Skip to content

Bruins GM haunts Leafs over Rask trade details

Jun 11, 2013, 4:45 PM EST

Cam Neely, Peter Chiarelli AP

Boston’s road to the Stanley Cup finals was made possible in more ways than one by the Toronto Maple Leafs. Not only did they beat the Leafs in the first-round of the playoffs in seven games, starting goalie Tuukka Rask was a Leafs prospect at one time.

During today’s Media Day talks, Bruins GM Peter Chiarelli was asked about the trade that brought Rask into the Bruins’ fold. His description of how trade talks went down won’t do anything to make Leafs fans feel better.

Chiarelli said the Bruins then interim GM Jeff Gorton did the deal with former Leafs GM John Ferguson, Jr. while Chiarelli was in the process of going to Boston from Ottawa.

Ferguson went to the Bruins desiring then B’s goalie Andrew Raycroft and offered up then Leafs prospect Jiri Tlusty for him. The Bruins insisted the trade be goalie-for-goalie and wanted Rask. On June 24, 2006 the deal was done: Rask for Raycroft straight up.

That sound you hear from Toronto are Leafs fans grinding their teeth over a poor trade from the old regime. To make matters worse, Raycroft was coming off his worst season with Boston and a year removed from winning the Calder Trophy as rookie of the year.

  1. 1943mrmojorisin1971 - Jun 11, 2013 at 5:03 PM

    Worst deal JFJ made and that’s not even hindsight. Rask had just won top goalie at the WJC and, along with Pogge, the future of the Leafs net was as promising as ever. Hated the deal then and don’t even have the words to describe it now.

    • 19to77 - Jun 11, 2013 at 5:20 PM

      Especially considering the Bruins were entirely willing to take Pogge for Raycroft instead. There’s just no way whatsoever to make this deal look anything other than terrible.

    • drone501 - Jun 12, 2013 at 12:37 AM

      sounds like a paul holmgren deal.

  2. dudermcrbohan - Jun 11, 2013 at 5:32 PM

    The Bruins let the Leafs decide which goalie they sent over. The Leafs decided to send Rask and keep Pogge.

  3. jcmeyer10 - Jun 11, 2013 at 5:40 PM

    As a Bruins fan I owe the Maple Leafs a thank you note or an Edible Arrangement or something.

    • revansrevenant - Jun 11, 2013 at 6:44 PM

      How about a Vermont Teddy Bear?

    • drone501 - Jun 12, 2013 at 12:36 AM

      as a penguins fan, you suck.

      • gallyhatch - Jun 12, 2013 at 6:33 AM

        Penguins just got embarassed in the conference finals. . . . It’s pretty obvious who sucks here.

  4. jaguar0413 - Jun 11, 2013 at 5:50 PM

    Still not as bad as the Kessel trade.

    • 19to77 - Jun 11, 2013 at 6:01 PM

      Nonsense. The Kessel trade gave Toronto their top scorer. The Rask deal gave them a goalie who couldn’t even manage as a backup. One trade got them something, albeit at much too high a cost. The other got them nothing – also at much too high a cost.

      • spitfisher - Jun 11, 2013 at 9:54 PM

        actually, I wouldn’t say nonsense…..The bruins or any team would do the same trade again in a heart beat.

        Leafs acquire:

        Phil Kessel

        Bruins acquire:

        Leafs 2010 1st rounder – Tyler Seguin
        Leafs 2011 1st rounder – Dougie Hamilton
        Leafs 2010 2nd rounder – Jared Knight

      • 19to77 - Jun 12, 2013 at 1:36 AM

        Oh, absolutely. I’m not saying the trade was good at all. But compare the two:

        Leafs get a major impact player
        Leafs get Andrew f*cking Raycroft

        Which was worse?

    • mpk1516 - Jun 12, 2013 at 9:58 AM

      I still don’t see why Bruins’ fans think they dominated the Kessel trade at this stage.

      At some point, maybe 1-4 years, that might be true, but right now Kessel is a 25 year old 1+ point per game sniper over the past 2 years, while Seguin is a 21 year old .67 point per game player and Hamilton is a 20 year old DMan who has been a healthy scratch for more than half of the playoffs.

      The “winner” of this trade is still unwritten and won’t be until we know how far Seguin and Hamilton develop.

  5. negaduck - Jun 11, 2013 at 6:08 PM

    ” To make matters worse, Raycroft was coming off his worst season with Boston and a year removed from winning the Calder Trophy as rookie of the year.”

    You tell us it was the worst year he had ever had in Boston, but then you immediately tell us it was only one year after winning rookie of the year. So up to that point his whole NHL career consisted of one year where he was great and won rookie of the year, and one additional year where he was not as good. So that second year is labelled as “his worst season with Boston?”

    Would you say a two year old is having the worst year of his life?

    • 19to77 - Jun 11, 2013 at 6:20 PM

      Depends. Does he play net as badly as Andrew Raycroft?

  6. phillyphanatic77 - Jun 11, 2013 at 9:14 PM

    According to wikipedia, the Bruins were going to release Raycroft anyway, so the Leafs could’ve had him without compensation. Even if you disregard that fact, it’s mind boggling that they would give up a 1st round goalie prospect for a goalie who posted 3.70GAA the year before. Although Leafs fans can’t say Raycroft didn’t give them something, as he posted 37 wins his first season in Toronto. Unfortunately his GAA and SV% were horrendous.

Featured video

More than a Stanley Cup hangover?
Top 10 NHL Player Searches
  1. S. Crosby (4242)
  2. B. Bishop (3492)
  3. C. Crawford (2598)
  4. D. Krejci (2589)
  5. C. Kunitz (2488)
  1. C. Perry (2286)
  2. O. Palat (2177)
  3. B. Elliott (2139)
  4. T. Oshie (1919)
  5. T. Hall (1669)