Compare the Rangers and Blue Jackets
- Thread starter EspenK
- Start date
I think the Rangers are faster and have the better goaltending. Before the playoffs started, I wanted the Pens because of the Fluery's playoff struggles....I wanted nothing to do with Lundqvist in the 1st round
Pretty decent list, although I would say the Rangers have a clear advantage with their head coach. I don't think Richards is in that group yet.
Defense is a pretty good advantage aswell as goaltending. A big thing Columbus needs to be better at is blocking shots. A team like New York who has been there before knows how to win, our guys for the most part havent been in that situation. But just like them you gotta lose before you win
I say Mcdonagh is a clear two steps ahead of any of our defenders, and because of that their defence is a step better overall. Offence is almost a wash- Johansen is better than any Ranger forward, but they have more skill and playmaking ability on three lines. Lundqvist > Bob (this is no knock on Bob, no goalie is as consistently dominant as Lundqvist).
CBJWerenski8
Rest in Peace Johnny
- Jun 13, 2009
- 43,696
- 26,743
1. Team speed. They all got it except Dorsett and Boyle.
2. They are deeper on defense with skill and experience
3. Henrik is better than Bob, and every other goalie in the league
4. We don't play the defensive system of the Rangers, which is the Wingers go fish the puck while the D, Goalie, and Center try to save the pucks and cover rebounds.
2. They are deeper on defense with skill and experience
3. Henrik is better than Bob, and every other goalie in the league
4. We don't play the defensive system of the Rangers, which is the Wingers go fish the puck while the D, Goalie, and Center try to save the pucks and cover rebounds.
Cyclones Rock
Registered User
- Jun 12, 2008
- 10,912
- 7,076
I wouldn't use the Rags SC Finals appearance as a benchmark of how the Jackets should build themselves. I think that will be very clear after the Stanley Cup finals. I'd think that the Rangers will be fortunate to win a game in the finals against either prospective opponent.
Montreal lost its best player, goalie Carey Price, in the first game of the series and while Torkaski played as well as one could expect for an AHL goalie,he was no Carey Price. Perhaps the biggest loss of Price was Price's outstanding puck handling and clearing ability. Torkaski rarely went out of his net and the Habs transition game suffered dearly as a result.
Game 1 was 2-1 NYR when Price was injured, but Price stayed in for a few minutes and let in two goals due to his injury which effectively ended all Montreal chances. Game 4 was a quarter inch away from going Montreal's way as a puck hit the bottom of the cross bar and missed going in by inches on a Galchenyuk shot with 2 minutes remaining. The Rags won that game in OT.
The Canadiens really did not play a single good game in the 6 game series. They were not the team which swept Tampa Bay and beat the Presidents Cup-winning Boston Bruins. Most of the top regular season Hab point producers went on hiatus during the Rags series. More about a collective slump and running out of gas as opposed to any great coaching strategy by Vigneault.
The Rangers personnel is pretty good on the blue line. McDonough is a true standout on defense and the defense is a very quick and fast unit overall. Lundqvist is an excellent goalie. So Price. But, the Habs were one of the worst teams 5 vs. 5 in the NHL during the regular season, so most teams are going to look defensively sound against them-especially when the transition game was suffering due to the loss of Price. Montreal's power play was a hot and cold proposition throughout the year. It deteriorated to a pass the puck to Subban and let him blast it model in the Rags series. It was awful more than the Rags doing anything special to shut it down.
The Rags forwards are an aging group with decent, but not great talent-St. Louis excepted and he's on his last legs. Brassard centers the first line. Need more be said? Johansen, Dubinski, Jenner, Foligno, Atkinson, Horton (not thisyear's, but the normal one
),Letestu,and MacKenzie would all easily slot into the Rags forward mix. Richards, Nash and St. Louis are all on borrowed time with only the latter being very effective in the playoffs this year.
Montreal and the Rags both maximized each's potential by getting through superior opponents (Boston, Pittsburgh) in 7 games in round 2. Someone had to win the Conference Finals. The Blue Jackets maturing and improving roster is very comparable to either of these two squads. Nothing to really learn from the Rags or Montreal on team building in my eyes except that team defensive speed is very useful, but the Jackets aren't bad in that department overall anyway.
Montreal lost its best player, goalie Carey Price, in the first game of the series and while Torkaski played as well as one could expect for an AHL goalie,he was no Carey Price. Perhaps the biggest loss of Price was Price's outstanding puck handling and clearing ability. Torkaski rarely went out of his net and the Habs transition game suffered dearly as a result.
Game 1 was 2-1 NYR when Price was injured, but Price stayed in for a few minutes and let in two goals due to his injury which effectively ended all Montreal chances. Game 4 was a quarter inch away from going Montreal's way as a puck hit the bottom of the cross bar and missed going in by inches on a Galchenyuk shot with 2 minutes remaining. The Rags won that game in OT.
The Canadiens really did not play a single good game in the 6 game series. They were not the team which swept Tampa Bay and beat the Presidents Cup-winning Boston Bruins. Most of the top regular season Hab point producers went on hiatus during the Rags series. More about a collective slump and running out of gas as opposed to any great coaching strategy by Vigneault.
The Rangers personnel is pretty good on the blue line. McDonough is a true standout on defense and the defense is a very quick and fast unit overall. Lundqvist is an excellent goalie. So Price. But, the Habs were one of the worst teams 5 vs. 5 in the NHL during the regular season, so most teams are going to look defensively sound against them-especially when the transition game was suffering due to the loss of Price. Montreal's power play was a hot and cold proposition throughout the year. It deteriorated to a pass the puck to Subban and let him blast it model in the Rags series. It was awful more than the Rags doing anything special to shut it down.
The Rags forwards are an aging group with decent, but not great talent-St. Louis excepted and he's on his last legs. Brassard centers the first line. Need more be said? Johansen, Dubinski, Jenner, Foligno, Atkinson, Horton (not thisyear's, but the normal one
),Letestu,and MacKenzie would all easily slot into the Rags forward mix. Richards, Nash and St. Louis are all on borrowed time with only the latter being very effective in the playoffs this year. Montreal and the Rags both maximized each's potential by getting through superior opponents (Boston, Pittsburgh) in 7 games in round 2. Someone had to win the Conference Finals. The Blue Jackets maturing and improving roster is very comparable to either of these two squads. Nothing to really learn from the Rags or Montreal on team building in my eyes except that team defensive speed is very useful, but the Jackets aren't bad in that department overall anyway.
EspenK
Registered User
- Sep 25, 2011
- 15,842
- 4,445
Rangers were 3-1 collectively against the Kings & Hawks regular season.
Isn't the Stepan line #1 with Nash & Kreider? Although the Brass line has been pretty good this playoff and reg season too.
Cyclones Rock
Registered User
- Jun 12, 2008
- 10,912
- 7,076
You might be right, although announcers did refer to Brassard as the #1 line center on one occasion....although that may have been a PP reference
In any case, Brassard, Stepan, Richards and Kreider all play about the same even strength amount.I would have felt the same about Montreal. I just can't see the Rags shutting down the forwards on either LA or Chicago. I also can't see the Rangers being able to generate all that much offense against either of these two teams. I didn't know what the reg. season records were, but I feel safe in disregarding them.
Last edited by a moderator:
SuperGenius
For Duty & Humanity!
- Mar 18, 2008
- 4,639
- 199
You might be right, although announcers did refer to Brassard as the #1 line center on one occasion....although that may have been a PP reference
Perhaps the folks who refer to brass as a number one center are the same that still try to characterize Nash as a "power forward"
I don't think the Rangers roster is that great - I actually prefer the CBJ roster. Rangers will get steamrolled in the finals.
St. Louis and Brad Richards are old, Nash is invisible, Stepan is decent but not a bonafide #1, Brass is Brass....the only forwards on that team I really like are Zucc and Hags, although Kreids is promising as well.
They are getting key goals at key times from one year cast offs like Moore Carcillo, Boyle, or Pouliot...I mean right now those look like good signings and depth players but this team isn't really built that well IMO
But I'd take Dubie, Artie, and more importantly, Johansen over any of those guys.
McDonough, Staal, and Girardi are solid, but after that, it's pretty much a poo poo platter. I mean, Kevin Kein? Anton Stralman? John Moore?
Give me Jack and Murray to build around any day. I could honestly see them missing the playoffs next year. They almost did this year, had a cake end of schedule season and then got to face the Flyers and imploding Pens
St. Louis and Brad Richards are old, Nash is invisible, Stepan is decent but not a bonafide #1, Brass is Brass....the only forwards on that team I really like are Zucc and Hags, although Kreids is promising as well.
They are getting key goals at key times from one year cast offs like Moore Carcillo, Boyle, or Pouliot...I mean right now those look like good signings and depth players but this team isn't really built that well IMO
But I'd take Dubie, Artie, and more importantly, Johansen over any of those guys.
McDonough, Staal, and Girardi are solid, but after that, it's pretty much a poo poo platter. I mean, Kevin Kein? Anton Stralman? John Moore?
Give me Jack and Murray to build around any day. I could honestly see them missing the playoffs next year. They almost did this year, had a cake end of schedule season and then got to face the Flyers and imploding Pens
a clear two steps? Did you see Jack in that playoff series?
Let's not forget Murray was the number 2 overall pick, top d prospect in the world...if he can man up and stop getting hurt, he has the chance to be the next Suter or Weber
EspenK
Registered User
- Sep 25, 2011
- 15,842
- 4,445
You might be right, although announcers did refer to Brassard as the #1 line center on one occasion....although that may have been a PP reference
I meant to say win more than one game in the finals.
I would have felt the same about Montreal. I just can't see the Rags shutting down the forwards on either LA or Chicago. I also can't see the Rangers being able to generate all that much offense against either of these two teams. I didn't know what the reg. season records were, but I feel safe in disregarding them.
I think that Lundqvist is the key to the Rangers winning the CUP. Quick and Crawford have looked sieve like this series. IF Lundqvist maintains his stats the Rangers could surprise a lot of people. Remember the Bruins or Pens were slam dunks to come out of the East.
Cyclones Rock
Registered User
- Jun 12, 2008
- 10,912
- 7,076
Cyclones Rock
Registered User
- Jun 12, 2008
- 10,912
- 7,076
Absolutely. I just don't see him shutting down the likes of Hossa, Kane, Toews, Sharp, Saad, Bickel over a series.
Then there's that other team with Kopitar and two other guys whose names are escaping me right now
Anything can happen. That's why they play the games. But, I'll leave it to the hockey historians to rank where a Rangers upset over the Kings or Hawks would rank. I would think that it would rate very high on the scale of all time SC Finals surprises.
Yes, and if Jack plays like that consistently then we have nothing to worry about. But so far he hasn't played at that level consistently and McDonagh has.
Crede777
Deputized
- Dec 16, 2009
- 14,841
- 4,558
While I can see the parallels between the Jackets and the Rangers, I think the Jackets draw closer parallels to the Kings but younger. If everyone develops correctly, we could be the Kings in a few years.
Kopitar - Johansen: A top line center with size who is good on both ends of the ice and can carry a line.
Doughty - Murray: #2 overall defenseman who is always in the right place at the right time. Decent size, great at carrying the puck.
Brown - Jenner: A physical winger who plays on the edge and is a big time leader.
Quick - Bobrovsky: A goalie who is stilln relatively young and relies heavily on athleticism / acrobatics.
Of course, we'd be lucky if any one of those guys develops into his Kings comparable let alone all 4 of them. We also need to add more forward punch like Williams, Carter, and Gaborik that we can lean on as other top-line forwards when guys like Kopitar are quiet.
Double-Shift Lasse
Just post better
EspenK
Registered User
- Sep 25, 2011
- 15,842
- 4,445
Good points the only thing missing are likely candidates to become Carter & Gaborik. Maybe Wennberg is Carter and Bjorkstrand becomes Gabby and Rychel becomes Toffoli?
And another thing that I think is true the Kings and Blackhawks for that matter both seem much faster on D than the Jackets. Maybe its just the level you need to play at in a conference final but as I watched I kept asking myself can Savard, Prout, Tyutin, Wiz ever play as quickly and efficiently as these guys? I don't know but I'd be surprised if they did. Murray & JJ yes, maybe Wiz, the others I wonder.
