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

[OverTheCap]

Maybe the team should ask to have him removed for that first goal he gave up. Today is not the day to bemoan Lundqvist's plight, quite frankly. If he was average we win this game. That first goal was a joke. The second one I thought was deflected, but he probably could have stopped it. Seriously, the first 3 periods were pretty even, the team didn't even bother to show up in OT. What an embarrassing OT. If Lundqvist didn't have his head up his ass we win this one.

I just don't get Lundqvist, he either plays above his regular season play or well below. Like he's bipolar or something. He rarely is in the middle. He play 8 games, 2 were awful, 2 were mediocre, and 4 were amazing. I'm sorry he doesn't have this many bad games in the regular season. That's why I've called him a choker. I guess choker is a misnomer, but the guy has a much higher rate of flat out bad performances in the playoffs. Seriously in the regular season he can go 10 games without giving up a bad goal, he's done so like 4 times in 8 games already.

Interesting choice of words. Weren't you starting threads on the main boards about how great Lundqvist's playoffs stats are? Now you are spamming this thread with posts about how last night's loss is all on Lundqvist. Bipolar, indeed...

 

[Fitzy]

It's just an ill-advised pass in overtime.

I wouldn't get on Brassard about it because I don't want to shatter his confidence. Keep playing aggressive.

For the team, they've been here, I don't think they'll be the least bit rattled by a 1 or 2 game deficit.

This team just plays horribly in overtime. They play to make it last as long as possible, without making any proactive effort to win the game.

 

[RedeyeRocketeer]

Bruins fan here. How do you guys manage to keep people from getting infracted when blaming Hank? That's unreal. You can't win 1-0 hockey games all the way to the cup.

 

[Clowes Line]

Bruins fan here. How do you guys manage to keep people from getting infracted when blaming Hank? That's unreal. You can't win 1-0 hockey games all the way to the cup.

Rangers scored 2 goals last night. Hank could've stopped both of your goals. Am I gonna harp on him for it, no. But to say we couldn't have kept that 2-1 lead and won the game 2-1, is foolish IMO. Hank had a 3rd period lead and let up a soft one.

Once the buzzer went off at the end of the 3rd period, the game was already decided

 

[Garv23]

Brassard's pass was tipped, was it not? Risky sure, but if it gets across we have a glorious chance. Sucks the way it turned out, but at that point, we had zero offense throughout OT.

So what, we lost game 1. Isn't that how it's supposed to be? We should all prefer it at this point.

 

[NYR Viper]

I thought the whole team played like massive crap last night. Losing pucks, not getting pucks out, missing shots, miss connecting on passes. Just a bad game overall.

 

[Clowes Line]

I thought the whole team played like massive crap last night. Losing pucks, not getting pucks out, missing shots, miss connecting on passes. Just a bad game overall.

I still don't understand how Callahan missed the entire net from 10 feet away...

 

[Synergy27]

The problem with this team from the fan's perspective is that they seriously leave you wanting. It is absolutely amazing that they are in the second round of the playoffs given the performances being put in by the big guns. The question is, should you be proud of the team for persevering, or pissed because if those guys were playing to their capability this team would be a great one? It's a tough question to answer.

 

[Ice Hockey]

garbage game last night. i think it's a wakeup call. HELLO! MCFLY!!!!? ANYONE HOME?

rangers should come out blasting pucks on net and screening the hell out of their young fragile goaltender. softys are gonna happen and boy was that a softy. moving on. win the next one and this becomes an entirely different series.

 

[jrentor]

I did not read the entire thread so could have been posted, but i am tired of hearing about Lundqvist letting in soft goals and should have stopped. If it was not for him would not be anywhere even close to where we are now.


Here is a quote I see from the Daily News I guess he said in post game and can tell he is really frustrated with the team it looks like:

“I’ve got to be really careful to ask myself the right question there,” Lundqvist said in a moment of candid frustration. “Because have I played bad in overtime? No. Can I score? No. Is it frustrating? Yes. It was terrible in overtime, but I’ve just got to stick with it, play my game and hopefully it will turn around.

He stopped 45 out of 48 shots, can't ask for a shutout every night, and is he also expected to score?


It only game 1, but watching that felt like a totally different team from game 6 and 7, though they still have same problems, consistency and special teams.

I think they will do much better and series is far from over, but everything can't fall on his shoulders.

 

[LORDE]

Yup. They lost one game.

True.

Problem is, it was a very winnable game against a banged up team who will certainly get healthier as time goes. I guess these guys are so good they can afford to lose the 1st game every series huh? They can afford losses when the other team is ripe for the picking. They can afford losses on the road because they'll always win at home and just have to take game 7 again. Right?

 

[RangerBoy]

The Rangers didn't deserve to win. They played a bad game. Moore took a dumb penalty on the PP. Dorsett took a bad penalty. The only frustrating thing is sometimes they don't call it during the season and call it in the playoffs. Its a penalty. Boyle falls down the PK and it opens up the ice for Krug. Stepan's line did nothing outside of the soft goal allowed by Rask. Brassard made a terrible play in OT. Nash had more open ice last night. He failed to finish on a good chance in the 2nd. The Rangers need to be much better in game 2. They need to generate more speed and offense. Use different personnel on the PP. Kreider was on the PP late in the game hanging out in front of net occupying the Boston D. Go with it in game 2. Maybe he knocks in a rebound if the Rangers bother to shoot the puck.

 

[HockeyBasedNYC]

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.

I agree.

 

[Richter Scale]

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.

I missed the game, so I can't comment on much of anything other than the highlights and replays I saw of the goals. But sorry - those two goals Hank gave up in regulation were weak (especially the first one). He is not free from criticism. I didn't see all of the other saves he made throughout the game, so I can't comment on what his overall play was like last night. But I don't think it is bogus to expect Hank to make those two saves in regulation and get a third shutout. Going into the game should you expect him to get a 3rd shutout in a row? No. But when those are the goals he gives up, for someone to sit there, shake their head, and say he should have had a shutout is not unreasonable. Those are simply shots that need to be saved.

As has been said before, Hank needs to find that next gear come playoff time and bring that game consistently if this team wants to make deep playoff runs. Goalies on championship teams not only keep the "bad" goals out - but also step up and make the stops that you don't expect them to make. No one is saying Hank isn't allowed a softie here or there, but if it happens more than a handful of times, that is a problem in the playoffs. You just can't afford to make that many mistakes in playoff series where the margin between winning and losing is so razor thin.

Does he deserve all of the blame? I didn't see the game, but my guess is probably not. Knowing this team, and seeing Nash and Richie continue to be kept off the scoreboard, they are certainly responsible too. Would this team be where it is today without him? Absolutely not. Would I rather have anyone else in net? Almost assuredly not. But it doesn't mean he gets a pass.

 

[Parker]

Frustrating, the Rangers played terribly in overtime (to be expected at this point) but if Lundqvist doesn't give up that softie to the no-name rookie defenseman (also par for the course that guys score against us in their first games) the Rangers are up 1-0 in this series.

Next time a Rangers game goes to OT I'm turning it off, that was painful to watch and there's about a 5% chance they will win it if it gets to that point.

 

[PlamsUnlimited]

Until this team starts to skate and actually puts forth a consistent effort, Lundqvist is the only thing keeping this team from being a bottom feeder

 

[RangerBoy]

Does anyone know the real story with Staal? You can't count on him. Richards is hopeless. Nash and Callahan are capable of playing a million times better unless both of them are playing with injuries. People don't like that excuse and excuses are for losers but if you're injured its hard to be effective or its a major slump. Something is wrong with Callahan. He doesn't look like same player. That chance late in the 3rd. Was he hooked on that play? I thought the call was going to be for hooking/interfering Callahan and it was Bergeron on Stepan. He had the potential GWG on his stick with 3:45 left.

 

[tjs252]

Lundqvist did not have his best game. It looked like he was fighting the puck the whole night.

That said, Lundqvist was still good enough to get a W if Nash and Callahan show up, and if Brassard was a bit more assertive. Looking for the pass far too much last night.

 

[Ail]

I'm really getting tired of losing in OT, LOL.

The Bruins were the better team. Watching OT, I think the writing was on the wall. We were either going to get a lucky bounce and steal one, or, more likely, succumb to their pressure. The end result was basically a foregone conclusion.

That said, we didn't play terribly. I saw enough out of the boys last night to maintain my confidence that we can win this series. Come out strong next game, win one in Boston, and we're in good shape.

Pretty much how I feel. The OT losses are so deflating.

On another note, here we are again though in a losing GDT where Henrik had a less than stellar game and people are putting it all on him. He was only the first round MVP by a landslide and the only reason there even is a round two, but let's **** on him and him alone. Oh yeah and let's do it without watching the game.

For every one bad game Henrik has the D, O or both of them have 5. That's why you give him a pass. You know he will bounce back and be better. Can we consistently say that about the rest of the team ever? No. So ridiculous. I can't wait to see what some of these people say when Henrik retires. Should be a real gas.

 

[Ail]

I did not read the entire thread so could have been posted, but i am tired of hearing about Lundqvist letting in soft goals and should have stopped. If it was not for him would not be anywhere even close to where we are now.


Here is a quote I see from the Daily News I guess he said in post game and can tell he is really frustrated with the team it looks like:



He stopped 45 out of 48 shots, can't ask for a shutout every night, and is he also expected to score?


It only game 1, but watching that felt like a totally different team from game 6 and 7, though they still have same problems, consistency and special teams.

I think they will do much better and series is far from over, but everything can't fall on his shoulders.

Welcome to HFboards dude, enjoy your stay and enjoy beating your head against the keyboard reading people saying the same stupid stuff every time Henrik has an off night.

 

[nevesis]

Anyone, and I mean anyone remotely blaming Lundqvist for this loss is a complete and utter ignorant fool. The people doing this have NEVER played the position, on the ice, in ANY type of competitive way.

The ones that do on this forum, myself and a select few others are the ones who defend him when he needs to be defended. The goals he gave up were not soft by any means, they only look soft to the ignorant eye.

Other goalies understand when someone winds up and you have a tenth of a second to react to a shot, and you're expecting a bomb of a shot, all of a sudden when the puck comes in as a knuckler, the puck dips and moves and is extremely unpredictable to know where it will end up.

The best part about those two goals is that Hank actually got a piece of BOTH of them. The first one landed behind him and it was bad luck that he landed on it and went in. The second one dropped and found an opening under his glove side arm. He caught a piece of that way too.

What is never mentioned are the almost impossible saves he makes most of the game on shots that, again, most people who don't play the position have ZERO idea on the difficulty of the saves on a majority of them. He stopped 45 out of 48 shots. They lost 3-2.

Listening to the amount of ignorance in this forum, you would think he let up 7 goals in a row a la Mike Richter/Ron Francis.

Get a grip everyone. Henrik Lundqvist is this whole ****ing team. Without him, we're NOTHING. The problems do not begin to start anywhere near him.

 

[Riverdale]

Pretty much how I feel. The OT losses are so deflating.

On another note, here we are again though in a losing GDT where Henrik had a less than stellar game and people are putting it all on him. He was only the first round MVP by a landslide and the only reason there even is a round two, but let's **** on him and him alone. Oh yeah and let's do it without watching the game.

For every one bad game Henrik has the D, O or both of them have 5. That's why you give him a pass. You know he will bounce back and be better. Can we consistently say that about the rest of the team ever? No. So ridiculous. I can't wait to see what some of these people say when Henrik retires. Should be a real gas.

Hank could probably have won this game 2-1, but he didn't. So what? Nash and Callahan could have won this game 3-2. They didn't and while Hank bounces back it is up in the air whether or not the big guns on this team will.

I am waiting for Callahan and Nash to have a good playoff series. Callahan missed two empty nets last night and Nash ,while he looked better, still has put up zero goals. The whole makeup of this team was changed when Nash came in and he is playing like he is in Columbus.

 

[Saitama]

Lundqvist may have had a sub-par game, but quite a few Rangers have been having sub-par playoffs. The problem is not with Lundqvist.

 

[Zappy]

Pretty much how I feel. The OT losses are so deflating.

On another note, here we are again though in a losing GDT where Henrik had a less than stellar game and people are putting it all on him. He was only the first round MVP by a landslide and the only reason there even is a round two, but let's **** on him and him alone. Oh yeah and let's do it without watching the game.

For every one bad game Henrik has the D, O or both of them have 5. That's why you give him a pass. You know he will bounce back and be better. Can we consistently say that about the rest of the team ever? No. So ridiculous. I can't wait to see what some of these people say when Henrik retires. Should be a real gas.

Yep. I mean, I'm not going to sit here and argue with people on this board, because everyone sticks to their opinions. Funny how common sense and intelligent conversation goes out the window when you are typing on a message board...

Anyways, the game is won by the Rangers if we actually have a solid forecheck (Steps goal was soft and McD's goal was really only because Nash made it happen) and if we are actually ALIVE during OT. If the two goals Hank lets in aren't soft, no one here says anything about his performance and then the offense is completely blamed. It just so happens these goals were stoppable, and now the blame is completely on him. I'm sure Hank isn't happy about it, and I'll let him deal with that aspect. As a fan, I am seeing that we have plenty of faults across the board, but that game was winnable. I expected the B's to be a lot better in their Game 1 honestly.

We have NO presence in front of the net. There was a point on a PP where there were 3 B's players in front of the net and no Ranger player to be seen. And that happens NIGHT AFTER NIGHT. Hank lets in soft goals every now and then? Ok, it happens, but not consistently. We CONSISTENTLY have the same exact forechecking and PP issues? Yeah, that is what you should be concerned about.

 

[RGY]

Anyone, and I mean anyone remotely blaming Lundqvist for this loss is a complete and utter ignorant fool. The people doing this have NEVER played the position, on the ice, in ANY type of competitive way.

The ones that do on this forum, myself and a select few others are the ones who defend him when he needs to be defended. The goals he gave up were not soft by any means, they only look soft to the ignorant eye.

Other goalies understand when someone winds up and you have a tenth of a second to react to a shot, and you're expecting a bomb of a shot, all of a sudden when the puck comes in as a knuckler, the puck dips and moves and is extremely unpredictable to know where it will end up.

The best part about those two goals is that Hank actually got a piece of BOTH of them. The first one landed behind him and it was bad luck that he landed on it and went in. The second one dropped and found an opening under his glove side arm. He caught a piece of that way too.

What is never mentioned are the almost impossible saves he makes most of the game on shots that, again, most people who don't play the position have ZERO idea on the difficulty of the saves on a majority of them. He stopped 45 out of 48 shots. They lost 3-2.

Listening to the amount of ignorance in this forum, you would think he let up 7 goals in a row a la Mike Richter/Ron Francis.

Get a grip everyone. Henrik Lundqvist is this whole ****ing team. Without him, we're NOTHING. The problems do not begin to start anywhere near him.

No one should be blaming Lundqvist. He stopped 45 shots. 45. Rask stopped what, 33? That's pathetic. I think the issue for the Lundqvist critics (though they shouldn't be talking much) is that they are so used to him being spectacular and quite honestly the two goals he let up were soft goals. No screens. He had clear looks. The OT goal was Brassard and McDonagh's fault.

They lost again because of a poor PP. Just absolutely poor. Boston's PP isn't much better, but that doesn't make things ok. In fact it makes it worse because this is an area the Rangers can capitalize on if they are better. Boston's defense is beat up. They have young inexperienced guys on the blueline. They will take more penalties in this series. The Rangers play a very physical game, they will draw the PP's. They need to convert. Kreider should get more time. Richards and Nash should get less. Nash has been awful. He tries to do too much. Just shoot the puck. I think having Kreider and Nash on the ice at the same time for the PP could be very effective. Definitely not ES seeing as they are both horror shows defensively.

It was Game 1. It was a feeling out game. Boston is a very different team than the Capitals. They are not as quick as the Capitals. The game seemed slower. They have good defenseman but they do not have a Mike Green that pushes the play quickly up the ice to offense. The Rangers can win this series. No one thought they were going to sweep the B's. They will win Game 2.