News Article: FLUTO: Bruins’ Tuukka Rask not playing like a No. 1 goalie

[LouJersey]

Tim Thomas played on average 55 games every year. I think we were quite happy about his performance. Apparently the gold fish memory at these boards doesn't go that far.

The issue is games 56-80.

But Tuukka isn't part of the problem agreed.

 

[LouJersey]

I compare Rask with Bobrovsky. They're near the same age. They both have international success. They both won the Vezina and fell off when their clubs fell off. They both make over 7M. Torts got the Jackets playing well, so now Bob is back on the Vezina map too.

Compared to the options, I think the Bruins should hold on to what they have in Rask and try to help him the best they can. When the Bruins D starts playing well and the team finally buys into a system that works, Rask will be there too. With the right coaching and division of labor he can elevate his play back to where it was.

It's better than trading him for scraps and going with some unknown journeyman free agents for what will inevitably be a fairly similar cap hit altogether. This latter option is a desperate one that only satisfies the vengeance of some fans, but doesn't make the club any better. My 2 cents.

Good post. They will have to spend on a quality backup if you keep him.

 

[smithformeragent]

Hmmmmm....who are the quality backups in the league?

Are they paid like backups or like 1Bs?

 

[Therick67]

Good post. They will have to spend on a quality backup if you keep him.

With Rask making 7 million, how much can you really invest in a backup, with all the holes this team has?

 

[Number8]

Tim Thomas played on average 55 games every year. I think we were quite happy about his performance. Apparently the gold fish memory at these boards doesn't go that far.

Problem is there was a viable backup for him. Here is how Boston fares against other playoff team candidates in the East in terms of points from back-ups.

Games Started/Points/Projected against 82 games:

WAS 17 / 22/ 106 projected
NYR 25 / 32 / 105 projected
TOR 14 / 16 / 94 projected
MTL 18 / 20 / 91 projected
CLB 11 / 12 / 89 projected
NYI 27 / 25 / 76 projected
BOS 15 / 12 / 66 projected

Teams listed above overwhelmingly lean on one goalie leaving backups to fill in gaps.

OTT, FLA, TB, and PIT all split games pretty evenly among either two or three starters.

If we miss the playoffs, look no further than our inability to even remotely compete in terms of points coming from our backups.

 

[Number8]

Hmmmmm....who are the quality backups in the league?

Are they paid like backups or like 1Bs?

Pick any playoff contender in the East and you will see a bunch of names you almost don't even recognize. I doubt few are making big money.

ALL -- emphasis on ALL -- are kicking Boston's ass in terms of points coming from backups.

Rest of contenders split games pretty evenly between two or more keepers.

No matter how you slice it, our goalie approach doesn't work. Only way to compete is to have Rask winning at higher rate than other teams starters. Maybe at $7M he should be. Regardless, management has dropped the ball here.

If out backups performed even close to others in East, hell, we'd be thinking about how to manage games for rest of season to line up the best Round One matchup.

 

[PlayMakers]

Personally, I felt like last year's failure was on Rask more than anyone else.

Folks wanted to blame the last coach for the collapse (and are starting to blame the current coach for this collapse) but last year, Rask posted an .876 sv pct over his final final 10 games, and obviously didn't play in the final game.

.876. That's unacceptable.

Heck, the year before wasn't great either. He posted a .905 in the final 10 games, which is under the league average for starters, and well under his career average of .922.


There's no doubt that Rask has the ability to elevate his game and play like an elite goalie, but there's also no disputing the fact that he hasn't played like one the last two years and has been flat out awful when it matters most.

Rask played 70 games in 2015 and posted a .922 so I'm not totally sold on this being all about limiting his games. Thomas was much older and played a much less economical style so it made sense that he'd need more rest... That said, trying to play him less may be our only option going forward because other GM's can look up the numbers just as easily as I did. Who's going to trade for a $7m goalie that plays his worst at the end of the season when playoff spots are on the line?

 

[smithformeragent]

Pick any playoff contender in the East and you will see a bunch of names you almost don't even recognize. I doubt few are making big money.

ALL -- emphasis on ALL -- are kicking Boston's ass in terms of points coming from backups.

Rest of contenders split games pretty evenly between two or more keepers.

No matter how you slice it, our goalie approach doesn't work. Only way to compete is to have Rask winning at higher rate than other teams starters. Maybe at $7M he should be. Regardless, management has dropped the ball here.

If out backups performed even close to others in East, hell, we'd be thinking about how to manage games for rest of season to line up the best Round One matchup.

Devil's advocate, but could that be attributed to the fact that those teams are better than the Bruins and thus the back-ups accrue more points?

 

[Gator Mike]

Compared to the options, I think the Bruins should hold on to what they have in Rask and try to help him the best they can. When the Bruins D starts playing well and the team finally buys into a system that works, Rask will be there too.

Except, I'm not sure what more the Bruins can really do a while lot more to help Tuukka out.

By far, the two best teams at preventing shots against at even strength this year are LA and Boston.

