HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Metropolitan Division > New York Rangers
Notices

This series was closer then people think, just making a point here

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
05-06-2008, 09:56 PM
  #1
SupersonicMonkey*
DROP THE PUCK
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: USA
Country: United States
Posts: 15,193
vCash: 500
This series was closer then people think, just making a point here

Just to show that this series was closer then the "analysts" say.

I kept saying that the Rangers are the team who moves on if a couple of bounces went our way...and *ahem* a few calls.

NYR | PIT

Goals 12 | 15

Shots 145 | 144
PPG 2 | 5
Face Offs 150 | 133
Hits 164 | 190


3 Goals made the difference between moving on and staying... and guess what those 3 goals were? PP goals.

Like has been said by any knowledgeable hockey fan, the POWER PLAY was the difference in this series.

And, Lundqvist still played a HELL of a lot better than Fleury. Lundqvist had to make the tougher saves ALL SERIES.


So... here is more proof thatt he Power Play needs a serious shot in the leg next year.


Last edited by SupersonicMonkey*: 05-06-2008 at 10:02 PM.
SupersonicMonkey* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-06-2008, 10:01 PM
  #2
Tawnos
Moderator
BoH Mod Only
 
Tawnos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Charlotte, NC
Country: United States
Posts: 11,276
vCash: 500
The Rangers needed 6 goals to win 3 other games, since 3 of the games they lost were essentially one goal decisions.

Besides which, the goal differential is screwed up by the fact that the game we won was the by the largest difference in the series.

Tawnos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-06-2008, 10:03 PM
  #3
SupersonicMonkey*
DROP THE PUCK
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: USA
Country: United States
Posts: 15,193
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tawnos View Post
The Rangers needed 6 goals to win 3 other games, since 3 of the games they lost were essentially one goal decisions.

Besides which, the goal differential is screwed up by the fact that the game we won was the by the largest difference in the series.
EXACTLY.

And no they wouldn't have had to win the extra 3 games. Those extra 3 games were games they already played...

The POWER PLAY was the difference in the series. Thats all. Nothing else.

The Rangers score on the PP and we win. The Penguins don't get granted extra power plays they didn't deserve... we win.

SupersonicMonkey* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-06-2008, 10:06 PM
  #4
Inferno
HFB Partner
 
Inferno's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Atlanta, GA
Country: United States
Posts: 19,811
vCash: 500
This series was as close as it was for one reason. Henrik Lundqvist played out of his frigging mind. Granted, thats the benefit of having a goalie like him back there, but still, Tom Renney said it earlier in the playoffs....something along the lines of, if your goalie has to bail you out of every game, youre not going to last very long. Thats exactly what happened. W/ any other goalie not named Luongo, Nabakov, or Kipper, this series is over in 4, with each game being a 4 or 5 goal route.

Thats how badly they outplayed us.

Inferno is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-06-2008, 10:09 PM
  #5
Tawnos
Moderator
BoH Mod Only
 
Tawnos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Charlotte, NC
Country: United States
Posts: 11,276
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by inferno272 View Post
This series was as close as it was for one reason. Henrik Lundqvist played out of his frigging mind. Granted, thats the benefit of having a goalie like him back there, but still, Tom Renney said it earlier in the playoffs....something along the lines of, if your goalie has to bail you out of every game, youre not going to last very long. Thats exactly what happened. W/ any other goalie not named Luongo, Nabakov, or Kipper, this series is over in 4, with each game being a 4 or 5 goal route.

Thats how badly they outplayed us.
In every game but game 4 and 5. Yes, I agree with this.

Tawnos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-06-2008, 10:13 PM
  #6
SupersonicMonkey*
DROP THE PUCK
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: USA
Country: United States
Posts: 15,193
vCash: 500
The Rangers were not out played the whole series.

The series was very closely played most of the time, except for when we paraded to the box.

There were points in the series were the Rangers dominated the tempo of the game too.

It was closer then the out come suggested. That is my point.

Same with last year in the Sabres series. We win that game instead of icing the puck with 7 second left, and we may be in the Conference Final.

The series was close. Not one sided.

SupersonicMonkey* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-06-2008, 10:13 PM
  #7
roxchipsi8
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 200
vCash: 500
the penguins were who we thought they were. and we let them off the hook!

roxchipsi8 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-06-2008, 10:17 PM
  #8
SupersonicMonkey*
DROP THE PUCK
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: USA
Country: United States
Posts: 15,193
vCash: 500
This came to me when watching NHL network, and them praising the Penguins.

Then they go on to show the series stats, and it just proved what i thought, and contradicted what they were saying.

The series was closer, and not DOMINATED like the analysts say.

A few bounces in our favor and we are still playing.

SupersonicMonkey* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-06-2008, 10:17 PM
  #9
SingnBluesOnBroadway
Retired
 
SingnBluesOnBroadway's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: NYC
Country: United States
Posts: 29,779
vCash: 500
Awards:
The series took a very bad turn when the Rangers lost game one (which they should have won). A spilt of the first two games would have been huge.

__________________
SingnBluesOnBroadway is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-06-2008, 10:19 PM
  #10
SupersonicMonkey*
DROP THE PUCK
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: USA
Country: United States
Posts: 15,193
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SingnBluesOnBroadway View Post
The series took a very bad turn when the Rangers lost game one (which they should have won). A spilt of the first two games would have been huge.
I agree.

That was our "7.7 seconds" of this year.

Last year was the bad icing. This year was blowing a 3 goal lead.

SupersonicMonkey* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-06-2008, 10:22 PM
  #11
Tawnos
Moderator
BoH Mod Only
 
Tawnos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Charlotte, NC
Country: United States
Posts: 11,276
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by PukkuMikku View Post
This came to me when watching NHL network, and them praising the Penguins.

Then they go on to show the series stats, and it just proved what i thought, and contradicted what they were saying.

The series was closer, and not DOMINATED like the analysts say.

A few bounces in our favor and we are still playing.
I agree the series wasn't dominated by the Penguins. The Penguins beat the Rangers because the Rangers beat themselves. Neither team played well in game 1 or 3. The Rangers played poorly in game 2. The Penguins played poorly in game 4. Both teams played well in game 5. The Pens managed to persevere in the games where both teams played poorly and that's why they won.

Tawnos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-06-2008, 10:23 PM
  #12
Inferno
HFB Partner
 
Inferno's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Atlanta, GA
Country: United States
Posts: 19,811
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by PukkuMikku View Post
This came to me when watching NHL network, and them praising the Penguins.

Then they go on to show the series stats, and it just proved what i thought, and contradicted what they were saying.

The series was closer, and not DOMINATED like the analysts say.

A few bounces in our favor and we are still playing.
it was close, because the scores were all close. but the way their skaters played, they should have scored 7-8 goals a game. They were flat out dominating, but were equalized by a ridicu-freaking-less display of goaltending by Henrik. He gave up 5 goals in game 1, and i swear, it could have been twice that. The only game he wasnt spectacular was in game 3, where he was ordinary.

Inferno is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-06-2008, 10:32 PM
  #13
Plato
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Plato's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: New York
Country: Greece
Posts: 9,043
vCash: 50
On a completely unrelated note why is FLYLine no longer a mod?

Plato is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-06-2008, 10:39 PM
  #14
The Thomas J.*
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Staten Island, NY
Posts: 18,847
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SingnBluesOnBroadway View Post
The series took a very bad turn when the Rangers lost game one (which they should have won). A spilt of the first two games would have been huge.
I agree, as much as game one killed me, we could have recovered had we won game two, IMHO the series should have been 2-2 going into Sundays game 5.

The Thomas J.* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-06-2008, 10:50 PM
  #15
Mixtures89
 
Mixtures89's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Hamden, CT
Posts: 75
vCash: 500
i think the series was much closer than the 5 games that it ended up being IMO. Yes, lundy played spectacular, yes they got the better chances, yes they were the BETTER team. But i truly do not believe that we would have/should have gotten swept if not for henrick. Fleury was no slouch at the other end of the ice either. If our powerplay was reasonably respectable and we gained momentum from it rather than losing it it would have been a closer series. If ryan hollweg wasn't a buzzkill in game 3 it would have been an even closer series.

Mixtures89 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-06-2008, 10:59 PM
  #16
BlueShirts88
Section 208 Row 15
 
BlueShirts88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Long Island, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 10,333
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to BlueShirts88
I feel like the pre-trade deadline Pens and Rangers were two very even teams. We had a slight edge in goaltending, and they had a slight edge in offesnive power. The factor in this series that shifted the power was Marian Hossa. If he went to Montreal instead of Pittsburgh, I think we could have easily won this series. Yes, the penguins were a better team, but like others said, iffy officiating and bad bounces were a common theme for the Rangers which led to thier fall. Full marks to the Pens, but hats off to the Rangers as well. Any hockey fan knows that this was a very very close series, and should have gone at least 6 or 7 games.

__________________
"Matteau! Matteau! Matteau!"~H. Rose
BlueShirts88 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-06-2008, 11:27 PM
  #17
jrd303
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Country: United States
Posts: 495
vCash: 500
It was close if we didn't give up a three goal lead in game one.

It's not close when you have a three goal lead and give it away, it's also not close when you're down 3-1 climb back to 3-3 and lose anyway. That's the better team showing resiliancy when it matters most. Throw in the powerplay differance (which was no surprise) and this series was no where near close. We couldn't expose Fleury (I think it will be interesting to see how PIT handles the Flyers PP). Henrik was the only reason we even won a game in this series. Even with him stealing a game he gave away another one in game 3 to even it up.

We didn't out hit the Penguins and we didn't perform as well on the powerplay. The Pens were much more consistent in their play over the course of the series and took advantage of the breaks when they got them. A PP goal scored on a weak call always seems to be remembered for the weak call instead of the of a well executed power play. We had our chances and never took advantage of them. We performed horribly at the most crucial times.

I thought we killed the Devils in round one and it wasn't really ever that close and I thought the Pens killed us. Saying it was close is a slap in the face to a team that set the tone in game 1 by climbing out of a three goal hole. Outside of Hank and Jagr the Ranger's scoring was all but invisible.

jrd303 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-07-2008, 12:09 AM
  #18
Inferno
HFB Partner
 
Inferno's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Atlanta, GA
Country: United States
Posts: 19,811
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jrd303 View Post
It was close if we didn't give up a three goal lead in game one.

It's not close when you have a three goal lead and give it away, it's also not close when you're down 3-1 climb back to 3-3 and lose anyway. That's the better team showing resiliancy when it matters most. Throw in the powerplay differance (which was no surprise) and this series was no where near close. We couldn't expose Fleury (I think it will be interesting to see how PIT handles the Flyers PP). Henrik was the only reason we even won a game in this series. Even with him stealing a game he gave away another one in game 3 to even it up.

We didn't out hit the Penguins and we didn't perform as well on the powerplay. The Pens were much more consistent in their play over the course of the series and took advantage of the breaks when they got them. A PP goal scored on a weak call always seems to be remembered for the weak call instead of the of a well executed power play. We had our chances and never took advantage of them. We performed horribly at the most crucial times.

I thought we killed the Devils in round one and it wasn't really ever that close and I thought the Pens killed us. Saying it was close is a slap in the face to a team that set the tone in game 1 by climbing out of a three goal hole. Outside of Hank and Jagr the Ranger's scoring was all but invisible.
absolutely 110% agreed.

Inferno is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-07-2008, 12:24 AM
  #19
EventHorizon
Bring Back Ties!
 
EventHorizon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Budd Lake, NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 3,897
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jrd303 View Post
It was close if we didn't give up a three goal lead in game one.

It's not close when you have a three goal lead and give it away, it's also not close when you're down 3-1 climb back to 3-3 and lose anyway. That's the better team showing resiliancy when it matters most. Throw in the powerplay differance (which was no surprise) and this series was no where near close. We couldn't expose Fleury (I think it will be interesting to see how PIT handles the Flyers PP). Henrik was the only reason we even won a game in this series. Even with him stealing a game he gave away another one in game 3 to even it up.

We didn't out hit the Penguins and we didn't perform as well on the powerplay. The Pens were much more consistent in their play over the course of the series and took advantage of the breaks when they got them. A PP goal scored on a weak call always seems to be remembered for the weak call instead of the of a well executed power play. We had our chances and never took advantage of them. We performed horribly at the most crucial times.

I thought we killed the Devils in round one and it wasn't really ever that close and I thought the Pens killed us. Saying it was close is a slap in the face to a team that set the tone in game 1 by climbing out of a three goal hole. Outside of Hank and Jagr the Ranger's scoring was all but invisible.
Very much in agreement here.


Each individual game may have been close, but the series as a whole was not. Great teams figure out ways to win those close games, and the Penguins figured out how to do that and did it in decisive fashion.

EventHorizon is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:18 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.