Post-Game Talk: Rangers - Kings | SCF | Game 4

[WhiskeyDeke]

Some of these weak shots are making me check to be sure Gomez hasn't snaked his way back into the building.

 

[Whiplash27]

McD and Moore on the point on the PP. Richards doesn't produce anything back there. If you want him on the PP put him as a forward.

 

[Fletch]

There's a distinct difference between this situation, and the last situation in which Richards was scratched, against Boston last year. That was the semi-finals, with Richards having done exactly jack-**** all playoffs. He literally had no positives from those playoffs. Was it necessarily a no-brainer to scratch him? I don't think so, but I definitely agreed with the decision. Richards played a big part in getting us here, though he sucked ass against Montreal, he was very good against Pitts and Philly. The coaches know that too. I'm not one bit surprised he isn't getting scratched, though his play of late has absolutely warranted it.

If he's sucked arse mostly in his last, say, 10 playoff games, I don't think a coach should be saying, let's keep him in because he was one of the guys that got us here. And if he did suck in Montreal, and they knew, perhaps during those 5/6 days off before the SCFs the coach should have been making adjustments to the game to accommodate his suckiness. If he attributed it to being tired and Richards comes out and continues the same play in game one, the coach needs to make an adjustment. He made a slight adjustment last night, but not a full adjustment. So either AV doesn't think he's sucking on the PP, or he doesn't know of a better option, or he's doing what many coaches do and they just hope the guy turns in a good game even thought there haven't been signs he will. As an analyst, he will get criticized for keeping him there. If it works, nobody will say anything. Seems like he's getting this one at least a little bit wrong, and it may have had a serious impact on the outcome of this series.

 

[nevesis]

“@AGrossRecord: Have arrived back in L.A. Rangers on ice at Staples Center at 3:30 local time (6:30 NY time).”

 

[Pizza]

It's really Nut Cuttin Time now. Guys have to step up. Hank really elevated in game 4. Others....not so much.

These games are tremendously important in that guys really get to see who they can count on in a tough situation. Hank just showed he's one of these guys.

But we'll have to have that performance from him again in game 5, or it's over. It's brutal but I think he can do it again.

Who else will step up? Decisions on who stays with the Rangers should be made based on that.

 

[94now]

Rangers played great, well beyond their capability against best team full of superstars. Just watch and enjoy. We have no business being in this contest. Yet we were not swept!!!

 

[AHB*]

It's really Nut Cuttin Time now. Guys have to step up. Hank really elevated in game 4. Others....not so much.

These games are tremendously important in that guys really get to see who they can count on in a tough situation. Hank just showed he's one of these guys.

But we'll have to have that performance from him again in game 5, or it's over. It's brutal but I think he can do it again.

Who else will step up? Decisions on who stays with the Rangers should be made based on that.

Zucc and his linemates, Pouliot especially, have stepped up this series.

 

[KreiMeARiver*]

Regardless of whether Richards plays or doesn't, there is one objective. Win tomorrow.

LA is going to throw everything and the kitchen sink at us tomorrow. The last time they gave it their all in periods 2 and 3 to try and tie the game, it was game 1. In game 2 they were noticeably slower. I don't expend that trend to repeat itself. In fact, I think that they will muster every bit of energy that they can possibly have into game 5. The longer the series goes, the better for us, and the worse for them. Sutter and his players know that. Expect Friday to be their biggest effort.

Now, focus on that game. Win that game. If the Rangers are able to steal that game, and yes I say steal because I'm anticipating the Kings putting the pedal to the metal for the entirety of the game... the series gets very interesting.

After that, a lot more pressure starts coming LA's way. We need quite a bit of puck luck tomorrow to continue on. Fend them off tomorrow, live another day, and the outlook of this series completely changes.

this^^^

Tomorrow will either be just really sad (we get killed and we are out of it relatively early) or some of us will need defibrillators.

 

[BarbaraAlphanse]

this^^^

Tomorrow will either be just really sad (we get killed and we are out of it relatively early) or some of us will need defibrillators.

I don't think that the Kings are capable of killing us unless we play timid hockey - i.e. how we played in games 3 and 4.

Problem is, we tend to play timid and conservative hockey only when home. It seems to be a reason that we are better on the road than we are at home.

Here's the interesting part of how the series has gone. The Rangers have lost 3 games in which they have had no luck and Quick has made some ridiculous saves. In those 3 games, Henrik played good but not great hockey, as did the rest of the team.

In games 1 and 2, with the Kings playing some very good hockey and the Rangers playing better albeit not to their potential (especially Henrik), they barely beat us and both games had to go to OT.

