[brooks] Shattenkirk to... the Lightning?

4. Isn?t there some sort of cap contained in the CBA limiting the number of Rangers on the Lightning? Apparently not, given Tampa Bay?s substantial scouting presence at the Garden last week. The league?s best team is on the hunt for a righty defenseman. Kevin Shattenkirk, for whom the Lightning had completed a conditional deal prior to the 2017 deadline before the defenseman rejected it, shoots right. Just saying.

https://nypost.com/2019/02/13/mats-zuccarello-should-be-the-exception-to-rangers-fire-sale/

https://nypost.com/2019/02/13/mats-zuccarello-should-be-the-exception-to-rangers-fire-sale/

Wonder what a return for Shattenkirk would look like? I'd even retain on salary to sweeten the deal.

Probably something like Taylor Raddysh + Ryan Callahan's shit-ass contract for Shattenkirk with some level of retention.

Was just about to post this re: Callahan. Not sure of any other way to make it work. So we would be stuck with Callahan next year. I guess that would be better than Shattenkirk for 2 more years.

Probably something like Taylor Raddysh + Ryan Callahan's shit-ass contract for Shattenkirk with some level of retention.

Bah, how much retention are we talking here? Callahan's still got one year left on his deal.

Was just about to post this re: Callahan. Not sure of any other way to make it work. So we would be stuck with Callahan next year. I guess that would be better than Shattenkirk for 2 more years.

The only alternative is to take on much longer term in Killorn or Johnson, but those would be more hockey trades than salary dumps.

Bah, how much retention are we talking here? Callahan's still got one year left on his deal.

For the Rangers, it doesn't matter. They're not going to be hung up by his $5 million and change cap hit for a season.

For the Rangers, it doesn't matter. They're not going to be hung up by his $5 million and change cap hit for a season.

No, but taking on a contract PLUS retaining (plus Smith buyout) = a lot of wasted cap space. That’s bad business.

No, but taking on a contract PLUS retaining (plus Smith buyout) = a lot of wasted cap space. That’s bad business.

This. Rangers still have dead weight to get rid of.

I saw somewhere a couple of days ago where TBs GM said he can?t deal his 1st or 2nd Rd pick due to the stipulation in the trade they made with us for Miller/McD. We get the 1st if they win the Stanley Cup or we get the 2nd if they don?t. Maybe we will work that into they trade like we are guaranteed both the 1st & 2nd.

I would also look at Cal Foote, Ben Thomas, Lipanov & Volkov. Especially since if we will take Callahan who has 1 more year at 5.8 mil. and we are gonna retain some of Shattenkirks contract.

Sent from my iPad using Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk

This. Rangers still have dead weight to get rid of.

And Shattenkirk for Callahan+ would be a good start to get rid of some of that. Callahan 1 year > Shattenkirk 2 years + we would get a prospect/pick back. Its a win-win.

And Shattenkirk for Callahan+ would be a good start to get rid of some of that. Callahan 1 year > Shattenkirk 2 years + we would get a prospect/pick back. Its a win-win.

I?d do that in a heart beat. One less year on the contract and a smaller cap hit (unless the rangers retain salary) and picks/prospects. Can?t go wrong.

Sent from my iPhone using Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk

If Shattenkirk already rejected a deal to go there 2 years ago, why is he going there now? They were still a sick team 2 years ago.

They missed the playoffs.

Shattenkirk didnt have a NTC then...

https://www.capfriendly.com/players/kevin-shattenkirk

If Shattenkirk already rejected a deal to go there 2 years ago, why is he going there now? They were still a sick team 2 years ago.

from all accounts it looked like he just wanted to be a Ranger. But now that it's not really worked out, maybe he'd be willing to accept a move there.

We'd certainly have to eat some salary retained, but I'm wondering if this kind of deal would even be possible. TB has three defenseman hitting UFA and they still need to spend the money on Point's contract. Obviously getting Shattenkirk would lower that amount to two holes at defense. but depending on how much Point gets (and it'll be a lot) and how much we are able and willing to retain, I'm really not seeing cap room. Foote would have to be a fulltime NHLer next year and his cap number would be about 1.5 and they'd need to sign one other Dman at least.

from all accounts it looked like he just wanted to be a Ranger. But now that it's not really worked out, maybe he'd be willing to accept a move there.

 

 

We'd certainly have to eat some salary retained, but I'm wondering if this kind of deal would even be possible. TB has three defenseman hitting UFA and they still need to spend the money on Point's contract. Obviously getting Shattenkirk would lower that amount to two holes at defense. but depending on how much Point gets (and it'll be a lot) and how much we are able and willing to retain, I'm really not seeing cap room. Foote would have to be a fulltime NHLer next year and his cap number would be about 1.5 and they'd need to sign one other Dman at least.

They have the same problem with Callahan's contract on the books for next year. If they could dump Callahan, and get Shattenkirk at a caphit less than Callahan's then it is a big win for them. It saves cap and fills a need. Rangers would need to retain 1m+ per year to reduce Shattenkirk's cap hit to be lower than Callahan's for Tampa. I would be complerely on board if they retained up to 50% of Shattenkirk's contract next year only, something creative like that.

The return needs to be good to do it. Getting their 2nd round pick and making the conditional a 1st, along with a B prospect is probably enough.

from all accounts it looked like he just wanted to be a Ranger. But now that it's not really worked out, maybe he'd be willing to accept a move there.

 

 

We'd certainly have to eat some salary retained, but I'm wondering if this kind of deal would even be possible. TB has three defenseman hitting UFA and they still need to spend the money on Point's contract. Obviously getting Shattenkirk would lower that amount to two holes at defense. but depending on how much Point gets (and it'll be a lot) and how much we are able and willing to retain, I'm really not seeing cap room. Foote would have to be a fulltime NHLer next year and his cap number would be about 1.5 and they'd need to sign one other Dman at least.

TB doesn't have nearly the cap issues that people want them to have unless Point holds out for market value. Cernak and Sergachev on ELCs gives them a lot of space to breathe.

If they dump Cally, assuming an $80m cap next year, they'd have ~$15m in space. Miller, Killorn, Johnson are tradeable if you need more wiggle room.

They missed the playoffs.

Weird. Is that the year Stamkos was hurt?

They have the same problem with Callahan's contract on the books for next year. If they could dump Callahan, and get Shattenkirk at a caphit less than Callahan's then it is a big win for them. It saves cap and fills a need. Rangers would need to retain 1m+ per year to reduce Shattenkirk's cap hit to be lower than Callahan's for Tampa. I would be complerely on board if they retained up to 50% of Shattenkirk's contract next year only, something creative like that.

 

The return needs to be good to do it. Getting their 2nd round pick and making the conditional a 1st, along with a B prospect is probably enough.

TB doesn't have nearly the cap issues that people want them to have unless Point holds out for market value. Cernak and Sergachev on ELCs gives them a lot of space to breathe.

 

If they dump Cally, assuming an $80m cap next year, they'd have ~$15m in space. Miller, Killorn, Johnson are tradeable if you need more wiggle room.

Shattenkirk on the extra year makes it more difficult though. Would we want to retain 50% for the entirety of that contract? Cernak is an RFA this year and they'd need some kind of bridge deal which is certainly doable. Miller they can probably move but I doubt they'd be keen on having to move Killorn and/or Johnson as a byproduct of having Shattenkirk.

Not saying it's not possible but I just don't know if having Shattenkirk offers them enough upside to make this situation with their cap worth it.

Shattenkirk on the extra year makes it more difficult though. Would we want to retain 50% for the entirety of that contract? Cernak is an RFA this year and they'd need some kind of bridge deal which is certainly doable. Miller they can probably move but I doubt they'd be keen on having to move Killorn and/or Johnson as a byproduct of having Shattenkirk.

 

Not saying it's not possible but I just don't know if having Shattenkirk offers them enough upside to make this situation with their cap worth it.

The retunr would have to be really good to do 50% both years. Id do 50% for next year only. The benefit is being out from under Shattenkirks contract a year early.

Shattenkirk on the extra year makes it more difficult though. Would we want to retain 50% for the entirety of that contract? Cernak is an RFA this year and they'd need some kind of bridge deal which is certainly doable. Miller they can probably move but I doubt they'd be keen on having to move Killorn and/or Johnson as a byproduct of having Shattenkirk.

 

Not saying it's not possible but I just don't know if having Shattenkirk offers them enough upside to make this situation with their cap worth it.

Cernak is signed through next year.

In general, I agree with you that TB isn't really a good landing spot for Shatty. But at $3m you could make it work since those other two guys are on ELCs next year. It's the second year of Shatty that would be way more problematic.