RUMOURS 'HURT' SAVARD according to Ottawa Sun interview

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

    Re: RUMOURS 'HURT' SAVARD according to Ottawa Sun interview

     "You don't know me"?????? What is this the Jerry Springer show.
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from duinne. Show duinne's posts

    Re: RUMOURS 'HURT' SAVARD according to Ottawa Sun interview

    In Response to Re: RUMOURS 'HURT' SAVARD according to Ottawa Sun interview:
    In Response to Re: RUMOURS 'HURT' SAVARD according to Ottawa Sun interview : Nobody is blasting Savard for wanting to stay in Boston.  Not one person. However, the entire topic does blow your theory of "they don't read the papers" right out of the water.  Not surprising, of course, as you do tend to simply make stuff up.
    Posted by Not-A-Shot


    He doesn't have to "read the papers" to be informed. Most of these guys get info from their friends, family and/or agents. Lucic, for one, said he'd been talking to Savard about the situation.

    But then again, I consider players to be human beings, and I listen to what they have to say. From your posts, you regard them as pieces on chessboard, or androids. Why you - and fans like you - don't just play video games, where you can be in total control, and not have to deal with the messiness of human life, is beyond me.
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from stevegm. Show stevegm's posts

    Re: RUMOURS 'HURT' SAVARD according to Ottawa Sun interview

    In Response to Re: RUMOURS 'HURT' SAVARD according to Ottawa Sun interview:
    In Response to Re: RUMOURS 'HURT' SAVARD according to Ottawa Sun interview : A NTC or NMC doesn't translate into a "don't try to trade me" clause or "never can be traded" clause.  It is a tool that gives the player the power to choose his destination if the team decides they want to move him.  Nobody is renegging.  Traded players still get paid. And yes, every player not named Crosby or Ovechkin knows there is a possibility that he will be traded.  I didn't say he expects it, but he knows it's possible.
    Posted by Not-A-Shot


    I don't fully know the fine print regarding ntc and nmc, but I know the spirit is either to guarantee the location, or the choice of the new location.  If a team agree's to that, it's not the players fault.  Most players would think, that this clause is for protection down the road, not protection before the thing even kicked in.  Plain and simple, if the ntc is part of the deal, they want to be here....for a long time.  What's so bad about that?  If the B's are trying to dump Savard, isn't it only logical that he'd be upset?  He just made a deal with them....it hasn't even started yet.  If true, his employer is ethically attempting to circumvent the spirit of the deal, which is exactly as sleazy as the player demanding a raise when he's had a great first year, while still having 3 more years in a 4 year contract.
    All of us here would think that's terrible.
    By and large, the teams/owners  make the rules, and are best case scenario, twice as greedy and selfish as the players.  Look at the cap?  The teams shut the game down because they claimed they needed it for it's very survival.  I was dumb enough to buy in at the time, but it should be obvious to any logical person, it was nothing more than economic bs.  The cap has risen enormously in just a few short years, despite the biggest U.S recession in decades, yet owners and managers still can't excercise the discipline required to work within the spirit of their own economic system.(see Kovalchuck,Savard, Pronger et al)
    I'm still smarting about the lock out year, and only because I believed the sewage the league was spewing.  It's pretty clear now though.
    Maybe i'm too old school, but a deal is a deal, and that goes for both sides.
    I've never been a big Savard fan, but regardless of the player, or the team, I think any player would be upset at the thought of being moved before their ntc contract even kicks in.
    What's to debate about that?
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from lordy4. Show lordy4's posts

    Re: RUMOURS 'HURT' SAVARD according to Ottawa Sun interview

    It is the salary cap era. Players names are going to be included in trade talk. Deal with it. It is part of the game. If you're upset, talk to the team about it, not the media. To me, it makes him look like a whiner to me.

    Savard didn't exactly act like a good teammate in the Flyers series. Yes, he did score the overtime game winner. However, he took a lot of dumb penalties. He got involved in an incident with the circus act that is Dan Carcillo and didn't come off looking to good. He threw his teammate under the bus after causing a too-many-men-on-the-ice penalty that cost the team the series. These kinds of incidents could cause a team to look to move a player. Not to mention that the team has salary cap issues and a ton of depth at center.
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from biggskye. Show biggskye's posts

    Re: RUMOURS 'HURT' SAVARD according to Ottawa Sun interview

    In Response to Re: RUMOURS 'HURT' SAVARD according to Ottawa Sun interview:
    In Response to Re: RUMOURS 'HURT' SAVARD according to Ottawa Sun interview : Irrelevant.
    Posted by Not-A-Shot


       If Chiarelli trades Savard before the start of the season, he will have done something that has never been done in the history of the NHL.
    OF COURSE IT'S RELEVANT!!
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from CausewayStBullies. Show CausewayStBullies's posts

    Re: RUMOURS 'HURT' SAVARD according to Ottawa Sun interview

    I just spent some time reading the 80 or so posts on here, and the two main themes I come away with are as follows:

    a) Feelings are allowed.  If you came into a storied original six franchise that was in dire condition, and you used your talents to bring out the skill-sets of young forwards and brought the team back to relevancy and back to the playoffs (with the help of others, obviously), and you then signed a contract extension that would imply you were part of the team's FUTURE, you would be hurt too if the team then brought in a younger, less banged-up, spotlight grabbing center like Tyler Seguin.  All the sudden you're irrelevant, and the B's management that wanted you so badly and wanted to find a way to get you signed for "team friendly" money wants to move that "friendly" contract to a team that is probably a long way from winning a cup (that's you, Toronto/Ottawa).  The man is a professional, but he has a pulse too, and that feeling had to blow. 

    b) The right course of action with those feelings is not to talk to a newspaper, and even more so not a paper in a rival NHL city.  Keep it to yourself, talk to your family, talk to your boss or teammates, or if you have to, blog or talk to your NHL city's paper as a last resort.  But really, his feelings on the situation should remain internal and we as fans should only see and be aware of his production on the ice.  We pay for his production, and his feelings in a direct sense have no bearing.  I love that he was honest, just...wrong time, wrong paper, wrong topic. 

    I heard Savvy had no heart when he came to town, and he has proven me very wrong.  I was there when he scored that OT goal in game one against Philly, and that whole team was exhausted in that OT.  He was probably still feeling the lingering effects of that concussion.  The guy has heart.  He is a Bruin.  I think he would be a great role model for Seguin and I hope he stays for that new contract.  Everyone was embarrassed by the too many men penalty; no one wanted the blame for it because its consequences were so monumental.  I didn't hear any of his team-mates stepping up and saying "hey, the guy shouldn't even have been playing, he is a month out of a concussion, cut hit some slack."  They all wanted to hide from the responsibility of that collapse. 

    Good Bruin, Bad Move, Both sides will get over it.  End of story. 
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from Bookboy007. Show Bookboy007's posts

    Re: RUMOURS 'HURT' SAVARD according to Ottawa Sun interview

    RE: Savard wants to stay in Boston.  It's rarer, and usually a huge mess, when a player says he wants out of his current city than when he says he loves it there and would love to stay.  Short of Edmonton, and outside of family concerns, I think most players would prefer the stability of a situation in which they've been successful to moving to a new city and having to fit in with 20 new guys, some of whom are probably giving up ice time now that you've arrived.

    More specifically, though, here's what we can say about the relevance of Savard wanting to stay in Boston:  His contract makes it easier and easier to move him as he ages - a provision he agreed to in negotiations;  As NAS has pointed out, his contract is cap friendly, but not discounted - he didn't take less money to stay in Boston though he might have taken less if he'd have risked the UFA market and the chance he'd have to go farther from his family; his comments on the subject have been limited in context to responding to unsubstantiated rumours and signing a long-term deal.  So - do I think Savard wants to stay in Boston?  Yep.  Do I think he wants to stay in Boston for the Bruins' sake?  Nope.  Should it matter if dealing him makes this team better able to compete for a Cup?  Nope.

    As for the "crucify guys who don't want to play in city X, then crucify guys for complaining they're being shopped because they love city X" argument?  Apples and Oranges.  When a guy says he wants to leave the franchise, you know you're not getting full effort out of him on the ice.  You know that he's unhappy, and unhappy players don't tend to sell out on the ice.  By its nature, it's a statement that says you are no longer committed to the team.  When a guy says he wants to stay, it's usually because he's unhappy about the prospect of leaving.  That should be a win-win for the franchise.  He stays, and is happy to stay, and plays to stay.  He goes, and is unhappy, and is someone else's problem.  The only risk here is the grudge when a player's shopped, but you know, guys get over that.  The Red Wings almost dealt Steve Yzerman to the Senators.  It was public, messy, ugly, and a gross spectacle because it involved a great captain and player - and looky! he stayed in Detroit and they won multiple Cups.  Why?  Because Yzerman was, by that point, a consummate professional.  If Savard stays in Boston, and I think he will for at least two years, I hope he can follow Yzerman's example.

