A lot of Girardi wide shots are intended that way. He sees a Ranger near the net and shoots at him , hoping for a deflection goal.
Post-Game Talk: #46 Rangers @ Panthers
- Thread starter JESSEWENEEDTOCOOK
- Start date
-
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
A lot of Girardi wide shots are intended that way. He sees a Ranger near the net and shoots at him , hoping for a deflection goal.
crisb
Registered User
Great post. I agree with Chimp here over Jon. Our defense in our own zone naturally gives the opposing team plenty of time in at the point, if they get it to them (which they do a lot). Since they have time at the point, it means there's also time to get in front of the net, hence the deflected/screened shots that Henrik always faces.
I thought it was an unlucky game for Henrik, two shots that seemed more difficult than people are making it out to be. Out of the 14 or so saves that he had, are people forgetting the 3-4 world class saves he made to keep us in the game?
Really disappointed in Torts last night. Right when you think they're getting it together they pull an act like they did last night.
It's a joke to pull the goalie when we have a PP like this team does.
Hagelin and Callahan can't handle a puck to save their lives right now.
Has Clowe been playing since that first game?
Zucc and Richards looked great. Pyatt has looked good.
Though the 4th line looked better than our first line. But they were benched after the first period.
It's a joke to pull the goalie when we have a PP like this team does.
Hagelin and Callahan can't handle a puck to save their lives right now.
Has Clowe been playing since that first game?
Zucc and Richards looked great. Pyatt has looked good.
Though the 4th line looked better than our first line. But they were benched after the first period.
This team needs to take notes on the Gordon Bombay art of passing.
I will personally buy these ****ers a **** ton of eggs if need be
Epitome of the major disconnect that goes on in Torts haters' heads...
"Torts sucks." Followed by almost entirely a list of all of the players who had a bad game.
Thunderhead
Registered User
eco's bones
Registered User
We all expected to win that one last night but we lost. We pretty much carried the game to them but it was a case of the Panthers bending but not breaking and us paying for a couple of defensive breakdowns. No team can be taken for granted. Not one of our best efforts but we should have won anyway. Reminds me of our last game with the Isles when the opposite was true. It's not the end of the world--we have two games left and if Winnipeg loses its last game to Montreal we're in anyway. Three results--only one of them has to go right.
All this doom & gloom & bridge jumping on this hread is dishearting. I think we will be ok. It may be a nail biter but in the end we will be there when the playoffs start.
Glad i took my wife out to dinner instead of watching this game. I was so sure we were going to win after our past few games i figured it was a no brainer. What a ****ing shame. I actually hope they dont make the play offs now bc i really want Tortorella gone.
LORDE
I am Lorde, YA YA YA
I hated the call right away... especially when we have a PP... they can ice the puck over and over until they get an EN goal. It only took one this time... but there was what? 1:02 on the clock still.
In effect Torts made the game 1:00 shorter while down by a goal.
Dumb.
DumpnChase12
Registered User
Its one of the practice pucks but it still has the NHL logo on the side
LoL..i'm sure one of Zuc's jersey will fit
For me, having a bad power play is a reason TO pull the goalie at the end of the game.
I still think Torts is the right coach for this team. I was making general observations about the game.
They weren't connected other than the fact that they all occurred in the same game.
All the blame isn't on Torts. At the end of the day, it's the players out there. But certain things, like pulling a goalie, on a power play which consistently gives over the puck all season, are beyond my comprehension.
Again, not all on Torts and this team will still make the playoffs, but certain guys need to get it going.
Callahan, Hagelin and Clowe being the main three.
Thankfully Richards seems to have found his legs and his game. Zucc and Stepan have consistently been very good in almost every game, etc.
While it's not acceptable to lose a game against the Panthers at this point in the season, I do think there were a lot of weird things in yesterdays game. One being that Markstrom seems to have our #. And two being that the Panthers decided to trap at the beginning of the 2nd period after getting a lead.
Unpredictable1
Registered User
Totally agree. I played pipes for many years myself and on that second goal, in that situation you're usually playing the guy that is undoubtedly alone to your immediate right for the easy tap in. Because it never had much velocity going in, most people will say it was weak. But whatever.
The first one I cringed a bit, but it had more to do with Florida scoring first than hank not as tight in butterfly. But he did have several players in front of him.
If you're going to stand in the line of sight of the shot - you better be blocking the puck because you're making quite a bit harder for the keeper to pick up. I've been known to knock my own players out of the way if they're close enough to me no different than if it was an opponent.
I have no blame for Hank in this one. He made some great saves.
Bring on Carolina and everyone play with some urgency, for the love of God.
charlie460
Stone Age Hockey
SA16
Sixstring
You can't prove things by stating data from a small sample size. And in fact given that there is a spread of teams who win and that only one team can win per year it's going to be essentially impossible for there ever to be a statisitcally significant sample size to tell you how often a given seed should expect to win.
Additionally even with your useless sample size I don't know if you are trying to dispute my point or prove my not. I said the two number 1 seeds combined should have ~36% to win the Cup. I don't know what we can expect it to be for the 2 and 3 and I'm at work now and don't have time to try and work it out but if you say the 2 drops to maybe 25% and the 3 drops to maybe 10% (maybe that's low for the 3 but the 3 seed is often much worse than the 4 or 5). that gives you 71% right there.
I never said it was disadvantageous to be a top seed. I just said a lower seed is still very capable (and yes, still unlikely) of winning. But ever writing a team off because of a seed is just wrong. This is not the NBA where the difference between the 1 and 8 is extremely large. There is a lot of parity and the differences between teams in the tier of playoffs is not that great that one is expected to win a given game 80-90% of the time.
94now
Registered User
Lost perspective? Fans never have any. Nor they should. They are fans. Fanatics should lose perspective, or they would be a normal people.
Hank wasn't at his best. That was the point. No one calls for his head or questiones his greatness. People want to know why we lost to figure if it was a fluke or we are really doomed. Blaming Hank gives fans hope, while defending Lundqvist is nothing but moving to something that may not be well comes Thu. I may agree with you as an reasonable person, but as a fan I am with Jonathan on this.
How many points has the PP cost the team?
I can think of 3 games, the early losses to Philly and Bruins where they had a 5 on 3 late to tie it and failed. And last night's game.
The EN is indicative of the PP, 3 out of 4 forwards were behind the net, why? A missed pass and Shore had all the time in the world to aim and shoot.
The 2 goals scored against were tough to stop, Could Hank stopped one of them? Maybe, the better question is why was Goc was so wide open in the slot.
I can think of 3 games, the early losses to Philly and Bruins where they had a 5 on 3 late to tie it and failed. And last night's game.
The EN is indicative of the PP, 3 out of 4 forwards were behind the net, why? A missed pass and Shore had all the time in the world to aim and shoot.
The 2 goals scored against were tough to stop, Could Hank stopped one of them? Maybe, the better question is why was Goc was so wide open in the slot.
pld459666
Registered User
Not blaming Torts for last nights display of hockey, but I do not believe he is the right guy for this team.
I do not believe that a system that is designed to keep the puck away from the front of the net will ever be a successful one.
With all the board work and keeping the puck behind the net and working below the hash marks, there's no one that is going to and staying in front of the net with purpose.
Pucks and players should be going to the front of the net, not kept along the walls and behind the goal.
It forces the team to rely on exceptional situations to score goals and proof is in the pudding over that last few years that when you have to rely on those scoring chances, you will not score very many goals.
I don't trust this Rangers against any team in the PO's.
Not with the offensive system we have.
Offensive with the dual meaning.
I do not believe that a system that is designed to keep the puck away from the front of the net will ever be a successful one.
With all the board work and keeping the puck behind the net and working below the hash marks, there's no one that is going to and staying in front of the net with purpose.
Pucks and players should be going to the front of the net, not kept along the walls and behind the goal.
It forces the team to rely on exceptional situations to score goals and proof is in the pudding over that last few years that when you have to rely on those scoring chances, you will not score very many goals.
I don't trust this Rangers against any team in the PO's.
Not with the offensive system we have.
Offensive with the dual meaning.
pld459666
Registered User
I'm still trying to figure out what Hank did wrong to get the blame for anything last night.
Gets screened by 3-4 players and a goal is deflected and goes in and that's his fault?
When that happens, you try to be as big as you can in front of the net and HOPE you get a piece.
He did nothing wrong there.
on the 2nd goal I don't see what he could have done any differently. The pass that got deflected in was also screened. Another situation where you are moving side to side, two players in close and one guy in the high slot un-touched.
At some point you have to tip your cap to the other team for a nice play which that was.
Lundqvist was not the problem last night. Not even close.
Gets screened by 3-4 players and a goal is deflected and goes in and that's his fault?
When that happens, you try to be as big as you can in front of the net and HOPE you get a piece.
He did nothing wrong there.
on the 2nd goal I don't see what he could have done any differently. The pass that got deflected in was also screened. Another situation where you are moving side to side, two players in close and one guy in the high slot un-touched.
At some point you have to tip your cap to the other team for a nice play which that was.
Lundqvist was not the problem last night. Not even close.
So a fan is always a stupid, illogical, nonsensical nitwit? Fans can have perspective. My father was a fan of me playing he didn't take me home and berate me or beat me. Fans have perspective and smarts. Scary you would argue otherwise. If you want to say fans oftentimes react emotionally in the instances when they are dissappointed this I can accept but there are plenty of smart people who do not do this around here
Ad
Upcoming events
-
-
Finland vs Sweden - Centre Bell, MontréalWagers: 3Staked: $387.00Event closes - 3 days from now
- Updated:
-
USA vs Canada- Centre Bell, MontréalWagers: 3Staked: $389.00Event closes - 3 days from now
- Updated:
-
-
Sweden vs USA - TD Garden, BostonWagers: 4Staked: $1,776.00Event closes - 5 days from now
- Updated: