Value of: (Stl-TB) Shattenkirk

[tjs*]

Not a fan of trading core/near-core players for a rental we probably can't afford to keep anyway, nor of weakening our center depth when Stamkos is such a huge question mark going forward. We also have a hard time scoring as it is and despite his struggles Johnson is still fourth on the team in goals and fifth in points. And let's not forget how huge TJ has been for us in the playoffs - another big postseason from him (assuming we get that far) and we'd look like idiots for even considering trading him.

Personally I'd rather just wait until the end of the year and try to sign Shattenkirk after the expansion draft. He isn't going to put us over the top this season anyway the way we've been playing, by waiting until after the draft we won't have to expose Koekkoek, and we can move Garrison and (if we want to, which I'm still not so sure is a good idea) Johnson and get a longer lasting return for them.

 

[Number1RedWingsFan52]

Pleasantly surprised by how amicable this is. I like the base of TJ and Garrison for Shatty and Berglund. Wouldn't mind this at all.

Yup sounds like both fan bases are in agreement on the deal, And it helps both clubs out tremendously.

 

[bleedblue1223]

https://www.nhl.com/lightning/schedule/2017-03-01/ET

There we go, that's more like it.

I'll say this though, for all the Tampa fans currently in Tampa enjoying 70 and 80 degree weather...I hate you.

Ok, lets get back to being nice. I do love some of the t-shirts at your team store. I definitely bought me a "Bish Please" shirt and laughed harder than I should have.

 

[tjs*]

Yup sounds like both fan bases are in agreement on the deal, And it helps both clubs out tremendously.

Look at the deal beyond this season. We're giving up Johnson, Garrison, and possibly Koekkoek and getting absolutely nothing in return besides an early start on trying to re-sign Shattenkirk. So the deal makes no sense for us unless we think Shattenkirk is going to win us a Cup this season. Even without the loss of our de facto 1C I'm not so confident that would happen; when you add in the downgrade from Johnson to Berglund our chances look even bleaker. I wouldn't mind getting Shattenkirk into a Lightning uniform if we could find a way to do so that works with our cap situation, but this just isn't the way to go about it - especially when he'll be a free agent next summer.

 

[Rschmitz]

Can some Tampa fans enlighten me on Johnson?

I know he's small, but how is his two-way game? Can he kill penalties? Is he primarily a shoot first or pass first player? Also, can he stay healthy?

Also, is he struggling this season? 16 points in 30 games isn't anything fantastic. Was the 70 point season a fluke? What should be expected over 82 games (45-50,50-55,55-60,etc) in terms of point production?

I like the idea nonetheless. Tyler Johnson+Braden Coburn for Shattenkirk+Berglund is not a bad start. Since we'd have an overload, maybe Edmundson can go Tampa's way (replace Coburn, cheap option) for probably not too much (lower tier prospect/3rd?).

So essentially, Johnson+Coburn+3rd for Shattenkirk+Berglund+Edmundson?

The bio on Johnson makes me not want to trade him, honestly. He's a top 20 face off guy, has an elite wrister that helped give him 29 goals, and is our best playmaking center too. He's also not afraid to go to the dirty areas, which is why he gets banged up now and then.

He's super smart and very good defensively, plays on both the PK and the PP, and it's either him or Drouin as the fastest skater on the team.

Back to the trade, I think a TJ for Shattenkirk deal straight up makes the most sense for us. In fact, we could probably even retain on Johnson. The other moving pieces are unnecessary and do more harm than good.

 

[tjs*]

The bio on Johnson makes me not want to trade him, honestly. He's a top 20 face off guy, has an elite wrister that helped give him 29 goals, and is our best playmaking center too. He's also not afraid to go to the dirty areas, which is why he gets banged up now and then.

He's super smart and very good defensively, plays on both the PK and the PP, and it's either him or Drouin as the fastest skater on the team.

Back to the trade, I think a TJ for Shattenkirk deal straight up makes the most sense for us. In fact, we could probably even retain on Johnson. The other moving pieces are unnecessary and do more harm than good.

Again though, who plays center for us with TJ gone? If Stamkos could actually stay healthy (and be counted on to produce in the postseason) I could see Point eventually making him expendable but Stammer is an enormous question mark going forward and Point's time hasn't come yet. And after this season that deal becomes TJ for zilch. If we are going to trade Johnson we need a longer lasting return. At a bare minimum I'd need Shattenkirk signed to a team-friendly extension before signing off on this trade - at least then we'd be guaranteed to be getting something back for Johnson that lasts beyond the next few months.

 

[Rschmitz]

Look at the deal beyond this season. We're giving up Johnson, Garrison, and possibly Koekkoek and getting absolutely nothing in return besides an early start on trying to re-sign Shattenkirk. So the deal makes no sense for us unless we think Shattenkirk is going to win us a Cup this season. Even without the loss of our de facto 1C I'm not so confident that would happen; when you add in the downgrade from Johnson to Berglund our chances look even bleaker. I wouldn't mind getting Shattenkirk into a Lightning uniform if we could find a way to do so that works with our cap situation, but this just isn't the way to go about it - especially when he'll be a free agent next summer.

TJ for Shattenkirk at the trade deadline, no need to complicate the trade. We lose Johnson, but Stamkos should be back. We can worry about dealing Coburn and/or Garrison in the offseason to make $$ work. In the mean time, that gives us a boon of experience and depth on the blueline for this season.

 

[Rschmitz]

Again though, who plays center for us with TJ gone? If Stamkos could actually stay healthy (and be counted on to produce in the postseason) I could see Point eventually making him expendable but Stammer is an enormous question mark going forward and Point's time hasn't come yet. And after this season that deal becomes TJ for zilch. If we are going to trade Johnson we need a longer lasting return. At a bare minimum I'd need Shattenkirk signed to a team-friendly extension before signing off on this trade - at least then we'd be guaranteed to be getting something back for Johnson that lasts beyond the next few months.

This deal can be made at the trade deadline once Stamkos returns, or a separate deal can be made to acquire top 6 center rental for cheap.

Also, Johnson is due for a hefty raise. Considering our wealth of talent at the center position, wouldn't you prefer to trade that for an area the team could desperately benefit from? Shattenkirk would have a huge and immediate impact.

 

[Rschmitz]

Not a fan of trading core/near-core players for a rental we probably can't afford to keep anyway, nor of weakening our center depth when Stamkos is such a huge question mark going forward. We also have a hard time scoring as it is and despite his struggles Johnson is still fourth on the team in goals and fifth in points. And let's not forget how huge TJ has been for us in the playoffs - another big postseason from him (assuming we get that far) and we'd look like idiots for even considering trading him.

Personally I'd rather just wait until the end of the year and try to sign Shattenkirk after the expansion draft. He isn't going to put us over the top this season anyway the way we've been playing, by waiting until after the draft we won't have to expose Koekkoek, and we can move Garrison and (if we want to, which I'm still not so sure is a good idea) Johnson and get a longer lasting return for them.

We wouldn't be exposing Koekkoek. If anything, this trade helps us with expansion protection because we won't have to protect TJ, and with Shattenkirk as an impending UFA he won't require protection either.

 

[EastonBlues22]

If Garrison is coming to the Blues, the organization would have to expose one of Gunnarsson/Bortuzzo/Edmundson to waivers once they're all healthy, unless one of them is shipped out.

It's hard to imagine them wanting to do that. Edmundson would be claimed, and even if the other two wouldn't be, the Blues aren't the sort of organization that will attempt to ditch a quality player in the AHL for financial purposes.

Also, are we sure that Garrison's NTC was voided completely when he waived it for the trade? Waiving an already active NTC once normally doesn't void it for the duration of the contract.

 

[tjs*]

This deal can be made at the trade deadline once Stamkos returns, or a separate deal can be made to acquire top 6 center rental for cheap.

Also, Johnson is due for a hefty raise. Considering our wealth of talent at the center position, wouldn't you prefer to trade that for an area the team could desperately benefit from? Shattenkirk would have a huge and immediate impact.

Again, though, we aren't trading for TJ for Shattenkirk - we're trading TJ for a few months of Shattenkirk. It'd be different if they were both impending UFAs but they aren't.

We wouldn't be exposing Koekkoek. If anything, this trade helps us with expansion protection because we won't have to protect TJ, and with Shattenkirk as an impending UFA he won't require protection either.

We won't have to protect TJ but the forward we would want to protect with his spot (Killorn) will have to be traded anyway to clear up cap space - especially since Shattenkirk will almost certainly make more than TJ would have made. We were already looking at having to move Filppula, Garrison, and one of our top six forwards to get under the cap and even if we can resign Shattenkirk that would simply make our cap situation even worse than it was already shaping up to be. So actually this trade would at best allow us to protect Namestnikov - big deal. And Stattenkirk doesn't require protection if we don't resign him before the expansion draft, but then we lose our advantage of being able to deal with him before anybody else can.

I just don't think the short term benefit of having Shattenkirk on our team these next few months is worth Tyler Johnson. If we want to move Johnson let's move him for somebody that will help us long term, not a rental who probably won't put us over the top this season anyway.

 

[Rschmitz]

If Garrison is coming to the Blues, the organization would have to expose one of Gunnarsson/Bortuzzo/Edmundson to waivers once they're all healthy, unless one of them is shipped out.

It's hard to imagine them wanting to do that. Edmundson would be claimed, and even if the other two wouldn't be, the Blues aren't the sort of organization that will attempt to ditch a quality player in the AHL for financial purposes.

Also, are we sure that Garrison's NTC was voided completely when he waived it for the trade? Waiving an already active NTC once normally doesn't void it for the duration of the contract.

Garrison doesn't need to be part of the trade, and in fact I'd prefer not included.

I was always under the impression that once a NMC was waived, it stayed that way. No confirmation on whether Garrison's NMC is still intact then

 

[bleedblue1223]

Garrison doesn't need to be part of the trade, and in fact I'd prefer not included.

I was always under the impression that once a NMC was waived, it stayed that way. No confirmation on whether Garrison's NMC is still intact then

It can potentially be voided if they are traded before the clause is activated. The new team can choose to honor it or void it. Could be slightly wrong on details, but that's what I believe it is.

 

[2020 Cup Champions]

There we go, that's more like it.

I'll say this though, for all the Tampa fans currently in Tampa enjoying 70 and 80 degree weather...I hate you.

Ok, lets get back to being nice. I do love some of the t-shirts at your team store. I definitely bought me a "Bish Please" shirt and laughed harder than I should have.

Don't get too hasty--it got down to 65 or so last night.

 

[tjs*]

An example forward lineup for Tampa next season if we trade TJ for Shattenkirk and move Filppula and Killorn for cap reasons. Yeah, we could move some people around and promote some guys from Syracuse, and we might get somebody for Flip or Killer who we could slot in somewhere, but this at least gives you an idea of the sort of lineup we'd be looking at:

Palat - Stamkos - Kucherov
Point - Namestnikov - Drouin
Conacher - Paquette - Callahan
Vermin - Boyle - Brown

And this is actually optimistic: it assumes Vegas doesn't take a forward from us AND that we can afford to resign Boyle. Does anybody really want to go into next season looking like this? Now imagine what happens when Stamkos goes down. Is this really worth a few months of Shattenkirk?

 

[Rschmitz]

Again, though, we aren't trading for TJ for Shattenkirk - we're trading TJ for a few months of Shattenkirk. It'd be different if they were both impending UFAs but they aren't.

The cap implications of retaining TJ makes his free agent status irrelevant in a deal, because we can't keep him and add a piece like Shattenkirk.

We won't have to protect TJ but the forward we would want to protect with his spot (Killorn) will have to be traded anyway to clear up cap space - especially since Shattenkirk will almost certainly make more than TJ would have made. We were already looking at having to move Filppula, Garrison, and one of our top six forwards to get under the cap and even if we can resign Shattenkirk that would simply make our cap situation even worse than it was already shaping up to be. So actually this trade would at best allow us to protect Namestnikov - big deal. And Stattenkirk doesn't require protection if we don't resign him before the expansion draft, but then we lose our advantage of being able to deal with him before anybody else can.

1. Well, you were stating that we lose Koekkoek. That isn't the case at all, it's a net gain for us. We wouldn't need to trade Killorn, we'd protect Namestnikov and expose Killorn, and Vegas probably takes him since he's the best value. Regardless if they do or not, we either gain the added cap space, or we trade him.

2. Free agency doesn't begin immediately after the expansion draft. The expansion draft is June 21st, that gives Yzerman over a week to negotiate with Shattenkirk.

I just don't think the short term benefit of having Shattenkirk on our team these next few months is worth Tyler Johnson. If we want to move Johnson let's move him for somebody that will help us long term, not a rental who probably won't put us over the top this season anyway.

There is nobody currently available who is a more ideal fit than Shattenkirk.

 

[Rschmitz]

It can potentially be voided if they are traded before the clause is activated. The new team can choose to honor it or void it. Could be slightly wrong on details, but that's what I believe it is.

Clause was activated before the trade. I remember now, an admin at boltprospects.com called and verified that Garrison's NMC had been voided.

 

[CrypTic]

Garrison doesn't need to be part of the trade, and in fact I'd prefer not included.

I was always under the impression that once a NMC was waived, it stayed that way. No confirmation on whether Garrison's NMC is still intact then

EastonBlues is correct. An NMC is only voided if the player is traded before it kicks in. That generally happens when they sign a deal that spans RFA and UFA years and are traded before they would have become a UFA bc an NMC/NTC cannot be effective until a player would reach UFA status, e.g., Subban. Garrison's NTC is listed on the cap sites as currently effective and his current contract is only for UFA years. I don't see why it would be voided by his waiver unless he for some unknown reason agreed to waive it for all teams going forward (which any player can do, it doesn't require a trade).

It sounds like fans of the two teams have agreed that a simpler Shattenkirk for Johnson makes more sense anyway.

 

[Rschmitz]

An example forward lineup for Tampa next season if we trade TJ for Shattenkirk and move Filppula and Killorn for cap reasons. Yeah, we could move some people around and promote some guys from Syracuse, and we might get somebody for Flip or Killer who we could slot in somewhere, but this at least gives you an idea of the sort of lineup we'd be looking at:

Palat - Stamkos - Kucherov
Point - Namestnikov - Drouin
Conacher - Paquette - Callahan
Vermin - Boyle - Brown

And this is actually optimistic: it assumes Vegas doesn't take a forward from us AND that we can afford to resign Boyle. Does anybody really want to go into next season looking like this? Now imagine what happens when Stamkos goes down. Is this really worth a few months of Shattenkirk?

That isn't pretty. But....

On one hand you say we are losing all of these players in order to sign Shattenkirk

On the other hand, you are saying we only have Shattenkirk for a few months

You have to pick a side of the argument to make. Aside from those logical fallacies, what likely happens is we deal Garrison and/or Coburn and not Filppula. Regardless, swapping Johnson for Shattenkirk does not create the bleak outlook you outlined.

 

[Alklha]

I proposed something similar a few days ago...

Shattenkirk (with some form of agreement) & Gunnarsson for Johnson, Garrison & Condra.

Swapping Garrison for Gunnarsson saves $1.7m, moving Condra gets rid of the $300k cap penalty for burying him. If there is no need for Gunnarsson, I could understand that.

The Blues can't afford to move expiring contracts for players that will command around $10m in cap next season.We'd need someone signed through next season to be going out as well.

As for Garrison's NMC, the League has confirmed that he agreed to void that when traded.

 

[Butchered]

I'd do Garrison+TyJo for Shattenkirk and Berglund.

Let Berglund walk at the end of the season. Use the cash you save from Bishop and Berglund leaving and Killorn likely being picked up in the expansion draft to resign Shattenkirk. Try your damnedest to fit everyone else in.

Palat-Stamkos-Drouin
Boyle-Point-Kucherov
Erne?-Filppula-Callahan
Paquette-Namestnikov-Brown

Hedman-Stralman
Shattenkirk-Coburn
Koekkoek-Sustr

Vasilevski
Gudlevskis/Wilcox

 

[Mashed Potatoes]

Well if Shattenkirk has any interest in signing in Tampa (low taxes) Tampa would be wise to wait. If he is not going to sign there, dont screw up the future.

 

[Linkens Mastery]

Like, what do we do now? I don't think we've ever been as far as agreeing on a trade.

 

[KirkOut]

would I be pushing my luck if we made it Johnson+Garrison for Shattenkirk+Lehtera (instead of Berglund) ?

 

[MissouriMook]

I'd love to see the Blues pick up a guy like Killorn at the deadline (I've always loved his game) and I'm surprised to see that Bolts fans think he will either be traded or left unprotected. If Shattenkirk for Johnson is considered a reasonable basis for a trade, is there a palatable add on the Blues' part that gets Killorn added in the deal pre-TDL, whether that is someone useful in the lineup or just a different body to leave exposed in the expansion draft?