Post-Game Talk: Rangers @ Caps Game 5: see you on sunday

[SnowblindNYR]

A game in which most of our offense provided nothing but missed opportunities calls for Boyle getting most of the blame? Truly amazing.

Yes, in a game where our offense provided nothing but our defense and goaltender would have pitched a shutout if a player didn't take a **** on his own team with a selfish play, that player needs most of the blame. The mistakes and lack of good play by the forwards was not due to them being selfish idiots.

Edit: The defense and goaltending would have most likely pitched a shutout.

 

[SnowblindNYR]

I assume that "you can't say that for sure" was meant that you can't say they'd win for sure. If that's what he meant, that's not mutually exclusive with the statement "likely would have won". Likely, but not for sure.

 

[Callagraves]

1 for their last 11 in washington

The Rangers have never won a game 7 on the road

in the last 4 series against they have not won an elimination game in Washington

Sorry, but these are facts. The Series is effectively over, even if they win on sunday.

They just cannot win in Washington in the playoffs. Get the offseason thread ready.

Not only are you superstitious, but you're self contradictory.

 

[Callagraves]

Some of you spineless jellyfish need a bit of "one time" up in here

 

[Zappy]

Yes, in a game where our offense provided nothing but our defense and goaltender would have pitched a shutout if a player didn't take a **** on his own team with a selfish play, that player needs most of the blame. The mistakes and lack of good play by the forwards was not due to them being selfish idiots.

Edit: The defense and goaltending would have most likely pitched a shutout.

Ok. So you keep basing your opinions on what ifs, which you are completely entitled to, and I'll base my opinions on what actually happened.

The offense provided nothing (well, except Boyle lulz!) to support the defensive output in that game. That is a fact. When ownership/management needs to make decisions on this team for the next season, I think they will put more focus on the lack of offensive output than a single penalty that may or may not have had any impact on the outcome of the game.

 

[Hi ImHFNYR]

I've entire 80+ history of the Rangers they have never won a game 7 on the road.

If history was so irrelevant they would have won at least 1 by now. With the Rangers, history is NOT irrelevant.

They've also never won a series after losing the first two on the road. History right on schedule there.

It is irrelevant in so much that a team that lost 10 years ago has absolutely zero to do with today it will not influence our performance in any way shape or form. It really is coincidence and a really terrible one for rangers fans at that but it's a coincidence nonetheless that we've lost that many game 7's on the road. Amazing that that's how it works for this franchise.

But I will say to you and the other guy that it is relevant to many fans because it's a demonstrated pattern of failure and as a defense mechanism some fans are going to avoid getting hopeful and I don't blame them. Going into OT we all had hope but I can't deny that something naturally held me back and my thought was that we would lose. I had the Jets go to two AFC cham games and I, especially for the Pitt game I had allowed myself to be convinced beyond a shadow of a doubt that they had it. First offensive play is a fumble for a TD. Then Kyle Wilson drops the INT on the Pitt 30 and we rough the punter immediately after to extend the Pitt drive and of course we lose by one possession.

Then the Rangers get molested by the Devs. Lets go for another decade of pure incompetence because that's what comes next

 

[SnowblindNYR]

Ok. So you keep basing your opinions on what ifs, which you are completely entitled to, and I'll base my opinions on what actually happened.

The offense provided nothing (well, except Boyle lulz!) to support the defensive output in that game. That is a fact. When ownership/management needs to make decisions on this team for the next season, I think they will put more focus on the lack of offensive output than a single penalty that may or may not have had any impact on the outcome of the game.

The "what if", is a pretty likely scenario. Considering the Caps were pushing hard in the 2nd and 3rd period, I tend to think that any added pressure would have been marginal. Now, of course I have no proof of that.

I don't know what long term plans of management have to do with this one game quite frankly. I'm talking about this one specific game. Also, the offensive problems are spread out to the entire team. So if we're blaming a player, it's not like they all have the burden of the entire offense.

Yes, our offense stunk, but you know what, the rest of the team was good enough to win, if not for Boyle. Most playoff games will be close, so either the offense or the defense/goaltending won't be great. That's to be expected. What's not to be expected is a player think his emotions are more important than the team. That's unacceptable.

 

[Maaxse]

I wish there was a secret thread 'for the rational and cautious thinking' with rules like:

1. Asking for Lundqvist to go elsewhere to win a cup is Pejorative Slured.
2. Firing the coach is not going to happen.
3. It is o.k to lose 2-1 in OT, in an away game, of the playoffs. It's sad but it is bound to happen. You know, sometimes.
4. Overachieving is a dubious concept.
5. Sitting a star player is not going to happen.
6. Avery is not a hockey player anymore.
7. It is not a fact that they lose Game 6 and/or Game 7.

 

[Fitzy]

We won games 6 and 7 vs the Pens in the first round last year.

 

[SnowblindNYR]

It is irrelevant in so much that a team that lost 10 years ago has absolutely zero to do with today it will not influence our performance in any way shape or form. It really is coincidence and a really terrible one for rangers fans at that but it's a coincidence nonetheless that we've lost that many game 7's on the road. Amazing that that's how it works for this franchise.

But I will say to you and the other guy that it is relevant to many fans because it's a demonstrated pattern of failure and as a defense mechanism some fans are going to avoid getting hopeful and I don't blame them. Going into OT we all had hope but I can't deny that something naturally held me back and my thought was that we would lose. I had the Jets go to two AFC cham games and I, especially for the Pitt game I had allowed myself to be convinced beyond a shadow of a doubt that they had it. First offensive play is a fumble for a TD. Then Kyle Wilson drops the INT on the Pitt 30 and we rough the punter immediately after to extend the Pitt drive and of course we lose by one possession.

Then the Rangers get molested by the Devs. Lets go for another decade of pure incompetence because that's what comes next

The problem is that the gentleman you are talking to is trying to make an actual inference. He's trying to make an intellectual statement about the Rangers' chances. He is not saying that "this is why I don't get my hopes up, I've been scarred", he seems to think that teams that played decades ago have some sort of impact on what happens in a potential game 7 in this series.

So at best it's a superstition. He thinks that there is some mythical "Rangers jinx" that prevents teams decades later from winning game 7s on the road. Or an astounding lack of common sense.

He already insulted my intelligence because I gave him the benefit of the doubt and thought it was superstition. A benefit of the doubt I shouldn't have given him because his profound argument was "well if history had nothing to do with it, they would have won game 7 on the road at some point". Seems like it was not superstition after all.

 

[Maaxse]

We won games 6 and 7 vs the Pens in the first round last year.

A closet philadelphian

 

[*Bob Richards*]

It's only adversity.

 

[PlamsUnlimited]

It's only adversity.

Only for this team means

"ALRIGHT GUYZ LOLZ LETS BACK UP IN OUR OWN ZONE"

Also makes me want to do what I sent you in the text yesterday. I hate it. They need to adapt.

 

[Fitzy]

A closet philadelphian

Whoops, Sens. No idea why I typed Pens.

 

[Hockey Team]

I saw Sullivan outside MSG. I asked him for advice on how to bean him in the head with a puck I happened to be carrying.

It went wide.

 

[SnowblindNYR]

I wish there was a secret thread 'for the rational and cautious thinking' with rules like:

1. Asking for Lundqvist to go elsewhere to win a cup is Pejorative Slured.
2. Firing the coach is not going to happen.
3. It is o.k to lose 2-1 in OT, in an away game, of the playoffs. It's sad but it is bound to happen. You know, sometimes.
4. Overachieving is a dubious concept.
5. Sitting a star player is not going to happen.
6. Avery is not a hockey player anymore.
7. It is not a fact that they lose Game 6 and/or Game 7.

I'm with you with everything except for #2 and #4.

#2- Why isn't it going to happen? I mean, obviously not in the middle of the playoffs. Why is it not going to happen in the offseason? If your answer is that it's because Sather likes Torts and not because Torts is a good coach, well then I think people should be given leeway in their complaints. I think it's fair to want Torts fired and complain about it, even if it's likely not going to happen.

#4- I disagree with this to some extent. The margin of victory in most games is so thin that I don't think it's out of the realm of possibility that a team can win 5 more games one year than another just on how the puck bounces in a 3-2 win vs. a 3-2 loss. I don't believe that the team that wins a few more 3-2 games vs. the one that loses them is necessarily more clutch. There is just so many random factors. It's a little easier in basketball and football. Hockey is chaos on every shift, so I don't believe in clutchness in hockey. Off the top of my head if we project the +/- this year to 82 games (I did this a while ago, so I don't remember 100%), I think it will be +31. Last year's was +38. Not a huge difference in the grand scheme of things. We ended up with a significantly lower win %. Also, I don't see why it's not possible for some important players to have outstanding years that are better than they put in any other year, an outlier if you will.

Now regarding last year's team. Just going by the talent, my hunch, and the fact that it didn't get THAT much better than the 8th seeded team from year before, I think they overachieved. That said, that team was remarkably consistent. They had only 2 3 game losing streaks all season, one of which they managed 2 points in. At some point you have to wonder if it really was a lot of random bounces turning 3-2 losses in 3-2 wins. Why would the bounces not go our way 3 games in a row just twice? It's a bit of a pattern. They seemed to consistently have moderate length winning streaks (4 or 5 games rather than 10). They consistently didn't lose many consecutive games. The consistency seems hard to duplicate with random chance. You'd think that even if we had such a successful season that there wouldn't be pattern to our streaks (or lack thereof), you'd think if randomness had a lot to do with it, the wins and losses would be scattered around a bit more.

 

[Boruto]

Time to get back to it Sunday
This team doesn't do anything easy, why should they now?
It sounds like a rationalization but truthfully, they have simply done everything in the most difficult fashion possible in all the important moments possible. The 1 goal games, the WLWLWLW and WLWLLWW of last year's two series and even our 3-0 wins only came in the third periods against the Devils. The Winter Classic was a 0-2 deficit win, we start off every year struggling. The one year when we started 7-0, we ended up losing in game #82 in a shootout. We blow 3 goal leads to lose in OT and be down in a series. We lose as many OTs in the playoffs as anyone else. We had to come back in game 3, recover from blown 2-0 lead and almost blown 4-2 lead. Game 7 Caps, scored the 2-0 insurance goal and they score 40 seconds later. Took half a season to put together a team that has a chance at doing something in the PO. Traded away a non-playoff performer in Gaborik but we have Nash to replace some of that goal scoring prowess and Nash is invisible. The one goal games, man. Just gotta buckle down and go one game at a time. LGR...!

 

[*Bob Richards*]

Time to get back to it Sunday
This team doesn't do anything easy, why should they now?
It sounds like a rationalization but truthfully, they have simply done everything in the most difficult fashion possible in all the important moments possible. The 1 goal games, the WLWLWLW and WLWLLWW of last year's two series and even our 3-0 wins only came in the third periods against the Devils. The Winter Classic was a 0-2 deficit win, we start off every year struggling. The one year when we started 7-0, we ended up losing in game #82 in a shootout. We blow 3 goal leads to lose in OT and be down in a series. We lose as many OTs in the playoffs as anyone else. We had to come back in game 3, recover from blown 2-0 lead and almost blown 4-2 lead. Game 7 Caps, scored the 2-0 insurance goal and they score 40 seconds later. Took half a season to put together a team that has a chance at doing something in the PO. Traded away a non-playoff performer in Gaborik but we have Nash to replace some of that goal scoring prowess and Nash is invisible. The one goal games, man. Just gotta buckle down and go one game at a time. LGR...!

I like this post. Tomorrow may be the last game of the season. Going to attempt to enjoy it as much as possible even though we don't make it easy. The smooth road was never one this team would take. So be it.

I do remember guaranteeing victory in the Senators series after we lost Game 5. I won't do that again, but it certainly made me feel about as Messier as possible without shaving my head.

 

[Hockey Team]

I like this post. Tomorrow may be the last game of the season. Going to attempt to enjoy it as much as possible even though we don't make it easy. The smooth road was never one this team would take. So be it.

I do remember guaranteeing victory in the Senators series after we lost Game 5. I won't do that again, but it certainly made me feel about as Messier as possible without shaving my head.

I want a guarantee from callahan.

 

[McDonagh]

I didn't think we'd win Game 6 vs the Sens, then I believe Brad "The Kid" Richards came up big. I believe it will happen again.

 

[NYRSchrute217]

I want a guarantee from callahan.

Why? Messier could back it up. Callahan can't. Also, it's not 1994 anymore. We don't need to try to be that team...write your own story

 

[Ail]

I want a guarantee from callahan.

I don't, I'd probably puke.

 

[Machinehead]

I want a guarantee from callahan.

How about a goal?

 

[Hi ImHFNYR]

Yes, in a game where our offense provided nothing but our defense and goaltender would have pitched a shutout if a player didn't take a **** on his own team with a selfish play, that player needs most of the blame. The mistakes and lack of good play by the forwards was not due to them being selfish idiots.

Edit: The defense and goaltending would have most likely pitched a shutout.

Who gets more blame the guy who scored our only goal and took a penalty that resulted in a tying goal or the entire offense that did zero whatsoever? I say the offense gets more blame than just Boyle alone. Also if Boyle doesn't score that goal and take that penalty than it's just a replay from Game 2. So it's a consistent issue then with our O. Boyle does not consistently take penalties like that. I take umbrage with you absolving the rest of the O and taking their blame and shifting it onto Boyle. Does he get some. YUP. But I can't sit idly by and watch someone not blame this offense for failing miserably yet again.
I never want to hear any1 say "They would have most likely pitched a shutout" implying that it's ok to settle for holding onto to a 1-0 win ever again! Step the **** up rangers offense. Steal a series that you're supposed to lose for once.

 

[Jonimaus]

I wish there was a secret thread 'for the rational and cautious thinking' with rules like:

1. Asking for Lundqvist to go elsewhere to win a cup is Pejorative Slured.
2. Firing the coach is not going to happen.
3. It is o.k to lose 2-1 in OT, in an away game, of the playoffs. It's sad but it is bound to happen. You know, sometimes.
4. Overachieving is a dubious concept.
5. Sitting a star player is not going to happen.
6. Avery is not a hockey player anymore.
7. It is not a fact that they lose Game 6 and/or Game 7.

Losing 3 times, scoring less than 1 goal per game is not ok, especially not the way the rangers played.

Losing while playing good/trying, I'll accept it. Losing like the rangers has been doing in washington, **** no, stop it.