Trade Tukka Tonight

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from nitemare-38. Show nitemare-38's posts

    Re: Trade Tukka Tonight

    In Response to Re: Trade Tukka Tonight:
    Don't be dramatic, it's a bad idea and people are saying so. Why trade Tuukka for something the Bruins can get on the free agent market or from their own system (depth defensmen and forwards)?  It makes no sense. You could trade Rask, but only if you are bringing back something more valuable to the team than a young talented goalie who has already had a Vezina caliber season under his belt and has shown he can be a top goalie in the league.  Is anyone offering that? Look, Tuukka is a backup goalie.  A REALLY, REALLY talented backup goalie, but a backup goalie nonetheless.  If you could trade Tuukka and a 2nd round pick for a top 20 pick AND a likely top five pick in 2012, then you wouldn't even consider it?  I am pretty sure that Cam and Chia would (consider it, that is).... And it is true that people on this board want to protect Rask, like he was either 1) their own child or 2) actually reading these boards and no one wants to hurt his feelings. I like Tuukka and I think that he will be a Bruin for years to come.  But it is POSSIBLE that he is traded this summer and it is ALSO POSSIBLE that he is traded for current and/or future draft picks.  This is the last year that he is a RFA and he will be due a huge bump in salary.  Thus, I believe that the Bruins will consider trade offers for Rask.
    Posted by Bigpapa1977


    I think PC learned his lesson about THINKING about trading away his so called backup goalie!
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from red75. Show red75's posts

    Re: Trade Tukka Tonight

    I was trying to think of any scenario in which I'd trade Tuukka tonight in a reasonable trade that is beneficial for both squads. The only one I could think of would be Tuukka and the 9th, to Florida for Jacob Markstrom, the 3rd overall and Kulikov, and even then I have doubts.
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from dezaruchi. Show dezaruchi's posts

    Re: Trade Tukka Tonight

    In Response to Re: Trade Tukka Tonight:
    In Response to Re: Trade Tukka Tonight : Don't be dramatic, it's a bad idea and people are saying so. Why trade Tuukka for something the Bruins can get on the free agent market or from their own system (depth defensmen and forwards)?  It makes no sense. You could trade Rask, but only if you are bringing back something more valuable to the team than a young talented goalie who has already had a Vezina caliber season under his belt and has shown he can be a top goalie in the league.  Is anyone offering that?
    Posted by Fletcher1

    Spot on Fletch.I can never figure out why some posters feel slighted when others/most disagree with their ideas.This particular poster likes to post "rumours" that he reads about on sites that are less reputable than the National Enquirer and then is upset when people question his "ideas". If I sell you a bag of crap by telling you it's candy, I won't be upset when you say it doesn't taste good.
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from dezaruchi. Show dezaruchi's posts

    Re: Trade Tukka Tonight

    In Response to Re: Trade Tukka Tonight:
    Don't be dramatic, it's a bad idea and people are saying so. Why trade Tuukka for something the Bruins can get on the free agent market or from their own system (depth defensmen and forwards)?  It makes no sense. You could trade Rask, but only if you are bringing back something more valuable to the team than a young talented goalie who has already had a Vezina caliber season under his belt and has shown he can be a top goalie in the league.  Is anyone offering that? Look, Tuukka is a backup goalie.  A REALLY, REALLY talented backup goalie, but a backup goalie nonetheless.  If you could trade Tuukka and a 2nd round pick for a top 20 pick AND a likely top five pick in 2012, then you wouldn't even consider it?  I am pretty sure that Cam and Chia would (consider it, that is).... And it is true that people on this board want to protect Rask, like he was either 1) their own child or 2) actually reading these boards and no one wants to hurt his feelings. I like Tuukka and I think that he will be a Bruin for years to come.  But it is POSSIBLE that he is traded this summer and it is ALSO POSSIBLE that he is traded for current and/or future draft picks.  This is the last year that he is a RFA and he will be due a huge bump in salary.  Thus, I believe that the Bruins will consider trade offers for Rask.
    Posted by Bigpapa1977

    Bigpapa, on the one hand you're calling Rask a back-up goalie and on the other hand you're saying he's due for "a huge bump in salary". Well which is it because I can't think of too many backups that deserve a huge raise.......
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from dezaruchi. Show dezaruchi's posts

    Re: Trade Tukka Tonight

    In Response to Re: Trade Tukka Tonight:
    I was trying to think of any scenario in which I'd trade Tuukka tonight in a reasonable trade that is beneficial for both squads. The only one I could think of would be Tuukka and the 9th, to Florida for Jacob Markstrom, the 3rd overall and Kulikov, and even then I have doubts.
    Posted by red75

    Red,at least you've proposed a  deal that makes some sense for both sides.Some of these other proposed deals  stop just short of paying another team to task Rask off of our hands...........
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from red75. Show red75's posts

    Re: Trade Tukka Tonight

    Thanks Dez. I'm not adverse to trading Rask completely. But the return would have to be reasonable. My proposal would get the Bruins one of the top two goaltending prospects in the league(though coming off an injury), a top three pick, and an NHL ready mobile D, for a top ten pick and a franchise goalie (yes, a franchise goalie). Some of the proposals I've seen either give Rask away for nothing, or rob the other team blind.
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from Bigpapa1977. Show Bigpapa1977's posts

    Re: Trade Tukka Tonight

    Bigpapa, on the one hand you're calling Rask a back-up goalie and on the other hand you're saying he's due for "a huge bump in salary". Well which is it because I can't think of too many backups that deserve a huge raise.......

    You are absolutely correct, I should have clarified.  He is a backup goalie for us, but he would be a starter with another team.  Thus, we will have to bump up his salary if we want to keep him (or someone else will sign him as a RFA).

    TT has been the best goalie in the league for two out of the last three years, is it not reasonable that that he will play at a high level for three or four more years?  Is it also not reasonable that the B's would be better off with a top flight, young top six forward or top 4 defenceman as opposed to Rask? 
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from dezaruchi. Show dezaruchi's posts

    Re: Trade Tukka Tonight

    In Response to Re: Trade Tukka Tonight:
    Thanks Dez. I'm not adverse to trading Rask completely. But the return would have to be reasonable. My proposal would get the Bruins one of the top two goaltending prospects in the league(though coming off an injury), a top three pick, and an NHL ready mobile D, for a top ten pick and a franchise goalie (yes, a franchise goalie). Some of the proposals I've seen either give Rask away for nothing, or rob the other team blind.
    Posted by red75

    I'm with you Red in that I don't mind Rask being traded for something that makes sense.Some of these posters think Rask should be dealt for nothing just because he doesn't like being a back-up. We've seen these past 2 seasons that you might NEED both goalies at some point(or all) of the season.Boston has the best tandem in the league for 6.5mill. Why anyone would want to change that is beyond me.
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from red75. Show red75's posts

    Re: Trade Tukka Tonight

    True Dez, I like Markstrom, because you could bring in a backup for next season, and by the time Thomas is ready to give up the top spot, Markstrom could well be ready to take the starter spot, with possibly more longterm upside than Rask. Whereas Rask may get Florida in the playoffs this season.

    Plus Kulikov could be an inexpensive potential upgrade on Kaberle. Basically trading the 9th for Markstrom, and Rask for Kulikov and the third.

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from Orrthebest. Show Orrthebest's posts

    Re: Trade Tukka Tonight

    Why would another team want to trade for Tuukka Rask right now when he is about to have surgery to repair a torn meniscus in his knee?  It has apparently been bothering him for most of the current season.

    http://twitter.com/#!/GlobeKPD
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from dc-bruins-fan. Show dc-bruins-fan's posts

    Re: Trade Tukka Tonight

    To be fair, there's a great chance that Edmonton's first pick next year will be top 3. Getting that back for Rask would be adding value to the franchise. We obviously open up a hole, but I still think we'd get more if we got a top 3 pick (likely, but not a guarantee). Whether it's worth it to open a hole just to get stronger, when you're already the strongst, I suppose is also debtable.
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from Olsonicator. Show Olsonicator's posts

    Re: Trade Tukka Tonight

    fail thread. Tuuka isn't going anywhere.
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from beantowngm15. Show beantowngm15's posts

    Re: Trade Tukka Tonight

    If I were to trade Rask (I don't want to, but if the offer is something that blows me away I'd do it), I would ask for AT LEAST a top 5 pick, a very talented goalie prospect who isn't quite ready yet but could slide into the backup role (Red I liked your suggestion of Markstrom), a talented D or forward prospect who could be our #6 this year but probably a star #1 in the future or, in the case of a forward, a guy who could be on our third line this year but will probably be a star on the 1st line in the future, and a later pick like a 3rd or 4th rounder. As in (and this is for no specific team, just an example of prospects) Jacob Markstrom, Jordan Eberle, 1st from Edmonton/Colorado/Florida/New Jersey/NYI (I'd take RNH/Huberdau/Larsson/Couturier/Landeskog), and a 3rd or 4th from Chicago.
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from nitemare-38. Show nitemare-38's posts

    Re: Trade Tukka Tonight

    In Response to Re: Trade Tukka Tonight:
    Bigpapa, on the one hand you're calling Rask a back-up goalie and on the other hand you're saying he's due for "a huge bump in salary". Well which is it because I can't think of too many backups that deserve a huge raise....... You are absolutely correct, I should have clarified.  He is a backup goalie for us , but he would be a starter with another team.  Thus, we will have to bump up his salary if we want to keep him (or someone else will sign him as a RFA). TT has been the best goalie in the league for two out of the last three years, is it not reasonable that that he will play at a high level for three or four more years?  Is it also not reasonable that the B's would be better off with a top flight, young top six forward or top 4 defenceman as opposed to Rask? 
    Posted by Bigpapa1977


    Roloson is 41! Say goodbye to that theory!
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from Bigpapa1977. Show Bigpapa1977's posts

    Re: Trade Tukka Tonight

    is it not reasonable that that he will play at a high level for three or four more years?

    Roloson is 41! Say goodbye to that theory!

    Sorry, I was using a double negative while asking a question (probably grammatically incorrect).  I meant "Why isn't it reasonable to assume that he will play at a high level for three or four more years?"  I agree with you.
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from nitemare-38. Show nitemare-38's posts

    Re: Trade Tukka Tonight

    In Response to Re: Trade Tukka Tonight:
    is it not reasonable that that he will play at a high level for three or four more years? Roloson is 41! Say goodbye to that theory! Sorry, I was using a double negative while asking a question (probably grammatically incorrect).  I meant "Why isn't it reasonable to assume that he will play at a high level for three or four more years?"  I agree with you.
    Posted by Bigpapa1977


    I just don't think it's reasonable to trade away the future unless it's for an immediate impact. Ex. The B's get the rights to a Shea Weber sort of thing. IF the B's didn't just come off a championship season & they were about to lose a lot of core players like Chicago did. I'd be more in tune with the trading Rask option. I think now as Champs they can afford to hold off at least for another season. See how the team does at least until Christmas before you trade away the future of your most important position.
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from Fletcher1. Show Fletcher1's posts

    Re: Trade Tukka Tonight

    In Response to Re: Trade Tukka Tonight:
    In Response to Re: Trade Tukka Tonight : Spot on Fletch.I can never figure out why some posters feel slighted when others/most disagree with their ideas.This particular poster likes to post "rumours" that he reads about on sites that are less reputable than the National Enquirer and then is upset when people question his "ideas". If I sell you a bag of crap by telling you it's candy, I won't be upset when you say it doesn't taste good.
    Posted by dezaruchi


    Exactly Dez.  Especially when you use your half-baked idea to start a new thread, which is literally asking for feedback.

    Papa, let's not assume that every 41 year old goalie is going to have a great playoff run like Roloson did (and he lost, by the way, largely because the younger goalie across from him was better).

    Furthermore, I can't believe that anyone would want to trade Tuukka for draft picks?  Draft picks?  If everything went exceptionally well with the draft you could hope and pray that a draft pick turned into a...Tuukka Rask.  Five years down the road.

    Why would the Bruins want draft picks so badly?  Are we in a rebuild now?  I thought this roster just won the Cup, is young, and needs a great young goalie to take the reigns soon from Thomas. 

    What more could we want out of a draft pick than what we already have!?  Keep Rask.
     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share