Sparkling .815 sv % today.
5 goals on 27 shots, elite talent.
I'll just chime in here by saying Rask had a bad game today, and he hasn't been playing up to his potential recently.
That said, posts like yours are offensive. Players have ups and downs. Bergeron is MIA. DK is MIA. We have two players on the whole team that pass the eye test most of the time in Marchand and Pasta.
How do you think Rask got his contract? Because he's an elite talent. How do you think he won his Vezina and his olympic medal? Because he's an elite talent.
He's an elite talent that's not playing well now. Playing poorly and being an elite talent are not mutually exclusive. Is is really that hard to comprehend?
The Bruins can move on from Rask, but there's a very real possibility he'll find his game again on another NHL club and become an elite goalie there once again. Who will we replace him with that gives us a better chance to succeed? Make no mistake, 7M for a starting goalie isn't that much. This team needs a Price, but a Price will cost 10M. That's what his upcoming contract will be like. Hank costs 8.5M, and his backup in Raanta is playing just as well. A Jimmy Howard would cost 5.3M. A Mike Smith would cost 6.3M. Are you saying that with the 700K-1.5M in cap savings we'd be a drastically better team? Who will that 1M buy? Or are you saying we should just roll the dice with some rookies who play for less than 2M AAV? Is that a long term strategy? Either the rookies fail miserably and probably cost you your job in management, or they pan out and you have to give them 7M. See how that works?
The whole squad is filled with free riders who aren't contributing, and if you really want change you have to start by ridding yourself of Cam Neely. If you want to go further, ship DK, Rask and Chara out too, but at least it's helpful if we're being honest about the facts here instead of just screaming 'RASK SUCKS' and leaving it there.