I do not know what conclusion I am supposed to reach from that chart or how you got to your conclusion from that chart and not the very carefully selected moments you described early.Player A
View attachment 20735
Player B
View attachment 20736
Look, I like Rask and I certainly root for him, but I have no idea how you can be confident with him in goal for a must-win game.
He literally just won a must-win game last night.Player A
View attachment 20735
Player B
View attachment 20736
Look, I like Rask and I certainly root for him, but I have no idea how you can be confident with him in goal for a must-win game.
Hey! Let's arbitrarily take two recent things and use them to extrapolate back over actual evidence!Player A
View attachment 20735
Player B
View attachment 20736
Look, I like Rask and I certainly root for him, but I have no idea how you can be confident with him in goal for a must-win game.
Its pretty much as if they get their entertainment by listening to people tell them who to get angry at.In an unscientific observation of my FB feed last night, the Venn diagram of people I know to be patently stupid knee-jerk sports fans and those who were anti-Tuukka was pretty much a single overlapping circle.
Like I said, outside of one playoff series, Jones's stats are still no better than Rask's.Player A
View attachment 20735
Player B
View attachment 20736
Look, I like Rask and I certainly root for him, but I have no idea how you can be confident with him in goal for a must-win game.
The B's scored 7 goals last night. Scott Foster could have won that game (note I did not say Blaine Lacher). /hyperboleHe literally just won a must-win game last night.
Yup. He is what he is. This discussion is more about having this discussion and the people who have this discussion than it is about Rask.A 7 game sample size tells you nothing about a goalie. Rask's career body of work tells you a lot, he's been a borderline great playoff goalie his entire career, and it's silly to suggest otherwise.
However, his skills have declined over the past few years, he's no longer an elite goalie. He's probably an average starter. Toronto shot a little over 10% on the season and did the same this series. I think he's capable of being better but that's a pretty normal performance from Rask. He's certainly good enough to win a cup with, but I don't see him stealing a series on his own. They're going to have to beat teams
The problem with this thought exercise is that we can never know what the Bruins would’ve gotten for Rask. This coming from someone who wanted the Bruins to explore trading Rask and keeping Jones in-the-moment... but Jones brought back Kuraly, who I am also a fan of, and Frederic who is a top-rated prospect, so I’m fine with how it all worked out.I love Tuukka. With that said...
Would people revisit the Martin Jones trade? Kuraly and a draft pick - which turned into Frederic - for Jones.
Jones is younger, roughly $1.25m a year cheaper after signing his new contract, and has seemingly performed about the same.
I'm a Kuraly fan, so I'd have still made the deal. But might be a fun thought exercise. Lose Kuraly, but add some salary space and also get some talent/picks for Tuukka.
How is 4 goals in 7 shots in a playoff game? Is that good?Player A
View attachment 20735
Player B
View attachment 20736
Look, I like Rask and I certainly root for him, but I have no idea how you can be confident with him in goal for a must-win game.
There's too much money to be made for it not to work.LVK are so fucking good. This isn't how this is supposed to work.
60 minutes.I don't think the question is so much whether Rask is or was a good goalie. He is. His record speaks for itself.
The question is to what extent you stick with him, in adversity, going forward. He has been up and down so far, pulled in game 5, and giving up 4 goals in 30 minutes last game. Though clearly not all his fault, I don't think it's preposterous to have considered a switch back to Khudobin at that point in the game. In retrospect, Cassidy's patience paid off, and the team is better for it. Reference was made earlier to Rask's uneven play to start the season, when Khudobin's solid fill-in work seemed to light a fire under him.
Rask is the rightful #1, and deserves to start going forward. But these are the playoffs, and a few of our core players may not be able to sustain this level of excellence for much longer. As such, Rask must play well now, or risk giving his coach, and Joe 6-pack sports fan, reason to doubt.
Or Rinne tonight...How's Martin Jones looking tonight?? Pulled after 5 goals.
For a $500 million franchise fee it better work early. Imagine the player pool Seattle gets to choose from for $650.There's too much money to be made for it not to work.
I'm guessing his old pads were burned in a dumpster fire.What about goalie equipment?
Imagine if he gave up four, three games in a row.Jones gave up 3 last night in a win. 8 in two games for him.
Vas got his team to the Conference Finals. That's going to paper over a lot of sins.6 goals allowed in Game 2 on top of Game 1 for Vas. Tuukka would be tar and feathered for this.
That is EVERY goalie. The problem is when fans of one team don't recognize this and assume a goalie they see 3-4 times a season is WAY better than the guy they watch 82+ times a season because that opposing goalie stood on his head against their team.Some nights are better than others, and Tuukka is often good, sometimes outstanding, and sometimes clunky.
Yeah, it really sucks that Tuukka's never been able to do thatVas got his team to the Conference Finals. That's going to paper over a lot of sins.
Memories are very, very short.Yeah, it really sucks that Tuukka's never been able to do that
Memories are very, very short.Yeah, it really sucks that Tuukka's never been able to do that
I read it as sarcasm though i have been known to be mistaken from time to time. Its so hard to keep track of who hates Tuukka and who loves him.Memories are very, very short.
He’s about average at this point in his career. He’s tied for third among goalies in salary.My final thoughts on this.
The level of play on a night for a player is not a bar, its a bell curve. Some nights are better than others, and Tuukka is often good, sometimes outstanding, and sometimes clunky. The thing is, his bad nights, and their frequency are NOT this team's biggest problem. They're about 7th or 8th on the list. He's paid a cap-friendly amount and is a position on this team I'm ok with just staying as is going forward to next year.
The only reason I'd see getting rid of him is if the return is significant, but that is entirely hypothetical, and extremely unlikely.
So what are you implying? Not being a wiseass, I'd like to know. Do you think they should trade him and look for a less expensive option? Go with in-house options?He’s about average at this point in his career. He’s tied for third among goalies in salary.