Thread: Something
View Single Post
12-31-2003, 11:28 AM
Registered User
dedalus's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 7,215
vCash: 500
NOBODY can give accurate analysis about what will happen in April with any given team due to the fact that we aren't even 1/2 way theough the f'in season for Christ's sake!!!
Really? Because at least four poster on this board - myself, Aneirin, and Laches among them - predicted as early as last November that the Rangers wouldn't make the playoffs. That's exactly what I'm doing here. It wasn't luck that we were right at that time, it wouldn't be luck this time. It's a simple matter of looking at the team realistically. Put away the red-white-and-blue sunglasses, and stop praying for the Easter miracle of a hot goaltender - especially because your dream of one has no basis in reality, as you'll see below.

There won't be any"it could happens" so put you money where you mouth is smart guy and lets hear this indepth breakdown from you.
To be perfectly fair I don't know every other team the way I know the Rangers, so it would be silly of me to offer an analysis of those teams. However, I'm more than willing to put my money where my mouth is with regards to the Rangers. A bi-level bet for you, my friend, one on which I'll stake my December assessment of the Rangers against your faith in the history of the upset:
1. The Rangers must make the playoffs. If they fail to even accomplish that, I win.
2. They must win a matchup against any one of: Ottawa, New Jersey, Philadelphia, Toronto.

Please make this bet worth my while. We can begin at $300. PM me if you're interested.

you're telling me that a team that is better then the regular season or one that "plays at another level" as you like to say can't be beaten by an inferior team in the playoffs
Once again I suggest you try actually reading a post before replying to it. Without doubt you'll come off sounding less ignorant if not less intelligent.

Nowhere in any of my posts does it say a lesser team CAN'T beat a better team. What my posts argues is that the Rangers WON'T, therefore they should look to begin building for the future now.

The playoffs boil down to what team gets hot at the right time, what team gets the hot goaltending and what team gets some timely goalscoring.
Do you really think? So the Devils' championships are attributable to their being a "hot" team not a "good" team. Same with Detroit. And the Lanche. Please. Those teams won because they're excellent teams, and their regular season performances support that, just as the Rangers' regular season performance supports my position, not yours.

As for your darlings the Wild and the Ducks, let's look for a second at those teams. Both were 95 point teams which the Rangers were not and which they probably will not be this season. They proved to be better teams in the regular season than the Rangers, so saying that the Rangers could match their playoff accomplishment doesn't work. The Rangers couldn't even match their regular season accomplishments, so you have no data to support the claim that their playoff performance would be equal.

More importantly, much as you and TB would love to make this about hot goaltending, you're wrong in the case of the goalies for those two teams.

JS Giguere's regular season save percentage: .945
JS Giguere's playoff save percentage: .945
Manny Fernandez's regular season save percentage: .929
Manny Fernandez's playoff save percentage: .929

Surprise! Clearly those goalies didn't get "hot" at all. They played extraordinarily well in the regular season and they carried the same level of play into the playoffs. Has Mike Dunham played as well as those two this year? No. So why should I believe that he could suddenly do it in the playoffs?

Asking me to state facts as to why the NYR's could beat team X in seven game series when we're not even at the halfway point is doing the same thing and the fact that you keep trying to paint my arguement as "it could happen" just goes to show what a tool you are.
They're hardly the same thing, and the fact that you see them the same shows how little you understand the nature of this discussion. If you look at the paragraph above, you'll see what I mean about bringing facts to the table. You want to argue that the Rangers could get a hot goalie just as the Ducks and Wild did. I've given you facts to demonstrate that neither the Ducks nor Wild GOT hot goaltending. Your own examples, then, go to support my position: what happens in the regular season is a direct reflection of what will likely happen in the playoffs.

My argument is supported by the simple facts of what this team is and how it has performed this year, last year, and the year before. I can talk about Dunham's inconsistency. I can talk about Sather's failure to use his players in proper roles. I can talk about the defensive shortcomings of Poti and Leetch. Or the ineffectual and soft play of Hlavac. Or the boneheaded mistakes of Kasper. Or the in-again-out-again play of Malakhov. Or the ongoing failure of the team in its entirety to play 60 minute hockey. Or ... or ... or ...

Your argument is based on hope not fact. You hope all those problems I listed above get fixed. You hope Mike Dunham becomes something he's not shown he can be. You hope an important trade happens that will do something to make this team something other than what it is: mediocre.

In short, my entire argument is based on what this team IS, and I can back it up by examining the personnel and play of this team and its coach. Your argument is based on what COULD happen and you bring nothing to the table to show that what you think COULD happen has any basis in what IS happening and what HAS been happening for the last two years. This is why your argument is terribly, terribly weak. taken to its logical conclusion it reads thus: "Lazarus was raised from the dead. Therefore we should reasonably expect that we could all be raised from the dead."

just you being a whiney little who unrealistically is calling for the team to dump everybody and tank it the rest of the season.Way to be in touch with reality there.
I see. So what you're saying is that our wishes (in this case for a true rebuilding) should be grounded ONLY in the realistic. Well then we should all definitely stop wishing for peace and goodwill among all men, huh? I mean why bother to wish for an end to racism, or speak out for equal rights when we know how unrealistic those goals are.

Sorry, JR, this team is hopelessly flawed. getting to the playoffs won't help to repair those flaws; it may even aggravate them because it will prove that Dolan/Sather are right in their philosophy. Trading these players for draft picks is the way to a proper rebuilding and a successful construction of the team. maybe it's unrealistic to advocate for that, but only a weakling would build his beliefs only on what is realistic.

And as for the Garden, no I don't have actual concrete #'s to back up my "claim"
Yep. Thought not.

And that is beside the fact that I'm at almost every game, in the crowd and have been for the last 12-13 yrs
And this addresses my question how, exactly? Are you saying that you walk around interviewing people? "Excuse me, sir, did you pay for your seat tonight, or was it given to you by a charitable organization?"

If you're actually doing that, PLEASE take me along next time. The Rangers suck but watching that would be well worth the price of admission.

dedalus is offline