Post-Game Talk: #12 - 11/06/21 | RANGERS @ flames | 10:00 - MSG

[Shesterkybomb]

Why does Gallant keep giving Shesterkin the wrong games on B2Bs?

Its called protecting your goalie, edmonton has been averaging over 4 goals a game and a 50 percent pp, they likely felt this as a possible loss so why bother putting him in there to get lit up when you could put him in the next night for a better chance at a win.

 

[CLW]

I've been complaining about this BUT if the Rangers win today it's possible it was the right decision since we won't be able to score as easily against the Flames to make up for the shitty goals against. Georgiev gives up so many bad goals that it almost doesn't matter who he plays against. So I'm changing my stance to maybe this was the right call, we'll see.

Calgary's offense is nowhere near as potent at the Oilers is. Igor keeping the scoring down and if the Rangers can pot a few it should end on a positive note.

 

[Lindberg Cheese]

Dubinsky kid looks good tho.

Let's go Brandon!

Lol, good set up

 

[FultonReed]

Oh man what have I done?

Screw it, let's do this. 2 goals at least.

I like your moxy, kid.

seriously, I hope you're right. 3 more hours!

 

[Barnaby]

Oh man what have I done?

Screw it, let's do this. 2 goals at least.

I think it’s completely doable that Kakko scores two goals... this season. By the end of the calendar year might even be a stretch at this point...

 

[Barnaby]

Its called protecting your goalie, edmonton has been averaging over 4 goals a game and a 50 percent pp, they likely felt this as a possible loss so why bother putting him in there to get lit up when you could put him in the next night for a better chance at a win.

Yea, I’m not going into a game against Edmonton just assuming that we’ll lose and punting. Protecting your starting goalie by giving him off against the tougher offenses is a bold strategy...

 

[Mugless]

 

[Vitto79]

So McKegg down . Reaves back

 

[Row I Goon]

My bro-in-law is Flames. My best mate is Oilers. I’m already getting stick from the latter for us blowing a lead and if lose today the next week will be unbearable.

May the hockey gods have mercy on us this day.

 

[duhmetreE]

So McKegg down . Reaves back

I couldn't take it any more

Laf Scores a goal now because Reaves provides a +100 buff to Swag and Confidence for his linemates. Take it to the bank

 

[Crease]

Heading out for some oysters and steak now. Back in sweats by 10 and puck drop. Will be a great night, Kakko willing.

 

[Shesterkybomb]

Yea, I’m not going into a game against Edmonton just assuming that we’ll lose and punting. Protecting your starting goalie by giving him off against the tougher offenses is a bold strategy...

If you're looking for points its the way to go, you could play him, lose anyway and then lose vs calgary as well. If they win tonight it was the right move 3 pts.

 

[RickChartraw]

2 more hours?

 

[NYR94]

So McKegg down . Reaves back

Good.

 

[Synergy27]

If this is anything other than terrible I’ll be happy.

 

[RangersFan]

This will be interesting to see how the Rangers respond to last night and the curb stomping the Flames gave them last time. It will tell us the character of this team. The Flames game was a thorough beat down, they were buzzing around the puck all night.

 

[Cmox]

The Rangers are pretty funny too.

Yes, they definitely make me laugh a lot.

 

[Clark Kellogg]

Deleted. That video was already available in Loffen’s OP when the Flames logo is selected.

 

[Cmox]

Not again

How did you hear my liver? Confucius asks “ But Cmox , can’t you just not drink?”

No, my friend, I’m watching the Rangers play hockey.

 

[Shesterkybomb]

So with Reaves back id assume Laf goes with Chytil and Blais? Id be all for that

 

[aufheben]

Its called protecting your goalie, edmonton has been averaging over 4 goals a game and a 50 percent pp, they likely felt this as a possible loss so why bother putting him in there to get lit up when you could put him in the next night for a better chance at a win.

I can’t tell if this is in jest.

 

[MysticLeviathan]

Sutter on McDavid goal: 'It wasn't 1-on-4, it was 1-on-1'

I mean it was loosely 1 on 4, more like 1 on 2. I mean you could argue the two to the side were beaten by his speed which almost no other player can do, but it was nemeth and another who got truly beat.

 

[aufheben]

This will be interesting to see how the Rangers respond to last night and the curb stomping the Flames gave them last time. It will tell us the character of this team. The Flames game was a thorough beat down, they were buzzing around the puck all night.

Need to keep a clinical eye on who steps up tonight and who doesn’t. That’s probably more important than the actual outcome of the game.

 

[RangersFan1994]

Jason Labarbera a name from the past

 

[Leonardo87]

To drink or not to drink, that is the question.