Those 2 things aren't mutually exclusive. Yeah who cares about entertainment? That's clearly not why we watch sports. Sports is serious business. No having fun guys!
Just How Good Are the 2013-14 Rangers?
- Thread starter Thirty One
- 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
- Status
Those 2 things aren't mutually exclusive. Yeah who cares about entertainment? That's clearly not why we watch sports. Sports is serious business. No having fun guys!
HatTrick Swayze
Just Be Nice
To each their own. I've seen more than enough "pretty" moments, and regular season skill in my time as a Ranger fan. I would take winning at any cost, in any fashion, over that every single day of the week.
This group has been able to provide both for a stretch here. I'd be lying if I said it wasn't entertaining. It will be interesting to see how they handle the postseason.
I'm not saying I'd rather lose in the first round than make the ECF with an exciting team. That said, if this team didn't have the horrible lows it had but had a worse record to this point than that 11-12 team I'd enjoy this season throughout much more. I can't understand people that don't care a bit about whether they're watching a fun team. Spectator sports is supposed to be entertainment. I don't want a fun loser, but I'd prefer a fun winner to a boring winner. I remember not looking forward to the playoff games in 2012. The team was boring, frustrating, and exhausting. It was almost a chore watching them. I loved the feeling of wins, but it was hard to watch them in the playoffs.
aufheben
#Norris4Fox
Even beastly teams can't win the Cup every year. It's hard to do. But having the best team possible gives you the best chance. Reaching the CF shouldn't be looked at negatively, i.e. it doesn't mean they couldn't have gotten farther next year. Maybe '12-13 they finish with 43 wins, but make the SCF.
I love the style this team currently plays. That said, winning is the ultimate entertainment (to me at least). And I personally enjoyed watching the Torts team, as has been said by another poster on here: "those players would run through walls to win". I was proud to be a fan of that team. You can never guarantee a Cup within a 1 year window.
I love the style this team currently plays. That said, winning is the ultimate entertainment (to me at least). And I personally enjoyed watching the Torts team, as has been said by another poster on here: "those players would run through walls to win". I was proud to be a fan of that team. You can never guarantee a Cup within a 1 year window.
Last edited:
aufheben
#Norris4Fox
I have to say though, I find it strange that you are so glass half empty about that team, but so half full about this year's team?...
I really don't care how this team plays, as long as they play well, I can't help at wonder if there's a certain retrospective bias regarding Torts teams and their "Caveman hockey".
I really don't care how this team plays, as long as they play well, I can't help at wonder if there's a certain retrospective bias regarding Torts teams and their "Caveman hockey".
Well the current team isn't exactly the pre-lockout squad. They have had lapses late in games, but I wouldn't say it's due to a lack of effort. Though, they didn't look like they were trying too hard against Edmonton on that goal. However, usually it's just a bad play. I think the Rangers are playing hard right now and want to win AND they're exciting to watch. I was proud of that team, don't get me wrong. I was constantly tracking that stat of not allowing 5 goals all the way through the record. I remember getting nervous when the other team scored 4, wanting that record and I was proud of that record.
aufheben
#Norris4Fox
I loved that team for the most part. But I've always wanted a puck possession team to root for and now we got one, flawed as they are (and yes they do have flaws, I'm not oblivious). The other thing is, that team to me went out on a whimper. Not because they lost in the ECF but because of how they played in the playoffs. It was painful to watch. I'm serious when I say that part of me wasn't looking forward to those games. All I got was angst. Maybe they'll score 2 goals and we'll win 2-1. It was ugly soul crushing hockey. That entire playoff was that kind of garbage. Look at the CF. Boring-ass Rangers vs. boring-ass Devils and boring-ass Coyotes vs. boring-ass Kings. Even during the regular season they weren't that exciting to watch most of the year. I'm a fan of the NHL, not only the Rangers, I don't like teams that play boring hockey, wouldn't I be a hypocrite if I said I enjoyed watching the Rangers if I would have blasted the Devils for playing the same style?
Who is not giving this team a chance? What exactly does that term even mean?
Torts produced results and an on ice product to be proud of. What AV produces remains to be seen.
Raspewtin
Stay at home defenseman hater
- May 30, 2013
- 44,300
- 21,901
Comparing those Devils teams to 2012 Rangers is wrong. Those were very talented teams. The closest in the 2003 Devils, and even they were much better.
Wow. You must have been a huge fan of the Lindros Rangers. They lost in very entertaining ways.
I, and am guessing most fans, will take winning ahead of anything else. Having a winning team is the most fun of all. Winning ugly ways is infinitely more entertaining than loosing in fun fashion.
Winning and success is fun. Period.
You sound like Rueben Sierra who famously complained that all the Yankees care about is winning.
Not a comparison of talent levels, just a statement of "boring, caveman hockey" being highly successful.
Raspewtin
Stay at home defenseman hater
- May 30, 2013
- 44,300
- 21,901
That team was tough as nails. Something that should be admired instead of frowned upon for petty selfish reasons. This team has gone in quite a different direction and it suits some players better than others.
From one end of the spectrum to the other. The Glen Sather way. Would be nice to have a team that incorporated the positive elements of both '11-12 and '13-14.
Your whole argument, this season anyway - when the team style makes you feel
, is that lower seeds have a chance to knock off higher seeds. Thats a convenient argument for you now - it makes you look pretty stupid when you complain that lower seeds gave the Rangers a difficult time in 2012.
- Jul 20, 2005
- 4,923
- 2,329
Thirty One
Safe is safe.
- Dec 28, 2003
- 28,981
- 24,357
- Jul 20, 2005
- 4,923
- 2,329
People said that after the lockout when they were the faster forechecking team in the league. People will say that forever. Doesn't mean that is their style of play.
They were boring and painful to watch under Lemaire. That style was long gone by the end of the 90's.
Both.
And I think this team is more skilled. Its tough to compare the two, quite honestly. Personally, I put more stock in wins vs. style points and how they got there
- Jul 20, 2005
- 4,923
- 2,329
I think that team had a marginally tougher roster. Dubinsky, Anisimov, Prust, Fedotenko, Mitchell and Rupp replaced by Kreider, Brassard, Carcillo, Pouliot, Moore and Dorsett. Maybe a better defensive group. But only marginally tougher.
I'll wait to see how they handle a full season before I label them less mentally tough. They have faced a decent amount of adversity so far.
- Jul 20, 2005
- 4,923
- 2,329
I'm happy for you.
As a person who is not a Devils fan, their success or failure in the standings meant nothing to me. To me it was unentertaining hockey.
- Status
Latest posts
-
-
Post-Game Talk: Suxmore 2, Cats 1 - Why do the refs love us so?- Latest: barkovcanfinnish
