Subban recalled, Svedberg sent to Providence on a conditioning loan

Lose Remerswaal

Missing an “R”
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Would love to see what Malcolm can do, but I bet this just means Tuukka is getting the next handful of starts during the relatively light schedule

Saturday - Kings
Wednesday - Rangers
Saturday - Isles
Sunday - Les Habs
Tuesday - Stars
Friday - Canucks
 
I could easily see Rask getting 5 of those games
 

The Napkin

wise ass al kaprielian
Dope
SoSH Member
Jul 13, 2002
23,676
right here
Provy plays tonight and then not again until next Fri. It wouldn't surprise me if Svedberg gets both those games and then comes back up.
 

The Napkin

wise ass al kaprielian
Dope
SoSH Member
Jul 13, 2002
23,676
right here
Svedberg back up
 
Svedberg went 3-1-0 during his conditioning stint in Providence, posting a 2.76 goals against average and .911 save percentage. Svedberg has appeared in 12 games for Boston this season, accruing a 5-5-0 record (two shutouts) with a 2.22 goals against average and .922 save percentage.  In total, the 25-year-old has competed in 13 games for Boston, with a 6-5-0 record (two shutouts), .924 save percentage and 2.20 goals against average.
 

Salem's Lot

Andy Moog! Andy God Damn Moog!
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
8,095
Gallows Hill
Lucic and a couple other guys were sick last week. If it's going around the room they might need to fly Subban out just in case the goalies aren't 100% since they're out west this week.
 

cshea

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 15, 2006
27,127
306, row 14
Julien confirms Subban is on the way to join the team. He won't be in Calgary tonight, but I'd assume Edmonton. I don't usually buy into showcases, but Friedman's a pretty reliable source and he tweeted this:
 
https://twitter.com/FriedgeHNIC/status/567371392363270144
 

PedroSpecialK

Comes at you like a tornado of hair and the NHL sa
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2004
25,912
Cambridge, MA
As far as a showcase is concerned, not sure if it's a great idea to fly him most of the way across the continent to play behind a badly-struggling defense against the best competition he's ever faced.
 

timlinin8th

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 6, 2009
1,521
PedroSpecialK said:
As far as a showcase is concerned, not sure if it's a great idea to fly him most of the way across the continent to play behind a badly-struggling defense against the best competition he's ever faced.
This may be one of the only times a Taylor Hall-less Oilers team will be referred to as "the best competition he's ever faced"
 

PedroSpecialK

Comes at you like a tornado of hair and the NHL sa
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2004
25,912
Cambridge, MA
Looks like Subban will start on Wednesday in Edmonton
 
https://twitter.com/ChantalMachabee/status/567532239689236481
 

TheRealness

Don't make him go all Lucic on your ash
SoSH Member
Feb 8, 2006
11,278
The Dirty Shire
PedroSpecialK said:
As far as a showcase is concerned, not sure if it's a great idea to fly him most of the way across the continent to play behind a badly-struggling defense against the best competition he's ever faced.
 
I don't know where I heard it, maybe it was Haggs (I know, I know), but there was whispers about a combo deal involving both Yandle and Vermette and that Subban was in play. Not sure how on earth that would work with the cap implications, but I like both guy's fit on this team. 
 

RedOctober3829

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
47,440
deep inside Guido territory
PedroSpecialK said:
As far as a showcase is concerned, not sure if it's a great idea to fly him most of the way across the continent to play behind a badly-struggling defense against the best competition he's ever faced.
This is partly why I think this isn't a showcase.  I think they are not happy with Svedberg's recent performances and can't afford to have Rask play every game so they are giving Subban a look.
 

cshea

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 15, 2006
27,127
306, row 14
They haven't been doing Svedberg any favors. 1 start in January, a shutout. Then on the bench for the month as they ride Rask on a hot streak. Svedberg goes down to the A to get some work in. After calling him back up to Boston, they give him a start and proceed to yank him after a period. So he's played 80 minutes of NHL hockey since 1/1/15.

I guess the showcase aspect is interesting because Subban was up a week ago. If they wanted to give him a game, they easily could've done that during his previous recall. They easily could've put him in against the Islanders, a good team, but one he did see in the preseason. Last year they called up Svedberg, let him start a game, then sent him back down and that was that. I don't know, I don't usually believe in showcases, but the handling of the Subban/Svedberg situation just seems a bit odd the past few weeks.
 

RedOctober3829

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
47,440
deep inside Guido territory
cshea said:
They haven't been doing Svedberg any favors. 1 start in January, a shutout. Then on the bench for the month as they ride Rask on a hot streak. Svedberg goes down to the A to get some work in. After calling him back up to Boston, they give him a start and proceed to yank him after a period. So he's played 80 minutes of NHL hockey since 1/1/15.

I guess the showcase aspect is interesting because Subban was up a week ago. If they wanted to give him a game, they easily could've done that during his previous recall. They easily could've put him in against the Islanders, a good team, but one he did see in the preseason. Last year they called up Svedberg, let him start a game, then sent him back down and that was that. I don't know, I don't usually believe in showcases, but the handling of the Subban/Svedberg situation just seems a bit odd the past few weeks.
Well, the reason he got pulled is because he gave up 3 goals in 10 shots. I'd say him getting pulled was justified.   I agree that his usage pattern has been abnormal, but that's the life of a backup goalie.  He's got to be ready at a moment's notice even though he hardly plays. 
 

cshea

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 15, 2006
27,127
306, row 14
It was a 3-1 game in his first NHL actuon in over a month. What did they expect? I probably would've let him stay in the net for that one to A) get him work and maybe get into a rhythm and B) give Rask a full game off. I'd imagine it's hard to get into any sort of rhythm when your used as infrequently as Svedberg was over the past month.
 

Toe Nash

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 28, 2005
4,758
02130
RedOctober3829 said:
Well, the reason he got pulled is because he gave up 3 goals in 10 shots. I'd say him getting pulled was justified.   I agree that his usage pattern has been abnormal, but that's the life of a backup goalie.  He's got to be ready at a moment's notice even though he hardly plays. 
Second goal was bad, but one goal was a breakaway and the other was a point-blank snipe from Benn. Maybe he would have continued to suck, but they ended up losing the game AND they didn't give Rask a rest. 
 

kenneycb

Hates Goose Island Beer; Loves Backdoor Play
SoSH Member
Dec 2, 2006
13,596
Tuukka's refugee camp
Toe Nash said:
Second goal was bad, but one goal was a breakaway and the other was a point-blank snipe from Benn. Maybe he would have continued to suck, but they ended up losing the game AND they didn't give Rask a rest. 
He gave up pretty much the entire upper half net on the Benn "snipe" (about 55 seconds in).  Plus he looked like crap in his previous games, with a general inability to catch the puck and a propensity to kick rebounds to poor spots.
http://youtu.be/IVUJQUNAJ0M
 

TheRealness

Don't make him go all Lucic on your ash
SoSH Member
Feb 8, 2006
11,278
The Dirty Shire
I've watched Svedberg up close. He's spastic like Thomas, but he also doesn't make himself big like Thomas did. He also doesn't stand up much, and generally resorts to butterflying in times of crisis and confusion. His rebound control is horrid, he's weak over both shoulders (much moreso than a traditional butterfly goalie), and his mechanics are all over the place. He's like if Tuukka and Thomas had a baby, only he got the worst of both goalie's skills. 
 

RedOctober3829

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
47,440
deep inside Guido territory
Pierre LeBrun was on Vancouver’s TSN 1040 on Tuesday afternoon.
On if this is an audition of the Oilers, if the Bruins give Malcolm Subban the start against the Oilers:
"You know, I know that talk’s been out there and I certainly believe that there are teams that have phoned Boston at least to find out down the road what it would take.
“But I will tell you this. I was talking to a Bruins source yesterday and he said, ‘We’re not planning on trading Malcolm Subban.’
“It was pretty straightforward as a response. But that doesn’t mean – never say never, right? I mean, I think come the offseason if you’re a team that needs a young franchise goalie, if you’re willing to pay up. Boston is going to have to do something at some point. Tuukka Rask is signed for life, so they’re going to have to examine Subban at some point and decide what they’re going to have to do with him.
“But that’s the response that I got yesterday, was they had no intention on moving him. Certainly not right now.”
 
http://www.nicholsonhockey.com/worthreading/2015/2/17/bruins-source-to-lebrun-were-not-planning-on-trading-malcolm-subban
 

FL4WL3SS

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2006
12,090
Andy Brickley's potty mouth
cshea said:
It was a 3-1 game in his first NHL actuon in over a month. What did they expect? I probably would've let him stay in the net for that one to A) get him work and maybe get into a rhythm and B) give Rask a full game off. I'd imagine it's hard to get into any sort of rhythm when your used as infrequently as Svedberg was over the past month.
You don't leave a kid in the game to figure it out when you're clinging to the 8th seed. Every point is critical and Julien needs to do what he can to win every point.
 

TSC

SoSH's Doug Neidermeyer
SoSH Member
Oct 25, 2007
10,061
Between here and everywhere.
Smiling Joe Hesketh said:
 
He doesn't play against a shitty team in Edmonton, but gets the start against a very good one in St Louis? How does this make any goddamn sense at all?
 
You can't make the tanking effort look TOO obvious.
 

cshea

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 15, 2006
27,127
306, row 14
Smiling Joe Hesketh said:
 
He doesn't play against a shitty team in Edmonton, but gets the start against a very good one in St Louis? How does this make any goddamn sense at all?
It doesn't, they've mangled this. The called him up after the Vancouver game with whispers that he'd play in Edmonton, and Julien tells the world Subban will play this trip. Then they blow the Flames game, and as a result decide they can't afford to piss away points against the worst team in the league, especially with the St. Louis/Chicago end to the trip, so they start Rask in Edmonton. They lose. Oops. Now we're barely hanging onto a playoff spot and are tossing a rookie into the net for his NHL debut against a top 5 team in the league.
 

timlinin8th

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 6, 2009
1,521
cshea said:
It doesn't, they've mangled this. The called him up after the Vancouver game with whispers that he'd play in Edmonton, and Julien tells the world Subban will play this trip. Then they blow the Flames game, and as a result decide they can't afford to piss away points against the worst team in the league, especially with the St. Louis/Chicago end to the trip, so they start Rask in Edmonton. They lose. Oops. Now we're barely hanging onto a playoff spot and are tossing a rookie into the net for his NHL debut against a top 5 team in the league.
Reading along these lines, their course of action was to be willing to concede tonight's game (the first in their young goalie prospect's NHL career, throwing him to the wolves) to ensure they got points against Edmonton rather than play Subban against Edmonton and at least compete in both games. Now it is likely they'll get neither.

I hope at season's end both Chia and Julien are expected to explain this "strategy", because it doesn't inspire a lot of confidence. I've never been in the coaching/management needs to be looked at camp but this... Ehhhhh
 

TheRealness

Don't make him go all Lucic on your ash
SoSH Member
Feb 8, 2006
11,278
The Dirty Shire
Starting Rask against Edmonton smacked of desperation. They were playing the worst team in the NHL. How does the locker room absorb the message that they were so concerned that they might lose to the worst team that they had to start their #1 and not a rookie? Doesn't inspire a lot of confidence in the players, and while they may not deserve that confidence, the decision reeked of desperation. 
 
Now, Subban may pitch a shutout tonight and it may look better, but at this point it's pretty absurd. I am fairly shocked at desperate this team is looking, and it makes me doubly concerned about any trade that they make given their current mindset. 
 

veritas

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 13, 2009
3,032
Somerville, MA
I don't get why they didn't start him in Edmonton. The worst case scenario in doing that was much better than the situation they're in now.
 
But either way, if they can't risk slightly lowering their chances of winning *one* game this season to get their top goalie prospect an NHL game, they don't deserve to be in the playoffs. If it takes riding Rask (who hasn't been very good this month by the way) every single game the rest of the way to squeak into the playoffs, chances are he's not going to be in good form by that time. And their only chance of going far in the playoffs this year is with Rask playing at the top of his game.
 
Regardless of them screwing it up by not playing Subban in Edmonton, I fully support them playing him tonight. There are some potential good that could come out of it. Maybe he has a great game that turns into a hot month or two and they keep him up for the rest of the season as an upgrade over Svedberg. Maybe playing in front of a rookie goalie sparks the defense to be a little bit sharper and more focused. Right now they're playing awful. Something needs to change, and maybe a few games of Subban helps a little bit. I'm not counting on it, but it's better than the status quo.
 

Myt1

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Mar 13, 2006
30,982
South Boston
Putting your worst unit against the best of your opponent's is very Art of War, because it lets you maximize your chance of points if everything else matches up evenly. I don't really have an issue with this because two points are two points.

The fact that they didn't execute against the Oilers is the issue, not the strategy, IMHO.
 

veritas

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 13, 2009
3,032
Somerville, MA
Myt1 said:
Putting your worst unit against the best of your opponent's is very Art of War, because it lets you maximize your chance of points if everything else matches up evenly. I don't really have an issue with this because two points are two points.

The fact that they didn't execute against the Oilers is the issue, not the strategy, IMHO.
 
I agree in a vacuum, but you're starting Subban to help his development and possibly increase his trade value. There's a better chance of those things happening vs Edmonton. But you're right, as far as the season goes, it doesn't matter, two points is two points.
 

Myt1

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Mar 13, 2006
30,982
South Boston
I guess I just don't think one game would have that much of a difference on him, while it could be a big deal for the team this seaso.
 

timlinin8th

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 6, 2009
1,521
Myt1 said:
Putting your worst unit against the best of your opponent's is very Art of War, because it lets you maximize your chance of points if everything else matches up evenly. I don't really have an issue with this because two points are two points.

The fact that they didn't execute against the Oilers is the issue, not the strategy, IMHO.
Everything is based on odds. If they're basically conceding that Subban isn't going to win either game if he started, why is he up? Playing your lesser goalie vs the lesser opponent, and the better goalie vs the greater opponent should give you even odds at potentially gaining four points. If these concessions are being made to scratch for points it's much ado about nothing because this team has no business getting into the playoffs.
 

Myt1

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Mar 13, 2006
30,982
South Boston
timlinin8th said:
Everything is based on odds. If they're basically conceding that Subban isn't going to win either game if he started, why is he up?
I don't think anyone was conceding that.

Playing your lesser goalie vs the lesser opponent, and the better goalie vs the greater opponent should give you even odds at potentially gaining four points.
Well, there aren't two games in the season. To the extent that you're going to rest your top goalie, because you have to, why not give him the night off from the best competition? IIRC, it's what the Bruins have done over the past few seasons, obvious rest days (like a back to back or matinee) notwithstanding.

If these concessions are being made to scratch for points it's much ado about nothing because this team has no business getting into the playoffs.
What do you think they should be doing this year, if not "scratching for points"?
 

Smiling Joe Hesketh

All Hail King Boron
Dope
May 20, 2003
31,580
Deep inside Muppet Labs
Myt1 said:
I don't think anyone was conceding that.


Well, there aren't two games in the season. To the extent that you're going to rest your top goalie, because you have to, why not give him the night off from the best competition? IIRC, it's what the Bruins have done over the past few seasons, obvious rest days (like a back to back or matinee) notwithstanding.
 
 
 
That's certainly not what they did last year, when they played Johnson almost exclusively against weak competition and played Rask against all the tough teams.
 
So it's clear the Bruins couldn't have fucked this up worse. They benched Svedberg forever because Rask got hot, wore down Rask, got Svedberg rusty, called up Subban because Svedberg was rusty, panicked after the Calgary game and didn't start Subban against a shitty team, lost to that shitty team anyway, started Subban against an elite team and watched him shit the bed to the point that I'm skeptical he'll ever wear a Bruins sweater again.
 
So these results were less than optimal, as was the decision-making process.
 

Toe Nash

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 28, 2005
4,758
02130
Myt1 said:
Well, there aren't two games in the season. To the extent that you're going to rest your top goalie, because you have to, why not give him the night off from the best competition? IIRC, it's what the Bruins have done over the past few seasons, obvious rest days (like a back to back or matinee) notwithstanding.

 
I don't think this is true at all. Besides back-to-backs I remember Rask playing against the better teams and them starting Khudobin or Johnson against lesser teams. 
 
In 12-13 Khudobin's toughest opponent in 14 games was probably PIT on the second night of a back-to-back. Otherwise he played 4 v BUF, 2 v TOR, 2 v OTT, and 1 game each vs. TB, CAR, WSH, NJ and PHI. Rask started the 34 other games and came in relief of Khudobin twice.
 
Not going to go through the game logs in detail but last year, eyeballing it, it seems like more of the same with Johnson.
 
It absolutely makes sense to rest your top goalie against worse teams; they didn't do that here for whatever reason.
 

charlieoscar

Member
Sep 28, 2014
1,339
Well, if they were showcasing Subban, his value may have gone down. Now that they are down 1-4, why don't they put Subban back in the game?
 

MiracleOfO2704

not AWOL
SoSH Member
Jul 12, 2005
6,167
The Island
charlieoscar said:
Well, if they were showcasing Subban, his value may have gone down. Now that they are down 1-4, why don't they put Subban back in the game?
Considering he was 0-3 in the second period before getting pulled, I'd rather try again in a few days against a team like Arizona or New Jersey so as not to turn him into the counterpoint to his older brother's confident self.
 

timlinin8th

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 6, 2009
1,521
Myt1 said:
I don't think anyone was conceding that.


Well, there aren't two games in the season. To the extent that you're going to rest your top goalie, because you have to, why not give him the night off from the best competition? IIRC, it's what the Bruins have done over the past few seasons, obvious rest days (like a back to back or matinee) notwithstanding.


What do you think they should be doing this year, if not "scratching for points"?
Other people beat me to it, but they should be slotting their number one goalie against top competition, and resting him when you think your backup gives you at least a fair chance at victory? Thought I made that point in my original post. If they consider themselves a contender they shouldn't be "scratching" they should be able to beat the Edmonton's of the world handily, backup or not.
 

Myt1

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Mar 13, 2006
30,982
South Boston
Hmmm. I have no idea why I thought they had been doing that.

The Bruins aren't good enough and haven't been playing well enough to beat the Edmontons of the world handily. But what do you think the alternative is to scratching for points? Not trying to get as many points as possible (without trading away assets, of course)?
 

Myt1

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Mar 13, 2006
30,982
South Boston
Smiling Joe Hesketh said:
That's certainly not what they did last year, when they played Johnson almost exclusively against weak competition and played Rask against all the tough teams.
 
So it's clear the Bruins couldn't have fucked this up worse. They benched Svedberg forever because Rask got hot, wore down Rask, got Svedberg rusty, called up Subban because Svedberg was rusty, panicked after the Calgary game and didn't start Subban against a shitty team, lost to that shitty team anyway, started Subban against an elite team and watched him shit the bed to the point that I'm skeptical he'll ever wear a Bruins sweater again.
Stop it.
 

Myt1

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Mar 13, 2006
30,982
South Boston
I mean, Subban wouldn't have beat a mite team tonight. He fucking sucked. It had absolutely nothing to do with playing an elite team.
 

Toe Nash

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 28, 2005
4,758
02130
The thing about goalies is that they are not really predictable. Sometimes prospects become great (Rask), sometimes they are just OK (Bernier), sometimes they never do anything. And often guys come out of nowhere and are better than any prospect (Thomas). If the B's didn't have a top 3 goalie already I'd advocate they just try out a bunch of different random FAs and international guys until they found a solid starter.
 
So what I'm saying is that I think Subban has far less trade value right now than most people are assuming. I know he has the pedigree but while I'm sure he's very athletic there's not much indication he has the mental and physical skillset to succeed at the top level until he actually shows it. Maybe someone will give you something good for him earlier but it doesn't seem too likely. He really needs to have a season as a backup at least and then you might get a buyer, and at that point his ELC will be close to up.
 
So, relax. They can send him back down and give him more chances later.
 

Smiling Joe Hesketh

All Hail King Boron
Dope
May 20, 2003
31,580
Deep inside Muppet Labs
Myt1 said:
I mean, Subban wouldn't have beat a mite team tonight. He fucking sucked. It had absolutely nothing to do with playing an elite team.
 
 I'm pretty damn sure he would have been far better against Edmonton. Yeah. he sucked tonight. Had they not dicked around with his start and given him the scheduled start against a horseshit team I am extremely confident he would have been far more comfortable in the net than he was tonight. He was ready to go in Edmonton and Chia and Claude panicked.
 
Their handling of Subban and Svedberg has been inexcusable.
 

Myt1

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Mar 13, 2006
30,982
South Boston
Smiling Joe Hesketh said:
 I'm pretty damn sure he would have been far better against Edmonton.
You mean, he wouldn't have given up 4 soft goals?

The Bruins held the Blues to 15 shots. The quality of opponent had absolutely nothing to do with how Subban played.

Yeah. he sucked tonight. Had they not dicked around with his start and given him the scheduled start against a horseshit team I am extremely confident he would have been far more comfortable in the net than he was tonight.
He gave up 3 goals on 6 shots. And they were all shit. It's way more likely that he just had first game nerves than the rarely seen "first game against the Blues but he would have been totally fine against Edmonton, which actually outplayed the Blues" nerves.
 

Myt1

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Mar 13, 2006
30,982
South Boston
If they had played Svedberg a bunch when Tuukka was hot and then lost, you'd be the first person in here complaining about them not riding the hot hand. In any thread in which you doubt we're ever going to see Subban in a Bs sweater again, based on one game, you should just step away from the keyboard, take a dump on your Tim Thomas memorial toilet seat, and go to bed.