Post-Game Talk: Islanders at Rangers 12/20/2013

  • Thread starter Thread starter *Bob Richards*
  • Start date Start date
  • 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
In fact, you can argue that the Rangers would have been better off long-term if Lundqvist had never played a game for them, as Sather would have been fired by now without King Henrik saving his posterior for the past eight years.

James Dolan still owns the team doesn't he? The Rangers were even more hopeless and more godawful in Sather's first four seasons pre-Lundqvist. He still didn't get fired.
 
Who's their goalie? Did they even have the same goalie winning the last 2 cups? That's how much they think of goaltending


Are you serious? They have a team loaded with talent. Oh my god...
 
Nobody has that and that's why the Hawks will be IMO an all-time great dynasty when all is said and done.

But like a poster above me mentioned, look at the top of the standings and count the teams with elite goalies.


What does that have to do with Hanks salary? You make zero sense
 
Are you serious? They have a team loaded with talent. Oh my god...

That's the point..you build your team with talent - forwards and D..goaltending doesn't need to be elite..how do you think they got Kane and toews? By finishing last fir 2 straight years. If you have an $8.5 mio elite goalie and no talent, you never finish last but always be mediocre..get it?..get out of the Hank fan club..join the rangers fan club
 
Off the top of my head, LA-Quick, BOS-Rask, arguably SJ-Niemi; Montreal built around Price, they're 4th in the East, Vancouver built around Luongo.

Not every team can be Chicago, they're a ******* powerhouse.

I don't think it would be too hard to argue that Tampa, Dallas, Colorado, and Minnesota are having so much more success than years past in huge part because of improved goaltending. But they weren't rosters constructed around goalies so it proves nothing about the impact of a great goalie on a team's success.
 
Off the top of my head, LA-Quick, BOS-Rask, arguably SJ-Niemi; Montreal built around Price, they're 4th in the East, Vancouver built around Luongo.

Not every team can be Chicago, they're a ******* powerhouse.

and only one of those teams has actually won a Cup, and that was an 8 seed.
 
The hank fan club here only wants to see hank do well not the team. They think the vezzz is everything whereas we think the Cup is everything.

Henrik was 7 when I started watching the Rangers. A little more effort next time :dunce:
 
whose gonna be left once the rangers get rid of sather, hank, danny g, nash.. whoever else is at fault for everything going wrong..
 
Off the top of my head, LA-Quick, BOS-Rask, arguably SJ-Niemi; Montreal built around Price, they're 4th in the East, Vancouver built around Luongo.

Not every team can be Chicago, they're a ******* powerhouse.

Quick is a mediocre regular season goalie who gets hot in the playoffs. Chara and Bergeron are far more important to Boston's success than Rask. Thornton, Couture and Pavelski are more important to San Jose than Niemi. Vancouver is built around the Sedins and Kesler. Also none of those goalies have the cap hit that Hank will have.
 
whose gonna be left once the rangers get rid of sather, hank, danny g, nash.. whoever else is at fault for everything going wrong..


Nothing, This team needs a blank slate, as it's rotten to the foundation. I would gladly give away EVERYONE on this team if that meant that Sather and all his underlings (Clark, Gorton, Schoenfeld, Vingneault, Samuelsson, Arniel, Gernander, etc) were unceremoniously tossed out of the organization.
 
That's the point..you build your team with talent - forwards and D..goaltending doesn't need to be elite..how do you think they got Kane and toews? By finishing last fir 2 straight years. If you have an $8.5 mio elite goalie and no talent, you never finish last but skyways be mediocre..get it?

Yes and no. Having a great goalie probably prevents a team from getting lottery picks, but lottery picks are not the only way to build a successful team. I refuse to buy into the idea that having a great talent lowers the chances of a franchise's long term success. Having Lundqvist doesn't force Sather to pay fifteen million a year for seven years to Gomez and Drury. Or Redden. It doesn't force us to draft Sanguinetti over Giroux, Berglund, Lucic, or Marchand. Or Del Zotto over Carlson and Eberle. Having a highly paid goalie doesn't cripple a team, especially if he's earning it. Poor management does.
 
Quick is a mediocre regular season goalie who gets hot in the playoffs. Chara and Bergeron are far more important to Boston's success than Rask. Thornton, Couture and Pavelski are more important to San Jose than Niemi. Vancouver is built around the Sedins and Kesler. Also none of those goalies have the cap hit that Hank will have.

Quick had a phenomenal regular season the year he won the cup, vezina runner up I believe. The otehr three statements I won't even touch, because they're opinions stated as facts. Also none of them have earned the cap hit that Hank will have.
 
Anyone have a replay or can explain something: about a minute before the Rangers 3rd goal the Isles got a breakaway and it looked like they scored top shelf. I was at the game and they showed no replay but everyone sitting around me was convinced it went in and was going to get reviewed when the whistle blew. How close was it?
 
Anyone have a replay or can explain something: about a minute before the Rangers 3rd goal the Isles got a breakaway and it looked like they scored top shelf. I was at the game and they showed no replay but everyone sitting around me was convinced it went in and was going to get reviewed when the whistle blew. How close was it?

Wasn't actually close, hit square on the crossbar. But yeah, watching it on the TV my thoughts were also that it was going to the booth.
 
Im really starting to think the new size pads Lundqvist has + AV's style infront of him is REALLLY affecting him this year. I find it hard to believe we'll see the old Lundqvist anytime soon
 
Wasn't actually close, hit square on the crossbar. But yeah, watching it on the TV my thoughts were also that it was going to the booth.

I was so sure that it went in that I wasn't happy when the Rangers scored because I didn't think it was going to count. If only the team could hold on to a damn lead.
 
and only one of those teams has actually won a Cup, and that was an 8 seed.

8th seed means nothing, they won the Cup. Boston not only won a cup around a great goalie, he won the Conn Smythe.

What am I talking about, Quick won the Conn Smythe also. Then they gave him a 10-year extension with a $4M raise.
 
Last edited:
Yes and no. Having a great goalie probably prevents a team from getting lottery picks, but lottery picks are not the only way to build a successful team. I refuse to buy into the idea that having a great talent lowers the chances of a franchise's long term success. Having Lundqvist doesn't force Sather to pay fifteen million a year for seven years to Gomez and Drury. Or Redden. It doesn't force us to draft Sanguinetti over Giroux, Berglund, Lucic, or Marchand. Or Del Zotto over Carlson and Eberle. Having a highly paid goalie doesn't cripple a team, especially if he's earning it. Poor management does.

Lottery picks are generally the way you obtain franchise forwards in their prime.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad