[Signing] Bruins sign Tuukka Rask. 8 Years.. $7mil Per

[Clever_Iggy]

Chiarelli is taking a page from Paul Holmgren's playbook.

Terrible, terrible, terrible contract.

[albertGQ]

Originally Posted by $ven27

8 years? I thought only the team that originally drafted the player can sign them for 8?

You can re-sign a player for 8 years. But only sign one for 7 years

[rubecube]

Bruins are nearly 1.4M over the cap now with 13 forwards, 7 defencemen, and 2 goalies. They're screwed if they get into injury trouble.

EDIT: I think that's also taking Savard's LTIR relief into account.

[Parallex]

Awful, awful, awful deal for the Bruins... just brutal.

[jeffman]

Rask is an Elite goalie but the contract can screw them

[GreenLantern]

Geez... I expected right around what Quick got, but 7 mill cap hit?

Crazy.

[Murph]

For those stating the Bruins need to shed salary, no, they don't. With Savard on LTIR they'll be about $2M under the cap. With that roster, that's pretty impressive.

As for Rask's deal, yeah it's high, but it's not terrible. Probably about $1.5M too high.

[Fire]

Yikes. They better hope the cap goes up a lot the next few years and Rask doesn't start sucking after a couple of seasons.

[You Need a Thneed]

Originally Posted by albertGQ

You can re-sign a player for 8 years. But only sign one for 7 years

Someone correct me if I'm wrong:

The player has to have been on your roster at the previous trade deadline for you to sign a player to an 8 year contract.

However, If a player becomes an UFA, even their previous team cannot sign them to an 8 year deal. As soon as the July 1 deadline passes, and a player becomes a UFA, that extra year cannot be done.

[Makarov]

Well, if there is one goaltender in the world to give that type of contract to, it is Rask.

[Hockey_Ninja]

Imagine how much Lundqvist is going to want...

[Huntingwhale]

Not saying Rask isn't a great goalie, but that deal is ######ed.

[jg13]

there are at least 20 other teams in the league that would have signed him to the same contract.

[Jacks]

I know Rask is amazing but I would never want to sign a goalie to a long term, big money deal. No lesson learned from Luongo, Dipietro or Bryzgalov.

[Coach]

Yeah I would agree. Rask is phenomenal but wow. That's a lot of dough for a loooong time.

[moon]

That's a lot of money/term for any goalie and for me Rask isn't top 5.

It seems that is the price you have to give to keep the "stars" of your team but based on what we have seen with goalies and big money contracts lately I am not sure I want to be tied to that deal, especially when he didn't look all that much more impressive than Corey Crawford the past SCF.

[Enoch Root]

too much money, too much term

[Anduril]

No doubt, it's hard to deal with this much cash for one goalie even if he's as good as Rask. Not a knock on the player but surprised the Bruins would be throwing this much money.

[Bertuzzied]

I like Rask but that is insane. With that defence they could just put an average goalie in and still win it.

[Husky]

Horrible deal.

Rask is a very good goalie but Boston has a strong team. I do not think Rask is a Lundquist type goalie that on a bad team could basically get them to a playoff spot.

I would much prefer $7MM to a top end forward and have a 1a/b goalie for 2-3 million instead.