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

[Ryan McDonut]

People blaming Boyle are just ridiculous.

My take on this team right now is that it's a ****ing miracle that they're even still in the conversation given the absolute no-show performances from Nash, Callahan and Richards. The supposed backbone of the ****ing offense is completely non-existent and this team is still giving the Caps basically all they can handle. I guess there can be some solace taken from that, but I can't help but be pissed off by it because if those guys were playing at the level that they are capable of this team would probably be the juggernaut many were expecting them to be before the season started.

I'm particularly pissed because I was absolutely certain that Nash was going to be a major upgrade over Gaborik when the playoffs rolled around. I'm not saying that I think current-state Gaborik would be helping more than Nash is right now, but jeez, what a disappointment. If he's not injured, he better be seriously embarrassed, especially considering the job Brassard has done since he's been here.

i genuinely wonder if holtby broke a sweat last night.

 

[The Gloaming]

I have no confidence in this team if they force an away game 7. Not in a building where they're scoring about .5 GPG.

 

[The Gloaming]

i genuinely wonder if holtby broke a sweat last night.

As Bob said in the GDT, he finished reading War and Peace three times.

 

[Ail]

Here's another fact...

History is irrelevant when playing a game.

The Bell Centre disagrees, the "power play" disagrees, the record in Washington disagrees, the empty net goals down late in the game disagree, the free agent signings disagree.

History is never irrelevant. It continues to haunt this franchise.

 

[chosen]

Ok, so next time I'm holding a knife in my hands and someone says something about me that I don't like, I'll react by stabbing him/her to death. Boyle is an adult "reacting" is not a good enough excuse I'm sorry to say. We have opportunities to react quite often in life but don't for various reasons.

Did you absolve Chris Simon when he reacted to Hollweg by slashing him in the head?

Analogies are not your strong point.

 

[Ryan McDonut]

Imaginary internet players. Haha, ok.

Every top player gets blanketed. If he's got two/three guys on him, then that means someone is wide open to pass to. Nash has been a major disappointment in this series, no two ways about it.

this. star players find a way to score. nash hasn't found one.

 

[SnowblindNYR]

Analogies are not your strong point.

Well if that's true please tell me where I erred and I will do my best to correct my weakness and turn it into a strength.

 

[Championship*]

Here's another fact...

History is irrelevant when playing a game.

I've entire 80+ history of the Rangers they have never won a game 7 on the road.

If history was so irrelevant they would have won at least 1 by now. With the Rangers, history is NOT irrelevant.

They've also never won a series after losing the first two on the road. History right on schedule there.

 

[LittleKev6D9]

I'm not even worried, they are going to win Game 6. It would be typical Rangers. I'm ready to give up on this team, so naturally they will win to prolong my suffering. We'll be here for the **** show on Monday.

 

[SnowblindNYR]

I've entire 80+ history of the Rangers they have never won a game 7 on the road.

If history was so irrelevant they would have won at least 1 by now. With the Rangers, history is NOT irrelevant.

They've also never won a series after losing the first two on the road. History right on schedule there.

Can I ask you something? If you played roulette and got black 9 times in a row, does that mean that you are more likely to get black on the 10th time?

You're bringing up 80 years worth of history. I'm going to assume that most people on this board were decades away from being born.

The last time the Rangers were in a game 7 on the road was 2009. That team has 4 players remaining (actually 3 with Staal out). I will give you that Torts being there plays a relatively large part. Ok, fine so we're 0-1 under Torts. The last time we played a game 7 on the road before that was a while pre-lockout. No one is left from that team, absolutely no one. This is nothing but a silly superstition.

 

[bmw2004]

It's very ****ing tiring to play one and half period in your own zone. If their disgrace PP would be at least 30% better they would win the game. But on the other hand if old women would have balls she would be an old man.

 

[Championship*]

Can I ask you something? If you played roulette and got black 9 times in a row, does that mean that you are more likely to get black on the 10th time?

You're bringing up 80 years worth of history. I'm going to assume that most people on this board were decades away from being born.

The last time the Rangers were in a game 7 on the road was 2009. That team has 4 players remaining (actually 3 with Staal out). I will give you that Torts being there plays a relatively large part. Ok, fine so we're 0-1 under Torts. The last time we played a game 7 on the road before that was a while pre-lockout. No one is left from that team, absolutely no one. This is nothing but a silly superstition.

The players change, yet the history remains.

I'll take the smart bet on history 10 times out of 10.

 

[aufheben]

Seriously, we heard you the first time. You know they're going to lose. Telling people their sports team is inevitably going to lose isn't informative, or critical, or anything other than really annoying.

 

[haohmaru]

Seriously, we heard you the first time. You know they're going to lose. Telling people their sports team is inevitably going to lose isn't informative, or critical, or anything other than really annoying.

Exactly. What's the point of spouting negative crap over and over and over again? We get it.

 

[SnowblindNYR]

The players change, yet the history remains.

I'll take the smart bet on history 10 times out of 10.

So it's a superstition? There's nothing "smart" or rational about that.

 

[hpNYR]

History is made to be broken. That is all.

 

[Blueshirt Special]

I've entire 80+ history of the Rangers they have never won a game 7 on the road.

If history was so irrelevant they would have won at least 1 by now. With the Rangers, history is NOT irrelevant.

They've also never won a series after losing the first two on the road. History right on schedule there.

Have yo ever heard the expression "That's why they play the games!"? Do I have to bring up the red sox?

Hey I hear you. History is not on our side, but they have to play the games. Washington has to win it. They don't just award winners based on history. If we squeak by and get to Round 2....who knows?

 

[Hunter Gathers]

Have yo ever heard the expression "That's why they play the games!"? Do I have to bring up the red sox?

Hey I hear you. History is not on our side, but they have to play the games. Washington has to win it. They don't just award winners based on history. If we squeak by and get to Round 2....who knows?

Don't even bother with that guy. All he does is whine and hate the team and doesn't post on here when we win. What's the point in dealing with someone like that?

 

[Hunter Gathers]

It's almost like you want them to lose.

He does. He said that earlier. He wanted them to get swept.

 

[LieutenantLackluster]

Can I ask you something? If you played roulette and got black 9 times in a row, does that mean that you are more likely to get black on the 10th time?

Today I learned: Hockey is a game of chance.

 

[Championship*]

So it's a superstition? There's nothing "smart" or rational about that.

I don't think you know what the word "Superstition" means...

Don't even bother with that guy. All he does is whine and hate the team and doesn't post on here when we win. What's the point in dealing with someone like that?

Hey, how was the offense last night?

 

[KingWantsCup]

I had a dream last night that Staal came back for game 6 and scored a big goal from the point. I'd be happy just to see him on the ice let alone scoring a goal.

 

[Idlerlee]

The players change, yet the history remains.

I'll take the smart bet on history 10 times out of 10.

History isn't a valid mathematical terminology. Defining history as a probability is in fact the exact opposite of what the law of averages tells us (applying it to a small sample size, which is what is going on here).

Quick brain maths suggest to me that the Rangers are both probable to win at home and away.

Or better explained: The numbers will even out in a small sample size. The bigger the number, the bigger the chance off the evening out incident occurring.

I thought the Rangers played a good match yesterday if we forget about most of the 2nd and third half which mainly consisted of Hank saving the collective ***** of the Rangers. The first period was really, really good.

Didn't Zucc hit Holtby's stick yesterday. Which means that we were around 1-2 inches away from winning the game (maybe!). The margins are tiny and there is no way that they cant work in the Rangers favor the next 2 matches.

This team is more than capable of taking this home, its obviously going to be hard work but the series is still all there for the taking.

 

[haohmaru]

History was pretty important in 93-94, too. Oh. Wait.

 

[SnowblindNYR]

Today I learned: Hockey is a game of chance.

Today I learned: You only read half of a post.

The point is that outside of the 2009 team the rest of the Rangers' history in road game 7s is irrelevant. Even 2009 is MOSTLY irrelevant. So yes, in a sense it is chance. The Rangers by CHANCE have a bad history in road game 7s. It's random that they lost all of them. Has nothing to do with history or anything. If the Rangers lost game 7 on the road every 20 years, is that really anything more than an arbitrary statistic that happened by chance? Maybe they lost 2 in consecutive years in the 70s or something, but it's still irrelevant to now.