Confirmed with Link: CBJ Sign David Savard
- Thread starter aDreamboat
- Start date
1857 Howitzer
******* Linesman
EspenK
Registered User
- Sep 25, 2011
- 15,842
- 4,445
Just to get a discussion going- What does this contract mean (if anything)?
Jarmo is cheap
He is never going to over pay an RFA?
Savard is no better than a 5-6 D-man and is not worth signing for a longer term
Savard believes this all he is worth and is thankful for a one way deal?
He is not as good as those of us who believe he is a top 4 guy (and I've seen some suggest top pairing)
He is terrific and we just got a bargain a la Cam & Calvert?
Jarmo is cheap
He is never going to over pay an RFA?
Savard is no better than a 5-6 D-man and is not worth signing for a longer term
Savard believes this all he is worth and is thankful for a one way deal?
He is not as good as those of us who believe he is a top 4 guy (and I've seen some suggest top pairing)
He is terrific and we just got a bargain a la Cam & Calvert?
Savard nearly doubled his salary on this deal. I highly doubt he's going to bed unhappy tonight.
Also, as I said in the other thread, this proves Jarmo's MO is signing RFAs to reasonable, two-year deals. It's what RyJo will eventually settle for, whether he likes it or not.
I'm meh on the guy, but I'd rather have him at this good cap hit than Nikitin at his cap hit.
Hopefully he continues to develop, last year was a decent start.
Hopefully he continues to develop, last year was a decent start.
Double-Shift Lasse
Just post better
spintheblackcircle
incoming!!!
- Mar 1, 2002
- 67,454
- 13,291
Iron Balls McGinty
Registered User
- Aug 5, 2005
- 9,163
- 7,244
Fro
Cheatin on CBJ w TBL
That we got a defensemen locked up short term at about 500-750k less than he's worth. That's all I'd read into it.
It's a good signing, assuming he doesn't take a step back conditioning wise. If he shows as much improvement as last season, it'll be a great signing.
Xoggz22
Registered User
Like this deal. Very little downside. I thought he was very good last year as, essentially, his first full year in the NHL. He improved his conditioning and skating and showed he can play in all three zones. I think there is more to his offensive game and if he can add a little more speed and quickness to his skating (and remain committed to fitness) he can be a very good top 4 player.
Good deal for both sides.
Good deal for both sides.
More like this is what you get paid after one good year even if you have top 4 upside as Savard does. Reasonable deal. I'd prefer a longer deal, but its okay.
I'm not about to suggest Savard's (Savvy?) deserves any kind of hefty contract. But if you think he's signed for up to three quarter mill less than he's worth, then to Espen's post I will venture that Jarmo possibly could be playing a dangerous game in terms of how he deals with players with little leverage salary-wise. We see these as "great deals" but at some point it's possible that hardball tactics could breed resentment among players who feel they could get more. Like, certain offers are disrespectful slaps in the face.
Last edited:
I think he's getting paid about what he's worth. He took a great leap forward last year and that was clear from the opening days of camp. But the year before he couldn't make the squad, even though he'd played some before. He's had one good year as a plus third pairing defender. Glad we have him back, and if he keeps improving he'll get paid more down the road.
You know what? If the players didn't like the deal, then they shouldn't sign it. You are worrying about something that doesn't need to be worried about. Jarmo is doing his job. The players and their agents are doing their job.
yeah that's the whole leverage thing. They'll sign a deal they don't like (except Joey, who has more leverage) and then wind up resentful. That's the dangerous game.
Since making my initial post, I read through this deal and other RFA deal discussion in a different thread, and good points were made re: RFAs to short, cheap deals as a basic approach by management. If so, I could see how a consistent approach might have a positive effect, especially if there's equal consistency in the form of fair or market contracts at the UFA stage.
edit: I see since responding to your first post, you've edited it to expand on your point. It's not clear to me why you're bringing a snippy attitude to the discussion, but Jarmo's job is varied. It doesn't begin and end with getting great deals out of RFAs.
Last edited:
It's too early to tell but you might have a point.
I'm not sure how "long term" a memory players have. If they like it here, the team is competitive, and the offer is competitive, I don't think it'll matter when it comes time for a new contract. Conversely, I don't think players have, for lack of a better term, much loyalty come UFA time so I don't think an extra 500-750k would matter that much.
One of the factors that can play into negotiations is the desire by the GM not to alienate his players. Practically speaking, RFA's don't have much leverage at all, they have to sign. So if a GM doesn't care whether he alienates the players, he can get better deals, at a cost.
But in Savard's case 1.3m isn't bad.
jag72
Registered User
- Jun 9, 2011
- 114
- 0
cbjfaninmo
4 those about 2 rock
That's exactly why players, especially young one looking for their first contract after their ELC, should leave the negotiations to their agents and stay away from the press. There was no need for as much angst as has surfaced in the Johansen contract situation. He's going to end up signed, probably satisfied with the money, and face questions about a "bad attitude." It was unnecessary, his agent is supposed to be the bad guy, that's what he gets paid for.
