View Single Post
05-22-2013, 01:50 PM
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 7,964
vCash: 500
He's only played one bad game. I don't view his game one has a bad game. He let up two soft goals. Rask let up two soft goals. The Bruins found a way to win. Rangers didn't. Bruins had the better of the play in the first game, had more chances, more shots on goal, etc. They deserved to win.

Game two, the Bruins still outplayed us, but Rask was the difference. Rask was outstanding in the second period. That said, I'm not convinced the Rangers actually deserved to win the game for playing 20 minutes. But, Lundqvist was well below expectations and was a big contributor in the loss.

Game three was his best game of the series. If the team had a little more offensive potency, pressured the oppositions goaltender instead of sat back with a one goal lead, this team could be up 2-1. Instead, we're down 3-0 because of a bad bounce and a style of hockey that is way too passive.

Fataldogg is offline