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

[TheTakedown]

This is tough if he's only a Ranger Captain for 1 year. Historically, that's not the Ranger way.

I could live with it, for sure, if McDonagh was named Captain after next season.

Personally, I don't think Staal or Girardi have what it takes to be Captain.

It also depends on what they do this offseason... I would gamble that if Staal doesn't get a letter it's because they plan on trading him at the deadline...

 

[pld459666]

I understand that, but I'm not comparing the teams as a whole.

I'm explaining why, at the end of the day, when all is said and done. Unless Hank wins a cup, "the history books" and "sports world" will always have Richter as the superior Rangers goal tender.

Now, if Hank stands on his head for the next three and pushes it to a game 7? We'll maybe that will go a long way to strengthen his case.

And that History book will be grossly incorrect and not worth wiping my rear end with.

 

[Riverdale]

How is winning the cup an individual accomplishment ?

Teams win cups. Give Lundqvist the '94 team. We wouldn't be having this conversation.

 

[pld459666]

I have perspective. That 94 team was down 3-2 to the Devils and honestly got two lucky breaks to start that comeback. Kovalev's goal late in the 2nd was not a good goal and the Devils hit the post while up 2-0. Richter also stood on his head to keep that game at 2-0. Game 7 against the Devils could have easily gone the devils way. Again Devils hit the post in OT and Matteau ends it on a wraparound that goes in off the Devils. The Rangers had a ton of "puck luck" in that series. In the finals they blow a 3-1 series lead against the 7th seed Canucks. As good as that team was one wrong bounce and they do not win that cup. You need bounces to win a cup. In this series the Kings have gotten the majority of the bounces.

And this team was down 3 games to one against Pitt.

Rangers in 93-94 were best team in the league. Devils were a close 2nd.

Rangers in 13-14 were marginally better than average and Pitt was 2nd in the conference.

Difference is apples and onions.

 

[Nickmo82]

nope. we lost 4-2 the game after the 2nd shutout in a row. and then we went on a 5 game winning streak.

ah... ****.

 

[RangerLifer]

Pretty idiotic viewpoint when:

1. the Rangers got shut out last night
2. the Kings are a better team

Give Lundqvist 3.5 goals per game like Quick has been getting these playoffs and see what happens.

Who's being idiotic now? They got shut out because Quick played out of his mind.

 

[RangerLifer]

How is winning the cup an individual accomplishment ?

Teams win cups. Give Lundqvist the '94 team. We wouldn't be having this conversation.

Who said it was?

 

[Bleed Ranger Blue]

How is winning the cup an individual accomplishment ?

Teams win cups. Give Lundqvist the '94 team. We wouldn't be having this conversation.

I shouldnt be surprised, but it still astounds me how many people ignore this.

 

[Bleed Ranger Blue]

Who's being idiotic now? They got shut out because Quick played out of his mind.

Right.

Rangers were unlucky. And Lundqvist got outplayed by the opposing goaltender.

Thats the simpleton thinking thats permeated this board for a long time.

Its much easier to blame a loss on one or two internal things than just admitting the Kings 20-man group is better and (heres the important part) more versatile than this Rangers squad.

 

[Bleed Ranger Blue]

Who said it was?

The army of stupid that start sentences with "Until Lundqvist wins a cup..."

 

[TeamStewie]

I have to stay out of the playoff board. I just can't take these fans of garbage teams crapping all over us.

The fact of the matter is we are a VERY good team who couldn't hold leads on the road and suffered two psychologically devastating losses. We just couldn't recover. Last night proved that.

I called us being done after game 1. When you come out like that and STILL can't win, it's not good for the psyche.

Richards' comments in the post game were disgusting. "we have to play the next game, it's on the schedule."

really? Are you kidding me??? Keenan HATED it, and rightfully so. We just don't have enough players on this team with the mental toughness needed come back against a team like the Kings.

**** Keenan. At least none of the Rangers are talking to other teams during the final.

 

[Riverdale]

Who said it was?

Pretty much everyone who argues that Richter was a better goalie than Lundqvist is.

