Confirmed with Link: Rask signed

Canadian Bruin

Registered User
Jun 16, 2007
194
7
Halifax, NS
Malcolm might be our future, looks special but nobody can predict where Subban will be in 3-4 years, seen/watched goalies, more than any other position who are drafted with fanfare become minor leaguer`s or the guy who`s answering the phone when your upgrading insurance

This is true, in the last 10 to 15 years we have seen a ton not work out. I think a lot due to how the Bruins used to handle young goalies, but at least that doesn't seem to be the case anymore.

But as posters were saying earlier in this thread, I think trading Malcolm now would be a huge mistake. Nothing wrong with having a ton of good prospects.
 

Shoebottom

Bruin exiting lair
Aug 31, 2005
5,872
0
7 steps from my can
so we're going from worshipping this guy during the playoffs to thinking he might play so poorly over the course of 4 years that he'll be untradeable?

Thats what happened to DiPietro, Luango, Bryzgalov etc. I think Rask is great, but $7 million over 8 years for a goalie who is a RFA and who has played only 138 games in the nhl (plus 35 in the playoffs) is excessive. For those saying that this proves to other players that the Bs aren't cheap anymore, I thought those days were over when Chia came to this city. All this says is, "hold out and you'll get what you want". Rask wanted $7 to start the negotiations, he ended up with 8 years and a NMC to boot! How much is Bergeron gonna get :amazed:? How long are the buyouts good for? At least we still got two of them just in case:D
 

Canadian Bruin

Registered User
Jun 16, 2007
194
7
Halifax, NS
I think the negotiations happened in 2010 and 2012. Rask was told to prove himself and he did. He was a good soldier and patiently waited his turn. I think it was very classy that Bruins didn't start haggling now.
QUOTE]

This is so true. He has paid his dues and now is paid for it without a big fight over it that could leave a sour taste in his mouth with the front office.
 

Artemis

Took the red pill
Dec 8, 2010
20,860
2
Mount Olympus
Thats what happened to DiPietro, Luango, Bryzgalov etc. I think Rask is great, but $7 million over 8 years for a goalie who is a RFA and who has played only 138 games in the nhl (plus 35 in the playoffs) is excessive. For those saying that this proves to other players that the Bs aren't cheap anymore, I thought those days were over when Chia came to this city. All this says is, "hold out and you'll get what you want". Rask wanted $7 to start the negotiations, he ended up with 8 years and a NMC to boot! How much is Bergeron gonna get :amazed:? How long are the buyouts good for? At least we still got two of them just in case:D

Bryzgalov was 31 when he signed a 9-year deal; Louongo was 31 when he signed a 12-year deal. DiPietro was only 25, but his deal was for 15 years.

Rask is 26 and is signed for 8 years.

I was never really good at math, but I can see a distinct difference here.
 

Gee Wally

Old, Grumpy Moderator
Sponsor
Feb 27, 2002
74,324
88,119
HF retirement home
If Rask continues this level of play, and Subban develops the way he's expected to, after that 4 years Rask will be worth a 1st round pick and a top young roster player.

No way Rask plays out all of this contract.

I like the option at year 4. If both are playing solid, (Rask & Subban) it allows for flexibility anyway. No way of knowing but at least the door is left open for something.
 

RussellmaniaKW

Registered User
Sep 15, 2004
19,692
21,783
I just really don't get all the wailing and gnashing of teeth about this deal. For many people the only argument they have is "what if he plays bad or gets hurt in a few years?" I get that concern, but I just really don't understand any fan's desire to dwell on that now. In 3 years if Rask is sucking and the deal is killing us then you have every right to be upset about it, but I just don't see the point in crying about it now when we have no idea what the future holds.

Right now, Rask is a top goalie in the world entering the prime of his career and we have him locked up. If that situation changes down the road then we can all be upset about it, but why get upset about it now?
 

Roll 4 Lines

Pastafarian!
Nov 6, 2008
7,846
1,569
In The Midnight Hour
That's horrible! No movement clause for 4 years is not good. And, as a goalie, when submitting teams he would accept a trade to, he could just list every team that already has a franchise goalie if he doesn't want to get traded.
Granted, though, if a team truly wants to move someone, the player usually obliges, but the situation will definitely be in Rask's hands.

Then the teams could swap franchise goalies.
 

Artemis

Took the red pill
Dec 8, 2010
20,860
2
Mount Olympus
I just really don't get all the wailing and gnashing of teeth about this deal. For many people the only argument they have is "what if he plays bad or gets hurt in a few years?" I get that concern, but I just really don't understand any fan's desire to dwell on that now. In 3 years if Rask is sucking and the deal is killing us then you have every right to be upset about it, but I just don't see the point in crying about it now when we have no idea what the future holds.

Right now, Rask is a top goalie in the world entering the prime of his career and we have him locked up. If that situation changes down the road then we can all be upset about it, but why get upset about it now?

Pre-emptive angst. It saves time. :)
 

missingchicklet

Registered User
Jan 24, 2010
36,589
34,463
This is not a bad signing. Yeah, it's for 8 years but several years from now the money part will seem like a relatively good deal as other elite goalies see their salaries rise. That's just the way it works. The other option would be to let someone else pay Tuukka and take a huge chance on not having an elite goalie. Might as well not sign the likes of Iginla and make trades to improve the team if you are not going to pay your better players what they are worth and watch them go elsewhere.

I feel like Tuukka's best days are ahead of him and he will be phenomenal, but let's say he stays the same as he is now. That is still good enough to give us solid chances at the Cup, and if B's brass so decide, he will easily be able to be traded given his skill. Chia did what he needed to do.
 

EverettMike

FIRE DON SWEENEY INTO THE SUN
Mar 7, 2009
44,242
30,996
Everett, MA
twitter.com
I just really don't get all the wailing and gnashing of teeth about this deal. For many people the only argument they have is "what if he plays bad or gets hurt in a few years?" I get that concern, but I just really don't understand any fan's desire to dwell on that now. In 3 years if Rask is sucking and the deal is killing us then you have every right to be upset about it, but I just don't see the point in crying about it now when we have no idea what the future holds.

Right now, Rask is a top goalie in the world entering the prime of his career and we have him locked up. If that situation changes down the road then we can all be upset about it, but why get upset about it now?

Fair enough! Everyone, from now on we can only discuss present day facts. No more projecting, predicting, hoping, or fearing.

</sarcasm>

This is such a childish post. If you dont want to discuss it, fine. If you love this %100 fine. But just leave the possibility that the deal isn't totally awesome if you insist on posting in here.

Lots of smart people have said smart things in here. Stop being so condescending and dismissive because you disagree with them.
 

RussellmaniaKW

Registered User
Sep 15, 2004
19,692
21,783
Fair enough! Everyone, from now on we can only discuss present day facts. No more projecting, predicting, hoping, or fearing.

</sarcasm>

This is such a childish post. If you dont want to discuss it, fine. If you love this %100 fine. But just leave the possibility that the deal isn't totally awesome if you insist on posting in here.

Lots of smart people have said smart things in here. Stop being so condescending and dismissive because you disagree with them.

Take a step back and compare my post and yours and tell me objectively who comes off as more condescending and childish.
 

BB624

Registered User
Jan 1, 2009
826
0
Boston Ma-Roslindale
Amazing how many people are already trading Rask and saying he won't live up to the deal. But these same people are convinced Subban will become a star. This is great situation for Bruins to be in, I love that they have a top goalie in nhl and 2 highly thought of prospects .
 

RussellmaniaKW

Registered User
Sep 15, 2004
19,692
21,783
Let's read this whole thread and compare them.

you've pretty consistently had this smart-ass attitude throughout the thread so I don't see how that would help prove your point.

You've already made up your mind that anyone who opposes this deal is being rational and sensible and anyone who likes it is being childish and condescending so why bother trying to discuss it with you?
 

