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

[The Nightman]

Bad business from Bergy

We're a laughingstock.

 

[Le depisteur]

He's 24. We get him in his prime and he's most definitely a usefull player. As long as the cap hit is reasonable we should be celebrating

25 in less than one month...

 

[Ghetto Sangria]

3.9 is high... Off by 150k which in the end isn't so bad, but I thought he would have taken less for longer term

 

[Habster33]

3.9M/6 years as per Dregger

 

[Mad Brills*]

Why sign a tweener for 6 ****ing years?

Jesus christ.

 

[Seb]

Can someone please put Bergevin in a locked room with no key

 

[CristianoRonaldo]

6 years oh my god 6 ****ing years for a ****ing grinder

 

[The Great Weal]

**** off Marc just **** off

 

[Price is Wright]

So $400k more than Eller.

Not ideal. Small upgrade.

 

[WeThreeKings]

Add another horrendous contract for a non-key player for Marc Bergevin.

His flaws keep getting exposed.

This guy needs to get fired ASAP.. Alas, I fear the UFA contract we give to Perron and/or Weise

 

[LastWordArmy]

The contract ends at age 30... cue the freakout.

 

[jaffy27]

Hope it's between 3.25-3.75. Six years is way too long for a guy like him. We saw how quickly Prust declined with us.

We signed Prust when he was like 29, he's 24....his contract will be almost over by the time he hits Prust's age when we originally signed him

 

[SnapVirus]

600 000$ too much per year.

Shaw will be grinding for more than half of the next decade. Damn boy! At 6 years, they consider him part of our core. Only Subban is signed longer than him.

 

[CH25]

As a Hawks fan, I'll miss Shaw, but man...that contract....good luck.

Luck is pointless for us. The only thing that will save us at this point is Bergevin resigning.

 

[Mue]

I don't post anymore but thought I'd come out of hibernation to comment on how bad this contract is.

6 years....christ.

 

[Lebowski]

Seriously, nigh 4M on a God damn 3rd liner when there's an abundance of top 6 wingers waiting on the FA market and that so happens to be our biggest need.

What is wrong with this team's obsession with role players. A 24M commitment to a 15 goals guy. Unreal.

 

[The Great Weal]

Yep, and when he scores 15 goals a year and is a warrior in the playoffs, after your 2 years, he'll become a UFA and will go to the highest bidder and you'll have lost 2 second round picks for him, everyone will complain

LA lost a good propect and a 1st for Sekera whats your point? 3.9 for 6 years is WAAAAAYYYY too much.

 

[OldCraig71]

It's like watching a car wreck, you want to turn away but you just have to look.

 

[The Nightman]

2 more million and we could have afforded one of Lucic, Eriksson, Backes, Ladd, Okposo, Boedker, WITHOUT giving up two 2nd rounders in the process.

 

[Cole Caulifield]

Unsure how he makes more than Gallagher. If I'm Gallagher I look at this and don't exactly feel like I got my just reward.

 

[CristianoRonaldo]

3.9 hahahahahahhahahahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahhahahahaha

 

[Grate n Colorful Oz]

No way he gets more than Gally on a 6 year contract.

 

[Uncle Gary]

MB is as boneheaded as they come. So we clear a nice 3.5M from Eller while receiving 2 2nds only to go give up 2 high 2nds for another ******* grinder and sign him for a long term deal worth way to much.

 

[VirginiaMtlExpat]

I don't have a problem with this contract. Getting Shaw for two second-rounders does not bother me either, especially given the promise of the player chosen in the first and the next two rounds. I am not happy about letting Eller go because the team's coach wants to show who's boss, but to me getting and signing Shaw for a contract consistent with market value is a separate issue. He has been an important cog in a Stanley Cup-winning team, so he could be part of the solution rather than part of the problem.

In an ideal world, with a coaching upgrade and given a roster where we both keep Eller and acquire/sign Shaw, that would have been a decent transition from an abysmal season moving forward, assuming Price's knees hold up.

 

[Marc-E-]

Expensive.