Discussion in 'Boston Bruins' started by bruinsfan1970, Oct 5, 2018.
Not nearly as consistent as you'd hope.
He's a slow starter. He'll be elite again soon enough.
Right now we have one of the best tandem goalies situations in the NHL , if not the best.
I think we have the most expensive tandem in the NHL. They'd better be one of the best.
2 U's, 2 K's and 6 threads! Means he's been around a awhile. He's gonna win us another one
At least part of the year, which is the usual showcasing.
At least they both cost less than Carey Price combined.
Actually 2nd highest (I thought it would have been #1 too). CF just recently added a new tab that breaks down how much of a teams cap goes towards FWD/DEF/G. Montreal leads G's with $11.4 million and Boston is currently at $9.75 million. Which I guess makes sense being that Price is something like a $10 million hit lol.
Aw. Right. Forgot about the Habs and their awful team.
I liked the tandem in Boston last season better if only because it was cheaper. Halak is a better goaltender though and I am unapologetic in being a Rask apologist. I love Tuukka and love that I haven't had to complain about our goaltending in what.. 15 years? That space between Moog and Timmy was an eternity.
Ain't that the truth lol. I'm really hoping between Vladar/Swayman/Kesyer that we'll be set for another 15+ years
pretty easy to tell in teh Rask discussions who lived through hte Merry Go Round of Toivonen, Potvin, Grahame, Raycroft, Sigalet, etc.
The lone brightspot in that dark period was the 1.5 years of beast mode Dafoe
Those were dark days my friend, preceded by the equally dark days that preceded Dafoe's brief stint as a quality tender.
Always been a Fan of Halak.
I think the competition will push Rask
But in the playoffs I never had confidence in Rask he always seems to let in soft goals in crucial games.
Anyways great to have a 1A/1B goalie
Rask Career Regular Season: .922 save percentage; 2.26 GAA
Rask Career Playoffs: .924 save percentage; 2.25 GAA
Im not saying i dont like Rask
Statistically hes great but it doesnt change the fact that he lets in soft goals in big games
Rask has the numbers, absolutely no one ever denies this.
At the end of his career we can all debate whether or not he brought the team to the promised land.
Can he? Statistics say it's possible. Will he? Only time will tell.
Fact or opinion? More or fewer than other "top" goalies?
I mean, Pekka Rinne allowed like 2 trash goals every 3 minutes last year in the post season.
Holtby gave up 7 last night but only 3 were on him
When watching home teams there's an element of critical observation that influences our perception. We're more critical .
If Tuuk was playing for an opposing team we would be hoping he wasn't the starting goalie .
I remember a lot of Byron Dafoe fans. I don't think I have been a Boston goalie fan since Lacher and Casey. Well, I grew to like Tim Thomas, after I got over the part where he would look ridiculous sometimes when he overplayed the puck. Rask does that too, except it never seems to go right. I kind of think Thomas might have broken Rask. That style goaltending wouldn't work in today's NHL.
Are there advanced stats for goalies yet? I too feel that Rask lets in momentum changing soft goals too often and don't trust him in the playoffs. It would be nice if it could be quantified.
I don't like big dollar goalies in general. I realize your screwed if you don't have one, but the top paid guys haven't been worth the investments in playoff success. I wouldnt pay Price $10 million unless he could center the 1st line and skate back to stop the puck as well.
I recently heard on TSN , a hockey annalist expressing concern about Boston's Tuukka Rask. As per the annalist (I can't for the life of me remember his name) he said that Rask has put up some pretty average numbers in spite of having faced among the easiest work loads in The NHL. He sighted that the Bruins defense was top in the league, giving up the least high danger chances of any team yet Rask's numbers didn't reflect this advantage. I set out to find this on the net and came across one that I deemed to be even better, as it explains in detail how these conclusions are drawn and how they compare to the norm.
Here is an in depth look and analysis of Rask's work since he signed his current contract. Unsurprisingly (at least to me ) it deems him to be below average and getting worse by the year among starters.
It's a long read but it is worth the read. Rask vs. Reward: Does the performance match the pay?
It concludes the following
Takeaway: The best available stats tell us Rask was good at stopping easy shots, not so much with harder ones and was rarely above average (either year by year or overall) in any meaningful advanced statistic. In fact, he has been regularly below average and in some cases among the bottom third of starting goaltenders. Worse yet for Bruins fans, he is seemingly getting worse each year, despite minimal changes to the team defense in front of him, as one can reasonably expect due to goaltender aging curves.
We already discussed this (too briefly) when it came out.
Separate names with a comma.