Anyway. Rask. Govtminion and mrmojorisin both have the truth of it – the deal was awful, gave Boston their future starter and Toronto jack shit, but Rask was going nowhere on what was then a godawful club anyway. He could not have had his spectacular rookie season in a Leafs’ jersey. Hell, until this season he probably couldn’t have managed an AVERAGE one. Goalies are a product of their defensive coverage as much as their own skill and can’t make a thoroughly uninspiring team go far on their own (unless it’s Patrick Roy in the eighties, but that’s beside the point). Rask’s name wouldn’t be nearly as big as it is if he had suffered in Toronto the whole time. They lost nothing they were going to make work if they had kept him.

Still a terrible, terrible, terrible deal.

Anyway.

As to Rask… honestly, had he stayed in Toronto, would things have gone well? Probably not. First off, if he hadn’t been traded to Boston, Ferguson didn’t really seem like he was averse to bad deals- I’d bet Rask would be wearing someone elses’ jersey anyway through some piss-poor trade or other.

But, assuming he wears a leaf on his sweater- then what? Porous defense (only now improving), no offense, bad penalties… goalies tend to take the fall when things aren’t going well for a team. It doesn’t even have to be a goaltending issue alone per se, if a team plays poorly for a stretch the goalie gets heat on him (see: Luongo, Roberto). That team could have had Patrick Roy in net and I’m not sure it would have been enough to get into the playoffs.

By using Rask, they likely would have set his development back and not gotten anywhere. Instead, he’s in Boston waiting to take the reigns of a very good hockey club- and showing a fresh Stanley Cup ring- and Toronto will at some point have James Reimer back, who has shown nothing but brilliance so far prior to getting hurt. All in all, it seems to have worked out for everyone in the long run.