    As for Wally, who I talked to a few times years ago when we were both in Calgary and bought cigarettes at the same store near the stadium (filthy habit - glad I quit over a decade ago), he misses Roy Shivers - best CFL talent director in the last three decades, with the possible and brief exception of Saints scouting guru Bill Kuharich's brother Larry - and he needs to find a way to get his players healthy.  I don't think the philosophy is antiquated, but the execution has fallen off.
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from Chowdahkid-. Show Chowdahkid-'s posts

    Re: RUMOURS 'HURT' SAVARD according to Ottawa Sun interview

      So - do I think Savard wants to stay in Boston?  Yep.  Do I think he wants to stay in Boston for the Bruins' sake?  Nope.  Should it matter if dealing him makes this team better able to compete for a Cup?  Nope.

    Should it also matter if keeping him makes this team better able to compete for the cup ? Yes. When he originally signed was he doing it for the Bruins or for himself ? Obviously like any other player who signs with a team he is doing it to benefit himself . Why should his priorities for staying or going change because of recent events ? Savard is no different then any other player who would be in this situation. A 'me' first attitude ! 
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from Not-A-Shot. Show Not-A-Shot's posts

    Re: RUMOURS 'HURT' SAVARD according to Ottawa Sun interview

    In Response to Re: RUMOURS 'HURT' SAVARD according to Ottawa Sun interview:
    In Response to Re: RUMOURS 'HURT' SAVARD according to Ottawa Sun interview : If the B's are trying to dump Savard, isn't it only logical that he'd be upset?  He just made a deal with them....it hasn't even started yet.  If true, his employer is ethically attempting to circumvent the spirit of the deal, which is exactly as sleazy as the player demanding a raise when he's had a great first year, while still having 3 more years in a 4 year contract. All of us here would think that's terrible.
    Posted by stevegm


    It's not a never can be traded clause.  There is nothing sleazy about trading a player.  It's the NHL.  It's professional sports.  Everyone can be traded.  Every single player can be traded.  What part of that don't you get?
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from Not-A-Shot. Show Not-A-Shot's posts

    Re: RUMOURS 'HURT' SAVARD according to Ottawa Sun interview

    In Response to Re: RUMOURS 'HURT' SAVARD according to Ottawa Sun interview:
    In Response to Re: RUMOURS 'HURT' SAVARD according to Ottawa Sun interview :    If Chiarelli trades Savard before the start of the season, he will have done something that has never been done in the history of the NHL. OF COURSE IT'S RELEVANT!!
    Posted by biggskye


    As the cap numbers get more difficult to manage, many things that haven't happened before are going to start happening.  It won't be ground breaking when it does.
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from perrysound. Show perrysound's posts

    Re: RUMOURS 'HURT' SAVARD according to Ottawa Sun interview

    Last point on this - at least from me anyway. Savard has been a consistent point producing Center that the Bruins deemed good enough to offer him a long term contract, that he freely accepted. He has been relatively quiet off the ice, and with the exception of the 'too-many-men-on-the-ice' penalty, he usually handles himself with some class and demonstrates a good solid work ethic pretty much every night, at least when I've seen him play. In short, a Good Citizen!

    Guys like this are not a dime a dozen, actually they are very rare, so unless you think the B's can do better right now, then he is the Man, and deserves better than to be trashed for expressing his feelings about wanting to stay and play for YOUR favorite team.
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from islamorada. Show islamorada's posts

    Re: RUMOURS 'HURT' SAVARD according to Ottawa Sun interview

    In Response to Re: RUMOURS 'HURT' SAVARD according to Ottawa Sun interview:
    In Response to Re: RUMOURS 'HURT' SAVARD according to Ottawa Sun interview : ^ Yep! "he's got 28 million reasons to get over it.  That said, I expect a bounceback season for Savvy, as he will have better linemates and hopefully better health." Couldn't ask for more from a future Canadian amateur golfer!
    Posted by SanDogBrewin


    After reading all the posts, SanDog your reply here is dead on!  Savard should learn how to be quiet 28 million times in front of the media.  I agree with NAS that Savard signed a contract, it was a business decision.  The Bruins management did the same.  
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from stevegm. Show stevegm's posts

    Re: RUMOURS 'HURT' SAVARD according to Ottawa Sun interview

    In Response to Re: RUMOURS 'HURT' SAVARD according to Ottawa Sun interview:
    In Response to Re: RUMOURS 'HURT' SAVARD according to Ottawa Sun interview : It's not a never can be traded clause.  There is nothing sleazy about trading a player.  It's the NHL.  It's professional sports.  Everyone can be traded.  Every single player can be traded.  What part of that don't you get?
    Posted by Not-A-Shot


    please read my post.  I didn't say there was anything sleazy about trading a player.  I said attempting to move a player you just signed..with a ntc, before it even kicks in....is as sleazy as a player expecting a raise while still under contract.  What part of that don't you get?
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from JWensink. Show JWensink's posts

    Re: RUMOURS 'HURT' SAVARD according to Ottawa Sun interview

    Everyone seems to be avoiding the obvious -why was he given a long term contract with a NMC...only to be on the block less than a year later. Seems like the front office is making this up as they go, without a plan in place.

    IMO, they never had a contingency cap/roster structure in place if Seguin ended up as their pick. Spin it any way you like, but make a long term COMMITMENT to your best offensive player, only to make him expendable months later makes no sense. Now they're up against the cap, need help on the wing, and have five centers on this team...now what do you do? Sounds like Chia told Savard one thing, and did another. I'm sure it wasn't malicious, it's incompetence. Either way it's bad business for everyone involved, and sends this team into the upcoming season with some dysfunction. There is going to be a learning curve with this 1st time GM, and Savard is currently experiencing it.

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from Not-A-Shot. Show Not-A-Shot's posts

    Re: RUMOURS 'HURT' SAVARD according to Ottawa Sun interview

    In Response to Re: RUMOURS 'HURT' SAVARD according to Ottawa Sun interview:
    In Response to Re: RUMOURS 'HURT' SAVARD according to Ottawa Sun interview : please read my post.  I didn't say there was anything sleazy about trading a player.  I said attempting to move a player you just signed..with a ntc, before it even kicks in....is as sleazy as a player expecting a raise while still under contract.  What part of that don't you get?
    Posted by stevegm


    The part about it being sleazy.  It's nothing like a player expecting a raise while under contract.  Trading a player doesn't change his contract.  Trading a player with a NTC would require the player to agree to some extent, and it's changing the contract.

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from rolerhoky19. Show rolerhoky19's posts

    Re: RUMOURS 'HURT' SAVARD according to Ottawa Sun interview

    In Response to Re: RUMOURS 'HURT' SAVARD according to Ottawa Sun interview:
    In Response to Re: RUMOURS 'HURT' SAVARD according to Ottawa Sun interview : As the cap numbers get more difficult to manage, many things that haven't happened before are going to start happening.  It won't be ground breaking when it does.
    Posted by Not-A-Shot


    What players get traded immediately after signing extensions with no trade clauses??

    There was no reason to extend savard if the intent was not to keep him here for atleast the season, I understand circumstances change, but I must say I do not get your stance on this.

    Your stance on thomas is the signing was a must, no gm has ever let a vezinna goalie walk with out a tested goalie behind etc, were in agreement there..
    But on this issue you seem to think the no trade is a non issue, players have no emotions and siging the guy to an extension and trading him before its even kicked in and asking him to waive his no trade is a non issue, and also will have no affects on signing players down the road etc, and i am in strong dissagreement.

    If savard is traded I think that makes the bergeron negotiations that much harder.. Why would you sign here for anything less then max value?  We have krejci and a plethora of young centers, if we trade savard when it comes time to negotiate with bergeron, why is "you extended savard and then traded him, why would you not do the same thing to me?" not part of his decision.. If I was in his shoes I am not going your going to give me 5 mill fine.. I am going I can wait and see who offers me what, and where I want to play, there is not reason for me to not hit free agency with this teams track record in regards to extensions.."

