The Bruins got an unexpected opportunity to hit the reset button over the holidays, as they wound up with a COVID-induced two-week break. They have come back strong so far, as they exploded for nine goals in a pair of wins over the Sabres and Red Wings this weekend.
This is also a good time to reset the Tuukka Rask conversation. If you missed it, we actually got a fairly notable update on Rask’s seemingly inevitable return to the Bruins last week. Coach Bruce Cassidy put an actual timeline on it and laid out a tentative plan, saying that Rask could be ready for game action as soon as next week when the team gets back from its road trip to Tampa Bay and Washington.
There are of course still plenty of details to be worked out. Rask still needs to officially sign a contract, first and foremost. Then he and the Bruins will need to decide if a conditioning stint with AHL Providence should be part of the return plan. Lastly, the Bruins will have to figure out what Rask’s return means for current goalies Linus Ullmark and Jeremy Swayman. The easiest and most likely option remains rolling with Rask and Ullmark at the NHL level and sending Swayman down to Providence, as he would not need to go through waivers.
There are some clear pros to bringing Rask back, but there could be some potential cons as well. Let’s run through them.
Pro 1: Rask could be a real upgrade in goal
On the surface, the Bruins’ goaltending numbers look pretty good this season. Their .913 team save percentage ranks 11th in the NHL, and their 2.55 goals against per game is sixth. A deeper dive tells us that the Bruins’ team defense has helped those numbers, and that there is still room for improvement in net.
The Bruins are giving up the fifth-fewest shots on goal per game in the NHL and the fewest high-danger chances per game. But they rank just 20th in high-danger save percentage as a team, with Swayman ranking 21st among the 68 goalies who have played the most minutes and Ullmark way down at 58th.
Evolving-Hockey has the Bruins first in five-on-five expected goals against, but they’re eighth in actual five-on-five goals against. Swayman and Ullmark rank 30th and 35th in goals saved above expected at +0.10 and -0.99, respectively. Basically, they’ve been league-average goalies who have benefited from playing behind a very good defensive team.
There’s no guarantee Rask will be better than that. The Rask of last season wasn’t. But we know now that the Rask of last season was battling a deteriorating hip all year, eventually resulting in the torn labrum that forced him to miss time late in the regular season and undergo surgery in the summer.
The Rask of two years ago -- the last time he was healthy -- was a lot better than that, though. That Rask ranked third in goals saved above expected and third in high-danger save percentage. Oh, and he finished second in Vezina Trophy voting. If the Bruins get a healthy Rask who’s anywhere close to those 2019-20 levels, that’s a clear upgrade.
Pro 2: Rask should be cheap
Rask himself told The Greg Hill Show in August that he “will be a cheap goalie” for the Bruins. He has made it clear all along that his priority and strong preference is to play for the Bruins. There has not been any indication that’s changed, or that he’s suddenly decided to shop around his services in search of the highest bidder.
What “cheap” actually means remains to be seen. Something around $1 million would be a steal. Something around $2 million would still be very good value, and would still leave the Bruins with enough cap space to make a meaningful move or two before the trade deadline.
If “cheap” means $3 or $4 million, suddenly the discussion changes a bit. Combined with Ullmark’s $5 million salary, that becomes a lot of money spent on goaltending when the Bruins have more pressing needs to address.
Pro 3: The Bruins might need three goalies
The Bruins began January with 56 games still to play, and 119 days in which to play them (if the regular season isn’t extended). They play 16 games in 31 days in January. They’re scheduled to close out the season with 29 games in 60 days in March and April. They hope their six postponed December games will all be moved to the open part of February that had been set aside for the Olympics.
Ullmark and Swayman have probably gotten too much rest through the first three months of the season. But from here on, there is going to be a lot of opportunity for wear and tear. Without Rask in the fold, Kyle Keyser would be the next goalie up if something happened to either Ullmark or Swayman. Keyser has never played an NHL game.
Even if Rask is unable to reach a Vezina level of play, having another proven, capable goalie will provide an extra -- and possibly necessary -- level of security for the Bruins over what’s sure to be a hectic four-plus months.
Con 1: Sending Swayman to Providence may not be what’s best for him
The Bruins don’t believe sending Swayman down will hurt his development. He’ll play plenty there. He’ll get to continue to work on things like rebound control that he’s struggled with at times this season.
But there’s always a risk of mental disappointment. Swayman has shown he can play in the NHL. Even if he hasn’t been as great this season as he was in 10 games last year, he’s still been league-average at worst. He’d have a spot on most NHL rosters fairly comfortably.
Swayman has said all the right things to this point -- that he’s happy to see Rask around, and that he just wants what’s best for the Bruins -- and you would expect he’ll continue to do that if and when he gets sent down. But you’d have to imagine there would be at least some level of a letdown, whether he acknowledges it or not.
Jack Studnicka might be a cautionary tale here. Studnicka was one of the Bruins’ 12 best forwards in training camp and preseason this year, but he started the season in Providence because other guys would have to be exposed on waivers to be sent down and he wouldn’t.
Studnicka got off to a slow start and currently has 11 points (4 goals, 7 assists) in 16 games, which is fourth on the P-Bruins in points per game and is below his own previous production at the AHL level. That can’t be entirely chalked up to disappointment over being sent down, but that could be a factor.
Con 2: Sending Swayman to Providence may not be what’s best for the Bruins
Obviously the ideal scenario for the Bruins is that Rask and Ullmark both play well in the NHL and give the Bruins a top tandem, and Swayman plays well in the AHL and continues to develop nicely.
But what happens if Rask struggles out of the gate? He’s coming off major surgery and hasn’t played since the spring. And what happens if Ullmark also isn’t playing great at that time? He has certainly played better recently, but that slow start to the season that he had wasn’t that long ago.
While Swayman and Ullmark have been fairly even all things considered this season, there have been times when Swayman has been better. His high-danger save percentage also remains markedly better (.853 to .788).
If Swayman, Ullmark and Rask were all given equal opportunities at the NHL level going forward, it’s not hard to envision a scenario where Swayman performs the best. And if Rask and/or Ullmark struggle, and Swayman plays well in Providence, it’s not hard to envision an outcry from fans to bring Swayman back.
If that situation were to arise, the Bruins would have to decide how much time they’d be willing to give Rask and Ullmark to figure things out. While they’re in the eighth playoff spot in the East right now, their postseason berth is by no means a lock.
If they think Swayman might give them the best chance to win, they would have to give serious thought to bringing him back. And that could create an awkward situation where one of Rask or Ullmark sits for an extended period of time.
Con 3: The Bruins could become too attached to Rask in the playoffs again
The Bruins probably stuck with Rask too long last spring. It was understandable to an extent. He was the established veteran. Swayman was the promising but unproven rookie. But Rask was also playing hurt, and it became increasingly clear that he wasn’t anywhere close to 100%.
It’s fair to wonder if the loyalty that led the Bruins to stick with Rask in 2021 will make him the unquestioned No. 1 again in 2022. Obviously if Rask is playing great and is clearly the Bruins’ best option, then there’s nothing to debate.
But if Rask never quite gets back to being himself and Swayman or Ullmark looks healthier and better, the Bruins shouldn’t feel they owe Rask the No. 1 job. This should be treated as a true best-man-wins competition, especially come playoffs, but it’s not always easy to go against personal relationships and loyalties that have been built up over a decade-plus.
All stats from Natural Stat Trick, Evolving-Hockey or NHL.com.