Toggle sidebar

Confirmed Signing with Link: [NYR] G Jonathan Quick signs with the Rangers (1 year, $825k)

  • Work is still on-going to rebuild the site styling and features. Please report any issues you may experience so we can look into it. Click Here for Updates
Quick is sporting a .926 sv% atm, which would make it the 2nd best of his career, only after his 2011 season, 12 years ago.

Just because an unlikely scenario happened, doesnt mean people were wrong to have their doubts about a 37 year old goalie who came off the worst season of their career. That was the most logical position to have at the time.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: The Crypto Guy and EdJovanovski
SoundAndFury said:
No, it's typical for the "experts" to try to dunk on it with hindsight at hand when the scenario that no sane person could have predicted happens.
Click to expand...
Ooooh.... Did I hit a nerve?
It's ok to be flat out wrong or completely blinded by the need to follow what all the cool kids are saying. Im not sure which group you fall into, but just admit when it happens and move on.

It doesn't have to be a hostile reaction.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JKG33
I think it was completely reasonable to have think Quick was done. I’m so happy to see he isn’t, love that guy.
 
SML2 said:
Ooooh.... Did I hit a nerve?
It's ok to be flat out wrong or completely blinded by the need to follow what all the cool kids are saying.
Click to expand...
This is my first post in this thread, I just decided to say something for all the reasonable people here.
 
SoundAndFury said:
... the scenario that no sane person could have predicted happens.
Click to expand...
well at least "the scenario that no HFB poster with the typical recency bias, and tendency to underestimate players, could have predicted happens"
 
  • Like
Reactions: SML2
ItWasJustified said:
How'd you know? Nobody have seen how the Laviolette Rangers play defense yet.
Click to expand...
I knew.
ItWasJustified said:
He showed that he is capable behind Vegas defensive core and Cassidy's system.
Click to expand...
And look at him now
WATTAGE4451 said:
His sv% and gaa with Vegas were still worse than league average behind a team defense that propped up goalies like adin hill and Laurent Brossoit to .915 and .927 sv%. He still got a few wins but he wasn't good and rangers team defense isn't vegas.

And he actually played worse for LA AFTER he got benched for Copley. He was mediocre for the first month.and was terrible the rest of the time after Copley emerged so that's a false narrative.
Click to expand...
Now do his numbers this year, and compared to Shesterkin

SoundAndFury said:
No, it's typical for the "experts" to try to dunk on it with hindsight at hand when the scenario that no sane person could have predicted happens.
Click to expand...
Ah great. Instead of admitting you were wrong (if you posted in this thread/thought Quick was done), instead double down and say "I should've been right?" What a loser take.

I guess the Boston Bruins should've been cup champs last year too. Just because shit goes the opposite of what the majority expects, doesn't make those who claim the opposite "no sane person"
 
SoundAndFury said:
This is my first post in this thread, I just decided to say something for all the reasonable people here.
Click to expand...
Well I am glad "those people" have elected a leader.
Was there a vote, or did you run uncontested?

Everybody gets things wrong. Just own it.

Do people go back and dunk on people who blew it?

Absolutely. It's part of this game.

As many people as there are getting dunked on right now for being wrong, there were getting dunked on back then when, in fact, they turned out to be right on the money.
It all comes out in the wash.

That's what makes this group the "experts" instead of actual experts and why not a single one of us actually has a job involving opinions about the game or a hand in running a team even though we all consistently second guess and criticize the choices of people who do.

Example: I do not think K'Andre Miller is a good defenseman, and I think it will turn out to be a terrible mistake to give him a Fox level contract 2 years from now.
Most people on the NYR board have not been shy about telling me I do not know WTF I am talking about.

I stand by my opinion. I don't want to be right but I think I am, and nothing would make me happier that KAM making me look silly.

If/when he does, I will come back to the board and help myself to more servings of Crow than than a fat kid on a porch that just leaves all the candy out in the bowl with a "take one" sign at Halloween, because I was wrong and the others were right and they all told me so.

That's how it works.
 
  • Like
Reactions: smitty10 and JKG33
It’s very noticeable that he’s completely changed his game.

Which I think he deserves a ton of credit for at age 37. And I’d have to think Benoit Allaire had a lot to do with that.

I thought this signing was a joke when it happened. I thought he was physically shot.

It turns out he wasn’t physically shot, it was just his old way of doing things was long since shot.

I’m sure Benoit Allaire told him if he wanted any success in the NHL anymore, he needs to overhaul his game.

It’s noticeable that he’s no longer shooting himself all over the crease or pulling himself way out of position and swimming and flopping all over the place. That’s something that hasn’t worked for the better part of the last 5 years.

The coaches in LA never made him change his game, which I can’t really blame Ranford and company for that. It’s very hard to play a certain style for 20+ years and then have to change your game at age 37, but that’s exactly what Quick has done and that is the explanation for why he’s found success this season.

If he continued to play the way he always has, I’m pretty sure he would have continued to be unserviceable/unplayable like he had been in LA.

And there’s not many other goalie coaches that would have worked with him to change his game or even suggested it like Benoit Allaire.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ecemleafs and RangersFan1994
SML2 said:
Well I am glad "those people" have elected a leader.
Was there a vote, or did you run uncontested?

Everybody gets things wrong. Just own it.
Click to expand...
And you are the "no hostile reactions" one :laugh:

But I definitely love that these 11 games cancels 4 seasons of varying degrees of stink and some of you pound your chests about knowing it all along. Actually hilarious. "Recency bias" :laugh:
 
Bleedred said:
It’s very noticeable that he’s completely changed his game.

Which I think he deserves a ton of credit for at age 37. And I’d have to think Benoit Allaire had a lot to do with that.

I thought this signing was a joke when it happened. I thought he was physically shot.

It turns out he wasn’t physically shot, it was just his old way of doing things was long since shot.

I’m sure Benoit Allaire told him if he wanted any success in the NHL anymore, he needs to overhaul his game.

It’s noticeable that he’s no longer shooting himself all over the crease or pulling himself way out of position and swimming and flopping all over the place. That’s something that hasn’t worked for the better part of the last 5 years.

The coaches in LA never made him change his game, which I can’t really blame Ranford and company for that. It’s very hard to play a certain style for 20+ years and then have to change your game at age 37, but that’s exactly what Quick has done and that is the explanation for why he’s found success this season.

If he continued to play the way he always has, I’m pretty sure he would have continued to be unserviceable/unplayable like he had been in LA.

And there’s not many other goalie coaches that would have worked with him to change his game or even suggested it like Benoit Allaire.
Click to expand...
The thing that I don't get is how people can call this signing a joke (even before hindsight) when guys like Halak and Elliott continued to get contracts despite being far more dead than Quick looked in LA. And those two, in the primes of their careers, were 1Bs at best. So if career backups can get 17th chances while approaching 40, why shouldn't Quick? He'd earned much more runway than those 2 ever did
 
SoundAndFury said:
And you are the "no hostile reactions" one :laugh:

But I definitely love that these 11 games cancels 4 seasons of varying degrees of stink and some of you pound your chests about knowing it all along. Actually hilarious. "Recency bias" :laugh:
Click to expand...
The funny thing to me is, I'm really not even arguing the point of Quick either way.

I have been coming to this board for a very long time.

Every signing, every trade, they all get the same treatment.

There's people who love it, people who hate it, and the majority that just stand off on the sidelines throwing rotten eggs at the parade as it goes by with their takes and digs at other fan bases.

Those ones on the sidelines are the peanut gallery I was referring to.
 
JKG33 said:
The thing that I don't get is how people can call this signing a joke (even before hindsight) when guys like Halak and Elliott continued to get contracts despite being far more dead than Quick looked in LA. And those two, in the primes of their careers, were 1Bs at best. So if career backups can get 17th chances while approaching 40, why shouldn't Quick? He'd earned much more runway than those 2 ever did
Click to expand...
I agree that guys like that getting signed is also a joke.

But I'm starting to understand it more and more now. The goalie position in the league is extremely barren and depleted. I mean the talent at the position.

There's about 7 or 8 (give or take, maybe even more) career minor league goalies, some of who are 30-something years old, who are signed this year to be NHL goalies and have full time roster spots. That's how depleted the position is right now. Then you got stupid contracts given out to goalies who have mostly been bad their entire career, just because they came off a hot up year (Korpisalo) and that's probably another symptom of what I'm talking about.

So I understand Halak and Elliott still getting deals (they didn't this year), but I also was questioning at why this is.

Goalies also have inflated reputations and it's hard to lose those reputations. I'm sure teams will be lining up to sign Fleury this coming offseason (if he chooses to continue to play) despite the fact that he doesn't look like he should really play for another year.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Ad

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom