Toggle sidebar

Just How Good Are the 2013-14 Rangers?

  • 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
Status
Not open for further replies.
SnowblindNYR said:
In a way it seems like the team has taken the personality of the coach. Since their awful start, especially lately seems like the team is pretty even keel. The 11-12 team took after ITS coach, and I actually mean that as a compliment considering I'm not a Torts fan and think that team was overrated. They were a gritty blue collar team that played very hard.
Click to expand...

I agree, and I think this coach has a very successful style of coaching.

I wish he brought more physicality with him but damn, i'd rather be winning and that's exactly what we're doing.

I love the balance of this team. I love how every line has the ability to score on any given night.

I'm not saying we are the favorites or anything to win the cup, but i'll be very excited and optimistic watching this team in the playoffs (if of course we make it).
 
SnowblindNYR said:
Oh come on what? Are you a Jets fan? Jets fans celebrate their AFCCG losses. Not that this team will likely win the cup, but you know what if they don't, at least they play the way I like to see teams play.
Click to expand...

Until a NYR team does better than '11-12, they are the standard of achievement for this franchise in the post-lockout NHL. This team doesn't even have a playoff spot remotely secure yet.

And no, I don't like the Jets.
 
Last edited:
bobbop said:
There's a lot to like about this team. Great balance among the forward lines, nice development of young players and plenty of perceived upside. There is something missing though -- I'm not sure I can put my finger on it -- but it just doesn't feel like a team that can be a juggernaut for two months. And I am not talking about the practical needs (i.e. power play quarterback, some more sandpaper)
Click to expand...

Maybe it's because Rick Nash is our #1 forward?

I don't know if I've ever soured on a player quicker than Nash...
 
bobbop said:
There's a lot to like about this team. Great balance among the forward lines, nice development of young players and plenty of perceived upside. There is something missing though -- I'm not sure I can put my finger on it -- but it just doesn't feel like a team that can be a juggernaut for two months. And I am not talking about the practical needs (i.e. power play quarterback, some more sandpaper)
Click to expand...

They're missing a #1 center and a play making defenseman. Its been the same problem for Sather's entire tenure.
 
True Blue said:
You may be the only hockey fan who views as a run to the conference finals as not being a deep run. WOW
Click to expand...

Ya know, its absolutely fine to not like the way the '11-12 team played, but when you make excuses to crucify the '11-12 team and glorify this team, reality starts to take a backseat. He likes this team and they are unlucky - he didnt like the '11-12 team and they were lucky. Thats what Snowblind's arguments basically come down to.

I wonder what my boss would say if I came to him with sagging quarterly numbers and, when he asked me why, I told him we were "unlucky"
 
By the way, my comment on deep runs has been somewhat misunderstood. Just because something isn't conducive to deep runs doesn't mean deep runs can't happen.
 
First of all don't get your panties in a bunch just yet. I realize that no matter how good our D is and no matter how good Hank is the Devils were superior in the back end and goaltending.

That said I don't think the 2003 Devils team was super skilled up front and they won the cup. They seemed to be deep, but other than Elias I guess really didn't have too many game breakers. They still ended up winning it all in the pre-salary cap era and beating a super-talented Sens team and God-mode Gigeure in the process. I guess that team was a lot grittier than these Rangers. Still, if there's one team that I can think of that ended up winning it all that these Rangers at least somewhat resemble it's that one.
 
True Blue said:
You may be the only hockey fan who views as a run to the conference finals as not being a deep run. WOW
Click to expand...

It's a deep run, but not what we're looking for. All of these hardcore fans that want to yell from the rooftops about how much they love winning all of a sudden are satisfied losing in the ECF to a team like the Devils?

All I see is "out in the 2nd round like all those loser teams in the past!" but I guess 3rd round is where you guys draw the line? I don't understand why people get so mad about a team losing in the 2nd round, but are ok losing in 3rd. There's an inconsistency there.
 
SnowblindNYR said:
First of all don't get your panties in a bunch just yet. I realize that no matter how good our D is and no matter how good Hank is the Devils were superior in the back end and goaltending.

That said I don't think the 2003 Devils team was super skilled up front and they won the cup. They seemed to be deep, but other than Elias I guess really didn't have too many game breakers. They still ended up winning it all in the pre-salary cap era and beating a super-talented Sens team and God-mode Gigeure in the process. I guess that team was a lot grittier than these Rangers. Still, if there's one team that I can think of that ended up winning it all that these Rangers at least somewhat resemble it's that one.
Click to expand...
Those playoffs were Neidermayer's coming out party. Before that, he was a solid, yet unspectacular defenseman. After that run though, he evolved into a a Norris caliber player. Truth is, none of the skaters on the Rangers stepped up to that ability.
 
Mint said:
Those playoffs were Neidermayer's coming out party. Before that, he was a solid, yet unspectacular defenseman. After that run though, he evolved into a a Norris caliber player. Truth is, none of the skaters on the Rangers stepped up to that ability.
Click to expand...

Right, that's why I said they were better in the backend. My point is that seems like a similar team to this one. Great backend, goaltender (at least recently on our part), and deep offensively. That Sens team was possibly more talented than the current Blackhawks for example. They were a beast team that finally put it together in the playoffs.
 
SnowblindNYR said:
Right, that's why I said they were better in the backend. My point is that seems like a similar team to this one. Great backend, goaltender (at least recently on our part), and deep offensively. That Sens team was possibly more talented than the current Blackhawks for example. They were a beast team that finally put it together in the playoffs.
Click to expand...

Yeah, **** happens though. Bad luck for the Sens with the Friesen goal.

Regardless, that Devils team was much more top heavy. Rafalski, Stevens and Neidermayer were better than all our defenders that year. I don't think there was much difference in goaltending though, but I'm biased.
 
Mint said:
Yeah, **** happens though. Bad luck for the Sens with the Friesen goal.

Regardless, that Devils team was much more top heavy. Rafalski, Stevens and Neidermayer were better than all our defenders that year. I don't think there was much difference in goaltending though, but I'm biased.
Click to expand...

Rafalski was better than McDonagh, really?
 
SnowblindNYR said:
Because Mint listed Rafalski has one of 3 D-men that they had that's better than anyone in our defense. I just don't see it.
Click to expand...

We can haggle over this little footnote, but I'd like to focus on where you get off calling the team's "similar" when that Devil's team had at least 2 and possibly 3 defensemen better than the Rangers best defenseman
 
Last Stanley Cups:
03/04 Tampa: StLouis 38, Lecavalier 32,Modin 29, Richards 26, Stillman 25, Andreychuk 21 2@17
05/06 Carolina: Staal 45, Williams 31, BrindAmour 31, Cole 30, Mullen 25 Stillman 21
06/07 Anaheim: Selanne 48, Penner 29, McDonald 27, Kunitz 25, Getzlaf 25, Perry 17
07/08 Det: Zetterberg 43, Datsyuk 31, Franzen 27, Cleary 20, Holmstrom 20, Filppula 19
08/09 Pitt: Malkin 35, Crosby 33, Sykora 25, Staal 22, 2@17
09/10 Chi: Kane 30, Toews 25, Sharp 25, Hossa 24, Brouwer 22, Versteeg 20
10/11 Bost: Lucic 30, Horton 26, Bergeron 22, Marchand 21, Ryder 18
11/12 LA(turd of the litter): Kopitar 25, Williams 22, Brown 22, Richards 18
Draw you own conclusions but I don't see the firepower nor do I see the D being a difference and if a team wins the cup when all things come together for that one special moment every 10 years, LA just took away the thunder.
 
Trxjw said:
Sometimes all people need is a fluke in order to completely ignore the reality of things.
Click to expand...

1) I tend to agree with you and I have said before that people should stop bringing up the case of 1 8 seed bucking the trend.

2) HOWEVER, that was one team to go all the way, but for a while you got cinderella teams making the finals practically every year and doing well most of those years. 95 the Devils won it all (maybe not a cinderella but that was a huge upset in the finals). The 99 Sabres were a blown call away from possibly taking their series against the Presidents' Trophy winning Stars to 7 games. In 02, Canes made the finals and were actually surprisingly competitive against one of the best teams in recent memory. They won game 1, lost a game in triple OT, and lost game 5 by a goal and empty net. There is no team that is anywhere near as good as those Wings this year and I'd argue we're decently better than that Canes team that was one of the worst teams in the league the next year. 03 Ducks took the Devils to 7 games, though game 7 was no contest. The 04 Flames outplayed the Lightning all series, IMO and should have won in 6 games (I think they blew a call in OT). The 06 Oilers lost by a goal in 7 games with their starting goalie injured. Hell, the 10 7th seeded Flyers who were within a shootout of missing the playoffs came within a goal of forcing game 7 against one of the most stacked teams post lockout. I'd also make an argument that the Bruins scored a pretty damn big upset against Vancouver.
 
It's relatively common to see upsets in any of the first three rounds and exceedingly rare to see upsets in the Finals. The only one I can really think of is the Canadiens in 1993. Many point to the Devils in 1995, but forget that essentially the same team was an OT goal away from being the favorites in the Finals the year before. It was a shortened season, so there's no real telling where the Devils would have ended up in the standings in a normal year. As for Bruins/Canucks... that was a great Bruins team and just look at the record of the other teams in the Canucks division. It was like the old Southeast, but worse.

If your goal is to just get there and be competitive, anything can definitely happen. If you want to win it all, it requires having the same or more talent than the team from the other conference.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom