Post-Game Talk: BOS @ NYR | Still Alive

I'm sorry I got pulled into that convo but I am NOT assigning all of the blame to hank for game 1. I am assigning some to him though. He was absolutely PHENOMENAL today and in the last game and in most of the games he has been in and I have defended him as the best goalie on earth and a great PO performer multiple times on the main board and here. I try to be objective game by game and not be a biased homer fan though
 
You are bafflingly incapable of understanding anything.
"Godlike saves in OT"
"The OT performance by the forwards was atrocious."

LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL I am getting trolled or you are a very very poor reader.

Also I later clarified. "Henrik cost us a win" means in regulation. I also did not say that he ALONE cost us a win. And in the 18 or so posts SINCE this first one I clearly clarified I was blaming the forwards as well. But I do feel hank deserves more blame in regulation for his bad goals. But yea even in what you quoted I am not blaming Henrik alone. :handclap: You have impressed me with your troll skills/inability to comprehend information. Or maybe you've ALREADY been drinking I dunno but there's not much else that could explain your inability to fairly discuss things and understand clarifications or opinions

Yes, I have been and I am drinking.
Listen, I learned a long time ago, not to take insults personally, they are actually a sign of a weak position, but I digress.
If you changed your mind about who is to blame in game 1 along the way, then that's all that matters to me.
Let's enjoy this win, i was not expecting it after the first period. Cheers.
 
Yes, I have been and I am drinking.
Listen, I learned a long time ago, not to take insults personally, they are actually a sign of a weak position, but I digress.
If you changed your mind about who is to blame in game 1 along the way, then that's all that matters to me.
Let's enjoy this win, i was not expecting it after the first period. Cheers.

Why are you insulted? DId I say something incorrect or misrepresent your position in some way as you have done to me? You can['t seem toe xplain yourself or correctly understand what I'm writing even when it's spelled out as clearly as possible. What a joke. Also there is a difference between an insult and a legitimate criticism.
 
Why are you insulted? DId I say something incorrect or misrepresent your position in some way? You can['t seem toe xplain yourself or correctly understand what I'm writing even when it's spelled out as clearly as possible. What a joke.

I offered an olive branch and you refused it.
You seemed to have tied yourself in a knot. you were arguing against your own words, all I did was repost them. Don't blame me.
 
I offered an olive branch and you refused it.
You seemed to have tied yourself in a knot. you were arguing against your own words, all I did was repost them. Don't blame me.

No I wasn't you were. I asked you to explain and you did not. You asked me to explain and even though it was already obviously explained I explained again. Go ahead explain yourself why does Hank get zero blame for his goals he let in?

Also why, when I said I was blaming both hank and the F, did you continue to say I blamed only Hank? Why did you quote a post where I BLAMED the forwards and claim I was blaming Hank alone? Trying to run away from your own incorrect points is not extending the olive branch. If you wanted to extend any sort of olive branch you'd discuss this instead of ignoring points and putting words in my mouth.
 
Not at all.

You seem to be though.

K then explain yourself. back up your opinion with logic and reasoning. I asked you to do something if you are going to put words in my mouth and misrepresent me then prove it Quote the times I said that hank was not solely at fault and quote all the times I blamed the forwards. I did it a lot. This should neatly disprove your false assertion
 
Last edited:
In 2010 Philly won game 4 in OT and then went on to comeback to win the series. Can we do it? One game at a time! (They also lost game 1 of that series in OT, like we did)

I'll be praying that Hank is in god mode for game 5, if he is...ANYTHING CAN HAPPEN!
 
I think our 4th line really helped set the tone. They were flying around laying hits. When you think a hit is coming you tend to rush and make mistakes. Our 4th line gave us exactly what Boston's 4th line has been giving them all series.
 
No I wasn't you were. I asked you to explain and you did not. You asked me to explain and even though it was already obviously explained I explained again. Go ahead explain yourself why does Hank get zero blame for his goals he let in?

Also why, when I said I was blaming both hank and the F, did you continue to say I blamed only Hank? Why did you quote a post where I BLAMED the forwards and claim I was blaming Hank alone? Trying to run away from your own incorrect points is not extending the olive branch. If you wanted to extend any sort of olive branch you'd discuss this instead of ignoring points and putting words in my mouth.

Now you are moving the goal posts. the debate was about who gets the blame for costing us the game.
Sure One of those goals was a soft one, I said it then and i am saying it now. But the soft goal, the tying goal very early in the 3rd period, didn't cost us the game, the failure of the PP is what cost us the game.

I think it was in discussion with Crease where I said, I can't blame Hank for any of the losses. the one where there is a debate in my mind is the second game, 5-2 game. But given how bad the defense in front of him was I can hardly blame him.
I will defend Girardi to the grave, except for that 2nd game. He was dreadful.
 
Now you are moving the goal posts. the debate was about who gets the blame for costing us the game.
Sure One of those goals was a soft one, I said it then and i am saying it now. But the soft goal, the tying goal very early in the 3rd period, didn't cost us the game, the failure of the PP is what cost us the game.

I think it was in discussion with Crease where I said, I can't blame Hank for any of the losses. the one where there is a debate in my mind is the second game, 5-2 game. But given how bad the defense in front of him was I can hardly blame him.
I will defend Girardi to the grave, except for that 2nd game. He was dreadful.

Incorrect I did not move the goal posts.
Incorrect that's not the debate. My POINT is both get a share of the blame.
Your point is Hank gets zero blame. "Who" implies one group or person gets blamed. Not my stance

. Why does Hank get zero blame for his goals he let in?

Also why, when I said I was blaming both hank and the F, did you continue to say I blamed only Hank? Why did you quote a post where I BLAMED the forwards and claim I was blaming Hank alone? .

You answered nothing that I asked here. 3 Questions in that quote. Answer them please.
 
Thank you schabadoo and Kwayry you have both failed miserably to explain yourselves, clarify or answer me. Yikes. At least Kwayry you admitted you are drunk but I've got to go to bed. Hopefully you can admit you were wrong. But you're admittedly drinking so I guess it doesn't matter.
 
Incorrect I did not move the goal posts.
Incorrect that's not the debate. My POINT is both get a share of the blame.
Your point is Hank gets zero blame. "Who" implies one group or person gets blamed. Not my stance



You answered nothing that I asked here. 3 Questions in that quote. Answer them please.

I will summarize my answers this way. Hank gets blamed for the tying goal, it was a soft goal that he should have made. I will stress this point, it was a tying goal early in the 3rd period. It was not a go ahead goal!
The team had a late PP to win the game, again, not to tie it, but to win it.
Therefore, I cannot blame him for costing us the game.
 
Kreider-Stepan-Nash
Hagelin-Brassard-Callahan
Clowe-Richards-Zuccarello
Pyatt-Boyle-Dorsett

if clowe isnt healthy

Kreider-Stepan-Nash
Hagelin-Brassard-Callahan
Richards-Boyle-Zuccarello
Pyatt-Powe/Newbury-Dorsett

Richards might look better on the wing riding shotgun to boyle-zuccarello with how they are playing. liked haley's game tonight, but pyatt's been good and i think richards should get another shot this series and be benched if he sucks. Shouldn't be allowed near the power play.

healthy staal and stralman

McDonagh-Del Zotto
Moore-Girardi
Staal-Stralman
 
Thank you schabadoo and Kwayry you have both failed miserably to explain yourselves, clarify or answer me. Yikes. At least Kwayry you admitted you are drunk but I've got to go to bed. Hopefully you can admit you were wrong. But you're admittedly drinking so I guess it doesn't matter.

Dude, I know this is a messageboard and you are entitled to have your arguments with people, but you are SUPER hung up on getting approval from people in like every thread. Not everyone is going to agree with you or like you - let it go.

I'm trying to read people's opinions on THIS game and your comments one Game 1 took up like half the fricken thread. There is a Lundqvist only thread, ya know...

ANYWAYS

Glad they didn't get swept. Regardless of goals, the PP looked better in general. We quieted down their fourth line a tad. Played a more physical game. Hank played great but did seem a little gassed at times.

Not trying to be a jerk, but really don't see them winning four in a row. If they prove me wrong, great. But I feel like these changes were too little too late and the adrenaline will fade.
 
Gotta take games one by one.

The ****ing Leafs pushed the Bruins to a 7th game after being down 3-1. Let's go Rangers.

We are...................ALIVE!

49045-Game-of-thrones-what-do-we-say-ODHu.gif
 
Last edited:
Dude, I know this is a messageboard and you are entitled to have your arguments with people, but you are SUPER hung up on getting approval from people in like every thread. Not everyone is going to agree with you or like you - let it go.

I'm trying to read people's opinions on THIS game and your comments one Game 1 took up like half the fricken thread. There is a Lundqvist only thread, ya know...

ANYWAYS

Glad they didn't get swept. Regardless of goals, the PP looked better in general. We quieted down their fourth line a tad. Played a more physical game. Hank played great but did seem a little gassed at times.

Not trying to be a jerk, but really don't see them winning four in a row. If they prove me wrong, great. But I feel like these changes were too little too late and the adrenaline will fade.

Couldnt agree more.

I think they played an overall solid game. They were back to the early season Rangers where they would get flattened in the first ten minutes of the game. They pulled it together. Gotta get it back to the garden for game 6. One game at a time. I liked our 4th line. Brought some energy like a 4th line is supposed to. Woulndt mind seeing the same 4th line with clowe on the third and Pyatt sitting.
 
One game at a time.

This team is at their best when desperate. If they can pull out a win in game 5 (hopefully Lundqvist goes into Christ-mode), then we've got a series.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad