Post-Game Talk: Montreal Canadiens at New York Rangers 10/8/17

[offdacrossbar]

What confuses me is how much he hated McIlrath. Maybe it was his age.

mac was both young and bad at hockey. the reasons were there.

and 22 is so much better than yandle because 22 has a shooters mentality from the top. he's always looking to pull the trigger and gets it on net. yandle was a playmaker and passer first.

its been years since this team has had a shooter on the pp point. makes the pp hum bc the pk has to respect that shot and that in turn creates time and space to operate.

 

[eco's bones]

Still need yandles most common teammates on the pp to judge whether or not that was pp1 or pp2

It's obvious though that Yandle was the first option. He had a full 40 second + over McDonagh 2:36 to 1:55. AV and Boyle were not always eye to eye and Boyle was scratched from time to time and then he complained and pouted. Brooks rode with that story for a while which is why Boyle exploded on him on breakup day. The truth is Boyle's offensive game had declined and his power play time on ice is the ice time that is not justifiable for what he was producing and if he started a shift on the power play he would not come off the ice until it was just about over. The coaching staff gave him too much leeway--too much respect.

 

[Off Sides]

Yandle/Shattenkirk in my opinion both have pros and cons

Shattenkirk is better on the PP, he has a better shot and the ability to get it through. PP or 5on5 he makes better O-zone reads and executes them better.

Yandle I think was a better neutral zone player. He has great stretch passes and reads well but was less effective in the O-zone. He also seems to break up the other teams plays better in the neutral zone than Shattenkirk.

D-zone, unless they or their team have the puck they both are about as effective as each other in protecting the net, or in coverage being in the right place at the right time, or along the boards winning a puck battle, neither are going to be magnificent in that regard.

 

[Levitate]

Curious as to whether people really think Lundqvist faced the same kind of shots but just played much better, or if that's just hyperbole.

I don't have shot quality stats in front of me but it seemed like he saw far more shots against Montreal than against Toronto or Colorado (seeing as in not being screened). Even when he had to make a "big save", the Rangers were putting pressure on the shooter or let Lundqvist track the puck on a pass or something.

That means they DID do something better (or Montreal was just a lot worse) even if their shots allowed stats were terrible

 

[Larrybiv]

What would truly be amazing would be Allaire saying Hank played poorly.

I know I didn't say it was Hanks fault, but no one can tell me that if Hank in his prime......would have allowed all 5 of those goals. The one miscue by Grabs easily should've been stopped. No way you can let that puck trickle in like it did. All in all, Toronto took it to us in 1st and there was nothing saving us but the intermission.

 

[Levitate]

I know I didn't say it was Hanks fault, but no one can tell me that if Hank in his prime......would have allowed all 5 of those goals. The one miscue by Grabs easily should've been stopped. No way you can let that puck trickle in like it did. All in all, Toronto took it to us in 1st and there was nothing saving us but the intermission.

Funny thing is that those little trickler can't control it plays aren't ones that I think would be affected by aging...his reflexes? Sure. Rebound control? Sure. Stuff like that? Just bad luck/bad concentration.

 

[eco's bones]

I'd much rather have Shattenkirk than Yandle. Bigger, stronger, younger, better defensively, better offensively in that he uses his shot as a weapon--much better contract. Yandle did have a great personality. Shattenkirk probably does too.

 

[romba]

I know I didn't say it was Hanks fault, but no one can tell me that if Hank in his prime......would have allowed all 5 of those goals. The one miscue by Grabs easily should've been stopped. No way you can let that puck trickle in like it did. All in all, Toronto took it to us in 1st and there was nothing saving us but the intermission.

Pretty sure I can dig up a few history rewriters who post here who would claim prime Hank would have allowed all 5. To say otherwise would be implying Hank is no longer playing the same as he used to, a notion many cannot come to terms with.