Poll: Andrew Shaw's Antics

[BigTed3]

Andrew Shaw came here labeled a winner. Chicago fans felt he was a key piece in their Cup runs. But despite some stretches of good play, he's also shown some reckless on-ice behavior that has put us in trouble at times. We want to know how you would handle his situation if you were GM.

[Regis22]

2 Cups

Character

Grit

Know what it takes to win ) so MB says )

If his initial were PK , pretty sure MT would single him out , for his play. Tell him to settle down and play the team gain

 

[Noob616]

I find the antics really frustrating for a "character guy" but to me the biggest reason to trade him is the 3.9MX6Y contract. Don't think it's worth exposing him in the expansion draft and losing him for nothing since you could definitely get something back in a trade.

[habs_93]

6 hours ago, Noob616 said:

I find the antics really frustrating for a "character guy" but to me the biggest reason to trade him is the 3.9MX6Y contract. Don't think it's worth exposing him in the expansion draft and losing him for nothing since you could definitely get something back in a trade.

Pretty much. I can put up with a lot of stuff from a player whose contract is more reasonable. But a guy with those numbers should be valuable on the ice, and right now he's not. NHL GMs won't make changes this quickly after they've done something like signed a guy to a contract because "it makes them look bad" (their teams being garbage apparently does not make them look bad; the more you know, etc), and by the time it's obvious we need to move him his value will be significantly reduced. I'd honestly have the market open now, while we can still fleece somebody. Chiarelli strikes me as a kind of kindred GM spirit to Bergevin who overpays for "character" and "winning". Dangle Shaw to get RNH?

[H_T_L]

I don't see him being tradable at this point,,, at least not for value, so trading him for scraps is equivalent to giving him away. I would hold on to him for now. Exposing him to the draft wouldn't upset me in the least unless his game somehow does an about face.

[jeff33]

we have a precedent for this kind of thing now dont we?

clear answer, we trade him for the older, less skilled version of himself

[maas_art]

4 hours ago, habs_93 said:

Pretty much. I can put up with a lot of stuff from a player whose contract is more reasonable. But a guy with those numbers should be valuable on the ice, and right now he's not. NHL GMs won't make changes this quickly after they've done something like signed a guy to a contract because "it makes them look bad" (their teams being garbage apparently does not make them look bad; the more you know, etc), and by the time it's obvious we need to move him his value will be significantly reduced. I'd honestly have the market open now, while we can still fleece somebody. Chiarelli strikes me as a kind of kindred GM spirit to Bergevin who overpays for "character" and "winning". Dangle Shaw to get RNH?

Agreed. 

Shaw is incredibly frustrating because he's got some skills but he just goes nuts every now and again.  Ted compared him to Sean Avery the other day & I think thats spot on - they are both guys who could (or in avery's case, could have been), if their heads were screwed on right - be valuable, contributing players. But the nonsense stuff is so counter productive it doesnt help.  I love the idea of trying to use him as a piece to get RNH.  I am sure Edmonton would be very interested (we'd likely have to add a dman too). 

That said, I am pretty sure that MB stays the course - at least though the playoffs, as he seems to believe thats where Shaw will shine. 

 

 

[habs1952]

3 hours ago, H_T_L said:

I don't see him being tradable at this point,,, at least not for value, so trading him for scraps is equivalent to giving him away. I would hold on to him for now. Exposing him to the draft wouldn't upset me in the least unless his game somehow does an about face.

Agree. It seems this has turned out to be a bad deal. Minimize the loss by trying to get something for him before losing him for nothing in the expansion draft.

[maas_art]

4 hours ago, H_T_L said:

I don't see him being tradable at this point,,, at least not for value, so trading him for scraps is equivalent to giving him away. I would hold on to him for now. Exposing him to the draft wouldn't upset me in the least unless his game somehow does an about face.

I actually disagree on his value.  I bet you that some team out there would pay fair value (if not more) for him.  Edmonton was mentioned & I could totally see them coveting his "grit"

That said, its moot, imho as I dont see MB moving him before at least one playoff run. 

[BigTed3]

I also think Shaw has value. If players like Raffi Torres and Jordin Tootoo and Sean Avery and Zach Kassian can find multiple homes, there will be a market for a 24 year-old like Shaw who's viewed as having been a valuable piece in a Cup win. His contract is a bit ludicrous for what he brings, but there will be GM's willing to pay that.

From our end, I just think he's not worth the fuss. For every stretch of 5 games that he plays well, he's going to cost you a win for some sort of stupidity. I still find it hard to believe the Habs made such a big deal of getting rid of guys like Briere, Subban, Kassian, Prust, and so on for being distractions to the team and/or selfish players or whatever you want to call it and then you have a guy like Shaw who has actually played boneheaded hockey on several occasions and who's still here. Just goes to show that ditching those other guys was never about what the Habs said it was about and moreso about liking or not liking a person. Clearly the Habs still like Shaw because they continue to defend his antics to the media.

[H_T_L]

4 hours ago, maas_art said:

I actually disagree on his value.  I bet you that some team out there would pay fair value (if not more) for him.  Edmonton was mentioned & I could totally see them coveting his "grit"

That said, its moot, imho as I dont see MB moving him before at least one playoff run. 

