Bevans
Registered User
- Apr 15, 2016
- 2,648
- 2,330
Ullmark for Koskinen+2nd/3rd?
This deal would be alright if you removed Ullmark from it.
Ullmark for Koskinen+2nd/3rd?
Koskinen is an expiring contract. They would be rolling Rask and Swayman anyways. Koskinen can sent down and hide 1 million of the contract. If they are going to send down Swayman, why not send down Koskinen and add a 1 rounder for the draft or a potential deadline deal?
Adding Koskinen literally means nothing for Boston and the standings. There's not much difference between a Rask/Swayman tandem and a Rask/Ullmark, that first could be used towards a guy like Giroux at the deadline.
This is another paint myself in the corner move by Sweeny...............he is just terrible
How is he "paint himself into a corner" with this move?
It still wouldn't be ok...This deal would be alright if you removed Ullmark from it.
And the Flames pick for Vladar not doing them much good right now..............It makes the Ullmark move even dumber
Why?
$5 mil of cap space lit on fire by Sweeney with that Ullmark signing. Horrible
Pretty sure he can't qualify for bonuses, @DominicT knows better.
$5 mil of cap space lit on fire by Sweeney with that Ullmark signing. Horrible
Because Bruins fans have a crystal ball that showed them management was intent on signing Rask from the beginning, obviously.
They seem to forget there were a) legitimate questions about Rask hanging it up prior, and that was before he had the hip injury and b) acting like Rask is now going to be here for the long term despite him being an about to be 35 year old goalie with hip injuries and has already thought about retirement.
But little foresight in the Ullmark deal.Because Bruins fans have a crystal ball that showed them management was intent on signing Rask from the beginning, obviously.
They seem to forget there were a) legitimate questions about Rask hanging it up prior, and that was before he had the hip injury and b) acting like Rask is now going to be here for the long term despite him being an about to be 35 year old goalie with hip injuries and has already thought about retirement.
Why not Ullmark for Yamamoto and a higher pick.Ullmark for Koskinen+2nd/3rd?
This is another paint myself in the corner move by Sweeny...............he is just terrible
I did not mention Rask.............what I was trying to say was that if he intended to bring Rask back ,why did go out and sign a goalie 20 mil for 4years and I believe no trade clause. That is what I call painting yourself in a corner.Is this^some 3yr old posting? "Rask is terrible" One of the best goalies of the last 10yrs...
I did not mention Rask.............what I was trying to say was that if he intended to bring Rask back ,why did go out and sign a goalie 20 mil for 4years and I believe no trade clause. That is what I call painting yourself in a corner.
As opposed to going into the season with two unknowns in Swayman and some scrub backup?
Do we as fans just like to hate on goalies at this point? Half of the fanbase bitched incessantly about Rask for a decade, clamoring for the next guy and now the new guy also isn't good enough?
I like Rask, I also like Ullmark they are both good goalies. I don’t think it’s particularly wise to spending top of the market money when you knew your veteran was returning. I don’t believe it for a second the bruins didn’t have any idea he was coming back either. You had Vladar and Halak that you could turn to for cheap until he came back. It’s not a pro or anti Rask take like every bruins fans makes it out to be. If you knew he was coming back patch it up and put your money elsewhere.
But they didn't know because they had to see how he felt after surgery and if he even wanted to play again
I still wouldn’t be dishing out a long term deal to a free agent goalie if rask had said he wasn’t up to it.
I’d have preferred the $5 mil be spent elsewhere trying to address forward and D depth that is so lacking which to be fair they tried to do, but swung and missed.