LouJersey
Registered User
I was thinking of that too... 8mil per over 5 years. I hate these long termers..
Confirmed with Link: Rask signed
- Thread starter Fire Sweeney
- Start date
I was thinking of that too... 8mil per over 5 years. I hate these long termers..
patty59
***************
Shoebottom
Bruin exiting lair
Guess you missed the big picture i was trying to paint. All those goalies started to suck after signing huge contracts and have been brought out or become a ball and chain. Add MA Fluery to that list as well. All I was trying to point to is that big contracts, more often than not, result in a decline of that player. Anyways, when Boston is up against the cap like they are, every million counts. Who plays 138 games and gets $7 million dollars? That must be a record of the fastest $7 million in NHL history. Please correct me if I'm wrong.
Just saying, glad we still have 2 buyouts left & JJ's deep pockets
RussellmaniaKW
Registered User
- Sep 15, 2004
- 19,698
- 21,801
I've made 1 post in this thread that can be considered inflammatory (about this fanbase being spoiled) and I stand by it. Otherwise, I don't know what you're talking about.
MillerTime 86
So Long Tyler SeQuin
Chiarelli gambled last summer with the one year bridge contract and lost. Rask gambled as well, and it paid off huge for him. Probably $2+ million extra a year huge...
Tuukka Ra$k™
Tuukka Ra$k™
Danton Heineken
Howard Potts
VanIsle
Registered User
Guess you missed the big picture i was trying to paint. All those goalies started to suck after signing huge contracts and have been brought out or become a ball and chain. Add MA Fluery to that list as well. All I was trying to point to is that big contracts, more often than not, result in a decline of that player. Anyways, when Boston is up against the cap like they are, every million counts. Who plays 138 games and gets $7 million dollars? That must be a record of the fastest $7 million in NHL history. Please correct me if I'm wrong.
Just saying, glad we still have 2 buyouts left & JJ's deep pockets
Nicklas Backstrom played for 3 seasons (every game) before signing a 10 year $67 million dollar contract.
A few more games, but he is a forward, so somewhat comparable.
Shoebottom
Bruin exiting lair
Yup. Thinking Rask would've jumped all over $5-5.5 any term at that time. Bad gamble by Chia for sure.
BergyMeister
Overpaid 4th liner
Well I might as well pick a side. 
$$ eh Years Guh!! I know it's they way in pro sports today but I HATE long contracts for athletes.
$$ eh Years Guh!! I know it's they way in pro sports today but I HATE long contracts for athletes.
RussellmaniaKW
Registered User
- Sep 15, 2004
- 19,698
- 21,801
WBC8 you're one of the best posters here but I think this is unfair because it sort of implies that the people who have argued that this is a good deal must all be 100% fluffers.
It's possible to agree with a lot of the misgivings some people have about this deal while still thinking it's a good move overall. The term and money concerns me because it represents a big risk that could hurt the franchise in the future, but ultimately I don't believe there was a better move for Chiarelli to make. If that makes me a pom pom waver or fluffer then so be it.
Shoebottom
Bruin exiting lair
Guess you missed the big picture i was trying to paint. All those goalies started to suck after signing huge contracts and have been brought out or become a ball and chain. Add MA Fluery to that list as well. All I was trying to point to is that big contracts, more often than not, result in a decline of that player. Anyways, when Boston is up against the cap like they are, every million counts. Who plays 138 games and gets $7 million dollars? That must be a record of the fastest $7 million in NHL history. Please correct me if I'm wrong.
Just saying, glad we still have 2 buyouts left & JJ's deep pockets
The big difference here is it is not Rask's fault that the Bruins signed Tim Thomas. On any other team in the League, Rask would not have had to wait until he was 26 to take over the #1 job and thus could have cashed in for bigger money much earlier than he did here. It is clear to me that part of this contract is reward for the patience and perseverance that Rask has shown in working his way up the ranks. He has been a perfect picture of consistency and quite frankly has only gotten better every year. Time will tell, but I'm with the B's management in their belief that in 4-6 years, this contract might look like a great bargain. It's not like the guy came out of nowhere. He was a 1st round draft choice who was quite simply incredible in his final World Junior tournament. For those who say "what if he gets injured?", I say "what if he doesn't?"
RussellmaniaKW
Registered User
- Sep 15, 2004
- 19,698
- 21,801
Good point. Also, I thought Rask easily could have played more games in the 11-12 season. Shorter sample size, but his numbers were better than Thomas' numbers last year and there were several stretches where Rask put up a really solid game (sometimes as good as a shutout) and then instead of going with Rask again, Claude would go back to Thomas. I remember it frustrating a lot of people on this board at the time. Rask arguably outplayed Thomas at points that year but presumably b/c of seniority, Thomas kept getting most of the starts.
RedeyeRocketeer
Registered User
To the people worried about the length, by then they'll already be more rules for buyouts if it came to that. I'm not worried....
Shoebottom
Bruin exiting lair
Hope you're right, but I still say $5.5 should've been enough. I don't understand why it took 2 weeks to sign Rask if Chia didn't want to negotiate. Should've been a one day thing. Rask wanted $7 million and he got it and then some.
LouJersey
Registered User
You explained why you think it's a good deal...and you have some concerns...that is perfect IMO...You always call them like you see them...
VanIsle
Registered User
Only time shall tell on this deal, as there are many other teams that have signed goalies to a longer term deal. So yes the Bruins did sign him to a long contract, but there are many other teams that have done the same.
Luongo signed 12 years
Quick 10 years
Rinne/Fleury 7 years
Lundqvist/Price/Ward/Smith/Howard 6 years
Thats is basically 1/3 the league that has signed a goalie to a long term contract.
Luongo, yes his contract length is a little long, but he is still a very serviceable goalie, Fleury is suspect, but the rest I would take on my team.
All in all, time shall tell, just like the never ending debate of who won the Kessel trade.
Luongo signed 12 years
Quick 10 years
Rinne/Fleury 7 years
Lundqvist/Price/Ward/Smith/Howard 6 years
Thats is basically 1/3 the league that has signed a goalie to a long term contract.
Luongo, yes his contract length is a little long, but he is still a very serviceable goalie, Fleury is suspect, but the rest I would take on my team.
All in all, time shall tell, just like the never ending debate of who won the Kessel trade.
Last edited:
EverettMike
FIRE DON SWEENEY INTO THE SUN
No one has even asked the most interesting questions:
Does Tuukka Rask not care about zoos and houses, or is he unaware of the dearth of them in Massachusetts?
Does Tuukka Rask not care about zoos and houses, or is he unaware of the dearth of them in Massachusetts?
Neely08
Registered User
He likes houses. Apparently real big houses.
Zoos? ppppfft. He just bought Mike Tyson's tiger.
Shoebottom
Bruin exiting lair
I think a Quick contract would've been great. $5.8/year-10years. Guy played 250 games, won a cup and was the MVP of that run. And he gets $5.8! Rask plays 138 games, made it to the final and he gets $7 million in a year where the cap goes down dramatically? Somebody has been talking to Thomas too much
22Brad Park
Registered User
Not really sure what Chia was thinking all along here.Bruins had nothing even close to NHL ready in nets other then Rask and Chia could had him locked up for couple yrs last contract for way less money.I do not like tying up 7 million on a goalie and Chia is to blame for that not Rasks great play. Rasks agent knew he had them by the junk here.SHABBY GM ing this time.But what ya gonna do ?
@TheBruinsBlog: (1/2) Chia on this year's cap: “We’re fine. We’ve got space, we’ve got Savard LTI. We’re in good shape
"@TheBruinsBlog: (2/2) We’re fine. To commit to a contract like this, obviously we’ve got to put certain pieces in place in advance,but we’re in good shape.""
"@TheBruinsBlog: (2/2) We’re fine. To commit to a contract like this, obviously we’ve got to put certain pieces in place in advance,but we’re in good shape.""
N o o d l e s
Registered User
Only time shall tell on this deal, as there are many other teams that have signed goalies to a longer term deal. So yes the Bruins did sign him to a long contract, but there are many other teams that have done the same.
Luongo signed 12 years
Quick 10 years
Rinne/Fleury 7 years
Lundqvist/Price/Ward/Smith/Howard 6 years
Thats is basically 1/3 the league that has signed a goalie to a long term contract.
Luongo, yes his contract length is a little long, but he is still a very serviceable goalie, Fleury is suspect, but the rest I would take on my team.
All in all, time shall tell, just like the never ending debate of who won the Kessel trade.
That's just the thing. People are freaking out saying Rask will collapse by the end of the contract and there's no way he'll see the end of it and are saying long term goalie contracts never work out. Besides Fleury those are all big name guys who I would take on my team. Just because the contract is long does not mean it is horrible.
- Oct 31, 2007
- 17,954
- 16,861
Does anyone know if there is a time limit on the 2 compliance buyouts that each team has?
It's a gamble giving a goalie an 8 year contract, so I wonder if B's management is thinking that if it all goes to hell in a hand-basket they have the buyout option that they'll try and save.
It's a gamble giving a goalie an 8 year contract, so I wonder if B's management is thinking that if it all goes to hell in a hand-basket they have the buyout option that they'll try and save.
neelynugs
Registered User
- Feb 27, 2002
- 35,433
- 9,870
