AJgoal Posted January 9, 2016 Share Posted January 9, 2016 Two seasons ago, there were rumors that the Blues were considering moving Shattenkirk because they wouldn't be able to afford to sign him. Custance over at ESPN is saying they're considering it again (http://insider.espn.go.com/blog/craig-custance/insider/post?id=6899): "Finances may also motivate the trade of another impact player, this time in St. Louis, where GM Doug Armstrong will soon be faced with a difficult decision regarding defenseman Kevin Shattenkirk. Multiple sources have said Shattenkirk’s name is in play on the trade front, not because the Blues don’t like him but because they probably can’t afford to keep him when his contract runs out after next season. The Blues are a budget team, and they’re already paying Alex Pietrangelo and Jay Bouwmeester top-pairing salaries on long-term deals. The emergence of a young defenseman like Colton Parayko helps ease the pain of losing Shattenkirk, if that’s the path the Blues decide to take. The challenge is dealing Shattenkirk in the middle of the season when you’re trying to win a Stanley Cup." 'Unless they significantly improve or come out even somewhere else, that’d be a tough deal to make during the season,” said one NHL source. “Is that an area where they can give him up now and improve somewhere else in the lineup? Maybe it is. He’s going to be a good piece for someone if they trade him.'” It’s more reasonable to expect a deal like that to happen in the offseason, but as the Keith Yandle trade proved last year, the return would be greater now because an acquiring team would get two postseasons out of Shattenkirk before his contract expires." Shattenkirk has a year and change left on a deal that pays out 4.25 million a season. They have some decisions to make in the offseason with Backes and Schwartz, among others, due for new deals, and the team right now is over the cap. Then next season, when Shattenkirk's contract is up, they have guys like Steen and Parayko who will also need extensions. Shattenkirk will take a huge package to acquire, I would think At least as much as what Yandle cost if he's traded during this season. (Moore, Duclair, a first, and a second. The Rangers also got Summers and a fourth, but they're pretty much throw ins). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flyercanuck Posted January 9, 2016 Share Posted January 9, 2016 No. Before someone suggests it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AJgoal Posted January 9, 2016 Author Share Posted January 9, 2016 Just now, flyercanuck said: No. Before someone suggests it. I thought about it very briefly and came to the same conclusion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J0e Th0rnton Posted January 9, 2016 Share Posted January 9, 2016 Doug Wilson, get in on this. Offer the moon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OccamsRazor Posted January 11, 2016 Share Posted January 11, 2016 I could see the Bolts trading Drouin for him. There would need to be more going both ways i think, i read Blues would like to trim salary and Bolts don't have enough room for all of Shatty's caphit. So you could throw Coburn in there more cap reasons and Coburn could be a rental and off the books after this year. I know the Bolts would love to include Carle instead of Coburn but that ain't happening. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J0e Th0rnton Posted January 11, 2016 Share Posted January 11, 2016 Methinks this trading talk will be on hold while they have half the team injured. 2 of them Dmen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.