Toggle sidebar

Lundqvist - Two Weak Games, Bounce Back Buddy

Status
Not open for further replies.
In what world did Cam Ward not have an incredible roster to help him out?
 
boingpuck_medium.gif


It seems like he looks right at it :shakehead
 
Rangers Report ‏@rangersreport 2m

Henrik Lundqvist is now 9-11 with a 1.56 GAA and .941 SV% in playoff games when he has 30 or more saves. Had another 32 tonight.
Click to expand...

I am sad for Hank.
 
Well this game, he was really good. Not the best he's had, but really good. Of course that's why you're playing with fire when you have ****** games. You can have a great game and then still go down 3-0 in the series. ****ing Chicago scored 2 goals in the last 2 games. You just can't throw away games. Then you will have amazing games where your team can't score for you.
 
17futurecap said:
I am sad for Hank.
Click to expand...

Why?

Its a cumulative stat.

Did you feel bad for him on the Drury goal? Did you feel bad for him when the Sabres obliterated him with 4 goals in the 2nd period in Game 6?

Did you feel bad for him when he haad a 3-0 lead in Game 1 against the Pens?

Were you sad for him when he gave up 5 goals on 17 shots in the critical game 3 of the 2008 Pens series? You know, the game the rangers dominated had to to fight back twice to tie, only to have the pens score on almost every third shot they took.

Were you sad for him in 2009, when he was trounced for 11 goals in 67 shots over the last three games of a series they had a 3-1 lead in? Or how about game 7, in which he had a 1-0 lead, have up a terrible tying goal to Semin late in the first period -- a period the caps had a whopping 2 shots on goal in.

In that game 7, he faced a 1985 Oilers-esque 24 shots. Wow. What a shooting gallery.

Were you said for him in 2011, when he had a 1-0 lead late in the 3rd of game 1, gave up a soft tying goal to Ovechkin and they lose in OT. Or two games later, when he had a 3-0 lead in game 3, and gave up three goals in about 9 mins to pretty much seal the series.

Were you sad for him in 2012, when he was blitzed for big early deficits in games 5 and 6 of the CF, only to see the Rangers come back and tie it for "him", and then he gives up a crushing late goal in Game 5 and a series clincher in OT in Game 6?

No sympathy for that dude. He's the team MVP, a hart candidate, and a Vezina winner. He's the heart and soul of the team. But this annual attempt to paint him as some sort of victim is pretty sad.


Henrik has put the team in a position to seal the deal more time than the team has done so for him. Both have let one another down.

Henrik is not above blame.
 
In that page full of stats Richter Scale, you forgot the most important one. The team goal support. What is it now, about 1,7 GF/ G in the 65 playoff games Hank has played in? Which goalie won't be scrutinized when every goal matters? 1,7 GF/ G might be enough to get anywhere if you're a great goalie in soccer (and barely even there). In hockey, even in this watch paint dry era, not even close. How many Cups do Roy, Hasek and Brodeur win if their team supports them like that? We've already concluded goalies can't score goals as well as saving them.

And this talk about Lundqvist "struggling" in the playoffs compared to the regular season (which I don't agree with)... you don't think that has anything to do with that there are only good teams left in the playoffs, teams that usually outplay the Rangers in basically every series? You know, those teams the Rangers regularly have a struggling record against in every season, where we hope Hank can bring it to the shootout? Teams that tighten up their defense for the playoffs, so we can barely hit the net? Unfortunately, there are no shootouts in the playoffs.

And not only that, in many series, we've been outplayed at the verge of slaughter. You don't think that will reflect on the sad goalie who have to try to cover up for everything the team can't do?

So here we are, in a thread with over half a thousand posts discussing Lundqvist's play in inches and how he can't perform miracles in every game, while the team in front continues to play like **** and our opponents make our skaters look silly on most nights in series after series. Just another year.

Let's just face some reality here. This team isn't even close to be a legit playoff team. It's a regular season team Hank drags kicking and screaming into the playoffs, where the teams we can't beat in the regular season outperform us handily in the playoffs, while Hank makes the numbers look closer than it really was.

Legit playoff teams have at least 3 players who are in the discussions for the Conn Smythe who help eachother carrying the big load. I don't need to remind you the last time the Rangers had a team like that. In Rangers land, playoff discussions should be about who wins the Choke Smythe, because that's where you find the majority of the candidates.

I actually start to believe it would be beneficial for the Rangers to let Hank go. Let the horrible flaws of this team be shown in the actual spotlight and let the team sink down into some good lottery choices. The core is still fairly young. More importantly, that means Torts would be gone.
 
Last edited:
GWOW said:
Why?

Its a cumulative stat.

Did you feel bad for him on the Drury goal? Did you feel bad for him when the Sabres obliterated him with 4 goals in the 2nd period in Game 6?

Did you feel bad for him when he haad a 3-0 lead in Game 1 against the Pens?

Were you sad for him when he gave up 5 goals on 17 shots in the critical game 3 of the 2008 Pens series? You know, the game the rangers dominated had to to fight back twice to tie, only to have the pens score on almost every third shot they took.

Were you sad for him in 2009, when he was trounced for 11 goals in 67 shots over the last three games of a series they had a 3-1 lead in? Or how about game 7, in which he had a 1-0 lead, have up a terrible tying goal to Semin late in the first period -- a period the caps had a whopping 2 shots on goal in.

In that game 7, he faced a 1985 Oilers-esque 24 shots. Wow. What a shooting gallery.

Were you said for him in 2011, when he had a 1-0 lead late in the 3rd of game 1, gave up a soft tying goal to Ovechkin and they lose in OT. Or two games later, when he had a 3-0 lead in game 3, and gave up three goals in about 9 mins to pretty much seal the series.

Were you sad for him in 2012, when he was blitzed for big early deficits in games 5 and 6 of the CF, only to see the Rangers come back and tie it for "him", and then he gives up a crushing late goal in Game 5 and a series clincher in OT in Game 6?

No sympathy for that dude. He's the team MVP, a hart candidate, and a Vezina winner. He's the heart and soul of the team. But this annual attempt to paint him as some sort of victim is pretty sad.


Henrik has put the team in a position to seal the deal more time than the team has done so for him. Both have let one another down.

Henrik is not above blame.
Click to expand...

Bold is why I feel bad for him. Never said he didn't have some awful playoff games, I'm not a person who says every goal he lets in was either a fluke or a screen, he was bad in game two in this series, deserved better tonight though.

For all the time Hank has been here when they get to the playoffs it seems the Rangers offense and Hank can never have a combined dominant game. Game 7 vs the Caps this year, game 1 of the Sens series last year and 7-0 vs Atlanta are the only games that come to mind.

Last year was probably there best chance to win a cup, shame they needed 14 games to get past the 8th and 7th seeds. Also not only having to play the max 14 games, but Sather not getting a dman at the deadline leading to some serious wear down minutes for McDonagh and Girardi. Probably should have been Devils in 5, not really sure how the Rangers stole game 3 in Newark.
 
Trading away a star goalie never works out. Theyre better off just keeping Henrik and roll the dice every year.

But this "I feel bad for him" has to stop. We're not children. He's a grown man who has a great life. If he wants to beat himself up over losing in the postseason, so be it. Hockey has a short offseason. He obviously gets over it quickly.

The guy is just part of a long list of players in all major sports who might not play for a winner. That doesnt mean he wont be a hall of famer or recognized as a great one.
 
jcman said:
Me thinks the celebrating players tricked Hank into believing the puck had already gone in and out
Click to expand...

Is there a reason not to take his own word for it?

When asked he said that the actual problem was that he did not see the puck at all.
 
LaGu said:
Is there a reason not to take his own word for it?

When asked he said that the actual problem was that he did not see the puck at all.
Click to expand...

because one of those reasons is pretty embarrassing? from my perspective he saw the puck and assumed it went in until he saw paille swipe at it? I mean, he looked right at the puck..
 
MartyOwns said:
because one of those reasons is pretty embarrassing? from my perspective he saw the puck and assumed it went in until he saw paille swipe at it? I mean, he looked right at the puck..
Click to expand...
Unfortunately, your perspective in this case doesn't matter. If Lundqvist looked right at the puck and saw it in the crease, why would he right after that look around some more and ignore it, with a couple of minutes left in a very important playoff game? Seriously. He said he didn't see it and he reacted like he didn't see it. He swiveled his head around, but couldn't track it. What's left to discuss about this?

You can't claim "he looked right at it" while watching a slow motion replay. To me, it looks like he glances around inside his crease in the vicinity of his pads, but the puck unfortunately was right outside of it.
 
Last edited:
Chimp said:
Unfortunately, your perspective in this case doesn't matter. If Lundqvist looked right at the puck and saw it in the crease, why would he right after that look around some more and ignore it, with a couple of minutes left in a very important playoff game? Seriously. He said he didn't see it and he reacted like he didn't see it. He swiveled his head around, but couldn't track it. What's left to discuss about this?

You can't claim "he looked right at it" while watching a slow motion replay. To me, it looks like he glances around inside his crease in the vicinity of his pads, but the puck unfortunately was right outside of it.
Click to expand...

To me it looks like he saw the puck, thought it was a goal, and then turned his head and started to do his typical "the other team scored" reaction but was interrupted when he realized the play was still going on.
 
Chimp said:
Unfortunately, your perspective in this case doesn't matter. If Lundqvist looked right at the puck and saw it in the crease, why would he right after that look around some more and ignore it, with a couple of minutes left in a very important playoff game? Seriously. He said he didn't see it and he reacted like he didn't see it. He swiveled his head around, but couldn't track it. What's left to discuss about this?

You can't claim "he looked right at it" while watching a slow motion replay. To me, it looks like he glances around inside his crease in the vicinity of his pads, but the puck unfortunately was right outside of it.
Click to expand...

fair enough. from my perspectice though, I believe that when he finally did see the puck, he had given up on it, thinking it was a goal (prob the bruins or their fans yelling). hence the embarrassing part. he sort of gave up on the play IMO

edit- what the guy above me said :laugh:

it happens
 
MartyOwns said:
because one of those reasons is pretty embarrassing? from my perspective he saw the puck and assumed it went in until he saw paille swipe at it? I mean, he looked right at the puck..
Click to expand...

OK.

I am no expert on Lundqvist but to me he has always seemed like a stand-up guy, not afraid to admit mistakes and/or to take the blame for bad goals (sometimes too much imo).

I see what you're saying but I'll still take his word for it that he didn't see the puck.

edit: anyway, it's not really that important.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom