Speculation: Better Match Up: Blackhawks or Kings

[Enforcinator*]

Who do you guys think the Rangers match up better against in a 7 game series between Chicago and LA?

I think both teams pose problems.

Hawks and Rangers both incredibly fast teams, but the Hawks have the better depth, while on paper the Rangers have OVERALL better talent.

Kings and Rangers both play the same physical style of hockey. But King's center depth and defense are better.

What do you guys think would be the more favorable match up?

(Not saying the Rangers wouldn't beat either team... just wondering which match up suits the Rangers best)

Click to read more...

 

[Rangerfan4life90]

I think the Kings have better depth than the Hawks do.

I think we'd match up better against Chicago than LA.

 

[poeman]

It doesnt matter, both teams are great...They both have areas of strength and it will be a big battle...The Rangers can beat them, it will take everything to do it.

 

[Enforcinator*]

It doesnt matter, both teams are great...They both have areas of strength and it will be a big battle...The Rangers can beat them, it will take everything to do it.

Well the Rangers can run and gun with Hawks for sure.

Hawks don't like getting roughed up by the overly physical teams so the Rangers have that.

Plus Lundqvist > Crawford by a mile.

 

[NYGBleedBlueNYR]

I think if we lock McD & G on Kane then we have a good shot vs Chi.

LA just seems so deep that they'd pose more problems than Chi.

Then on paper LA has a much better goalie.

I'm pulling for Chi but figure it's a crapshoot either way.

It's gonna have more to do with NYR effort & execution than anything.

 

[jerseyjinx94]

I don't want to pick one.

Bring on anybody. We're in the Cup Finals. We can beat anyone.

 

[New York RKY]

I'd prefer the Hawks if I had a say in the matter.

To me, the Kings remind me more of the Bruins. They have depth and their forwards are big and hard-hitting. They also have a very good goalie. We wanted to avoid the Bruins and I think the Kings are built similarly.

The Hawks remind me of the Penguins. They have some top end forwards but I feel like their bottom six aren't as strong. They have a great top pairing defense but the other ones aren't to their level. They also have a goalie that can be shaky at times. We faired pretty feel against the Penguins I would say.

 

[Enforcinator*]

I don't want to pick one.

Bring on anybody. We're in the Cup Finals. We can beat anyone.

Any of the 3 teams left could beat eachother.

That is not the point of the thread...

It's who is a more favorable match up for the Rangers.

 

[Enforcinator*]

I'd prefer the Hawks if I had a say in the matter.

To me, the Kings remind me more of the Bruins. They have depth and their forwards are big and hard-hitting. They also have a very good goalie. We wanted to avoid the Bruins and I think the Kings are built similarly.

The Hawks remind me of the Penguins. They have some top end forwards but I feel like their bottom six aren't as strong. They have a great top pairing defense but the other ones aren't to their level. They also have a goalie that can be shaky at times. We faired pretty feel against the Penguins I would say.

Hjalmarsson and Leddy are underrated.

Hawks can roll 4 lines but their top 3 lines are incredible.

Not that anyone knows what those top 3 lines are game in and game out.... Because: Q.

 

[clmetsfan]

I had originally wanted the Kings because I feel that their offense can be shut down under the right circumstances, but I've shifted to the Hawks primarily because of the goaltenders. Obviously either team would be a ***** and a half to play.

 

[Krams]

I'd prefer the Hawks just because of the goalie factor.

Rangers have one of the premier goaltenders in the world. There are very few others who are at or near his level. Jonathan Quick is one of them.

For as well as Crawford has played at times, he's obviously far inferior to Lundqvist.

The Rangers wouldn't really have a clear advantage in any aspect of the game against the Kings. Not offensively, defensively, or between the pipes. At the very least against Chicago, we know any deficits that may or may not exist up front can be partially mitigated by Lundqvist in net.

 

[New York RKY]

Hjalmarsson and Leddy are underrated.

Hawks can roll 4 lines but their top 3 lines are incredible.

Not that anyone knows what those top 3 lines are game in and game out.... Because: Q.

My point being that in terms of forwards both teams have depth but the Kings are much more physical team (like the Bruins) and the Hawks are more of a skill forward group.

Both have top pairing defensemen and good secondary defenseman. I'm not saying their second and third pairing are bad but they're not to the even of their top guys obviously. The Kings also have the better goalie.

So how the Kings built their team and their style of play resembles the Bruins. The Hawks remind me more of the Penguins in that they have similar holes and I'm confident in our d group to be abke to shut them down like they did to Pittsburgh.

 

[aufheben]

Blackhawks. Their defense and Crawford don't really impress me. The Rangers will have to shutdown either team, but I'm not concerned about the Blackhawks doing the same to us.

 

[yrrebbor]

Hawks. Tickets are cheaper.

 

[Placid]

I'd have to go with the Hawks.

On the other hand, its like selecting between plague and cholera, there isn't a good option

Whoever wins it, just bring them on, crossing my fingers that the Rangers will prevail

 

[BroadwayBlues]

Always take the team with the lesser goalie.

 

[Enforcinator*]

Always take the team with the lesser goalie.

It's pretty damn close... here are their CF numbers:

Quick:

.886 SV%
19 GA

Crawford:

.884 SV%
22 GA

 

[highandwide]

Hawks. Tickets are cheaper.

Aren't the hawks 8-1 at home? The "cheap" tickets are standing room only.

Lol, my sister and I already did dry run calculations for both. Game 2 is on a Saturday.