When Bruins head coach Bruce Cassidy took to his pregame press conference and announced that Tuukka Rask would be scratched from his start about an hour or so before Saturday's puck drop against the Canadiens, I knew what was coming.
To his credit, Cassidy did his best to clarify that Rask's absence from the game (a 2-1 overtime win for the Bruins) was not due to anything particularly damning, but that the 30-year-old Rask was dealing with a 'very, very minor injury' and that they were being cautious.
Still, I knew the annual Tuukka Rask Trashstorm was about to make its way to Twitter. And if we know this story tends to go, it was about to come crashing into Twitter user @_TyAnderson (hey, that's me!) and his previously unsuspecting mentions.
"Tuukka's soft. He's still mentally weak. This is the kind of fragile stuff that the Bruins cannot afford for $7 million per season! They shoulda kept Martin Jones because 2016!"
It was as predictable as Claude Julien complaining about the officials after a Bruins-Canadiens game.
But not even for a second did we give any sort of credence to the idea that Rask actually was nursing an injury, and that the Bruins were being legitimately cautious with a piece they'll surely need to perform at a high level come April, May, and if they're lucky, June. You know, which is exactly what we all agreed to do when the Black and Gold decided to scratch defenseman Matt Grzelcyk with similar rationale last week, by the way.
By now, the reality of the situation is clear: Rask, barring a matching of Tim Thomas' 2011 run (seems reasonable), is never quite going to get a fair shake in this town.
In the (relatively short) time that I've been with EEI, I believe that I've written an 'In Defense of Tuukka' column about five times. I've even written plenty of 'Tuukka Rask is not good and that's concerning!' blogs and columns. While the varying tones of those stories can be misconstrued as inconsistent, it's important to note that I've dealt in facts throughout every one of those stories. I find your emotional hang-ups regarding a person's ability to play professional hockey while suffering from food poisoning (have you ever had food poisoning? It's a nightmare that leaves you wishing for death) and the fate of the 2014 Team Finland Olympic squad to be bizarre, I admit, but that's your right.
But can we for just one moment, jump into my world and deal in some facts?
Let's start with the obvious one: Rask allegedly 'bailing' on a 5 p.m. Saturday night game against the Canadiens would not show an ounce of the 'mental weakness' you throw around like it's still 2010. Forget about the rivalry (you should do just that, by the way, because it absolutely sucks eggs right now) and the name of the team on the other bench and this game is as meaningful as a holiday matinee against the Coyotes.
If that game against the Canadiens was still an 'important' must-start game in your mind, that's because this sport is not important enough for you to look at the standings.
You're also conveniently ignoring the fact that Rask started the first three games of this season series, which came when the Canadiens were still clinging to the idea of a postseason prayer, and grabbed wins in all three while posting a .935 save percentage. Your decision to ignore a situation in which Rask has established obvious success that completely eliminates any shred of legitimacy your argument may have, while infuriating, is something I'm used to at this point when slinging outdated narratives.
But in case all of those facts are not enough for you, here's another: Cassidy himself acknowledged the season series finale against the Habs as a 'swing game' in the sense that it could've gone to Anton Khudobin just as easily as it could've gone to Rask.
The coach of the effing team didn't even consider that game a must-start for his franchise netminder!
Don't fall for it, though, because Rask's injury comes in the midst of a slump featuring just four wins and an .888 save percentage in his last seven games. It's all one big sham and Rask is simply ducking the spotlight of his cold streak, you see. Rask, a goaltender that has played the most games in the NHL since 2013, fakes all of his injuries when things get tough. That groin injury he battled through late in the regular season and through the playoffs last year? Massive conspiracy. That May 9, 2017 groin surgery performed by Dr. Peter Asnis? Don't believe it for a second!
And don't you dare even allow yourself for a second to think that that injury may have been suffered sometime during the slump in which Rask experienced a noticeable and massive dropoff from the run he had been on for the past three months.
...Or, just for one more moment, let's return to reality and toy with the idea that this injury is real.
It would in no world make sense for the Bruins, a team with an 18-point lead on a playoff spot and just six points behind the Lightning for the East's top seed (and with three games in hand), to run the risk of Rask worsening his condition in early March. It would be a borderline fireable offense, especially when you're talking about a backup that's had as good of a season as Anton Khudobin. (Also: You Anti-Rask people should be thrilled every time he misses a game, as it ensures that the Bruins will not choke, right? But that's an argument for another day...)
It's similar to the theory behind your acceptance of Patrice Bergeron's current absence, and why you're going to be extra careful with Charlie McAvoy when his official diagnosis comes down the pike. As well as it should be, too, as Rask is just as important as those players when it comes to the B's getting to where they look capable of going this spring.
Consider that another fact in an argument that could always use a few more, even if I know what's coming back my way.
The Big Bad Blog is presented by:
