
Savard/By S. Bradley
Marc Savard showed how much he wanted to stay with the Bruins last December when he re-signed with the club, and the Bruins have seemingly determined they can keep Savard around after a couple months of allegedly shopping him around to clear cap space.
Now it seems there’s a chance the Savard-Bruins marriage could be broken up by a third party, and that might not be the worst thing for the club.
As first reported by the Team 1200 in Ottawa and confirmed by a number of other media outlets, Savard’s seven-year, $28.05 million extension – which pays him just $525,000 over the last two years of the deal – is one of four so-called “retirement contracts” that is still being investigated by the NHL.
This information was revealed in a footnote in the arbiter’s decision that voided Ilya Kovalchuk’s contract with New Jersey Monday. The others deals being examined by the league belong to Philadelphia’s Chris Pronger, Chicago’s Marian Hossa and Vancouver’s Roberto Luongo. Only Hossa has begun to be paid as part of his 12-year, $63.3 million contract.
The hypocrisy of this is obvious. The league approved and registered the contracts and, by almost all accounts, they’re allowable under the current Collective Bargaining Agreement. While the Kovalchuk ruling seems to have given the league new life in fighting the battle against the would-be cap-circumventers, the timing in all this is just ridiculous. Should the league reject one of the investigated deals, and win the inevitable arbitration afterward, four of the biggest stars of the league would be deemed unrestricted free agents just weeks before the opening of training camps. What the league would rule about Hossa as part of the Stanley Cup-winning Chicago team last season could only be ascertained by climbing into commissioner Gary Bettman’s brain. If you thought the major media outlets of the U.S. and the other major professional sports entities looked at the NHL as a circus act before, just wait to see how large the big top would be should the league start voiding contracts some eight months more after approving said deals.
Without digging too much through the muck that is the NHL and its dealings with the NHLPA, let’s look at this from a purely Boston Bruins-based perspective. The league investigates, the league rescinds the deal and Savard is rule an unrestricted free agent. Then what would the club do? His contract contains a full no-trade clause, which combined with his recent concussion problem and not-so-great locker room reputation around the league, has made him untradeable despite the friendly cap hit he carries (slightly more than $4 million). Seemingly, the Bruins have no room for him on the depth chart when you pencil in No. 2 overall pick Tyler Seguin as a third center behind Patrice Bergeron and David Krejci.
If the league removed Savard from the Bruins’ roster, the team would free up $4 million in cap space. But more importantly, they’d have $7 million cash more to spend in each of the next two seasons and $25.5 total to spend over the next four years. That type of dough would come in handy when trying to re-sign Zdeno Chara and Bergeron, not to mention bolstering the depth on the wing and at defense.
Now all summer I’ve argued against the idea of trading Savard. Removing the best offensive player from the league’s worst offense smells like a step back to me, despite the addition of Seguin and Nathan Horton. I also couldn’t see how swapping out Savard would be much of a help for Boston’s cap because any player the team would take back in a trade – if it wanted to get value – would probably be making an equal amount. And most teams taking on a Savard-sized deal would have to cut some payroll of their own.
Oddly, the idea of losing Savard for nothing appeals to me a little more. You save the cap space and the cash. You devote some of it to brining in Bill Guerin to help up front and/or Willie Mitchell to lend a hand on the back end. The cash flow makes sweetening Chara and Bergeron’s pot a little easier. In essence, the Bruins get a mulligan on a contract they gave out before they knew that Seguin would fall in their laps, Tim Thomas would become a $5 million No. 2 and Savard would get knocked into the next dimension by Matt Cooke.
I’d probably still be more apt to retain Savard’s services and see how things play out with Seguin and Horton fitting into the offense and injuries that will undoubtedly occur over the season’s first couple months During those months, the Bruins will have cap relief from Marco Sturm’s long-term injury, which is a luxury they seem determined to let postpone their decision-making.
If the Bruins are serious about deducting Savard from their midst, however, the league investigation into the center’s contract validity could be the perfect opportunity to walk away.









There is no possible way the NHL will veto Savard’s contract (or Hossa’s, or Pronger’s, or Luongo’s). None. The Kovalchuk veto was designed to send a message of “we’re not going to accept this moving forward”. They’ve already ratified those old contracts; this is just for show. The fact that they approved those contracts actually suggests to me that there might be a legal challenge to any attempt to overturn them.
4 million…career 80+ guy…dump salary and get no return…no sense, plain and simple.
The only reason these other contracts are being looked at by the league is because the Devils are crying foul even though Kovalchuks deal was way more absurd than the others. Savard’s contract will stand. I also feel that if the Bruins are going to part ways with Savard then he should be dealt for a decent winger or defencman of similar value instead of a Salary dump. At this point & time I do not see it being in Boston’s best interest to trade Savard, they would be far better off to keep him for another year or two & allow Sequin &/or Coulborne time to develop at the NHL level.
Leave it to Bettman and his cast of clowns to start making up the rules as they go along like they’re doing in this circumstance. Ordinarily, one doesn’t unapprove something that one approved within the last year, but this IS Bettman that we’re talking about. At this point, judging from his less-than-astute stewardship of the league over the course of his tenure, I wouldn’t put anything past him. I did read an interesting angle on this that said that Jeremy Jacobs might have initiated this from the background in order to dump Savard’s contract. I, myself, consider that to be a little far-fetched, although with Bettman, et al, running the NHL show, and absentee owner Jacobs lurking/operating in the shadows, who really knows for sure?
You really think you’re getting Chara/Bergeron signed for just $11 mill? I don’t. Plus there are bonuses for Colborne, Caron, Marchand too that could factor in. Then you have to replace guys like Recchi, Ryder, etc.
Nonetheless, if you read the end of the story, I say I’d probably be more apt to keep Savard, but the Bruins might be thinking another way.
Not much homework done here Matt!? The Bruins have 25Mil of cap space for the summer of 2011 which will end up being about 15 or 16Mil after signing Chara or Bergeron. Then add Sequin’s and Recchi’s bonuses the Bruins will probably have approx. 13Mil or 14Mil to spend that’s with Savard’s salary.
So please tell me Matt how does Savard playing with Kessel for the next 4 or 5 years help the Bruins especially with Boston having the Leafs 2011 #1 draft pick ?
Losing Savard for nothing and using the savings to bring in Guerin does not make us a better hockey team. There is no rush.
I’m tired of all this contract talk. I’m wondering if the Maple Leafs hold up their end and give the B’s another lottery pick do they look to pick Swedish defenseman Adam Larsson? I’m thinking that a high ceiling defenseman is the way to go.
I’m not sure how this contract thing will work out, but this is really unfair to Savard. He signed the contract in good faith. For the NHL to re-open this thing after this much time is bogus.
Keep Savard and put Bergeron on the wing. Yes, you lose his faceoff superiority but he has played on the wing many times including with Crosby in the world juniors. Imagine these lines???
Savard Lucic Horton
Krejci Wheeler Bergeron
Seguin Recchi Caron or Sturm
Campbell Paille Thornton
That means Ryder to the minors!!!!! Colborne, Knight get their shot if any injuries occur. Defence and goaltending is rock solid. Prepare for a long run, the B’s are healthy young with tons of talent. Lots of depth now, not like last year!!!
My opinion on this matter is this investigation will go nowhere. As Mausehockey1 said, the NHL has made its point with the Kovy deal. To resind already approved contracts would mean chaos for the league. A move like that would definitely be leagally be challenged, taking the matter far into the season. Savard will be a Bruin this coming season unless he is traded. I look forward to watching him with the spoked B on his sweater.
[...] the Bruins would free-up a whole lot of cap-space ($4.083 million) for this year…and beyond. Could the Bruins benefit from the NHL’s investigation? I, for one, wouldn’t mind [...]
I think the issue here is that New Jersey completely broke the issue. 17 years with the last 5 probably under the veteran minimum in 12 years?
Yes Savard is a retirement contract. They were legal. It allowed a 80+ point per year person to be signed for a cap hit of 4 mil a year. I could look at anyone and say tough, your GM should have thought of it. It is not cheating. But New Jersey??
Of all the “questionable” contacts mentioned, Savard’s is the least objectionable. Its 7 years and it goes until he is 40. Luongo’s, Hossa’s, RIDICULOUS!
I realize this may be a case of saying my cheating was better then your cheating, but I dont feel bad about Savard’s contract at all.
And for Gods sake… DONT TRADE/RELEASE HIM!!
I can not wait to see Horton getting passes from Savard.
I CAN NOT WAIT.
[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Matt Kalman and Boston Bruins Buzz, BostonSports93. BostonSports93 said: RT @TheBruinsBlog: New blog: Could Bruins benefit from leagu… http://bit.ly/ditSnL #bruins [...]
If this were to happen you can pencil in Savard beside Kessel in Toronto. I’d rather trade him for Kaberle and then deal with cap issues later in the season when Sturm returns. Also Kaberle comes off the books after the season.
I completely agree in terms with what that means for the bruins, but for the NHL, it would be an absolute nightmare and a joke for those four contracts, especially Hossa’s to be voided. It would be a monstrous mistake, they made their point with the Kovy contract, and now stand your ground with all new contracts, now need to be a revisionist.