View Single Post
05-13-2012, 03:31 PM
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: HIJACKED
Posts: 685
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by Santini5389 View Post
Do you guys REALLY think Smith is THAT good? He's played well, don't get me wrong, but I feel like his "technical" ability and positional soundness just isn't as good as Hank or Quick. My list would be:

Brodeur (only because of his age, obvi)

I think Johnny Quick is clearly the best goalie left in the playoffs. His mobility and ability to take away the lower portion of the net is unrivaled. Lundqvist is a VERY close second (and I'm a Ranger fan!) and if he can get his glove hand back to where it should be he'd probably be just as good if not better than Quick. Hank usually thrives in odd man rushes and one on one situations as well - haven't watched enough of Quick to say he does the same. And Smith, well, he just doesn't seem like he's AS good as the other 2. He's definitely been playing great and keeping his team in it, but I think a lot of credit has to go to the defense as well.

EDIT: I don't get how Brodeur having 3 Cups under his belt means he's the better goalie right NOW. Explain please. One thing I can say about him is that his puck-handling abilities are the best out of the 4, and if the Rangers don't figure out a way to keep the puck away from him, they're in trouble and can kiss their forecheck goodbye. That being said, I don't think Brodeur has the same athleticism (considering his age) as the other 3 guys.

If you actually bothered to watch Quick, you would have him under Smith and Lundqvist then.

There is no way hes faces more or done more for his team these playoffs than either of them. I think people are riding him because of the Vezina talk that ended the season.

The Kings success thus far is because of Dustin Brown, not Jonathan Quick.

Hes been great, but the other two have been amazing. Quicks probably been tested 3 total games all playoffs.

Rangers1985 is offline   Reply With Quote