EverettMike

FIRE DON SWEENEY INTO THE SUN
Mar 7, 2009
44,242
30,996
Everett, MA
twitter.com
you've pretty consistently had this smart-ass attitude throughout the thread so I don't see how that would help prove your point.

You've already made up your mind that anyone who opposes this deal is being rational and sensible and anyone who likes it is being childish and condescending so why bother trying to discuss it with you?

No. I haven't. And no, I dont. I havent said one negative thing about anyone that loves this deal.

I've only addressed two people who continue to be dismissive and condescending to everyone that doesn't love this %100. You keep laughing at those people and trying to stifle conversation. You've done it post after post after post.
 

patty59

***************
Apr 6, 2008
18,632
1,018
Lethbridge, Alberta
I think it's a little foolish to think that he would have taken less money. I doubt that this was Chiarelli's first offer and that Rask just jumped on it.

Also, if he would have filed for Arb, we'd be ****ed, since he'd likely get 1 year at close to 7M(similar to Weber) and then be a UFA the following summer and based on past performances he's been trending upwards, so what do people figure he'd get next year as a UFA?

I'm not thrilled at the 7M figure, but it's better than the alternatives, IMO.
 

NeelyDan

Spot-Picker
Sponsor
Jun 28, 2010
6,712
13,196
Dundas, Ontario
....I mean, are other fanbases as insane as ours?

You have a top-flight netminder who wants to stay here and sign him to a long term deal with a cap that allows it now and is going up next year.

Some of you just like to complain for the sake of complaining.
 

EverettMike

FIRE DON SWEENEY INTO THE SUN
Mar 7, 2009
44,242
30,996
Everett, MA
twitter.com
I think it's a little foolish to think that he would have taken less money. I doubt that this was Chiarelli's first offer and that Rask just jumped on it.

Also, if he would have filed for Arb, we'd be ****ed, since he'd likely get 1 year at close to 7M(similar to Weber) and then be a UFA the following summer and based on past performances he's been trending upwards, so what do people figure he'd get next year as a UFA?

I'm not thrilled at the 7M figure, but it's better than the alternatives, IMO.

I wonder if he would have taken 7.5 for 5. My issues is the length, not the money.

I might be the only person advocating a higher cap number.
 

Danton Heineken

Howard Potts
Mar 11, 2007
18,610
45
Fall River
I wonder if he would have taken 7.5 for 5. My issues is the length, not the money.

I might be the only person advocating a higher cap number.

I think the fact that the NMC becomes Limited No-Trade after 4 years means after 4 years they're gonna try to trade him. Unless Svedberg and Subban both bust.
 

patty59

***************
Apr 6, 2008
18,632
1,018
Lethbridge, Alberta
I wonder if he would have taken 7.5 for 5. My issues is the length, not the money.

I might be the only person advocating a higher cap number.

Maybe, but I doubt it. That's still close to 20M less. Although, he'd only be 31 after that and he'd likely get another big deal afterwards.

I don't mind the 8 years, I also don't hate the cap hit. But if I could lower one or the other it would be the cap hit. But that's probably shortsighted since it's really only a hindrance this season.

If this is what it costs to keep him then I'm OK with it. If we were talking about a forward or dman, then it would be different because they are a little easier to replace. But we've seen the importance of goaltending and I don't think it's a department that the Bruins can afford to go cheaper on.
 

patty59

***************
Apr 6, 2008
18,632
1,018
Lethbridge, Alberta
I think the fact that the NMC becomes Limited No-Trade after 4 years means after 4 years they're gonna try to trade him. Unless Svedberg and Subban both bust.

Possibly, but it's at least an option if that's what they need to do. PLus in 4 years the cap hit or length won't really be that big of a deal and an easy player to trade.

I'm not sure they plan on trading him though, but at least can if they need to.
 

VanIsle

Registered User
Jun 5, 2007
12,254
4,720
Comox Valley, B.C.
Also remember the goaltending tandem of Rask/Johnson = $7,600,000

A few comparables.

Fleury/Vokoun = $7,000,000
Lundvquist/Biron = $8,175,000
Price/Budaj = $7,900,000
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->