darko
Registered User
- Feb 16, 2009
- 70,272
- 7,803
Something tells me you wouldnt be happy unless we won games 10-0
More than half of those goals would be flukey so lack of finish would still be an issue.
Post-Game Talk: Rangers @ Panthers 11/27/13: Mashed Potatahs! Gravy! And Cranberry SAUCE!!
- Thread starter Machinehead
- Start date
-
Xenforo Cloud will be upgrading us to version 2.3.5 on March 3rd at 12 AM GMT. This version has increased stability and fixes several bugs. We expect downtime for the duration of the update. The admin team will continue to work on existing issues, templates and upgrade all necessary available addons to minimize impact of this new version. Click Here for Updates
More than half of those goals would be flukey so lack of finish would still be an issue.
eco's bones
Registered User
Well we sucked for the most part but won anyway. A good thing that Thomas sucked a lot more. We'll need to play better against Boston and Vancouver.
Something tells me you wouldnt be happy unless we won games 10-0
********. People say that I'm too happy after losses. I say it when the Rangers play well and lose and say it when the Rangers play poorly and win. When Lundqvist was a monster against Dallas I said it. When he was excellent against the Kings I said it. When the offense created lots of chances and outplayed their competition but didn't win I said it too. This game the Rangers got outplayed, not as much as it looked, the offense was awful though and Lundqvist while having a good game for the most part gave up his quota of soft goals. That has to end. We're scoring about 2 goals a game, we can't spot the other team a goal every ****ing game.
don't know how you could feel comfortable when hank gives up goals like that....
yea u say he only gives up 2 a game, but r those the kind of goals u want to give up?
up 3 in 3rd against a struggling team and you lose focus just like that?
man, i for one don't !
yea u say he only gives up 2 a game, but r those the kind of goals u want to give up?
up 3 in 3rd against a struggling team and you lose focus just like that?
man, i for one don't !
Not impressed at all by this win. 2 points but let's look at the bigger picture. Long way to go.
Chimpradamus
Registered User
JESSEWENEEDTOCOOK
Twenty f*ckin years
- Oct 8, 2010
- 80,056
- 17,674
****** game, but a win's a win. They also scored 4 goals (5 with EN) and capitalized on their chances. And just like that, we're 2nd in the division.
I'm happy they won but i just dont wanna get excited and then be let down dude. This team needs to get over 500. Period. They won tonight, if they lose to Boston, its right back to 500. Then who knows about Vancouver? I just wanna see consistency
Crease
Chief Justice of the HFNYR Court
- Jul 12, 2004
- 24,765
- 27,707
He was the reason the Rangers were able to get a multi-goal lead in the first place. When that's the case, who cares how he gives up his 1 or 2.
CHGoalie27
Don't blame the goalie!
I'm almost happy we won a game like this. Makes me feel a lot better about some of the games we lost. Now play like this against Boston and get lit up.
JESSEWENEEDTOCOOK
Twenty f*ckin years
- Oct 8, 2010
- 80,056
- 17,674
Interesting that Hank starts in Boston, probably means Talbot gets Vancouver. Good move, Torts knows Hank inside and out, but Talbot is an unknown commodity to him.
Megustaelhockey
"I like hockey" in Spanish
- Apr 29, 2011
- 23,457
- 17,596
17,268 announced attendance tonight - 89.7% of capacity. Anyone at the game, do these numbers seem right to you? Do you have an idea of the proportion of Rangers fans there?
I think it comes down to Eastern vs Western team. If you have to pick, you want to get your best chance vs another east team.
Machinehead
HFNYR MVP
Always whining and bickering. Even after wins. Just look at the victory gif and be happy, it's a holiday!
The Lightning went up hard against the Rangers when they ventured into the dirty area in front of Bishop. The Panthers may have shown a lot of strength at times offensively, but they surprisingly gave Rangers in front of Thomas a fair bit of freedom. They did not do a great job of tying up Rangers players. I'm happy to see that the Rangers are developing some good thought practices, one of the most important of which is the tried and true 'go to the net' and get into the slot. It doesn't always result in goals, but you get almost nothing if you never do it.
Amazing Kreiderman
Registered User
- Apr 11, 2011
- 45,070
- 40,920
JESSEWENEEDTOCOOK
Twenty f*ckin years
- Oct 8, 2010
- 80,056
- 17,674
You're pretending like the D completely left him out to dry. Take a look at that 2nd period, we lived in our zone and how many great chance did he see? Even in the first. One shift he was great. He wasn't the reason at all. Nice play by the PP on the first, Tim Thomas on the second, the Panther who gave the puck away/Nash on the 3rd and good (albeit not great) D were all bigger factors. Also, I hate this end justifies the means attitude. Who cares if he gave up 1 or 2? Well, what if we score 0-2 like we usually do then it would have mattered. He's not absolved because we scored 5. Also, he's been doing this practically every game. We don't score enough to spot another team a goal every game.
You're giving me flashbacks to a guy from the old official Rangers board that would ask "do you know how many Rangers fans there were?" after every game. I think both home and away. I'm pretty sure it's not you because I don't remember you asking this after other games. It was SO annoying. The guy cared about how many Rangers fans went to games more than whether they won the game.
I have a feeling that the people giving Lundqvist credit for being amazing outside of that one goal would be first in line to say that the Rangers can't finish and had easy shots all game if the roles were reversed. People were saying how Ben Bishop got no chances against despite having far better chances than the Panthers got this game.
Amazing Kreiderman
Registered User
- Apr 11, 2011
- 45,070
- 40,920
