Player Discussion Kevin Shattenkirk

[Gliff]

Shatt is the new bieska .... i hope he doesnt cause expansion problems

How can he? He doesnt have a NMC.

I thought he was good the first couple games. He has just been terrible since then.

 

[Zegs2sendhelp]

How can he? He doesnt have a NMC.

I thought he was good the first couple games. He has just been terrible since then.

I mean BM could still protect him and expose someone

 

[darkwingduck]

What I am hopeful of is that maybe because Shattenkirk was playing literally in right b4 October and that perhaps this is fatigue from a shortened off-season.

 

[Paul4587]

What I am hopeful of is that maybe because Shattenkirk was playing literally in right b4 October and that perhaps this is fatigue from a shortened off-season.

Doesn’t seem to be affecting the rest of the Lightning though.... although Shattenkirk is the wrong side of 30 I guess.

 

[TheGoodShepard1]

He’s been bad but there’s nothing stopping Eakins from trying Hakanpaa, Larsson, Hutton, or Curran with Lindholm instead but he absolutely refuses to do anything other than give Shattenkirk a bullshit amount of minutes.

He should absolutely be parked in the press box when Manson comes back. 42-47 will be reunited, Larsson has first crack but that slot should be a rotating door for the other young guys in San Diego to get looks if he falters, and Hutton has earned the right to the other slot on the 3rd pairing (if anything, Bob should be working to re-up him for another year)

 

[Leonardo87]

What I am hopeful of is that maybe because Shattenkirk was playing literally in right b4 October and that perhaps this is fatigue from a shortened off-season.

Tampa also didn’t overplay him and he had Hedman to babysit him when he was on the top pairing, but that didn’t last too long. I mean nothing against Lindholm, but that Hedman guy is pretty good.

 

[Paul4587]

Tampa also didn’t overplay him and he had Hedman to babysit him when he was on the top pairing, but that didn’t last too long. I mean nothing against Lindholm, but that Hedman guy is pretty good.

Even when he was paired with Hedman that pairing weren’t getting the tough matchups, the McDonagh pairing was. He was the very definition of sheltered last season in that even when he did play with top players he wasn’t asked to play hard minutes.

 

[Leonardo87]

Even when he was paired with Hedman that pairing weren’t getting the tough matchups, the McDonagh pairing was. He was the very definition of sheltered last season in that even when he did play with top players he wasn’t asked to play hard minutes.

This is exactly the issue. Shattenkirk is not a shutdown D. He should not be logging top mins and not facing other teams top lines. When Manson gets back hopefully he is playing better, move Shattenkirk to the bottom pairing.

 

[Gliff]

I mean BM could still protect him and expose someone

Then that is a Bob problem not a Shatty problem.

 

[DavidBL]

What I'd like to see is BM somehow swing Manson for Letang ina deal and expose Shattenkirk. Sell Pit on some toughness. Add Jones. That would force DE to push Shattenkirk down.

 

[Gliff]

What is like to see is BM somehow swing Manson for Letang and expose Shattenkirk

Why Letang? He would cost way more in cash and would just be here for the rebuild. Manson should be moved for futures.

 

[DavidBL]

Why Letang? He would cost way more in cash and would just be here for the rebuild. Manson should be moved for futures.

Because Letang actually does what we wanted Shattenkirk to do? Letang would help this team more in the year and a half than what ever we get in a futures package for Manson.

 

[Gliff]

Because Letang actually does what we wanted Shattenkirk to do? Letang would help this team more in the year and a half than what ever we get in a futures package for Manson.

Help us what?
Finish outside of the playoff picture?

mare you actually thinking the Ducks will be competing in the next year?

 

[DavidBL]

Help us what?
Finish outside of the playoff picture?

mare you actually thinking the Ducks will be competing in the next year?

Not sure if you noticed but the Ducks are in games now without an actual threat on the blue line. This team really doesn't need a lot. We need need a good quantity for quality trade or 2.

 

[Gliff]

Not sure if you noticed but the Ducks are in games now without an actual threat on the blue line. This team really doesn't need a lot. We need need a good quantity for quality trade or 2.

Have you seen this team play? A team in 31st out of 31 teams in offense is not a quantity for quality trade away from being close.
This team needs a top line.

 

[Trojans86]

Have you seen this team play? A team in 31st out of 31 teams in offense is not a quantity for quality trade away from being close.
This team needs a top line.

I agree. Even though this team has outperformed my expectations, this year and next year are not party of out win now window no matter who we trade for. Next year could be fun though amd I wouldn't mind trading for a youngish talent.

 

[Hockey Duckie]

This thread makes me wish that Curran would start tearing up the AHL soon to give us options to demote or bench Shattenkirk.

 

[DavidBL]

Have you seen this team play? A team in 31st out of 31 teams in offense is not a quantity for quality trade away from being close.
This team needs a top line.

