Discussion in 'Montreal Canadiens' started by justafan22, Feb 15, 2018.
And he's often injured. Overpaid. And completely useless on this team..
At this deadline...I agree. This summer may be different but when I think about it, you are probably right. Bergevin probably sees this season more as a blip in the road.
Based on how Julien absolutely adores Plekanec and has a very important role for him...i'm not convinced of that anymore.
Agreed...IF Tavares gets to free agency, it's hard to sell him on the idea of playing for the Habs when you just traded Pacioretty for some futures.
You're probably right and my confidence in Bergevin is tapped out
Need to move out some wingers. If the Habs can get something of value for him, I'd definitely go for it. Unfortunately, I feel like Bergevin thinks he might be part of the core.
Don't like shaw, don't like Bergevin , both are here to stay long term. Great news
not sure what people are expecting to get for him.....we got him for 2 picks which i thought was over payment at the time.....he might be worth one pick now,
just like patches and chucky....MB will over estimate his value just like most here, and that why he probably will not be traded....MB likes to play hardball, but can't swing the bat, so he loses out
Im ok with keeping him. Hes one of the very few guys (theres like another one or two) who care.
Shaw represents the problem with Bergevin and his country club. You don't overpay for bottom six players. You make other teams do it.
Chicago couldn't afford him at anything more than $2.5 million. So what do they do? They got two second round picks for him and one of them ended up DeBrincat, who at 20 years old will have a better season than Shaw's best.
What does Montreal do? They sign Shaw for six years at a hair under $4 million. They try him in the top six and he can't do it. He's now an overpaid energy guy who takes bad penalties and already looks walking wounded for what? 35 points a year?
Is he a good player? Sure. But paying guys like him for middle of the road scoring means less money for actual stars that make a difference. Lose Shaw and Alzner and you got $8 million for a superstar. You know, like overpaying Radulov a little to keep him in Montreal. But nah. He isn't a priority.
He still has decent hockey ahead of him but I think there is a chance his contract and injury history diminish his value.
I don’t like the contract, but if the offers aren’t there we might as well keep him. Alzner is a truly bad player. Shaw’s term is too long (although not encumbered by a NTC, which is a positive), but he has some utility.
This is more IMO a I'm not trading him because I acquired him type of situation
Bergevin just being himself, arrogant and heard headed
As much as I like Shaw, if you can get something close to the value we paid for, you have to move him
one simple fact you missed....
You are smart he is dumb
There probably is no way to know unless someone reports the rumor, but I wonder what the return offered by teams is. Maybe it's not worth it.
Also, reluctant to trade doesn't mean they won't trade him. That doesn't qualify him as "untouchable." They just would rather hold onto him than move him.
I'm probably in the minority here, but I've liked what I've seen from Shaw, particularly ever since CJ took over a year ago.
He's only 26. And if Habs do indeed go with a youth movement, it's still a good idea to keep veterans around to help the kids. He'd be one I wouldn't mind keeping around for.
I will conclude by saying that if the return is worth it, he should be traded.
I think weber and drouin and what they were traded for represent bergevin's mentality more perfectly than shawzie
He is only 26. But he just sucks so so so so much. Ugggghhhhh he sucks and everyone knows it so we can't really trade him.
Let's say I hate Shaw's contract and uselessness, I want to trade him ASAP, but more like a late 2nd rounder and a cap dump or even a 3rd, something like that.
Now, let's say I'm more rational, I want to up his value a bit and wait for some offers, hoping for more than only a 2nd rounder or a quality B prospect, and trade for the best offer only.
Finally, let's say I'm delusional, I want to keep him because I traded for him and gave him this contract for a reason, and we'll win everything with him !
The above says you're a Habs fan.
The above says you're Bergevin.
I wouldn’t get too excited about what a possible return would be for sure. Maybe a 2nd. ..maybe.
Shaw represents what Bergevin publicly said about the players he wanted on his team. He said he wanted guys like in Chicago who get angry after losses instead of move on to the next day. Weber was a part of that as well.
Alzner and Shaw represent what he values most: reputation and grit.
Drouin... He represents the failure of our pro scouting. He was clearly traded for because they believed he could be a superstar 1C in the time of their cup window. While the other players represent that as well, Drouin is a guy who would at least look better if he was on the wing, 8lbs lighter, and expected to be less of a driver and more the Tac in a Tic-Tac-Toe. Instead they want him to be all three.
They are the Bergevin core though, along with Jordie Benn. The core that sank the Canadiens.
I've noticed over my 50 years on this planet that there are trick words. Such as, refreshing. "How's the water?" "Refreshing." In this case, refreshing means cold. Much like like good personality means not good looking and so on.
Apparently now, Reluctant means impossible.
I actually like Shaw but if a team offers good value you trade him asap.
Of course he’s hesitant to trade Shaw. Why couldn’t he of been as “hesitant” to trade Subban or Sergachev? The guy doubles down on character and shuns skill and somehow people are shocked when we have this awful awful team.
He seems to be remarkably willing to get rid of D-men that are competent at managing the puck.
Under no circumstances should you be reluctant, as a horrendously bad team, to trade a non critical piece.
MB is not reluctant to move good players or let them walk for nothing.. But ask for a player with perceived grit and character? Oh god no, I can't possibly consider that!
He models the defense after his NHL playing days. Slow, gritty, character and fighters
How about an infirmary package to some sucker of a team:
Nevermind.........forgot MB is the sucker.
One of the more frustrating old-school mentalities is that forwards (especially top forwards) need to be defensively responsible, but the reverse (top D-men need to be offensively responsible) never seems to be required.
I like teams that have forwards that back-check and defend well. But I also like teams that have D-men that can create scoring chances, stretch the ice and create mismatches.
Separate names with a comma.