• Moderators, please send me a PM if you are unable to access mod permissions. Thanks, Habsy.

Leaf Rumours

number17 said:
Yeah, we'd think.

BUT, he holds all the cards on when he retires. It wouldn't be the first time a player refuses to shut it down and want to keep playing ... I mean, look at Mark Recchi.

Just because he regress into a 45-50 points player doesn't mean you can force him to retire. What do you do then?

Once he's your player then that's your problem. You don't want to be in that situation where we're talking every year whether we should buy him out or force him to retire ... it's a BAD situation
Click to expand...

It's not really a matter of ability at that point... do you really think a that Savard will be playing for $525,000 a year? I just don't see it. Recchi is playing for $1mil a year at least. Even then it a pretty rare player that plays that late if he's not making a fair bit more.

At the very most I could see Savard playing that 5th year where he'll make $1.5mil, but I have my doubts about that even.
 
Player like that retire when they aren't useful anymore. Perhaps his cap hit will be a bit much for his contributions, but he won't be playing if he can't contribute. There are obviously exceptions and Savard may just be one, but highly unlikely.
 
Don't be too sure that players like him won't try to stick around for the love of the game and some additional dough, when they know it'll all be over once that contract is up.
 
If that contract was paying him $4mil per year then I'd agree... but to these guys $550K is not really additional dough.

I guess we will find out in 4-7 years.
 
Don't get me wrong, I agree that it's exceedingly unlikely he'll play in the 6th year - probably injuries will be the leading cause for his retirement - but if he's healthy, and we're a competitor, and he just wants to have a role on a winning team, he may want to stick around.

But whatever, my concern is the first five years of the contract anyway. We need a winger, we need a proper amount of capspace to get him, and we have two very deserving kids that should have a chance at the top two center spots for us. Bringing in Savard would ruin all that - it's just a bad fit and a bad risk considering his recent injuries.
 
Savard has a good contract. Thats not the problem.

The problem is he is 33, has concussion problems, had a bad year last year and most importantly is a center.
 
If they're a 90 point centre it is. Like 101 mentioned, the problem with Savard's contract is not performance-related, it's the fact that he's difficult to slot in positionally on the Leafs depth chart and has a medical history.
 
If he's still playing well, and likes the game, he won't retire just because he's making 525k a year.

Of course, if he's playing well, then he might still be worth something at that point. And given his less and less restrictive NTC, I'm sure some bargain basement team would love to have a guy who takes a 4M cap hit but makes 3.5M less than that.

Really, the point whether to deal for him revolves around 3 things:
1. What's the price to acquire him?
2. Is he going to stay healthy enough to be competitive/has his injury past dropped him down too much?
3. Will he slow the development of the Leafs other players/help the Leafs be a better team in the 3-4 years from now?

We really don't know the answer to all 3. If he's only a ~60 point centre like he was last year, then you stay far, far away from him. Sure, 4M a year for a 60-point player is not a bad contract, but given the age and position for the Leafs, it doesn't make sense. If he can stay healthy and be an 80-90 point guy, then you go for it and let your kids develop. I mean, if both Bozak and Kadri develop as solid top-2 line centres, even if you can't trade Savard, there's nothing that says you can't trade Bozak or Kadri for a winger, or move one over there (or just keep them all as a very solid 1-2-3 down the middle).
 
The Savard contract is overblown.

If he's still putting up 60+ pts into his late 30's then let him play it out if he's willing to pocket the chump change.

If he's declined, then he either retires or is bought out. (and yes, the buyout actually isn't that bad).
 
629K for 8 years if you're forced to buy him out after year 3 of the deal

283K for 6 years if you buy him out after year 4

175K for 4 years if he's stuck around through year 5 but insists on staying.


Aslong as he makes it through year 4 of the deal, the buy out is negligible.
 
Meanwhile, one of Bozak or Kadri would be relegated to a role for which they are not ideally suited and would lose the opportunity to develop properly.

No thanks.
 
Actually the cap hit is pretty bad on a buyout because they are paying him so much less than the cap hit in the later years.

If you buy him out after year 4 it is:

2014-2015: $2,790,476
2015-2016: $3,765,476
2016-2017: $3,765,476
2017-2018: $283,333
2018-2019: $283,333
2019-2020: $283,333

A buyout would be worse than letting the contract run out.
 
You don't buy him out after year 4 dumb dumbs.......he'll be retiring after year four, just as he planned the day he signed the contract.
 
leafman101 said:
Actually the cap hit is pretty bad on a buyout because they are paying him so much less than the cap hit in the later years.

If you buy him out after year 4 it is:

2014-2015: $2,790,476
2015-2016: $3,765,476
2016-2017: $3,765,476
2017-2018: $283,333
2018-2019: $283,333
2019-2020: $283,333

A buyout would be worse than letting the contract run out.
Click to expand...

There's been some confusion about this point, and I'm not sure how it works either when the payments and the cap hit are different numbers.

But my guess is that if we bought him out after year 3, he would then have a cap hit of $4M per for the remaining 4 years (i.e., $16M). I think you reduce that number by one third, which leaves $10.66M, which you would divide up over eight years (4 remaining years x 2), which gives you a dead cap hit of around $1.25M per year.

I would think and hope that a buyout works like this in a situation like Savard's. For buyout purposes, I don't think the lower cash payment has anything to do with the cap hit, just what you need to pay out to him for the lost years.

If someone knows how to confirm, please share.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top