Afam*
Guest
if artemis followed this, artemis posts would drop by 97%.
Ha ha. So you do agree ?
if artemis followed this, artemis posts would drop by 97%.
I wouldn't fire him. He has done a good job besides giving a rask a 8 year deal. I hope he doesn't give bergy a 8 year deal. We all love bergy as a player, but with his concussion history I'm not giving him an 8 year deal.
Rask playing style doesn't translate we'll at age 36. Yikes. Rask relies on his quickness to get to the puck. Now picture him at age 36. I would have given rask a 6 year deal Worth 6 or 6.5 mil. That's fair enough for both sides.
He turns 34 the March of the final year of this deal. You're so new to the sport, stick around for a while before even suggesting you would want a hugely successful GM fired.
I don't think they could have done much different.
- Convince him he isn't worth that much? Good luck with that.
- Let him go to arbitration? Good luck signing him long term after that.
- Drag him through the mud and try to shave a few bucks off? He'd love you long time. No, not really.
I can see Rask getting traded in a few years once Subban and Svedberg are ready. So as long as Rask performs for the next few seasons and Svedberg and Subban continue to develop, the Bruins will be in a great position.
What are you talking about Rask has already taken the 28th best offensive team in the league to the second round of the playoffs. He would turn most teams in the league into contenders. The picks would likely be in the mid 20ies, we could get 4 Jordan Caron types. Oh yeay.
I'm on your side on this argument, Artemis... But your candor is grating to me as well. Mike's concerns are valid and what he's saying is not inflammatory. I'm not sure why you feel the need to treat those not entirely on board with such empty disdain.
I'll restate my opinion that Rask's deal is market value. We may not appreciate what market value is, but it is not as though Chiarelli can reset it when it is time for HIM to re-sign HIS players.
Me being new to the sport doesn't have anything to do with me suggesting chia should be fired. Furthermore it's not like I started watching hockey yesterday so can people stop using that term.
Rask is tied top 3 for salary next season; and tied for top 2 for cap hit next season for goalies.
For a cupless (I'm not going to count playing backup and zero games during the cup winning season), Vezina-less goalie, what market is dictating a guy to be on that echelon without fully proving himself? He has played great the last few seasons but has never played more than 45 games per NHL season.
COULD he be worth it? Yes. He still shows great potential, you can agree to disagree, but Rask is being paid ABOVE market value for what he has proven thus far. We're paying a premium for what Rask could do in the future. Is he the top 1-3 goalie in the league? That's pretty debatable. I'm just saying giving him over 10% of the cap hit, when it comes to putting a better team in front of him is gonna get dicey really quick.
Tuukka Rask Comparable Goalie Salaries
At the time of signing, let's bring the names of the goalies with cap hits that exceeded 10% of the cap at the time of signing: Lundquvist, Ryan Miller, Cam Ward, Kiprusoff. Since any of those guys signed, how many of them have won cups? Cap will likely go up, but we've already made significant roster changes to accommodate this overpaid contract, and will likely need to every season going forward.
He has the best career save percentage ever. The only thing he hasn't proven himself is playing a full ~65 game regular season workload and showing he won't wear down. He did play 75 games this season including playoffs and time in Europe.
So what would have done then? Taken Rask to arbitration where he was likely to be awarded 7 million or more? Traded him for a mid first round pick? Let Rask sign an offer sheet for more that 7 million (I am sure the Oilers would have offered more)?
So what would have done then? Taken Rask to arbitration where he was likely to be awarded 7 million or more? Traded him for a mid first round pick? Let Rask sign an offer sheet for more that 7 million (I am sure the Oilers would have offered more)?
Rask is tied top 3 for salary next season; and tied for top 2 for cap hit next season for goalies.
For a cupless (I'm not going to count playing backup and zero games during the cup winning season), Vezina-less goalie, what market is dictating a guy to be on that echelon without fully proving himself? He has played great the last few seasons but has never played more than 45 games per NHL season.
