Where Would the Rangers Place Without Lundqvist?
 

This is a good team, the first legitimately good team Lundqvist has ever had and the team is currently the best in the league. On paper you would not expect this team to be that high if you remove Lundqvist with say, Biron.

So with Biron in net, what place would the Rangers finish the season in, in your opinion?

Somewhere sunny :)

6th in the conference

Still at least 5th.

I'm gonna go with 12th.

Somewhere in the Buffalo/Washington/Ottowa area.

Fighting for 8th.

Gonna be positive and say 6-7

We missed Hank on the Michael Kay show at 4:30. :cry:

This team would be fighting for a playoff spot if Biron replaced Lundqvist. Perhaps worse.

I can't possibly imagine we would have won that game against Vancouver if Biron started. 3-0 against the Bruins? Nope. 5-0 against the Flyers? Nope. I am not sure if we get any wins against the Pens if Biron starts those games.

Would we have Biron in net though? That's 6.75 Million in cap the Rangers can use to get another goalie. If it's the case of Hank being out for the season from let's say training camp, I'd go with somewhere up ****'s creek without a paddle.

Optimistically fighting for 8th.

Without Hank and the 29th PP? Yeah. Very optimistically.

Posting to youtube :nod:

Probably in the 6th to 9th spot

7th-9th.

You're the best. :)

first overall...........


























and the Rangers select with their first overall pick in this years draft... :handclap:

not as worse off as they were with Dunham in net.

Somewhere in the 7-10 range. We'd be fighting with Buffalo, Ottawa, Washington, and Winnipeg.

posted in my video/stuff thread

1st in the league...

Callahan would suit up in his place.

I think we would be 1st
Only cause we would of had top 3 draft picks 5 years in a row now lol

The Debbies are in 6th and they scored 208 and gave up 201. If Lundqvist were replaced by another goalie who had the same GAA as Biron, we'd give up 191 (including the same number of empty nets we had this year).

We scored 213 goals, which I believe would be about the same. We'd likely play a more defensive game early on, knowing our goalie isn't great, but we'd push for more goals in later parts of the game because we'd be down in more games.

Either way, we'd score at least as many goals as the Debbies, while giving up about 10 less. Our goals for/against would be 5-20 ahead of them.

This isn't proof of anything, but it's enough to make an educated guess that the Rangers would be somewhere in that territory.

The most likely outcome for our goals for/against is +22. At a minimum, it would still be in double digit plus territory. Every single team in the East that isn't in the playoffs is in the double digit negative territory. I find it hard to believe that we'd be out of the playoffs without Lundqvist.

We would need to lose 55+ goals in the goals for/against category, and I just don't see Lundqvist being responsible for 55 goals over 77 games.

I think 6-9, but only because the division was so tough this year.

I can see this team being a 90-plus point team without Henrik, only when you consider they would acquire a goalie who could legitimately carry the workload with success.

There are a lot of good defenders on this team. That's why we win with Biron.

Depends on who Biron's backup is then.

If it's just Biron playing the same amount as Hank does, then we'd be fighting for the 8th. If it's Biron and an average backup sharing the load, then i'd say probably around 6th.