I have actually and part of our problem is that we have players being asked to be more than they are. You're not wrong about the top line but we have a likely top line player coming in Zegras. Rakell, who you want to trade so bad, is generating shots like a top line player and really is suffering from a terrible shooting %. What does that mean? That we need 1 top liner yo have a full top line within the next 2 years. The mentality that you shouldn't add good players now because "we're not ready to compete," is flawed at best. If you have the opportunity to make the team better then you do it. There is a lot that goes into that for sure, like asset costs, Cap space etc. But the fact is we have more players then can play right now. Adding futures just pushes the problem down the line and IMO makes us weaker as the assets are unknowns rather than a known commodity of a player upgrade.
Not to mention Letang would likely be a pretty good mentor for Drysdale. Im of the mind that we should always be looking to improve the team.

 

[AngelDuck]

There is nothing more condescending to me than asking a regular poster(ie: diehard fan) here if they’ve watched this team play

it’s nails on a chalkboard

 

[FiveHoleTickler]

Usage is probably the biggest problem here. Shattenkirk is averaging over 4 minutes a game more this year than he did with Tampa last year. And as some of you mentioned, they're not easy minutes either.

Eakins should be getting as much flak as Shattenkirk.

 

[duxfan1101]

Usage is probably the biggest problem here. Shattenkirk is averaging over 4 minutes a game more this year than he did with Tampa last year. And as some of you mentioned, they're not easy minutes either.

Eakins should be getting as much flak as Shattenkirk.

Obviously he hasn't played well, but do we have anyone else who can handle those minutes? I wouldn't be against giving someone else a shot next to Lindholm, but I don't really think anyone would do well in that spot.

 

[FiveHoleTickler]

Obviously he hasn't played well, but do we have anyone else who can handle those minutes? I wouldn't be against giving someone else a shot next to Lindholm, but I don't really think anyone would do well in that spot.

This crossed my mind as well. Maybe Hawk, Hutton or Manson when he gets back. Given the lack of obvious options, the finger unsurprisingly points back to Murray.

 

[Magnus the Duck]

Obviously he hasn't played well, but do we have anyone else who can handle those minutes? I wouldn't be against giving someone else a shot next to Lindholm, but I don't really think anyone would do well in that spot.

I think basically anyone could do it. Shattenkirk is about as good as Karlsson on defense but without any offensive upside. Noticed how Sharks had slightly better defense last game? And that Karlsson wasn't playing.

 

[Gliff]

I have actually and part of our problem is that we have players being asked to be more than they are. You're not wrong about the top line but we have a likely top line player coming in Zegras. Rakell, who you want to trade so bad, is generating shots like a top line player and really is suffering from a terrible shooting %. What does that mean? That we need 1 top liner yo have a full top line within the next 2 years. The mentality that you shouldn't add good players now because "we're not ready to compete," is flawed at best. If you have the opportunity to make the team better then you do it. There is a lot that goes into that for sure, like asset costs, Cap space etc. But the fact is we have more players then can play right now. Adding futures just pushes the problem down the line and IMO makes us weaker as the assets are unknowns rather than a known commodity of a player upgrade.
Not to mention Letang would likely be a pretty good mentor for Drysdale. Im of the mind that we should always be looking to improve the team.

I want to trade Rakell because I have no desire to pay him 6 mil+ a year, which is the minimum he will get on his next contract.
You are acting like Zegras is going to step onto the top line. That is most likely not going to happen. I sure as hell don't want to count on it and act like the Ducks will be ready to compete next year with a full top line of Zegras, Rakell, and a mystery player we are supposed to pull out of our ass without trading Rakell or Zegras.

I am all for making the team better if the piece is a long term piece. Letang is not a long term piece. If his contract was for 4 years then I could see it working. His contract is just short enough that he will leave before the Ducks are ready to compete.

There is nothing more condescending to me than asking a regular poster(ie: diehard fan) here if they’ve watched this team play

it’s nails on a chalkboard

Get some thicker skin then. It is a totally valid question. If you see the standings you may think the Ducks are on the cusp of the playoffs. If you watch them then you see how terrible offensively they are.
The sexy line has been great but they still are not going to be a #1 line on a playoff team, let alone a team contending.

His statement that the Ducks are a couple moves away (Letang being one of them) is just absurd to me.

 

[AngelDuck]

I want to trade Rakell because I have no desire to pay him 6 mil+ a year, which is the minimum he will get on his next contract.
You are acting like Zegras is going to step onto the top line. That is most likely not going to happen. I sure as hell don't want to count on it and act like the Ducks will be ready to compete next year with a full top line of Zegras, Rakell, and a mystery player we are supposed to pull out of our ass without trading Rakell or Zegras.

I am all for making the team better if the piece is a long term piece. Letang is not a long term piece. If his contract was for 4 years then I could see it working. His contract is just short enough that he will leave before the Ducks are ready to compete.



Get some thicker skin then. It is a totally valid question. If you see the standings you may think the Ducks are on the cusp of the playoffs. If you watch them then you see how terrible offensively they are.
The sexy line has been great but they still are not going to be a #1 line on a playoff team, let alone a team contending.

His statement that the Ducks are a couple moves away (Letang being one of them) is just absurd to me.

Fine to disagree with him. I do as well. but the dude has been posting here regularly for like a decade or more. Obviously he’s watched them play and has his opinion.

It’s stupid to ask him if he’s seen them play. But to each their own