Confirmed with Link: Andrew Shaw, 6 years/3.9M AAV.

[Andy]

Probably the same reaction as trading for Shaw.

I like Shaw, so if MB does nothing, my reaction won't be the same.

 

[Puck Luck Run Amok]

I understood that you're quite unhappy with the move by reading all your posts.

You clearly underestimate what this grinder will bring to this team .

There's no point in arguing anymore... Just time will tell.

I don't recall if you're one from the army that always crap on all our top six that they suck in the PO , but the point is that guys like Shaw and Gallagher make you win in the PO and MB clearly identified this ...


Did you watched how this guy plays? He's a copy of Gally , so stop bringing me the Toews and Hossa thing .

His style of play will be effective with any roster . We just need to put the puck at the net ....

Shaw's Hero chart says literally everything.

BTW Hossa is what? 37 now? And yes, Toews is a much, much, much better C than Plekanec could ever be.

The main point of us "Anti-Bergys" is that the team overvaluates "Grit" (Even McGuire said 4m for Shaw was really steep, even more steep when considering the two 2nds) and shows clear disdain for talent.

 

[Mad Brills*]

Probably the same reaction as trading for Shaw.

And probably the same reaction if he does bring a Top 6 forward.

The die is cast. Bergevin can't do anything right. It's the group think narrative.

bergevin can't do wrong is also a group think narrative.

 

[Talks to Goalposts]

Maybe MB is hoping that one of Andrighetto, Carr, Hudon, McCarron, Lekhonen or Shaw break out?

Or maybe he's taking a goals approach? If Carr, Danault, Shaw and Desharnais can all get around 10-15 goals each from the bottom 6, while Galchenyuk, Gallagher and Pacioretty all hit 30+, maybe he doesn't need a top 6 forward? Could it be? Or am I just looking for logic that isn't there?

For the first time in a while, I have no idea what the plans of this team is. I don't mean that as a negative, I just legit don't know. We'll see what happens. I'll give MB the benefit of the doubt.

Benefit of the doubt is for new, unknown entities who it would be unfair to judge due to small sample size.

Bergevin has lost his benefit of the doubt. His tendancies have been well established.

 

[Hoople]

This isn't directed just at you, because many others in the thread have done the same thing, but why do people keep harping on offensive production as if it somehow a barometer to measuring this players worth?

It's pretty clear - and again, I don't mean you specifically - that there are a lot of people in this thread that really don't have a clue what kind of player Andrew Shaw is or what it is that he will bring to the Canadiens, so they dismiss him as a "grinder" or harp on his point totals as if that is somehow a measuring stick that "proves" he is a third line player.

There are a few nonsense arguments that keep coming and then get repeated as fact. It's like the Republic Party talking points in here. A bunch of lies and half-truths keep getting repeated until they become "fact."

Let's go through a few of these "talking points"...

1) Shaw "only" got 30 points while playing with Chicago's high end players, he'll do much worse with the Montreal's inferior offensive players.

There are a few issues with this, that have been pointed out in this thread already, but ignored because they don't fit the narrative. First of all, if Shaw is plugged into a second line agitator/go-to-the-net role that I suspect he will be, he will be playing with guys with the exact same, if not better, offensive totals than Jonathan Toews and Marian Hossa. Look at the numbers. This argument is just plain nonsense.

He spent a lot of time in Chicago playing with those two on a top six line that was given a lot of shutdown assignments by coach Quenville. This was an excellent line. Shaw helped make room, went to the net, caused distractions and was a major pain in the ass.

Even if there was a big difference between the offensive calibre of Toews/Hossa and say, Galchenyuk and Max or Plex and Gallagher - with there isn't - the notion that he is somehow "leaching" off these star players is also a total misnomer. Anybody that is familiar with his game knows that he is a thorn in the side of opponents, a guy that goes to the net, battles for rebounds, plays at the edge of the paint and tries to tip pucks and distract defensemen into battling with him instead of paying attention to the pass lanes, etc. This game would translate anywhere and with anybody. He doesn't rely on his line mates to prop him up. He wants to create situations where they can do what they do best.

2) He is a third line player

He could certainly be used on the third line. His physical play, defensive awareness and work ethic would make him excellent in that regard, but I think he would be much better deployed in the Top Six where he could really compliment two offensive players, help to create room for them and distract the other team. The simple fact that he was a Top Six player on a team that won the Cup twice and is widely regarded as one of the best teams in the league but all of the detractors here want to call him a "third liner" and a "grinder" is frankly bizarre. If he's a Top Six guy on a great team, why is he a bottom six guy on a team with issues on the wing. This makes no sense at all and is a pretty big credibility hit to any poster that keeps parroting this.

This claim becomes even more dubious when the detractors point to his 34 points as "proof" that he isn't a Top Six player. Look at the league. Look at the point totals of players on the second line. 34 points is in no way out of line with what second line guys put up on the vast majority of teams in the league. Not to mention, if you think Andrew Shaw's acquisition is strictly about the points he will personally produce, it's crystal clear that you aren't really aware of what kind of player he is.

3) This is way too much money for a player like this. This contract is a disaster.

I can at least understand the basis of the argument that people don't like a six year contract. I personally have no issue with it, because of his age and the fact that a six year deal could lower the cap hit, but to dispute how much he's being paid is really quite strange. There are tons of comparables of guys making similar money or in many cases more to do a lot less than Andrew Shaw. This is market value. Casey Cizaks, Brandon Sutter, Cody Eakin, Brooks Laich, Ryan Callahan, etc. This is by now means an outlier for a contract.

4) He's not even better than Lars Eller

How anybody could watch Andrew Shaw play and arrive at this conclusion is completely beyond me. I have seen people in this thread claiming that Eller is actually a *better* player, then they parrot off a bunch of stats. Andrew Shaw's direct contribution to the score sheet is NOT the way to gauge his value. Many Montreal fans have seen the way that Brendan Gallagher can get plugged into a line and become the engine of that line. His relentless hard work, his compete level, and his passion effects the entire line. This is what Andrew Shaw does. He does not have the offensive skill set of Brendan Gallagher, but he has the same fire, the same compete level, the same doggedness. Comparing a player like this to Lars Eller is essentially like saying "I actually don't know much about Shaw, but I looked up his numbers on the internet." Speaking of things you don't get from "the numbers..."

5) Intangibles are overrated

This is such a silly and vague argument. Just seems like a great way to dismiss the things that make the player so valuable and special. It's almost too dumb to even get into, so all I will say is Joel Quennville and Stan Bowman really disagree with the "experts" here and I will take their word on what matters when building a winning team over the HFBoard's geniuses any day of the week.

Great post. Refreshing to read here.

 

[ohmyjlord]

Which is why you don't trade for guys (especially 3rd liners) coming off their entry level contracts to $3.9M / year contracts. It's about asset management. Trading Eller for picks would have probably gone over better than overpaying (picks and salary) for Shaw.

This league is about two things:
-Acquiring and paying top 6 forwards, top 2 D and top goalie
And dumping everybody else at the right time (see how many guys Chicago has traded at the peak of their value Buff, Sharp, Versteeg, Campbell, Saad, Leddy...Shaw).
-Drafting or trading for guys on entry level contracts who can develop and contribute
-Smart moves: Paying PK, Price and MaxPac
-Dumb moves: Extending Plek, Markov because of loyalty alone and not trading them at the deadline.

Source? See that last 20 Stanley Cup Winners

And not to mention that front office spending which can be uncapped so there's no reason we shouldn't have the best coach, GM, consultants, etc here instead of the lame ducks we have now.

I'm confused now...are we debatting Eller vs Shaw, or Bergevin vs Bowman/Tallon ?

I never said Bergevin was a good GM, I'm far from being his biggest supporter around here. All I'm saying is that the extra $400k on our payroll isn't going to make the difference between getting a top-6 winger, and not getting one.

If Bergevin fails to sign anyone, it's because he wasn't ready to overspend for the players on the market. Not saying it's a good call...just that Shaw's contract isn't a factor here. Even if we had traded Eller, and not traded for Shaw, Bergevin wouldn't have spent a dime more than what he considers "player value". That's just who he is.

Now you can criticize Bergevin all you want for that, I'll probably join you. But to say that Shaw's contract is preventing us from signing such and such is just absurd.

 

[jaffy27]

Easy to call those the worst using hindsight. Of course, we knew that the Clarkson deal was bad but think about this:

It's 1.35mil less for a player who scored 14 goals when the other scored 30.

Also, I said "one of".

In the same breath, you haven't even given Shaw a chance to prove his worth. Compare the deal to deals made within the last year. It's called inflation, salaries are driven up as the cap is driven up. 3.9 million today was 3.3/3.4 million a few years ago. Look at Yandle, do you think he's worth almost 7 million?? I mean, if you wanna talk about suspect deals, look no further than a 7yr deal for a 30 yr old....not 6yrs for a 24yr old

 

[Hoople]

bergevin can't do wrong is also a group think narrative.

Every single person who is not crapping on Bergevin for bringing in Shaw has offered criticism of Bergevin That is not group think.

Group think is over the top criticism of a player who has yet to play a single shift for the Habs.

 

[Hope Of Glory]

Probably the same reaction as trading for Shaw.

And probably the same reaction if he does bring a Top 6 forward.

The die is cast. Bergevin can't do anything right. It's the group think narrative.

That's simply not true. People gave him credit when he acquired Vanek, same for Petry and Weise before he was overused. And Muller as well.

I guess some people have lower standard than others. Most people here can't accept the level of mediocrity of this organization anymore. If you can and you're fine with 1st/2nd round exit, good for you I guess. But some people want to see this team actually improve.

 

[jaffy27]

bergevin can't do wrong is also a group think narrative.

the whinning outweigh the praise on this board by 10:1.......I swear I pull out my umbrella before I log on to HF due to all the that goes on here.

 

[Andy]

For me it's not about Eller vs Shaw. That isn't really the issue.

In a vacuum the Eller trade was great. MB got good value. End of analysis.

On an individual level, I really really like Shaw as a player. Always wanted him on the Habs. At the trade level, I think the Habs overpaid a little bit for a RFA from a team who had their hands tied. I won't harp on it too much, but I think Shaw could have been had for less. 2nds are great assets to have.

When looking at the acquisition in the context of the team's needs. I'm uncertain if Shaw will help the offense. I'm hoping he breaks out like Ladd and Buff. I'm a big fan of Shaw, but if the Habs get the 30-35 point Shaw, then it's not what the Habs needed, at least not at the price they paid...his contract will depend on his performance moving forward. Like Flynn, Desharnais, Byron and Mitchell, I don't have issue with dollars, more so term.

I don't dislike the Shaw trade, but for me it's about priority. The Habs NEED a top 6 winger. Maybe Shaw is the guy, but he's a gamble, just like Kassian, PAP, Sekac, DSP, Briere and Semin were gambles, and so far MB has struck out on all of them.

 

[Bergevillain]

For me it's not about Eller vs Shaw. That isn't really the issue.

In a vacuum the Eller trade was great. MB got good value. End of analysis.

On an individual level, I really really like Shaw as a player. Always wanted him on the Habs. At the trade level, I think the Habs overpaid a little bit for a RFA from a team who had their hands tied. I won't harp on it too much, but I think should could have been had for less. 2nds are great assets to have.

When looking at the acquisition in the context of the team's needs. I'm uncertain if Shaw will help the offense. I'm hoping he breaks out like Ladd and Buff. I'm a big fan of Shaw, but if the Habs get the 30-35 point Shaw, then it's not what the Habs needed, at least not at the price they paid...contact will depend on his performance moving forward. Like Flynn, Desharnais, Byron and Mitchell, I don't have issue with dollars, more so term.

I don't dislike the Shaw trade, but for me it's about priority. The Habs NEED a top 6 winger. Maybe Shaw is the guy, but he's a gamble, just like Kassian, PAP, Sekac, DSP, Briere and Semin were gambles, and so far MB has struck out on all of them.

And this time it is a 6 year gamble, which is scary for a lot of people I think.

 

[WhiskeySeven*]

I think most of the ire is also directed at the context of this Shaw acquisition... The organization prioritizing bottom6ers over top6ers at every opportunity.

6 years for Shaw... Mon dieu.

 

[habaholic]

For me it's not about Eller vs Shaw. That isn't really the issue.

In a vacuum the Eller trade was great. MB got good value. End of analysis.

On an individual level, I really really like Shaw as a player. Always wanted him on the Habs. At the trade level, I think the Habs overpaid a little bit for a RFA from a team who had their hands tied. I won't harp on it too much, but I think should could have been had for less. 2nds are great assets to have.

When looking at the acquisition in the context of the team's needs. I'm uncertain if Shaw will help the offense. I'm hoping he breaks out like Ladd and Buff. I'm a big fan of Shaw, but if the Habs get the 30-35 point Shaw, then it's not what the Habs needed, at least not at the price they paid...contact will depend on his performance moving forward. Again, I don't have issue with dollars, more so term.

I don't dislike the Shaw trade, but for me it's about priority. The Habs NEED a top 6 winger. Maybe Shaw is the guy, but he's a gamble, just like Kassian, PAP, Sekac, DSP, Briere and Semin were gambles, and so far MB has struck out on all of them.

Their hands weren't really tied though, at least no yet. They could've given him a QO and traded him later on. Also, we were not the only team after him, I read somewhere that 8-10 teams showed significant interest and seeing that CHI probably wanted some draft picks this year, then that's what the price was. In other words, it was either that or let him go to another team...and what if that team was Boston or Toronto or Ottawa..

I'm glad he's with us!

 

[hototogisu]

I think most of the ire is also directed at the context of this Shaw acquisition... The organization prioritizing bottom6ers over top6ers at every opportunity.

The one thing Bergevin has going for him is that no other top six forwards have changed hands yet either this off-season.

When he starts losing out on top-six forwards, then the ire becomes reasonable. But I'm not going to be too mad at him for swapping out one third liner for another third liner. That doesn't really preclude him from addressing the top-six problem.

 

[Habs Icing]

But to say that Shaw's contract is preventing us from signing such and such is just absurd.

It's not Shaw's contract that necessarily will prevent him. It's the thinking behind the Shaw trade.

Until this Friday I was one of Bergevin's defenders. But like many of his detractors I thought this off season he needed to fill the two holes on our top two lines. So far he went and tinkered with the third line. Surprise! Surprise! I won't even argue the value difference between Shaw & Eller. I'll concede Shaw is a slight improvement. But how will that fill those top two holes? Shaw is mostly a winger so DD/Danault may center that third line. You see an improvement on our 3rd line center position? I don't. So he exchanged 5 nickels for a quarter.

He wanted to get rid of Eller. He was redundant. Okay great. You freed up another 3.5 mil. Super now go and get those two top six wingers you need. He doesn't. He gets Shaw. An excellent 3rd liner. A not so great 2nd liner. Especially on an offensive-poor team like the Habs.

What do you want us to think? He's going to make more trades to free up some more cap space so he can round off the top two lines? I don't see it coming. MB sees Shaw as a solution for one of those top two spots and maybe if we're lucky another trade or a UFA for the other spot.

 

[jaffy27]

That's simply not true. People gave him credit when he acquired Vanek, same for Petry and Weise before he was overused. And Muller as well.

I guess some people have lower standard than others. Most people here can't accept the level of mediocrity of this organization anymore. If you can and you're fine with 1st/2nd round exit, good for you I guess. But some people want to see this team actually improve.

Price......best goalie in the world
Subban......top 8 defenseman in the world, Norris trophy winner
Paccioretty......top 5 goal scorer in NHL in the last 5yrs
Gallagher........every team dreams of a Gallagher, a 25/30 goal scorer
Galchenyuk.......6'2 #1 centre that scores 30
Sergachev....... Up and coming #1/2 D
Scherbak......promising prospect
McCarron......promising prospect
Shaw.......2 time Stanley Cup champ......15/20 goal scorer

Where is the MEDIOCRITY here???

What?...because the habs had a injury riddled off year, this is who we were the whole time?
There is work to be done, there is no doubt, but to call this team mediocre is a little overboard, actually, it's way overboard.

 

[habaholic]

And this time it is a 6 year gamble, which is scary for a lot of people I think.

If he was 28 maybe, but he's 24. I know he plays a style that can wear a player down, and it can be a risk, but I think it's a low risk

 

[ohmyjlord]

For me it's not about Eller vs Shaw. That isn't really the issue.

In a vacuum the Eller trade was great. MB got good value. End of analysis.

On an individual level, I really really like Shaw as a player. Always wanted him on the Habs. At the trade level, I think the Habs overpaid a little bit for a RFA from a team who had their hands tied. I won't harp on it too much, but I think should could have been had for less. 2nds are great assets to have.

When looking at the acquisition in the context of the team's needs. I'm uncertain if Shaw will help the offense. I'm hoping he breaks out like Ladd and Buff. I'm a big fan of Shaw, but if the Habs get the 30-35 point Shaw, then it's not what the Habs needed, at least not at the price they paid...contact will depend on his performance moving forward. Like Flynn, Desharnais, Byron and Mitchell, I don't have issue with dollars, more so term.

I don't dislike the Shaw trade, but for me it's about priority. The Habs NEED a top 6 winger. Maybe Shaw is the guy, but he's a gamble, just like Kassian, PAP, Sekac, DSP, Briere and Semin were gambles, and so far MB has struck out on all of them.

That's pretty much where I'm at.

Though I don't see Shaw as a top-6 forward, even at that price. I see him as a luxury third-liner, and I think you can easily have one of those on your payroll, without handcuffing yourself.

But now, Bergevin has to find a way to clear Desharnais. If he does, than I'm more than okay with Shaw, as I value what Shaw can bring to our team more than I value Desharnais or Eller's contribution, given our current roster.

So yeah...got good value for Eller, slightly overpaid in terms of assets in the Shaw deal, contract is pretty much what I expected once we traded for him, give or take $150k and 1 year of contract...now, lets see how the dominos will fall.

 

[Bullseye]

Leaf fan coming in peace. I think Shaw is a good player and will always have value because of his role in the Cup win last year if he needs to be moved in 3 years time hypothetically.

The Leafs take the cake in head-scratching "intangibles" trades/signings - first Versteeg, then Bolland, then of course we signed Clarkson as a UFA.

Shaw is a much better/safer investment and makes the Habs even more difficult to play against.

 

[ohmyjlord]

It's not Shaw's contract that necessarily will prevent him. It's the thinking behind the Shaw trade.

Until this Friday I was one of Bergevin's defenders. But like many of his detractors I thought this off season he needed to fill the two holes on our top two lines. So far he went and tinkered with the third line. Surprise! Surprise! I won't even argue the value difference between Shaw & Eller. I'll concede Shaw is a slight improvement. But how will that fill those top two holes? Shaw is mostly a winger so DD/Danault may center that third line. You see an improvement on our 3rd line center position? I don't. So he exchanged 5 nickels for a quarter.

He wanted to get rid of Eller. He was redundant. Okay great. You freed up another 3.5 mil. Super now go and get those two top six wingers you need. He doesn't. He gets Shaw. An excellent 3rd liner. A not so great 2nd liner. Especially on an offensive-poor team like the Habs.

What do you want us to think? He's going to make more trades to free up some more cap space so he can round off the top two lines? I don't see it coming. MB sees Shaw as a solution for one of those top two spots and maybe if we're lucky another trade or a UFA for the other spot.

I agree with all that.

The only thing I'm saying is this...

Say we had traded Eller, and didn't trade for Shaw. Now we get to Free Agency, and we have roughly $12.0m to spend. Bergevin calls, say...Okposo's agent. Say Okposo wants...$8.0m on a 6-years contract. Bergevin thinks Okposo is not worth more than $6.5m. You really think he would've gone $1.5m a year over his perceived player value, just because he now has the room to do so ?

This goes against everything I know about Bergevin. Not saying I agree with him...but it's just not what he does. Now I have NO problem criticizing Bergevin for his 'conservative mentality', believe me. I wouldn't shed a tear he Molson would let him go.

THAT is my issue. Shaw's deal isn't.

 

[Habs Icing]

Leaf fan coming in peace. I think Shaw is a good player and will always have value because of his role in the Cup win last year if he needs to be moved in 3 years time hypothetically.

The Leafs take the cake in head-scratching "intangibles" trades/signings - first Versteeg, then Bolland, then of course we signed Clarkson as a UFA.

Shaw is a much better/safer investment and makes the Habs even more difficult to play against.

You're talking about the previous managements. The Leafs have a different management team today.

Patches Chucky Gally
****** Pleks ******
Andrighetto DD/Danult Shaw
Byron Mitchell Flynn
Carr

You see those two holes on our second line? Shaw is not suited to fill either one of them. And I'm not all that comfortable with Gallagher on the first line but I can live with it if MB gets two second line wingers. He hasn't to date.

 

[jaffy27]

I agree with all that.

The only thing I'm saying is this...

Say we had traded Eller, and didn't trade for Shaw. Now we get to Free Agency, and we have roughly $12.0m to spend. Bergevin calls, say...Okposo's agent. Say Okposo wants...$8.0m on a 6-years contract. Bergevin thinks Okposo is not worth more than $6.5m. You really think he would've gone $1.5m a year over his perceived player value, just because he now has the room to do so ?

This goes against everything I know about Bergevin. Not saying I agree with him...but it's just not what he does. Now I have NO problem criticizing Bergevin for his 'conservative mentality', believe me. I wouldn't shed a tear he Molson would let him go.

THAT is my issue. Shaw's deal isn't.

No fear, we have 8.6 million on the cap......a DD buy out or trade and we'll have enough cap room to sign Danault, Carr and a top UFA

 

[Habs Icing]

I agree with all that.

The only thing I'm saying is this...

Say we had traded Eller, and didn't trade for Shaw. Now we get to Free Agency, and we have roughly $12.0m to spend. Bergevin calls, say...Okposo's agent. Say Okposo wants...$8.0m on a 6-years contract. Bergevin thinks Okposo is not worth more than $6.5m. You really think he would've gone $1.5m a year over his perceived player value, just because he now has the room to do so ?

This goes against everything I know about Bergevin. Not saying I agree with him...but it's just not what he does. Now I have NO problem criticizing Bergevin for his 'conservative mentality', believe me. I wouldn't shed a tear he Molson would let him go.

THAT is my issue. Shaw's deal isn't.

If he's playing with 12 mil and Okposo is asking too much, there are other fishes in the sea. Especially this year. He got rid of Eller. His next trade should have been for a top six winger. It wasn't. His next move was for Shaw. That tells me he sees Shaw as a top six winger. I don't see it but right now I'm hoping I'm wrong and that MB's evaluation is correct.

 

[Smokey Thompson]

For me it's not about Eller vs Shaw. That isn't really the issue.

In a vacuum the Eller trade was great. MB got good value. End of analysis.

On an individual level, I really really like Shaw as a player. Always wanted him on the Habs. At the trade level, I think the Habs overpaid a little bit for a RFA from a team who had their hands tied. I won't harp on it too much, but I think Shaw could have been had for less. 2nds are great assets to have.

When looking at the acquisition in the context of the team's needs. I'm uncertain if Shaw will help the offense. I'm hoping he breaks out like Ladd and Buff. I'm a big fan of Shaw, but if the Habs get the 30-35 point Shaw, then it's not what the Habs needed, at least not at the price they paid...his contract will depend on his performance moving forward. Like Flynn, Desharnais, Byron and Mitchell, I don't have issue with dollars, more so term.

I don't dislike the Shaw trade, but for me it's about priority. The Habs NEED a top 6 winger. Maybe Shaw is the guy, but he's a gamble, just like Kassian, PAP, Sekac, DSP, Briere and Semin were gambles, and so far MB has struck out on all of them.

Good post. I mostly agree with you, except that I don't see him as a gamble at all. It's safe to assume he'll continue to be at least a 15g 15a player if he's in the top 9 and on the PP. Add his grit / intangibles and the fact that he can play shutdown hockey in a one-goal game, and he's worth $3.5m. If he can raise his production as he gets older and maybe even gets near 30 goals one season, then his $3.9m will be worth it.