Not sure that I like it.
I'm with you. I don't think he's worth that today. Hopefully he'll continue to develop his way into it.
Not sure that I like it.
I loved the season Savard had last year
More like the last third of the season.
Ok fair...but think of the unit he was expected to anchor that first half of the season. Definition of the word brutal.
I've not been a fan of Savard's - I've been trying to come around as his profile has risen but it hasn't really happened.
That said it's pretty clear (more so mow obviously) that the FO views him as part of the core, so I guess this is a good thing.
Agreed. Hope we're wrong, but I just don't see what others see with Savard.
Exactly. It's a really good deal, especially if you look at what he would probably get in a few years if he keeps improving at the same pace. I look at him as Tyutin's replacement. Not necessarily in style of play, just their overally role on the team. Top 4 d that can move up if needed and who is signed to a pretty good deal.
I thought Savard was our best defenseman last year. He has some mistakes, but his improvement is why the FO believed Wisniewski was expendable. Hopefully he keeps improving.
I'm sure blahblah will be giddy when he finds out.
Dunno about this one. Jarmo is really banking on continued improvement, and I think his play last season has at least earned him that much. But the contract is a pretty large commitment. Let's hope Savard keeps on trucking.
Interesting notes:
Savard was 4th among NHL defensemen in (4-on-5) shorthanded ice time last year, behind Andy Greene, Jack Johnson, and Alex Pietrangelo, and slightly ahead of Rob Scuderi and Alex Goligoski.
In order:
Greene had 308:45 of this ice time, with 40 power play goals against. His team's PK % was 80.60 against a league average of 81.34%. (One PP against every 7:43)
Johnson had 241:53 of this ice time, with 31 power play goals against. His team's PK % was 80.20 against a league average of 81.34%. (One PP against every 7:48)
Pietrangelo had 234:53 of this ice time, with 26 power play goals against. His team's PK % was 83.66 against a league average of 81.34%. (One PP against every 9:02)
Savard had 232:36 of this ice time, with 26 power play goals against. His team's PK % was 80.20 against a league average of 81.34%. (One PP against every 8:56)
Scuderi had 230:17 of this ice time, with 31 power play goals against. His team's PK % was 84.84 against a league average of 81.34%. (One PP against every 7:25)
Goligoski had 228:20 of this ice time, with 27 power play goals against. His team's PK % was 80.71 against a league average of 81.34%. (One PP against every 8:27)
I'm not sold on this one either.
I understand we are a small market team and just like the prior GM and Administration you have to sign "core" members before they peak or likely we can't afford them.
But our d-corps is not good. So even if he is the best d-man, it doesn't necessarily mean he's real good. He could just be the tallest midget (sorry PC police).
Hopefully he keeps progressing but that is a lot of years and a few dollars. Yes he can be worth it, but I'm not 100% sold on this one.
The market rate for a top 4 D who kills penalties and puts up ~35 points/yr is certainly at or above $4.25m/yr, no?
I personally like the signing. I'm a little weary of regression but if he can replicate last season or even take another step forward then it'll look like a solid signing.
Oh.. let's not forget that Savard played 23 minutes per game for us last year. He's carrying a top pairing load right now.
I'm with you. I don't think he's worth that today. Hopefully he'll continue to develop his way into it.
All the Johnson and Savard haters I'm sure will just accidentally glance over this piece of info.
I've seen several folks comment in here that he's a top 4 d-man. That's fine but I don't think he's any where near a top pairing d-man.
So if you phrase it differently and say we signed a bottom 4 d-man to 5 years, 4.25M per would it still be a good deal?
I've seen several folks comment in here that he's a top 4 d-man. That's fine but I don't think he's any where near a top pairing d-man.
So if you phrase it differently and say we signed a bottom 4 d-man to 5 years, 4.25M per would it still be a good deal?
What is a bottom 4 d-man when you used top 4 already? There are only 6 d-men. It would be too much for a 5/6. 7th is just out of the question and stupid to contemplate with that contract.
He's paid like a 3/4 (not top 4). So second pairing. I'd rather we use him as a 5/6 long term but that ship sailed with how many minutes (role) we played him.
Well, there is a huge difference, IMO, between a 3/4 dman and a 5/6/7 dman. Also, I don't know how you can look at his play or stats and lump him in with guys who are 5/6/7 dmen.
That's fair but refer to him as a 2nd pairing guy not as top 4.
For a 2nd pairing guy - are you comfortable with a 5 year contract at $4.25M per year?
Top 4 refers to a 1/2/3/4 d-man.
Bottom 4 refers to 3/4/5/6 d-man.
"Top 4" is lazy terminology. The distinction between top pair and second pair is very important.
As for whether $4.25 is appropriate for second pair, absolutely, yes, if it includes several UFA years. Take a look at what second pair d-men have been signing for if you don't believe me.
I'm excited for Savard's development, but like a lot of folks I'm not 100% sold on him as one of our top d-men. But if you want to move him for some reason, say a year down the road if you wanted to build around Goloubef and Spurgeon as our RHD or some other scenario, then Savard's deal should be very tradeable. Lots of teams want a goal scoring hitting machine, even if the rest of his game isn't great.
You do say his yr last year "earned him that much", if you mean you're ok with it, that his numbers fit the cap hit then I agree. But there's nothing, added with the fact his ES and PP time will both go up, that should make you think there wont be "continued improvement" both in his actual game and on the stat sheet. Still young, only 2 years in the league, improved team, more PP time and Ryan Murray are all things that Savard has going for him going forward.
Could either of you explain what you dislike about his game? Or maybe, what you think others see in him that you don't? I really don't get what's not to like about his game.
And don't give me anything about his skating. If anything that is the 1 thing(speed/overall fitness/strength/whatever) that he improved dramatically that then positively affected every other aspect of his game. He's not Murray/Johnson but he's no slouch ala Wiz. His skating has improved DRAMATICALLY since the beginning of 13/14.