Confirmed with Link: David Savard signed to 5-year extension ($4.25 AAV)

[blahblah]

Some issues with Savard, some of these items improved slightly over the last 30 games of the season last year.

1. Mobility. I don't care if thebus thinks it's improved. It's still poor. It takes a while to get that big boy moving.
2. Awareness. Too many times he seems surprised with a defender getting behind him; thus why I call him Whiplash. He has tunnel vision out there, he's looking at the puck and not aware of what is going on around him. That is not top 4 awareness. I laugh when I see him follow the puck and realize he's dead meat. It's like the start of Benny Hill.
3. Puck decisions. When he has the puck in his zone, he makes too many mistakes moving it up ice. Too many defensive zone turnovers. Really hurts our puck possession. In the neutral and offensive zones he'll pass the puck to a checked player leading to a turnover. The player will receive the puck and it will lead to an immediate turnover. He will do this without being pressured. I illustrated this multiple times in games last season. People just kind of glossed over it. His neutral zone play can be quite ghastly.
4. Defensive transition. Once the puck is established in our defensive zone he's fine and he can either pressure just the puck or play in a zone he's cool. But if he has to skate with a player in transition he gets beat - a lot. If he's the only defender in a 2-1 he makes the life hard in the goalie. He tries, too often, to slide and take the man and the pass. Just play the pass and leave the man with the puck to the goalie.

What he does well.

1. Shots from the point. He has a very good shot and I think this is why they look the other way in the rest of his game a lot. That and he's young so they figure he'll continue to improve. Having said that you can't fix his on-ice intelligence. You can only simplify his game. An example, this shot of his if you look a lot of times it's a "luck and a prayer shot".
2. Play on the body. If he's playing the puck in the defensive within the system he's quite effective. He's a big boy and his task is pretty simple. Just the way he likes it.

That is Savard in a nutshell. Average skater, big body, good defensive zone defensmen, great shot, below average moving the puck, and, finally, not the sharpest tool out there. Should be a 5/6, right now, with PP and PK time (second unit for both). Tool wise, he's not close to being in the same league as Murray. Murray is an amazing passer and his vision is incredible. However, Savard was a great find at his spot on the draft.

I'm just glad we signed him before we ended up a 6+ million tag because:
1. Richards has the biggest man crush in the planet on him and/or
2. We really haven't had better options.

I think we have a few guys moving up that, if Richards is actually object - or has a clue what he is looking at, will pass Savard in the depth chart in fairly quick order. It's not that I don't like Savard, it's I don't like how we use him. Hopefully he proves me wrong and can improve in areas that I think he's just about peaked in.

 

[Viqsi]

3. Puck decisions. When he has the puck in his zone, he makes too many mistakes moving it up ice. Too many defensive zone turnovers. Really hurts our puck possession. In the neutral and offensive zones he'll pass the puck to a checked player leading to a turnover. The player will receive the puck and it will lead to an immediate turnover. He will do this without being pressured. I illustrated this multiple times in games last season. People just kind of glossed over it. His neutral zone play can be quite ghastly.

This is admittedly the thing I noticed the most, and why I flinch whenever folks mention his "turnovers" stats. He doesn't get dinged for those directly, but that's something advanced stats makes rather visible. Ends up setting up guys to fail, basically. Either that or he believes some of our guys are miracle-workers or something. Or that starting a board battle is the Right Thing To Do in a given situation. Or whatever.

 

[NotWendell]

I think his skating can be improved. My biggest concern with Savard are his occassionally stupid decisions. He truly is the new Wisniewski!

 

[blahblah]

I think his skating can be improved. My biggest concern with Savard are his occassionally stupid decisions. He truly is the new Wisniewski!

Mmmm.. I don't think Savard does a lot of "Let's try and keep the puck in at our offensive blueline and watch the puck get past me leading to a breakaway on our power play". I think he has that going for him.

 

[thebus2288*]

Jesus.... where do I "start".

I guess 1st, I wanna again address my pet peeve of hearing about this concept of a "checked" player in hockey. The terminology and just the "idea" of what I think you guys consider a "checked" player bothers the **** out of me. If Wennberg makes these same "set up to fail" passes you guys claim his IQ, awareness, and creativity is too strong for Dubi, Foligno, Savard or any other "average" offensive player.

What is a "checked" player anyway? 2 feet away? 3 feet away? Stick contact? Eye contact?

You people could watch James Wisniewski stand behind a guy in front of the net, just outside the crease, with both hands on his stick on the middle of the guys back with some soft crosschecks, and think to yourself, "Hell yeah Wiz. Sweet 'man checking' out there." What knowledgeable fans and hockey players like Savard or Murray will notice, and "HF fanatics" and **** hockey players like Wiz wont, is that during this "man checking battle" in front of the net this other player will attempt to get his stick loose to either tip a shot or redirect a pass or pass-shot.

Some people and players can literally see these types of plays developing well before the "play" has actually began. Others will see that Wiz has his man "checked" and is supposedly doing his job, and not have a reaction until the puck is already in the back of the net and blaming Bob for "not doing more", or Savard or Johnson "for not filling up the lane".

 

[pete goegan]

Jesus.... where do I "start".

Here's a suggestion: with a bit less certainty in your own opinion and a bit more appreciation that many of us have been following the game at least as long as you.

 

[thebus2288*]

If this type of play "shows" where Wennberg is right now, then it also shows (even more) where Savard is right now.

[nhl]2014021051-114-h[/nhl]

What does this goal tell you about his intelligence, awareness, IQ and skill? What I want people to realize is just how good of "touch" is shown here by Jenner, along with what Savard has to do, and does, just to get in the perfect and tiny area so he can even receive the pass. To add to that, the release AND placement of the shot is also IMO "something else". There's defenseman in the NHL seen as "elite offensively" that cannot execute what Savard does here. Also while this wont disprove people's idea that he's a bad skater or whatever, I think this shows that "footwork" in general is not an issue at all in Savard's current game.
[NHL]2013021207-614-a[/NHL]

Just simply a nasty wrist shot.
[NHL]2014020793-664-h[/NHL]

Besides the fact that I think people are severely overplaying his defensive "woes", the dude is also not getting the credit he deserves for his offensive ability. A full season of "FADEAWAY THUMPERS" will change the opinions. I'm sure of it.

[NHL]2011020789-78-h[/NHL]

[NHL]2014020256-89-h[/NHL]

[NHL]2014020580-699-h[/NHL]

[NHL]2014020890-617-h[/NHL]

 

[stevo61]

Its funny how any little critism on a player you like turns into a war. His footwork is fine, its straight line speed people are talking about. Also how many guys wouldnt improve if they added more speed.
im guessing maybe a couple people actually read these posts because its just im right and you are wrong so here is what you should think

 

[Viqsi]

Here's a suggestion: with a bit less certainty in your own opinion and a bit more appreciation that many of us have been following the game at least as long as you.

That's much nicer than what I was considering saying.

 

[blahblah]

Its funny how any little critism on a player you like turns into a war. His footwork is fine, its straight line speed people are talking about. Also how many guys wouldnt improve if they added more speed.
im guessing maybe a couple people actually read these posts because its just im right and you are wrong so here is what you should think

To be fair, I'm not a fan of his footwork nor his speed. I don't mind if that offends some; just trying to give my honest opinion. I try and list his good with his bad.

 

[thebus2288*]

Disclaimer-With two kids under 4, I don't watch half as many games as I used to and I definitely don't watch the games as closely, but his skating is exactly my main concern.

I've always wondered if he pours cement in his skates prior to the games. Maybe this has changed, but I just haven't seen it..

I just...I mean...watch the game. As closely as possible. There's things to see there.

For the most part, I love what Jarmo and JD have done with this organization from top to bottom, but our defense concerns me greatly. I think it's good enough to get us into the playoffs, but not Cup worthy like our Offense.

Murray- Will he ever be healthy? History suggests no.
Johnson- very inconsistent in my opinion.
Tyutin- Seems to have lost a step or two.
Savard- Seems like a bottom pairing (on a good team) guy to me.

Prout, Connauton, Goloubef, etc.- I can live with those guys on the bottom pair, but I don't expect much out of them.

Right now we have one guy with top pair talent, but can't stay healthy. I'd like our D a lot better if we had a legit top pair and then everyone else could move down accordingly. If that's the case, do we want to be paying Savard $4.25/year for another 5 years? Especially when a ton of guys need new contracts and we already have so many locked up to big contracts.

Again, others (including Jarmo) see Savard as a legit second pairing D-man. I'm just not convinced. Hopefully I'm wrong.

If the team can make the playoffs they can win the cup. ANY team in the NHL can. Besides the fact that there isn't much to "agree" OR "disagree" with on your "assessments" on our defense, I definitely disagree. I also find it "funny" and it brings me back to people in the Boll thread how you lump all the "bottom pairing" defenseman together and say how you don't expect "much" out of them. The 1st thing is that practically all of our available "depth" or bottom pairing defensemen bring a completely different type of game to the team and would be asked to play different roles. The only guy IMO that would be asked or "expected" to do "much" offensively would be Connauton. That includes Paliotta and Golobeuf. The way the D is built I can see each and every 5/6/7/8 guy bringing "much" or "enough" of what they will be asked to bring to the 3rd pair and the team.

The way the team is built, simply is what it is. There's a salary cap. The CBJ are NOT a budget team. If you want to add to the defense, especially a WHOLE top pair, then there would have to be major subtractions from our "cup worthy" offense. We have 3 guys who are paid(or will be(Murray) on next contract) as #2's and play perfectly fine as #2's. While YES it would be great to have a superior legit #1 defenseman added to the team the realization that we would need to shed "significant" $$ or assets for that to happen need to be realized.

Some issues with Savard, some of these items improved slightly over the last 30 games of the season last year.

1. Mobility. I don't care if thebus thinks it's improved. It's still poor. It takes a while to get that big boy moving..

All I can continue to do is disagree. IMO his skating is at the higher levels of average for NHL defenseman. In no way is it poor. 3 years ago yes.

2. Awareness. Too many times he seems surprised with a defender getting behind him; thus why I call him Whiplash. He has tunnel vision out there, he's looking at the puck and not aware of what is going on around him. That is not top 4 awareness. I laugh when I see him follow the puck and realize he's dead meat. It's like the start of Benny Hill..

I'm not sure (actually I am) if you have enough knowledge, of either the game of hockey OR mindreading, to know what is or isn't "suprising" Savard by what YOU THINK he is looking at or what he is "aware" of on the ice. You make it seem like he's giving up breaks left and right, which is completely untrue. It seems IMO that your nickname is based on the fact that Savard actually has too much "vision" or "awareness" for you to literally even understand. It not single-A Louisiana winter ball talk, but here ya go for an analogy... A good smart defenseman will actually play man coverage a lot like a cornerback or safety in football. Some of the focus on the puckcarrier/QB and some on the "target(s)" of the pass. And to think you know what a guy is thinking on the ice based primarily on what direction he is facing is pretty ridiculous.

3. Puck decisions. When he has the puck in his zone, he makes too many mistakes moving it up ice. Too many defensive zone turnovers. Really hurts our puck possession. In the neutral and offensive zones he'll pass the puck to a checked player leading to a turnover. The player will receive the puck and it will lead to an immediate turnover. He will do this without being pressured. I illustrated this multiple times in games last season. People just kind of glossed over it. His neutral zone play can be quite ghastly. ..

Like his skating and "awareness", I completely disagree with you here. Frankly I think just above his shot, I would rank his "puck decisions" as his best quality and IMO I think this is definitely where you should lose some "credibility" in this argument. His passing and "puck skills" has been the thing he's essentially ALWAYS been good at. I mean how DID he win the CHL Defenseman of the Year? How DID he get a decent "cup of yea", and play decent, in the NHL just out of juniors? Blaming him for other people's turnovers?

