Patience is a virtue

[Holocene]

"Let's not get ahead of ourselves"? Seriously that is what everyone in this thread is doing... Calling for a tank and rebuild 10 games in lol. But yeah sure the comment that they've been fun to watch and playing way better is just too damn much!!!

 

[bubba5]

You basically beat a junior hockey team with 2 wins and 12 losses this season with some aging vets yesterday by a huge score of 2-0, I know Miller played well but common. So if you want to hang your hat on that then good for you.

 

[Championship*]

Yeah, nice to get some wins, but let's be honest with ourselves and look at the level of competition and the sample size.

 

[SnowblindNYR]

"Let's not get ahead of ourselves"? Seriously that is what everyone in this thread is doing... Calling for a tank and rebuild 10 games in lol. But yeah sure the comment that they've been fun to watch and playing way better is just too damn much!!!

Exactly the doom and gloomers can say this team sucks and call for a tank 10 games in but God forbid people say good things about the team when they play well (competition notwithstanding).

 

[Championship*]

Exactly the doom and gloomers can say this team sucks and call for a tank 10 games in but God forbid people say good things about the team when they play well (competition notwithstanding).

You can't leave this out though. These were two games where, even if they were unbeaten on the season, would have been MUST wins anyway. I'm not going to kiss their ass for doing something they're supposed to do. Full credit for actually winning, for a dominating performance last night and a comeback win on the Island, but these were games that were must wins from day 1. Let's not get ahead of ourselves is exactly what we should be saying. This team was trash, and two wins against a mediocre and the worst team in the league respectively prove nothing.

 

[SnowblindNYR]

You can't leave this out though. These were two games where, even if they were unbeaten on the season, would have been MUST wins anyway. I'm not going to kiss their ass for doing something they're supposed to do. Full credit for actually winning, for a dominating performance last night and a comeback win on the Island, but these were games that were must wins from day 1. Let's not get ahead of ourselves is exactly what we should be saying. This team was trash, and two wins against a mediocre and the worst team in the league respectively prove nothing.

No one needs to kiss anyone's ass. The team is playing better. They've had plenty of games over the years where they lost to terrible teams, even in 11-12. I believe Montreal was terrible that year and we got murdered twice in Montreal. It doesn't necessarily prove anything, but it's encouraging to see. Can't give the team credit when they win but **** on them when they lose, seems like someone that just is looking for an excuse to trash the team.

 

[Championship*]

No one needs to kiss anyone's ass. The team is playing better. They've had plenty of games over the years where they lost to terrible teams, even in 11-12. I believe Montreal was terrible that year and we got murdered twice in Montreal. It doesn't necessarily prove anything, but it's encouraging to see. Can't give the team credit when they win but **** on them when they lose, seems like someone that just is looking for an excuse to trash the team.

They are playing better, but it's easy to play better against a team that has given up as a whole and against a major rival with a poor defense. The larger sample size this season if of them playing bad against good (and bad) teams. I'm more inclined to believe that until I'm proven wrong. Not saying that it's NOT going to happen, but we've seen the Rangers start the season in the exact opposite way and then struggle to make the playoffs. I gave them credit for the two points on the wins, but they have to sustain that over a longer period of time. Right now, based on all the games of this season, these last two games are more the aberration than the norm.

 

[Holocene]

There is no such thing as a larger sample size 10 games in. All of it is a small sample size. We have no idea which team we're going to see for the full 82 games but trying to say not to get ahead of ourselves when that's what a lot of fans have been doing so far with this tank and rebuild crap is just hilarious.

 

[Championship*]

There is no such thing as a larger sample size 10 games in. All of it is a small sample size. We have no idea which team we're going to see for the full 82 games but trying to say not to get ahead of ourselves when that's what a lot of fans have been doing so far with this tank and rebuild crap is just hilarious.

Yes there is. 7>5. Unless things have changed, 7 is a greater number than 5. There are more games where they have played horribly than played well. The level of play that they have shown the last two games needs to be sustained over a longer period of time. This is our first back to back wins of the season. Against mediocre - bad teams. They need to sustain. Calling this the norm is just as crazy as calling what we saw earlier is the norm then. They need play well, not even win, but play well for an extended period. 2 games is not an extended period. Carolina is on saturday. That's a must win game for the Rangers, regardless of standings. When this level of play is sustained and it's not a roller coaster like it has been, then we can talk about what is the norm for this team.

 

[bubba5]

Also, of the 7 losses, how many did they have an actual chance of winning, one maybe, against the Flyers, a bad team. Of the 5 wins, how many of those could have gone either way, I would say at least 3 (Kings, Islanders, Detroit). I mean they have been out of games for at least half, where they had no chance of winning. So to get crazy about a 2-0 win over Buffalo, I'm sorry, i will think better of it if the win on Saturday against another sub .500 team, but 3 in a row and 4 of 5 would say something positive.

 

[noupf]

Yes there is. 7>5. Unless things have changed, 7 is a greater number than 5. There are more games where they have played horribly than played well. The level of play that they have shown the last two games needs to be sustained over a longer period of time. This is our first back to back wins of the season. Against mediocre - bad teams. They need to sustain. Calling this the norm is just as crazy as calling what we saw earlier is the norm then. They need play well, not even win, but play well for an extended period. 2 games is not an extended period. Carolina is on saturday. That's a must win game for the Rangers, regardless of standings. When this level of play is sustained and it's not a roller coaster like it has been, then we can talk about what is the norm for this team.

Am i the only one here who thinks that the teams effort has actually been pretty god the last 4 or 5 games? I am not diagreeing with you here, what you say, is what makes a good hockey team a good hockey team. However, I think they are beginning to do everything you are asking for......EXCEPT score goals........and that my friend is the big problem right now. I beleive they have just about righted the ship in terms of defensive play, forecheck pressure, offensive pressure, powerplay and overall effort in general. They have not gotten blown out since early on, so to me, i see the lack of goals now, as the last hurdle.......a its a big one, unfortunately, especially with Nash and Cally out. If they cant score some goals, this team will not go far. Barely beating sub par teams shows where the weakness is. To me, the effort and overall better play has stared to become more consistent though.

 

[Samuel Culper III]

Exactly the doom and gloomers can say this team sucks and call for a tank 10 games in but God forbid people say good things about the team when they play well (competition notwithstanding).

You can't really discount the competition though. If you're only able to pick up points against the absolute bottom of the barrel, than you're little more than a bottom feeder yourself. That said, I do think the Rangers have looked infinitely better lately, in the games I've been able to catch, and I've been preparing to eat some crow when they get a bit more comfortable and hopefully start busting out some wins against more respectable competition.

That said, I just want to point out one flaw in the attitudes of the posters who criticize the "blow it up" crowd. Don't look at their attitudes and arguments in a vacuum. Most of them (certainly not all of them, but the ones who have posted well reasoned arguments and are clearly long time fans) have been watching this team for years and are not drawing a line between each season and making their argument "based on 10 games". Granted, there's the rational posters who have a strong negative view of the direction of the team over several seasons and the personnel we possess, and then there's the "doom and gloom" bandwagoners, who just throw their hats in with the more rational posters, because of a knee jerk reaction to the 10 game start. The criticisms leveled at the "doom and gloom" crowd are valid in the case of these posters, but in the case of the former, it really isn't a petty reaction to 10 games. It's a frustration at the repeated mistakes of the organization, the constant application of bandaids and the telltale signs of another season where our players (assets) get older and less valuable while we fail to achieve true competitor status but our management ensures we make short sighted moves to secure the all important playoff spot rather than selling parts from a mediocre roster for once and allowing the team to stock up on futures and land a strong draft position.

Do 10 games at the start of the season MAKE this the year that you blow it up? Obviously not, especially since we're clearly not going to be as bad as we were in week one, but if anyone thinks we've suddenly become a GOOD team who is genuinely a competitor, I don't know what to say to that. This may not be the year, but at some point, if the goal is to actually win a Cup (which we may never know with this organization) the acknowledgement that a middle of the road team isn't going to get the job done has to be made and significant alterations have to follow.

 

[Championship*]

Am i the only one here who thinks that the teams effort has actually been pretty god the last 4 or 5 games? I am not diagreeing with you here, what you say, is what makes a good hockey team a good hockey team. However, I think they are beginning to do everything you are asking for......EXCEPT score goals........and that my friend is the big problem right now. I beleive they have just about righted the ship in terms of defensive play, forecheck pressure, offensive pressure, powerplay and overall effort in general. They have not gotten blown out since early on, so to me, i see the lack of goals now, as the last hurdle.......a its a big one, unfortunately, especially with Nash and Cally out. If they cant score some goals, this team will not go far. Barely beating sub par teams shows where the weakness is. To me, the effort and overall better play has stared to become more consistent though.

For sure, the effort has been better, but like I said, need to see that sustained over a longer period of time. Let's get a win against Carolina and then go from there.

 

[Tawnos]

The Islanders aren't poor competition.

 

[Blatant]

Depressing reading some of these posts right now.

Some points I would like to make...
1. Rangers are missing 2 of top forwards if not 2 most important forwards on the team. They need to beat the teams they need to beat without them and just stay afloat until we get some help with health. Not having hagelin and Kreider in the lineup hurt for speed also.

2. We've won 3 of 4, including big late performances against Detroit and Islanders (neither a bottom feeder) and beat a team we have to beat in Buffalo.

3. PP looks good and is 13 in league. If we can get Nash/cally back have chance at a top 10 PP.. When was last time we could say that. The PP is also extremely important for playoffs so hopefully we can improve and keep the PP going.

4. Lundqvist was bad first few games, might have been banged up but is looking sharper now. We have a good backup in talbot that can keep henrik fresh for playoffs

 

[Killem Dafoe]

It doesn't really matter what the competition is, these past two games have given some key pieces in our lineup confidence that is sure to bleed into the next few games and hopefully spark something in our team that will lead to much bigger wins. This is good.

 

[Holocene]

I don't really care about how they have played in the context of this discussion right now btw, just pointing out irony or really the double standard.

 

[Idlerlee]

Just thought I'd remind everyone that even tho Buffalo are not the best NHL team, they have beaten other NHL teams this year, have one of the better PK's in the league, and each and every player on that team would probably beat everyone on this forum 15 v 1 .. so you know, relax.. we're doing good

 

[bubba5]

Yes, they beat the Panthers and Islanders in a SO, so I guess.

 

[True Blue]

They didn't show up for what 3 games this year?

They did not show up in more than just 3 games.

But the issue I have here is many of these same guys have killed themselves for YEARS so i feel you are minimizing this in favor of a very small, recent sample size which may represent what we see for the rest of the year but likely wont.

The lack of effort has been the case more often than not this year. The last couple of wins were great, but it remains to see if the laziness returns.

I do feel there is a difference between sucking and not even showing up though and I can only point to the anaheim, NJ and san jose games as definite no shows.

What about Phoenix? Did the Montreal game seem like they were giving maximum effort?

I do not think we are anywhere near as bad as our worst games were. I do believe we are close to what our best games have shown us to be so far.

Remains to be seen

 

[offdacrossbar]

they are playing alot better.

i think they tightened up in front of talbot. it happens, young kid in goal and the team goes back to basics and plays better.

forget the 2 teams we beat. weve lost to worse in the past. and the wings win on the road was a quality win.

they are playing better no doubt. they won at home. they are getting a taste of winning games and now they have some confidence. the pp is clicking too. if nothing else, an effective top 15 pp will allow them to be competitive until nasher returns.

they are not scoring enough 5on5 goals however and that if that continues to be a problem, it will hurt them.

 

[nyr2k2]

You can't draw any conclusions from 12 games. To do so would be ridiculous.

They've tightened up the past four or so games. Have they turned a corner? Too early to say. There's some positive things happening, which I think is undeniable.

I don't care if it comes against weak teams. If memory serves, we played like **** and lost to Philadelphia and the then-winless Devils not long ago. If nothing else, we've been able to beat crappy teams. It's a start.

 

[SnowblindNYR]

They are playing better, but it's easy to play better against a team that has given up as a whole and against a major rival with a poor defense. The larger sample size this season if of them playing bad against good (and bad) teams. I'm more inclined to believe that until I'm proven wrong. Not saying that it's NOT going to happen, but we've seen the Rangers start the season in the exact opposite way and then struggle to make the playoffs. I gave them credit for the two points on the wins, but they have to sustain that over a longer period of time. Right now, based on all the games of this season, these last two games are more the aberration than the norm.

Larger sample is still pretty tiny. Also it's affected by a coaching change and Lundqvist slumping badly. The Rangers gave up more than 5 goals once in the last two seasons and now they gave up more than 5 two games in a row, including 9 in one game without making big changes anywhere but coaching. You don't think the coaching transition had something to do with it? You're using a sample size of 8 games vs. 4 like the 8 games is a significant difference from 4.

 

[SnowblindNYR]

Yes there is. 7>5. Unless things have changed, 7 is a greater number than 5. There are more games where they have played horribly than played well. The level of play that they have shown the last two games needs to be sustained over a longer period of time. This is our first back to back wins of the season. Against mediocre - bad teams. They need to sustain. Calling this the norm is just as crazy as calling what we saw earlier is the norm then. They need play well, not even win, but play well for an extended period. 2 games is not an extended period. Carolina is on saturday. That's a must win game for the Rangers, regardless of standings. When this level of play is sustained and it's not a roller coaster like it has been, then we can talk about what is the norm for this team.

7>5? You're splitting hairs. I thought you were splitting hairs when I counted it as 8>4, now you're just REALLY splitting hairs. A 7 game sample size is what you're inclined to believe rather than take the positive of their most RECENT sample size or take a wait and see approach. Sounds like you're just looking for a reason to think the team sucks. I mean 7 games is your proof.

 

[Championship*]

You can't draw any conclusions from 12 games. To do so would be ridiculous.

They've tightened up the past four or so games. Have they turned a corner? Too early to say. There's some positive things happening, which I think is undeniable.

I don't care if it comes against weak teams. If memory serves, we played like **** and lost to Philadelphia and the then-winless Devils not long ago. If nothing else, we've been able to beat crappy teams. It's a start.

I think this is the thing here for me. They look good. Let's see them sustain that, that's all I'm saying.