Post-Game Talk: Rangers @ Hurricanes - March 31

[pld459666]

disgusting loss.

1st period was about the worst I have ever seen or heard this team play.

Take a 3-1 lead and cough it up?

In October November these losses are brutal.

with a hand full of games remaining and during a time when you are supposed to be refining things for the PO's this was unacceptable.

1st round and out.

there's only 5-10 guys I would prefer they keep. I wish the expansion draft was this June.

 

[KOVALEV022473]

Chicago definitely would have steamrolled us for sure. I would have bet on it only lasting 4-5 games. We were beat up and Chicago is just a far better team.[/QUOTE]

The premise was that we were healthy, in which case I say we would have steam rolled Chicago!

 

[pld459666]

Even through the deep playoff runs the past couple years this group of players has played its best hockey with its back against the wall. They haven't been put into that situation yet this year, and you have heard various quotes throughout the year that for this team the only thing that matters is the playoffs. They are going to get there and once in, they know how to play. Whether the flaws of the regular season carry into the playoffs is TBD, but they are battle tested and I will give them the benefit of the doubt until they prove otherwise. I am a fan and watch to be entertained, and this group of players has provided more of that than all but wo other teams in the league the past few years.

I'm not confident that a season long and habit forming trend is all of a sudden going to change when the PO's roll around.

Not buying it at all.

 

[LieutenantLackluster]

I also believe the Kings happen to be exceptionally lucky.

If luck can get you 2 cups in 3 years, Rangers should have at least 1.

Who else has been better than the Rangers since 2011?

Consistently? Youve named the 2. And theyre gonna win cups forever, they are that good. Rangers are no match.

2012 they got kicked out of the ECF by the Devils. The Devils. And last year the Lightning, who they couldnt win a game against during the regular season. 2 teams they should have been able to beat in a best of 7, they failed at doing so.

Speaking of, have we even won a season series against a playoff-bound divisional opponent this season?

If this is truly a window, they are flat out squandering the opportunity. Or maybe its not, and Rangers are the ones getting extremely lucky.

 

[DelZottoHitTheNetJK]

This is a game where in the past, Lundqvist stops 2 more of those goals and we win 3-1 without breaking a sweat.


The king is slowing down. Anyone who can't see that is blind. Throw whatever ******** statistics around that you want.. how many leads have we blown? How many OT games have we lost with him in net? He can't stop a beach ball on the PK or on breakaways anymore.. guess what - your goalie is one of the PKers.

That goal by Faulk was horrific. A wrist shot from the point. If you can't fight through that "screen", it's time to play Raanta.


And I'm one of Hank's biggest fans. I defend him all day long. But there's no defending him anymore.. he's slowing down.


I don't blame him. I blame management for waiting until he was 33 to put together an actual team. The '04 draft and the Drury/Gomez era will haunt this team forever

 

[nevesis]

This is a game where in the past, Lundqvist stops 2 more of those goals and we win 3-1 without breaking a sweat.


The king is slowing down. Anyone who can't see that is blind. Throw whatever ******** statistics around that you want.. how many leads have we blown? How many OT games have we lost with him in net? He can't stop a beach ball on the PK or on breakaways anymore.. guess what - your goalie is one of the PKers.

That goal by Faulk was horrific. A wrist shot from the point. If you can't fight through that "screen", it's time to play Raanta.


And I'm one of Hank's biggest fans. I defend him all day long. But there's no defending him anymore.. he's slowing down.


I don't blame him. I blame management for waiting until he was 33 to put together an actual team. The '04 draft and the Drury/Gomez era will haunt this team forever

"Throw whatever ******** statistics/science you want, global warming is NOT happening. Look at the blizzard outside!"

 

[DelZottoHitTheNetJK]

"Throw whatever ******** statistics/science you want, global warming is NOT happening. Look at the blizzard outside!"

I'd love to see the stats on how many OT games we've lost with Hank in net the past 3 years. Reg season and playoffs.


Bet no one will dig that one up though

 

[silverfish]

I'd love to see the stats on how many OT games we've lost with Hank in net the past 3 years. Reg season and playoffs.


Bet no one will dig that one up though

If you're trying to prove a point, maybe you do your own work to prove it?

 

[DelZottoHitTheNetJK]

If you're trying to prove a point, maybe you do your own work to prove it?

I don't need to prove any point. That point is proven by simply watching the games. See: Justin Faulk goal

I'm 100% confident the majority will agree that Lundqvist has not been good enough this year, certainly not good enough for that contract.

 

[silverfish]

I don't need to prove any point. That point is proven by simply watching the games. See: Justin Faulk goal

I'm 100% confident the majority will agree that Lundqvist has not been good enough this year, certainly not good enough for that contract.

So how do you respond to the fact that he is having the 2nd best season 5v5, for goalies who have played more than 60 games, since the lockout?

Because you say so? That seems like a poor way to make a point.

 

[nevesis]

I don't need to prove any point. That point is proven by simply watching the games. See: Justin Faulk goal

I'm 100% confident the majority will agree that Lundqvist has not been good enough this year, certainly not good enough for that contract.

Two beat writers who have access to multiple replays in the press box both mentioned that the puck deflected off McDonagh's elbow and Valiquette mentioned it during the intermission.

Keep trying though.

 

[LieutenantLackluster]

This is a game where in the past, Lundqvist stops 2 more of those goals and we win 3-1 without breaking a sweat.

This statement is so useless. Its not even wrong. At least you can falsify something that is wrong using things like, you know, all those stats you hate. This is just pure conjecture.

The guy has a .92 sv%, which is great, but a 2.44 GAA, which is not so great. Additionally, lets see the total number of shots he has faced this season:

1,849. Good for 2nd most in the NHL.

He is simply facing too many shots. Even a .92sv% goalie will let 2-3 in every game if he is facing 30 shots a game, on average. Letting in 4, sure, bad game, but this is countered by that .95sv% he had against Boston the other day while only letting in 2.

Hank is really the only reason the Rangers are where they are. He takes the rest of the team to places where they are in over their heads, and the entire team as a whole gets exposed, especially our bags of rocks on defense.

 

[nevesis]

This statement is so useless. Its not even wrong. At least you can falsify something that is wrong using things like, you know, all those stats you hate. This is just pure conjecture.

The guy has a .92 sv%, which is great, but a 2.44 GAA, which is not so great. Additionally, lets see the total number of shots he has faced this season:

1,849. Good for 2nd most in the NHL.

He is simply facing too many shots. Even a .92sv% goalie will let 2-3 in every game if he is facing 30 shots a game, on average. Letting in 4, sure, bad game, but this is countered by that .95sv% he had against Boston the other day while only letting in 2.

Hank is really the only reason the Rangers are where they are. He takes the rest of the team to places where they are in over their heads, and the entire team as a whole gets exposed, especially our bags of rocks on defense.

On another point, I always point people to this article when they bring up GAA.

http://ingoalmag.com/analysis/its-time-to-scrap-goals-against-average/

Goals against average is altered by a variety of factors, and it cannot realistically tell us anything about an individual goaltender. It is simply a team stat. Nothing more, nothing less.

A good read for those who are interested...

 

[DelZottoHitTheNetJK]

So how do you respond to the fact that he is having the 2nd best season 5v5, for goalies who have played more than 60 games, since the lockout?

Because you say so? That seems like a poor way to make a point.

So you claim I have a poor way of making a point because I watch the game and judge based off the on ice play, yet you pull out a completely irrelevant stat to counter. Hockey games aren't only played 5v5. Lundqvist has been bad on the PK, which is, you know, part of the hockey game. And your goalie is part of the PK

Two beat writers who have access to multiple replays in the press box both mentioned that the puck deflected off McDonagh's elbow and Valiquette mentioned it during the intermission.

Keep trying though.

Watch the replay. Whether the beads on the side of the puck ever so slightly grazed McDonagh or anyone else, the trajectory did not change anywhere near enough for it to be an unstoppable deflection. That's a terrible goal, just as bad as the 1st goal he let up, and if you think otherwise there's no hope for you

This statement is so useless. Its not even wrong. At least you can falsify something that is wrong using things like, you know, all those stats you hate. This is just pure conjecture.

The guy has a .92 sv%, which is great, but a 2.44 GAA, which is not so great. Additionally, lets see the total number of shots he has faced this season:

1,849. Good for 2nd most in the NHL.

He is simply facing too many shots. Even a .92sv% goalie will let 2-3 in every game if he is facing 30 shots a game, on average. Letting in 4, sure, bad game, but this is countered by that .95sv% he had against Boston the other day while only letting in 2.

Hank is really the only reason the Rangers are where they are. He takes the rest of the team to places where they are in over their heads, and the entire team as a whole gets exposed, especially our bags of rocks on defense.

Are you serious? Useless? Did you even watch the game last night?


So you believe that goal #1 and goal #3 shouldn't have been EASY saves for an $8.5M dollar goalie? And that had those 2 saves been made, we wouldn't have won 3-2?

Am I on planet earth right now? Are all of you guys such Lundqvist fanboys that you can't see the truth? Ranger fans, cmon. We're better than this.


I'm as big of a Lundqvist fan as any of you. He had a bad game yesterday. So did a lot of players - but that was a game we win if Hank is Hank from the past couple years. He's done this VERY often this year. I'm embarrassed by the play of our goalie in a playoff clinching game against a doormat team with practically 20 rookies in the lineup. Pathetic effort all around.

But hey, at least Patrick Brown got his first NHL goal!

 

[silverfish]

So you claim I have a poor way of making a point because I watch the game and judge based off the on ice play, yet you pull out a completely irrelevant stat to counter. Hockey games aren't only played 5v5. Lundqvist has been bad on the PK, which is, you know, part of the hockey game. And your goalie is part of the PK

Save percentage is completely irrelevant?

I really love when posters here resort to such condescending bull**** when they aren't saying anything of substance.

How do you want me to respond to this...

Oh my God! I totally forgot that teams can take penalties! Thank you, sir, for enlightening me to this new concept I seem to have completely forgotten for some reason. Wow, and look at that, Lundqvist is performing poorly on the PK this season. Let's ignore the fact that the team in front of him ****s the bed every night when they are down a man, Rick Nash was hurt for 20 games and they had Dan Paille in his place. No, no, no, that could not have impacted Lundqvist's PK save percentages at all.

Does that meet your quota for condescending crap in a single post?

 

[LieutenantLackluster]

So you believe that goal #1 and goal #3 shouldn't have been EASY saves for an $8.5M dollar goalie?

For every 1 of these there are like 10 saves he makes that should have gone in.

I dont have stats for that, but hey, if you can do the whole "feels over reals" thing, so can I.

 

[NCRanger]

Hang on. I truly believe these analytic statistical deep dives are taking watching and observing the game out of the equation. It seems as if some are so married to data, that they see players as data points and robots, rather than living, breathing people.

I think it is painfully obvious to people who actually WATCH the games that Hank has regressed from an absolute monster 20 game start to the season. Whether that's him slowing down, seeing too many shots, a combination of both, or something else is completely reasonable for debate. He HAS given up some absolutely awful goals this season that he hasn't before. He also is dealing with a much weaker defense corps that he probably hasn't dealt with his whole career.

All that said; he is not making the saves he needs to make if this team is going anywhere, REGARDLESS of the quality of the play in front of him.

I'm really afraid that because everyone is so in love with Lundqvist, in much the same way everyone was in love with Richter, that Ranger management is going to screw up a replacement plan for Hank, and leave the team floundering with whatever the 2020 version of Mike Dunham, Kirk McLean, Jussi Markkanen, or whomever is out there, because management can't see an obvious decline. It might be sacrilege, but I hold Richter as responsible for the first two years of the Dark Ages as anyone else. The guy was just not a Dead Puck Era goaltender. That 1997-98 season was one where he couldn't come up with the big save to keep a game tied, or keep the team in it. Eerily similar goals to the crap Hank gives up to give up leads. I am NOT saying those Ranger teams would have been contenders had Richter been better; I'm saying those teams may have been able to get into the playoffs.

 

[DelZottoHitTheNetJK]

Hang on. I truly believe these analytic statistical deep dives are taking watching and observing the game out of the equation. It seems as if some are so married to data, that they see players as data points and robots, rather than living, breathing people.

I think it is painfully obvious to people who actually WATCH the games that Hank has regressed from an absolute monster 20 game start to the season. Whether that's him slowing down, seeing too many shots, a combination of both, or something else is completely reasonable for debate. He HAS given up some absolutely awful goals this season that he hasn't before. He also is dealing with a much weaker defense corps that he probably hasn't dealt with his whole career.

All that said; he is not making the saves he needs to make if this team is going anywhere, REGARDLESS of the quality of the play in front of him.

I'm really afraid that because everyone is so in love with Lundqvist, in much the same way everyone was in love with Richter, that Ranger management is going to screw up a replacement plan for Hank, and leave the team floundering with whatever the 2020 version of Mike Dunham, Kirk McLean, Jussi Markkanen, or whomever is out there, because management can't see an obvious decline. It might be sacrilege, but I hold Richter as responsible for the first two years of the Dark Ages as anyone else. The guy was just not a Dead Puck Era goaltender. That 1997-98 season was one where he couldn't come up with the big save to keep a game tied, or keep the team in it. Eerily similar goals to the crap Hank gives up to give up leads. I am NOT saying those Ranger teams would have been contenders had Richter been better; I'm saying those teams may have been able to get into the playoffs.

Ah.. there is hope. This guy gets it.

 

[DelZottoHitTheNetJK]

For every 1 of these there are like 10 saves he makes that should have gone in.

I dont have stats for that, but hey, if you can do the whole "feels over reals" thing, so can I.

Yeah, that ratio isn't even close, but good try. You're confusing routine or moderate difficulty saves with saves like the one Jonathan Quick recently made with the paddle of his stick.

Do you have a Lundqvist Fathead in your house? Or a shrine maybe?


Just admit the guy played bad. I don't get why that's so hard

 

[DelZottoHitTheNetJK]

Save percentage is completely irrelevant?

I really love when posters here resort to such condescending bull**** when they aren't saying anything of substance.

How do you want me to respond to this...

Oh my God! I totally forgot that teams can take penalties! Thank you, sir, for enlightening me to this new concept I seem to have completely forgotten for some reason. Wow, and look at that, Lundqvist is performing poorly on the PK this season. Let's ignore the fact that the team in front of him ****s the bed every night when they are down a man, Rick Nash was hurt for 20 games and they had Dan Paille in his place. No, no, no, that could not have impacted Lundqvist's PK save percentages at all.

Does that meet your quota for condescending crap in a single post?

You spanned your "stat" all the way back to the lockout, which made it automatically irrelevant regardless of you only accounting for 5v5 play.

Who cares what Lundqvist did in 2008? He's not in his prime anymore.

Again.. not his fault. Management waited until he was 33 to put together an actual team. Of course the guy is going to regress at some point. I'm just afraid that time is upon us now, and our team isn't good enough defensively to compensate for that change

 

[nevesis]

Hang on. I truly believe these analytic statistical deep dives are taking watching and observing the game out of the equation. It seems as if some are so married to data, that they see players as data points and robots, rather than living, breathing people.

I think it is painfully obvious to people who actually WATCH the games that Hank has regressed from an absolute monster 20 game start to the season. Whether that's him slowing down, seeing too many shots, a combination of both, or something else is completely reasonable for debate. He HAS given up some absolutely awful goals this season that he hasn't before. He also is dealing with a much weaker defense corps that he probably hasn't dealt with his whole career.

All that said; he is not making the saves he needs to make if this team is going anywhere, REGARDLESS of the quality of the play in front of him.

I'm really afraid that because everyone is so in love with Lundqvist, in much the same way everyone was in love with Richter, that Ranger management is going to screw up a replacement plan for Hank, and leave the team floundering with whatever the 2020 version of Mike Dunham, Kirk McLean, Jussi Markkanen, or whomever is out there, because management can't see an obvious decline. It might be sacrilege, but I hold Richter as responsible for the first two years of the Dark Ages as anyone else. The guy was just not a Dead Puck Era goaltender. That 1997-98 season was one where he couldn't come up with the big save to keep a game tied, or keep the team in it. Eerily similar goals to the crap Hank gives up to give up leads. I am NOT saying those Ranger teams would have been contenders had Richter been better; I'm saying those teams may have been able to get into the playoffs.

You spanned your "stat" all the way back to the lockout, which made it automatically irrelevant regardless of you only accounting for 5v5 play.

Who cares what Lundqvist did in 2008? He's not in his prime anymore.

Again.. not his fault. Management waited until he was 33 to put together an actual team. Of course the guy is going to regress at some point. I'm just afraid that time is upon us now, and our team isn't good enough defensively to compensate for that change

Did you watch the March 19th game vs San Jose when he faced 47 shots? That was a technical goaltending clinic.

Anyone who watched that game who knows and understands goaltending knows what a performance that was, and to suggest he's regressed, or regressing is purely fictional. The eye-test proves it (to those who actually study, play, teach goaltending) and the statistics back it up as well.

He hasn't regressed yet. It WILL indeed happen, but this year does not support that in any way shape or form despite what you want to believe.

 

[LieutenantLackluster]

Yeah, that ratio isn't even close, but good try.

Maybe if you were able to back it up with :gasp: stats, we would know for sure.

You're confusing routine or moderate difficulty saves with saves like the one Jonathan Quick recently made with the paddle of his stick.

You mean like these?

Do you have a Lundqvist Fathead in your house? Or a shrine maybe?

No, and not sure what it would have to do with anything if it did. Man, you're really bad at presenting a case.

Just admit the guy played bad. I don't get why that's so hard

I can admit that. What seems to be hard for you to do is accept the fact he is still a top-5, goalie in this league, if not top-3.

 

[DelZottoHitTheNetJK]

Did you watch the March 19th game vs San Jose when he faced 47 shots? That was a technical goaltending clinic.

Anyone who watched that game who knows and understands goaltending knows what a performance that was, and to suggest he's regressed, or regressing is purely fictional. The eye-test proves it (to those who actually study, play, teach goaltending) and the statistics back it up as well.

He hasn't regressed yet. It WILL indeed happen, but this year does not support that in any way shape or form despite what you want to believe.

Lundqvist has no doubt played some unbelievable games this season.

But the late 3rd period and OT goals are becoming too frequent. At this point, I don't care if we score 2 goals in our remaining games this season leading into the playoffs. I need to see this team shutdown the opposition and limit scoring chances, with Hank coming up big when needed. That first goal yesterday was NOT a good start for the team, despite them not being ready. You just can't let a guy score his first NHL goal on a terrible off-angle shot like that. It can't happen.


Of the past 5 or so years, I feel the least optimistic about this groups playoff chances. Of course I hope they prove me wrong, but we've just given up so many goals this year that we've gotten away from our identity of being a hard team to score against

 

[silverfish]

You spanned your "stat" all the way back to the lockout, which made it automatically irrelevant regardless of you only accounting for 5v5 play.

Who cares what Lundqvist did in 2008? He's not in his prime anymore.

Again.. not his fault. Management waited until he was 33 to put together an actual team. Of course the guy is going to regress at some point. I'm just afraid that time is upon us now, and our team isn't good enough defensively to compensate for that change

No, you just completely misunderstood the fact.

Lundqvist, this season, has a .939 save percentage 5v5. That .939 is the SECOND BEST goalie season since the lockout, among goalies who appeared in 60 or more games during each respective season. The only goalie, since the lockout, who has a better SINGLE SEASON 5v5 sv% was Carey Price last year.

Make more sense now?

Lundqvist is having a career year 5v5.

But, this doesn't matter because of the 10% of the game that is played on the PK. Gotchya.

 

[Infinitum Vitae*]

Hank is barely top 3. He is slowing down. And i fear for next season because i can see him regressing badly. And people complain about Nash's contract? How about the highest paid goalie not playing like the best goalie in the world? Ohhhh boy i can't wait for that **** show.