Re: great hockey
posted at 9/5/2010 1:05 PM EDT
In Response to Re: great hockey
In Response to Re: great hockey : You are 100% correct that I have no idea how many B's games you watch. I have had many hockey discussions in my life, and you opinions ring out similar to those who haven't watched many games lately. My mistake. I do use stats often, but assists have never been a stat I've relied upon. The NHL should join the KHL in assigning only one assist per goal. The secondary assist is often times subjective. It's no as bad as it used to be (they say Mario got a few assists while sitting on the bench), but still bad. As I have stated before, on many occasion, I believe Marc Savard is a very good hockey player. I believe he is a very good passer of the puck. I believe his stats are inflate due to extraordinary wingers and secondary assists. I do not believe he is an elite center, or a superstar center. These terms are reserved for players like Crosby, Sedin, Backstrom and others like them. I'm sure you wouldn't put Savard on a list of top players with those guys, right?
Posted by Not-A-Shot
You are right in assuming I would not put Savard at the same talent level as Crosby, Sedin, Backstrom or say, even a Stamkos (altho' he's still young and has yet to prove himself worthy over time). Yes, I would trade any of those players for Savvy straight up and not look back.
My point on Savard's worth to the Bruins has to do with the fact that he is AT LEAST the next level down from those EXCELLENT players you mentioned and therefore has great value to the Bruins, given that none of those other players are skating thru the door to replace him.
The Bruins need Savard in the absence of anyone of the same position of equal value coming over, and given his contract status and the number of teams who would hang on to those players they have who may be as good or better, why run down Savard when the Bruins clearly NEED his talent?
What we DO KNOW about Savard is that w/out him, the Bruins PP is almost non-existent; that Krejci is an excellent center but why not have the B's be deeper by having him the #2 guy, w/Savvy up top?; that Bergeron is a great 2way player who excels on face offs, but does not have Savvy's offensive skill set....and that Savard is a PPGame player who can light it up when healthy AND has the potential of having a stud of a young forward to pass to in Horton. Maybe they'll click and maybe they won't,but don't you at least want to give them the chance?
The Bruins have an opportunity in keeping Savard of having 3 lines that can score. Given that they had the league's most anemic offense last year (in no small part due to Savard's games missed) why are we spending so much time arguing about a player that is clearly VERY good (if not Crosby level), and simply makes the bruins better by being in the line up rather than out of it?
Now, if you can get me Crosby or Stamkos or Sedin to take Savvy's place--great, I'm on board. Til then, I'm more than happy to have him as the team's #1 Center.