No argument that he has some value. I just don't believe we'll get fair value, based on his contract and play so far. No doubt there are likely some GM's who might take a chance on him, but I think most ( at least the smart ones) will believe he'll be hard pressed to live up to the terms of that contract.

[Habs=stanleycup]

Personally I like Shaw. I'd stay the course with him.

[BigTed3]

1 hour ago, Habs=stanleycup said:

Personally I like Shaw. I'd stay the course with him.

There's no doubt he can be a useful hockey player. But the illegal hits, the running his mouth, the trying to pump the crowd up during a fight, etc... and the fact that he has done this several times already since joining our team. It just looks like he isn't going to learn. As I said, you look at Sean Avery and the guy was a contributor on the ice. He got under your skin like a Brad Marchand and he could pop in a few goals and stir things up. But then every few weeks, there was another incident with him running his mouth off unnecessarily or making a dirty cheapshot or so on. At some point, you have to cut ties with that type of player if they're not going to learn. I'd be more hard-pressed to part with a guy if he was in his 1st or 2nd year in the league and still learning to be mature, but Shaw's been around for a while and he seems to be getting worse. Not only that, he hasn't taken accountability for any of his actions and he doesn't seem to feel the need to change anything he's doing. The signs to me are not promising that he'll turn himself around.

[Noob616]

3 hours ago, H_T_L said:

No argument that he has some value. I just don't believe we'll get fair value, based on his contract and play so far. No doubt there are likely some GM's who might take a chance on him, but I think most ( at least the smart ones) will believe he'll be hard pressed to live up to the terms of that contract.

I just see Shaw at 3.9M as a negative value asset. To me the flexibility of clearing or reducing that 3.9M is worth getting 50 cents on the dollar for him, because the full value of Shaw was two 2nd rounders. Not peanuts but not really anything to lose sleep over if you only get a 2nd and a 4th or a B prospect back. He's not a bad player but reality is that Gallagher and Radulov are both substantially better RW's, and Galchenyuk/Danault/Plekanec are all better C's. Shaw should never be in the top 6 or PP on this team unless there's injuries, so at 3.9M you're either drastically overpaying a 3rd line RW, or you have to waste a vastly superior player on the 3rd line and make space for him in the top 6. 

My biggest fear is they think he's another Gallagher. I just keep going back to the press conferences when he was traded to the Habs, Bergevin said things like: 

Quote

He's a guy who knows what it takes to win, who has scored big goals in the playoffs. A player like Brendan Gallagher who takes his teammates with him into battle."

I know you have to pump up the guy you just traded for but this kind of thing is really a stretch. They have superficially similar playstyles but Gallagher is orders of magnitude better than Shaw. It's as ridiculous as calling Nathan Beaulieu a player like Hampus Lindholm because they're both puck movers.

[BigTed3]

^^ Absolutely. Shaw and Gallagher might both play with a lot of hustle, but that's pretty much where the similarities end. Gallagher has more skill and is better at scoring goals. Gallagher's also by far a smarter player. He'll get an opponent riled up and force him to take a penalty. Shaw on the other hand is the guy getting riled up and taking the bad penalty himself.

[Noob616]

18 minutes ago, BigTed3 said:

^^ Absolutely. Shaw and Gallagher might both play with a lot of hustle, but that's pretty much where the similarities end. Gallagher has more skill and is better at scoring goals. Gallagher's also by far a smarter player. He'll get an opponent riled up and force him to take a penalty. Shaw on the other hand is the guy getting riled up and taking the bad penalty himself.

I beat the "Gallagher is underrated" drum a lot because it really bothers me how out of whack the perception of his value is with his actual performance. Gallagher is one of the top 10 shot producing forwards in the NHL (in shots for/60min) since he came into the league. He's up there with Bergeron, Marchand, Crosby, and Matthews in terms of his shot rates, some pretty elite company for a guy who gets called "a 3rd liner on a good team" all the time. His ES production rates are elite, only thing holding him back from big point totals is ice time and that the Habs PP has been a dumpster fire for so long. 

[PuckPundit]

Difficult to get rid of Shaw for 2 reasons:

1) MB won't admit his mistake

2) Shaw's salary for a 3rd liner is too much for other teams to bite

The moment of truth for Shaw's value will be in the playoffs.  That's where he's been hyped as a game changer, so we shall see whether the myth is busted.

 

[habs_93]

2 hours ago, PuckPundit said:

The moment of truth for Shaw's value will be in the playoffs.  That's where he's been hyped as a game changer, so we shall see whether the myth is busted.

Ah, but narratives based on nebulous, non-falsifiable conjecture are rarely abandoned if it not proven exactly correct. That's when the excuses start.

[maas_art]

3 hours ago, PuckPundit said:

The moment of truth for Shaw's value will be in the playoffs.  That's where he's been hyped as a game changer, so we shall see whether the myth is busted

For sure and I mean honestly I think we do need to see what he can do in the post season.  I mean if Edmonton offered up RNH for Shaw + Pateryn right now Id do it in a heartbeat but assuming we cant get that sort of return Id really like to see what he can do.

Hype or not, he has strong career playoff stats - 35 points in 67 games (career) is not too shabby, including 18 points in his last 2 years (29 games).