Now, I'm not saying this is an equal value trade or that either team would do this, but Shatty for Giroux straight up. Is that a deal you make?
Why would anyone in their right mind trade Shattenkirk?? That makes no sense.
Gretzky was once traded. Twice even. Chris Pronger was once traded for Eric Brewer and some lint. You tell me. Anyone is fair game.
And how long had those mentioned been playing?? They weren't second or third year players and among the league leaders in scoring. Unless you are getting back a proven superstar and multiple picks to replace that current level of scoring and all the future scoring they should provide, you don't trade them.
Mike Keenan isn't running the Blues now.
So Claude Giroux isn't a star and doesn't provide scoring? I know he's not on Sidney Crosby's level, but he scored 93 points last season. I don't get why the question is that far fetched. You wouldn't at least consider it if Giroux was the other player involved?
Giroux has scored 20+ goals twice. Would you replace one of the league's top scoring defenseman with a 20-30 goal a year guy, when that guy has never even scored 30 goals in season?? I would not. 20-30 goal guys are far easier to find than scoring defenseman, and Giroux is a 20-30 goal guy. Heck, the Blues probably have that already in Rattie and could have both Shattenkirk and Rattie in a couple of years as long as Shattie isn't moved.
Fair enough. I'm not saying I just want to give Shattenkirk up, but I'd think about it a bit if Giroux was involved. He's not a 30+ goal scorer, but he's put up 70+ points the last two years. That's something.
But you're right, scoring defensemen are hard to find and we've got two of them. My only thought is whether the Blues will pay them both. If they won't, then a trade is definitely a possibility. That's hard to ignore.
2015-2016 LGB Sponsor of Not Ott, because he is a booger-eating dumb dumb