    The second pc extends someone were looking to deal them, it makes more sense to just let the guys walk..
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from Not-A-Shot. Show Not-A-Shot's posts

    Re: RUMOURS 'HURT' SAVARD according to Ottawa Sun interview

    All of that is interesting, Roler, but one instance doesn't make a rule or even a pattern.  If you take the contracts the B's have given over the years, all of the guys who have re-signed with the team over the years and put them on one side of the scale while putting a traded Marc Savard on the other side of the scale, I think one would outweight the other but just a little bit.
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from Not-A-Shot. Show Not-A-Shot's posts

    Re: RUMOURS 'HURT' SAVARD according to Ottawa Sun interview

    Has Kaberle cried in the press?
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from rolerhoky19. Show rolerhoky19's posts

    Re: RUMOURS 'HURT' SAVARD according to Ottawa Sun interview

    In Response to Re: RUMOURS 'HURT' SAVARD according to Ottawa Sun interview:
    All of that is interesting, Roler, but one instance doesn't make a rule or even a pattern.  If you take the contracts the B's have given over the years, all of the guys who have re-signed with the team over the years and put them on one side of the scale while putting a traded Marc Savard on the other side of the scale, I think one would outweight the other but just a little bit.
    Posted by Not-A-Shot


    Its not one instance though, We did ask morris to waive his no trade as we couldnt deal with him for a full season apparently, and also mentioned in trade talks (maybe just rumors?) Thomas, and Ference..

    Thornton still lingers in my brain as the bruins always kept him here and extened, while openly never being happy about having him here even with all his talent.

    But Yeah I guess it is less of a pattern then I was thinking. 
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from biggskye. Show biggskye's posts

    Re: RUMOURS 'HURT' SAVARD according to Ottawa Sun interview

    In Response to Re: RUMOURS 'HURT' SAVARD according to Ottawa Sun interview:
    Has Kaberle cried in the press?
    Posted by Not-A-Shot


       Kaberle has stated many times that he signed with Toronto, and did not want to leave. No, he was not crying, but then neither was Savard.
    Savard was simply being a human being, and explaining how he felt about the situation.
    For this, you continue to disparage him. Your obvious dislike for him as a hockey player, would appear to have left you incapable of being objective in any situation, regarding the man.
       As far as trying to trade a player you just signed as a UFA, and why it leaves a bad taste in my mouth, I will explain it like this.
    I work for a large company. There is a job opening in another city, and I decide I am going to take it. My boss doesn't want me to go, offers me a few perks, and talks me into staying.
    A month goes by, and suddenly some wiz-kid appears that will do my job at 1/2 the money, so the boss comes to me and says he no longer wants me, and would prefer I now transfer. The job I originally wanted is no longer available, Do I have a right to be upset?
    Please do not bring money into the discussion. Now that would be irrelevant.
    To millions of people in the world, the amount of money we make compared to them, is even more pronounced than the difference between us and hockey players.
    I don't think the fact I may make more in a day, then someone might make in a year, means I should not be allowed to show emotions.
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from nitemare-38. Show nitemare-38's posts

    Re: RUMOURS 'HURT' SAVARD according to Ottawa Sun interview

    In Response to Re: RUMOURS 'HURT' SAVARD according to Ottawa Sun interview:
    In Response to Re: RUMOURS 'HURT' SAVARD according to Ottawa Sun interview :    Kaberle has stated many times that he signed with Toronto, and did not want to leave. No, he was not crying, but then neither was Savard. Savard was simply being a human being, and explaining how he felt about the situation. For this, you continue to disparage him. Your obvious dislike for him as a hockey player, would appear to have left you incapable of being objective in any situation, regarding the man.    As far as trying to trade a player you just signed as a UFA, and why it leaves a bad taste in my mouth, I will explain it like this. I work for a large company. There is a job opening in another city, and I decide I am going to take it. My boss doesn't want me to go, offers me a few perks, and talks me into staying. A month goes by, and suddenly some wiz-kid appears that will do my job at 1/2 the money, so the boss comes to me and says he no longer wants me, and would prefer I now transfer. The job I originally wanted is no longer available, Do I have a right to be upset? Please do not bring money into the discussion. Now that would be irrelevant. To millions of people in the world, the amount of money we make compared to them, is even more pronounced than the difference between us and hockey players. I don't think the fact I may make more in a day, then someone might make in a year, means I should not be allowed to show emotions.
    Posted by biggskye


    OK, but trades are expected & accepted in sports. NMC/NTC or not. They still happen. If this scenario you mention did happen. Do you squawk to the media, or go to a rival companies newspaper & tell them "how hurt you are" Comon, I think if the situation is true that the B's absolutely without a doubt tried to trade Savvy. I think his feelings are justified, but running to the media without talking to your own company about it first is NOT JUSTIFIED! That's where Savard is wrong. However, if PC tried to trade Savvy without his knowledge??? Well, if his NMC doesn't kick in until the new season starts. PC isn't obligated to tell him! Savvy is no different than any other player. The B's don't have a Ray Bourque type of player anymore where they've "earned" special priviledges. If Savvy has a NMC in the contract he's still under. PC would have to ask him to waive it. So, there's no sneaky underhanded things going on. The point of the whole matter is Savvy never should've went to the media & said what he said! He knows better than that. I want Savvy here & I hope he stays, but I hope he learns his lesson, but it's quite obvious he didn't. He said somethings when the B's got eliminated that he shouldn't have said & now this! If this guy is being honest when he says "I want to stay in Boston" he's got a strange way of showing it!
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from rolerhoky19. Show rolerhoky19's posts

    Re: RUMOURS 'HURT' SAVARD according to Ottawa Sun interview

    In Response to Re: RUMOURS 'HURT' SAVARD according to Ottawa Sun interview:
    In Response to Re: RUMOURS 'HURT' SAVARD according to Ottawa Sun interview : OK, but trades are expected & accepted in sports. NMC/NTC or not. They still happen. If this scenario you mention did happen. Do you squawk to the media, or go to a rival companies newspaper & tell them "how hurt you are" Comon, I think if the situation is true that the B's absolutely without a doubt tried to trade Savvy. I think his feelings are justified, but running to the media without talking to your own company about it first is NOT JUSTIFIED! That's where Savard is wrong. However, if PC tried to trade Savvy without his knowledge??? Well, if his NMC doesn't kick in until the new season starts. PC isn't obligated to tell him! Savvy is no different than any other player. The B's don't have a Ray Bourque type of player anymore where they've "earned" special priviledges. If Savvy has a NMC in the contract he's still under. PC would have to ask him to waive it. So, there's no sneaky underhanded things going on. The point of the whole matter is Savvy never should've went to the media & said what he said! He knows better than that. I want Savvy here & I hope he stays, but I hope he learns his lesson, but it's quite obvious he didn't. He said somethings when the B's got eliminated that he shouldn't have said & now this! If this guy is being honest when he says "I want to stay in Boston" he's got a strange way of showing it!
    Posted by nitemare-38


    I agree about your comments w/ going public, as well as not having a ray bourque like player on this team.. but your glossing over an importand fact here, I don't think those of us who are saying, "yeah he has a right to be angry" are saying it because he may have been shopped in spite of a NTC, its because his extension has not even started and he may have been shopped in spite of his NTC, so why extend him at all, they could have let him walk and tried to make a splash in teh free agent market (or simply not be struggling with the cap right now)..

    Savard clearly signed a 7year deal with the intent of retiring as a bruin, though that may change down the road, the bruins have clearly sent a message that that might not be in there plans even as of now, If he had been aware of that at the time of the signing, i think he certainly would have tested the free agent market.
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from Bookboy007. Show Bookboy007's posts

    Re: RUMOURS 'HURT' SAVARD according to Ottawa Sun interview

    re: Savard having emotions.  There are many ways to see what Savard did as "wrong."  I've mentioned in previous posts that I don't like that he's responding to rumours in the press without talking to PC "man to man".  I'll add that he's an employee of the Bruins and is making personal, public comments that could hurt his employer's competitiveness - something that almost everyone who supports Savard in this not only recognizes but holds against PC.  Because now everyone is acting as though PC is kicking Savard out the door, and listing his failings for not having a contingency plan (Wensink's words but many people's implication).  I've still never seen anything that confirms that PC has put Savard on the block or even that Savard has been asked to waive his NTC or for conditions under which he would.  The only reason this is even a debate is that shallow logic says the Bruins have too many centres so surely they'll have to deal a C.  Bergeron and Krejci are homegrown, younger, and play a more rounded game.  So I guess the only option here is trade Savard!  Murfdy durh!