COULD he be worth it? Yes. He still shows great potential, you can agree to disagree, but Rask is being paid ABOVE market value for what he has proven thus far. We're paying a premium for what Rask could do in the future. Is he the top 1-3 goalie in the league? That's pretty debatable. I'm just saying giving him over 10% of the cap hit, when it comes to putting a better team in front of him is gonna get dicey really quick.
Tuukka Rask Comparable Goalie Salaries
At the time of signing, let's bring the names of the goalies with cap hits that exceeded 10% of the cap at the time of signing: Lundquvist, Ryan Miller, Cam Ward, Kiprusoff. Since any of those guys signed, how many of them have won cups? Cap will likely go up, but we've already made significant roster changes to accommodate this overpaid contract, and will likely need to every season going forward.
09-10 was interesting. He was obviously quite good, but the Bruins clicked at just the right times against Buffalo... and then crapped the bed against the Flyers (injuries played a big part) but Rask was just as big a part in the collapse as he was for getting them in that position.
No, Rask would not be able to make a crap team with no defense into a contender. Those picks, at least the first couple, would be top 10.
So what would have done then? Taken Rask to arbitration where he was likely to be awarded 7 million or more? Traded him for a mid first round pick? Let Rask sign an offer sheet for more that 7 million (I am sure the Oilers would have offered more)?
Fair questions. Good ones. I would have let him play on a one year deal or tried to make rask accept a 6 year deal and a AAV of 6 million. If worst comes to worst, you let other teams offsheet him and collect the four first round picks. No player is beyond being traded. Rask is a good goalie but not a great one. We can replace him. Don't be surprised if rask is traded at one point to make room for subban. One of subban or rask is getting traded unless one of them doesn't mind being a backup for a long time.
Back to my point, I wouldn't have given rask a 8 year deal. What's the point of negotiating if you just going to crave in. I'm beginning to wonder if rask asked for a 10 year deal and chia settled for 8. If not chia just got schooled. I wouldn't take him to arbitration, but i would have let him play on a one year deal.
Guys rask can be replaced. We are not talking about a Goat goal tender here.
So what would have done then? Taken Rask to arbitration where he was likely to be awarded 7 million or more? Traded him for a mid first round pick? Let Rask sign an offer sheet for more that 7 million (I am sure the Oilers would have offered more)?
I'm just saying giving him over 10% of the cap hit, when it comes to putting a better team in front of him is gonna get dicey really quick.
Tuukka Rask Comparable Goalie Salaries
At the time of signing, let's bring the names of the goalies with cap hits that exceeded 10% of the cap at the time of signing: Lundquvist, Ryan Miller, Cam Ward, Kiprusoff. Since any of those guys signed, how many of them have won cups? Cap will likely go up, but we've already made significant roster changes to accommodate this overpaid contract, and will likely need to every season going forward.
The only thing Subban has going for him at the moment is his last name. There's no certainty he will even become an NHL goaltender, but because of his big brother people here assume he's going to carry the torch. This is the Rask era and there's about a dozen drafts and chances to pick up a goalie of the future before he's gone.One of subban or rask is getting traded
The only thing Subban has going for him at the moment is his last name. There's no certainty he will even become an NHL goaltender, but because of his big brother people here assume he's going to carry the torch. This is the Rask era and there's about a dozen drafts and chances to pick up a goalie of the future before he's gone.
Fair questions. Good ones. I would have let him play on a one year deal or tried to make rask accept a 6 year deal and a AAV of 6 million. If worst comes to worst, you let other teams offsheet him and collect the four first round picks. No player is beyond being traded. Rask is a good goalie but not a great one. We can replace him. Don't be surprised if rask is traded at one point to make room for subban. One of subban or rask is getting traded unless one of them doesn't mind being a backup for a long time.
Back to my point, I wouldn't have given rask a 8 year deal. What's the point of negotiating if you just going to crave in. I'm beginning to wonder if rask asked for a 10 year deal and chia settled for 8. If not chia just got schooled. I wouldn't take him to arbitration, but i would have let him play on a one year deal.
Guys rask can be replaced. We are not talking about a Goat goal tender here.