Subban recalled, Svedberg sent to Providence on a conditioning loan

Eddie Jurak

Eddie Jurak

canderson-lite
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2002
44,854
Melrose, MA
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.
Click to expand...
Yes, but SJH's larger point stands - they grossly mismanaged their goalie situation and then threw Bobby Sprowl (Oops, I mean Malcolm Subban; all we're missing is a statement about icewater in his veins) into the fire as a desperation move. Yes, Subban would have lost against Edmonton, too, but it never should have come to this.
 
Smiling Joe Hesketh

Smiling Joe Hesketh

Throw Momma From the Train
Moderator
SoSH Member
May 20, 2003
35,917
Deep inside Muppet Labs
Myt1 said:
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.
Click to expand...
 
No, because that rationale for keeping Rask fresh would have made sense. The way the team has handled this whole issue has not made any sense at all. That's the underlying complaint here.
 
j44thor

j44thor

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
11,137
Last night notwithstanding, goalie has been about dead last on this teams list of issues this season.  Sure the Red Army would have lost last night with Subban in net but for the most part this team has lost because of shitty D and inconsistent offense.
 
The larger issue with Subban is that unproven and in most cases even proven goalies go for dimes on the $$ in trades.  Given that BOS already had Rask it was rather perplexing that they drafted Subban in the first place.  Perhaps he was simply way, way ahead on their draft board but if not this may end up being another missed opportunity in the draft.
 
I don't think anyone would be happy with a Bernier type return (2nd rd pick, middling prospect, backup vet goalie) and unless Rask gets injured it is very hard to foresee a Schneider type return (9th overall pick).
 
The other obvious issue is that backup goalie is not a roster spot you can spend a lot of cap space on when you have a franchise goalie already with a large hit, or expect to have a goalie with a large hit as was the case when Malcolm was drafted.  Once Subban is an RFA it will be tough to keep him and Rask on the same team.  B's will have little leverage in trade negotiations and end up with a very underwhelming return.
 
veritas

veritas

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 13, 2009
3,151
Somerville, MA
charlieoscar said:
On the other hand, if Subban came up dazzling, Rask makes an interesting trade possibility.
Click to expand...
They're not going to trade their franchise goalie a few months into an 8 year contract.
 
cshea

cshea

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 15, 2006
36,254
306, row 14
It takes an eternity to develop goalies, even the blue chip ones. Rask was drafted in 2005. He played a season in Finland, 2 full seasons in Providence (with a cup of coffee in Boston), and then 3 years as Thomas' backup before being ready to take over as starter. Rask may have been ready earlier and blocked by Thomas, but it still was a 4-5 year journey before Rask was truly ready. This is year #2 for Subban, he's not ready. I'll never understand why they did this.

J44thor- I wouldn't worry about Subban's contract. He'll be an RFA after next season. At best he'll be a backup next year, but he's not going to break the bank here.
 
j44thor

j44thor

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
11,137
cshea said:
It takes an eternity to develop goalies, even the blue chip ones. Rask was drafted in 2005. He played a season in Finland, 2 full seasons in Providence (with a cup of coffee in Boston), and then 3 years as Thomas' backup before being ready to take over as starter. Rask may have been ready earlier and blocked by Thomas, but it still was a 4-5 year journey before Rask was truly ready. This is year #2 for Subban, he's not ready. I'll never understand why they did this.

J44thor- I wouldn't worry about Subban's contract. He'll be an RFA after next season. At best he'll be a backup next year, but he's not going to break the bank here.
Click to expand...
 
True he won't break the bank but in a salary cap league you really need players whose production exceeds their cap hit to build a strong team.  Players on ELC are the primary candidates to exceed their cap hit.  Very tough if not impossible for a backup goalie to provide that kind of production as you don't pay backups more than 1-1.5M anyways.
 
Outside of Pastrnak this team has virtually no one that will be outproducing their cap hit for the foreseeable future.  Joe Morrow is the only other viable option and he is a longshot at best.
 
C

charlieoscar

Member
Sep 28, 2014
1,339
RedOctober3829 said:
Actually, it's not interesting at all. Only an idiot would trade Rask.
Click to expand...
 
And if Subban were as good as Rask, he'd be younger and he'd clear up some room around the salary cap for the Bruins by making Rask available. So, however remote, there is at least one scenario where trading Rask makes sense.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom