Sigh.Holy overreaction Batman! They lost RASK SUCKS. They win WE GOT JAROSLAV HASEK IN NET!!!
Take it easy fellas
Figured this would happen at some point.
Player Discussion Tuukka Rask - V - warning in OP
- Thread starter Gee Wally
- Start date
- Status
Figured this would happen at some point.
rocketdan9
Registered User
- Feb 5, 2009
- 20,415
- 13,210
Yesterday game
“He played well,” Cassidy said. “He was our best player. And that’s probably never good when your backup goalie is your best player. But I thought he really played well.”
Chief Nine
Registered User
- May 31, 2015
- 12,006
- 15,755
It’s like there’s zero perspective. Just absolute overreaction to whatever just happened
Lord help us
rocketdan9
Registered User
- Feb 5, 2009
- 20,415
- 13,210
Chief Nine
Registered User
- May 31, 2015
- 12,006
- 15,755
Yeah. But he isn’t replacing Rask as starter any time soon. Remember this narrative last year?
JOKER 192
Blow it up
I can't speak for the others but I don't need to come and eat crow when he plays well. When Rask plays well I say so , when Rask play poorly I say so as well. It's just that some of us can tell the difference and others can't.
LouJersey
Registered User
Agreed. Not sure what’s so difficult about this around here. Had Halak laid an egg I’m sure there would have been Wall to Wall insults around here. Halak got the easy game, I’m sure results would have been similar had they switched, especially with the way the skaters played. Night and day. Team is blessed to have such a good tandem.
Eh, most of the people saying trade rask, me one of them, aren't overreacting to the one game. Opening night is a little more pressure and from years of watching this guy, he poops his pants under pressure, figuratively and literally. This would be more acceptable if he weren't a top 5 paid goalie. But he needs to bail the team out more if he's getting paid like that and he's just not that guy.
Donnie Shulzhoffer
Rocket Surgery
I am losing count how many times this has been explained to you. No one, NO ONE has an issue with Rask being called out when he plays poorly. The issue is when he plays poorly and gets blamed for the loss when it wasn't all on him.
- Apr 30, 2010
- 25,887
- 16,784
I’m getting up there in age so my memory may be failing me...
But didn’t this EXACT same thing happen last year and Rask ended up turning it on and being practically unbeatable for the bulk of the regular season? If you want to talk about poor trends that rask may have, this is also pretty typical for him.
I’m not necessarily defending him. I honestly don’t know where I fall in the Great Rask Debate, but I’m all for fairness. In addition to the team looking like donkey doo in front of him, he usually starts out rough and rebounds.
But didn’t this EXACT same thing happen last year and Rask ended up turning it on and being practically unbeatable for the bulk of the regular season? If you want to talk about poor trends that rask may have, this is also pretty typical for him.
I’m not necessarily defending him. I honestly don’t know where I fall in the Great Rask Debate, but I’m all for fairness. In addition to the team looking like donkey doo in front of him, he usually starts out rough and rebounds.
ON3M4N
Ignores/60 = Elite
Pretty much. If you look at Rask's career splits (see below):
Oct = Average
Nov/Dec = Elite
Jan/Feb = Average
Mar/Apr = Elite to Above Average
| Month | GP | SV% | GAA | SO |
| October | 45 | 0.914 | 2.48 | 4 |
| November | 70 | 0.926 | 2.13 | 6 |
| December | 70 | 0.931 | 1.99 | 10 |
| January | 75 | 0.916 | 2.43 | 5 |
| February | 65 | 0.918 | 2.44 | 3 |
| March | 86 | 0.923 | 2.18 | 9 |
| April | 38 | 0.925 | 2.20 | 4 |
LouJersey
Registered User
If you trade him, can you come up with 10 goalies you would rather have then him? I can't
Please explain why his playoff numbers are among the best to ever play the position. No pressure in the playoffs?
And what about those March/April numbers above? No pressure then either, I guess.
Please stop perpetuating this myth that Rask sucks when the pressure is on. If anything, it's the EXACT opposite.
JOKER 192
Blow it up
Ya, it's just that , that is not what happens. Yesterday I clearly stated that Rask had a bad game I also stated that so did the entire team. I took exception to a poster calling his performance "extremely sharp ".
The usual suspects all rose up the way they always do . One even called me a poor mans what the puck. See this is why you can keep giving me your explanation and it will never sink in, simply because it is not the reason. Some here will defend Rask regardless of how he plays and it is the ridiculous things those posters say that drive me up the wall. The same way it drives some here up the wall when someone states the opinion that Rask had a bad game. This is what boards are for. A sounding board of opinions, no need to get snarky or disrespectful as many here often do.
P.S. What the puck's opinions are just as valuable as anyone else's. Some need to get off the horse.
GloryDaze4877
Barely Irrelevant
You said Rask “had a bad game”.
Other than the 2nd Kuznetsov goal on the PP, which goal was soft? I guess you could say he could have made a play on the 2nd goal off the draw, but that’s a stretch imo, and it was just bad luck.
In the first period, Rask WAS sharp. He made 4/5 great saves just to keep the B’s in it while the majority of the team was standing around. Do I need to go back to the DVR and point out each save to you because I will be happy to do so?
As far as WTP goes, you reap what you sow. When a poster makes outlandish and ridiculous statements repeatedly over time, people have a tendency to take what they say less seriously.
The don godfather
Registered User
I would explore a trade for rask to Calgary. They need a goalie badly and will pay a bounty for rask. They in the killer west and wanna make a run.
BruinsFanSince94
The Perfect Fan ™
LouJersey
Registered User
So Rask isn't good enough for us, but a team will deal for him so they can make a run?
GloryDaze4877
Barely Irrelevant
You come up with all these wonderful ideas, but who would the B’s replace Rask with?
Not sure having the 33 year old Halak as your starter is a good idea, when you don’t have a steallar backup.
easton117
Registered User
- Nov 11, 2017
- 5,138
- 5,911
Not positive, but I’d bet my lunch money those trends hold up for pretty much 90% of goalies in the league.
The first 15-20 games are like a Chinese fire drill defensively for teams. New guys come in blowing assignments. Old guys getting up to game speed again. Young scorers come in like gangbusters the first few weeks then taper off....it happens every year.
If Rask looks like hot garbage night in night out come December then ya, bench him. After one game where the whole team sharted all over the ice though I’d say relax a little
That's the funny thing about the trade Rask crowd. If he's so bad, inconsistent and terrible under pressure, why would any other team want him?
ON3M4N
Ignores/60 = Elite
Without looking at every goalie, who knows. I looked at Price and Hank and the only thing that stood out was that both of their November numbers were towards the top performances month over month. After that it seemed like each guy kind of had varying results, but all had peaks and valley's throughout the season.
BigBadBruins7708
Registered User
guess the Caps better dump Holtby soon, huh? After all, only bums give up 7 goals while being paid so much
- Status