The Bruins' defense OWNS the area in front of Tuukka. Other teams just don't get scoring chances from in close against the Bruins. Probably more shots from the high slot than you'd like, but this is the defensive shot chart characteristic of a very good defensive team. And it's leaps and bounds better than it was in years when the Bruins made deep playoff runs.

Conditions for a goalie don't get a whole lot better than this. And Tuukka is putting up numbers similar to Petr Mrazek behind it.

 

[Number8]

Devil's advocate, but could that be attributed to the fact that those teams are better than the Bruins and thus the back-ups accrue more points?

I think that's a fair point. Let me look at the bottom dwellers. Be interesting to see what they look like.

 

[22Brad Park]

Far as Trading Rask.haha I was him I would be telling you all do not threaten me with a good time. No goalie would like playing behind that turnovers machine called a defence in Boston. That chart above is a mirage Not worth paper it's printed on.

 

[Fenway]

Personally, I felt like last year's failure was on Rask more than anyone else.

Folks wanted to blame the last coach for the collapse (and are starting to blame the current coach for this collapse) but last year, Rask posted an .876 sv pct over his final final 10 games, and obviously didn't play in the final game.

.876. That's unacceptable.

Last April I thought the board was going to have a meltdown after this fiasco.

 

[Gator Mike]

That chart above is a mirage Not worth paper it's printed on.

Just so we're clear, that chart is based on data collected by the NHL, which tracks the exact time and locations on the ice where shots are generated.

It's not a mirage. It's reality. [MOD]

 

[Estlin]

I have the nagging feeling that Tuukka doesn't really care. He already has his lifetime money.

Ugh. I hope that is not the case.

 

[CharasLazyWrister]

Was happy to go to a game in person last night for this first time in two years, even if they lost.

I honestly forgot how different of a perspective sitting up in the balcony is, in an end zone, than watching on television.

That being said, it didn't change my opinion. People can complain all they want about Tuukka not "saving games", yadda yadda. The fact is...he is not the central problem AT ALL. People are really being ignorant or copping out on watching the overall gameplay if they think this **** is on Tuukka. The team is weirdly bad at blocking shots coming from out high (this has been the case for years) and can be absolutely dreadful at clearing rebounds. Now that their offense isn't flying high at breakneck speed, as it seemed to be when Cassidy first got hired, the overall lack of defensive IQ is getting exposed. Every now and then, Tuukka gives up a goal you wish he could have had. But people are *****ing about him getting beat by guys that are allowed to walk right down the slot and pick their spots.

He made 5+ great saves either on deflection or point blank last night, but all people want to do is point to the GA figure and blame him. Isn't it funny how no goalie has had any real success in this system lately? You'd think this would tip the real Tuukka haters off, but it's just too much of an addicting and easy thing to endlessly demonize the last line of defense.

The team also makes a ton of soft plays in the defense zone, such as cute passes and passes up the middle when under pressure. This goes all the way down through the D from Chara to Colin Miller. It needs to be fixed and that's on the coaching. And yes, I am very much a pro-Cassidy guy. But, they really need to be coached on making smart HARD plays in the defensive zone.

 

[Number8]

Devil's advocate, but could that be attributed to the fact that those teams are better than the Bruins and thus the back-ups accrue more points?

Just looked and it's worse than I thought. For teams in East that don't split games and generally rely on one goalie to take the load. Here are the projected points coming from games started by back-ups over an 82 game season.

WAS-106
NYR-105
TOR-94
CAR-92
MTL-91
BUF-89
CLB-89
PHI-85
NYI-76
DET-75
NJ-69
BOS-66

Ladies and Gentlemen......... Tuukka's been average over past several weeks and that's an issue that cannot be ignored. However, the main reason our playoff chances hang in the balance is management has us using the worst backups (in terms of point generation) in the East.

 

[NDiesel]

Was happy to go to a game in person last night for this first time in two years, even if they lost.

I honestly forgot how different of a perspective sitting up in the balcony is, in an end zone, than watching on television.

That being said, it didn't change my opinion. People can complain all they want about Tuukka not "saving games", yadda yadda. The fact is...he is not the central problem AT ALL. People are really being ignorant or copping out on watching the overall gameplay if they think this **** is on Tuukka. The team is weirdly bad at blocking shots coming from out high (this has been the case for years) and can be absolutely dreadful at clearing rebounds. Now that their offense isn't flying high at breakneck speed, as it seemed to be when Cassidy first got hired, the overall lack of defensive IQ is getting exposed. Every now and then, Tuukka gives up a goal you wish he could have had. But people are *****ing about him getting beat by guys that are allowed to walk right down the slot and pick their spots.

He made 5+ great saves either on deflection or point blank last night, but all people want to do is point to the GA figure and blame him. Isn't it funny how no goalie has had any real success in this system lately? You'd think this would tip the real Tuukka haters off, but it's just too much of an addicting and easy thing to endlessly demonize the last line of defense.

The team also makes a ton of soft plays in the defense zone, such as cute passes and passes up the middle when under pressure. This goes all the way down through the D from Chara to Colin Miller. It needs to be fixed and that's on the coaching. And yes, I am very much a pro-Cassidy guy. But, they really need to be coached on making smart HARD plays in the defensive zone.

Personally I'd love to know how people expect him to save Point's goal where he was left uncovered, the perfectly placed one-timer by Kucherov on the PP or the deflection off his own player.

HOWEVER, he absolutely should have had Stralman's and Drouin's....no excuse at all and ultimately those two goals were the difference.

 

[World of Wardlow]

He was terrible last night, but hard to blame him 100% when he's played 3 games in 4 nights with terrible backchecking and D in front of him

 

[WhalerTurnedBruin55]

Tim Thomas played on average 55 games every year. I think we were quite happy about his performance. Apparently the gold fish memory at these boards doesn't go that far.

Rask is paid like an elite goalie. Tim Thomas played above his pay grade. Rask isn't playing up to his.

If Rask was paid 5-6 million, the backlash wouldn't be as bad. He overall has average numbers over a full season, for various reasons. But unfortunately, he is one of the highest paid goalies.

 

[EverettMike]

He's arguably been the worst goalie in the league since January 1st.

Does anyone think this team is so bad that it explains away a 7 million dollar goalie being the worst netminder in the league?

 

[Jean_Jacket41]

He's arguably been the worst goalie in the league since January 1st.

Does anyone think this team is so bad that it explains away a 7 million dollar goalie being the worst netminder in the league?

This team is so good that they still hold a playoffs spot and winning the majority of their games even if they have the worst netminder in the league in net.

 

[BruinDust]

With Rask making 7 million, how much can you really invest in a backup, with all the holes this team has?

I don't think anyone is saying spend 5-6 million on a back-up.

But spending 2.5-3.5 for a back-up to play 25 games a year I have no issue with at all if he's a quality tender. Give this team 15 wins from their back-up, and it's a bonafide playoff team without question.

Far better investment than the money wasted on the likes of Matt Belesky and Jimmy Hayes.

The fact that this team hasn't spent to the cap the last two seasons when they easily could of invested that money into a better back-up only infuriates me more.

This was an easy problem to solve, instead we got a guy who spent all of last year in the AHL and expected him to return to the NHL and be a quality player. The year before it was a guy who couldn't even get a contract and came to camp on a PTO.

 

[Daishi]

Personally, I felt like last year's failure was on Rask more than anyone else.

Folks wanted to blame the last coach for the collapse (and are starting to blame the current coach for this collapse) but last year, Rask posted an .876 sv pct over his final final 10 games, and obviously didn't play in the final game.

.876. That's unacceptable.

.876 is bad, that's for sure, but if you're looking at the save percentage during a massive losing streak, what are you expecting to find except confirmation bias?

Just to put things into perspective, here's Carey Price's SV% during the final few games that lead to Therrien being fired: .900 .846 .840 .886. He also posted .708 against Minnesota and .846 against the Pens a couple weeks earlier. Did the Habs fire the wrong guy? Surely they should've got rid of Price instead of Therrien?

Goalies on teams that play like crap have bad stats. I know this sounds surprising to many. A groundbreaking statement. You won't find any goalies in elite goalie or Vezina discussions or with high save percentages on garbage teams. Colorado is the worst team in the league by a massive margin. Their goalies post .909, .898 and .878 for the year. Are we to say Colorado is losing their games because their goalies have garbage stats, or are we to say their goalies have garbage stats because the team is losing?

All evidence points to the latter. Fans like to think that goalies are supermen who can carry otherwise weak squads, but that's a myth. Goalies have their best seasons and win all their awards when their teams are playing extremely well defensively. Goalies have their worst seasons and get run out of town when their teams are collapsing.

I'll consider changing my mind after a goalie on a bottom 5 finishing team wins the Vezina. I'm not holding my breath.

 

[patty59]

He was terrible last night, but hard to blame him 100% when he's played 3 games in 4 nights with terrible backchecking and D in front of him

At the end of the day his job is to give the team a chance to win and he's not doing that. There could be a ton of factors, I'm sure being overplayed is one of those. But it really doesn't matter at this point in the year, he just has to make saves and he's not doing that.

Rask is paid like an elite goalie. Tim Thomas played above his pay grade. Rask isn't playing up to his.

If Rask was paid 5-6 million, the backlash wouldn't be as bad. He overall has average numbers over a full season, for various reasons. But unfortunately, he is one of the highest paid goalies.

That's just not true, it doesn't really matter what he's getting paid he's not getting the job done. I know it wouldn't make me feel any better if he was getting less money and still losing games down the stretch. People here didn't really go easy on Khudobin's garbage play earlier and he's not making much at all.

 

[Gator Mike]

Are we to say Colorado is losing their games because their goalies have garbage stats, or are we to say their goalies have garbage stats because the team is losing?

In Colorado's case, it's both.

The issue here is that as a team, the Bruins are allowing very few shots, and very few shots from high danger areas, but they're leaking goals. That sort of evidence points to a goaltending issue.

Tuukka started off well, then became ordinary, and he's just been bad lately. And the backups have largely been garbage this year. The Bruins have a goaltending issue.