Toggle sidebar

Post-Game Talk: Rangers @ Caps Game 5: see you on sunday

Kershaw said:
Hank is a god amongst NYR fans and for me, he is #2 behind Leetch as the greatest Ranger ever. I would however lose a lot of respect for him if he called out the coach to publicly be fired, even if it is Torts.

But I have a big concern for Hank's FA status. The Rangers have 1 yr to try to convince their greatest goalie of all time to stay put with this franchise. The only way to do that is to make a deep playoff run, which I don't see possible with these group of players. From now on, I will appreciate very single start from Hank like it'll be his last.
Click to expand...

When you've got an owner who doesn't care for hockey, a GM who has overstayed his welcome, no one should be calling into question a player's integrity for doing what is right to this organization, especially when that player has been your backbone and is your real foundation to another Cup.

You get someone with actual hockey knowledge as the owner..long gone is Sather and Torts.
 
Ovechkin has one goal and one assist and we're still down 3-2 in the series.

That is so ridiculous I can't wrap my head around it.
 
Kershaw said:
Hank is a god amongst NYR fans and for me, he is #2 behind Leetch as the greatest Ranger ever. I would however lose a lot of respect for him if he called out the coach to publicly be fired, even if it is Torts.

But I have a big concern for Hank's FA status. The Rangers have 1 yr to try to convince their greatest goalie of all time to stay put with this franchise. The only way to do that is to make a deep playoff run, which I don't see possible with these group of players. From now on, I will appreciate very single start from Hank like it'll be his last.
Click to expand...

I hate to think about it, but things can really go nuclear if next season doesn't go well. Richards will inevitably be bought out. Torts is a goner for anything less than the conference semis. Lundqvist, Callahan, and Girardi, if I'm not mistaken, are all UFA's. Things could get interesting.
 
No Nash (not even mentioning Richards anymore)

+ No Special teams.

= Loss

Callahan attempt at start of OT was one of most pathetic things I've ever seen.

This team is really hard to root for some times. How many ****ing OT losses vs the Caps.
 
ImIdaho said:
When you've got an owner who doesn't care for hockey, a GM who has overstayed his welcome, no one should be calling into question a player's integrity for doing what is right to this organization, especially when that player has been your backbone and is your real foundation to another Cup.

You get someone with actual hockey knowledge as the owner..long gone is Sather and Torts.
Click to expand...

My respect for Henrik is a 10. If he called out the team it would be at an 11. They deserve it. If they lose on sunday I hope they get booed off the ice.
 
Richter Scale said:
Brutal loss. Other than the first period and a few minutes afterward, they didn't play a good game. Almost seemed like, yet again, they stopped playing after the early goal. I almost don't want them to score early anymore... always seem like they just sit back after the first goal and it ****s up their effort for the rest of the game.

Boyle took a stupid penalty. No denying that... but, since we've got Boyle reactionaries up in here....

Things that were more responsible for losing this game than Boyle:

- Offense's inability to score a second goal.
- Refusal to forecheck hard after the first 10-15 minutes of the game.
- 0 goals for Nash in 5 games.
- 0 goals for Callahan in 5 games.
- Abysmal power play.
- Stupid mistakes on the PK.
- Hagelin continues to fail to be able to finish on breakaways. Second game in Washington this series in which he had a breakaway when the Rangers were leading 1-0. He doesn't score. Game would have been completely different if he does in both games. He is driving me insane with his inability to finish on breakaways.
- Rangers continue to be god awful on the faceoffs in away games in this series... 41.6 % tonight. And seemingly failing more in some of the more important faceoffs.
- I love Zuccarello's vision... but he is simply not built for playoffs. His size really makes things difficult for him in this new season. He is being given zero room to be creative and is just getting pushed around in this series. It has been consistent throughout.
- Losing Clowe early in the game. Big loss, shortened the bench further. Didn't allow the Rangers to keep up a physical game that they undoubtedly wanted to keep up. Also impacted the PP, since he would have likely been a part of one of the units. Not a coincidence that he leaves and their play suffers. Just having to deal with the shuffling lines that result from losing him really hurts the forwards in and of itself.
- Hate to say it... and I don't really blame Hank for either goal -- but Hank needs to stop one of those goals if this team is going to have a shot at winning a Cup. As we discussed earlier today in the GDT -- he needs to find another gear in the playoffs. He has made some amazing stops in this series; but has not been consistently a game breaking goalie. This just has to happen. He has been very good, but very good is not enough (though this was the least of the issues tonight).
- Fail refs actually calling the penalty on Boyle, not getting Ribeiro for what he did to draw it, and missing a myriad of others (again, this was the least of the issues tonight).


All of that said -- none of those are meant as excuses. The entire team simply has to be better. No other way to say it.
Click to expand...

