Sportsnet Don Cherry points at Rask for Bruins demise - and also calls out Marchand

[LouJersey]

I think Cherry called it as he saw it from a goalie with a 2.88 GAA and a .903 save %, his worst stats ever without considering the reaction he would trigger on HF. Good for Cherry #cherrynarative

The team scored what 7 goals in 4 games? I do however understand his frustration with Rask as he will never be mistaken for Ken Dryden.

he just hasn't been the same guy his last four play-off series.

 

[Kate08]

The team scored what 7 goals in 4 games? I do however understand his frustration with Rask as he will never be mistaken for Ken Dryden.

he just hasn't been the same guy his last four play-off series.

Or was he not the same guy in 2013? From a statistical perspective, that year is the anomaly and the last 4 playoff series is who he is.

However...he's not the reason there isn't a game 6 tonight.

 

[JOKER 192]

I wouldn’t say Rask was the reason they lost,but would say maybe he was one of the reasons.

That's how I see it.

To put it totally on Rask is quite the stretch to me.

Rask had a hard time putting together a solid 60 minute game. There were periods were he was outstanding and there were periods were he wasn't so he has to take his fair share IMO. But to put it on him is a bit much.

As far as Brad goes, it's hard to criticize a player who contributed 17 points in 12 games but somehow he left himself open to that. Like, licking people, really?

That he couldn't draw a penalty to save his life is his own doing. It's Stupid none the less because a penalty is a penalty no matter who it's on but he has to see the reality of it at some point. Sadly he's damaged goods now, I doubt he will ever be able to reverse that.

But that the Bruins as a team couldn't get the calls, that is on the refs and hopefully it is addressed at some point.

 

[bp13]

He certainly wasn't putting up tremendous performances agreed, but I'm not sure if I would even put him as one of the reasons we lost.

It's tough since it's binary. He wasn't one of the reasons they lost, but he also wasn't good enough that they won. So if it's one or the other, and they lost, then I can see Cherry's point.

I agree with the premise that it's oversimplification though. If he'd stolen a game, if the refs had been competent in Games 2 and 4, if the Bruins had fewer key injuries, etc. etc. Too many components to pin the blame on any player or coach, IMO. And by the way, this is probably the case for every team 99.9% of the time.

Long story short though, a lot of things could have gone better and they likely still would have lost. TB is a very good team and they played well for much of that series. The better team won.

 

[BigBadBruins7708]

Or was he not the same guy in 2013? From a statistical perspective, that year is the anomaly and the last 4 playoff series is who he is.

However...he's not the reason there isn't a game 6 tonight.

statistically this year was the anomaly.

.912/2.61 in 13 games
.940/1.88 in 22 games
.928/1.99 in 12 games
.920/2.24 in 6 games
.903/2.88 in 12 games

 

[BBB24]

Love Don, but haven’t really taken him serious in a few years. He makes a lot of comments but never backs them up with fact. The Bruins score ONE even strength goal in five games against TB, how this gets Pinned on Rask is unfair. Not going to get into the whole Rask thing to get the haters out, but I will say I would rather have Rask than any other option they had.

 

[LouJersey]

Or was he not the same guy in 2013? From a statistical perspective, that year is the anomaly and the last 4 playoff series is who he is.

However...he's not the reason there isn't a game 6 tonight.

Very good point.

 

[Bruin4Life]

Rask was brutal. No ways to cut it. .904 is unexceptable.
People say that our defence let breakaways through to Rask.... Well we also got breakaways.

Rask was part of the problem. So was our other 3 lines

 

[Kate08]

statistically this year was the anomaly.

.912/2.61 in 13 games
.940/1.88 in 22 games
.928/1.99 in 12 games
.920/2.24 in 6 games
.903/2.88 in 12 games

Fair enough. Statistically probably wasn't the best word.

My point was that everyone points to '13 as the benchmark and what he's capable of in terms of the type of run he has in him. That's more the outlier than the other playoff performances.

Or, was the team in front of him just that much better? Funny how it always comes back to the team as a whole and not one specific player or position, hmmmmmm?

 

[LouJersey]

statistically this year was the anomaly.

.912/2.61 in 13 games
.940/1.88 in 22 games
.928/1.99 in 12 games
.920/2.24 in 6 games
.903/2.88 in 12 games

2014 Montreal series- 2.56, .903
2017 Ottawa series- 2.24, .920
2018 Toronto series- 2.94, .899
2018 Tampa series- 2.82, .907

1-3 last 4 series.

 

[BigBadBruins7708]

Fair enough. Statistically probably wasn't the best word.

My point was that everyone points to '13 as the benchmark and what he's capable of in terms of the type of run he has in him. That's more the outlier than the other playoff performances.

Or, was the team in front of him just that much better? Funny how it always comes back to the team as a whole and not one specific player or position, hmmmmmm?

haha, I'm an analyst by trade, so statistical "fun" catches my attention.

and agree, win as a team and lose as a team. There is never 1 reason for either outcome.

Is Rask a reason they lost? sure. Is it in the top 5? nope

 

[BigBadBruins7708]

2014 Montreal series- 2.56, .903
2017 Ottawa series- 2.24, .920
2018 Toronto series- 2.94, .899
2018 Tampa series- 2.82, .907

1-3 last 4 series.

and if he has a 2.00 GAA in the last 4 games in the Tampa series, they still lose in 5. No goalie is winning with 1.75 GPG (0.00 ES GPG) of support

 

[Hockeyholic]

I cannot stand this man. I so wish he would go away. I will never forget the too-many-men-on-the-ice penalty, Mr Ego with bad fashion style.

Lifelong Bruins fans still upset over that? 40 years later?

 

[Glove Malfunction]

Rask was brutal. No ways to cut it. .904 is unexceptable.
People say that our defence let breakaways through to Rask.... Well we also got breakaways.

Rask was part of the problem. So was our other 3 lines

Saying Rask was brutal and pointing to a goalie stat without giving it the context of the way the team played defense in front of him is a really lazy way to go. Rask had maybe one game in the TML series where he gave up a REALLY bad goal, and he stole game 4. Calling him brutal really seems, just wrong.

 

[Glove Malfunction]

2014 Montreal series- 2.56, .903
2017 Ottawa series- 2.24, .920
2018 Toronto series- 2.94, .899
2018 Tampa series- 2.82, .907

1-3 last 4 series.

I'm gonna paraphrase what Kate said - it seems to come back more to the team in front of him than to him exclusively.

 

[patty59]

Or was he not the same guy in 2013? From a statistical perspective, that year is the anomaly and the last 4 playoff series is who he is.

However...he's not the reason there isn't a game 6 tonight.

he's just as good, scoring is way up this year. That 2013 team could score goals 5 on 5.

 

[Orr Fourever]

Cherry's in his 80's. So you know grain of salt...

 

[Seidenbergy]

2014 Montreal series- 2.56, .903
2017 Ottawa series- 2.24, .920
2018 Toronto series- 2.94, .899
2018 Tampa series- 2.82, .907

1-3 last 4 series.

I'm actually amazed how good his numbers were against Ottawa last year, given the train wreck on D in front of him. Any time you have to ice Tommy freaking Cross in the playoffs, you know you're in trouble.

 

[ON3M4N]

Tuukka Rask could face 100 shots, save 99 and lose 1-0 on an unsaveable shot and people would still complain about him. It'll be a sad day when he's gone, but hopefully one of the kids in the system can help bridge things together.

 

[ON3M4N]

Kind of interesting, but I see everyone blamed except the top line. Now I'm sure someone reads that and think I'm crazy (and maybe I am), but why are they not getting criticized?

Marchand was held pointless in 40% of the playoff games this year, while Pasta was held pointless in 33% of the playoff games this year. Sure they had eye popping numbers, but they were not consistent.

Pasta - 20pts but only a +2 in 12 games
Marchand - 17pts but only a +4 in 12 games (had 17 giveaways too)

Bergeron was the only one that consistently produced on that line and along with DeBrusk, they're the only two that IMO get little to no blame for these playoffs.

 

[Fenway]

Lifelong Bruins fans still upset over that? 40 years later?

 

[VanIsle]

2014 Montreal series- 2.56, .903
2017 Ottawa series- 2.24, .920
2018 Toronto series- 2.94, .899
2018 Tampa series- 2.82, .907

1-3 last 4 series.

Couldn't agree more, he's not the complete reason as to why the Bruins lost but he didn't play above average, below average isn't good enough for me.

.899 and 907 is pure trash.

 

[LouJersey]

I'm actually amazed how good his numbers were against Ottawa last year, given the train wreck on D in front of him. Any time you have to ice Tommy freaking Cross in the playoffs, you know you're in trouble.

Agreed. Should have been lit up but they would have won with a healthy D

Montreal sucked the players quit it seemed like.

The Toronto series he won so I don't care if he gave up 100 goals

This past one the team in front sucked and he was meh.

That Detroit series was a very underrated performance by him. Was stellar

 

[fin8]

For about 5 years now, I’ve been saying that Rask, will never take this team to the promise land. Back then, there was only few people that agreed with me. Now, there are a lot of people that agree with me. He is not a true champion. Never was, never will be. Still waiting Rask. Still waiting.

 

[Donnie Shulzhoffer]

For about 5 years now, I’ve been saying that Rask, will never take this team to the promise land. Back then, there was only few people that agreed with me. Now, there are a lot of people that agree with me. He is not a true champion. Never was, never will be. Still waiting Rask. Still waiting.

Wrong on back then. Wrong on the present. And just plain wrong.