order to do it. It was, in almost every sense, worth it to make that deal.
My issue is that I’m not at all making an “unreasonable discussion”. Dealing somebody tomorrow who would automatically be the best rental Center option by a country mile could easily return something positive for this team. You seem to be positing that it isn’t worth dealing Stas unless it’s for a clear upgrade (boxcar stats-wise) *right now*, which to me seems ridiculous at this point in a lost season. Get what you can get for something you’re going to lose anyways, and move forward ffs.
What? The Blues made the WCF with Brouwer, Backes, and Shattenkirk, not after losing them.
Dealing Shattenkirk at the deadline was forced because the Blues 100% knew they were going to lose him, and they could comfortably move him since they had Pietrangelo, Parayko, and Bortuzzo to hold down the fort on the RH side. Moving him didn't open a big roster hole that would immediately need to be filled. They let Backes walk over term, and Brouwer walk because the contract he commanded was downright stupid for a 3rd line quality player. None of those are analogous situations.
I'm saying (pretty clearly, I think) that Stastny shouldn't be moved at all because there's no reason for the Blues to preemptively create a big roster hole they subsequently would need to turn around and immediately fill to be a legitimate contender. If you can fill that hole in the trade, whether upgrade or downgrade, then that's one thing...but history tells us that you won't be getting that sort of return at the trade deadline.
My questions about upgrades were in response to another poster who said it wouldn't be that hard to improve upon Stastny this offseason if we moved on from him. I don't think that's true, so I questioned the premise.
My suggestion is that you re-sign Stastny, and then pursue whatever alternatives you wish (whether internal or external), with the intention of trading him later or simply swallowing the deal for a few years with him as your #3 center if that's what it takes. You bypass much of the risk without limiting your options moving forward all that much.
The only risk in that approach is that Stastny walks, which then puts you right where the "trade Stastny now" option puts you anyway...just without the 1st and whatever else you get for him. Basically, what I'm saying is that the 1st and stuff isn't worth the increased risk of being left hanging without a #2 center for the immediate future. For some people it might be. For me it's not. For Amstrong it's probably not, either.
