Shattenkirk reportedly on board with the Shanaplan

Photo Credit: Kirby Lee/USA TODAY SPORTS

For a while, we’ve been discussing the potential for the Leafs to make a substantial move in trade or free agency as they soon find themselves in the thick of the “build” portion of their plan to contend. They have the cap space to do something big, and earlier this week I wrote about whether that might manifest as a run at Kevin Shattenkirk. Rebuilds come at you fast.

Shattenkirk will understandably continue to be the focal point of trade deadline and free agency rumours, as he’s perhaps the only one worth giving a damn about in a relatively weak class. And if he’s moved prior to the deadline, there’s a strong possibility a contract extension (likely on the shorter side) is worked out beforehand. Is that something that might interest the Leafs? It’s tough to say. But Shattenkirk seems warm to the idea.

From Darren Dreger on TSN Radio this morning:

“You look back historically, (the Blues) didn’t get anything for Brouwer, he left. They didn’t get anything for David Backes, he left as a free agent…Many out there believe the best way to maximize the return is by trading him, and then Shattenkirk signing an extension. So where might he want to go to do that? Again, he’s giving up free agency to do that if he’s traded between now and March 1st. And I know that Toronto is on the list. I’m not saying Toronto is location number one on the list, but it’s among the eastern conference cities that he would enjoy playing in.”

Now, I usually take anything Dreger says that’s Leafs-related with a major grain of salt, especially under this new front office and Lou’s cone of silence. But this information likely would be coming from the Blues/Shattenkirk side of things anyway. And he seems quite confident about it. 

There’ll be more written here at this site about what Shattenkirk can bring to the Leafs, but the quick rundown is that he’s a top pairing right-handed defenceman that drives play and produces at the level of Nazem Kadri. I can’t see any reason why Lou wouldn’t at least pick up the phone, especially if these rumours have substance. 

  • The Russian Rocket

    Should we be concerned that he was -14 last year which was the worst +/- on the Blues? And this year he’s -14 which is the worst +/- on the Blues…

  • The China Wall

    Let’s remember folks, that any assets the Leafs might trade for Shattenkirk would eventually also include losing Carrick in the expansion draft to Vegas, as he would have to be exposed to protect Shattenkirk.

    So cost would be whatever assets are traded, plus loss of a young 2nd pairing RHD under a good team-friendly contract, plus whatever it costs to actually sign Shattenkirk.

    I’m not against trading for Shattenkirk, just trying to understand the true costs…

      • LeafsTakeFlight

        4? I see two 81 game seasons. Then the 48 game lockout season. Are you counting this year’s season?

        I just hope they don’t trade JVR to get Shattenkirk. He’d be a nice addition but losing an elite winger would hurt. I’d rather see them try to acquire him in free agency.

        • Wesley Thompson

          If the point is that he’s injury prone, he didn’t miss any games during the lockout year. Then, during his rookie season, he played 72 NHL games and 10 AHL games.

          I count those as full seasons. Maybe I’m wrong there.

          • James Rielly

            Good Point there.Not saying he is prone but it was the groin, which can haunt you.My main concern is that he is an offensive D-man which we have and I would not want to give up assets for that.

        • Marcel DePass

          Through trade we would lose assets, but wait for free agency and the cost against the cap will be high. Best trade for him and negotiate a deal before the playoffs. Unless they can get a reasonable deal without too much term, I’m cool with that. Anything over $5M, forget it.

  • Capt.jay

    I wonder what St. Louis would want in return. Would Carrick and a second do it? Probably not. Would Carrick, Lypsic and a second do it? Probably if St. Louis is thinking rebuild as their time has past in my honest opinion. Would the leafs give up prospects for a vet defeating the shanaplan? Not sure. I don’t want to give up JVR for him because I believe JVR could fetch and younger Dman with term. Plus I don’t want to lose the chemistry we have up front. Oh the dilemma.

    But I would like him on our team. Especially if it keeps him away from a team we are contending against.

        • espo

          why? shattenkirk is a UFA after this year, worst case is Vegas throws way too much money at him during expansion. if thats the case, make a condition trade offer based on Shattenkirk re-signing in TO.

          Not saying the Leafs should go all out to get him, but losing Carrick isn’t a foregone conclusion in the event they do aquire him.

          • espo

            no I knew what you meant despite the ambiguous wording, but UFA’s don’t need to be protected. If Lou waits until after the expansion draft to finalize a deal w shattenkirk there d be no reason to lose Carrick to the draft.

            You’d totally have a point if they were talking about trading for a Lindholm or Trouba, who both have term but the draft shouldn’t come into it on a Shattenkirk deal unless it’s a sign and trade type deal.

          • Capt.jay

            My concern is he gets traded to another team and signed before the draft or UFA. Your scenario is best case which I hope for as well. Just don’t like chancing it that’s all.

          • espo

            don’t think there’s a reason to shoot for anything other than best case scenario though. If the Leafs trade for Shattenkirk they really should be making it a conditional deal. ie the 4th they included becomes a 2nd if Shattenkirk re-signs with the leafs (obviously pulling figures out of my a$$ here but you get the point)

            probably doesn’t give the leafs the best chance of acquiring him, but why overpay when he’ll be potentially available July 1st?

            Should the Leafs acquire him in a trade, they just need to wait until after the expansion draft to re-sign him in order to avoid losing Carrick.

            At that point, worst case is LV offering Shattenkirk something ridiculous that he can’t turn down, and if thats the case, the Leafs weren’t going to match anyway.

  • LukeDaDrifter

    I think everyone agrees Shattenkirk is an above average defenceman, So it really comes down to the cost of acquiring him. Can the Leafs offer the Blues something they actually need. It looks like the Blues may have to expose Carrick if he went back to other way. Shattenkirk is making $4,250,000 this year. One has to assume they Blues have spoke to his agent and have some idea what sort of contract he is looking for next year. Speculation has it that on the open market someone will be willing pay him aprox. $7 million for seven years. I read somewhere that he is looking for a contract total of $50 million.

  • STAN

    Agree fully with your Dreger analysis. He hedges with Trump=like qualifiers, siuch as “many people are saying…” and “I’m hearing…” That said, Shattenkirk would be a perfect fit in Toronto. Let’s hope LL is on this one.

  • Harte of a Lion

    Everyone loves Shattenkirk however no one is looking long term at the salary cap implications. If the Leafs acquire Shattenkirk, they may not have the cap flexibility to offer Gardiner an extension.

  • Ron K

    Shattenkirk may be exactly the kind of player the Leafs are in need of but does he really fit in with the Leafs? He really doesn’t.
    First of all, he’ll be 28 next season and really doesn’t fit in with the core age group of this team. Second, he’s looking for $6.5 to $7 million per year which is not in line with the current blueliners we have under contract. He wants too much money. Period.
    Why on earth would you ever want to disrupt your entire pay scale with the signing of one player? If we could get him signed at $5 to $5.75 million per for the next 4 or 5 years then I say do it. Otherwise, forget about it. And, I doubt very, very much that he would sign such a contract because there will be other teams foolish enough to give him more. Next……..