Trade ideas and speculation

[dudacek]

Kevin Shattenkirk is reportedly on the trade block...but I don't see us A.) Getting another RHD, B.) Giving up many more assets in trade.

 

He would have made more sense for Edmonton than Reinhart did. (Can't believe they only paid 1 less 2nd rounder for Reinhart, as Calgary did for Hamilton.)

 

Maybe this is why Bylsma is talking moving Risto to LD.  :ph34r:

(Don't see us having the ammunition to do this trade)

[dudacek]

Yandle rumours out there.

Im not a huge fan, but he is exactly what the Sabres are looking for.

Pending UFA. Not sure what it would take - Foligno and the type of prospect we don't have any more.

[nfreeman]

Yandle rumours out there.

Im not a huge fan, but he is exactly what the Sabres are looking for.

Pending UFA. Not sure what it would take - Foligno and the type of prospect we don't have any more.

 

Yandle cost the Rangers quite a bit, so presumably the price would be fairly high.  He also doesn't play a GMTM type of game.

 

So I'm skeptical.

 

Shattenkirk seems a bit more likely.but wouldn't come cheaply either.

[TrueBlueGED]

Yandle is fine as long as he's playing with a partner who can cover for his defensive lapses. Price should be reasonable given contract status.

[dejeanneret]

Yandle rumours out there.

Im not a huge fan, but he is exactly what the Sabres are looking for.

Pending UFA. Not sure what it would take - Foligno and the type of prospect we don't have any more.

Source?

[TrueBlueGED]

Yandle cost the Rangers quite a bit, so presumably the price would be fairly high. He also doesn't play a GMTM type of game.

 

So I'm skeptical.

 

Shattenkirk seems a bit more likely.but wouldn't come cheaply either.

Disagree on the style point. Murray loves puck moving defenseman.

[dudacek]

Source?

Tweet in the actual trade thread

[nfreeman]

Disagree on the style point. Murray loves puck moving defenseman.

 

Troof, but they also need to play "heavy" and/or "hard to play against."  That ain't Yandle.

[qwksndmonster]

Troof, but they also need to play "heavy" and/or "hard to play against."  That ain't Yandle.

I don't think every single defenseman on the roster has to be heavy and/or hard to play against.  In fact, if the rest of your D corp is heavy and hard to play against then your last spot could be a perfect fit for a predominantly finesse offensive defenseman.  Examples: Ehrhoff and Sekera were both sound defensively, but neither was very heavy.

[WildCard]

Troof, but they also need to play "heavy" and/or "hard to play against."  That ain't Yandle.

I know this is the case for his forwards, but is it for his defense? 

[Hoss]

If Yandle or Shattenkirk are available I would be willing to pay a lot for either. Yandle less than Shattenkirk, obviously... But Shattenkirk is one of the best dmen in the league... Yandle is a definite top-4 guy. Both still young.

[TrueBlueGED]

I don't think every single defenseman on the roster has to be heavy and/or hard to play against. In fact, if the rest of your D corp is heavy and hard to play against then your last spot could be a perfect fit for a predominantly finesse offensive defenseman. Examples: Ehrhoff and Sekera were both sound defensively, but neither was very heavy.

Totally agree. I'd even argue supply comes into question here: the number of defenseman who fit the ideal profile of both puck movers and hard to play against is a pretty small subset. And this team desperately needs a power play QB from the blue line. It all depends on price of course, but I think Yandle would be a pretty perfect add.

[Samson's Flow]

If Yandle or Shattenkirk are available I would be willing to pay a lot for either. Yandle less than Shattenkirk, obviously... But Shattenkirk is one of the best dmen in the league... Yandle is a definite top-4 guy. Both still young.

I would agree that both of those guys are pretty big names that I would love to add. My only concern with that is that with everyone else that we have now, it might force some tough Chicago like decisions where we have to lose players we like in a few years. That said, that is a great problem to have since you can use these talents to restock the prospects/depth with cheaper players.

 

I'd be down if we can find a price for either one. you can never have too many good players. 

[TrueBlueGED]

As an aside, "hard to play against" is rapidly climbing the ladder of my most hated hockey clichés, soon to pass "compete."

[Hoss]

I would agree that both of those guys are pretty big names that I would love to add. My only concern with that is that with everyone else that we have now, it might force some tough Chicago like decisions where we have to lose players we like in a few years. That said, that is a great problem to have since you can use these talents to restock the prospects/depth with cheaper players.

 

I'd be down if we can find a price for either one. you can never have too many good players. 

We're going to have Chicago-like decisions regardless. I would gladly take on Chicago-like decisions if we have Chicago-like success.

 

Just going to put this out there: I'm willing to give Girgensons for Shattenkirk. It would take more, but I'm that interested in Shattenkirk.

 

I wonder what the asking price on these guys would be. 

 

Yandle commanded prospect John Moore (who wasn't even tendered), Anthony Duclair (high-end forward prospect), a lottery-protected first in 2016 and a 2015 second. Arizona also sent along two spare parts.

 

To me we could match that without a problem. Moore is meh (Ruhwedel/Martin/Weber), Anthony Duclair is different (Bailey/Baptiste/Foligno/Larsson plus another piece?), a lottery-protected 2016 first and a 2016 2nd. So something like Ruhwedel, Bailey, lottery-protected 1st, 2016 2nd and Foligno?

 

On Shattenkirk: I'm willing to pay big if we can talk with him beforehand to make sure he would be willing to re-sign in a year. Girgensons, top-5 protected 2016 first and McCabe?

Edited July 1, 2015 by Hoss

[thewookie1]

I will never trade Girgs and you should be ashamed for even thinking it. I'd legitimately cry if we trade Girgs or Risto. Not to mention furious and wanting Murray's head

[Hoss]

I will never trade Girgs and you should be ashamed for even thinking it. I'd legitimately cry if we trade Girgs or Risto. Not to mention furious and wanting Murray's head

I know you wouldn't trade anything of value, Wookie. :p

[thewookie1]

I know you wouldn't trade anything of value, Wookie. :p

I came around with Zadorov

[SabresBillsFan]

We're going to have Chicago-like decisions regardless. I would gladly take on Chicago-like decisions if we have Chicago-like success.

 

Just going to put this out there: I'm willing to give Girgensons for Shattenkirk. It would take more, but I'm that interested in Shattenkirk.

 

I wonder what the asking price on these guys would be. 

 

Yandle commanded prospect John Moore (who wasn't even tendered), Anthony Duclair (high-end forward prospect), a lottery-protected first in 2016 and a 2015 second. Arizona also sent along two spare parts.

 

To me we could match that without a problem. Moore is meh (Ruhwedel/Martin/Weber), Anthony Duclair is different (Bailey/Baptiste/Foligno/Larsson plus another piece?), a lottery-protected 2016 first and a 2016 2nd. So something like Ruhwedel, Bailey, lottery-protected 1st, 2016 2nd and Foligno?

 

On Shattenkirk: I'm willing to pay big if we can talk with him beforehand to make sure he would be willing to re-sign in a year. Girgensons, top-5 protected 2016 first and McCabe?

 

 

I wouldn't put Girgensons in any deal for Shattenkirk. Larsson, Foligno and future picks could be used for another D-man. It doesn't have to be Shattenkirk.

Edited July 1, 2015 by SabresBillsFan

[Hoss]

I wouldn't put Girgensons in any deal for Shattenkirk. Larsson, Foligno and future picks could be used for another D-man. It doesn't have to be Shattenkirk.

You're right. It doesn't. I just think that Shattenkirk is a game-changer from the back end. If we pursue him it will take a Girgensons/Ennis type.

 

I can understand those that wouldn't want to go down that road, but I really like Shattenkirk. Doesn't hurt that he's from the good ole US of A.

[3putt]

We're going to have Chicago-like decisions regardless. I would gladly take on Chicago-like decisions if we have Chicago-like success.

 

Just going to put this out there: I'm willing to give Girgensons for Shattenkirk. It would take more, but I'm that interested in Shattenkirk.

 

I wonder what the asking price on these guys would be. 

 

Yandle commanded prospect John Moore (who wasn't even tendered), Anthony Duclair (high-end forward prospect), a lottery-protected first in 2016 and a 2015 second. Arizona also sent along two spare parts.

 

To me we could match that without a problem. Moore is meh (Ruhwedel/Martin/Weber), Anthony Duclair is different (Bailey/Baptiste/Foligno/Larsson plus another piece?), a lottery-protected 2016 first and a 2016 2nd. So something like Ruhwedel, Bailey, lottery-protected 1st, 2016 2nd and Foligno?

 

On Shattenkirk: I'm willing to pay big if we can talk with him beforehand to make sure he would be willing to re-sign in a year. Girgensons, top-5 protected 2016 first and McCabe?

NYR were looking to make a cup run and traded at the deadline on a gamble.  To a large extent that backfired.  St Louis has too much invested in one area of the team hindering its ability to remediate deficiencies elsewhere.  These should affect the value of each asset.  I do not think NYR get nearly the equivalent return in the offseason but rather roster flexibility and a fair return.  Shattenkirk isn't a must move so I agree he costs more, but I think you are not taking into account why they want to move these guys into the cost equation.  

I will add that I would give up Ennis not Girgs if it was the cost of poker.  

[Hoss]

NYR were looking to make a cup run and traded at the deadline on a gamble. To a large extent that backfired. St Louis has too much invested in one area of the team hindering its ability to remediate deficiencies elsewhere. These should affect the value of each asset. I do not think NYR get nearly the equivalent return in the offseason but rather roster flexibility and a fair return. Shattenkirk isn't a must move so I agree he costs more, but I think you are not taking into account why they want to move these guys into the cost equation.

 

I will add that I would give up Ennis not Girgs if it was the cost of poker.

You're most likely right that Yandle costs less. Shattenkirk, I don't believe, will cost any less than he should. They likely aren't actively trying to move him. If they do love him it's to add to their team overall.

[beerme1]

I came around with Zadorov

 

 

I'm still hurt. I'll get over it easier if he is screw up long term. But I expect him to be Pronger like long term. I got no issue with ROR but we lose a guy who can bash and skate.

[inkman]

I'm still hurt. I'll get over it easier if he is screw up long term. But I expect him to be Pronger like long term. I got no issue with ROR but we lose a guy who can bash and skate.

Idk Pronger is a HOF D

Edited July 1, 2015 by inkman

[beerme1]

Idk Pronger is a HOF D

 

 

Nikita's a kid. He has a chance to be amazing or a headcase. I respect the HOF D but we haven't had what Nikita brings in a long time and quick as he brought it, it's gone.

Bogo gives me some measure of being able to do both hit and skate but I see him skating far less than Nikita will. I'm excited at what ROR brings to the team as well so get me wrong. But mancrush on Nikita.