View Single Post
05-17-2013, 03:19 PM
Kershaw's Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 25,510
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by SnowblindNYR View Post
And Lundqvist in the last 2 years (including playoffs) has had a below 2.00 GAA. Though that is per 60 minutes, but I would be shocked if it wasn't less than 2. Granted, around 2 means that scoring 2 goals will get us only in OT. However it also means that he has had A LOT of games where he has given up fewer than 2 goals. All that is besides the point. I watched the game. Most of the game Boston's offense consisted of harmless bad angle shots (hell even OT). Boston's offensive performance was just as mediocre as our. If we can't win 2-1 with Hank when the other team puts up a bunch of bad angle shots (sure there were a couple of good ones, but hey that happens, this is the NHL), then we won't go far. We'll have to win 2-1, 1-0 games in this series. Rask wasn't very good either. Normally this game would have been 1-0. BTW, you bring up how terrible scoring 2 goals is. How many teams score 3 goals a game? I believe there were like 6 in the whole NHL in the NHL. For 80% of the teams scoring 3 goals in the regular season (when the scoring is easier to come by) is an above average performance. That's in 48 games against a lot of different defenses, the VAST MAJORITY worse than Boston's (even with the injuries), the VAST MAJORITY against goalies worse than Rask.

GAA is essentially a backup stat. Save Pct. is the stat to look for.

Besides, the stats disagree with your biased view. It's clear that you detest Lundqvist for some reason. Lundqvist has worst Fenwick/Corsi against in the playoffs, meaning the team plays like absolute ******* in front of him night in, night out. Game 1 of the series was no different. Brutally outplayed in the game.

You stop 94% of shots, the offense better help. They didn't and they blew it again. The rest of the team is garbage compared to Hank. The only elite player on the NY Rangers.

Kershaw is offline   Reply With Quote