Bad hockey takes are in my head.
Not because I necessarily think in a way that generates bad hockey takes; I mean that I literally think about people having bad hockey takes. Something happens in the NHL and one of my first reactions is that somebody will come to a dumb conclusion that I’ll inevitably get bent out of shape trying to correct.
So that’s my problem, but you get to watch Felger and I yelling at each other as a result. Hopefully, somebody wins.
On Friday morning, the Stars announced a six-year, $29.5 million contract for Ben Bishop, who will turn 31 in November. For you crazies who think Bruins are the only ones who give out no-trade rights to their players, the deal has a reported no-move throughout for the first three years and a modified no-trade in the final three.
“Oh, [Word direct at Kelly Oubre] me,” I thought.
Tongue-in-cheek, I sent this tweet:
Today Felger will say he wishes the Bruins signed Bishop to that contract and that Bishop is better than Rask. And I will have a meltdown— DJ Bean (@DJ_Bean) May 12, 2017
Seven minutes later:
Would you rather have Ben Bishop at five million per year or Tuukka Rask at 7 million?— Tony Massarotti (@TonyMassarotti) May 12, 2017
I could not be more sick of the Tuukka Rask conversation, but here’s the summary for the billionth time: Rask is one of 14 goalies who carried a cap hit between $5.5 million and $7.5 million this season, but considering that he ranked eighth among those goalies in save percentage, his $7 million cap hit can be considered a shade high: anywhere between $500,000 and $1 million, but probably closer to $500,000. He is one of the Bruins’ better players and the Bruins should be inclined to keep their good players unless they can get a ton for them.
But for the sake of hopefully making any asinine Bishop-or-Rask conversation brief, the Stars did not just sign a particularly great contract. In addition to having inferior statistics, Bishop also has more of an injury history and will be nearly two and a half years older at the end of his deal than Rask will be at the end of his (he turns 36 in November of his contract’s last season; Rask turns 34 in March of the last year of his pact).
Here are some quick numbers:
So do you want a worse player for less money? According to Felger, you should want the better player. Remember, Mike blew his lid when Jonathan Toews signed an eight-year contract worth $10.5 million a year and I pointed out that Patrice Bergeron makes only $6.87 million per. He argued, as one is warranted in doing, that he would rather the better player.
So if you’re the type that would rather have the better player, you should prefer Rask for $7 million through his age 33 season (turning 34 in March of deal’s last season) to Bishop at $4.91 million through his age 36 season.
The Bruins want to get better. Talking themselves into thinking goaltending is their problem would be foolish, so you shouldn't do it either.