Use Rask as another bait?

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from Five4Fighting. Show Five4Fighting's posts

    Use Rask as another bait?

    Hear me out on this hypothetical. I want to first say I'm not trying to be like some on here and saying the Bruins should give up the farm to get some huge, unrealistic star player. I'm simply playing devil advocate here to see what some of your fantasy GMs would do if you had the option.

    Do you think PC should consider/float out there to GMs that he would "listen to" consideration for Tuukka Rask?

    Despite Rask not looking spectatular in net this year, he is still probably the best background goal tender in league. Tim Thomas is back to his Vezina form and looks to be going strong into the playoffs.

    Since PC already has publically stated the Toronto pick is up for grabs and since the Bruins seem like they could use a forward and a PMD does PC let teams know a very valuable goalie could be moved too? After all it seems quite a few teams (Washington and Philly to name two) are looking for a quality keeper, not to mention a lot of other teams would love to have a Rask as their starter.

    Would you potentially let the world know you have not one hot ticket item but TWO hot ticket item out there to make some big trades before the dealine in order to double your returns?

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

    Re: Use Rask as another bait?

    What do you do in 2 years when Thomas is old and is no longer a starter?
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from I-Like-Hockey. Show I-Like-Hockey's posts

    Re: Use Rask as another bait?

    If you call up any GM and mention Rask, he will probably play it cool but as soon as you hang up he would immediately start fistpumping.

    Any trade that deals Rask gives away wayyyy to much from the future for success now. If you want to deal away futures for commoditities do it with your Picks. Do not trade Tuuka it would serioulsy bite this organization in the rear if they ever did.

    Organizationally speaking no1 is ready in providence or the farm system anywhere to step into a full time NHL back up position. So your essentially dealing the only horse you got in that stable. On top of that you need to sign a backup goalie who will cost more $$ than Rask limiting anything you can do. Its  a no win to move this kid for the bruins.

    But yes teams would listen if you offered.
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from Bookboy007. Show Bookboy007's posts

    Re: Use Rask as another bait?

    In the good old days, maybe.  Back in the days when KPD was a cub reporter, you could go at teams and try to talk them into shakeup deals or deep change manouevers like, say, calling the Avs and saying look, you've got lots of great young scorers but no goaltender.  Keep building through the draft, take a top 5 pick and this guy most people agree will be a franchise goaltender for Matt Duchene and Milan Hejduk.  We'll throw in Mark Stuart and Blake Wheeler, you send us back a 2nd rounder this year and next.

    Duchene was a 3 overall.  If they think they can get someone similar with that pick, keep their salary level down, and solve their goaltending problems long term, that's a steal.  Meanwhile the Bruins would be able to play Duchene and Seguin together until I'm old and doddering - but they'd have a huge hole behind Thomas.
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from Stuke50. Show Stuke50's posts

    Re: Use Rask as another bait?

    Until you have bonafide second goalie, NO. You keep Rask. Period.
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from Bookboy007. Show Bookboy007's posts

    Re: Use Rask as another bait?

    Oh yeah, meant to add - in the good old days, you didn't worry about a cap.

    And ILH is bang on re: the biggest reason you don't trade Rask now - barring a deal that brings back a top young goaltending prospect in addition to whatever you're after for an immediate boost.

    I have no faith in any of our goaltending prospects.  I thought Dalton looked like he had a pro game, but Courchaine doesn't have pro talent and Schaefer was a waste of a good legal size paper.  Hutchinson can look good but then he gets lit up like Cheech and Chong - figuratively speaking.  He might develop into an NHLer, but I wouldn't gamble on it.  Thomas might play another two good seasons, it's true, but he's one injury away from leaving the Bruins in the hands of a three-headed fail monster if Rask isn't there.
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from Five4Fighting. Show Five4Fighting's posts

    Re: Use Rask as another bait?

    I agree with what everyone is saying here. I couldn't even think of who the best goalie in Providence would be to take Rask's spot. I too don't think they should trade Rask I just wanted to pose the question to see the response. I'm actually surprise a lot more of the board dwellers didn't call for Rask's head after the Detriot loss since they seem to call out Julien, PC, Wheeler, etc. when the Bruins lose even one game.

    I was curious to see what some people would give up just to bring the cup to Boston, because I think giving up Rask for a player would be like a one-year-all-in type of move basically saying you aren't looking to the future, just looking for one big push.
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from BBReigns. Show BBReigns's posts

    Re: Use Rask as another bait?

    I would absolutely put his name out there to see what you can get in return. I'd be stunned if this wasn't already done.  Then again, it's Chiarelli.

    You can always secure another starting NHL goalie.   To some degree, Julien's system, or really, any coach who institutes a defensive minded style, creates the foundation for good goaltending.

    And that's not take anything away from either Thomas or Rask.

    But, say in 3 years, Thomas is done, who is to say Boston can't sign a legit #1 goalie FA or have one drafted and developed by then?

    The way Thomas keeps himself in such good shape, I don't see him falling off the cliff here.

    He almost appears to be improving as his career moves forward.  Rare, but not an unheard of thing.

    Hasek was like this, too. And no, I am not syaing Thomas is Hasek.

    I am one of those people that thinks the goaltending we see nowadays is so good, you can find a legit starter anywhere in this league.

    The differentiator is team defense and coaching.

    When Niemi wins a Cup or Michael Leighton takes his team to a cup, or before that Marc Andre-Fleury (overrated), the NHL has morphed into a different face in terms of how the goaltending should be viewed.

    Generally, speaking, the goaltending is so impressive overall, compared to 20 years ago, there is a larger pool to pull from in this area.

    This does not include the goalies who are top 5 every year in this league. Those are the uber-elite.
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from asmaha. Show asmaha's posts

    Re: Use Rask as another bait?

    Rask is the #1 guy on the "don't trade" list, given salary/age/talent. He's a proven starter who could play out his entire career with one organization. The only thing to accept in return would be a Staal-Kesler-Perry type AND a proven young starter, and I don't see other clubs doing that.

    ...and I like your icon, but folks may get confused.
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from wallydouglas. Show wallydouglas's posts

    Re: Use Rask as another bait?

    One thing i disagree to is that Rask is a good backup goalie, he needs to play, he needs to be a starter, yes maybe in 2 years when we need him but, his contract expires after next year so honestly tell me, do you think he will resign here especially if hes still a backup ? NOPE, So I think your correct in PC should dangle him and see whats possible. Not only does PC have to think longterm so does Rask.
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from bigvig. Show bigvig's posts

    Re: Use Rask as another bait?

    You listen to ANY offer for ANY player, its that simple as a responsible, serious GM.  nobody is un-tradable.  NOBODY.
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from SanDogBrewin. Show SanDogBrewin's posts

    Re: Use Rask as another bait?

    In Response to Re: Use Rask as another bait?:[QUOTE]What do you do in 2 years when Thomas is old and is no longer a starter? Posted by KrayzieJoe[/QUOTE]

    Exactly the future is now and his name is Reggie Hammond no wait wrong movie. and his name is Tuukka Rask I meant to say.
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from stevegm. Show stevegm's posts

    Re: Use Rask as another bait?

    In Response to Re: Use Rask as another bait?:
    [QUOTE]I would absolutely put his name out there to see what you can get in return. I'd be stunned if this wasn't already done.  Then again, it's Chiarelli. You can always secure another starting NHL goalie.   To some degree, Julien's system, or really, any coach who institutes a defensive minded style, creates the foundation for good goaltending. And that's not take anything away from either Thomas or Rask. But, say in 3 years, Thomas is done, who is to say Boston can't sign a legit #1 goalie FA or have one drafted and developed by then? The way Thomas keeps himself in such good shape, I don't see him falling off the cliff here. He almost appears to be improving as his career moves forward.  Rare, but not an unheard of thing. Hasek was like this, too. And no, I am not syaing Thomas is Hasek. I am one of those people that thinks the goaltending we see nowadays is so good, you can find a legit starter anywhere in this league. The differentiator is team defense and coaching. When Niemi wins a Cup or Michael Leighton takes his team to a cup, or before that Marc Andre-Fleury (overrated), the NHL has morphed into a different face in terms of how the goaltending should be viewed. Generally, speaking, the goaltending is so impressive overall, compared to 20 years ago, there is a larger pool to pull from in this area. This does not include the goalies who are top 5 every year in this league. Those are the uber-elite.
    Posted by BBReigns[/QUOTE]

    Of course his names out there.  Any NHL GM looking as his tending situation should have already made an inquiry.
    It's not that the B's would be in any short term peril if Rask were dealt.  They'd have 2, 3 years to find a starter.  In this game....that's an eternity.
    Saying Rask is untradeable, is making the assumption, he's a star in waiting.  I think assuming that is a mistake at this point.  Although trading him, wouldn't be my first choice right now, there have been dozens of goalies who played extremely well in their first year, but never met expectation moving forward.
    If a good enough deal presented itself, PC would be nuts not to consider it. 
    The question is not whether the B's would consider moving Rask....it's what would it take to make PC pull the trigger. 
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from bridgemanusa. Show bridgemanusa's posts

    Re: Use Rask as another bait?

    As I posted in another thread, what about Rask for Halak (in some sort of combo deal including a  defensemen)? I now it would tie up a fair amount in cap space for goaltending but we could always revisit the "trade Timmy" threads next season. Halak has proven winning playoff experience and is still young, in fact I think he is better than Rask.
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from BBReigns. Show BBReigns's posts

    Re: Use Rask as another bait?

    In Response to Re: Use Rask as another bait?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Use Rask as another bait? : Of course his names out there.  Any NHL GM looking as his tending situation should have already made an inquiry. It's not that the B's would be in any short term peril if Rask were dealt.  They'd have 2, 3 years to find a starter.  In this game....that's an eternity. Saying Rask is untradeable, is making the assumption, he's a star in waiting.  I think assuming that is a mistake at this point.  Although trading him, wouldn't be my first choice right now, there have been dozens of goalies who played extremely well in their first year, but never met expectation moving forward. If a good enough deal presented itself, PC would be nuts not to consider it.  The question is not whether the B's would consider moving Rask....it's what would it take to make PC pull the trigger. 
    Posted by stevegm[/QUOTE]

    Name out there v.s. Chia pretending he's off the list are two different things.

    Rask, B's 1st rounder, Stuart and Wheeler for Sharp and Brian Campbell.

    John Davidson just traded for Halak. I highly doubt he's looking to quickly shuffle him back out of town.

    I guess you could do a Rask/Stuart/Wheeler thing for a Halak/Brewer/draft pick sort of a move just to acquire Brewer.




     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from I-Like-Hockey. Show I-Like-Hockey's posts

    Re: Use Rask as another bait?

    In Response to Re: Use Rask as another bait?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Use Rask as another bait? : Name out there v.s. Chia pretending he's off the list are two different things. Rask, B's 1st rounder, Stuart and Wheeler for Sharp and Brian Campbell. John Davidson just traded for Halak. I highly doubt he's looking to quickly shuffle him back out of town. I guess you could do a Rask/Stuart/Wheeler thing for a Halak/Brewer/draft pick sort of a move just to acquire Brewer.
    Posted by BBReigns[/QUOTE]


    God no.
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from BBReigns. Show BBReigns's posts

    Re: Use Rask as another bait?

    Why is that? 

    You keep Toronto's 1st rounder, immediately upgrade the PP, consistent goal scoring from the wing and puck moving ability, with two proven players with Cup experience and who are both still in their primes.

    Care to explain why that is a "god no"?

    I couldn't ask for a better situation as a B's fan.  Sharp is a 30 goal guy. 

    You enjoy seeing Mark Recchi at the point on the PP?
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from I-Like-Hockey. Show I-Like-Hockey's posts

    Re: Use Rask as another bait?

    In Response to Re: Use Rask as another bait?:
    [QUOTE]Why is that?  You keep Toronto's 1st rounder, immediately upgrade the PP, consistent goal scoring from the wing and puck moving ability, with two proven players with Cup experience and who are both still in their primes. Care to explain why that is a "god no"? I couldn't ask for a better situation as a B's fan.  Sharp is a 30 goal guy.  You enjoy seeing Mark Recchi at the point on the PP?
    Posted by BBReigns[/QUOTE]


    For starters Campbell makes more $$ than Chara.

    Sharp is an awesome talent in his prime at 4.2mil. As well. No way CHI moves him and even if they do at the end of 2012 considering he keeps it up he'll be 6mil or more and Bos cant afford that.

    Basically theres no way the cap works, CHI will not move Sharp, and Campbell svcks and makes more money than anyone on the team.
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from SoxFanInIL. Show SoxFanInIL's posts

    Re: Use Rask as another bait?

    As much as I'd hate to see it, as a GM you have to consider every potential trade.

    That said, this team has already traded Ken Dryden and Bernie Parent.  If you've never heard of them, ask your Dad.

    If Chia could get a huge impact player back in a deal involving Rask, he has to think about it.  While I personally still think Rask has twice the talent TT has, both goalies do in fact benefit from Julien's system.  Seeing how this team could easily disappoint in the playoffs again, Julien could be gone.  Then what?  If you bring in a run and gun coach, you might have very different opinions of Rask and/or TT when they have to face more scoring opportunities.

    I will totally agree that Rask is absolutely not cut out to sit on the bench. This is not Alex Auld or Manny Legace... he's a starter.  This year he has been horribly mismanaged, and if they are going to continue to bury him on the bench then they might as well cash in now.  I would enjoy watching him anchor another franchise, though.

    Its also true that many teams now manage the cap by skimping on goaltending, Detroit-Philly-Chicago-Washington, etc.  This is the main reason I have so much trouble with TT's contract.  If the B's want to cash in on Rask and ride TT until he runs out of gas (the gauge is looking closer to empty already) then that's a strategy I could understand even if I didn't like it.
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from BBReigns. Show BBReigns's posts

    Re: Use Rask as another bait?

    In Response to Re: Use Rask as another bait?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Use Rask as another bait? : For starters Campbell makes more $$ than Chara. Sharp is an awesome talent in his prime at 4.2mil. As well. No way CHI moves him and even if they do at the end of 2012 considering he keeps it up he'll be 6mil or more and Bos cant afford that. Basically theres no way the cap works, CHI will not move Sharp, and Campbell svcks and makes more money than anyone on the team.
    Posted by I-Like-Hockey[/QUOTE]

    What does CHi not wanting to move Sharp have to do with "god no"?

    That makes no sense. Are you a Hawks fan?

    Just shrink the deal down to Rask/1st rd pick and Wheeler for Sharp then.

    Chicago was lucky to win the Cup last year with basically a one hit wonder in net and facing Mike Leighton on the flip side.  They ain't going anywhere now or in the future with what they have, so Rask and a 1st would absolutely be seen as a tempting from their perspective.

    Chia can just dangle Stuart and a prospect to get the puck moving defenseman elsewhere.

    Boston can absolutely afford Sharp by trying to deal Ryder in the offseason.

    Basically, Horton and Ryder are the same player.  They are streaky wingers.

    This team isn't going anywhere without a wing boost with scoring goals consistently and a PP that can be consistent/improve from what it is.

    This team doesn't draw enough penalties and they don't score enough on the PP.