Unrealistic expectations. He's been a game breaker in two games, both at the Verizone Center, and the team couldn't do anything with it. In the 1-0 loss, he literally played one of the best games of his career, and they still lost.

Basically, you're saying for the Rangers to compete with the Capitals, he has to go on a legendary Conn Smythe run. If they need Lundqvist to have one of the best post seasons a goaltender has ever had, than this team won't win a Cup.

I'm just being honest, I think it's stupid to call out the goaltender after a loss like that. There were dozens of reasons the team lost, and Lundqvist wasn't one of them.

He has consistently outplayed Holtby, but fails to win because the quality and quantity of chances come down at the Rangers end. He made three or four high quality saves in OT on top tier players in the NHL, and the Rangers still couldn't do anything with it.

Again, if you want Lundqvist to consistently win 1-0 or 2-1 games on the road, you're looking for something that isn't going to happen. He's not Hasek. And basically, you're looking for a Hasek caliber performance.

If you look at the kind of goaltending that recent Conn Smythe winning goaltenders have put in, they were on substantially better teams who were able to take advantage of their goalie's performance and score timely goals. With the Rangers, Lundqvist makes the timely / big saves, and he has to make another timely / big save, and it continues to the point where one of them is bound to go in.

In the Game 2 loss the Rangers went 20 minutes without a shot between both the 3rd period and OT. In Game 5 the Rangers had 9 shots in 45 minutes. That's not a good team who is generating chances on the opposing goaltender. When that happens, all of the action is in your end, and it's eventually going to beat you (and that last goal Lundqvist didn't have a chance). Lundqvist is giving the team to opportunity to steal one, and THEY cannot do anything with it. Good teams are able to feed off their goaltender coming up with timely saves, and the Rangers haven't been able to do that.

The Capitals are winning with Holtby providing adequate goaltending. And there is nothing legendary about it. And guess what? Their best player in Ovechkin hasn't been able to effectively beat Lundqvist. The Capitals team is better period. That's why they're on top, it has nothing to do with either goaltenders performance.

Lundqvist isn't Hasek. Once fans start realizing that, maybe they'll have more reasonable expectations. :shakehead
 
PromNite said:
Rick Nash is not capable of playing in the playoffs. People got on Gaborik for playing twice the game Nash is playing now.
Click to expand...

I don't understand how Nash is suddenly the better player.

Yeah, he was much better this season in 2012-13 by a wide margin.

But look at the comparison the season before. Gaborik was an 80 pt player, Nash was a 60 pt player.

Gaborik's had a better peak year than Nash (2009-10) and has a better track record of producing in the postseason (rookie season with Wild, series vs. Caps).

Even when Gaborik was struggling to produce last playoffs, he still made a lot of chances out of nothing in all three series.

Gaborik Career PPG: .87 PPG
Nash Career PPG: .82 PPG

Neither bring much of a defensive game or intangibles. Neither have been great puck possession players on a consistent basis, aside from Nash this year and Gaborik in 2009-10.

Why is one considered an elite NHL player, while the other is considered damaged goods and player you can't win with?

Would like an honest debate here.
 
Brian Boyle said:
Ovechkin has one goal and one assist and we're still down 3-2 in the series.

That is so ridiculous I can't wrap my head around it.
Click to expand...

Nash hasn't been effective for us either.

We play terribly on the road. Don't know what it is.
 
You guys saying that Boyle cost us the game....please. You're ridiculous. He was one of the only guys on our team that showed even a glimpse of effort and heart out there, not to mention he scored our only goal.

Invisible performances from Nash, Callahan, and Richards were the reasons we lost tonight, not Brian Boyle. When your stars aren't your stars, your team doesn't win.
 
Kershaw said:
I don't understand how Nash is suddenly the better player.

Yeah, he was much better this season in 2012-13 by a wide margin.

But look at the comparison the season before. Gaborik was an 80 pt player, Nash was a 60 pt player.

Gaborik's had a better peak year than Nash (2009-10) and has a better track record of producing in the postseason (rookie season with Wild, series vs. Caps).

Even when Gaborik was struggling to produce last playoffs, he still made a lot of chances out of nothing in all three series.

Gaborik Career PPG: .87 PPG
Nash Career PPG: .82 PPG

Neither bring much of a defensive game or intangibles. Neither have been great puck possession players on a consistent basis, aside from Nash this year and Gaborik in 2009-10.

Why is one considered an elite NHL player, while the other is considered damaged goods and player you can't win with?

Would like an honest debate here.
Click to expand...

Simply because people like to think that the unknown is better than the known
 
ImIdaho said:
When you've got an owner who doesn't care for hockey, a GM who has overstayed his welcome, no one should be calling into question a player's integrity for doing what is right to this organization, especially when that player has been your backbone and is your real foundation to another Cup.

You get someone with actual hockey knowledge as the owner..long gone is Sather and Torts.
Click to expand...

He is a professional and is merely getting paid to do his job out there - stop the puck. And he does a hell of a job at it. I don't want Hank becoming coach manager like Messier and co. were during the late 90's early 00's era. Keep the player humble, even if they are elite. By giving a player this much power, you develop a country club atmosphere.
 
Fataldogg said:
Unrealistic expectations. He's been a game breaker in two games, both at the Verizone Center, and the team couldn't do anything with it. In the 1-0 loss, he literally played one of the best games of his career, and they still lost.

Basically, you're saying for the Rangers to compete with the Capitals, he has to go on a legendary Conn Smythe run. If they need Lundqvist to have one of the best post seasons a goaltender has ever had, than this team won't win a Cup.

I'm just being honest, I think it's stupid to call out the goaltender after a loss like that. There were dozens of reasons the team lost, and Lundqvist wasn't one of them.

He has consistently outplayed Holtby, but fails to win because the quality and quantity of chances come down at the Rangers end. He made three or four high quality saves in OT on top tier players in the NHL, and the Rangers still couldn't do anything with it.

Again, if you want Lundqvist to consistently win 1-0 or 2-1 games on the road, you're looking for something that isn't going to happen. He's not Hasek. And basically, you're looking for a Hasek caliber performance.

If you look at the kind of goaltending that recent Conn Smythe winning goaltenders have put in, they were on substantially better teams who were able to take advantage of their goalie's performance and score timely goals. With the Rangers, Lundqvist makes the timely / big saves, and he has to make another timely / big save, and it continues to the point where one of them is bound to go in.

In the Game 2 loss the Rangers went 20 minutes without a shot between both the 3rd period and OT. In Game 5 the Rangers had 9 shots in 45 minutes. That's not a good team who is generating chances on the opposing goaltender. When that happens, all of the action is in your end, and it's eventually going to beat you (and that last goal Lundqvist didn't have a chance).

The Capitals are winning with Holtby providing adequate goaltending. And there is nothing legendary about it. And guess what? Their best player in Ovechkin hasn't been able to effectively beat Lundqvist. The Capitals team is better period. That's why they're on top, it has nothing to do with either goaltenders performance.

Lundqvist isn't Hasek. Once fans start realizing that, maybe they'll have more reasonable expectations. :shakehead
Click to expand...

spot on. couldn't have said it better myself.
 
Kershaw said:
I don't understand how Nash is suddenly the better player.

Yeah, he was much better this season in 2012-13 by a wide margin.

But look at the comparison the season before. Gaborik was an 80 pt player, Nash was a 60 pt player.

Gaborik's had a better peak year than Nash (2009-10) and has a better track record of producing in the postseason (rookie season with Wild, series vs. Caps).

Even when Gaborik was struggling to produce last playoffs, he still made a lot of chances out of nothing in all three series.

Gaborik Career PPG: .87 PPG
Nash Career PPG: .82 PPG

Neither bring much of a defensive game or intangibles. Neither have been great puck possession players on a consistent basis, aside from Nash this year and Gaborik in 2009-10.

Why is one considered an elite NHL player, while the other is considered damaged goods and player you can't win with?

Would like an honest debate here.
Click to expand...

Good luck. Nash is the new toy, Gabby is the old hand-me-down. And Nash is so noticeable on the ice! Gabby just ghosted around the ice and scored 40 goals a few times. No biggie.
 
I Eat Crow said:
I hate to think about it, but things can really go nuclear if next season doesn't go well. Richards will inevitably be bought out. Torts is a goner for anything less than the conference semis. Lundqvist, Callahan, and Girardi, if I'm not mistaken, are all UFA's. Things could get interesting.
Click to expand...

I for one am excited to see the direction of the team. Full rebuild at the trade deadline. :naughty: Tank for William Nylander.
 
Rangers do a terrible job on the rush.

They do a terrible job on Washington's. They might as well just not even try on theirs.
 
PromNite said:
Good luck. Nash is the new toy, Gabby is the old hand-me-down. And Nash is so noticeable on the ice! Gabby just ghosted around the ice and scored 40 goals a few times. No biggie.
Click to expand...

gabby couldn't deke so therefore he was a soft one-dimensional player. sarcasm of course
 
Fataldogg said:
Unrealistic expectations. He's been a game breaker in two games, both at the Verizone Center, and the team couldn't do anything with it. In the 1-0 loss, he literally played one of the best games of his career, and they still lost.

Basically, you're saying for the Rangers to compete with the Capitals, he has to go on a legendary Conn Smythe run. If they need Lundqvist to have one of the best post seasons a goaltender has ever had, than this team won't win a Cup.

I'm just being honest, I think it's stupid to call out the goaltender after a loss like that. There were dozens of reasons the team lost, and Lundqvist wasn't one of them.

He has consistently outplayed Holtby, but fails to win because the quality and quantity of chances come down at the Rangers end. He made three or four high quality saves in OT on top tier players in the NHL, and the Rangers still couldn't do anything with it.

Again, if you want Lundqvist to consistently win 1-0 or 2-1 games on the road, you're looking for something that isn't going to happen. He's not Hasek. And basically, you're looking for a Hasek caliber performance.

If you look at the kind of goaltending that recent Conn Smythe winning goaltenders have put in, they were on substantially better teams who were able to take advantage of their goalie's performance and score timely goals. With the Rangers, Lundqvist makes the timely / big saves, and he has to make another timely / big save, and it continues to the point where one of them is bound to go in.

In the Game 2 loss the Rangers went 20 minutes without a shot between both the 3rd period and OT. In Game 5 the Rangers had 9 shots in 45 minutes. That's not a good team who is generating chances on the opposing goaltender. When that happens, all of the action is in your end, and it's eventually going to beat you (and that last goal Lundqvist didn't have a chance). Lundqvist is giving the team to opportunity to steal one, and THEY cannot do anything with it. Good teams are able to feed off their goaltender coming up with timely saves, and the Rangers haven't been able to do that.

The Capitals are winning with Holtby providing adequate goaltending. And there is nothing legendary about it. And guess what? Their best player in Ovechkin hasn't been able to effectively beat Lundqvist. The Capitals team is better period. That's why they're on top, it has nothing to do with either goaltenders performance.

Lundqvist isn't Hasek. Once fans start realizing that, maybe they'll have more reasonable expectations. :shakehead
Click to expand...

When the day comes that science can turn me into a robot, I want this post hyper-link tattooed onto my chest.
 
Fataldogg said:
Unrealistic expectations. He's been a game breaker in two games, both at the Verizone Center, and the team couldn't do anything with it. In the 1-0 loss, he literally played one of the best games of his career, and they still lost.

Basically, you're saying for the Rangers to compete with the Capitals, he has to go on a legendary Conn Smythe run. If they need Lundqvist to have one of the best post seasons a goaltender has ever had, than this team won't win a Cup.

I'm just being honest, I think it's stupid to call out the goaltender after a loss like that. There were dozens of reasons the team lost, and Lundqvist wasn't one of them.

He has consistently outplayed Holtby, but fails to win because the quality and quantity of chances come down at the Rangers end. He made three or four high quality saves in OT on top tier players in the NHL, and the Rangers still couldn't do anything with it.

Again, if you want Lundqvist to consistently win 1-0 or 2-1 games on the road, you're looking for something that isn't going to happen. He's not Hasek. And basically, you're looking for a Hasek caliber performance.

If you look at the kind of goaltending that recent Conn Smythe winning goaltenders have put in, they were on substantially better teams who were able to take advantage of their goalie's performance and score timely goals. With the Rangers, Lundqvist makes the timely / big saves, and he has to make another timely / big save, and it continues to the point where one of them is bound to go in.

In the Game 2 loss the Rangers went 20 minutes without a shot between both the 3rd period and OT. In Game 5 the Rangers had 9 shots in 45 minutes. That's not a good team who is generating chances on the opposing goaltender. When that happens, all of the action is in your end, and it's eventually going to beat you (and that last goal Lundqvist didn't have a chance). Lundqvist is giving the team to opportunity to steal one, and THEY cannot do anything with it. Good teams are able to feed off their goaltender coming up with timely saves, and the Rangers haven't been able to do that.

The Capitals are winning with Holtby providing adequate goaltending. And there is nothing legendary about it. And guess what? Their best player in Ovechkin hasn't been able to effectively beat Lundqvist. The Capitals team is better period. That's why they're on top, it has nothing to do with either goaltenders performance.

Lundqvist isn't Hasek. Once fans start realizing that, maybe they'll have more reasonable expectations. :shakehead
Click to expand...

This post needs it's own thread, locked, and pinned at the top.
 
Kershaw said:
He is a professional and is merely getting paid to do his job out there - stop the puck. And he does a hell of a job at it. I don't want Hank becoming coach manager like Messier and co. were during the late 90's early 00's era. Keep the player humble, even if they are elite. By giving a player this much power, you develop a country club atmosphere.
Click to expand...

Him - along with the other guys - are also being paid to win. Him bringing up Torts wouldn't exude a country club mentality but highlighting a ****ing weakness on this team. 5 seasons, scoring being a problem, and..the coach still remains employed.

And with Lundqvist not getting any younger, I'm not questioning where he's coming from when he calls out Torts, ESPECIALLY when a majority of people are sick and tired of Tort's shtick.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom