News Article: Puck Daddy - 2016-17 NHL Preview: Boston Bruins

[CharasLazyWrister]

I would agree that people are likely underestimating how amazing Rask would need to be to cover up this god awful defense. I don't find it very realistic.

But in terms of his play last year I don't think it's beyond criticism. The .915 doesn't necessarily alarm me. But he's become pretty inconsistent behind a defense that has been consistently awful so it suggests to me that there's more going on then just the team in front of him. Seems like there's pretty big fluctuations from month to month, or perhaps stretches would be more accurate.

Lost in the overall disappointment in his play last season is that there were stretches where he was able to put up very solid numbers behind this team. But not able to maintain it, especially down the final stretch where his numbers were rightfully (to me anyways) in question when the team needed his best game.

I hear you. It's very difficult to prove a stance on Tuukka one way or the other, since all goalie stats are so dependent on a combination of their own play along with the rest of the team. As far as with goaltenders, I bank pretty heavily on the eye test. I had gone after Tuukka pretty hard in past seasons, but simply barely felt the need to last year. Rarely did I feel he gave up "easy" goals.

Tuukka is one of those guys who, while he put in the time in the minor leagues, got brought up simply because that was his destiny. His numbers were fine and Providence, but he never really had to "earn" his spot. Tuukka was next in line after Timmy, no matter what. He's an extremely good technical goalie, but I think that his drive and determinism can be questioned at times. That being said, I still stand by I don't think last year was even a bad year for him. You can draw on as many stats as you want, but I watched ~80% of last year's games and did not think he was bad. The defense was maybe the worst I've ever seen at a National Hockey League level.

I wouldn't be against moving Tuukka (or pretty much anyone) if it meant serious defensive help. I just wouldn't. It's another thing I don't think the FO has the balls to do (they've shown their balls are in odd places...), but I would not be against it. One of the big issues I see with this organization is that guys "establish" themselves and then somehow shed the need to be evaluated by the front office. If you have a reputation (see Chara), you retain not only your roster spot, but a permanent spot at a certain spot in the lineup. The way the defense has just been allowed to dwindle like it has...it makes me think a shakeup with Tuukka is seriously far fetched.

 

[GoBs]

I think this idea that a goalie can somehow allow a team to overcome defensive deficiencies is at best over stated and at worst, ludicrous.

You never watched games or series where a goalie carried the team?

 

[patty59]

maybe, but the marginal difference in influence between goalie A and goalie B given the other 18 players are the same isn't going to be massive

They missed by 1 point the each of the past 2 years. A good back up can get you an extra point.

 

[Bruinator]

I think this idea that a goalie can somehow allow a team to overcome defensive deficiencies is at best over stated and at worst, ludicrous.

With all due respect, That's what goalies do. They make up for your team's difficiencies. If your team didn't have any, they wouldn't have much to do.

 

[RedeyeRocketeer]

You never watched games or series where a goalie carried the team?

lord knows we've been on the losing end of our share of those series in the last decade.