Post-Game Talk: It's Not Over 'til it's Over PART II - See you at Game 7!!!

[Miamipuck]

My problem is my memory only retains so much and I've been active here for only so long, so I do not yet know who does what or who hates who or even sometimes who I like and don't wanna be as much of a ***** to etc lol. But yeah, that's definitely some other level Hank Hate right there...

Well if you were in the Talbot vs. Hank threads, I suspect you weren't, he was one of like 3 posters that thought they should trade Hank and save the cap space.

Let me tell you those 3 made sure to make about 1000 posts each on this subject. It's pretty funny now that the Rangers are still standing in most part because Hank: he is the only one still going on and on like the little energizer bunny of hate. It's actually pretty funny at this point.

Win or lose Wednesday, Hank has still been Hank, basically awesome. That said, when it comes ot putting money down on the game 7, my money is on Hank in these situations. I have a good feeling, an metered enthusiasm (The Rangers do cause heartburn no matter what) that the Rangers will win.

 

[JohnTonelliRises]

Look, I didn't mean to insult anyone, but if you missed so many games in the regular season you should be much fresher. If you want to win the Cup, endurance is very important. The cup doesn't care if you made 42 saves or 50 saves. The best wins. You got to be prepared for anything(including multiple OT), that's all I'm saying.

I disagree..

He wasn't allowed to do much in the way of physical activity for many weeks and then to put on a show like he did last night was definitely not an easy thing to do.

Any goalie would be exhausted. If anything that's a testament to just how much of a physical specimen he is to come back after an injury like that and play the way he did yesterday..

Just sayin'.

 

[IAMREALITY]

Well if you were in the Talbot vs. Hank threads, I suspect you weren't, he was one of like 3 posters that thought they should trade Hank and save the cap space.

Let me tell you those 3 made sure to make about 1000 posts each on this subject. It's pretty funny now that the Rangers are still standing in most part because Hank: he is the only one still going on and on like the little energizer bunny of hate. It's actually pretty funny at this point.

Win or lose Wednesday, Hank has still been Hank, basically awesome. That said, when it comes ot putting money down on the game 7, my money is on Hank in these situations. I have a good feeling, an metered enthusiasm (The Rangers do cause heartburn no matter what) that the Rangers will win.

There's not a coach, gm, or anyone with real knowledge of the game in any organization whatsoever that would make that call. Not one. That's usually a pretty good sign that it's an asinine position to hold.

 

[The Gloaming]

Continuing to trash the goalie after he posts a 42 save victory while getting shelled for 40 minutes. Now that's dedication.

 

[SnowblindNYR]

This looks like a tough order with who will be getting to the ECF and SCF, but if we're to win the cup, how high will Kreider's goal in game 5 be on the list of most important goals in Rangers history? If you think about it a tying goal prevents certain elimination, a winning goal guarantees victory but does not mean you would have lost if not for that goal (Matteau). In a way you could argue if you take away "1940" and just look at 2 cup runs (if we get one this year), the Kreider goal would be more important than the Matteau goal.

 

[2Leetch_94]

Talbot would of channeled his inner Ernie Banks and exclaimed "Let's play two" after such a performance. He's in peak physical condition, after all.

 

[Inferno]

i want the rangers to come out flying and go up 3 zip 6 mins into the game.

 

[2Leetch_94]

i want the rangers to come out flying and go up 3 zip 6 mins into the game.

Followed with it being tied 3-3 at intermission.

 

[Rangerfan4life90]

This looks like a tough order with who will be getting to the ECF and SCF, but if we're to win the cup, how high will Kreider's goal in game 5 be on the list of most important goals in Rangers history? If you think about it a tying goal prevents certain elimination, a winning goal guarantees victory but does not mean you would have lost if not for that goal (Matteau). In a way you could argue if you take away "1940" and just look at 2 cup runs (if we get one this year), the Kreider goal would be more important than the Matteau goal.

Kredier's game 5 goal of this series will be among the top 3 if the Rangers won the cup this season.

 

[haohmaru]

Look, I didn't mean to insult anyone, but if you missed so many games in the regular season you should be much fresher. If you want to win the Cup, endurance is very important. The cup doesn't care if you made 42 saves or 50 saves. The best wins. You got to be prepared for anything(including multiple OT), that's all I'm saying.

^ Play goal for 60 minutes with, what, 70+ shot attempts and 45 getting through and then talk to me about who has poor conditioning.

It's almost comical. Some of these Lundqvist criticisms... I can't.

You think Holtby wasn't gassed? Maybe that's why he let in a Boyle shot from the point.

At this point in the season, EVERYONE is tired and battling through it.

 

[Morten]

if the rangers continue this 1 goal game thing and by some chance make it to game 7 of the SCF they wont have any fans left, everyone will be lying in their livingroom with cardiac arrest

 

[The Lunatic Fridge]

Questioning the guy's condition is beyond absurd. he's played every game since the playoffs started. This is not a "ok hank gets the night off" situation where talbot can just get in and lundqvist can take a breather. Of course he's gonna get tired. You think any other goalie that hasn't been pulled this playoffs isn't/doesn't get tired?

Gimme a break.

 

[IAMREALITY]

This looks like a tough order with who will be getting to the ECF and SCF, but if we're to win the cup, how high will Kreider's goal in game 5 be on the list of most important goals in Rangers history? If you think about it a tying goal prevents certain elimination, a winning goal guarantees victory but does not mean you would have lost if not for that goal (Matteau). In a way you could argue if you take away "1940" and just look at 2 cup runs (if we get one this year), the Kreider goal would be more important than the Matteau goal.

The goal that gets ya into the SCF will always be more important than the one that keeps ya alive in the 2nd round.

 

[IAMREALITY]

i want the rangers to come out flying and go up 3 zip 6 mins into the game.

Noooooooo!!! C'mon... Don't you see what happens every single time a team goes up 3-0 in the first 10 minutes of the game? I fear it every time it happens.

I'd rather see consistent scoring spread out, maybe 2 in the first, 1 in the 2nd, 2 in the 3rd including the empty netter. They can allow the caps 1 in the 2nd and 1 in the 3rd. Consistent play, shutting them down, never taking our foot off the gas. But yeah, 3-0 in the final minutes goes south too damn often for me to be comfortable lol.

 

[ncmike]

Seems like the Capitals are trying to convince themselves they can win Game 7 by saying it to the media.

Well, Washington is known for saying things over and over until it becomes true. It's just not the hockey team.

 

[BarbaraAlphanse]

I think anyone thinking that this game will be a track meet, or that the Rangers come out and put a 3 spot on Holtby in the 1st, will be severely disappointed.

Game 7's tend to be conservative. Defensively-oriented. With limited risk taking unless it is a critical juncture in the game.

This favor's the Caps, considering that they've mastered the shell defensively and the flukey goal offensively.

Recipe for a win will remain: contain Ovi, volume shoot.

Baby Sinclair will need to watch over us.

 

[Xref]

I thought the check was textbook clean. McD turned at the last moment. Ovi didn'l leave his feet. Ovi wasn't striding when he hit him.

I hated the hit, but I didn't see anything illegal.

Whether McD turned or not is irrelevant. Charging is charging regardless of whether the opponent turns or not. People are confusing this with a head shot, which it wasn't. It was charge, due to "distance traveled". Nothing more, nothing less. The refs swallowed their whistles for the home team and their star punk.

 

[NikC]

Whether McD turned or not is irrelevant. Charging is charging regardless of whether the opponent turns or not. People are confusing this with a head shot, which it wasn't. It was charge, due to "distance traveled". Nothing more, nothing less. The refs swallowed their whistles for the home team and their star punk.

Remember me from we bleed blue ?

Looks like times done changed with you getting on the refs!

 

[TheDirtyH]

Anyone else notice both Stralman and Torterella picking us to go the distance after we went down 3-1?

 

[IAMREALITY]

Anyone else notice both Stralman and Torterella picking us to go the distance after we went down 3-1?

No idea what you're talking about (though I guess most do?). Can you elaborate?

 

[Rangerfan4life90]

Anyone else notice both Stralman and Torterella picking us to go the distance after we went down 3-1?

Huh?

 

[ReggieDunlop68]

Anyone else notice both Stralman and Torterella picking us to go the distance after we went down 3-1?

I think he was refering to Hakeem Olajuwon and Phil Mickelson, and I agree.

 

[IAMREALITY]

I think he was refering to Hakeem Olajuwon and Phil Mickelson, and I agree.

I know even less what this means...

 

[Mrpuck]

Might have missed it somewhere in this thread.

I recall last night, hearing one of the announcers comment when McDonagh broke his stick in the final minutes that he broke it over Ovechkin's head. Not sure if it was a high crosscheck or what since I missed it. Did anyone catch that or was it just horrible commentary from these guys as usual?

If he did, good for him. Don't condone trying to hurt other players, but at some point you have to play Messier style hockey and police yourselves.

 

[Sirius Vivace]

Here it is