Player Discussion Tuukka Rask - Part III - MOD WARNING 671

[ReggieMoto]

That site is laughable. I'm starting to believe you get some kind of commission from it though, given how much you keep plugging it.

I am not familiar with the site, but I am curious why you find it laughable?

 

[LouJersey]

I am not familiar with the site, but I am curious why you find it laughable?

Probably because it casts Tuukka in a bad light.

 

[Lady Rhian]

I haven't been here very long,but from what I've seen you can be critical of anyone except Rask,he seems to have a cult following.Lol

Oh, no. This goes on with every Bruins goaltender, I promise you. Woe to you if you like and praise both goalies and want them both to succeed and win- then the haters gather round your feet, snapping and snarling, trying to bait you into saying something nasty about one of the goalies, just to try and make you pick a side.

I don't find that there is a lot of haters against Rask- some of the folks being branded as such don't deserve it. They have rooted for him and still do, but they expect more from him than what he is giving. That is not a hater, that is one who wants accountability. Big difference.

The haters chose one side (goalie) and completely demolish and trash the other goalie, innocent of wrong doing or not. Those are obnoxious people that don't add anything but strife to the board, but what can you do, they're entitled to their "hate filled" opinion.

I think the term "haters" is over abused on here. It's really getting old, folks. Just saying.

 

[hoss75]

Its not ancient history as it pertains to his mental makeup. The dude has played in the cup and played well, he's not scared of game 73 against a mediocre team. He was legitimately not physically confident in himself- couple that with his bad play leading up to it and I don't want him in there. Let him rest. There are better teams to play, and he just beat one of them

Quite frankly if anybody seriously thinks that he opted out because he's scared then I do question their agenda. Because it's that preposterous, especially when he's back in there against a better team the next game and playing a lot better than he had

Maybe he was actually banged up to the point where he felt he would be ineffective and the extra few days helped him........nawwwwww that would be crazy

Spot on. Tuukka is simply not an iron-man goaltender. No more, no less. He play better with rest. It's been a clear pattern in his history with the B's.

 

[BMC]

Last season before the finale, it was reported that he couldn't go more than a short period of time without something coming out one end or the other. This would likely be an issue if you wanted a guy to play goal at a high level for 60 minutes.

This year, we have literally no idea what the injury is/was, or how long he has had it.

You can speculate all you want, but there is zero evidence for your statements about his mental toughness. It's a theory, not fact.

I think that for $7m+ and given how he has performed in the past, fans have every right to say that Rask needs to be better when he's in there. However, seeing as we have no idea what's wrong with him, I don't think fans should be questioning it if he says he can't go.

Last time I checked, the Preds are better than the Isles for the season (89 vs 82 pts) and have played better of late (7-2-1 vs 4-5-1), so if Rask was going to "tap out" of a pressure situation, wouldn't he have been better off bagging on the NAS game instead of NYI?

I never said my opinion of his mental toughness was fact. I made it clear this is what I think but I will spell it out again for you, maybe your reading comprehension is not that good:

My opinion is based on the facts: For the second straight season Rask literally failed to show up for a game critical to his team's playoff chances and for reasons that IMO were/are questionable, particularly the second game. Add to that not showing for Finland during the Olympics back in 2014 and a disturbing trend is developing, one that does not inspire confidence and in my case has destroyed it as I have always had reservations about his mental toughness.

Is that clear enough for you?

 

[ReggieMoto]

I never said my opinion of his mental toughness was fact. I made it clear this is what I think but I will spell it out again for you, maybe your reading comprehension is not that good:

My opinion is based on the facts: For the second straight season Rask literally failed to show up for a game critical to his team's playoff chances and for reasons that IMO were/are questionable, particularly the second game. Add to that not showing for Finland during the Olympics back in 2014 and a disturbing trend is developing, one that does not inspire confidence and in my case has destroyed it as I have always had reservations about his mental toughness.

Is that clear enough for you?

So you're saying it's a fact you have opinions?

 

[Lady Rhian]

I never said my opinion of his mental toughness was fact. I made it clear this is what I think but I will spell it out again for you, maybe your reading comprehension is not that good:

My opinion is based on the facts: For the second straight season Rask literally failed to show up for a game critical to his team's playoff chances and for reasons that IMO were/are questionable, particularly the second game. Add to that not showing for Finland during the Olympics back in 2014 and a disturbing trend is developing, one that does not inspire confidence and in my case has destroyed it as I have always had reservations about his mental toughness.

Is that clear enough for you?

I love it when you go into "ninja" mode!

You rock, BMC!

 

[BMC]

So you're saying it's a fact you have opinions?

Among other things

 

[BMC]

I love it when you go into "ninja" mode!

You rock, BMC!

Thanks LR!

 

[Gee Wally]

 

[EverettMike]

In my professional medical opinion, laughter is the best medicine.

 

[bobbyorr04]

That site is laughable. I'm starting to believe you get some kind of commission from it though, given how much you keep plugging it.

Why is this site so laughable?

 

[Lady Rhian]

Sorry, Wally! HF girls gone wild. We won't do it again this month, we promise.

 

[BMC]

Sorry, Wally! HF girls gone wild. We won't do it again this month, we promise.

Speak for yourself

 

[Donnie Shulzhoffer]

I am not familiar with the site, but I am curious why you find it laughable?

Why is this site so laughable?

I would like to see some valid reason as well.

 

[Lady Rhian]

Speak for yourself

Well, there is only one day left in the month. Surely we can wait to be devilish for another 36 hours.

 

[Seidenbergy]

For one, the site is laughable because it ignores every variable imaginable short of shot location. It essentially treats all shots from the same spot on the ice as the same.

 

[Donnie Shulzhoffer]

For one, the site is laughable because it ignores every variable imaginable short of shot location. It essentially treats all shots from the same spot on the ice as the same.

Well....with that in depth analysis I am sure sold.

 

[bobbyorr04]

Well....with that in depth analysis I am sure sold.

Yeah, the only thing laughable is that explanation.

 

[HumBucker]

I never said my opinion of his mental toughness was fact. I made it clear this is what I think but I will spell it out again for you, maybe your reading comprehension is not that good:

My opinion is based on the facts: For the second straight season Rask literally failed to show up for a game critical to his team's playoff chances and for reasons that IMO were/are questionable, particularly the second game. Add to that not showing for Finland during the Olympics back in 2014 and a disturbing trend is developing, one that does not inspire confidence and in my case has destroyed it as I have always had reservations about his mental toughness.

Is that clear enough for you?

But, c'mon, BMC. Those may be facts, but they're circumstantial, superficial facts. We all know he missed those games. It's your conclusion that's spurious. You don't know for a fact that he was scared. You don't know for a fact that he wasn't injured. Those are facts you don't know and you are choosing to overlook.

You're also ignoring other facts that contradict your conclusion. The fact that people reported seeing him looking very sick on the day of game 82 last year.

You can't just choose the facts you like to support your feeling, and ignore other facts.

 

[BMC]

Well, there is only one day left in the month. Surely we can wait to be devilish for another 36 hours.

Your self discipline is clearly greater than mine

 

[BMC]

But, c'mon, BMC. Those may be facts, but they're circumstantial, superficial facts. We all know he missed those games. It's your conclusion that's spurious. You don't know for a fact that he was scared. You don't know for a fact that he wasn't injured. Those are facts you don't know and you are choosing to overlook.

You're also ignoring other facts that contradict your conclusion. The fact that people reported seeing him looking very sick on the day of game 82 last year.

You can't just choose the facts you like to support your feeling, and ignore other facts.

I don't believe in coincidences HumBucker.
A pattern of not being able to go when the stakes are high is developing whether due to illness or injury, whether physical or mental. Maybe both.

As for your last paragraph why should I be any different than anyone else on this board?

 

[Boston Bruno]

Whatever they did for Rask on his day off, he is tracking the puck like a beast. Super sharp.

 

[Absurdity]

Whatever they did for Rask on his day off, he is tracking the puck like a beast. Super sharp.

 

[Seidenbergy]

Well....with that in depth analysis I am sure sold.

Yeah, the only thing laughable is that explanation.

Do a little research. The site doesn't take into any context into shots faced whatsoever. Here, I'll spoon feed just a few of the problems with this stat for those in the cheap seats:

Goalies that play more games will accumulate more goals saved. If the stat was expressed as GSAA/per 60 minutes, it would be even more accurate. You would have to turn it into a percentage, though. Only goalies that have played a certain number of games would be able to qualify.

It does not take penalty killing into account. On average this season in the NHL, goalies have seen a 4.4% drop in save percentage while on the penalty kill compared to even strength. This is a major problem for some goalies that play for a team that is constantly killing penalties. Undisciplined teams will have goalies with a lower save percentage and a lower GSAA as a result.

It does not take fatigue into account. Saves that are made after the 30 shot mark should be worth more, because goalies that face more shots than the league average will be more tired, and will make less saves due to the poor quality of the team in front of them giving up more scoring attempts.

It also does not take shot quality into account. This can be related to the number of penalties a certain team commits, or even a team’s quality of defense, tips/deflections, screens, etc. but that would be very difficult for any statistic to quantify.