great hockey

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from lucicfan. Show lucicfan's posts

    great hockey

    This was one of the best games I ever saw.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eG6wQRnnT8o

    It had it all, goals, hits, fights but most of all TEAM UNITY. This was the turning point for the Bruins that season. I also kind of miss the Sheriff Shane Hnidy watch at about 5:51 and what he does to Niskasin (spelling). One other thing I noticed besides Ott being a coward and Avery a +urd is that even Kessel got involved and stopped another player from getting in the crowd and pulled his jersey over his head. I loved watching that team, I thought it had Stanley Cup writen all over it. They sweep leHabs (was like winning the Cup) and draw a team they dominated all season and then it happened, I think there is no need to explain the rest.

    I'm very excited about this years team. It has potential to be better than that team, I just hope they unite right away and we have a season full of games like that. Im just rambling cause im jonesin for a Bruins game.

    Cheers B's Fan keep the faith.

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from duinne. Show duinne's posts

    Re: great hockey

    In Response to great hockey:
    [QUOTE]This was one of the best games I ever saw. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eG6wQRnnT8o It had it all, goals, hits, fights but most of all TEAM UNITY. This was the turning point for the Bruins that season. I also kind of miss the Sheriff Shane Hnidy watch at about 5:51 and what he does to Niskasin (spelling). One other thing I noticed besides Ott being a coward and Avery a +urd is that even Kessel got involved and stopped another player from getting in the crowd and pulled his jersey over his head. I loved watching that team, I thought it had Stanley Cup writen all over it. They sweep leHabs (was like winning the Cup) and draw a team they dominated all season and then it happened, I think there is no need to explain the rest. I'm very excited about this years team. It has potential to be better than that team, I just hope they unite right away and we have a season full of games like that. Im just rambling cause im jonesin for a Bruins game. Cheers B's Fan keep the faith.
    Posted by lucicfan[/QUOTE]

    Three things stick in my mind from that game: Ference's thundering hit; Savard pounding on Avery, and Edwards' "Brave Steve" comment. The latter still makes me laugh.

    I know what you mean - I'm jonesing too. I really, really hope they'll open up the captain's practices because I'd love to go. Can't wait for the rookie game Sept. 15!

    Just one more thought - several of the players have said they're looking forward to the Europe trip as a chance for the team to bond. A good long road trip reportedly does help (they had one, to the west coast, at the start of '08-09), and I hope they have a great time.
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from lucicfan. Show lucicfan's posts

    Re: great hockey

    Duinne I also thought Thornton played his roll to a T. Usually the rougher the game got the better the B's played. I like the scoring threat the B's are gonna have this year? just a question would you try Seguin with Krejci and Lucic. I know you probably want him with Rex and Bergy but I think he would be a perfect fit there, in place of Satan. I would try Horton and Wheeler with Savard too. thoughts?

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from duinne. Show duinne's posts

    Re: great hockey

    In Response to Re: great hockey:
    [QUOTE]Duinne I also thought Thornton played his roll to a T. Usually the rougher the game got the better the B's played. I like the scoring threat the B's are gonna have this year? just a question would you try Seguin with Krejci and Lucic. I know you probably want him with Rex and Bergy but I think he would be a perfect fit there, in place of Satan. I would try Horton and Wheeler with Savard too. thoughts?
    Posted by lucicfan[/QUOTE]

    I'm dying to see Horton on the wing with Savard, but I really like Lucic riding shotgun with Savard and creating space no matter who's on the other side. Savard's a tremendous playmaker, but not everyone can handle his passes (sort of like a great quarterback needs great receivers); I'd like to see what Horton can do. (oddly enough, Lucic seldom has trouble with Savard's passes - IMHO he doesn't get enough credit for a decent set of hands.) I don't think Wheeler is a good match for Savard; he seems to do better with Krejci's relatively soft feeds rather than Savvy's bullets.

    I know a lot of people are thinking it's a given that Seguin will be on Bergeron's wing but I actually really like the idea of pairing him with Krejci. I hope they try them together in camp. I think Seguin can play either wing (so can Wheeler, for that matter), so we'll see. It's possible that they try Wheeler out with Bergeron and Recchi; he's been doing good work on the PP, so his defense has certainly improved.

    Man, I wish I could make it to practices! This is going to be fun. :-)
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from Not-A-Shot. Show Not-A-Shot's posts

    Re: great hockey

    In Response to Re: great hockey:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: great hockey : I'm dying to see Horton on the wing with Savard, but I really like Lucic riding shotgun with Savard and creating space no matter who's on the other side. Savard's a tremendous playmaker, but not everyone can handle his passes (sort of like a great quarterback needs great receivers); I'd like to see what Horton can do. (oddly enough, Lucic seldom has trouble with Savard's passes - IMHO he doesn't get enough credit for a decent set of hands.) I don't think Wheeler is a good match for Savard; he seems to do better with Krejci's relatively soft feeds rather than Savvy's bullets.
    Posted by duinne[/QUOTE]

    All of Savard's high scoring wingers (Kovalchuk, Heatley, Hossa, Murray, Kessel) have been successful without him, but Savard hasn't made any wingers successful.  The B's have put plenty of different wingers with him that have failed to score like the superstars. Has Savard just been the luckiest center in the history of hockey? 
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from bim09. Show bim09's posts

    Re: great hockey

    Classic game, though not really my style of hockey.  Personally, I prefer hockey like this with a lot of puck movement and skill.  But if this years team can get some of that toughness to go along with all the skill, they could be Stanley Cup contenders.

    I agree Lucicfan, those line combo's could be great.
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from bear-in-the-woods. Show bear-in-the-woods's posts

    Re: great hockey

    In Response to Re: great hockey:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: great hockey : All of Savard's high scoring wingers (Kovalchuk, Heatley, Hossa, Murray, Kessel) have been successful without him, but Savard hasn't made any wingers successful.  The B's have put plenty of different wingers with him that have failed to score like the superstars. Has Savard just been the luckiest center in the history of hockey? 
    Posted by Not-A-Shot[/QUOTE]


    Do you really think he was the center for these scorers because he was lucky? I suppose Spezza and Thornton are lucky too, since they've also centered Heatley? I suppose Murray and Heatley and Samsonov made Thornton successful too, right? Crosby, Malkin, Datsyuk and Zetterberg were lucky because of Hossa? I suppose the Bruins went after Savard in free agency because they thought he was totally lucky to have put up so many points? They must have also signed him to a long term contract because they thought he was lucky, right? Right.

    In Savard's first three seasons with the Bruins, he had 74, 63, and 63 assists with a variety of wingers. As of early February 2009, he had the fifth-highest point total since the lockout with 331 points, behind Thornton, Ovechkin, Crosby and Heatley. The only winger I see on there that Savard centered was Heatley, but Heatley was a Senator at the time.

    In 2007, Savard was 3rd in league assists behind Thornton and Crosby. Murray had 28 goals in 59 games that year, Sturm had 27, and Kessel had 11. The year before that, with Thornton centering Murray, Murray had 24 goals in 64 games. Murray had more goals in fewer games playing with Savard.

    In 2008, Savard was 3rd behind Thornton and Datsyuk. Murray was gone, and Sturm had 27 goals again, while Kessel had 19.

    In 2009, he was 6th in the league behind Malkin, Crosby, Getzlaf, Backstrom and Datsyuk, and just ahead of Thornton by 2 points. Kessel finally broke out that year for 36 goals.

    Your constant arguments that Savard is not a number one center, and that he doesn't make the players around him any better doesn't hold any water. If you dislike him for other reasons, that's fine, but don't claim that he's the product of his wingers, just because they've had success without him. To suggest that his success has been solely the result of his wingers or blind luck is absurd. If anyone in the NHL thought that was the case, Savard would be unemployed, don't you think?
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from BadHabitude. Show BadHabitude's posts

    Re: great hockey

    In Response to Re: great hockey:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: great hockey : All of Savard's high scoring wingers (Kovalchuk, Heatley, Hossa, Murray, Kessel) have been successful without him, but Savard hasn't made any wingers successful.  The B's have put plenty of different wingers with him that have failed to score like the superstars. Has Savard just been the luckiest center in the history of hockey? 
    Posted by Not-A-Shot[/QUOTE]

    A valid point, but I would have to say that Savard made them more successful.  He extended the mileage of Murray, and Kessel appreciated him if we are to believe he was texting Savard saying he should join the Leafs.
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from Not-A-Shot. Show Not-A-Shot's posts

    Re: great hockey

    In Response to Re: great hockey:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: great hockey : Your constant arguments that Savard is not a number one center, and that he doesn't make the players around him any better doesn't hold any water. If you dislike him for other reasons, that's fine, but don't claim that he's the product of his wingers, just because they've had success without him. To suggest that his success has been solely the result of his wingers or blind luck is absurd. If anyone in the NHL thought that was the case, Savard would be unemployed, don't you think?
    Posted by bear-in-the-woods[/QUOTE]

    I deleted the top part of your post because it was unrelated and just stat regurg.  Name a player that Savard has made better.

    Kovalchuk:  52 goals with Savard, 52 goals without.

    Hossa:  39 goals with Savad, 43 goals without

    Heatley:  41 goals on Atlanta, 50 as a Senator (not sure if they were linemates)

    Murray:  Age is probably a bigger factor, but he still had more goals with Thornton.

    Kessel:  36 goals with Savard, 30 goals without...on Toronto.  Jury is still out here.

    Who has Marc Savard made a better player? 

    No he wouldn't be unemployed.  He's a very good hockey player.  He is a good passer and has an okay shot.  He does well in the faceoff zone.   The guy is no joke. He's just not this All-World player that some Bruins fans think he is.  If he were, he'd have been invited to Team Canada tryouts in 2009 after finishing tied for 9th in points the previous year.  They didn't even let him try.  Know why?  Yzerman was not fooled by the back of Savard's hockey card.

    Coming off a 98 point campaign, the soon to be 30 years old Savard should have broken the bank, right? 

    Savard to Boston:  4yr, $20M (avg $5M)

    Smyth to Colorado:  5yr, $31.2M (avg $6.25M)

    I'll leave Gomez and Drury out because Sather is a dope.  The list is long of players who had much lower point totals getting slightly less money or more money.  GMs aren't fooled...well, ones that don't work in Boston anyway.


     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from Reilly24. Show Reilly24's posts

    Re: great hockey

    NAS, only you could take one of the most consistent players in the NHL and put a negative spin on it. You are a joke and I am 100% sure that you are a Hab fan trying to get a rise out of Bruin fans here. A lot of people fall for your bull but I am not one of them. The only reason I don't hit the ignore button on you is I get a good laugh at the idiotic things you say.
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from bogie6. Show bogie6's posts

    Re: great hockey

    When Marc Savard first came to Boston he was a "Blue line hanging" offensive-only player. Julien changed that somewhat, and we all applauded. He has continued to be an offense first player which is why he is " mis-labeled" as the no.1 center. He has not played well with Ryder, Wheeler, and Sturm. He was a success with Kessel because Kessel's speed could catch up to those long passes behind the defense.He has been so-so on the Pk, and successful from the right boards on the PP. The Bruins failures on the PP without Savard are due to ineffective and unimaginative coaching. Maybe our new Asst. coach can contribute some insight here. Savvy has some valued skills, but that does not make him the no.1 overall skilled center on the Bruins.
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from Not-A-Shot. Show Not-A-Shot's posts

    Re: great hockey

    Reilly, I post about hockey.  You post about me.

    You don't oppose my positions or offer any counterpoints, you just post about me.  It's really strange.

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from no1bruinsfan. Show no1bruinsfan's posts

    Re: great hockey

    Interesting arguement whether or not Savard has made his wingers better. Do you base this judgement on whether they actually score, does that make them better? Or can it be based on how dangerous they are with Savard as a center?  I believe its a combination of both. Based on this I would have to say that Savard did make his wingers better. One of Savards true gifts is his playmaking ability and his vision on the ice.  In Kessels case yes its true he got 36 with the Bruins and 30 with the Leafs, but anyone who watched him play during both those seasons would have to admit that he was far more dangerous with the Bruins than he was with the Leafs. Him and Savard had some amazing chemistry, alot of which can be attributed to Savards ability to find Kessel on the ice.

    As far as why Savard didn't get an invite to Team Canada, I think this arguement is debatable, unless of course Steve Yzerman was phoning certain members on this blog and letting him know why he chose players and why he didn't.  The arguement presented by the media at the time was that Canada had too many good centers with the same skill set, no one ever singled out a weakness with Savards game. Is the fact that Savard didn't get an invite a knock on Savard, not at all. Its really a testament to how strong Canada is. If it is a knock against Savard, them Stamkos must be ticked as well, cause he wasn't selected either.

    Is Savard a No 1 center, I think he is. In the last minue of a game would you have him on the ice trying to get a tying goal or a game winning goal. In a heartbeat. The guy isn't just a good passer, hes a great passer. 
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from Not-A-Shot. Show Not-A-Shot's posts

    Re: great hockey

    Kessel and Savard had amazing chemistry.  Kessel scored 36 goals.

    Kessel goes to the second worst team in the league, has zero chemistry with much lower quality teammates and only scores six less.

    Chemistry doesn't win Stanley Cups.  Goals do.  Kessel can score goals without Savard.  In fact, every winger who has been successful with Savard has been successful without him.  I can't think of a winger who wasn't successful, but became a goal scorer when paired with Savard. 

    Can you?
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from duinne. Show duinne's posts

    Re: great hockey

    Good lord, Savard was third in the league in assists with the corpse of Glen Murray on his wing. 'Nuff said.
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from Not-A-Shot. Show Not-A-Shot's posts

    Re: great hockey

    In Response to Re: great hockey:
    [QUOTE]Good lord, Savard was third in the league in assists with the corpse of Glen Murray on his wing. 'Nuff said.
    Posted by duinne[/QUOTE]


    'Nuff said?  In your world, yes, because supporting facts disprove most of what you post.

    Glen Murray had similar totals the year before. It was the following year when Murray's skills eroded.  Without the star winger, Savard's production dropped almost 20 points. 

    But, let's not allow facts to stand in the way of your posting.
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from SanDogBrewin. Show SanDogBrewin's posts

    Re: great hockey

    Hey nice video I was wondering what happened to Shawn Thornton haven't seen him in years. Hold dance, hold dance call in the refs LoL!
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from Wheatskins. Show Wheatskins's posts

    Re: great hockey

    Marc Savard has really done a number on most Bruins fans. You over-estimate his value to the team.

    Is he an offensive player? Yes. Do his wingers score lots of goals? Yes. Does he improve the power play? Yes.

    Is he the leader? Questionable. Is he good in the room? I don't know, however there are suggestions that he is not. Does he have the intangibles to lead a team to a Stanley Cup? He's 33 now and hasn't done it yet. Can he help a team to a Stanley Cup? Yes, if there are others that do the leading.

    Are the Bruins better off with him right now? Yes.

    Why?

    Because he will force Seguin to play with Bergeron and Recchi. I believe that Seguin and Bergeron will develop an excellent chemistry together and with Recchi they will provide the Bruins with a potent second line, allowing Ryder, Krejci and Wheeler time to rediscover their lost magic up to the time that Sturm is expected back.

    Look for the Seguin-Bergeron-Recchi line to become the number 1 line by the end of October. The Savard line will then be the second line; hopefully providing some potency in offense. If the Ryder-Krejci-Wheeler isn't clicking one of the wingers will lose his spot to Sturm.

    Once this scenario is set, the pressure is off Savard as a leader and he can then be the help that can take a team to the Cup. And we should be in contention.

    If this scenario does not work out and the Savard line is the number 1 unit, I think we are in for a long season. We will make the play-offs. I don't think we will make a run for the Cup.

    I think the key to this season is Seguin and Bergeron. Seguin will help Bergeron become "the leader", until he takes over in 2-3 years. They will feed off each other, pushing themselves and taking this team to bigger and better success.

    This is my opinion. This is the way I see it. Excuse me if this offends anyone.

    The way to the top is with a duo: Orr & Esposito, Gretzky & Messier, Bourque & Neely, Beliveau & Richard, Toews & Kane, Lafleur & Robinson, Potvin & Trottier, Lemieux & Jagr....and hopefully - Seguin and Bergeron.


     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from Reilly24. Show Reilly24's posts

    Re: great hockey

    No NAS you do not discuss hockey. You insult hockey as we know it. Legion, Bergeron, United, Sandog, duinne and many others all discuss hockey what you do is not discussing at all. You probably hold the record for posters being ignored.
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from bear-in-the-woods. Show bear-in-the-woods's posts

    Re: great hockey

    In Response to Re: great hockey:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: great hockey : 'Nuff said?  In your world, yes, because supporting facts disprove most of what you post. Glen Murray had similar totals the year before. It was the following year when Murray's skills eroded.  Without the star winger, Savard's production dropped almost 20 points.  But, let's not allow facts to stand in the way of your posting.
    Posted by Not-A-Shot[/QUOTE]

    When someone posts numbers to support their argument, it's "unrelated and a stats regurg," but when you do it, it's "supporting facts." As you once stated, incredible comedy here.
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from JWensink. Show JWensink's posts

    Re: great hockey

    Back to the video... Physical play, standing up for each other, grit, character
    Marc Savard standing up for his "team-mates"They were on their way to becoming a cup contender...then it just stopped, and actually went in the other direction. Passive, unemotional and conservative to a fault.

    Why did those qualities leave this team? They haven't been the same since they stopped playing that aggressive cohesive style...it's so obvious. Then where did it go???

    There is only one possible explanation, and you all know who's responsible.
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from OlsonicCreations. Show OlsonicCreations's posts

    Re: great hockey

    yeah that game was amazing
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from duinne. Show duinne's posts

    Re: great hockey

    In Response to Re: great hockey:
    [QUOTE]Marc Savard has really done a number on most Bruins fans. You over-estimate his value to the team. Is he an offensive player? Yes. Do his wingers score lots of goals? Yes. Does he improve the power play? Yes. Is he the leader? Questionable. Is he good in the room? I don't know, however there are suggestions that he is not. Does he have the intangibles to lead a team to a Stanley Cup? He's 33 now and hasn't done it yet. Can he help a team to a Stanley Cup? Yes, if there are others that do the leading. Are the Bruins better off with him right now? Yes. Why? Because he will force Seguin to play with Bergeron and Recchi. I believe that Seguin and Bergeron will develop an excellent chemistry together and with Recchi they will provide the Bruins with a potent second line, allowing Ryder, Krejci and Wheeler time to rediscover their lost magic up to the time that Sturm is expected back. Look for the Seguin-Bergeron-Recchi line to become the number 1 line by the end of October. The Savard line will then be the second line; hopefully providing some potency in offense. If the Ryder-Krejci-Wheeler isn't clicking one of the wingers will lose his spot to Sturm. Once this scenario is set, the pressure is off Savard as a leader and he can then be the help that can take a team to the Cup. And we should be in contention. If this scenario does not work out and the Savard line is the number 1 unit, I think we are in for a long season. We will make the play-offs. I don't think we will make a run for the Cup. I think the key to this season is Seguin and Bergeron. Seguin will help Bergeron become "the leader", until he takes over in 2-3 years. They will feed off each other, pushing themselves and taking this team to bigger and better success. This is my opinion. This is the way I see it. Excuse me if this offends anyone. The way to the top is with a duo: Orr & Esposito, Gretzky & Messier, Bourque & Neely, Beliveau & Richard, Toews & Kane, Lafleur & Robinson, Potvin & Trottier, Lemieux & Jagr....and hopefully - Seguin and Bergeron.
    Posted by Wheatskins[/QUOTE]

    Savard has done a number on Bruins fans? Oh please. The majority of Bruins fans, his teammates, and the media have all had the wool pulled over their eyes by the nefarious machinations of Marc Savard? Except you, right? Give me a break.

    Several posters here have cited stats proving that Savard is one of the best playmakers in the game. Jack Edwards wrote an entire blog post on NESN, listing stats comparing Savard astoundingly favorably to his peers. Did you read it? Apparently not. You just continue to harp on your dislike for him. Yeah, we get it already. YOU DON'T LIKE THE GUY.

    "Is he good in the room? I don't know, however there are suggestions that he is not." Suggestions from whom? Source? Quotes? Next time Bob Beers is on The Sports Hub, do us all a favor, call the station, and tell him he's wrong about Savard, OK? I'd pay real money to hear that.

    And if you seriously think a key to this season is the play of Tyler Seguin, I'm afraid you're terribly misguided. I want Seguin to succeed and play well, but as I've said before, he is an 18-year-old kid, luckily joining a very strong team, and he is not going to be, nor should he be expected to be, The Man.

    Bergeron is a superb two-way player, but expecting him to be the #1 center is silly. His greatest value is in shutting down guys like Backstrom and Crosby, not in lighting up the scoreboard.
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from TryToBearIt. Show TryToBearIt's posts

    Re: great hockey

    In Response to Re: great hockey:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: great hockey : Savard has done a number on Bruins fans? Oh please. The majority of Bruins fans, his teammates, and the media have all had the wool pulled over their eyes by the nefarious machinations of Marc Savard? Except you, right? Give me a break. Several posters here have cited stats proving that Savard is one of the best playmakers in the game. Jack Edwards wrote an entire blog post on NESN, listing stats comparing Savard astoundingly favorably to his peers. Did you read it? Apparently not. You just continue to harp on your dislike for him. Yeah, we get it already. YOU DON'T LIKE THE GUY. "Is he good in the room? I don't know, however there are suggestions that he is not." Suggestions from whom ? Source? Quotes? Next time Bob Beers is on The Sports Hub, do us all a favor, call the station, and tell him he's wrong about Savard, OK? I'd pay real money to hear that. And if you seriously think a key to this season is the play of Tyler Seguin, I'm afraid you're terribly misguided. I want Seguin to succeed and play well, but as I've said before, he is an 18-year-old kid , luckily joining a very strong team, and he is not going to be, nor should he be expected to be, The Man. Bergeron is a superb two-way player, but expecting him to be the #1 center is silly. His greatest value is in shutting down guys like Backstrom and Crosby, not in lighting up the scoreboard.
    Posted by duinne[/QUOTE]

    I share your frustration in trying to teach people things when they clearly are resistant to the facts.

    Savard is an elite center who clearly makes the Bruins a FAR better team with than without. The team's PP ground to a virtual halt when he was absent and yet you have haters like NAS and Wheat-something ignoring that and trying to drive the guy out of town. Who knows why? It makes little to no sense.

    All we can hope--bottom-line--is that PC has enough sense to keep this guy in the fold long enough to see if he can get Horton scoring in bunches...and can you IMAGINE how awesome the Bruins offense could finally be with a trio of centers --Savard, Krejci, and Bergeron--wearing other teams down to the point where they simply can't shut ONE line down and be assured of a win, as has been the case w/som many 1-dimensional Bruins teams in the past?

    This coming season (WITH SAVARD) is a chance for the bruins to be 3 lines deep on offense and give Seguin time to experiment w/the wing or simply get his feet wet as a 4th line center. You can't go wrong with Savard in there.

    Without him--the Bruins become a team full of flaws and weaknesses. Edwards' analysis really does say it all....and I have yet to see anyone refute it with anything other than superficial and childish bias against a player they for some reason (NAS b/c he thinks Savard is a "girl" for talking to the press-yeah, there's a real cogent and thoughtful analysis)...just can't stand.

    Can't wait to see what this team can do with a full healthy squad anchored by Savard as one of the game's best centers!
     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from nitemare-38. Show nitemare-38's posts

    Re: great hockey

    In Response to Re: great hockey:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: great hockey : I deleted the top part of your post because it was unrelated and just stat regurg.  Name a player that Savard has made better. Kovalchuk:  52 goals with Savard, 52 goals without. Hossa:  39 goals with Savad, 43 goals without Heatley:  41 goals on Atlanta, 50 as a Senator (not sure if they were linemates) Murray:  Age is probably a bigger factor, but he still had more goals with Thornton. Kessel:  36 goals with Savard, 30 goals without...on Toronto.  Jury is still out here. Who has Marc Savard made a better player?  No he wouldn't be unemployed.  He's a very good hockey player.  He is a good passer and has an okay shot.  He does well in the faceoff zone.   The guy is no joke. He's just not this All-World player that some Bruins fans think he is.  If he were, he'd have been invited to Team Canada tryouts in 2009 after finishing tied for 9th in points the previous year.  They didn't even let him try.  Know why?  Yzerman was not fooled by the back of Savard's hockey card. Coming off a 98 point campaign, the soon to be 30 years old Savard should have broken the bank, right?  Savard to Boston:  4yr, $20M (avg $5M) Smyth to Colorado:  5yr, $31.2M (avg $6.25M) I'll leave Gomez and Drury out because Sather is a dope.  The list is long of players who had much lower point totals getting slightly less money or more money.  GMs aren't fooled...well, ones that don't work in Boston anyway.
    Posted by Not-A-Shot[/QUOTE]

    Savard ruined his chances because of past times he was asked to perform in the World Championships numerous times & declined. Ray Bourque almost didn't make the team in 98' because of the same reason. Bob Nicholson President of Hockey Canada doesn't take rejection kindly!
     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share