4. Defensive transition. Once the puck is established in our defensive zone he's fine and he can either pressure just the puck or play in a zone he's cool. But if he has to skate with a player in transition he gets beat - a lot. If he's the only defender in a 2-1 he makes the life hard in the goalie. He tries, too often, to slide and take the man and the pass. Just play the pass and leave the man with the puck to the goalie..

I mean to this point you have literally described a terrible NHL d man or any defenseman in general. Besides that I disagree almost completely with your description of his game and also understand the heightened threat of stirring up the "Wiz PP per 60" brigade I will say this, the numbers also do not back up what you are saying. You also have to realize just how much of what you are watching from Savard is literally against the best players in the world. You seem to "gloss" over that. Same goes for Johnson. The amount of PK time or "hard" minutes they play against top lines of other teams should not be held against them in any way. IMO it should actually seen as an absolute plus. Its a lot harder than playing 25% of your game spending 1:20 of every PP at the top of the umbrella attempting to bomb off 5 or so shots.

And 1 last point to counter what you think is "right" on a 2 on 1. While a clean or semi clean pass getting across the slot for a 1 timer, anywhere near or within the hashmarks is pretty much the last thing you want to happen, letting a guy walk all the way in on what turns into a partial breakaway is probably the only thing that could be worse. And IMO Savard is actually very smart when it comes to going down to the ice and breaking up plays. Both Johnson and Wiz are or were 2 guys who will play your "back all the way down to the crease, "checking" the extra guy" defense while the guy with the puck walks in with all day and dekes or shoots right around Bob. This "lay down" strategy on 2 on 1's IS the best case scenario if done correctly, which Savard most of the time can do. The problem is timing it correctly so the pass cant get over quick and that the shooter is as wide as you can force them. Savard also isn't afraid and is also very good at doing this during PK's when the puck gets down low. He'll get right down on 1 knee and attempt to block the entire back door passing lane. With Bob and the most part Mac, they both have good/quick lateral movement and can get over on "slower" passes that have to be "saucered" over Savard or whomever. And sure, sometimes playing against the best players in the world on 2 on 1 's and PK's, things don't quite go as planned. But at this point you are describing a modern day Wisniewski. I dream of a day that I can forgive and forget this...

What he does well.

1. Shots from the point. He has a very good shot and I think this is why they look the other way in the rest of his game a lot. That and he's young so they figure he'll continue to improve. Having said that you can't fix his on-ice intelligence. You can only simplify his game. An example, this shot of his if you look a lot of times it's a "luck and a prayer shot".


That is Savard in a nutshell. Average skater, big body, good defensive zone defensmen, great shot, below average moving the puck, and, finally, not the sharpest tool out there. Should be a 5/6, right now, with PP and PK time (second unit for both). Tool wise, he's not close to being in the same league as Murray. Murray is an amazing passer and his vision is incredible. However, Savard was a great find at his spot on the draft.

If you consider his shots to be a lot of times a "luck and prayer" shot, I wonder just how many shots you DONT consider are "luck and prayer". Let me guess, "luck and a prayer"?........
[NHL]2014020394-41-a[/NHL]

Just because YOU don't see the hole, doesn't mean the hole wasn't there.

And please, name some teams that have 4 better defenseman than Savard. I mean if a player is good enough to play a regular shift on both the PK and PP he's quite clearly NOT a 5/6. The fact that he scored 10 goals and played the amount of PK minutes he did compared to the WHOLE LEAGUE says enough right there. 1 last thing is that IMO Savard could actually be more Johnson like and take MORE risks while I'd like Johnson to ease up a bit. I don't see ANYONE currently in the organization that I think will overtake Murray or Savard on the "top pairing" going forward. Werenski, Carlsson, Golobeuf, Paliotta, Nuutivaara, none of them. That's how high I value Savard and how low I value Murray's "injury history/problems".

I think his skating can be improved. My biggest concern with Savard are his occassionally stupid decisions. He truly is the new Wisniewski!

Playing against the best hockey players in the world, sometimes split second "decisions" WILL seem "stupid". What % of goals do you think scored in the NHL are a direct result of a player or players on the scored upon team making a mistake?

Mmmm.. I don't think Savard does a lot of "Let's try and keep the puck in at our offensive blueline and watch the puck get past me leading to a breakaway on our power play". I think he has that going for him.

Here we go. Baby steps. I think that puts ya at 1 for 12 when it comes to Savard.

Here's a suggestion: with a bit less certainty in your own opinion and a bit more appreciation that many of us have been following the game at least as long as you.

I'm a little confused. If I didn't have "certainty in my own opinion", there'd be essentially no reason to even have or be vocal about an opinion, no? Since many/some people on here either are, or are nearly twice my age, I cant argue that they have been "following" the game for longer than me, however I can argue just how much "following" and "understanding" the game are related.

 

[blahblah]

So I bothered to look for a minute on some of the responses from thebus, against my better judgement.

I see that he's pulled out the highlights that favor him; although I didn't bother to look at the highlights. I'm not completely sure if he realizes that highlights are just that - highlights. There will be almost nothing on a players failures on the Internet; unless it leads to a highlight for another player. Meaning, you'll be able to find infinitely more good than bad with most players. Most if his responses are kind of just "look at my highlight video". Worse yet, the "nuh-uh" to my "yeah-uh".

I'm not 100% sure what his issue is and why he's so defensive with Savard. Savard isn't nearly as good as what he's made out to be. I've also left room for him (Savard) to change my opinion. I've done that with other players when I see true growth. A perfect example was Malhotra. My favorite reclamation player.

I'm not going to bother to counter point all his arguments because, quite frankly, there is no point. Also, really he hasn't offered up much in the way of arguments.

What I'm talking about with his decision making, which I find to be the worst part of his game, is that he'll make many passes in which one of the following will occur.

1. The player receives the puck in which he can do nothing with the puck. The puck is either no where near his stick (in the stakes a lot), ends up on the wrong "hand", or there is another player actively checking him (there are many types of "checks" in hockey). This leads to an immediate turnover. He can go through some of the GDT's for about 5 or 6 examples.
2. He's had, at least, two or three off-balance one-timers that's either went in or he's gotten a deflection. I can't provide evidence, because frankly I don't care enough to search through highlights - but they are there. They were very lucky. Good for him, but they can't be counted on to continue. That's what I mean by "hope and prayer" shots. I would recommend looking at third periods in close games in which he's had a goal or assist and you should find, at least, three of them. I don't actually mean it as a negative, just that I don't consider luck sustainable.
3. Dramatic improvement to his skating isn't saying a whole lot. It was atrocious before. Now I can just barely stomach it on most nights. I've tired of watching players skate right by him in transition. Watching him try and catch up on a breakaway is painful on most occasions (far too many breakaways). I hope he's taken advantage of the coaching staff that has been afforded to him this off season. It's been mentioned that Boll has, I don't think I saw Savards name.

I gave an honest and courteous response and what I got was a condescending response laced with insults. His 1-12 and comments on awareness pretty much speak for themselves. Pretty sure, at this point, it's damned if I do or damned if I don't. I've always tried to give fair an honest assessments on players (coaches, front office) that I like and those I dislike. I've had a pretty decent record in the past. In the long run, IMO, I feel that Savard will start to get lower and lower in the depth chart as we continue to develop players. With a stronger defense I don't believe that Savard would ever have been awarded the opportunities he's received to this point.

I wish thebus luck in his endeavors. I've said my peace, so he shouldn't expect any further response to him directly.

 

[Mayor Bee]

Here's a suggestion: with a bit less certainty in your own opinion and a bit more appreciation that many of us have been following the game at least as long as you.

I just follow my own basic rule of thumb: if I think it, it's right. If it was wrong, I wouldn't think it and accept it, therefore I am right.

 

[NotWendell]

I wish thebus luck in his endeavors. I've said my peace, so he shouldn't expect any further response to him directly.

David Savard couldn't ask for a better apologist than thebus2288

 

[Viqsi]

I just follow my own basic rule of thumb: if I think it, it's right. If it was wrong, I wouldn't think it and accept it, therefore I am right.

See, the problem is, that only works for me. When YOU do it, you mess things up.