Why is Shattenkirk being moved?

[Kerfuffle]

Just reading some hockey articles this morning on players likely to be traded by the deadline. Was wondering why Shattenkirk is not being given a new deal by Armstrong to stay - he's the core blue liner for you guys so I'm not sure why they are peddling him. I know his contract is up so he'd be a rent-a-player for whoever gets him the rest of the season but is his asking price too high to get a new deal in St Louis? Obviously you guys are going to be closer to this than I am so looking to see what others think here. Losing him to me looks like it's going in a direction of a rebuild instead of tinkering.

http://www.cbssports.com/nhl/news/here- ... pproaches/

[gaijin]

Just reading some hockey articles this morning on players likely to be traded by the deadline. Was wondering why Shattenkirk is not being given a new deal by Armstrong to stay - he's the core blue liner for you guys so I'm not sure why they are peddling him. I know his contract is up so he'd be a rent-a-player for whoever gets him the rest of the season but is his asking price too high to get a new deal in St Louis? Obviously you guys are going to be closer to this than I am so looking to see what others think here. Losing him to me looks like it's going in a direction of a rebuild instead of tinkering.

http://www.cbssports.com/nhl/news/here- ... pproaches/

You hit the nail on the head. He is already making $5.7 mil a year, and is going to be looking for that a new long-term deal, and rightly deserved. Unfortunately, we are at the cap and won't be able to afford him, unless we jettison a lot of other pieces instead. While 95% of us on this board would rather jettison those other pieces (Berglund, Bouw, Lehtera), it is unlikely management is willing and/or able to move all those other contracts in order to make enough space for a new contract for Shatty.

[Oaklandblue]

Just reading some hockey articles this morning on players likely to be traded by the deadline. Was wondering why Shattenkirk is not being given a new deal by Armstrong to stay - he's the core blue liner for you guys so I'm not sure why they are peddling him. I know his contract is up so he'd be a rent-a-player for whoever gets him the rest of the season but is his asking price too high to get a new deal in St Louis? Obviously you guys are going to be closer to this than I am so looking to see what others think here. Losing him to me looks like it's going in a direction of a rebuild instead of tinkering.

http://www.cbssports.com/nhl/news/here- ... pproaches/

You hit the nail on the head. He is already making $5.7 mil a year, and is going to be looking for that a new long-term deal, and rightly deserved. Unfortunately, we are at the cap and won't be able to afford him, unless we jettison a lot of other pieces instead. While 95% of us on this board would rather jettison those other pieces (Berglund, Bouw, Lehtera), it is unlikely management is willing and/or able to move all those other contracts in order to make enough space for a new contract for Shatty.

The problem is less moving then than getting something for them that either replaces or improves their production without weakening the team any further than it's already been from losing Backes and Brouwer.

Bergy is a center on a major upswing thanks to surgery on a team that is so Center poor it's ridiculous. His trade value is a pick. He is only valuable to us.

Boomer is the only top Dman we got that plays Left. His contract makes it hard to move him without retaining and we will get much less for him on top of that.

Lehtera is a dumpster fire that needs to go away. He just needs to be bought out. No one is trading for him and no one wants him.

Shattenkirk is a player we -could- lose because the Right side is stacked. His contract being up and his potential caphit and of course timing makes it a no-brainer that he'd be moved. Without a Sign and Trade deal in the works, he's only worth a few picks and a roster player. With a contract, we could net a solid Center to add to the ranks, but then we'd have to deal with that contract.

In my opinion, Shatt hasn't been traded yet because his situation is a real Catch-22 due to the above.

[Toasted Oates]

Just reading some hockey articles this morning on players likely to be traded by the deadline. Was wondering why Shattenkirk is not being given a new deal by Armstrong to stay - he's the core blue liner for you guys so I'm not sure why they are peddling him. I know his contract is up so he'd be a rent-a-player for whoever gets him the rest of the season but is his asking price too high to get a new deal in St Louis? Obviously you guys are going to be closer to this than I am so looking to see what others think here. Losing him to me looks like it's going in a direction of a rebuild instead of tinkering.

http://www.cbssports.com/nhl/news/here- ... pproaches/

I think where we'd disagree is that he is "the core blue liner." Pietrangelo carries more burden than any other player on the roster and Parayko is already playing more minutes per game than Shatty. Shattenkirk is a productive offensive defensemen but the thought is that Parayko can fill his skates and then some.

The Blues will want to extend Parayko soon as I believe he's in the last year of his entry deal. So if they do that and find a way to pay Shatty, that's a lot of cap invested in the right side of your defense. Especially considering (as Oaklandblue points out) this team is glaringly thin at the center position.

One area the Blues ARE deep in organ-eye-zationally is defense with guys like Schmaltz, Dunn, and Walman that could be ready in the near future. So it wouldn't exactly be a rebuild to move 22 out.

This will likely go down to the wire in terms of the trade deadline. Seems like they're trying to get an extension done with another team before pulling the trigger, thus raising his trade value. But why wouldn't he want to explore free agency and take a chance on himself? I'm admittedly clueless on what's gonna happen.

[WaukeeBlues]

Agreed with most points here ("stacked" on the right side, asking price, etc).

I've also heard through articles and whispers that Shatty really wants to go to the east coast. He's also going to get PAID this summer in a market that's really thin on defensemen this year. Someone will overpay their arses off to get him. Which isn't where the Blues should be at right now.

Agreed on it coming down to the wire. Don't get me wrong, I want the Blues to make the playoffs and put forth a respectable showing but in my heart of hearts this team isn't a cup contender and they're pissing me off right now going on that road winning streak.

I feel like Armstrong is going to sit on everything or get punch drunk and trade yet another first rounder for a rental player that won't make a bit of dang difference.

[theohall]

Shattenkirk is already on record as wanting to explore the market as a UFA. Highly doubt he agrees to an extension for any kind of trade.

He is on the block for a few reasons:
1) salary cap - Blues can't afford him, unless there are some kind of guarantees they aren't paying Bouwmeester and Berglund next season what they are paying them now - extremely doubtful
2) Colton Parayko being a RFA after this season and deserving to get paid - He could eventually be better than Pietrangelo. He and Pietrangelo are the core of the Blues D for years - which makes Shattenkirk as a right-side defenseman worth dealing.
3) They are stacked on defensive depth in the organization on the right side
4) Lastly, this is the same team which couldn't get out of it's own way for 2 months. Is the current win streak just a bump with players playing for their jobs after the coaching change? Or is the current win streak who the team really is? Every team this season which made a change, except FLA, had a significant bump in success immediately after the HC was fired.

If Armstrong could get a quality C in exchange for Shattenkirk, that would be a win, which is where the Tyler Johnson rumour keeps being floated with the Bolts up against the cap next season and Johnson being an RFA. But I doubt the Bolts want a UFA rental even though they are only 4 points out of a playoff spot. Both of their PP units already have quality players on the right point where Shattenkirk is at his best.

[glen a richter]

Shattenkirk also can't switch sides. Yeah he's good for offense, but move him over and he's useless--hence why the Blues did better with Edmundson in the lineup than with him out. His absence forced Shat over, which didn't work out at all.

Parayko is the best d-man on this team and still nowhere near his prime. He's the one who should get the bucks, and Dunn is shaping up very nicely in Chicago, poised for a call-up after Shat is traded or full time next season. I think the problem is that everyone knows the Blues probably want to trade and definitely have a reason to trade Shat that's pulling down his value in a return.

[cardsfan04]

The big reasons have already been touched on. But, one other thing is, he's fairly overrated. Offensively, he's among the top dmen in the league. But, he's toward the lower end of top 4 dmen when it comes to defense. I love Shatty, and wish we could keep him, and I have some concerns over our PP without him.

But, with cap issues, he can't be a priority. He'll get more than he's worth unless he steps up the defense part of his game (if he does that, he'll actually be worth the $7mil he's gonna get). And, we're not really Cup contenders this year. I mean, maybe Allen gets hot and we can steal a series in the playoffs, but we're not built for this year. If we're not built for this year and we won't be able to re-sign him, gotta get something for him now.

[WaukeeBlues]

Shattenkirk also can't switch sides. Yeah he's good for offense, but move him over and he's useless--hence why the Blues did better with Edmundson in the lineup than with him out. His absence forced Shat over, which didn't work out at all.

Parayko is the best d-man on this team and still nowhere near his prime. He's the one who should get the bucks, and Dunn is shaping up very nicely in Chicago, poised for a call-up after Shat is traded or full time next season. I think the problem is that everyone knows the Blues probably want to trade and definitely have a reason to trade Shat that's pulling down his value in a return.

All it takes is two teams to get in a bidding war...

[theohall]

The biggest problem I see for the Blues in trying to get a quality C for Shattenkirk is salary cap. How many GMs are willing to give up a quality Center who is making 4.25M or less (Shattenkirk's cap hit) for a rental? The only way I see Shattenkirk doing a sign and trade thing is if he gets what he expects to get on the open market and the Blues can't afford to do that. The C in return has to be no more than a 4.5M hit for the Blues to stay under the cap.

So, knowing that information, who is available given those salary restrictions? Or should the Blues do the draft pick thing and let the younger players (Megan, Barbashev, Dunn) move up permanently.

[glen a richter]

Detroit wasn't willing to deal when they didn't think they'd be terrible and in last place. Their thinking may have changed after this dumpster fire of a season for them.

[WaukeeBlues]

The biggest problem I see for the Blues in trying to get a quality C for Shattenkirk is salary cap. How many GMs are willing to give up a quality Center who is making 4.25M or less (Shattenkirk's cap hit) for a rental? The only way I see Shattenkirk doing a sign and trade thing is if he gets what he expects to get on the open market and the Blues can't afford to do that. The C in return has to be no more than a 4.5M hit for the Blues to stay under the cap.

So, knowing that information, who is available given those salary restrictions? Or should the Blues do the draft pick thing and let the younger players (Megan, Barbashev, Dunn) move up permanently.

See I'm much more relaxed about it. I'd be good with prospects and picks quite honestly. Of course you'd want a top line guy or a quality center but for a team making a playoff push they're not going to part with a big piece to get a piece. That just doesn't make any sense.

Now with this winning streak blazing along I'm becoming less and less optimistic Armstrong moves Shattenkirk. He's going to hang on to him so we can win our 2 playoff games and then he's going to walk July 1 for nothing. You heard it here first.

Heck, we might go blow our first rounder for this year again. Also a brilliant move.

[cardsfan04]

The biggest problem I see for the Blues in trying to get a quality C for Shattenkirk is salary cap. How many GMs are willing to give up a quality Center who is making 4.25M or less (Shattenkirk's cap hit) for a rental? The only way I see Shattenkirk doing a sign and trade thing is if he gets what he expects to get on the open market and the Blues can't afford to do that. The C in return has to be no more than a 4.5M hit for the Blues to stay under the cap.

So, knowing that information, who is available given those salary restrictions? Or should the Blues do the draft pick thing and let the younger players (Megan, Barbashev, Dunn) move up permanently.

See I'm much more relaxed about it. I'd be good with prospects and picks quite honestly. Of course you'd want a top line guy or a quality center but for a team making a playoff push they're not going to part with a big piece to get a piece. That just doesn't make any sense.

Now with this winning streak blazing along I'm becoming less and less optimistic Armstrong moves Shattenkirk. He's going to hang on to him so we can win our 2 playoff games and then he's going to walk July 1 for nothing. You heard it here first.

Heck, we might go blow our first rounder for this year again. Also a brilliant move.

I'm worried that's where this is heading too. I mean, teams have gotten hot and rolled through the playoffs after playing mediocre hockey for awhile. I guess that's possible and makes Shatty's value to us split between trade value and how he could help us in the playoffs. I just hope that whatever decision is made is based on a realistic expectation in the playoffs and not a short sample in which the team responded to a coaching change. I love how we are playing and each win increases my hope that it will continue, but I'm really worried we will hold onto him for a 1st-2nd round playoff exit.

[glen a richter]

The veteran presence of guys like Pie helping a guy like Dunn should offset the loss of Shattenkirk. They're both offensively gifted d-men, so why the heck not recall Dunn and trade Shattenkirk? I think any possible negative effect due to growing pains of a rookie would be negligible. Yeo and Thomas appear to know what they're doing. Heck, Parayko was a 3rd rounder who flew largely under the radar and just look at what he's done in just over a season and a half. It's not without precedent. Don't lose Shatty for nothing, get it Dunn.

[theohall]

It should be noted Dunn is a left defenseman so he wouldn't actually be replacing Shattenkirk, a pure right defenseman. Moving up Dunn puts him behind Bouwmeester, Edmundson, and Gunnarson.

Jordan Schmaltz is a more likely replacement for Shattenkirk (Right D for Right D) with Dunn moving up next season to replace whichever left defenseman the Blues likely lose in the expansion draft.

I know, Dunn is playing way better than Schmaltz, but one has to consider the left/right thing.

Remember, the Blues can only protect 3 defenseman. Two of those are Parayko and Pietrangelo. Which means one of Bouwmeester, Gunnarson, Edmundson, or Bortuzzo have to be exposed. Not really worried about the Blues losing any important forwards in the expansion draft.

[glen a richter]

I'm supremely confident the Blues will lose Bouwmeester in the expansion draft, and if it's not a foregone conclusion, they'll deal with Vegas to ensure it happens. Maybe some swapping of draft picks to guarantee he gets taken. There's no debating that depth on defense is the highlight of this organization, even the guys beyond the big names--Schmaltz, Dunn, Walman, Vannelli who I think is injured... there's a couple of other guys they drafted in the past few years who shape up as probably steady top 6 players.

Realistically, you go into next season with Pie, Parayko, Edmundson, Bortuzzo, Gunnarsson, Dunn and maybe a FA pick up for a little extra veteran presence, a guy like Kyle Quincey on a 2 year deal maybe. Bortuzzo plays the role of #7.

[theohall]

I'm supremely confident the Blues will lose Bouwmeester in the expansion draft, and if it's not a foregone conclusion, they'll deal with Vegas to ensure it happens. Maybe some swapping of draft picks to guarantee he gets taken.

One thing that makes Vegas taking Bouwmeester almost certainty - their expansion selection salaries have to add up to at least 60% of the salary cap, which Bouwmeester's salary definitely helps them achieve.

[gaijin]

From nhl.com (prior to last night's win over Vancouver):
https://www.nhl.com/news/nhl-trade-buzz ... =278542340

General manager Doug Armstrong will have some tough decisions to make.

St. Louis won its fifth straight game Wednesday, 2-0 at the Detroit Red Wings, and has won six of seven games (6-1-0) since Armstrong fired coach Ken Hitchcock on Feb. 1 and replaced him with Mike Yeo.

The Blues were two points out of a spot in the Stanley Cup Playoffs and had lost five of six games (1-5-0) when the coaching change was made, but now are third in the Central Division with 65 points, five ahead of the top non-playoff team in the Western Conference, the Los Angeles Kings.

This puts Armstrong in a tricky deadline position for the second straight season.
Last season, Armstrong did nothing at the deadline with the Blues holding the fourth-best record in the NHL at the time, keeping impending unrestricted free agents David Backes and Troy Brouwer and also choosing not to add anyone to the roster.

The Blues advanced to the Western Conference Final but lost to the San Jose Sharks in six games.

On July 1, 2016, Backes signed with the Boston Bruins and Brouwer with the Calgary Flames, giving the Blues nothing in return for those assets.

This season, it's defenseman Kevin Shattenkirk and center Patrik Berglund who can become unrestricted free agents July 1, and Armstrong is faced with a similar decision on what to do with them.

It has been considered a bit of a foregone conclusion that Shattenkirk will be traded. He enters Thursday tied for fifth among NHL defensemen with 39 points (11 goals, 28 assists) in 57 games and is in a five-way tie for first with 18 power-play points. Armstrong doesn't want to lose Shattenkirk for nothing if he is unable to re-sign him by July 1, but he also won't want to make many changes to his surging team.

The same dilemma exists with Berglund, though probably to a lesser extent. The 6-foot-4, 223-pound center joins Martin Hanzal (6-foot-6, 226 pounds) of the Arizona Coyotes as big, two-way centers with expiring contracts, the type of player most playoff-bound teams covet. But Berglund has come alive under Yeo with six goals in his past six games, including a hat trick in a 4-2 win against the Montreal Canadiens on Saturday.

Can Armstrong trade Shattenkirk, Berglund or both before the deadline and keep the Blues' playoff hopes alive?

They have five games remaining before the deadline, starting at home against the Vancouver Canucks on Thursday (8 p.m. ET; SN, SN360, FS-MW, NHL.TV).

Doesn't say much we haven't already covered.

Even with this nice win streak we're on, I think it is best to trade both these guys.

Berglund's value has probably never been higher in his career, so we need to sell high. Like it has been said by others, he probably doesn't factor into the team's long-term plans (especially not with his salary balanced against his typical production). Easy call.

Shattenkirk is a tougher decision. Yes, it makes sense to trade him and get something in return before he walks for nothing in the offseason, but he is a big part of this team's current success, and I fear what happens to our style of play when he departs. At least he is continually raising his trade value with the way he has been playing (and the continual media hype of being a top trade target). So ideally the return we get for him will be high enough that it will ease the pain of losing his offensive presence on the blueline.

[WaukeeBlues]

The biggest problem I see for the Blues in trying to get a quality C for Shattenkirk is salary cap. How many GMs are willing to give up a quality Center who is making 4.25M or less (Shattenkirk's cap hit) for a rental? The only way I see Shattenkirk doing a sign and trade thing is if he gets what he expects to get on the open market and the Blues can't afford to do that. The C in return has to be no more than a 4.5M hit for the Blues to stay under the cap.

So, knowing that information, who is available given those salary restrictions? Or should the Blues do the draft pick thing and let the younger players (Megan, Barbashev, Dunn) move up permanently.

See I'm much more relaxed about it. I'd be good with prospects and picks quite honestly. Of course you'd want a top line guy or a quality center but for a team making a playoff push they're not going to part with a big piece to get a piece. That just doesn't make any sense.

Now with this winning streak blazing along I'm becoming less and less optimistic Armstrong moves Shattenkirk. He's going to hang on to him so we can win our 2 playoff games and then he's going to walk July 1 for nothing. You heard it here first.

Heck, we might go blow our first rounder for this year again. Also a brilliant move.

I'm worried that's where this is heading too. I mean, teams have gotten hot and rolled through the playoffs after playing mediocre hockey for awhile. I guess that's possible and makes Shatty's value to us split between trade value and how he could help us in the playoffs. I just hope that whatever decision is made is based on a realistic expectation in the playoffs and not a short sample in which the team responded to a coaching change. I love how we are playing and each win increases my hope that it will continue, but I'm really worried we will hold onto him for a 1st-2nd round playoff exit.

In its strictest terms anything short of a cup would be a "failure."

We're just not deep enough at forward. Especially with Fabbri and possibly even Stastny out. Or goaltending for that matter. I could easily see us hitting the playoff goal drought wall which plagued this team in its past first round playoff losses to the Hawks and Kings.

I mean Christ, we have a "Chicago Wolves line" out there playing as our 3rd line. Granted they've been playing well but to your point what are the realistic playoff expectations for those 3?

I hope and pray this team comes back down to earth a little bit and starts pitching .500 closer to the deadline but we're running out of time. Armstrong is going to f**k this up no matter what he does I feel like

[glen a richter]

There's enough veteran presence on this team to offset the loss of two vets, one of whom is only recently playing well but normally doesn't. It's not like we're looking at a total rebuild and even trading Shatty and Berglund, they could still fend for themselves in the playoffs, at least no worse than they did the last few years last season nonwithstanding.

I get the left/right thing with Shatty and Dunn but just throwing out there that Dunn is coming up next season for sure. Get him some ice time. Replacing Berglund is a bit different. Get someone to take his spot via trade or what is there going on in Chicago that can be comparable? Best choice looks like maybe Samuel Blais. Not the greatest numbers on the planet but a good shooting percentage so the shots he does take seem to go in.

Armstrong needs to see the forest for the trees, it would take a Kings-esque run the year they were 8 seed, and we hit the same problem as last year anyway: get to the finals and no one is beating Washington or Pittsburgh out of the east. Both those teams are far too strong. Gear up for the next few seasons and wait for the power shift to the west to happen. EC is winning the next few Cups, let's be honest.