They beat an okay Philly team, a Pittsburgh team with a trainwreck in net and an invisible Crosby (Rangers didn't render him invisible, he did nothing against CBJ as well), and a team in the Habs without their all world goalie. You watched the Devils in 2012. Did you think they were good?
yeah, rangers had an easy way, but lundqvist had to play lite a trully elite goaltender every series to win, and that was without any super offensive powerhouses
chicago and LA is better at everything than the east teams they played against
better goaltenders, way better D, way better offense
Philly is always better than they project, they let stupid things get in their way.
Both us and Philly were on Crosby like stink on ****, there was ONE lapse where he was let alone in front and nothing came of it…and that breakaway goal.
Montreal was too busy cheap shooting and acting to play the game that beat Boston.
No argument that Chicago and LA were clear cut favorites over anyone not from Boston.
One would have to be a NY homer to be able to say without ignorance- any NY sports team and their payroll at the time can beat anyone if they gel and play like a team without the usual bad luck/horrifying costly mistakes (or laziness).
If anyone was going to beat either Western team, it would be the Rangers. My feelings were the same when this postseason started and so far I'm not made to look ignorant.
In short, if the NYR ****s the bed, it'll be a quick unsurprising series, and not because NYR isn't "good enough". If they play their game, no guarantees, but they have a great shot.