Big Phil
Registered User
- Nov 2, 2003
- 31,703
- 4,146
The issue with Savard is that he could score against bad competition, but he couldn't score against good competition. To illustrate, in his Chicago days (first 10 seasons), he generally led the Blackhawks in scoring in playoff series' against poor defensive teams, but almost never did against better defensive teams (and they didn't even play any series' against truly great defensive teams). Against the 10 best defensive teams they played over those 10 seasons, he led the team in scoring only in 2 series against Edmonton....and one of those was very high scoring. In the other 8 series against the best defensive teams, Savard never led his team in scoring.
When I watched Chicago in the '80s, that's what I saw - Savard could produce against relatively weak competition, and that's about all. To me, his game was limited.
Larmer was a very smart player who continuously improved his game, and he became a better player than Savard, who never really improved his game.
I think there's a good argument that, among good players, Savard is the most overrated player of the '80s, and Larmer the most underrated.
I can agree Larmer is underappreciated. But whenever the Hawks made deep runs, it was Savard who led the team in scoring. Alright, perhaps there were series where another player had more points than him late in the playoffs, but he was the man on the team. In 1990 he had 10 points in the semis vs. Edmonton. It was just Messier who carried that team past the Hawks. Savard even led the 1992 Habs in playoff scoring and the 1995 Hawks. Both by large margins, and he did well against the 1995 Wings. This was a time when he wasn't his 1980s self anymore.
I don't know, give me the choice between Savard and Larmer to build my team around and I don't even hesitate to pick Savard.