No, I don't think you're entirely wrong.
Last season we overachieved by two playoff rounds. This season was a return to reality.
I don't look at it that way. If we apply that to everyone, then that means the Avalance regressed four. They're still going into next season as one of the best teams in the league.
Boston had their full team.
Even if you don't look at it that way, the hockey world unfortunately does. Optics are a bitch. Any way you slice it, a first-round ouster was not what the hockey world expected of the Rangers.
I have less f***s for what the hockey world thinks than Lafreniere had points in that series.
No, I'm saying that because I believe they can actually win with some luck along the way and with Boston losing the east is wide open. They had a 112 point season so they are very good. I thought their inexperience would be their downfall but after game 2 they kind of figured things out and made the necessary adjustments and the Rangers did not. So what the team regressed? That shit happens all the time in the NHL. Colorado failed many years before they won. Tampa got swept in the first round after they had 128 points in the regular season. They made the right moves and then won cups. That's why I don't jump off a bridge when the team faces adversity. Is it disappointing? Hell yea. Is it the end of the world and the end of the Rangers being contenders? I don't think it is.
Who gives a f*** what the hockey world thinks? Do you think Colorado, Tampa or Boston organizations give a flying f*** about what the hockey world thinks about their first round losses? The Rangers lost to a team that finished ahead of them in the standings. This loss should not be some sort of shocker.
I don't really agree with you there. Game 7 may just be one game, but the Rangers were so thoroughly destroyed in a do-or-die situation that it would be completely incompetent to let this current trajectory continue. They scored 2 goals in 4 losses. And lost similarly last year after a really flukey run where they never should've advanced past Pittsburgh.
You're walking back your stance all this season about how this team is good and was a Cup favorite. But when there's a slump or when they keep losing to real contending teams during the regular season, you remind us that those are good teams and every team goes through losing. So why were we not able to make adjustments. Good teams do that, no? I watched the games in the Boston series. They played at a high level all through the regular season, but in the series with the Panthers they showed me that they don't have elite speed and skill outside of a few core players who are aging and their goaltending is suspect. The league is moving to superfast teams with decent to elite skill across 18 skaters. If this team is good, the problem is most other teams are still better.
I didn't say there wouldn't be changes. Of course there will be. Gallant will be fired and there will be roster moves as well. They still have good pieces though to recover. They also retained 1st rounders this year and next, as well as all their prospects.
It's a failure I guess but anybody who is actually shocked by losing to the Devils hasn't been watching hockey this year. They are skilled and fast. I thought we would win the series but that it wouldn't be easy. I never though we would be so inept on the PP like we were the last 5 games and that was what cost them because they weren't winning the 5 on 5 play. Gallant will be fired and we will make other changes. They will still be a playoff team next year.
Forget the outside world for a minute. No one in the organization deems this season a success. Absolutely no one. You yourself reached for outside examples in Colorado, Tampa and Boston to justify and to cope. So who cares what those organizations did on their way to their Cups, Goes both ways, not when it's convenient or inconvenient.
I'm not walking back anything and I never said they were the favorite. They were a cup contender, so were Boston, Colorado, and Tampa. The truth is anything can happen in a playoff series, especially the 1st round. I picked the Rangers in 6 because I thought we could take advantage of their inexperience. It didn't happen but they didn't get swept either. They lost in 7 games and if they score another PP goal instead of going 1 for 20 they would probably be playing Carolina in a few days. I do not know why they couldn't make adjustments, especially on the PP. You will have to ask Gallant about that. This team is good but there is no denying that they need changes and they need more speed for sure. It will be a very interesting off season but I expect them back in the playoffs next season.
Look, we're all emotionally frayed right now. Game 7 wasn't competitive. There's a chasm that is growing between where this team is and where other teams are. If this, if that doesn't mean much to me. It is about execution, adaptation and perseverence.
I don't agree. Extremely disappointing yes, catastrophic no. Even up 2-0 after the first 2 games I never thought it was a slam dunk because Jersey was such a good road team and was a little uneasy about that. I always said home ice meant nothing in this series. What I define as catastrophic is Boston losing the way they did with their expectations. Now that's catastrophic. This was their year and were huge favorites and to lose a series to a team that finished 43 points behind you after leading the series 3-1 is bad. They are also older, have no 1st or 2nd rounders for the next 2 years, and a limited prospect pool.
