Post-Game Talk: Los Angeles Kings @ New York Rangers |Game 3| 6/9/14

[Blueshirt Believer]

Stralman and McDonagh are amazing together, but the bottom four would be collectively incapable of making a breakout pass. I shudder to think what happens if they lose Stralman. I'm not trying to put Girardi down, but he really doesn't fit Vigneault's system. His skating and puck skills aren't going to improve. I also fear Staal's inconsistency going forward and am really dreading what his extension looks like.

To be fair, Dan would look much better further down the pairings. He only really runs into trouble against top units.

 

[bl02]

I'd just like to thank the Rangers for this amazing run. It's crushing that it looks like it may be over but this team is in great shape for a long run near the top. We have the ingredients needed and we can certainly add the missing pieces with some smart roster moves.

The truth is, the Kings know how to win big hockey games and the Rangers have a lot of guys who just don't. Our guys that do know how to win cups, ( Richards and St.Louis) have mostly been passengers on this ride, actually just Richards really. The young guys are learning what it takes to be champions and they will be better for it.

I hope you are right but finding a true number one center and an actual guy on the point for the powerplay that knows what he is doing will be very hard to find. Actually we probably need a few good centers. Richards has to go and Stepan is not close to being a number one center.

 

[ltsthinaz]

LA hasn't won 4 games yet. We can still win the Stanley Cup. LGR! Home crowd for game 4, get it done.

Doubt it, but not out of the question. For the most part, Rangers have acquitted themselves well. Outplayed them both games in LA, slow start today, some careless goals and bad luck. Probably not meant to be, but I think everyone seriously underestimated how good the Rangers can be. Speed kills. Get your FA's signed for a reasonable price with a small hometown discount in the off-season, buy out Richards, sign one very good FA to replace him (Stastny????), and this can be a good team and a contender for several years.

 

[ImIdaho]

I second that notion. Team overachieved.

Anyone thinking this wasn't arguably the easiest path to the SCF possible, or thinking we stood a legitimate chance against the Kings, was overly optimistic. We're not on their level. We don't have the talent or depth the Kings have. They're simply a more COMPLETE TEAM. I say TEAM because I know everyone loves to blame Lundqvist for every loss this TEAM suffers.

*********. Such a "complete" team doesn't keep falling behind and never taking a lead in regulation - outside of this game. The Rangers stood up well against them just dumb mistakes have did them in.

 

[MrEctions]

We need a real Number 1 center. Spezza would be my target. Move Staal for him and Id feel much more comfortable. Steps is just a really good number 2. Hes not quick enough to be a number 1.

 

[Rangerfan4life90]

I hope you are right but finding a true number one center and an actual guy on the point for the powerplay that knows what he is doing will be very hard to find. Actually we probably need a few good centers. Richards has to go and Stepan is not close to being a number one center.

Buyout Richards, trade for a number 1 center in Spezza or Pavelski, then move Stepan down to 2C.

 

[aufheben]

Personal attacks + you = infraction.

1) Flaming: Do not post any messages that harass, insult (name calling), belittle, threaten or mock other members. Debates are fine, but critique the opinion, not the person. Personal attacks are not permitted. Do not call other posters trolls. Do not use sweeping generalizations and plural pronouns to cloak personal attacks. For example if a poster(s) states that he thinks 'x' is a good idea, replying that "Anyone who supports 'x' is an idiot" is a personal attack. Do not start threads to call out and embarrass other members; or make posts about ignore lists.

 

[JESSEWENEEDTOCOOK]

Stralman and McDonagh are amazing together, but the bottom four would be collectively incapable of making a breakout pass. I shudder to think what happens if they lose Stralman. I'm not trying to put Girardi down, but he really doesn't fit Vigneault's system. His skating and puck skills aren't going to improve. I also fear Staal's inconsistency going forward and am really dreading what his extension looks like.

in that scenario we're flipping Staal for a puck mover/offensive defenseman.

 

[Fataldogg]

The bolded is my problem with the company line about Hank. This series, he hasn't been THE problem; but had he shown up with his best game in each of the last three games, this team would be up 2-1 in the series at worst.

I don't get why we can pay our goalie like he is the best goalie in the league, but then turn around and not expect him to be the best goalie in the league when it counts. At best, the "goaltending duel" in this series has been a draw. At worst, Hank has lost it so far (I would argue this). Regardless of whether you agree on my assessment between those two options - unless you choose the third unwritten option and think Hank has performed better than Quick (in which case, I'd call BS) - then that's not good enough from Hank.

Even though Quick wasn't stellar through the first two; he sure as **** came up with some pretty monster saves - on breakaways, on cross ice one timers, etc. Hank was good; but we didn't see him making a ton of those types of saves. And tonight, the performance of Quick speaks for itself.

In this series Hank has been good. Not bad. But not great. Good doesn't win championships.

I thought the first two games were draws for the goaltenders. Neither of them were the story in either game. And I have no problem with that. Lundqvist is a top-3 goaltender in the world going up against a top-3 goaltender in the world. I expect that. He is also facing a top-3 goaltender in the world on a much better team.

I don't know how people did not expect these results.

Lundqvist/Quick played pretty evenly the first two games. I think saying one was better than the other in either game is stretching it (even if I eluded to it earlier).

The first two games were games where neither of them were great, but both played well enough to win, and both were games where really anything could happen.

If anything, I thought Lundqvist won the duel in Game 2 but had an unfortunate break (he only let up three legitimate goals in regulation). But again, that's stretching it, because both goalies played well enough for their teams to win.

The better team won in each game.

 

[Zil]

SJ is supposedly looking to "rebuild." Pavelski could be made available.

Oh good, let's empty the remaining pieces of our farm system to get a guy who will be 30 next season, isn't a gamebreaker and carries a $6 million cap hit for the next five seasons.

 

[Blueshirt Believer]

We need a real Number 1 center. Spezza would be my target. Move Staal for him and Id feel much more comfortable. Steps is just a really good number 2. Hes not quick enough to be a number 1.

IMO, Step is a borderline #2. He will never be a #1. But he COULD be a legit #2 if he ever takes the next step with his off season conditioning.

I'm not entirely confident that he will.

 

[Fataldogg]

*********. Such a "complete" team doesn't keep falling behind and never taking a lead in regulation - outside of this game. The Rangers stood up well against them just dumb mistakes have did them in.

They're going to win their 2ND CUP in 3 YEARS with a very similar roster intact. That's a DEEP team. Oh yeah, that year they didn't make it, they made the Conference Finals.

If a team with their offensive roster isn't deep, I don't know what is.

 

[ImIdaho]

Oh good, let's empty the remaining pieces of our farm system to get a guy who will be 30 next season, isn't a gamebreaker and carries a $6 million cap hit for the next five seasons.

Pavelski for Nash+

 

[Richter Scale]

"Good doesn't win championships" when that's EXACTLY WHAT JONATHAN QUICK HAS BEEN THIS SERIES.



I'd be more okay with people dumping on Hank if it wasn't a constant theme this whole ****ing season.

That you think Quick has only been "good" this series says all that I need to know. The series isn't over yet and it's just 3 games, but he has a 0.938 save % and a GAA of 2.00. Hank has a 0.892 save % and a 3.67 GAA.

If you're a "small sample size" / "stop stat surfing" kind of guy -- then all I have to say is use the eye test. Quick has made a metric **** ton more monster saves than Hank has thus far. Not saying Hank has been terrible - and the team needs to be better in front him; but he certainly hasn't helped the team like he needs to in order for them to win a championship. Quick has for his team.

The Rangers have made just abysmal defensive mistakes, sure. But when you're playing the best teams in the league, there will be mistakes and there will be defensive breakdowns. In those moments, your goalie needs to bail the team out. The Kings have also made plenty of mistakes, and Quick has come up huge for them in a lot of those moments. In this series, not seeing the same from Hank. Disappointed to say the least.

Again - if you go back to my first post in this thread; there are more problems than just him. But enough is enough with acting as if the guy can do no wrong. He is paid to be the best goalie in the league. And he hasn't been.

 

[stan the caddy]

Quick was unreal. How many saves did he make with his stick alone? Zucc left one off the line also. The difference in this series was game 1 and 2 where they didn't put them away when they had the chance. They lost a tough one tonight, it happens.

 

[Glen Sathers Cigar]

Just a damn shame. Especially with how close the first two games were. It should've been 1-1 coming back, which changes everything.

I sad.

 

[nevesis]

I believe we are in the Post-Game Thread. I do believe we have a thread to discuss off-season trades/acquisitions.

I would like to continue discussing tonights game & the rest of the series we are in here if possible.

 

[aufheben]

That you think Quick has only been "good" this series says all that I need to know. The series isn't over yet and it's just 3 games, but he has a 0.938 save % and a GAA of 2.00. Hank has a 0.892 save % and a 3.67 GAA.

If you're a "small sample size" / "stop stat surfing" kind of guy -- then all I have to say is use the eye test. Quick has made a metric **** ton more monster saves than Hank has thus far. Not saying Hank has been terrible - and the team needs to be better in front him; but he certainly hasn't helped the team like he needs to in order for them to win a championship. Quick has for his team.

The Rangers have made just abysmal defensive mistakes, sure. But when you're playing the best teams in the league, there will be mistakes and there will be defensive breakdowns. In those moments, your goalie needs to bail the team out. The Kings have also had plenty, and Quick has come up huge for them in a lot of those. In this series, not seeing the same from Hank. Disappointed to say the least.

Again - if you go back to my first post in this thread; there are more problems than just him. But enough is enough with acting as if the guy can do no wrong. He is paid to be the best goalie in the league. And he hasn't been.

Well said. Step #1 of winning this series was Hank needed to be the best goalie. I'm not blaming Hank, I'm blaming the team, and that includes him.

 

[stan the caddy]

They're going to win their 2ND CUP in 3 YEARS with a very similar roster intact. That's a DEEP team. Oh yeah, that year they didn't make it, they made the Conference Finals.

If a team with their offensive roster isn't deep, I don't know what is.

That's a team that had Mike Richards on the fourth line for a good portion of the playoffs. They're as deep as it gets.

 

[ImIdaho]

They're going to win their 2ND CUP in 3 YEARS with a very similar roster intact. That's a DEEP team. Oh yeah, that year they didn't make it, they made the Conference Finals.

If a team with their offensive roster isn't deep, I don't know what is.

This is in response to you saying the Rangers overachieved. It's hard to say that when in fact, in the previous two games, the Rangers dominated the Kings outside of 1 period. Are they really that head and shoulders above the Rangers? I disagree.

 

[Fataldogg]

Quick was unreal. How many saves did he make with his stick alone? Zucc left one off the line also. The difference in this series was game 1 and 2 where they didn't put them away when they had the chance. They lost a tough one tonight, it happens.

It's been that issue the entire post season. Every round went 6-7 games because they lacked the killer instinct. Every time they had a team apparently down and out, they let them walk right back into it.

And for the Kings? They are a team that won't quit. They have proven they can come back no matter what. A team without killer instinct stands no chance against the Kings.

 

[Zil]

in that scenario we're flipping Staal for a puck mover/offensive defenseman.

Do you have a specific target in mind? I honestly believe Brady Skjei will be holding down the second pairing on the left side one and a half to two seasons from now. I really hate that they gave Girardi the NTC, because people would be willing to trade for him even with that cap hit. Two seasons down the line, our defense could be something like:

McDonagh-Stralman
Skjei-Allen
Bodie/Moore-Klein

 

[nyrleetch]

That you think Quick has only been "good" this series says all that I need to know. The series isn't over yet and it's just 3 games, but he has a 0.938 save % and a GAA of 2.00. Hank has a 0.892 save % and a 3.67 GAA.

If you're a "small sample size" / "stop stat surfing" kind of guy -- then all I have to say is use the eye test. Quick has made a metric **** ton more monster saves than Hank has thus far. Not saying Hank has been terrible - and the team needs to be better in front him; but he certainly hasn't helped the team like he needs to in order for them to win a championship. Quick has for his team.

The Rangers have made just abysmal defensive mistakes, sure. But when you're playing the best teams in the league, there will be mistakes and there will be defensive breakdowns. In those moments, your goalie needs to bail the team out. The Kings have also made plenty of mistakes, and Quick has come up huge for them in a lot of those moments. In this series, not seeing the same from Hank. Disappointed to say the least.

Again - if you go back to my first post in this thread; there are more problems than just him. But enough is enough with acting as if the guy can do no wrong. He is paid to be the best goalie in the league. And he hasn't been.

Small sample size I'd say, and Quick was better tonight and the Kings are a better team. Look at the goals Lundqvist is giving up, St Louis hand and then a 2 on 1 where Kings get the bounce and an easy goal. You can't blame Lundqvist for those. Both goalies had a .908 SV% coming in I believe. If the Rangers win game 4, Lundqvist could wind up having better numbers than Quick. Also Rangers always struggle to finish regardless of who is in net, Look at Tokarski against us.

 

[nyrleetch]

Take game 4 at home, steal game 5 on the road. Protect home ice game 6. Anything can happen in game 7. That's the motto.

Game 2 is going to sting for a long time.

 

[nevesis]

Take game 4 at home, steal game 5 on the road. Protect home ice game 6. Anything can happen in game 7. That's the motto.

Game 2 is going to sting for a long time.

This is the only way to look at it. Thanks for being one of the few who don't give up hope.