Toggle sidebar

Post-Game Talk: ECSF #1 - 5/16/13 | New York Rangers @ Boston Bruins - Damnit!

Bruins fan here.

The Bruins young D will come back to earth in Game 2 and I see a Rangers win.
 
I remember back in 1989-90 the Rangers had the 4th ranked PP and scored 103 PP goals.

Their leading scorer that year was John Ogrodnick with 74 points.

The PP was a threat to score and often times did score EVERY game.
 
Hank wishes he had Frankenstein's floater back, we would have won in regulation...Strals was awesome last night, mostly pitted against that idiot Lucic
 
Mio41 said:
Hank wishes he had Frankenstein's floater back, we would have won in regulation...Strals was awesome last night, mostly pitted against that idiot Lucic
Click to expand...

I agree with the fact that he probably should have stopped it...but then again these clowns left the guy with the 105MPH shot alllll alone between the circles. He had all the time in the world to wind up and blast
 
Mio41 said:
Hank wishes he had Frankenstein's floater back, we would have won in regulation...Strals was awesome last night, mostly pitted against that idiot Lucic
Click to expand...

....or maybe he doesnt save Krejci's shot labeled for the top corner later in the game. You never know.

Stepans goal was even worse. What if Rask saved that?
 
At this point... Don't fix the damn PP.

It's now a sense of pride! Look what we can barely accomplish without any semblance of a PP!

Look at us! We won a round in the playoffs WITHOUT a PP!!!

Look with wonder!!! All bow to the mildly successful NYR!!!

Whooooooooooooooo
 
rangers1314 said:
I agree with the fact that he probably should have stopped it...but then again these clowns left the guy with the 105MPH shot alllll alone between the circles. He had all the time in the world to wind up and blast
Click to expand...

I know but he was 55 feet away no screen, Hank stops that shot 99 out of 100 times
 
I was ******* LIVID when Eminger took that awful penalty...he is always putting his around around the other team when he gets beat, and more often than not he gets called, so sick of that ****

Please come back Staal...:help:
 
Riche16 said:
At this point... Don't fix the damn PP.

It's now a sense of pride! Look what we can barely accomplish without any semblance of a PP!

Look at us! We won a round in the playoffs WITHOUT a PP!!!

Look with wonder!!! All bow to the mildly successful NYR!!!

Whooooooooooooooo
Click to expand...

What the hell is wrong with them, we lose every faceoff on the PP, we can' t gain the zone, we pass around the perimeter and kill the penalty for them, this PP is killing us
 
McSauer said:
I was ******* LIVID when Eminger took that awful penalty...he is always putting his around around the other team when he gets beat, and more often than not he gets called, so sick of that ****

Please come back Staal...:help:
Click to expand...

He caused Dorsett's penalty too
 
McSauer said:
I was ******* LIVID when Eminger took that awful penalty...he is always putting his around around the other team when he gets beat, and more often than not he gets called, so sick of that ****

Please come back Staal...:help:
Click to expand...

Our 6th defenseman always take a penalty. It's always either the scrubs or the PK'ers that take penalties.

Of course, Chara and Bergeron each took penalties, and the Rangers pp looked abysmal anyway.
 
Wow. This board has gone mad.

Dorsett being blamed for the penalty, Zucc being blamed for Marchand's goal, Lundqvist blamed for 2 soft goals.

Maybe, just maybe, we should realize Boston came out with more intensity, since, after all, it was a game in Boston. You cannot expect us to sweep Boston in the play-offs. This will go to 6 or 7 games if we advance. Chill!!!

Rangers were not that bad. We just need to get hold of the puck a bit more and pressure the young guns on their D. I was very impressed by Bartkowski by the way. Their rookies really played well.

We lost this one. So what? We will get our chance on Sunday
 
Bleed Ranger Blue said:
....or maybe he doesnt save Krejci's shot labeled for the top corner later in the game. You never know.

Stepans goal was even worse. What if Rask saved that?
Click to expand...

Stepan's goal was soft. However, it was a one timer and Rask was on the move. Chara's goal was unscreened and Hank wasn't moving. Sure it dipped but so did that goal on Toskala a few year's back and he was mocked mercilessly (that Toskala goal was worse, but still dipping doesn't mean it wasn't soft).
 
Hm until OT started I was okay with the NYR game.. especially end of 2nd and complete 3rd was okay.

OT was absolutely not. Could have been over much earlier in the OT PD.
Hank had some problems with his 5hole this game..
Was a good chance to win it. We'll see how they will respond on sunday.
 
Pass art by Brassard said:
Wow. This board has gone mad.

Dorsett being blamed for the penalty, Zucc being blamed for Marchand's goal, Lundqvist blamed for 2 soft goals.

Maybe, just maybe, we should realize Boston came out with more intensity, since, after all, it was a game in Boston. You cannot expect us to sweep Boston in the play-offs. This will go to 6 or 7 games if we advance. Chill!!!

Rangers were not that bad. We just need to get hold of the puck a bit more and pressure the young guns on their D. I was very impressed by Bartkowski by the way. Their rookies really played well.

We lost this one. So what? We will get our chance on Sunday
Click to expand...

They came out with more intensity in the OT. I guess they also had the edge in play in the 3rd, it wasn't as noticeable as the OT. However, we should be able to win games like that with the best goalie in the league.
 
BTW, other than the 2 goals, Hanks let ANOTHER shot go through his 5 hole, but managed to cover it before Lucic got there. There were 3 posts. He was REALLY shaky yesterday. If 2 historic consecutive shutouts won't prevent him from being shaky what will? He should have had more confidence than anyone on the ice. Yet he looked super nervous or something.
 
SnowblindNYR said:
BTW, other than the 2 goals, Hanks let ANOTHER shot go through his 5 hole, but managed to cover it before Lucic got there. There were 3 posts. He was REALLY shaky yesterday. If 2 historic consecutive shutouts won't prevent him from being shaky what will? He should have had more confidence than anyone on the ice. Yet he looked super nervous or something.
Click to expand...

This is what I don't get. People on here complain that Lundqvist let up two soft goals. He only let up two goals. So in theory, fans expected a third consecutive shutout? Bogus.

Secondly, I'll state it again, Rask wasn't spectacular. He actually faced significantly less chances than Lundqvist and both goals he let up were soft. Bruins fans weren't blaming him when the Rangers took the 2-1 lead though. What did his team do, come out and score two goals.

That is the difference. Sure, if Lundqvist was perfect he gets his third consecutive shutout and wins 2-0 (assuming you count both soft goals that Rask lets up, or then you can argue that Rask shouldn't have let up any in regulation either, and if both were on its a 0-0 game in OT). OR, if he isn't perfect he wins 2-1.

Or you can argue, had the team not turtled for the third consecutive OT in the post season, and be outchanced and outshot 4:1 in OT, the team quite possibly could have scored a goal when it mattered. And that's on the coach, playing for a shootout, when it doesn't exist in the post season and the team needs a goal.

You can argue that had Nash actually scored a goal, the team wins 3-2 in regulation or OT. He's getting paid $7.8 million, we changed our team to fit Nash, and he hasn't scored ONE GOAL. And I don't care if people say Nash is playing well or creating chances (like our deluded coach believes), his job is to score goals. He's not getting paid $7.8 million to create a chance that he doesn't score on (and he's not doing that very well either). Or, it could start with that player Brad Richards, on the 4th line scoring a big goal. OR Ryan Callahan.

Point is, the team still could have won this game despite weak goaltending on both sides and they didn't because their big players never come to play.

Secondly, I don't care if Lundqvist let up two soft goals. The team was outshot 48-32. He stopped 45 pucks. I don't care about the posts either. That's just a shot that didn't hit the dimensions of the net.

I do care about our top players doing nothing and being dominated in every OT though. Rick Nash absolutely has to start getting the criticism for this teams shortcomings. Not two soft goals by Lundqvist (one arguably not soft either).
 
Last edited:
I don't have any qualms with Hank's performance last night. He dragged that Rangers team into OT, on the road, against a higher seed. They couldn't even return the favor by moving their feet in the extra period.

This team and it's fans rely too heavily on the goaltender. The biggest issue, IMO, is that they're not getting their bang for the buck from Richards, Nash, and Callahan.
 
Last edited:
Not sure how Zucc is getting blamed for the OT goal?

That was 100% Brassards fault, as good as he's been, he gets the blame for a terrible pass behind Nash which in turn led to an odd man rush, and the goal.
 
This board paints a picture like the Rangers are one of the worst run teams in the league with players who don't put in any effort or passion.

Meanwhile, there are 22 other teams that are playing golf right now, including most of our fiercest rivals.

Let's try to keep things in perspective.

Its one game. The Rangers are 4-0-2 in regulation the last 6 games.
 
HockeyBasedNYC said:
This board paints a picture like the Rangers are one of the worst run teams in the league with players who don't put in any effort or passion.

Meanwhile, there are 22 other teams that are playing golf right now, including most of our fiercest rivals.

Let's try to keep things in perspective.

Its one game. The Rangers are 4-0-2 in regulation the last 6 games.
Click to expand...

You're absolutely right, we're in the elite 8 and that is nothing to scoff at. Lost the first game, on the road no less. Only one team can win each game. It's not the end of the world and the end of the playoff run is not imminent.

I do think it's okay to say something along the lines of "I don't think it's our year". And I say that because in 8 playoffs games so far, I can really only count 1 in which the Rangers were truly the better team.

Sure, Lundqvist could pull a Giguere or Hasek and drag a clearly inferior team past stonger clubs on the way to the finals, but I find it more probably that at some point the dam is going to break.

I'm hoping Nash and Callahan find their game, Richards returns to form, and Staal gets healthy. Lundqvist can't do this by himself.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom