Toggle sidebar

GDT: #45 - 01/08/14 | New York Rangers @ Chicago Blackhawks | 8:00 PM - NBC SPORTS

  • Xenforo Cloud will be upgrading us to version 2.3.5 on March 3rd at 12 AM GMT. This version has increased stability and fixes several bugs. We expect downtime for the duration of the update. The admin team will continue to work on existing issues, templates and upgrade all necessary available addons to minimize impact of this new version. Click Here for Updates
Status
Not open for further replies.
Doc's "ricochet" count is at 7, by the way. Which, is kind of high, but he got up to 7 really early in the 2nd, so I was expecting even more by the intermission.
 
All I want for my birthday is a goalie that doesn't give up a soft goal a game.

And no it's not my birthday.
 
Last edited:
Zamboner said:
Positionally, there should be no room there at all.
Click to expand...

His positioning was fine, it's because he was deep in the net. That's his game. Staying deeper allows more time to react to a shot. If he was out of the net more, that shot probably just hits him in the gut and never finds a hole.

Its impossible to be reactionary on a shot with that velocity, that close. This is the one thing I wish he would tweak in his game, to be more aggressive at certain times where he has no chance to react to a shot.
 
nevesis said:
I call every goal like I see it. If it's a soft goal, i'll call it as such. Henrik gives up soft goals from time to time just like every other goalie in the league. Want an example? Watch this video below. By far, the softest goal Hank has let up all year.

http://video.nhl.com/videocenter/console?id=2013020265-576-h

The issue is, so many people here don't understand what a soft goal is. They think every goal scored should absolutely have been stopped by the goalie.

It's easy to say that sitting on your couch at home when you've never experienced pucks flying at yourself at 100mph. Puck's sometimes find holes and beat you. Shooters are talented, and at the NHL level even more so.
Click to expand...

No one complained about the first goal though.. Plenty of games this year no one complained about one of the goals he gave up in any given game. Whenever we do complain about a weak goal, the apologists keep saying **** like this, but it's untrue.
 
0a3c90wqtz.jpg
 
nevesis said:
I call every goal like I see it. If it's a soft goal, i'll call it as such. Henrik gives up soft goals from time to time just like every other goalie in the league. Want an example? Watch this video below. By far, the softest goal Hank has let up all year.

http://video.nhl.com/videocenter/console?id=2013020265-576-h

The issue is, so many people here don't understand what a soft goal is. They think every goal scored should absolutely have been stopped by the goalie.

It's easy to say that sitting on your couch at home when you've never experienced pucks flying at yourself at 100mph. Puck's sometimes find holes and beat you. Shooters are talented, and at the NHL level even more so.
Click to expand...

Even Keith Jones just said it was a bad goal. Yes, it was a good shot by Bollig to get it through the small gap between Hank and the post. The thing is that if you're Hank in that spot, there shouldn't even be a small gap. You have to take that shot completely away.
 
nevesis said:
I call every goal like I see it. If it's a soft goal, i'll call it as such. Henrik gives up soft goals from time to time just like every other goalie in the league. Want an example? Watch this video below. By far, the softest goal Hank has let up all year.

http://video.nhl.com/videocenter/console?id=2013020265-576-h

The issue is, so many people here don't understand what a soft goal is. They think every goal scored should absolutely have been stopped by the goalie.

It's easy to say that sitting on your couch at home when you've never experienced pucks flying at yourself at 100mph. Puck's sometimes find holes and beat you. Shooters are talented, and at the NHL level even more so.
Click to expand...

Nevesis,
I know you think that you are the goaltending authority and you may very well know your stuff, but you are a mind numbing Lundquist nut hugger.

No way, shape or form is a short side goal from a bad angle not a soft goal.

Hank has played well outside of that one, but it has happened way too often this year to call it a fluke.
 
Hawks: Cup winners
Hawks: Most goals in the NHL
Hawks: Much better team top to bottom than the Rangers
Hawks: home team, with only 2 regulation losses all season at home
Hawks: on pace for 39 shots

Rangers - tied 2-2 going into the 3rd on the road. Everyone should be happy instead of micro analyzing one shot on goal and modified Halo gifs.
 
haohmaru said:
Hawks: Cup winners
Hawks: Most goals in the NHL
Hawks: Much better team top to bottom than the Rangers
Hawks: home team, with only 2 regulation losses all season at home
Hawks: on pace for 39 shots

Rangers - tied 2-2 going into the 3rd on the road. Everyone should be happy instead of micro analyzing one shot on goal and modified Halo gifs.
Click to expand...

To be fair, one of them was a DBZ gif.
 
Stop complaining about Hank, aside from that goal he's having a very strong game.

Want it direct your ire at a more appropriate player? Derick Brassard is deserving of hate. Terrible momentum killing penalty. To one of the most lethal power plays in the game. Absolutely terrible and unnecessary penalty. Swung the momentum to Chicago.
 
Dagoon44 said:
He won a cup.. He isn't our goalie .. He doesn't make 9⃣million .. Thanks
Click to expand...

Neither does Henrik. That contract starts NEXT year. Thanks for playing. And don't change what you originally said "cup winners make that save" when the cup winner had an even worse one get behind him.
 
Dagoon44 said:
He won a cup.. He isn't our goalie .. He doesn't make 9⃣million .. Thanks
Click to expand...

Those are all facts.

But, I was responding to a comment where you said that a cup winning goalie doesn't let in goals that bad. And I said Crawford let in a worse goal, and as you clearly just agreed with, he just won a cup. Your statement seems to be a bit iffy, based on things we both agree with.

To that point, Henrik Lundqvist doesn't make 9 million dollars a year. He never has. He WILL, next season. His caphit for this season is still 6.8m, and his salary is 5.1m. His raise comes next season.
 
nevesis said:
His positioning was fine, it's because he was deep in the net. That's his game. Staying deeper allows more time to react to a shot. If he was out of the net more, that shot probably just hits him in the gut and never finds a hole.

Its impossible to be reactionary on a shot with that velocity, that close. This is the one thing I wish he would tweak in his game, to be more aggressive at certain times where he has no chance to react to a shot.
Click to expand...
His depth wasn't the problem. That's his game, I understand that. There should be no room on the short side from the top of his shoulder to the ice surface. Period. If you get beat high, whatever. He got beat laterally. He lost the net. It was a bad goal. Velocity had little to do with it. If he's in position, he could lose sight of the puck, and still make the save.
 
Look to me like he either should have been deeper in his crease or farther out.
 
On a lighter note, I think Boyle is having a good game.
Nash should have buried that puck, but at least he is playing with some life.

What is going on with Staal? He is really struggling.
 
Lol Hedja's goal..now THAT was a laser. When was the last time we saw something like that from a Rangers D?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom