HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Metropolitan Division > New York Rangers
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Mike Richter or Henrik Lundqvist

View Poll Results: Who ya got?
Mike Richter 83 30.97%
Henrik Lundqvist 185 69.03%
Voters: 268. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
01-04-2010, 06:13 PM
  #126
DM23BK30
HFB Partner
 
DM23BK30's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Country: United States
Posts: 17,529
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by allstar3970 View Post
It's close. I'd have to check but the stats may actually favor Mclean that series. He was absolutely otherworldly in Game 1 especially. 50+ saves in a game the rangers dominated and lost.
Mclean was horrible in Games 3, 4, 5 and was mediocre in Game 7

Richter was horrible in Games 5 and bleh in Game 1. Game 6 could have been 15-1 but he made great save after great save

McLean personally cost the canucks a chance to go up 2-1 and tie the series 2-2 with all the garbage goals he let in, and then blew a 3-0 lead in Game 5

The 1st Leetch goal in Game 3 was horrible

DM23BK30 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-04-2010, 09:58 PM
  #127
chosen
Registered User
 
chosen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 6,030
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeds2StepOpus View Post
In the beginning. Richter worked on that and improved.

Lundqvist is even worse now than Richter ever was.
You have posted lots of things that fly in the face of reality but nowhere were you more mistaken than on this point. Either you don't have a clue or you're playing the fool for some sort of game.

chosen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-04-2010, 10:04 PM
  #128
Gresch04
Registered User
 
Gresch04's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 150
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by chosen View Post
Great points!

Lundqvist had the benefit of Betts, Ortmeyer and Sjostrom. All Richter had were those stiffs Leetch, Messier, Graves and so forth.
Exactly! This debate can't possibly be fair because much like the dead, the retired are greater than they ever were in reality and Hank can't compete with the dead...I mean retired.

Gresch04 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-04-2010, 10:06 PM
  #129
chosen
Registered User
 
chosen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 6,030
vCash: 500
In summary, Richter, if we are judging by career, has to get the edge because Lundqvist hasn't played long enough.

Comparing their careers at equal stages, I don't see how anyone can say that Richter was better.

The one fellow here who believes that Lundqvist is garbage clearly has never even seen a hockey game unless all of the others who watch hockey have inferior knowledge of the game to this self-proclaimed genius.

Are the folks who vote for the Vezina all under mass hypnosis? Are they being paid off by Hank's agent? Or, as this poster would have us believe, are they all ill-equipped to judge hockey talent?

chosen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-05-2010, 02:20 AM
  #130
DevilInDisguise
Registered User
 
DevilInDisguise's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 88
vCash: 500
my vote goes for mike.. loved what he did for team usa hated what he did in 94 to my beloved devils...

DevilInDisguise is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-05-2010, 03:17 AM
  #131
NYSportsfan87
Thank You Eli
 
NYSportsfan87's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: New Jersey
Country: United States
Posts: 2,869
vCash: 500
I never watched Hockey when Richter played but Henrik seems to do so much on a team that gives him so little so I voted for him

NYSportsfan87 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-05-2010, 07:47 AM
  #132
eco's bones
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Elmira NY
Country: United States
Posts: 14,274
vCash: 500
Richter was a favorite and is one of the best characters around but have to keep in mind he played for some fabulous teams. Lundqvist is a lot more on his own so it's Henrik for me.

eco's bones is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-05-2010, 10:54 AM
  #133
Edge
Kris King's Ghost
 
Edge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Amish Paradise
Country: United States
Posts: 13,890
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by eco's bones View Post
Richter was a favorite and is one of the best characters around but have to keep in mind he played for some fabulous teams. Lundqvist is a lot more on his own so it's Henrik for me.
I think Richter played for more extreme teams.

He certainly played for several far better teams, but he also played for many far worse teams.

Richter played for 4, maybe 5, good teams. And even if you go with 5 good teams, you have to factor in that he split time with Beezer or in one season, he missed half the games due to injury. But you also have to keep in mind the era he played in and the style his teams played.

Lundqvist played has played for 4 good teams. But you also have to keep in mind the era he played in and the style his teams played.

It's hard to compare careers at this point, because Lundqvist is only 27 years old. If he stays healthy and the Rangers are competitive, he'll likely shatter all of Richter's records. But, right or wrong, he'll also be expected to win a cup.

If he does all of those things, it won't be close. If he doesn't do one or two of those things, they'll always be the debate.

Edge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-05-2010, 11:07 AM
  #134
Lion Hound
@JoeTucc26
 
Lion Hound's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: NY
Country: United States
Posts: 3,731
vCash: 500
Factoring in what is allowed and what is not allowed in what is allowed and not allowed in what is the "new NHL"...I would take Henrik Lundqvist all day long.

Now, I am a Richter fan. Always have been...but to me Henrik is just all around the better of the two. The fact that he gets the job done and plays so deep in his own net to me siginifies that his talent level is that much higher.

Henrik is going to surpass Richer is evert gategory. He won a Gold Medal. IMO he has a great chance of winning a cup, but that is yet to be seen.

With that said, Henrik gets my vote.

Lion Hound is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-05-2010, 12:23 PM
  #135
Salz
Registered User
 
Salz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 1,235
vCash: 500
I don't think we should compare them on the cups. The teams Lundqvist has played with weren't even close to the caliber of the 94 team. Besides Gaborik, not one forward we have now would have cracked their Top 6... not even close.

Salz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-05-2010, 04:03 PM
  #136
mm11
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 1,139
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Salz View Post
I don't think we should compare them on the cups. The teams Lundqvist has played with weren't even close to the caliber of the 94 team. Besides Gaborik, not one forward we have now would have cracked their Top 6... not even close.
personally I think Captain America along with young budding Cally and possibly Dubie would of sniffed the top six throughout the season one time or another. in 1994 Keenan would of loved the motors that Dubie and Cally offered and would of ran with thoroughbred Gaborik like he did with Kovy. It would of been interesting to see Kovy play his whole career with Keenan. Who knows how great he would of been

back to the original topic, the 2009 team absolutely has many top sixers I feel would of made the 94 top six all day and then some


So if my memory serves me correctly

The top six of 1994 were:

Mess with Graves and Kovy:

Sarge or Mac T (Probably Sarge as Mac was going on year 15 by then) with Tikkanen and Larmer or throw in Anderson going on year 15 along with workhorse Brian Noonan

All guys that Dubie and Cally and Captain America absolutely are on par with and to go futher Dubie and Cally have not reached their collective peaks as of yet while it was safe to assume Larmer, Anderson, Tikkanen, Sarge and Noonan peaked.

to say not even close that anyone on this ranger top six wouldent crack the 94 top six just false.

The 94 team had a ton of experience and some awesome leaders in MESS and Leetch and had a wildcard named KOVY where we had no idea how good the kid was and to where his career would unfol but to say that the 2009 vontage rangers top six skill wise would not crack the 934 team is just so outlandish and truly undersells the skill of Cally, Dubie and Drury



Now looking at the defense: wow is all I can say: take a peak at Zubov's numbers that year ( his 3rd NHL season too) (why trade the guy!!) , sprinkle in Leetch! and the throw in 15 year VET Lowe with how many cups? then top off 6'5 behemouth Beukeboom, and last but not least Lidster whom still had some wheels left along with a tough guy in wells whom had to play roughly 6 to 8 minutes a night to keep things honest and you can see Richter had the better team no doubt but Mikey boy still had to stand on his head many of times to get the cup to the Garden.

mm11 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-05-2010, 08:07 PM
  #137
GarretJoseph*
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: NYC
Country: United States
Posts: 7,614
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chimp View Post

3. Some of the arguments in these threads for either goalie, are ridiculous. And you should know it. "Won the Cup with his team?" Jesus... When will that stop being assumed as a logical, valid argument? Hint: Try dividing the imaginary points you give your goalie for winning the cup, with the number of players who helped carry the team. This will give a less crappy - but still crappy - answer. No goalie has ever won the Cup with a at least mediocre team in front of him.
Very important statement, If I had to think back the past few seasons, the only team that comes into my mind that IMO weren't the greatest and won was the Montreal (93?) who had a Patrick Roy in net.

The fact of the matter still remains though, Mike Richter is a NYR Stanley Cup Champion. Hank's isn't.

Leetch, Mess, Gravy and Richter will forever be considered Gods by a large majority of Ranger fans because and ONLY BECAUSE they won the Cup in 94'.

You can make a case for Gravy on other merits but mostly these guys became Gods (not Heros, Fav Players or All Stars...GODS!)

GarretJoseph* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-06-2010, 12:10 PM
  #138
Fataldogg
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 7,501
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by FATCHAMALA11 View Post
I love Richter, but Hank is more than 1/2 way to his total in a 1/4 of the time.
In fairness, did Lundqvist ever play on a team as bad as Richter? Richter was on a team that could not make the playoffs for seven consecutive years. I know we complain about the guys on our team, the effort occasionally, etc, but the bottom line is that Lundqvist has consistently played with a team better than Richter had for seven years. When you put together seven years that is a big chunk of a persons career. Could you even argue that had Henrik been on those teams that the Rangers would make the playoffs? I don't think you even can because the teams were THAT bad. Secondly, Richter played in an era, as others have mentioned, with ties. Lundqvist plays in an era where all goaltenders are winning more games.

Would Lundqvist amass as many wins at the rate that he has given similar conditions and rules and regulations Richter played with? Probably not. People have to realize that Richter played on a BAD team, in an era with ties and his career ended short and he still had 300+ wins. There is no doubt in my mind that if Richter was given the same scenario as Lundqvist that he easily would have topped 400+ wins. If Richter was able to finish his career appropriately he would have even finished with 400+ wins.

Richter is the more clutch goaltender too. 1994 Stanley Cup Champion. Big reason why the team won it all along with Leetch and Messier. 1996 World Cup Gold Medal and MVP. 2002 Olympic Silver Medal against a ridiculous Team Canada. Richter gets the vote in my book until Lundqvist can prove me otherwise and Lundqvist is my favorite player on this team.

Fataldogg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-06-2010, 01:40 PM
  #139
Gardner McKay
Moderator
What a time
 
Gardner McKay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Porch of Indecision.
Country: United States
Posts: 12,437
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Edge View Post
I think Richter played for more extreme teams.

He certainly played for several far better teams, but he also played for many far worse teams.

Richter played for 4, maybe 5, good teams. And even if you go with 5 good teams, you have to factor in that he split time with Beezer or in one season, he missed half the games due to injury. But you also have to keep in mind the era he played in and the style his teams played.

Lundqvist played has played for 4 good teams. But you also have to keep in mind the era he played in and the style his teams played.

It's hard to compare careers at this point, because Lundqvist is only 27 years old. If he stays healthy and the Rangers are competitive, he'll likely shatter all of Richter's records. But, right or wrong, he'll also be expected to win a cup.

If he does all of those things, it won't be close. If he doesn't do one or two of those things, they'll always be the debate.
If Lundqvist can win a cup, then yes it will be no debate. But if he breaks Richters records, and has the gold medal, but no cup, then yes the debate will ever rage on.

For those of you who say Lundqvist does not have it in him for the big game performances... Do you forget that fast the entire SERIES vs Washington last year where he was the only reason we came close to winning? If that team last year had any sort of offense we would have won that series and with the way the king was playing, possibly had a chance to go much further.

Gardner McKay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-06-2010, 01:44 PM
  #140
Gardner McKay
Moderator
What a time
 
Gardner McKay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Porch of Indecision.
Country: United States
Posts: 12,437
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fataldogg View Post
In fairness, did Lundqvist ever play on a team as bad as Richter? Richter was on a team that could not make the playoffs for seven consecutive years. I know we complain about the guys on our team, the effort occasionally, etc, but the bottom line is that Lundqvist has consistently played with a team better than Richter had for seven years. When you put together seven years that is a big chunk of a persons career. Could you even argue that had Henrik been on those teams that the Rangers would make the playoffs? I don't think you even can because the teams were THAT bad. Secondly, Richter played in an era, as others have mentioned, with ties. Lundqvist plays in an era where all goaltenders are winning more games.

Would Lundqvist amass as many wins at the rate that he has given similar conditions and rules and regulations Richter played with? Probably not. People have to realize that Richter played on a BAD team, in an era with ties and his career ended short and he still had 300+ wins. There is no doubt in my mind that if Richter was given the same scenario as Lundqvist that he easily would have topped 400+ wins. If Richter was able to finish his career appropriately he would have even finished with 400+ wins.

Richter is the more clutch goaltender too. 1994 Stanley Cup Champion. Big reason why the team won it all along with Leetch and Messier. 1996 World Cup Gold Medal and MVP. 2002 Olympic Silver Medal against a ridiculous Team Canada. Richter gets the vote in my book until Lundqvist can prove me otherwise and Lundqvist is my favorite player on this team.
Last years team was awful. Henriks inhumane stretch from Feb to april was why we made the playoffs, other wise we would have finished 10th-11th.

Gardner McKay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-06-2010, 02:13 PM
  #141
SouvenirCity
Registered User
 
SouvenirCity's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Astoria, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 626
vCash: 500
Richter. Win me a cup Hank, then we'll talk.

SouvenirCity is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-06-2010, 03:32 PM
  #142
Edge
Kris King's Ghost
 
Edge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Amish Paradise
Country: United States
Posts: 13,890
vCash: 500
We may have to wait for Lundqvist's career to end before we can really have this discussion.

For me at least, answers tend be a bit more clear.

Edge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-07-2010, 05:10 AM
  #143
WheresBarnaby
Registered User
 
WheresBarnaby's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Country: United States
Posts: 2,607
vCash: 500
Richter, but maybe when we get a decent team in front of Hank he'll be right there with him.

WheresBarnaby is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-07-2010, 07:41 AM
  #144
chosen
Registered User
 
chosen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 6,030
vCash: 500
When I see people needing Lundqvist to win a Cup in order to be taken seriously, I remember people not taking Hasek seriously despite his being the best in the game (until Detroit) and Ray Bourque being criticized for never winning a Cup with Boston. Anyone who didn't think Bourque was one of the greatest dmen of all-time had no business commenting on the sport.

Lundqvist needs a fairly lengthy career to be considered great. That is what is missing from his resume. If he also gets a Cup and continues at this skill level, this whole discussion will be laughable.

While it is difficult to compare across eras and generations, I also put Giacomin ahead of Richter.

chosen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-07-2010, 11:44 AM
  #145
mm11
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 1,139
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by WheresBarnaby View Post
Richter, but maybe when we get a decent team in front of Hank he'll be right there with him.
Since hank cracked onto the NHL scene the talent on the blueshirt squads were better than decent mixed with alot of veterans to show king Henry the ropes.

THere could of been worse situations to start (throwing him in as an 18 year old) and to make it even better, Hank's head coach built a system condusive to goalies putting up good to great stats. Hank, being a great talent ran with it and never looked back. Why would he? He has a great set of talents or tools, playing for an original six in the greatest USA market and city plus has a org that opens their wallet for hockey talent plus probably one of the best medical training staff in the NHL and last but not least an opportunity to run with the #1 gig. Kevin Weekes was the incumbrent. (not sure if that is even a word but you all know what I mean guess)

In a nutshell, Hank was very fortunate to be put in a great situation to suceed. To his credit he took full advantage of it. The great talents recognize these situations and go

mm11 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-07-2010, 02:39 PM
  #146
Edge
Kris King's Ghost
 
Edge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Amish Paradise
Country: United States
Posts: 13,890
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by chosen View Post
When I see people needing Lundqvist to win a Cup in order to be taken seriously, I remember people not taking Hasek seriously despite his being the best in the game (until Detroit) and Ray Bourque being criticized for never winning a Cup with Boston. Anyone who didn't think Bourque was one of the greatest dmen of all-time had no business commenting on the sport.

Lundqvist needs a fairly lengthy career to be considered great. That is what is missing from his resume. If he also gets a Cup and continues at this skill level, this whole discussion will be laughable.

While it is difficult to compare across eras and generations, I also put Giacomin ahead of Richter.
In fairness, people also weren't loning at Hasek or Bourqaue at 27 and trying to figure their all-time place with an organization (or the league for that matter).

Additionally, I think those two had a little more under their belt when the real conversations started. Lundqvist has done some wonderful things over the past 5 years, but I don't think he's done over a long enough period of time to start having an all-time conversation.

Edge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-07-2010, 04:40 PM
  #147
Richie Rich
Registered User
 
Richie Rich's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: NYC
Country: United States
Posts: 247
vCash: 500
Richter with ease.

Richie Rich is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-07-2010, 04:52 PM
  #148
ECL
If it weren’t for me
 
ECL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: New Jersey
Country: United States
Posts: 82,492
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to ECL
Richter with ease? Give me a break.

__________________
"Of course giving Sather cap space is like giving teenagers whiskey and car keys." - SBOB
"Watching Sather build a team is like watching a blind man with no fingers trying to put together an elaborate puzzle." - Shadowtron
I still think there should be a section of people at MSG behind the visiting bench, in curly wigs, and dark rimmed glasses, calling themselves the Pidtophiles. - Zamboner
ECL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-07-2010, 05:06 PM
  #149
Sayba
Registered User
 
Sayba's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: New Jersey
Country: United States
Posts: 254
vCash: 500
I hope we have not seen Hanks best but if you want to say at their best then Richter. His best was amazing and involved a stanley cup.

Sayba is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-07-2010, 05:29 PM
  #150
Richie Rich
Registered User
 
Richie Rich's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: NYC
Country: United States
Posts: 247
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jonathan. View Post
Richter with ease? Give me a break.
Yes with ease, didn't let up nearly as many softees as Henrik and actually had a glove.

Richie Rich 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 05:31 AM.

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

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2015 All Rights Reserved.