Here's a serious question for you Bruins fans: should Tuukka Rask start?
The goalie thing has been a topic of discussion all season because the team has two competent guys who have played just about equal amounts of time this season and had comparable results.
For example, Jaroslav Halak is 13-6-2 in 22 starts for the B's with 2.36 goals allowed per contest and a .926 save percentage. In contrast, Tuukka Rask is 12-8-2 in 22 decisions with 2.43 goals allowed per game and a 920 save percentage.
I guess you could call Halak the starter because he has stopped 61 more pucks, indicating they trust him more against tougher opponents because let's be real, the 6 percent out of 1000 isn't that many more.
But this debate has been a thing all season and because of it, now we hear "Tuukka should be starting!" whenever he strings together a few good games. The team has won each of his past four starts, so that means he is the greatest goalie in the world again. He's basically a mix between Fergie and Jesus.
But yeah, the whole debate--at least from my perspective--is futile. There's two good players and regardless of who the team puts out there, results are going to come. The difference between them is marginal and it's a huge asset to be able to keep guys fresh and healthy over the course of the long season.
The Bruins are lucky enough this season where they could still pull a Bruins in the final week of the season and still make the playoffs unless they pull a Bruins for the duration of the second half of the season (don't pretend you don't know what I'm talking about).
If they make the playoffs, then who should start? Uh.. well would you look at that! We're out of time.