High Line-ups

Shaw is probably gone next year as he becomes an RFA and Kruger will be signing a multi year deal. If there was some reason a need to trade Shaw, when you could already still trade Bickell/Versteeg/a few other of the not save much pieces but multiple make a couple K at a time. I would trade Shaw to keep Kruger.

Defensive checking line center, which is a role 3rd or 4th, even sometimes on a team 2nd line. Centers of that role often do get from 3-3.75 types of contracts, though still being an RFA Kruger can be kept below that 3 Mil range then it's great. Because that Is a role that is worth keeping in tact and roles matter more than arbitrary proclaimed lines. To call it 4th line has always been silly. That line is always out there 2nd or 3rd on ice to start games. The 3rd line has been far more a typical energy type low matchup 4th line style than Kruger's 4th line has been.

I would keep Kruger over Shaw.


Tater brought up a great point about Shaw screening in front of the net doesn't translate to points. Can't argue that part of his game. I wasnt trying to say I'd rather have Shaw over Bickell, but I do still think, if healthy, Bickell can have a good year and just wanted to point out that his production was on par, and arguably better, compared to Shaw last year. Shaw does have better intangibles though, energy, screening, can play C, etc..

As far as Kruger vs Shaw... I guess it really depends on who you think the glue was for that 4th line. Realistically, I think Kruger is a 3rd line C. As far as shutting down the opposition, Kruger is amazing at that role. You're talking about a guy that went up against Getzlaf, Perry, Stamkos, etc.. And actually neutralized them pretty effectively. I think he's a good player to hang onto because he's going to be affordable, and he's good at his job.

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/...hawks-to-trade-star-defenceman-brent-seabrook

and what if the cap relief was Seabrook? I hate them but that article isn't terrible. That 6.5 million sounds real good about now, however, Johns was the obvious Seabs replacement if you wanted to go that route. The Daley trade kills me.

Your freaking out about trading for Daley and parting ways with Oduya and the obvious solution is trade #2 D-man?

ClydeLee said:

Shaw is probably gone next year as he becomes an RFA and Kruger will be signing a multi year deal. If there was some reason a need to trade Shaw, when you could already still trade Bickell/Versteeg/a few other of the not save much pieces but multiple make a couple K at a time. I would trade Shaw to keep Kruger.

Defensive checking line center, which is a role 3rd or 4th, even sometimes on a team 2nd line. Centers of that role often do get from 3-3.75 types of contracts, though still being an RFA Kruger can be kept below that 3 Mil range then it's great. Because that Is a role that is worth keeping in tact and roles matter more than arbitrary proclaimed lines. To call it 4th line has always been silly. That line is always out there 2nd or 3rd on ice to start games. The 3rd line has been far more a typical energy type low matchup 4th line style than Kruger's 4th line has been.

Click to expand...

Do you think Shaw is going to command a huge contract?? My guess is he gets a 3 million dollar contract and for him that's worth it. If the cap goes up, we would still have room to give him the money and give Seabs the same contract amount he has now.


Sent from my Texas Instrument Calculator

Are we so deep that you can build a 5th line on our bench and have it be as respectable as most teams 4th?

I think there is a good chance we are. I'd like to see Shaw, Bickel, and Versteeg all shipped out so we can focus all that money on the guys we need to sign in future. Right now, I don't think Desjardins or Bickell are even in the top 12 players, regardless of salary. Shaw and Versteeg will be right on that edge depending on devlopment of Dano/Panarin/Tikhonov.