    And you know what?  Maybe it isn't more complicated than that - and maybe that was the contingency plan all along.  Sign him because he's valuable; give him a NMC because you don't anticipate wanting to move him for a couple of years; but know that he's a valuable chip if you end up with a gem C prospect.  You can't not sign him because you can't just let a #1C walk for nothing on the off chance you do get the #1 or #2 pick.  What if the Bruins had been dropped to third by the draft lottery?  What if the Laffs had put on a burst of improved pl.Bwah ha ha ha ha!  Okay, sorry, that wasn't going to happen, but you can't guess that you're going to get Seguin and let Savard go because, hey, who needs him?  If you give him an NTC or NMC he has about as much guaranteed control as a player can have.  PC's had to approach players before about NTCs and if anything he's been pretty respectful in dealing players to places they want to be.  Things change.
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from nitemare-38. Show nitemare-38's posts

    Re: RUMOURS 'HURT' SAVARD according to Ottawa Sun interview

    In Response to Re: RUMOURS 'HURT' SAVARD according to Ottawa Sun interview:
    In Response to Re: RUMOURS 'HURT' SAVARD according to Ottawa Sun interview : I agree about your comments w/ going public, as well as not having a ray bourque like player on this team.. but your glossing over an importand fact here, I don't think those of us who are saying, "yeah he has a right to be angry" are saying it because he may have been shopped in spite of a NTC, its because his extension has not even started and he may have been shopped in spite of his NTC, so why extend him at all, they could have let him walk and tried to make a splash in teh free agent market (or simply not be struggling with the cap right now).. Savard clearly signed a 7year deal with the intent of retiring as a bruin, though that may change down the road, the bruins have clearly sent a message that that might not be in there plans even as of now, If he had been aware of that at the time of the signing, i think he certainly would have tested the free agent market.
    Posted by rolerhoky19


    Ok, I do agree that if the B's had no intent on keeping him & making him think he was going to retire a Bruin, only to turn around & try & trade him 6 months later is rather a......well, as someone else on here said it does make it rather difficult for Bergeon/Chara to believe what the B's brass say. However, and I will apologize now if I missed it. I still have not seen conclusive evidence where PC actually said 'We are looking to trade Marc Savard." I don't care what reporter said what. I don't care what inside source said it. Until I see an actual word for word from, the GM of the Boston Bruins say it. I think Savvy is very much in the wrong with the way he handled this. All I know up to this point is there's rumours & speculation about Savvy. Savvy within 2-3 months has made himself look bad with his reactions to certain things. The penalty is one & now this. So, who's the real Marc Savard? The one that jumped in & helped (gloves on or off, he reacted to a teammate getting cheapshotted) in that Dallas game from 2 seasons ago? Or, the one that was a (selfish) type player in Jr, NY, Cal & Atlanta? I know which one I hope he is, but maybe the leppard's changed spots were only put on with an erasable marker!
     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from rolerhoky19. Show rolerhoky19's posts

    Re: RUMOURS 'HURT' SAVARD according to Ottawa Sun interview

    In Response to Re: RUMOURS 'HURT' SAVARD according to Ottawa Sun interview:
    In Response to Re: RUMOURS 'HURT' SAVARD according to Ottawa Sun interview : Ok, I do agree that if the B's had no intent on keeping him & making him think he was going to retire a Bruin, only to turn around & try & trade him 6 months later is rather a......well, as someone else on here said it does make it rather difficult for Bergeon/Chara to believe what the B's brass say. However, and I will apologize now if I missed it. I still have not seen conclusive evidence where PC actually said 'We are looking to trade Marc Savard." I don't care what reporter said what. I don't care what inside source said it. Until I see an actual word for word from, the GM of the Boston Bruins say it. I think Savvy is very much in the wrong with the way he handled this. All I know up to this point is there's rumours & speculation about Savvy. Savvy within 2-3 months has made himself look bad with his reactions to certain things. The penalty is one & now this. So, who's the real Marc Savard? The one that jumped in & helped (gloves on or off, he reacted to a teammate getting cheapshotted) in that Dallas game from 2 seasons ago? Or, the one that was a (selfish) type player in Jr, NY, Cal & Atlanta? I know which one I hope he is, but maybe the leppard's changed spots were only put on with an erasable marker!
    Posted by nitemare-38


    I agree I don't think anyone has found anything that says that he was asked to waive his no trade, but so much speculation, had to come from somewhere, and i think savy is a bit of a pre madonna over sensative player..

    I just think if the bruins trade him prior to his extension kicking in, it becomes a "black eye" or blemish or whatever you want to call it, on the front office.. All things considered he is one of the best offensive centers in the game today and his cap hit (if he is healthy) makes him a steal..

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share