Oh yeah, that thought has crept into my mind as well. But I also don't really want San Jose to win since they've been in the league a lot shorter than the Sabres.

_________________
"...they came down into the stands and asked if I knew how to do play by play. I said...No. But. I'll take a shot at it if you want".- Rick Jeanneret

VERY deceiving assertion.

You are NOT factoring in all the other injuries the Bruins have dealt with this season that overlapped during that stretch. They had the most or 2nd most injuries of ANY team this season, having 38 different players on their roster throughout the year.

Pinning that W/L record on Savard is disingenuous at best.

Since it is so often assumed that Vanek would have saved the day in the playoffs, should we really examine HIS season, 'cause it wasn't all roses. C'mon, 1/7th of his goal total was from the Ottawa game that the Sens didn't even care about.

Downplaying the importance of Savard to the Bruins while playing up the importance of Vanek to the Sabres is ignorant.

And this isn't a deceiving (or just plain wrong) assertion?

_________________
Proud LGBTQQ Individual

I was illustrating a point. You can cherry pick stats all you want to try and make a point. If you look at the big picture, Savard is AT LEAST as important to the Bruins as Vanek is to the Sabres.

And that stat about 1/7th of his goals (4) coming in a game that couldn't have mattered less to the Sens, is entitrely accurate: They didn't use Elliott, who was 8-0 against the Sabres, their playoff position was not going to change AND they created their own distractions with "Alfie Day", purposely trying to pass to him a lot so he could score on his big day. VERY ridiculous game on their part that day. This is no secret.

Savard is more important to the Bruins than Vanek is to the Sabres. Savard is the playmaker and the Bruins are filled with finishers, while the Sabres have Miller and a bunch of finishers (Vanek). We need a guy like Savard.

_________________
"Counting all the assholes in the room, I'm definitely not alone!" ~ Michael Poulsen, Volbeat, Still Standing.

You said the Bruins were better with Savard in the lineup, and I just proved they weren't. I'm not saying you pin it all on Savard, but you see how better they were without Savard in the lineup, NO THEY WERE NOT!! Argue it as much as you want to, but they lost 34 games when he was playing the entire game and won 29, I don't see it as being much better.

But you think we would have been zilch on the PP through 6 games if Vanek wasn't injured? And do you think our PK would have been better had Hecht been out there also? I honestly do, Vanek is a huge part of our PP, and Hecht was one of the best PKers on our team.

_________________

I think it's kind of stupid to talk about cherry picking stats and then go "oh well that game doesn't really count."

_________________
Proud LGBTQQ Individual