Friedman: Boston-Toronto goalie swap.

[The Hockey Tonk Man]

Friedman, looking for hits on the site
#ad

 

[Kranix]

Did someone make the Rask for Raycroft joke yet

 

[PatriceBergeronFan]

Nope. Leafs looking to cut salary in G not take in more. Also, we would just keep Andersen if there was no set goalie for the following year.

We also not in the business of helping the Bruins unless they throwing in CM.

Add this one to the list... your Boston trade values are not doing well this offseason.

OEL > McAvoy.
Debrusk for a 2nd.

You wouldn't trade Andersen for Rask? An average starting goalie for an elite one? Cap hit would have no impact, this is a trade Toronto makes immediately as it makes them a legitimate contender.

This make no sense for Boston to do and immediately makes them worse.

 

[BergyWho37]

What a flaming pile of dog sh..

Billy Madison style..

He called the Sh...

Poop

 

[jaric1862]

This trade "idea" makes no sense whatsoever.

 

[The don godfather]

Shut this down somebody

 

[Gator Mike]

Friedman brought up the notion in his 31 thoughts (I believe) of the two teams exchanging number one netminders. He wondered if Toronto would consider it an upgrade, and if they would be willing to take on the higher cap hit. Both goalies have one year remaining.

Seriously?

Would either side have to add? One for one straight up?

Toronto would have to add.

They'd have to add a lot, because Tuukka is a much better goalie than Anderson is.

Boston would clear cap space and only have to pay 1 million in actual money (to Andersen) so would that mean Boston would have to add a sweetener or retention on Rask’s contract?

Just so we're clear...

You're suggesting that the Bruins would surrender the much better player AND retain salary thereby reducing whatever cap savings such a trade would generate all so that they can save something around $5.5 million in cash?

I get that we're living post-COVID financial landscape, but no one is planning to have a bake sale to raise money for Jeremy Jacobs. The Boston Bruins are not the Arizona Coyotes or the Ottawa Senators or the Buffalo Sabres.

 

[LEAFANFORLIFE23]

Toronto would be better for thw coming season but it does nothing for them long term they still need to find the guy for the next 5 years

 

[Pyrophorus]

I'd rather sign Henrik.

 

[AcerComputer]

Boston isn't helping Toronto.

/thread

You must be that guy who asks a friend to come help him move, and at the same time tells him you're actually doing him a favour...lol

 

[Soundwave]

I think if Toronto moves Andersen they are going to end up regretting it.

 

[seanlinden]

Some homerism from both sides on this one.

If you're comparing Rask vs. Andersen, I think it's quite flawed to suggest that one is dramatically "better" than the other. Rask is a front-half-of-a-tandem goalie at this point in his career, and plays on a much better defensive team, so his numbers will of course be expected to be better. Andersen is a workhorse goalie who plays on a poor defensive team.

Given that they both have 1 year left, you can very easily nullify the salary difference by Boston retaining $2m -- and at that point, I think this is the way both teams look at it:

Toronto: The reasons to trade Andersen is to a) get a little younger, b) get a little cheaper, and c) take advantage of the extremely liquid goalie market, and d) With confidence in Campbell, maybe transition to more of a tandem situation. The problem with this deal is that it only accomplishes 1 of those things -- so I think the Leafs would rather stick with the status quo and maybe reduce Andersen's workload a bit.

Ultimately, I think if Toronto can't find the cheaper option, the deal strikes me as somewhat pointless as I do believe that Rask is considering retirement.

Boston: The reasons to trade Rask are a) he's getting up there in age, b) he's expensive, and c) he left this season on a bad note with the team after leaving the bubble. The problem with this deal is that Andersen doesn't really solve the expensive part (no salary difference this year after retention) and he's probably looking at $6m on a new deal. He isn't dramatically younger, and they are already quite well setup for a true tandem situation with Halak.

Everyone seems to be wanting to go tandem these days, but if Boston is thinking more of a 60-25 split or 55-30 (what Rask used to do) beyond this season, then I think this deal can certainly have merit, especially considering that the B's look to be at least 1 season away from throwing Vladar to the backup role.

 

[kb]

Friedman has officially hit troll status.

 

[shortfuze]

Boston isn't helping Toronto.

/thread

Ya cause it’s not as if Boston wouldn’t be saving cap and real dollars. But I get it. Boston is only helping Toronto. It doesn’t work both ways.

 

[PatriceBergeronFan]

Some homerism from both sides on this one.

If you're comparing Rask vs. Andersen, I think it's quite flawed to suggest that one is dramatically "better" than the other. Rask is a front-half-of-a-tandem goalie at this point in his career, and plays on a much better defensive team, so his numbers will of course be expected to be better. Andersen is a workhorse goalie who plays on a poor defensive team.

Given that they both have 1 year left, you can very easily nullify the salary difference by Boston retaining $2m -- and at that point, I think this is the way both teams look at it:

Toronto: The reasons to trade Andersen is to a) get a little younger, b) get a little cheaper, and c) take advantage of the extremely liquid goalie market, and d) With confidence in Campbell, maybe transition to more of a tandem situation. The problem with this deal is that it only accomplishes 1 of those things -- so I think the Leafs would rather stick with the status quo and maybe reduce Andersen's workload a bit.

Ultimately, I think if Toronto can't find the cheaper option, the deal strikes me as somewhat pointless as I do believe that Rask is considering retirement.

Boston: The reasons to trade Rask are a) he's getting up there in age, b) he's expensive, and c) he left this season on a bad note with the team after leaving the bubble. The problem with this deal is that Andersen doesn't really solve the expensive part (no salary difference this year after retention) and he's probably looking at $6m on a new deal. He isn't dramatically younger, and they are already quite well setup for a true tandem situation with Halak.

Everyone seems to be wanting to go tandem these days, but if Boston is thinking more of a 60-25 split or 55-30 (what Rask used to do) beyond this season, then I think this deal can certainly have merit, especially considering that the B's look to be at least 1 season away from throwing Vladar to the backup role.

Rask is a top 5 elite goalie. It is that simple.

Just one year ago he carried the Bruins to a Cup Finals in many games the Bruins otherwise would have lost.

 

[weaponomega]

Why would the leafs even want rask? I thought they were super happy with Justin Pogge. Franchise goalie

 

[NYR94]

Worked out really well for Toronto when they traded goalies before!

 

[The Podium]

Doesnt really make sense for Toronto. The plan was to cut costs on a goalie or get one with term. Yes they upgrade in goal but then end up in the same position at the end of next season looking for a starter.

 

[WhalerTurnedBruin55]

Neither side is going to come to an agreement. The reasons both teams have to help each other solves neither of their needs fully when there are other teams out there that are better fits to move either goalie.

 

[AvroArrow]

I think if Toronto moves Andersen they are going to end up regretting it.

Andersen is gone regardless. We're not resigning him for 7M, he's gone before the end of next season. With that being said, i don't see how this makes sense for either team. Rask imo could have/should have won the vezina this year but it was close. You don't trade that caliber of goalie, especially while you're still a contender, to save a few dollars. The leafs(Dubas) would not trade Andersen for 1 year of an elite goalie. Andersen will likely be moved for a younger roster player or a pick. If we landed Rask, i don't see how we fit him under the cap with all the work that needs to be done on D. I also don't know if he'd wanna re-sign here.

 

[Leafs87]

Isn’t there a possibility Rask never plays again? I mean he mentioned he wanted to retire after his contract, but after the playoffs he may not be back at all I heard somewhere?

 

[Halla]

this was the first season of the last 5 that rask had a higher sv%

leafs arent taking on an extra 2 mil in cap, and helping the bruins get enough space to bring in OEL without having to move salary

/thread