    The penalties come from skating.  Get a skater/scorer in here on the wing.
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from Bookboy007. Show Bookboy007's posts

    Re: Use Rask as another bait?

    Maybe the last 30 years have made me doubt that it's easy to draft, develop, or sign a top flight goaltender, but I think you're crazy if you think it will be as easy as just going out and finding someone in the next three years.  The Leafs drafted Rask in 2005 - 5 1/2 seasons ago! - as the best goalie not playing in the NHL, and he's still not a full-fledged starter.  Carey Price was the only goalie drafted higher that year, and he's only slightly ahead of Rask.  High end goalies drafted in 2004 - like Al Montoya, Devan Dubnyk, Marek Schwartz and Cory Schneider are just now getting to the NHL or just starting to take on starter's responsibilities.  You can go back over a decade without finding 5 goalies who've taken fewer than 5 years to develop.

    As for the trade front, there are probably 15-20 teams in the league that are wandering in the goaltender wilderness wondering when their saviour will arrive.  Tampa Bay was a Cup winner until they let their top netminder go - then they were an also ran. That top goaltender flopped in his new surroundings and has won nothing since. Carolina was a mediocre team with Martin Gerber in net, a Cup champion with Cam Ward - and Gerber can't crack the Oilers lineup.  Fleury is over-rated, but not because he doesn't have mad talent.  He's a head-case.  Chicago won in spite of Niemi - and San Jose has, until recently, been suffering the consequences of not figuring that out. The Bruins are getting high end picks from Toronto in part because Leafs goaltending has been suspect.

    This conventional wisdom that goaltending can be had on the cheap is a statistical blip.  Leighton/Boucher weren't the reason the Flyers made the finals even though they were playing out of their minds, but they sure were a big reason Philly almost missed the playoffs.  Chicago won because they had no injuries and because they played another team that won in spite of the quality of their goalies.  Put Lundqvist on the Flyers and they take the Hawks.

    The whole idea is build a good enough team that the goalie doesn't have to be great - just good enough.  But if you have a Rask, you can have a great goalie cheap enough that when you go head to head with a Niemi-backed team, you have an incredible advantage.
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from BobbyOrrAlumni. Show BobbyOrrAlumni's posts

    Re: Use Rask as another bait?

       
      Don't trade Rask !!!!
      
      Ottawa is anxious  to make a trade...any trade to dump salaries and start the rebuilding process.

      Offer Stuart, Ryder, First and TOR 1st round, Bruins 2nd round for Spezza and KArlson.

      Gives both teams what they need !
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from BBReigns. Show BBReigns's posts

    Re: Use Rask as another bait?

    In Response to Re: Use Rask as another bait?:
    [QUOTE]Maybe the last 30 years have made me doubt that it's easy to draft, develop, or sign a top flight goaltender, but I think you're crazy if you think it will be as easy as just going out and finding someone in the next three years.  The Leafs drafted Rask in 2005 - 5 1/2 seasons ago! - as the best goalie not playing in the NHL, and he's still not a full-fledged starter.  Carey Price was the only goalie drafted higher that year, and he's only slightly ahead of Rask.  High end goalies drafted in 2004 - like Al Montoya, Devan Dubnyk, Marek Schwartz and Cory Schneider are just now getting to the NHL or just starting to take on starter's responsibilities.  You can go back over a decade without finding 5 goalies who've taken fewer than 5 years to develop. As for the trade front, there are probably 15-20 teams in the league that are wandering in the goaltender wilderness wondering when their saviour will arrive.  Tampa Bay was a Cup winner until they let their top netminder go - then they were an also ran. That top goaltender flopped in his new surroundings and has won nothing since. Carolina was a mediocre team with Martin Gerber in net, a Cup champion with Cam Ward - and Gerber can't crack the Oilers lineup.  Fleury is over-rated, but not because he doesn't have mad talent.  He's a head-case.  Chicago won in spite of Niemi - and San Jose has, until recently, been suffering the consequences of not figuring that out. The Bruins are getting high end picks from Toronto in part because Leafs goaltending has been suspect. This conventional wisdom that goaltending can be had on the cheap is a statistical blip.  Leighton/Boucher weren't the reason the Flyers made the finals even though they were playing out of their minds, but they sure were a big reason Philly almost missed the playoffs.  Chicago won because they had no injuries and because they played another team that won in spite of the quality of their goalies.  Put Lundqvist on the Flyers and they take the Hawks. The whole idea is build a good enough team that the goalie doesn't have to be great - just good enough.  But if you have a Rask, you can have a great goalie cheap enough that when you go head to head with a Niemi-backed team, you have an incredible advantage.
    Posted by Bookboy007[/QUOTE]

    Isn't what you just posted the reason why Chia could use Rask as that chip, though?

    My issue is basically centered around the idea that Chia has made all these good trades (someone started a thread the other day noting these), and maybe he'll again not really be aggressive making that high reward deal that puts them over the top.

    I don't want a deal that's lukewarm.

    I want the deal that rattles the cage.

    Maybe some fans see this differently?  I.E., maybe some fans think Boston is very close with a minor tweak and some feel a major tweak or two is needed?

    I am of the latter.

    Anyway, Rask could be that chip puts Boston into that Detroit level of deep playoff contention capability.

    Right now, this is a one round team with Round 2 in question.

    Anything further is Thomas out of his skull like Ranford in '90.
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from I-Like-Hockey. Show I-Like-Hockey's posts

    Re: Use Rask as another bait?

    In Response to Re: Use Rask as another bait?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Use Rask as another bait? : What does CHi not wanting to move Sharp have to do with "god no"? That makes no sense. Are you a Hawks fan? Just shrink the deal down to Rask/1st rd pick and Wheeler for Sharp then. Chicago was lucky to win the Cup last year with basically a one hit wonder in net and facing Mike Leighton on the flip side.  They ain't going anywhere now or in the future with what they have, so Rask and a 1st would absolutely be seen as a tempting from their perspective. Chia can just dangle Stuart and a prospect to get the puck moving defenseman elsewhere. Boston can absolutely afford Sharp by trying to deal Ryder in the offseason. Basically, Horton and Ryder are the same player.  They are streaky wingers. This team isn't going anywhere without a wing boost with scoring goals consistently and a PP that can be consistent/improve from what it is. This team doesn't draw enough penalties and they don't score enough on the PP. The penalties come from skating.  Get a skater/scorer in here on the wing.
    Posted by BBReigns[/QUOTE]


    If your talking just Sharp then its A-ok with me. Yeah I am a Hawks fan but im a hardcore bruins fan. I like both teams.

    Your original deal included Campbel. That contract is absolutely terrible 'hence' the  "God No". I was including Campbell if you had him there is no way you can Resign, Krejci  and Sharp. See it gets very complicated.

    If its just sharp go for it. But im all out against brian campbell. I bet even offering to take him in a trade actually makes the deal easier for the hawks to stomache, than dealing Sharp alone.
     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from BBReigns. Show BBReigns's posts

    Re: Use Rask as another bait?

    Umm, I am well aware of the contract situations. It's why Chiarelli is in this position to begin with.

    Chia could also deal a Ference. Ference could go now or Ryder's deal expires at the end of the year, clearing full contract space for a Campbell contract.

    That's more than enough to offset Campbell's contract.  Not to mention, the 7.1 million cap hit isn't on Boston's books the rest of 2011.

    The issue would be moving forward into next year.

    Do fans want to win a Cup or what?

    I guess we disagree on who would help and how close Boston is.  This team isn't that close. They are teetering on having a legit chance with the goal tending and defense.

    TB, Philly, Montreal, Pitt, etc, would all give Boston a tough time in the East.


     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share