I fully expect this game to go to OT tomorrow. I would be exceedingly negative about that prospect, since we can't seem to put one through Quick in OT, but if we finally catch a lucky break, and one squeaks in on Quick (if it goes to OT)... man oh man would this series get interesting. The narrative would completely change, and i'm sure the Kings' fatigue would be under the microscope from the media going forward.

 

[Fletch]

Regardless of whether Richards plays or doesn't, there is one objective. Win tomorrow.

LA is going to throw everything and the kitchen sink at us tomorrow. The last time they gave it their all in periods 2 and 3 to try and tie the game, it was game 1. In game 2 they were noticeably slower. I don't expend that trend to repeat itself. In fact, I think that they will muster every bit of energy that they can possibly have into game 5. The longer the series goes, the better for us, and the worse for them. Sutter and his players know that. Expect Friday to be their biggest effort.

Now, focus on that game. Win that game. If the Rangers are able to steal that game, and yes I say steal because I'm anticipating the Kings putting the pedal to the metal for the entirety of the game... the series gets very interesting.

After that, a lot more pressure starts coming LA's way. We need quite a bit of puck luck tomorrow to continue on. Fend them off tomorrow, live another day, and the outlook of this series completely changes.

I thought that the Kings played a pretty strong game two from the third goal through the final goal. Thought they were the team that looked fresher on the in OT. Thought they controlled the play pretty good in game three and the Rangers held on. Thought that for a couple periods yesterday the Rangers looked like they were out of gas and the Kings were playing on fresh legs. I know you said early on that the Kings would be gassed compared to the Rangers, but honestly, that has yet to pan-out. The longer the series goes at this point, yea, it favors the Rangers because they're still in it (as opposed to one loss and they're done) and any opening of a door favors them, but again, the Kings currently look like a much fresher team than the Rangers. The Rangers have been getting noticeably gassed. They tried pretty hard to put it away last night. The Rangers are turning over the puck in their own end more, the are getting beat in the neutral zone more, and they are not stealing the puck in the offensive zone and keeping the play alive. Those are three huge attributes to them being where they are today. The fourth is Lundqvist. In no particular order.

 

[BarbaraAlphanse]

I thought that the Kings played a pretty strong game two from the third goal through the final goal. Thought they were the team that looked fresher on the in OT. Thought they controlled the play pretty good in game three and the Rangers held on. Thought that for a couple periods yesterday the Rangers looked like they were out of gas and the Kings were playing on fresh legs. I know you said early on that the Kings would be gassed compared to the Rangers, but honestly, that has yet to pan-out. The longer the series goes at this point, yea, it favors the Rangers because they're still in it (as opposed to one loss and they're done) and any opening of a door favors them, but again, the Kings currently look like a much fresher team than the Rangers. The Rangers have been getting noticeably gassed. They tried pretty hard to put it away last night. The Rangers are turning over the puck in their own end more, the are getting beat in the neutral zone more, and they are not stealing the puck in the offensive zone and keeping the play alive. Those are three huge attributes to them being where they are today. The fourth is Lundqvist. In no particular order.

I disagree. I think that they let the Kings come into the zone last night because they were afraid of taking risks. I think that they were afraid of playing a counter attack game because they did not want to take risks. Hagelin's post game interview was very telling. The message seemed to be "limit mistakes, play total defense as a unit".

Kings also made a series of adjustments mid-game that AV didn't fix in-game. They found ways to chip past G and Staal and go around them on the side. That won't be evident in the next game as AV is bound to fix it before they play.

 

[Fletch]

I disagree. I think that they let the Kings come into the zone last night because they were afraid of taking risks. I think that they were afraid of playing a counter attack game because they did not want to take risks. Hagelin's post game interview was very telling. The message seemed to be "limit mistakes, play total defense as a unit".

Kings also made a series of adjustments mid-game that AV didn't fix in-game. They found ways to chip past G and Staal and go around them on the side. That won't be evident in the next game as AV is bound to fix it before they play.

Guess we have differing opinions. Thought the Kings took the play to them. Seemed as though the Rangers have been having trouble getting the puck out of their zone and have been turning over the puck more of late, both as a result of pressure and being tired. Saw Boyle late in the game having trouble lifting the puck out of the zone. Also thought the Kings doubling the shots against compared to the Rangers were telling; hoping the strategy isn't to let them in and take shot after shot since one did get through, but couldn't cross the red line because of build-up of snow. And the Kings just seem to keep coming with speed and the body. As for Hagelin's comment...defense wins championships. A good defense limits mistakes. What may be telling is that he listened to his coach, who I hope preaches that. It should be the first thing you learn.

 

[The Gloaming]

JM got the puck to the net and set up a bunch of good chances

Yeah he was really good yesterday. I would swap him and Beaver. McD-Moore as the point men on the first unit.

 

[yrrebbor]

Why didn't the linesmen make sure the away team put their stick down first on faceoffs? Seems really unfair that LA doesn't have to obey that rule, or the constant breaking of the obstruction rule.

 

[Fugazy]

Why didn't the linesmen make sure the away team put their stick down first on faceoffs? Seems really unfair that LA doesn't have to obey that rule, or the constant breaking of the obstruction rule.

Even after the Rangers themselves were complaining about it. Ridiculous.

 

[chosen]

Wow, if that was such an easy decision, why aren't you the coach?

Because you certainly implied that you know more than the coach by referring to his decisions as stupid and egotistical.

I don't understand why it's such a forgone conclusion that to change what's worked all season is just such an easy decision for the coaches.

Brad Richards at least has PP points in these playoffs. Putting Anton Stralman that has none this whole season, or John Moore who can shoot and skate but hasn't gotten the results, isn't this silver bullet everyone thinks it is.

And I don't want Richards on the PP, either. But to say the coaching staff is stupid for leaving him there is just ****ing arrogant.

All of the analysts are saying the exact same thing. So is just about everyone here. Guess we are all arrogant. If you can't see that Richards has been an abomination on the PP and that the power play is a disaster, fine.

 

[aufheben]

Yeah he was really good yesterday. I would swap him and Beaver. McD-Moore as the point men on the first unit.

Didn't mean to imply that Moore shouldn't be on the PP. Who mans the second unit if McDonagh and J. Moore are both on the first?

I mean you could put Moore - Stralman together, but who replaces Beaver next to McDonagh? Stepan?

 

[Vickers8]

Even after the Rangers themselves were complaining about it. Ridiculous.

The officiating in this whole playoff run has been horrendous

 

[AHB*]

Didn't mean to imply that Moore shouldn't be on the PP. Who mans the second unit if McDonagh and J. Moore are both on the first?

I mean you could put Moore - Stralman together, but who replaces Beaver next to McDonagh? Stepan?

MSL and put Nash on the Right boards.

 

[aufheben]

MSL and put Nash on the Right boards.

Not bad.

 

[FOD]

Guess we have differing opinions. Thought the Kings took the play to them. Seemed as though the Rangers have been having trouble getting the puck out of their zone and have been turning over the puck more of late, both as a result of pressure and being tired. Saw Boyle late in the game having trouble lifting the puck out of the zone. Also thought the Kings doubling the shots against compared to the Rangers were telling; hoping the strategy isn't to let them in and take shot after shot since one did get through, but couldn't cross the red line because of build-up of snow. And the Kings just seem to keep coming with speed and the body. As for Hagelin's comment...defense wins championships. A good defense limits mistakes. What may be telling is that he listened to his coach, who I hope preaches that. It should be the first thing you learn.

In game 3 the Rangers outshot the Kings 28-10 in the second and third periods. I don't think anything from game 4 will carry over to game 5.

 

[Blue Blooded]

If we're talking PP units, this is how I see it:

1-3-1 formation

PP1:

--------Kreider
Stepan-Nash-MSL
-----McDonagh

PP2:
-----------Pouliot
Strålman-Brassard-Zuccarello
---------Moore/Diaz

Can't trot out 5 lefties, gives too few options. We need at least on RH shot per unit on the left boards.

If you want Richards on the 1st unit, remove Nash, put MSL in the 1-timer role in the center, and put Richards on the left boards.

 

[AHB*]

If we're talking PP units, this is how I see it:

1-3-1 formation

PP1:

--------Kreider
Stepan-Nash-MSL
-----McDonagh

PP2:
-----------Pouliot
Strålman-Brassard-Zuccarello
---------Moore/Diaz

Can't trot out 5 lefties, gives too few options. We need at least on RH shot per unit on the left boards.

If you want Richards on the 1st unit, remove Nash, put MSL in the 1-timer role in the center, and put Richards on the left boards.

There's absolutely no way they change the formation of the unit this far into the season.

Swapping one guy in or out, fine. We should just go with this.

Kreider-Stepan-Nash
McD - MSL

Pouliot-Brass-Zucc
Moore-Stralman

 

[Ryan McDonut]

Zucc and his linemates, Pouliot especially, have stepped up this series.

if only zucc would stop missing open nets on wraparounds we'd be set

 

[Blue Blooded]

There's absolutely no way they change the formation of the unit this far into the season.

Swapping one guy in or out, fine. We should just go with this.

Kreider-Stepan-Nash
McD - MSL

Pouliot-Brass-Zucc
Moore-Stralman

They have deployed the 1-3-1 on the PP for long stretches this season, so it isn't a new concept for the team. Your suggested personnel is basically identical to mine so it won't be a problem from that perspective either.