Nice deflection by Vanek but Lundqvist still could've stopped that.
I saw the deflection. I also saw it slowly trickle through his legs
Refs: "Let's just make sure every possibility of special teams is covered"
Okay, Joel. You've had your fun. Give your brother his pads back.
Sure you can. MA Fleury, for example.
The Blackhawks made Cory Crawford and Ray Emery look like superstars last year.
Chris Osgood in 2008 (with a broken Hasek splitting time).
Give me a very good goalie and the cap room with it over an elite goalie. The only caveat is you need proper management as well. And, with the Rangers, we know we won't have that. So we're ****ed either way. But in an ideal world, give me a very good goalie (along with the cap room savings) over an 8.5M "superstar" goalie.
He could have and it would have been a fantastic save had he done so. The puck deflected like 5 feet in front of him.
4 goals on 17 shots..u suck hank..
But is Lundqvist's cap hit really the problem with this team? Free cap space alone doesn't give you a good team. So what would we do with more cap room? We don't really need it for keeping our own players, we haven't lost one significant player due to cap trouble, so all we could do with it is sign more free agents. And I doubt that would put us over the top.
Our problem isn't managing the cap and keeping good players, it's getting good players. Letting Lundqvist go because of a couple million dollars wouldn't be any part of a solution, it would rather make things worse.
It went under his left arm! You sir are truly blind![]()
at least brassard can hit the net.
Reminds me of Tortorella complaining about the 25% rule when his goalie let in 4 goals on 16 shots when he was coaching TB