Post-Game Talk: Bruins @ Rangers 01/23/13 "Gabotrick Edition"

[Blueshirt Believer]

Couple of things:

Staal/Del Zotto pair looked VERY good through most of the game. Putting Del Z on the right side with a solid stay at home D man could be great. Del Z struggled a little bit at times, but if he can get used to playing that right side it should be fine.

The Pointmen, in general, were very effective in the Ozone.

Eminger should stay in the lineup. Keep Bickel out of the rear guard. Actually, just get Bickel out of the lineup period.

Our problem defensively was being careless with the puck mainly from our forwards. Specifically, wings did a poor job supporting the puck along the wall. Not to mention the forwards were fairly hesitant at times to chase down the puck.

We took too many penalties. Need better discipline.

Nash was excellent in this game. He was the glue for that first line. He made Gabs WAY better.

Nash-Richards-Gabs looks like a winner. Nash's size compliments that line perfectly.

Our PP needs more urgency. Too many times our guys looked disinterested or lazy with the man advantage We also still struggle with our transition on the PP.

Pyatt and Cally look good together. Kreider completely disappeared.

 

[gravey9]

Finally a lot to be encouraged about.

HOWEVER, I am definitely concerned that 4 of 12 forwards were completely ineffective tonight. In this shortened season with tons of games and less conditioning that will kill the Rangers. Kreider, Rupp, Halpern and Bickel all looked like the game was too fast for them. They were all a step behind for different reasons. This must change - either they get better or replaced. Kreider is totally lacking confidence and it's unclear where or what will help him get it back - but he needs to find it.

 

[TC82]

That first goal from Gaborik was actually a beauty. Not many are able to put the puck under the crossbar from that angle.

I think this line stays together now for a while. Gabs' goals had little to do with him shifting to RW, per se, but maybe it gave him again the comfort level he needs.

 

[Hockey Team]

The worst thing about this game was the flower play.

 

[Ola]

First line looks great but they're very thin after that.

Jason Arnott is still floating around. I know he's older than the sun but in a short season it doesn't matter much and he can help out on faceoffs, with the cycle, and 2nd PP unit.
Not much else out there and no guarantees Miller is ready or Fasth/Lindberg will be available the end of the season or they're ready to just be inserted in the lineup.

Henrik will get better, defense is getting better. Just need more reps.

I'm an Emminger fan, so keep him in the lineup.

Rangers got the Atlantic Banner last year, this year it's not as necessary. Just go into the playoffs playing their best hockey.

We definitely need speed and energy if we are to add someone to our bottom two lines...

 

[Ola]

4. This is why we got Nash, he may not have scored but his presence was definitely felt tonight on the ice

Yeah.

I mean, you don't automatically become a better team with a true super star. That star needs alot of room, and you loose something in the areas in which has been our trademark with a star like that.

But like I went on and on and on about in the wealth of posts before we got him, in terms of raw talent Rick Nash is like top 3-5 in the league. His stats didn't say a darn thing. You have Sid and Malkin and AO, but then you gotta sit down and really look carefully at like Nash vs Stamkos and so forth. He is that darn gifted. For CBJ he gave it his all for like 20 games and then they were out of the PO's no matter what he did, all teams could target him three times over on a night by night basis and so forth. Then he just fell into a comfortable pattern that where he carried his team but didn't go beyond that. But anyone who has seen him in like WCH's for Canada knows how much hockey he got in him. When you saw him line up next to guys like Joe T, Getzlaf, Heatly, Perry and co -- and like be heads and shoulders above them.

Again, Nash might not put over the top. Nash might not even make us all that much better. But, without Nash we could potentially be a team that went to war and give ten tries went all the way after a heroic effort by everyone. With Nash, -- if -- we put everything together, we could become a team that runs over other teams. We get potential to be a team we couldn't be without him.

 

[Ola]

Even though both Richards and Stepan have put up points, it doesn't necessarily mean either of them have played well - there's much more to this game than just points. Their decision-making could be better. Richards looks sluggish and Stepan's intensity level could be higher. I'm just hoping to see some continued development from Stepan.

Its hard to say much about Richards. He missed half the camp with the flu and was obviously extremely gassed the first couple of games atleast. But like you say, 4 pts in 3 games says nothing since he probably felt like he does after a 1:30 shift from the first second he hit the ice the so far this season..

 

[Blueshirt Believer]

Yeah.

I mean, you don't automatically become a better team with a true super star. That star needs alot of room, and you loose something in the areas in which has been our trademark with a star like that.

But like I went on and on and on about in the wealth of posts before we got him, in terms of raw talent Rick Nash is like top 3-5 in the league. His stats didn't say a darn thing. You have Sid and Malkin and AO, but then you gotta sit down and really look carefully at like Nash vs Stamkos and so forth. He is that darn gifted. For CBJ he gave it his all for like 20 games and then they were out of the PO's no matter what he did, all teams could target him three times over on a night by night basis and so forth. Then he just fell into a comfortable pattern that where he carried his team but didn't go beyond that. But anyone who has seen him in like WCH's for Canada knows how much hockey he got in him. When you saw him line up next to guys like Joe T, Getzlaf, Heatly, Perry and co -- and like be heads and shoulders above them.

