Toggle sidebar

Post-Game Talk: Hawks @ Rangers: It feels so good to be back!!

  • Xenforo Cloud will be upgrading us to version 2.3.5 on March 3rd at 12 AM GMT. This version has increased stability and fixes several bugs. We expect downtime for the duration of the update. The admin team will continue to work on existing issues, templates and upgrade all necessary available addons to minimize impact of this new version. Click Here for Updates
Matt4776 said:
People always say this, yet in every sport at every trade deadline, certain players that just so happen to be on the trading block seem to get extra playing time that they wouldn't ordinarily get.
Click to expand...

Dan has gotten time on the PP

This year, last year, the year before.

This is not the first time he has been asked to play PP time.

Dan is averageing 1:14 of PP time this year, last year it was 2:08, year before that 1:45

seeing Dan G on the PP is not a surprise
 
Girardi has been playing the PP under AV, plays the other side than McD, and AV could have been limiting McD's minutes somewhat because of the Olympics and recovery, though I haven't checked minutes
 
pld459666 said:
Dan has gotten time on the PP

This year, last year, the year before.

This is not the first time he has been asked to play PP time.

Dan is averageing 1:14 of PP time this year, last year it was 2:08, year before that 1:45

seeing Dan G on the PP is not a surprise
Click to expand...

Wasn't talking about Girardi specifically. Just in general, showcasing actually does exist.
 
Loffen said:
Didn't watch.

Big goal for Nash. Just what we needed. Hopefully the monkey's off his back. Huge win.
Click to expand...

Yep, huge "ugly" win.. Rangers were dominated the entire third period, but 2 pts is 2 pts... Would like to have seen a little more "push-back" from the Rangers in the third however..
 
pld459666 said:
Dan has gotten time on the PP

This year, last year, the year before.

This is not the first time he has been asked to play PP time.

Dan is averageing 1:14 of PP time this year, last year it was 2:08, year before that 1:45

seeing Dan G on the PP is not a surprise
Click to expand...
It is a surprise if you strive for a good PP and you're not considering the man advantage to be a power kill. Danny G is a defensive defenseman for a reason, he's not a puckhandler by any means. I would rather see Strålman out there, at least he's not afraid to shoot the puck and has tools to find the lanes too.
 
BTW, if we ended up allowing that goal in the final seconds and lost, this PGT would have 20 pages now. We beat the defending cup champs and swept them. Why is this thread dead?
 
Jackpot said:
Yep, huge "ugly" win.. Rangers were dominated the entire third period, but 2 pts is 2 pts... Would like to have seen a little more "push-back" from the Rangers in the third however..
Click to expand...

This is simply untrue. The Rangers played a smart, stiff third period. The last 40 seconds were wild but the rest of the period was pretty strong for a team protecting a lead (especially against a team with four of the best offensive forwards in the league who were being double shifted). Were we being dominated when Nash scored? This win wasn't ugly, in fact it was artful and don't forget how one-sided the officiating was. You can't just look at shots on goal and draw conclusions.
 
Yeah, I wouldn't say the Rangers were dominated in the 3rd. They played prevent and it worked. Not like the Hawks were getting chances left and right until the very end.
 
Bardof425 said:
This is simply untrue. The Rangers played a smart, stiff third period. The last 40 seconds were wild but the rest of the period was pretty strong for a team protecting a lead (especially against a team with four of the best offensive forwards in the league who were being double shifted). Were we being dominated when Nash scored? This win wasn't ugly, in fact it was artful and don't forget how one-sided the officiating was. You can't just look at shots on goal and draw conclusions.
Click to expand...

Guess that's a matter of opinion, they had chances left and right all period long, they just didn't capitalize on them. If I had to take a guess, I'd say they spent over half the period in our zone with possession of the puck, key words being WITH POSSESSION playing catch, shooting etc...

The play was all one way, ice was tilted, Rangers were back on their heels holding on for dear life, how anyone who watched it could say otherwise is beyond me. Artful? Seriously? No way you want to play an entire period of hockey that way.. I'm not going complain about the 2 points, but really, artful? lol, just saying....Artful was the tic, tac , toe play that almost tied the game with 11 seconds left...
 
Jackpot said:
Guess that's a matter of opinion, they had chances left and right all period long, they just didn't capitalize on them. If I had to take a guess, I'd say they spent over half the period in our zone with possession of the puck, key words being WITH POSSESSION playing catch, shooting etc...

The play was all one way, ice was tilted, Rangers were back on their heels holding on for dear life, how anyone who watched it could say otherwise is beyond me. Artful? Seriously? No way you want to play an entire period of hockey that way.. I'm not going complain about the 2 points, but really, artful? lol, just saying....Artful was the tic, tac , toe play that almost tied the game with 11 seconds left...
Click to expand...

Bad period, but I thought we limited the actual chances. Possession was not in our favor. Whatever, it happens. This wasn't Buffalo we were playing.
 
Eh I don't think the Rangers played terribly in the 3rd. Yes Chicago got chances but the Rangers did a good job not making it easy on them. The issue, as usual, is that it's very very hard in the NHL to play a game in which you don't allow the other team to get any momentum, and when you're up a goal or two in the final period, it can be hard to not go into prevent mode. I think there have even been studies on this that it's not something coaches or players consciously do, it just kind of happens. Add in Chicago is a very good team and they shortened their bench and started pushing hard for a goal, and you end up with the Rangers on their heels a bit, but still doing a good job to prevent easy scoring chances
 
Jackpot said:
Guess that's a matter of opinion, they had chances left and right all period long, they just didn't capitalize on them. If I had to take a guess, I'd say they spent over half the period in our zone with possession of the puck, key words being WITH POSSESSION playing catch, shooting etc...

The play was all one way, ice was tilted, Rangers were back on their heels holding on for dear life, how anyone who watched it could say otherwise is beyond me. Artful? Seriously? No way you want to play an entire period of hockey that way.. I'm not going complain about the 2 points, but really, artful? lol, just saying....Artful was the tic, tac , toe play that almost tied the game with 11 seconds left...
Click to expand...

The end was nerve wracking but that aside I felt comfortable with the lead. Yeah, they had the puck, but Talbot didn't have to be great (except at the very end). We kept them to the outside and made it very tough for them to get good scoring chances. Considering the competition I found it artful.
 
Bardof425 said:
The end was nerve wracking but that aside I felt comfortable with the lead. Yeah, they had the puck, but Talbot didn't have to be great (except at the very end). We kept them to the outside and made it very tough for them to get good scoring chances. Considering the competition I found it artful.
Click to expand...

I completely agree we did a decent job limiting really high percentage scoring chances. However, I would rather spend a little more time in the neutral zone, or their zone preferably. I mean it was an extremely long last 15 minutes of the game. One of the things that really stood out to me over the first 45 minutes of the game was how fast it was moving along. . I remember looking at my watch and we were in the third and the game had only been on for 2hrs.. Then it seemed we tightened up, couldn't skate, couldn't pass, couldn't control the puck long enough to even carry the play through the neutral zone, let alone the offensive zone. The one exception being Nash chasing down the puck he lost and scoring... It was pretty frustrating to watch really, considering how well they had been playing up to that point... No reason they needed to crawl into a shell...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom