Post-Game Talk: #68 - 3/7/20 | Rangers vs. Devils | 7:00 PM ET - MSG

[haohmaru]

Might want to read a message rather than cherry pick one line and run with it.

I read everything he wrote. Doesn't change that what you wrote is complete BS.

 

[Maximus]

Call me crazy but as disappointed in the loss last night as I am as it was a great opportunity to pick up badly needed points vs a “meh” opponent, I can’t but help pinch myself every day that this Uber young team of ours is playing important “playoff atmosphere “ type hockey games every other night, in just the 2nd year of a full blown rebuild.

That’s why even when we lose games like last night, I have an extremely difficult time getting angry or mad. I’m just so grateful that the team is where it’s at about a year ahead of schedule.

Good times ahead for sure!,

 

[21]

The Avs are the most disrespectful org in hockey history for not suiting up Sakic and Forsberg too.

thanks for stopping by

I'm not a super loyal NHL fan (supporting a specific team) but I love NHL hockey and since Forsberg is my all time fav I have been following them pretty good. Landeskog is a great guy and a great Captain as well.

Having said this I love the city of New York and Henrik is a living legend and definately one of my all time favorites as well, perhaps number second after Forsberg, I feel for him.

Lundqvist, Forsberg, Sundin, Loob, Hedman, Lidstrom. That's my dream setup. ;-)

I really, really like following Zibanejad though, wow, keeping an eye on him sure!

 

[Siddi]

Some nice shiny new hypocrisy.

I Will accept your forfeit.

Also, stop spreading fake news. His injury was non- displaced.

 

[SnowblindNYR]

I'll admit that if Hank had that game I'd be more pissed but I'd like to think my reaction would have been similar his rookie year.

 

[NYSPORTS]

I Will accept your forfeit.

Also, stop spreading fake news. His injury was non- displaced.

big victory for you

 

[NYSPORTS]

I read everything he wrote. Doesn't change that what you wrote is complete BS.

your contributions are gold.

 

[CasusBelli]

I'm not a super loyal NHL fan (supporting a specific team) but I love NHL hockey and since Forsberg is my all time fav I have been following them pretty good. Landeskog is a great guy and a great Captain as well.

Having said this I love the city of New York and Henrik is a living legend and definately one of my all time favorites as well, perhaps number second after Forsberg, I feel for him.

Lundqvist, Forsberg, Sundin, Loob, Hedman, Lidstrom. That's my dream setup. ;-)

I really, really like following Zibanejad though, wow, keeping an eye on him sure!

No Tommy Salo?

 

[The S5]

I was told that goalies need to save goals coming from deflections or screens.

Or is that expectation only on Hanks shoulders?

Hank's game isn't conducive to blocking deflections. He sits back too much. If you get closer to the player deflecting the puck, your chances of stopping it increase dramatically.

Look, Hank is no where near his prime. He hasn't been for years. At this stage, there should be no question that he is playing a backup role.

 

[Shesterkybomb]

You must have missed the first goal

I saw it, he had his pad there it squeaked through not sure what you want him to do different there.

 

[The S5]

Shiny new toy. Cant do no wrong. Some posters here have invested so much in Shesty that they cant be objective in regards to his play.

To be fair, he wasn't awful last night. That first goal was a complete fluke. His pad was on the post right where that puck went in. That was a 1/1000 shot. Otherwise, he was just average.

At this point, why are we still discussing Hank? He is the third option. His athleticism, which is what carried him, isn't any where near his peak. He makes a save and is then completely out of position. The coaches know this. There would have to be a prolonged streak of Igor and Alex playing poorly for Hank to get any shot.

 

[FOD]

I saw it, he had his pad there it squeaked through not sure what you want him to do different there.

Objectively, that was the definition of a bad goal. In my opinion there were 2 other goals he should have stopped. And pre-injury, he would have.

 

[Governor]

Objectively, that was the definition of a bad goal. In my opinion there were 2 other goals he should have stopped. And pre-injury, he would have.

I think calling that 1st goal a bad goal isn't the best term. It was very much a fluke that wouldn't go in if Palmeiri had tried that again.

 

[Siddi]

To be fair, he wasn't awful last night. That first goal was a complete fluke. His pad was on the post right where that puck went in. That was a 1/1000 shot. Otherwise, he was just average.

At this point, why are we still discussing Hank? He is the third option. His athleticism, which is what carried him, isn't any where near his peak. He makes a save and is then completely out of position. The coaches know this. There would have to be a prolonged streak of Igor and Alex playing poorly for Hank to get any shot.

Agree on the 1st goal. It was a fluke.

Georgie has been below average to put it kindly for the last 3 games.

 

[21]

No Tommy Salo?

I feel for Salo, that's for sure, officially humiliated after one bad goal, are you kidding me (???) it makes me really angry. :-( F**k all weak people making fun of Salo, humiliating him. It wasn't his fault we lost to Belarus anyway, our forwards couldn't score, missed countless number of wide open chances, vs Belarus in hockey.......

 

[Shesterkybomb]

Objectively, that was the definition of a bad goal. In my opinion there were 2 other goals he should have stopped. And pre-injury, he would have.

Disagree

 

[Blue Blooded]

Less than stellar performance.

But we again struggled mightily against a team that backed down against us and was prepared to be patient and take advantage of our mistakes.

We are a young team and there is a fine balance between stifling the kids by holding them back and just exposing everyone with an unrealistic approach.

DQ is most certainly not erring on the side of caution. Two things annoys me a bit in this perspective, and no 2 a lot more than 1.

1. We can fairly easily adopt and play a little more conservative. We did it when Zibanejad was hurt for example. It was quite obvious that Philly with experienced coaches were going to expose us and that NJ wouldn’t run and gun against us again. DQ could read these things a little better. Like we get the lead twice. Let NJ try create something against us and see how well they can do that without giving up grade A chances.

2. Look we have 4 lines. I think that the roster structure more or less gives us 3 lines. Ziba’s, Panarin’s and Chytil’s. Players around them are a bit interchangeable, but Panarin can carry his own line and Chytil isn’t a perfect fit with him.

So that leaves us with the 4th line. How should we build that line? Is there anything the teams lacks? Is our team uneventful and a little flat, does it need a 4th that can give us a spark? Is our team short on offensive talent, and do we need a 4th with some hidden offense?

From my POV it’s extremely obvious that we could use a 4th line that is can settle things down. More like a 3b line.

This is the biggest objection I have against DQs work in NY. Some will say, but what is he supposed to do? Gorton creates the lineup. But that don’t hold up. DQ has for a long time been on record that he wants a 3 line team with a 4th that can be used to provide a spark at times. The GM gets the player types the coach wants. McKegg for example, definitely hand picked. Smith has played there most of the year.

I was watching Philly’s 4th, a skilled Austrian in Raffel, a good 2-way guy in Nate Thompson and a 5’10 QMJHL in Aubel something.

And they are not alone. Most teams are having 4th built to play hockey, not berserk the ice. Very few teams have Hollweg-Betts-Ortmayer type of 4th anymore... As it is our 4th almost never has a positive impact.

It irks me a bit that DQ, but also our organization, aren’t a bit more solid and in tune when it comes to issues like this. It would help us so much if we had a line that could just hit the ice and play off some minutes. Provide stability. Expose teams we play against instead of getting exposed themselves.

I get what you mean but:

1. Our 4th line was our best line last night.

2. With three really good lines you can get away with playing the 4th 5-6 minutes and you are probably better off with it. It's VERY important that you don't spend ANY money on your 4th line, so if you can put a cheap one together that works that's great but it won't last more than a year as the players will need raises if they're good and that means they have to go unless thay take spots higher up in the lineup. Taking TOI away from better lines is never a good thing and with three good lines no single line will get burnt out if you match them somewhat evenly.

 

[Kovalev27]

We had to get Shesterkin back in. It didn’t go as planned but he had to knock that first game back off. You stay with him because he’s our best goalie. he should be playing the next one for sure and I suspect he’ll be fine.

having said that the team in front of him was just absolutely terrible. They got beat to every puck. It was unreal. As if they all went out partying all weekend to celebrate the last win. They really hurt themselves here. Really did.

on another note Quinn has got to stop riding DiGiuseppe Fast Lemieux in big spots. He’s got to play his talented kids and let them develop. Gauthier should not be on the fourth line with no powerplay time do you can run Lemieux out there even on 6 on 5. Kakko should not be playing behind Fast or DiGiuseppe. Just can’t continue.

outside of Mika going white hot we’ve generated nothing since Kreider got hurt.

Strome does zero if Panarin isn’t having a big night. I shouldn’t say that he does hurt us plenty regardless

 

[Chimpradamus]

Question is if the treatment of Lundqvist is the worst I ever have seen during all my years as a NHL fan.

The management "the hockey experts" aka "the bright guys" really believe they have two other goalies better than Henrik Lundqvist, seriously? Are we talking about Henrik f*****g Lundqvist here, are we talking about the same goalie, "The King"? Now it may be too late telling Lundqvist "We are sorry but we f****d it up, now please save our a***s and get us to the playoffs (because otherwise we may lose our jobs).", it's a tough task right now even if it wouldn't surprise me if Henrik did it. Maybe better riding the two Russians, failing reaching the playoffs and fire one or two guys in management instead? Perhaps better in the long run for the Rangers? These are obviously not the best experts out there, or the smartest guys.

I respect Lundqvist staying in New York getting officially humiliated but my guess is this was more of a family decision.

Same here. They haven't really given him a chance to compete. They've thrown him under the bus. He has had no chance to help the team while in game shape, with a team that doesn't play like it's a kindergarden.

Shesty entered when the team started to play like they actually could win a game. After Lundqvist couldn't hold together a debacle for several years now and since he's older than Georgiev, he's apparently out of the picture. Lundqvist is, still at his age, nowhere close to being worse than Georgiev at goaltending. He's probably still better, if he could play behind a team that plays with some kind of system - and be in game shape.

But since he gets 2 games a month, you'll never get Lundqvist in game shape. I would actually believe we would have better results with Lundqvist as the starter and Shesty as the backup IF NYR reaches the playoffs.

Lundqvist has always been a workhorse. He needs workload to get in the zone. But since NYR can't give him the workload, more of the absolute opposite, he can't perform.

If Shesty would've entered the NHL when NYR played like a kindergarden at the start of the year, it's no chance he has the numbers he has right now.

 

[Chimpradamus]

I also say it's absolutely comical NYR believes the goalie who has just returned from a car accident, with micro fractures in his ribs, is the way to go to win games. To then also choose Georgiev ahead of Lundqvist is because they dug that hole themselves. Of course choosing a 38 year old HHOF goalie is tough, when he saw time on the ice the last time we had an ice age.

But sure, continue to throw Lundqvist out on the curb. Let's miss the playoffs by showing zero confidence in him, because he has struggled in a fire sale and playing behind a truly dysfunctional team for so long. Sure, he has made a career playing behind dysfunctional teams, but this has been truly special.

Can I remind you that Lundqvist LEAD the NHL in advanced goalie stats after two months of the season, where the team was THE JOKE in the NHL of playing well? Yes, even worse than Detroit and the Kings, statistically. No? Apparently in just a span of months, he's not even an NHL goalie anymore.

I have to agree. The treatment of Lundqvist is a complete disgrace. If I would pick a nightmare scenario in a video game, it would be to play as Lundqvist in the last couple of years.

 

[Ola]

I get what you mean but:

1. Our 4th line was our best line last night.

2. With three really good lines you can get away with playing the 4th 5-6 minutes and you are probably better off with it. It's VERY important that you don't spend ANY money on your 4th line, so if you can put a cheap one together that works that's great but it won't last more than a year as the players will need raises if they're good and that means they have to go unless thay take spots higher up in the lineup. Taking TOI away from better lines is never a good thing and with three good lines no single line will get burnt out if you match them somewhat evenly.

I think that it differs a bit from team to team. It’s like when Chicago one with 4 Ds or Pittsburgh with a weak blueline, it worked for those teams but wouldn’t for many others.

It’s a long season. Really long season. Nobody can be sharp for all 82. You face different type of challenges during a season. And so forth.

But all those things can be discussed. No matter what we have a 4th and we use it app. 16% of the time and we could use it a bit a more.

DQ has spent no energy trying to get a 4th in place that can play a hockey game with any kind of level. It’s of course very obvious what the 4th’s game plan is, I.e to just get the puck deep and chase after it and create havoc. A bunch of teams focus on completely different things nowadays. You are seeing — a ton — of players all over the league that never would have been “4th line” players 10 years ago. And looking at what our team needs — stability, the ability to get a comfortable shift here and there instead of always run and gun — I just think that it’s a big blunder by DQ to go about business like it was done 10 years ago and look for that spark plug type of 4th. JMHO.

 

[KirkAlbuquerque]

Hank had his out. He chose to stay.

Hes being treated no differently than any other aging and declining player would be, or more importantly should be.

His resume offers him the respect the Rangers offered when they gave him the option to exit.

Beyond that, he resume offers him nothing else.

Hes cooked and will get mop up duty from here on out. And I'm fine with that.

He will ask to be bought out and the team will comply because NO ONE IS TRADING FOR HIM AT 50% RETENTION.

so... he doesn’t have his “out” then , if no one is willing to trade for him

 

[Blue Blooded]

I think that it differs a bit from team to team. It’s like when Chicago one with 4 Ds or Pittsburgh with a weak blueline, it worked for those teams but wouldn’t for many others.

It’s a long season. Really long season. Nobody can be sharp for all 82. You face different type of challenges during a season. And so forth.

But all those things can be discussed. No matter what we have a 4th and we use it app. 16% of the time and we could use it a bit a more.

DQ has spent no energy trying to get a 4th in place that can play a hockey game with any kind of level. It’s of course very obvious what the 4th’s game plan is, I.e to just get the puck deep and chase after it and create havoc. A bunch of teams focus on completely different things nowadays. You are seeing — a ton — of players all over the league that never would have been “4th line” players 10 years ago. And looking at what our team needs — stability, the ability to get a comfortable shift here and there instead of always run and gun — I just think that it’s a big blunder by DQ to go about business like it was done 10 years ago and look for that spark plug type of 4th. JMHO.

Kakko and Howden has caused a lot of issues this year. Howden destroys whatever line he is on and Kakko has only worked in very specific environments. Lemieux-McKegg-Gauthier has been inconsistent but has had some good games, but then 3L with Howden and Kakko becomes a disaster.

 

[will1066]

Kakko and Howden has caused a lot of issues this year. Howden destroys whatever line he is on and Kakko has only worked in very specific environments. Lemieux-McKegg-Gauthier has been inconsistent but has had some good games, but then 3L with Howden and Kakko becomes a disaster.

That we're still somewhat in the playoff hunt having been such a top-heavy team on both forward and defense is actually a small miracle.

 

[Blue Blooded]

That we're still somewhat in the playoff hunt having been such a top-heavy team on both forward and defense is actually a small miracle.

Our healthy T6 is one of the best in the league, but our B6 has been Detroit-tier.

Due to injuries the you can't use Mika/Artemi as definition of the top 6, but using Buch and Strome is a decent substitute:

Top 6: 100-69 (59 GF%)
Bottom 6: 45-73 (38 GF%)

Wouldn't call the D top heavy since DeAngelo and Fox can each carry a pairing, it's just Trouba that has hugely underperformed (he's been a lot better lately though).