Since returning from the Olympic break, the Edmonton Oilers have been pretty up and down, going back and forth between wins and losses.<\/p>\n
But one bright spot in this time has been Matt Savoie, who had seven points in the first four games after the break. While he went pointless in the next two games, resulting in a move down to the third line, he still impressed with strong two-way play.<\/p>\n
Obviously, there is a question of whether this is just a hot streak or if this is a sign that Savoie is starting to put it together and become a legitimate top-six forward. His defensive play is probably the key to showing that it is more likely the latter. Even with the move down to the third line, one could argue it is less of a demotion and more the team searching for the ability to have a more playable third line.<\/p>\n
If that is the case, another question arises: with Savoie being eligible to sign an extension on July 1, what should\/could that extension be?<\/p>\n
Interested in joining our writing or social media team? Apply here<\/a>.<\/p>\n Long term or bridge deal?<\/p>\n The first thing to consider is whether it is best to go with a bridge contract or go for a long-term one. <\/p>\n It certainly seems risky to sign a guy who currently has just 26 points in 67 career games to a long deal. That is especially the case when you know that in order for him to sign that kind of a contract, you have to pay for what you think you are going to get rather than what he has shown so far. You would be banking on him being able to hit the level of whatever cap hit you sign him for at the very least, with the hope that he can beat that. It would certainly seem that the risks far outweigh the rewards here.<\/p>\n It\u2019s also problematic for Savoie, who would have to debate between having the security of long-term guaranteed money versus betting on himself and being able to sign a much more lucrative deal in the near future.<\/p>\n There is an added wrinkle in this situation in that Savoie still has one more year to go on his ELC deal. Does it make sense for either party to sign an extension before next season, given the lack of history? <\/p>\n For the team, it would make more sense to wait to get a better idea of where Savoie truly is in his development. For Savoie, it is the same consideration as above, where a hot start to the season could net him a much higher value contract than he would sign this off-season.<\/p>\n This is where a bridge deal becomes more palatable, but there really is no reason for Savoie to look at rushing into signing that kind of deal this summer, for that same reason. Sure, there is always the risk that he takes enough of a step back that perhaps there is still enough of an incentive to get that security (see Nils Hoglander, who signed a three-year deal at $3M a year a year before his second contract expired and now is sitting at just two points on the season), but the hope on both sides is that that would not be the case.<\/p>\n Recent comparable contracts<\/p>\n Jackson Blake: eight years, $5.12M AAV (4.92% of the salary cap when the contract started)<\/p>\n This contract actually looks pretty on the nose for Savoie. Blake scored 17 goals and 34 points in 80 games the season before his contract expired, while Savoie is currently on pace for 13 goals and 34 points in 82 games this year. Blake also raised his value by scoring six points in 15 playoff games.<\/p>\n Blake has already beat his goal output this season with 19 and posted 39 points in 63 games, so he is certainly trending towards being a value contract potentially from day 1.<\/p>\n Since Savoie\u2019s contract would start one season later, if he signed at the same percentage at a $113.5M cap, this would be a $5.58 AAV. It should be noted that eight-year contracts are no longer allowed, so whether that one less year that Savoie can sign for would affect the AAV remains to be seen, but you have to think the team would use that as leverage for a lower amount.<\/p>\n Logan Stankoven: eight years, $6M AAV (5.77% of the salary cap when the contract started)<\/p>\n Blake wasn\u2019t the only young Carolina Hurricane to sign a long-term extension last summer, with Stankoven, the major piece in the second Mikko Rantanen trade, signing for eight years at a slightly higher $6M a year.<\/p>\n Stankoven had more history to look on when compared to Blake, having scored 52 points in 102 games (including 38 in 78 games the season before signing the contract), along with 16 points in 34 playoff games.<\/p>\n Stankoven hasn\u2019t been having as good a season as Blake this year, with just 11 goals and 28 points in 63 games. But there would appear to be enough history to have faith he will turn it around during this long contract. <\/p>\n His 5.77% cap percentage would work out to $6.55M, which is may be steep enough that it could give the team pause to sign with one more year to go.<\/p>\n Frank Nazar: seven years, $6.6M AAV (6.35% of the salary cap when the contract starts)<\/p>\n If Savoie were to keep up his production for the rest of the season and into the playoffs, you can be sure that he and his agent will be pointing to Nazar\u2019s contract as a comparable. Nazar signed after having only one real NHL season, where he spent half the time in the AHL (scoring 24 points in 21 games) and then 26 points in 53 games in the big league. Like Savoie, Nazar was also a decently high first-rounder (13th overall in 2022, while Savoie went ahead of him at ninth the same year).<\/p>\n That contract certainly raised some eyebrows when it was signed, but Nazar\u2019s current 30 points in 48 games isn\u2019t too bad on the Chicago Blackhawks where nobody outside of Connor Bedard is really lighting it up either.<\/p>\n That 6.35% would be $7.21M two seasons from now, a pretty high number at first blush, and I think the team would be looking for Savoie to perform at a higher rate, especially in the playoffs, before making that kind of commitment.<\/p>\n What would the contract look like<\/p>\n A lot of the other comparables were signed when the player\u2019s contract had already expired, meaning the team had a bit more leverage to get a lower contract from their RFA, so there really are just the three above that are informative in Savoie\u2019s situation.<\/p>\n Perhaps the parties go somewhere in the middle, say four years at an amount around $5M. My guess is the team would push for that to be closer to $4.5M, which could certainly be looked at as a good compromise for both parties.<\/p>\n If the team and player were looking at a max, seven-year contract, then that could very easily be closer to the $7M mark, although that would likely require Savoie to keep up at least a 0.5 point-per-game pace the rest of the way, including the playoffs. If Savoie does end up doing that, along with keeping up his strong defensive game, I am sure Oilers\u2019 fans would be more than happy for him to sign that contract.<\/p>\n