Pre-Game Talk: MDSF: (2) New York Rangers vs. (3) Philadelphia Flyers

[AHB*]

Not really, if we beat the Flyers with Emery in net, unless we completely dominated and he played well I'd just feel cheap. It's weird. It's my own psychosis, no need to analyze it.

And how about us having our first line LW out of the lineup for the whole series?

For real man, injuries happen all around the league. How about when we didn't have Staal due to the eye injury?

Every team has guys, usually important ones that go down for one reason or another. I don't care if half the flyers team is out, in fact, I"d prefer it. Winning is winning.

 

[*Bob Richards*]

I don't care if the Flyers pull a South Park and let a bunch of kindergartners take their place.

Wins are wins. We have injuries too.

 

[AHB*]

I don't care if the Flyers pull a South Park and let a bunch of kindergartners take their place.

Wins are wins. We have injuries too.

I didn't want to be too drastic, but I completely agree.

 

[Fitzy]

Agreed. I didn't give two ***** that the league thought we were boring in 11-12, and I don't care what the perception is if we win now.

 

[THE BIG WHISTLE]

Actual rangers good...rangers fans bad

LOL, well said

 

[SnowblindNYR]

And how about us having our first line LW out of the lineup for the whole series?

For real man, injuries happen all around the league. How about when we didn't have Staal due to the eye injury?

Every team has guys, usually important ones that go down for one reason or another. I don't care if half the flyers team is out, in fact, I"d prefer it. Winning is winning.

Change in goalie with all due respect to Kreider is a bigger deal, though we did have McDonagh out for 5 games just now. That said I do agree that it's the Flyers' own fault for having Emery as their backup although we got really lucky with Talbot.

 

[broadwayblue]

Injuries are a part of the game. Good teams find a way to win anyway. We've seen on many occasions that a backup goalie is far from a walk in the park.

 

[highandwide]

I watched the PIT/PHI game and Emery looked slow, could that game attest to his season or was that just a bad game?

 

[YoSoyLalo]

I watched the PIT/PHI game and Emery looked slow, could that game attest to his season or was that just a bad game?

He is incapable of moving side to side in the crease. His hip injury did him in. This is a huge positive for us.

 

[SnowblindNYR]

I don't care if the Flyers pull a South Park and let a bunch of kindergartners take their place.

Wins are wins. We have injuries too.

Let's take this hyperbole a step further. Let's say the Flyers, Penguins, Bruins, and say Ducks, pull a bunch the same thing and let a bunch of kindergartners and we sweep our way through the cup. What will that cup actually mean to you? You're not going to be able to use it in salary negotiations, you won't be able to pawn off a ring, the cup to you should represent great play and overcoming adversity. If your team got gimme wins (not Emery but your South Park example), what adversity did your team overcome and what did they accomplish? This is more of a philosophical question, and obviously is not based on Emery being in over Mason. I'm just illustrating my point with a bit of a philosophical question. It's sort of a reductio ad absurdum argument.

 

[BroadwayHustle]

Let's take this hyperbole a step further. Let's say the Flyers, Penguins, Bruins, and say Ducks, pull a bunch the same thing and let a bunch of kindergartners and we sweep our way through the cup. What will that cup actually mean to you? You're not going to be able to use it in salary negotiations, you won't be able to pawn off a ring, the cup to you should represent great play and overcoming adversity. If your team got gimme wins (not Emery but your South Park example), what adversity did your team overcome and what did they accomplish? This is more of a philosophical question, and obviously is not based on Emery being in over Mason. I'm just illustrating my point with a bit of a philosophical question. It's sort of a reductio ad absurdum argument.

The team who wins the cup is usually the team who gets hot at the right time and is healthiest. If we win the cup because we are the healthiest, I don't really care that other teams were hurt.

 

[aufheben]

Jesus Christo

 

[silverfish]

Wow. What an awful conversation this is.

I don't think the Flyers are on their board saying. Oh man, McDonagh is coming back from injury and Kreider is out. I'll be less satisfied if we win this series.

 

[RGY]

Let's take this hyperbole a step further. Let's say the Flyers, Penguins, Bruins, and say Ducks, pull a bunch the same thing and let a bunch of kindergartners and we sweep our way through the cup. What will that cup actually mean to you? You're not going to be able to use it in salary negotiations, you won't be able to pawn off a ring, the cup to you should represent great play and overcoming adversity. If your team got gimme wins (not Emery but your South Park example), what adversity did your team overcome and what did they accomplish? This is more of a philosophical question, and obviously is not based on Emery being in over Mason. I'm just illustrating my point with a bit of a philosophical question. It's sort of a reductio ad absurdum argument.

You're getting a little crazy with this.

Emery has playoff experience. With good teams. The Flyers still have talent in front of him. I don't want to hear excuses. The Flyers fans wouldn't enjoy a series win any less if Talbot was in net. This is the playoffs, wins are wins.

 

[broadwayblue]

Let's take this hyperbole a step further. Let's say the Flyers, Penguins, Bruins, and say Ducks, pull a bunch the same thing and let a bunch of kindergartners and we sweep our way through the cup. What will that cup actually mean to you? You're not going to be able to use it in salary negotiations, you won't be able to pawn off a ring, the cup to you should represent great play and overcoming adversity. If your team got gimme wins (not Emery but your South Park example), what adversity did your team overcome and what did they accomplish? This is more of a philosophical question, and obviously is not based on Emery being in over Mason. I'm just illustrating my point with a bit of a philosophical question. It's sort of a reductio ad absurdum argument.

Seriously? A championship is a championship. Nobody remembers (or suggests) that the road to the Cup was easier because different opponents were missing guys. Injuries are a part of the game. If a team wants to spend all their cap space on a few guys and as a result they lack depth, that's not the other team's concern. You construct your team knowing that injuries happen, and if you plan poorly for that possibility that's on you.

 

[RGY]

Seriously? A championship is a championship. Nobody remembers (or suggests) that the road to the Cup was easier because different opponents were missing guys. Injuries are a part of the game. If a team wants to spend all their cap space on a few guys and as a result they lack depth, that's not the other team's concern. You construct your team knowing that injuries happen, and if you plan poorly for that possibility that's on you.

Philly's goaltending situation was skeptical to begin with even with a healthy Mason. Mason had a decent year, but he is nothing spectacular. The Flyers special teams were very good this year. Stop kidding yourself if you are treating Mason like he is Rask, Varlamov, Bobo, Crawford, Quick, Hiller, etc; all goalies who are much better than him. Not to mention some guy named Lundqvist...

 

[highandwide]

people will always make excuses for why we win, we're just not a liked team, and quite honestly, I'm greedy and could careless at any teams injuries at this point.

CUP OR BUST.

 

[broadwayblue]

Philly's goaltending situation was skeptical to begin with even with a healthy Mason. Mason had a decent year, but he is nothing spectacular. The Flyers special teams were very good this year. Stop kidding yourself if you are treating Mason like he is Rask, Varlamov, Bobo, Crawford, Quick, Hiller, etc; all goalies who are much better than him. Not to mention some guy named Lundqvist...

My point is nobody is going to say that it's unfair the Rangers won because Philly only had Mason or Emery or whoever in net. You go to war with who you have. It's not our problem if they aren't good enough...whatever that even means.

 

[RGY]

My point is nobody is going to say that it's unfair the Rangers won because Philly only had Mason or Emery or whoever in net. You go to war with who you have. It's not our problem if they aren't good enough...whatever that even means.

Oh I agree. See my post above the one you quoted of me. You would never see flyer fans batting an eye at beating Talbot. They'd be celebrating just as hard.

 

[SnowblindNYR]

Seriously? A championship is a championship. Nobody remembers (or suggests) that the road to the Cup was easier because different opponents were missing guys. Injuries are a part of the game. If a team wants to spend all their cap space on a few guys and as a result they lack depth, that's not the other team's concern. You construct your team knowing that injuries happen, and if you plan poorly for that possibility that's on you.

Well that was just a philosophical exercise, I don't think the Flyers are a gimme even with Emery. I just don't understand the idea that people don't care if the other team is not even NHLers and you win. What's the point of a championship if you got a gimme? Not saying this is a gimme, just that in theory why would you care about a championship unless it represents something?

 

[YoSoyLalo]

Too much philosophical meandering in this thread

Can we go back to arguing about people punching people

 

[Pizza]

Who cares what the casual fans think? Or how confident the fans are in general. It has absolutely no bearing on the outcome of the series. The New York Rangers are not going to lose because the fans are obnoxious and cocky. Just like they're not going to win because some guy didn't shave his beard or wash his clothes for the duration of the playoffs.

I think we're missing the point here and I don't want my words twisted.

It's not about casual or obnoxious or cocky. My impression is that this year is different from last year and other years in one significant way. A lot of fans seems to be dismissing the Flyers a legit challenge. Not just here but in conversations I have with friends who followed the team in some cases longer than I have.

But your right. That has absolutely no bearing on the outcome. I simply stated that I do not agree. This will be tough series imo. I would be thrilled to be proved dead wrong.

 

[Section32]

I'm only upset because I like playing the other teams' best. If we beat the Flyers because Emery sucks there's nothing rewarding about that at all.

In a 7 game series, with all teams having injuries, I never feel any less satisfaction when the Rangers are able to move on.

I don't recall the '97 Flyers feeling like making the Stanley Cup was less important because the team they played was a beat up, 1/2 AHL-journeyman roster fielded by the Rangers.

We have had such crap luck with injuries forever.

A Cup is a Cup.

 

[Pizza]

Too much philosophical meandering in this thread

Can we go back to arguing about people punching people

Yes & Yes.

 

[Jim Ramsay]

You know it's time for the puck to drop when there are hypotheticals being thrown around about teams icing up kindergarten kids in the Stanley cup finals...

One thing people always talk about is 'depth' as an attribute to a team. Every year, teams face circumstances with injuries that question and test the depth of a team.

Even if the rangers get past the flyers , to get the the stanley cup, they still have to face 3 teams that will most likely have their #1 goalie playing for them....if the flyers don't have their number 1 for the first round...then it is what it is... the rangers would still have many challenges ahead of them if they get past round 1.