Rask Signed

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from Bookboy007. Show Bookboy007's posts

    Re: Rask Signed

    In response to shuperman's comment:

    Financial suicide.  8 yrs.  7 million.  Wow.   128 gms.  66-45 record.   Wow just wow.   You rask supporters better hope hes healthy for 8 yrs bc we are broke.   

    Enjoy no upgrades.  

     



    Look up winning percentages all time and tell me how many goalies have better numbers than Rask?  Look at where his career numbers fit all time?  Granted, he's played the equivalent of just over two years as a starter, but unlike a lot of guys with limited games played, you can't say Rask "got hot" like Steve Mason, and that his numbers are skewed or inconsistent.  Whenever he's been in, he's been consistently a very good to elite level goalie.  Take your head out of the oven. 

    I'm having flashbacks to all of the idiots who said the Bruins should have walked away from Tim Thomas the summer after he won a Vezina rather than give him a four year deal with a Cap hit of $5M.  Some guy got out of the penalty box after, what, 36 months in maximum security for closing his hand on the puck? suggested they should have hung on to Craig Anderson instead.  So they could "upgrade" elsewhere.

    Thomas's deal represented almost 9% of the Cap that year and made him the second highest paid player on teh team behind Chara.  If Chara was still making what he made in 2009, Rask would be teh second highest paid player on the team behind Chara.  Rask's deal is 10.8% of an artificiallly set cap number for next year that everyone expects to rise dramatically for the following year - that's by Malkin is signing his stupid deal, that's how Anaheim is locking up Perry and Getzlaf.  Within a year, this will be less than 9% of the Cap for a goalie who backstopped you to the Cup finals.  He could easily have been a Vezina finalist.  He's in his prime.  You're buying 7 years of UFA bargaining potential.

    One more thing for shupe's sake - goodbye upgrades?  Where do you want these upgrades?  Upgrade Krejci, Lucic, Marchand, Bergeron, Eriksson?  Chara and Seidenberg?  Because if you're talking about "upgrades" on the performance of those guys, I think you're talking about transforming the team in some very fundamental ways.  And if it's not those guys, you're talking about buying better deck chairs rather than fortify the hull before you take an arctic cruise.

    Lastly, for the Trade Subban! crowd.  He has an 8 year contract.  That doesn't mean he's in Boston for 7 years.  It means we know what they'll be paying for him as long as he's in Boston.

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from NeelyOrrBourque. Show NeelyOrrBourque's posts

    Re: Rask Signed

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    lets hope it works out.  No one wants me blabbing i told you so.  I hate the deal.  I hate the fact we have no room for upgrades.   i hate we have no backup.  I hate that he has never played a full season and we have an u/k as a backup.  I hope the cap doesnt move.  

     

    In order for this deal to be a success he better be able to play 65 gms a year for 8 yrs, win at least one cup, a vezina or 2.  I think playing 65 gms a year for 8 yrs will be impossible.  

    Im predicting a groin injury within the first 2 yrs.   

    Enjoy the next 8 yrs.   i wont dwell on this anymore.  When people start threads about getting a top 4 dman or a 3rd line player or an nhl player if one of our guys gets hurt please remember this thread.  

    Good luck rask.  You are gonna need it.  

    [/QUOTE]

    Think you're a little late announcing this. You've been belly aching for the past 2 wks Shupe! The worse I've seen you on any topic. I think we ALLLLLLL know how you feel. Can you plse let it go now? Geezus!!!

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from Beezfan4life. Show Beezfan4life's posts

    Re: Rask Signed

    In response to kelvana33's comment:



    If he continues to progress the way he did this year it will be a real good deal going forward, especially with the cap going up. Lets not forget, at the beginning of the year, there were doubts/questions as to wether he was a number one goalie.He proved he is, he even signed the one year deal to prove he is.




    Bingo !

     

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from days-of-Orr. Show days-of-Orr's posts

    Re: Rask Signed

    so PC lost all sense of reason all of a sudden?....

    i'm sure he tried to get Tuukka for the best deal possible....

    the last position i want the B'S to skimp on is between the pipes....

    i guess some would prefer to go back to the Jon Casey days....

     

     

    “People think common sense is common - but it's not.”


     
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from BadHabitude. Show BadHabitude's posts

    Re: Rask Signed

    In response to bostonfan191646's comment:

    not happy about this. too long, too much. I think Chiarelli might be losing his touch. 




    Darn.  I have to agree.

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from Not-A-Shot. Show Not-A-Shot's posts

    Re: Rask Signed

    That is a big contract. 

    For those who are saying that they just paid $X for Y number of wins, you are not looking at it properly.  They aren't paying him for what he's done.  They have seen what they wanted from this player over the years. 

    "But NAS, he has only played X games and hasn't even played over 50 games in a season yet."  Yeah, so?  Do you think he'll suddenly forget how to play goal after his 51st start? 

    It's too long:  Tell me, Mr. Crystal Ball, what is happening with the team in 2019?  I don't know either.  No one does.  How can you be upset that the player has a contract that year?  One thing I do know:  The salary cap will be much higher.  Elite starting goalies will be earning a lot more.  Rask will still be of a reasonable age in which to do well.  The contract may be a bargain and a half.

    It's too much:  What difference does it make if he's making $5.5M or $7M?  They just turned $5.75M Seguin into $4.25M Eriksson.  Same amount.  This salary cap dip isn't a trend.  It's a one year thing.  It'll go back up.

    Other options:

    Hold his feet to the fire for fewer years, less money.  Someone signs him to a 6 year deal worth $12M per.  Happy now?

    Sign him to another one year deal for $5.5M.  "Prove it over a full season, Tuukka."  And he does.  And he walks away, unrestricted.  Happy now?

    Tell him to go F himself and encourage other owners to offer sheet him. Take the draft picks.  Enter the Goalie-Go-Round that teams like Philly are on.   Happy now?

    Bottom line:  One of the best goalies in the league is signed for many years to come.  We don't need to worry about the Bruins goaltending for two more presidential elections.  That's a long time.  No drafting of goalies at all, instead the picks can be used for skaters.

    The very bottom line:  There are a lot of things that go on behind the scenes that we don't ever know about.  Did Chiarelli offer too much and Rask agreed?  Did Rask say, "This is the deal.  This is the only thing I will accept.  No negotiations"?  Did Rask say he wanted to go play in a non-traditional market and Chiarelli had to blow him away to keep him?  We don't know.

    The absolute very bottom line:  It's a deal.  No use being upset about it.  It's not your money, and you don't have a crystal ball.  All we can do is hope that this very large contract works out well for the Bruins.

     

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from days-of-Orr. Show days-of-Orr's posts

    Re: Rask Signed

    In response to Bookboy007's comment:

    In response to shuperman's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

    Financial suicide.  8 yrs.  7 million.  Wow.   128 gms.  66-45 record.   Wow just wow.   You rask supporters better hope hes healthy for 8 yrs bc we are broke.   

    Enjoy no upgrades.  

     

     



    Look up winning percentages all time and tell me how many goalies have better numbers than Rask?  Look at where his career numbers fit all time?  Granted, he's played the equivalent of just over two years as a starter, but unlike a lot of guys with limited games played, you can't say Rask "got hot" like Steve Mason, and that his numbers are skewed or inconsistent.  Whenever he's been in, he's been consistently a very good to elite level goalie.  Take your head out of the oven. 

     

    I'm having flashbacks to all of the idiots who said the Bruins should have walked away from Tim Thomas the summer after he won a Vezina rather than give him a four year deal with a Cap hit of $5M.  Some guy got out of the penalty box after, what, 36 months in maximum security for closing his hand on the puck? suggested they should have hung on to Craig Anderson instead.  So they could "upgrade" elsewhere.

    Thomas's deal represented almost 9% of the Cap that year and made him the second highest paid player on teh team behind Chara.  If Chara was still making what he made in 2009, Rask would be teh second highest paid player on the team behind Chara.  Rask's deal is 10.8% of an artificiallly set cap number for next year that everyone expects to rise dramatically for the following year - that's by Malkin is signing his stupid deal, that's how Anaheim is locking up Perry and Getzlaf.  Within a year, this will be less than 9% of the Cap for a goalie who backstopped you to the Cup finals.  He could easily have been a Vezina finalist.  He's in his prime.  You're buying 7 years of UFA bargaining potential.

    One more thing for shupe's sake - goodbye upgrades?  Where do you want these upgrades?  Upgrade Krejci, Lucic, Marchand, Bergeron, Eriksson?  Chara and Seidenberg?  Because if you're talking about "upgrades" on the performance of those guys, I think you're talking about transforming the team in some very fundamental ways.  And if it's not those guys, you're talking about buying better deck chairs rather than fortify the hull before you take an arctic cruise.

    Lastly, for the Trade Subban! crowd.  He has an 8 year contract.  That doesn't mean he's in Boston for 7 years.  It means we know what they'll be paying for him as long as he's in Boston.

    [/QUOTE]


    Bookboy, on the money as usual....

    btw, i was one of those idiots that criticised the TT deal....  not this time....

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from Not-A-Shot. Show Not-A-Shot's posts

    Re: Rask Signed

    Shupe:  This was written while you were posting your statement.  I hadn't read your latest soapbox.  None of it is referencing or directed at you, amigo.

     

     

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from Bookboy007. Show Bookboy007's posts

    Re: Rask Signed

    Oh yeah, Thomas's deal, combined with Rask's EL bonus hit?  Bruins had over $8M committed to goaltending.  With Rask and Svedberg next year, or Rask and Subban?  $8.5M tops.  It's foolish to say that they won't be able to manouever because of this deal.  Upgrade means someone on the roster goes away, so it's an incremental increase, and the Cap will go up at least $6M.  I'd bet my capology degree....

    Face it, shupe.  You don't like the deal, but it's entirely likely that there is no doomsday scenario here, no handcuffs, no cry me a river.  Any player can get injured.  Every player gets injured.  The Bruins will be fine - better than fine.  They've solidified the net for half a generation.

     

     

    Are you not entertained?!?!

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from abra-cadaver. Show abra-cadaver's posts

    Re: Rask Signed

    In response to Bookboy007's comment:

     

     Look at where his career numbers fit all time? 



     

    Product of the system.  Even a stiff like Alex Auld put up Vezina-like numbers in Boston's defensive "system" (with a worse D-core at that) years back.  Stick Rask on a team that cant play defense like Philly, and he is the one with the 2.78 GAA getting run out of town like Bryz right now.

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from shuperman. Show shuperman's posts

    Re: Rask Signed

    Book,

    i dont wanna kill this bc ive already done it.  He had played 2 seasons stretched over the last 4.  Fatigue never an issue, we have never seen the guy play 65 gms.  He was fresh as a daisy.  His win lose record on this type of team isnt really that great.  If you only see roses outta this fine, good for you....i think he does not have enough established seasons.  Hes played skattered seasons with good numbers.  Emery just went 19-1 or something like that last yr as a backup.  I dont trust the small sample size.  call me an idiot all you want.  Im entitled to an opinion.  And will use recent history for goalies.  

    As for upgrades.  You dont think injuries happen?  You automatically assume that we walk through the season needing nothing.  Well sports medicine is good but not that good.  Upgrades can be as minor as adding a quality depth player.  Im not even mentioning the top 6 fwd we need after the year.  But maybe we can pkg marchand with kelly to squeeze some more room.   

    those fwds you mentioned are prime time fwds who are well established with more then 128 gms. Not sure how you can compare established, decorated franchise players to a goalie who never played a full year.  

    Again, you can think what you want.  I will smile and chuckle to myself if he goes down, we need any help at the deadline, next yr when we are signing no one.   I hate the deal.  Nothing you can put in a novel will change my mind.  I cant stand paying a goalie this money.  

    you are above name calling.  Cut it out.  I hate the deal, not you.  

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from RichHillOntario. Show RichHillOntario's posts

    Re: Rask Signed

    In response to days-of-Orr's comment:

    so PC lost all sense of reason all of a sudden?....

    i'm sure he tried to get Tuukka for the best deal possible....

    the last position i want the B'S to skimp on is between the pipes....

    i guess some would prefer to go back to the Jon Casey days....

     

     

    “People think common sense is common - but it's not.”


     



    I like this. 

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from red75. Show red75's posts

    Re: Rask Signed

    It takes the B's to the end of the current CBA, with their likely being significant annual cap increases per annum up until that point. Other than for this season I don't see it being overly cap restrictive and it expires right when the future cap negotiations will taking place. Yes it's more than I would have liked to see, but if Rask remains healthy over that period, it isn't bad from a cap perspective (long-term).

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from days-of-Orr. Show days-of-Orr's posts

    Re: Rask Signed

    In response to Not-A-Shot's comment:

    That is a big contract. 

    For those who are saying that they just paid $X for Y number of wins, you are not looking at it properly.  They aren't paying him for what he's done.  They have seen what they wanted from this player over the years. 

    "But NAS, he has only played X games and hasn't even played over 50 games in a season yet."  Yeah, so?  Do you think he'll suddenly forget how to play goal after his 51st start? 

    It's too long:  Tell me, Mr. Crystal Ball, what is happening with the team in 2019?  I don't know either.  No one does.  How can you be upset that the player has a contract that year?  One thing I do know:  The salary cap will be much higher.  Elite starting goalies will be earning a lot more.  Rask will still be of a reasonable age in which to do well.  The contract may be a bargain and a half.

    It's too much:  What difference does it make if he's making $5.5M or $7M?  They just turned $5.75M Seguin into $4.25M Eriksson.  Same amount.  This salary cap dip isn't a trend.  It's a one year thing.  It'll go back up.

    Other options:

    Hold his feet to the fire for fewer years, less money.  Someone signs him to a 6 year deal worth $12M per.  Happy now?

    Sign him to another one year deal for $5.5M.  "Prove it over a full season, Tuukka."  And he does.  And he walks away, unrestricted.  Happy now?

    Tell him to go F himself and encourage other owners to offer sheet him. Take the draft picks.  Enter the Goalie-Go-Round that teams like Philly are on.   Happy now?

    Bottom line:  One of the best goalies in the league is signed for many years to come.  We don't need to worry about the Bruins goaltending for two more presidential elections.  That's a long time.  No drafting of goalies at all, instead the picks can be used for skaters.

    The very bottom line:  There are a lot of things that go on behind the scenes that we don't ever know about.  Did Chiarelli offer too much and Rask agreed?  Did Rask say, "This is the deal.  This is the only thing I will accept.  No negotiations"?  Did Rask say he wanted to go play in a non-traditional market and Chiarelli had to blow him away to keep him?  We don't know.

    The absolute very bottom line:  It's a deal.  No use being upset about it.  It's not your money, and you don't have a crystal ball.  All we can do is hope that this very large contract works out well for the Bruins.

     




    GREAT POST!!!!

    kudos.

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from BadHabitude. Show BadHabitude's posts

    Re: Rask Signed

    In response to Bigpapa1977's comment:

    I wonder when the Bruins will trade Malcomb Subban?  ... he just became irrelevant.




    Well, wait, he has to become relevant before he can become irrelevant.

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from shuperman. Show shuperman's posts

    Re: Rask Signed

    In response to Not-A-Shot's comment:

    Shupe:  This was written while you were posting your statement.  I hadn't read your latest soapbox.  None of it is referencing or directed at you, amigo.

     

     



    No worries dude.  Everyone is entitled to an opinion.   I realize the majority are fine with it.  Im not.  I dont like the deal.  End of story for me.  Its not a slam on anyone here.   i hate it.  Ive said my peace.   Move on.   

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from BadHabitude. Show BadHabitude's posts

    Re: Rask Signed

    Another thing about Malcolm Subban, goalies typically take until they are 25-26 until they really start coming into their own (Brodeur and Roy as examples), and Subban is just 19 now.   Subban might be "ripe" just as Rask's contract is ending.

    If this deal were to be at 6 mil per year I'd be thrilled.

     

     
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from dezaruchi. Show dezaruchi's posts

    Re: Rask Signed

    In response to abra-cadaver's comment:

    In response to Bookboy007's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

     

     Look at where his career numbers fit all time? 



     

     

    Product of the system.  Even a stiff like Alex Auld put up Vezina-like numbers in Boston's defensive "system" (with a worse D-core at that) years back.  Stick Rask on a team that cant play defense like Philly, and he is the one with the 2.78 GAA getting run out of town like Bryz right now.

    [/QUOTE]

    I guess we'll test your "theory" if your hero Thomas can manage to find a job. How about you tell us some more about how much less goal support Thomas had in 2011. Oh yeah, you can't because it's as untrue today as it was when you made that claim weeks ago. Google sure is wonderful for those of us who know how to use it. 

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from Not-A-Shot. Show Not-A-Shot's posts

    Re: Rask Signed

    In response to shuperman's comment:

      I will smile and chuckle to myself if he goes down, we need any help at the deadline, next yr when we are signing no one. 



    Oh come on.

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from red75. Show red75's posts

    Re: Rask Signed

    Great post there NAS

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from Crowls2424. Show Crowls2424's posts

    Re: Rask Signed

    In response to Not-A-Shot's comment:

    That is a big contract. 

    For those who are saying that they just paid $X for Y number of wins, you are not looking at it properly.  They aren't paying him for what he's done.  They have seen what they wanted from this player over the years. 

    "But NAS, he has only played X games and hasn't even played over 50 games in a season yet."  Yeah, so?  Do you think he'll suddenly forget how to play goal after his 51st start? 

    It's too long:  Tell me, Mr. Crystal Ball, what is happening with the team in 2019?  I don't know either.  No one does.  How can you be upset that the player has a contract that year?  One thing I do know:  The salary cap will be much higher.  Elite starting goalies will be earning a lot more.  Rask will still be of a reasonable age in which to do well.  The contract may be a bargain and a half.

    It's too much:  What difference does it make if he's making $5.5M or $7M?  They just turned $5.75M Seguin into $4.25M Eriksson.  Same amount.  This salary cap dip isn't a trend.  It's a one year thing.  It'll go back up.

    Other options:

    Hold his feet to the fire for fewer years, less money.  Someone signs him to a 6 year deal worth $12M per.  Happy now?

    Sign him to another one year deal for $5.5M.  "Prove it over a full season, Tuukka."  And he does.  And he walks away, unrestricted.  Happy now?

    Tell him to go F himself and encourage other owners to offer sheet him. Take the draft picks.  Enter the Goalie-Go-Round that teams like Philly are on.   Happy now?

    Bottom line:  One of the best goalies in the league is signed for many years to come.  We don't need to worry about the Bruins goaltending for two more presidential elections.  That's a long time.  No drafting of goalies at all, instead the picks can be used for skaters.

    The very bottom line:  There are a lot of things that go on behind the scenes that we don't ever know about.  Did Chiarelli offer too much and Rask agreed?  Did Rask say, "This is the deal.  This is the only thing I will accept.  No negotiations"?  Did Rask say he wanted to go play in a non-traditional market and Chiarelli had to blow him away to keep him?  We don't know.

    The absolute very bottom line:  It's a deal.  No use being upset about it.  It's not your money, and you don't have a crystal ball.  All we can do is hope that this very large contract works out well for the Bruins.

     



    Pretty much covered all the bases.  Good post.

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from days-of-Orr. Show days-of-Orr's posts

    Re: Rask Signed

    In response to shuperman's comment:

    Book,

    i dont wanna kill this bc ive already done it.  He had played 2 seasons stretched over the last 4.  Fatigue never an issue, we have never seen the guy play 65 gms.  He was fresh as a daisy.  His win lose record on this type of team isnt really that great.  If you only see roses outta this fine, good for you....i think he does not have enough established seasons.  Hes played skattered seasons with good numbers.  Emery just went 19-1 or something like that last yr as a backup.  I dont trust the small sample size.  call me an idiot all you want.  Im entitled to an opinion.  And will use recent history for goalies.  

    As for upgrades.  You dont think injuries happen?  You automatically assume that we walk through the season needing nothing.  Well sports medicine is good but not that good.  Upgrades can be as minor as adding a quality depth player.  Im not even mentioning the top 6 fwd we need after the year.  But maybe we can pkg marchand with kelly to squeeze some more room.   

    those fwds you mentioned are prime time fwds who are well established with more then 128 gms. Not sure how you can compare established, decorated franchise players to a goalie who never played a full year.  

    Again, you can think what you want.  I will smile and chuckle to myself if he goes down, we need any help at the deadline, next yr when we are signing no one.   I hate the deal.  Nothing you can put in a novel will change my mind.  I cant stand paying a goalie this money.  

    you are above name calling.  Cut it out.  I hate the deal, not you.  




    hard to build a team while taking injuries into consideration....

    PC'll cross that bridge if and when it happens....

    doubt if an extra 1m or so really matters when a key player goes down.... 

     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from Ronstar8. Show Ronstar8's posts

    Re: Rask Signed

    [/QUOTE]


    Look up winning percentages all time and tell me how many goalies have better numbers than Rask?  Look at where his career numbers fit all time?  Granted, he's played the equivalent of just over two years as a starter, but unlike a lot of guys with limited games played, you can't say Rask "got hot" like Steve Mason, and that his numbers are skewed or inconsistent.  Whenever he's been in, he's been consistently a very good to elite level goalie.  Take your head out of the oven. 

     

    I'm having flashbacks to all of the idiots who said the Bruins should have walked away from Tim Thomas the summer after he won a Vezina rather than give him a four year deal with a Cap hit of $5M.  Some guy got out of the penalty box after, what, 36 months in maximum security for closing his hand on the puck? suggested they should have hung on to Craig Anderson instead.  So they could "upgrade" elsewhere.

    Thomas's deal represented almost 9% of the Cap that year and made him the second highest paid player on teh team behind Chara.  If Chara was still making what he made in 2009, Rask would be teh second highest paid player on the team behind Chara.  Rask's deal is 10.8% of an artificiallly set cap number for next year that everyone expects to rise dramatically for the following year - that's by Malkin is signing his stupid deal, that's how Anaheim is locking up Perry and Getzlaf.  Within a year, this will be less than 9% of the Cap for a goalie who backstopped you to the Cup finals.  He could easily have been a Vezina finalist.  He's in his prime.  You're buying 7 years of UFA bargaining potential.

    One more thing for shupe's sake - goodbye upgrades?  Where do you want these upgrades?  Upgrade Krejci, Lucic, Marchand, Bergeron, Eriksson?  Chara and Seidenberg?  Because if you're talking about "upgrades" on the performance of those guys, I think you're talking about transforming the team in some very fundamental ways.  And if it's not those guys, you're talking about buying better deck chairs rather than fortify the hull before you take an arctic cruise.

    Lastly, for the Trade Subban! crowd.  He has an 8 year contract.  That doesn't mean he's in Boston for 7 years.  It means we know what they'll be paying for him as long as he's in Boston.

    [/QUOTE]

    Bang on, BB. 

    When Bergeron signs for 8 years, will people also be as nervous? 

    I like the deal. I like the player. Rask took a one year deal to show what he can do and he showed it. 

     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from stan17. Show stan17's posts

    Re: Rask Signed

    In response to abra-cadaver's comment:

    In response to Bookboy007's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

     

     Look at where his career numbers fit all time? 



     

     

    Product of the system.  Even a stiff like Alex Auld put up Vezina-like numbers in Boston's defensive "system" (with a worse D-core at that) years back.  Stick Rask on a team that cant play defense like Philly, and he is the one with the 2.78 GAA getting run out of town like Bryz right now.

    [/QUOTE]

    This is truly a silly statement.

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from chetgnat. Show chetgnat's posts

    Re: Rask Signed

    Not a fan of this deal. Too much too long (TMTL). Here's the bottom line:

    1 Cup - still a bad deal. could have done better with more flexibility

    2 Cups - a fair, good deal

    > 2 Cups - Chia is the best GM of all time and Tuukka's deal was a steal

    0 Cups - Chia threw his career away with this deal like Tyler with his last few keg parties. in fact maybe Chia was at those parties doing blow off whoker backs.

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share