 

[SwedeAmerican]

I don't post on these boards too often but can somebody explain to me why so many of you are very concerned about what the ''haters" on the "main boards" (who are probably posting from their mother's basement apartment) are saying. The only team that can talk s**t right now is the Kings and their fans. But even then... who cares?!

 

[Cobra Jack*]

How is winning the cup an individual accomplishment ?

Teams win cups. Give Lundqvist the '94 team. We wouldn't be having this conversation.

Speculation and more hypotheticals. Richter played out of his mind at key times during that run. Lundqvist has yet to prove he can do that. He's been "OK" in the finals. Not good enough.

 

[BarbaraAlphanse]

Right.

Rangers were unlucky. And Lundqvist got outplayed by the opposing goaltender.

Thats the simpleton thinking thats permeated this board for a long time.

Its much easier to blame a loss on one or two internal things than just admitting the Kings 20-man group is better and (heres the important part) more versatile than this Rangers squad.

It's easy to claim that you're always right when you base your arguments on purely subjective and opinionated focal points.

A team that didn't lead a second for the first 2 games... don't know how they can be considered "better", considering that the Rangers had about 60 minutes of lead time heading into last night's game.

 

[FOD]

And this team was down 3 games to one against Pitt.

Rangers in 93-94 were best team in the league. Devils were a close 2nd.

Rangers in 13-14 were marginally better than average and Pitt was 2nd in the conference.

Difference is apples and onions.

All I am saying is that even though the 94 Rangers were the best team in the league that year, they were a bounce or two from not even getting to the Finals. This Rangers team was a bad ref call, a Kreider OT post, A Zuccarello OT missed open net, a Zuccarello post and Stepan post, 3 weird deflections and two crazy Quick saves from being up 2-1 or even 3-0 in this series. The Kings are a better team top to bottom, but with some "puck luck" there would be an entirely different attitude on this board.

 

[Fletch]

it's a never-ending debate. Teams win Cups, but of course on each team everyone wants to ascribe a value to each player's contributions, and if that team doesn't win, people accentuate the negatives of certain people they think are overrated and the positives of the ones they like, but still need someone to blame for the loss. 1994's team was a great team. As great as Mess was. As great as Graves was. As great as Leetch was. As great as Ricther was. I gotta say, that entire team competed, all the way down to Lidster on defense, and Kypreos who got to play for the injured Kocur in game 7. And some play seemed spectacular at times. There seemed to be a bit less negative about the team, but of course, media was different and social networks weren't existent, and thus a bit less negativity out there. But again, teams do win Cups, but when one reflects on an individual's accomplishments throughout a career, the first thing that's looked at is did they win in the big game, and if not, it's immediately because of them. Even the "experts" will point to the lack of a championship as the difference between one guy and the other. One would be labeled a winner, and the other a choker, and to me, that's just the lazy man's way out. Kind of like a bunch of stats. Eh, it is a never-ending debate...

 

[Bleed Ranger Blue]

It's easy to claim that you're always right when you base your arguments on purely subjective and opinionated focal points.

A team that didn't lead a second for the first 2 games... don't know how they can be considered "better", considering that the Rangers had about 60 minutes of lead time heading into last night's game.

This is coming from the guy who said the Kings have no chance because they are tired.

A big reason they can be considered better is because they led at the end of every single game of the series.

 

[Eyedea40]

Pretty much everyone who argues that Richter was a better goalie than Lundqvist is.

I bet most people here were too young to remember the 1994 season. Richter had a few good seasons in his career, just look at his stats. He had solid teams around him also, that's not an excuse.


Lundqvist is for sure better.



Season Team League GP W L T MIN GA SO GAA SV%
1986–87 UW–Madison WCHA 36 19 16 1 2136 126 0 3.53 .901
1987–88 Colorado Rangers IHL 22 16 5 0 1298 68 0 3.14 —
1988–89 Denver Rangers IHL 57 23 26 3 3031 217 1 4.30 —
1989–90 New York Rangers NHL 23 12 5 5 1320 66 0 3.00 .904
1989–90 Flint Spirits IHL 13 7 4 2 782 49 0 3.76 —
1990–91 New York Rangers NHL 45 21 13 7 2596 135 0 3.12 .903
1991–92 New York Rangers NHL 41 23 12 2 2298 119 3 3.11 .901
1992–93 New York Rangers NHL 38 13 19 3 2105 134 1 3.82 .886
1992–93 Binghamton Rangers AHL 5 4 0 1 305 6 0 1.18 .964
1993–94 New York Rangers NHL 68 42 12 6 3710 159 5 2.57 .910
1994–95 New York Rangers NHL 35 14 17 2 1993 97 2 2.92 .890
1995–96 New York Rangers NHL 41 24 13 3 2396 107 3 2.68 .912
1996–97 New York Rangers NHL 61 33 22 6 3598 161 4 2.68 .917
1997–98 New York Rangers NHL 72 21 31 15 4143 184 0 2.66 .903
1998–99 New York Rangers NHL 68 27 30 8 3878 170 4 2.63 .910
1999–00 New York Rangers NHL 61 22 31 8 3622 173 0 2.87 .905
2000–01 New York Rangers NHL 45 20 21 3 2635 144 0 3.28 .893
2001–02 New York Rangers NHL 55 24 26 4 3195 157 2 2.95 .906
2002–03 New York Rangers NHL 13 5 6 1 694 34 0 2.94 .897
NHL totals 666 301 258 73 38,183 1840 24 2.89 .904

 

[Bleed Ranger Blue]

Speculation and more hypotheticals. Richter played out of his mind at key times during that run. Lundqvist has yet to prove he can do that. He's been "OK" in the finals. Not good enough.

Lundqvist is quite literally the only reason the Rangers are in the finals. Can you say that about Richter?

This isn't even getting into how extraordinarily better the 94 team was than this one which is actually the key to throwing out your very poor argument.

 

[Eyedea40]

it's a never-ending debate. Teams win Cups, but of course on each team everyone wants to ascribe a value to each player's contributions, and if that team doesn't win, people accentuate the negatives of certain people they think are overrated and the positives of the ones they like, but still need someone to blame for the loss. 1994's team was a great team. As great as Mess was. As great as Graves was. As great as Leetch was. As great as Ricther was. I gotta say, that entire team competed, all the way down to Lidster on defense, and Kypreos who got to play for the injured Kocur in game 7. And some play seemed spectacular at times. There seemed to be a bit less negative about the team, but of course, media was different and social networks weren't existent, and thus a bit less negativity out there. But again, teams do win Cups, but when one reflects on an individual's accomplishments throughout a career, the first thing that's looked at is did they win in the big game, and if not, it's immediately because of them. Even the "experts" will point to the lack of a championship as the difference between one guy and the other. One would be labeled a winner, and the other a choker, and to me, that's just the lazy man's way out. Kind of like a bunch of stats. Eh, it is a never-ending debate...

Richter was lights out that season. You don't always need a great goalie to win a cup. Great defenses win cups.

 

[Swept In Seven]

Dorsett has been fantastic Carcillo has to sit.

Dorsett has been great in his role. At this point he has not produced. I go with Carcillo, he has come up big this year for us

 

[Bleed Ranger Blue]

Richter was lights out that season. You don't always need a great goalie to win a cup. Great defenses win cups.

The cup washes away lots of sins.

Like how Richter let in a goal from about 170 feet away vs. Washington. Or his propensity to let in goals in the final minute.

A high-powered team in front of a goalie makes a big difference.

 

[Riverdale]

The cup washes away lots of sins.

Like how Richter let in a goal from about 170 feet away vs. Washington. Or his propensity to let in goals in the final minute.

A high-powered team in front of a goalie makes a big difference.

Now imagine if that was Lundqvist. HFNYR would literally cease to exist.

 

[RangerLifer]

The army of stupid that start sentences with "Until Lundqvist wins a cup..."

I WANT him to win a cup to shut all the haters up.