Again, Nash might not put over the top. Nash might not even make us all that much better. But, without Nash we could potentially be a team that went to war and give ten tries went all the way after a heroic effort by everyone. With Nash, -- if -- we put everything together, we could become a team that runs over other teams. We get potential to be a team we couldn't be without him.

I think the problems I still see with this team:

1)Lack of a true triggerman for the PP/depth Dman.

2)A balanced 3rd line center. Boyle is a very good Pker. But I just don't see much else from the guy. He is such an awkward offensive player.

I think we will figure out scoring for our second line. But the bottom 6 needs some tweaking. I don't know if we will have enough time this season to figure it all out.

 

[Ola]

Better game. But it was still quite unimpressive. The tone on here would be a lot different if we had lost in OT.

Aside from a great start (and man it was fantastic) they really tailed off. I'm really uncomfortable with how little it takes the Rangers to get off their game. I feel they often lose to themselves.

Bad bounces, an inability to clear the puck, missing glorious scoring opportunities and just plain stupidity plague this team. The biased (IMO) officiating didn't help tonight.

The players individually looked much better though (aside from Hank). Nash is another level of deadly. Gaborik with that poisonous touch, Richards made a ton of creative plays. I liked Stepan's game much more then usual. Hagelin easily had his best game, and Boyle was a rock in the defensive zone.

On defense I thought everyone was good individually, they just have some kinks to work out as a unit. MDZ has been a rock all season, and Staal made some great plays. Nothing needs to be said about McD and Girardi, they played their game to an extent. I barely noticed Spazzy Steve, which is a good thing, so color me impressed.

I'll take the 2 points. But something has got to give eventually.

Yeah, at the same time, we have given up goals on a regular basis and that effects the chance for any team to stay composed and get on top of a game.

The game in general and especially early this season is sooo much about not giving something up, take the lead when you get it and just let the other team expose themselves and on the odd occasion fall behind but not let things away and go for 1 point and a shot in OT.

I mean the prototypical win in the NHL goes like this basically:
1. A team gets the lead.
2. The other team starts to force things. Often the lead becomes a 2 goal lead.
3a. The team with the lead has a down period. They are pressured. The lead is maybe cut in half.
4a. In the third, the team down by a goal or two starts becoming desperate and gets away from their game plan. The team with the lead can take advantage of that and gets back on top and controlls the game till its over.
or
3b. The team behind ties the game.
4b. The last half of the 3rd period is played of and the game goes to OT/SO and one team gets the bonus point.

Very little is given up. The first goal or two comes sooner or later. Then maybe the game is tied up, or the team with the lead stays on top so long that the other team loose focus. And its over.

We have not so far been able to stay so composed that the team we play against is forced to scamble to tie it up and deviate from their game plan. We have played 183 minutes or whatever against teams that has been composed. Sure, only 25 minutes of those minutes has truely been somewhat impressive. But in the game today, you don't need to be impressive you just need to not shoot yourself in the foot. If you do that odds are that you will get over a point per game on avg. The rest is just a bonus.

If we after a couple of weeks play like sheit without giving up 2-3 goals the first 30 minutes of a game, if we still can't be composed, then Id be truely worried.

 

[Ola]

Hagelin better get going if he is going to score 60 goals in a shortened season and win the Richard, or else I guess I'll have that vote I made in the poll served a la crow.

 

[Thunderhead]

How was that first goal a dirty goal? I don't understand why people think the breakaway goal was nicer than the beautiful first goal.

I agree. The first goal was a beauty.

 

[TC82]

I agree. The first goal was a beauty.

Indeed. There are not many players who can score from that angle and under the crossbar to boot.

 

[Thunderhead]

Gaborik loves playing the Bruins. Scores on them every time he plays them.

He literally played the perfect goal scoring game. Can score from anywhere.

Maybe b/c of his friend Chara.

 

[FultonReed]

the only real problem i had was the fact that Torts was leaning very heavily on his top 4 d-men. they didn't look bad, don't get me wrong, i just feel like if he keeps doing that, they might get burned out a little sooner than we "want" them to. REALLY wish the 6th defenseman situation was handled a little bit better, but you can't have everything.

with that said, i thought they played WAY better than the previous two games. still some crucial mistakes being made that lead to goals, but we're getting there.

 

[TC82]

Yep, a 6th defenseman is needed in case Torts doesn't trust Eminger with more than 5-6 minutes a game and Bickel is just too much of a liability to play every day on D.

 

[Levitate]

Our problem defensively was being careless with the puck mainly from our forwards. Specifically, wings did a poor job supporting the puck along the wall. Not to mention the forwards were fairly hesitant at times to chase down the puck.

Agreed, too hesitant at times, and too careless at other times. Just not real comfortable defensively yet.

Our PP needs more urgency. Too many times our guys looked disinterested or lazy with the man advantage We also still struggle with our transition on the PP.

Also agree, though some of the early ones looked pretty good. The 5 on 3 was a joke and the late powerplay had nothing.

Pyatt and Cally look good together. Kreider completely disappeared.

Well he did only get 7 minutes of icetime...we'll see what happens. I don't think he really did anything wrong this game but Torts obviously doesn't trust him with important minutes. Need to send him down if less than 10 minutes is going to be a thing, and he needs to start getting more aggressive with his game.

I do worry about loading up that first line, it makes the Rangers depth looks a lot more suspect, but Hagelin had a better game I thought and helped make the third line at least somewhat respectable in the offensive zone. Still feels like they need another good 3rd liner at this point if they're not going to give Kreider a shot.

On the other hand, the NHL is generally a league that thrives on lines that come together for a number of games until they cool off and things are shuffled again. I'm sure this will get switched around again and the big guns spread out.

Oh I also thought Richards had a poor game outside of his assist, he's making some bad turnovers out there.

 

[Kokoschka]

Good: PKing was alright, the first 10 minutes were superb hockey. Nash, Gaborik, DZ, Staal, Pyatt.
Bad: Lundqvist didn't look sharp, should've had the Horton goal. The 2nd period.
Redden: Dat 5 on 3. I was watching with a friend who burst in tears, because he had to laugh so hard.

 

[Paulie Walnutz]

I think the problems I still see with this team:

1)Lack of a true triggerman for the PP/depth Dman.

2)A balanced 3rd line center. Boyle is a very good Pker. But I just don't see much else from the guy. He is such an awkward offensive player.

I think we will figure out scoring for our second line. But the bottom 6 needs some tweaking. I don't know if we will have enough time this season to figure it all out.

Djfjhffjjcjjjdk omg you bashed Boyle you can't do that here!j

 

[Vickers8]

The Captain must have blocked at least a half dozen shots, gabby was flying, Nash was strong on the puck, MDZ plays much better when he creates offense and plays with Staal, Emminger is slow, put Gilroy in, Hank hasn't hit his stride yet, should have won by 2 goals in regulation, but got sloppy, and in the name of God, stop with the stupid penaltie

 

[RangerBoy]

Torts was Mr.PP Genius in Buffalo. He can't get the PP on track with the players Sather has acquired in the last 2 summers?

 

[Crease]

In the first period, the Rangers seemed to be very aggressive about putting the puck on net. Wrist shots from the point. Shots from the half boards. It seemed to work for them, pouncing on rebounds and keeping Boston out of rhythm. I'm not sure why they got away from that in the second period, or on the PP in general.

 

[Rangers ftw]

Gaborik
Guess he won't be involved in trades for a 2rd around here for a while...

Richards was pure awful on the PP. But Gaborik-Richards-Nash is dynamite!

 

[Blue Blooded]

Torts was Mr.PP Genius in Buffalo. He can't get the PP on track with the players Sather has acquired in the last 2 summers?

Having LaFontaine, Hawerchuk, Andreychuk, Mogilny, and Audette on the roster might have something to do with that.

Andreychuk had 28 PPGs that season, LaFontaine had 23 in 57 games.

Out of the Rangers' stars, only Brad Richards and Ryan Callahan can be considered better on the PP than at ES (offensively in Cally's case).

Just looking at goals:

Gaborik - 90/324 = 28% PPGs
Nash - 83/290 = 29% PPGs
Richards - 81/246 = 33% PPGs
Callahan - 35/106 = 33% PPGs

Andreychuk - 274/640 = 43% PPGs
LaFontaine - 156/468 = 33% PPGs
Hawerchuk - 182/518 = 35% PPGs
Mogilny - 141/473 = 30% PPGs
Audette - 97/260 = 37% PPGs

However, I personally value a player that scores at ES more than a PP specialist as I feel such a player usually has a greater impact on the game as a whole.

 

[HockeyBasedNYC]

Rick Nash is going to be a beast for this team.

Those 3 or 4 primary chances he's had in each of the last 3 games will start resulting in goals. Great stuff from him.

I was blown away with that cut move he made where he brought it back into the middle of the ice, but then exploded to the goal with one stride and got a good wrister off. Most guys make that move and just hang out in limbo after finishing that move for a 1/2 second, and it allows the D to catch up. He is so large and strong in his legs that he literally distanced himself by a skaters length with one push off. That's scary good for a guy with his size, especially when you combine his stick skills.

Ive always loved Nash but never had the privilege of watching him on a nightly basis. Its only been three games and im seeing how much of a freak he is. Insane stuff, really.

Special player

 

[HockeyBasedNYC]

The first Gabby goal was absolutely beautiful, all the way up the ice.

It may have been one of the best Ranger skill goals of all time.