Halak's first two rounds of the 2010 playoffs were the best playoff performance by a goalie in the last three years.
I know Thomas and Quick were fantastic, but they still had very talented teams in front of them. Halak had a team that barely made the playoffs to begin with, and he still almost single-handedly knocked out the two top teams in the East.
Average goals for in the first two rounds:
Montreal: 2.79
Rangers: 2.07
Yes, he "almost single-handedly" won the first two rounds while Lundqvist didn't.
Through the first two rounds, Halak gave up more than 3 goals 4 times, while Lundqvist never did.
Lundqvist won 6 one-goal games, while Halak won 5.
Halak never won a game like Lundqvist did in the 3OT game.
__________________
"Trust me I'm an expert, I watched 13 rangers games on NHL center Ice this year through streaming." -Starburst
"I don't even understand what the point of all this arguing is. Are you guys hoping that the other side is going to have an epiphany and go 'Oh, OH! You're right, we ARE going to lose this series!'" -Crease
Average goals for in the first two rounds:
Montreal: 2.79
Rangers: 2.07
Yes, he "almost single-handedly" won the first two rounds while Lundqvist didn't.
Through the first two rounds, Halak gave up more than 3 goals 4 times, while Lundqvist never did.
Lundqvist won 6 one-goal games, while Halak won 5.
Halak never won a game like Lundqvist did in the 3OT game.
Are you seriously trying to say Lundqvist first two rounds in 11-12 are more impressive than Halaks first two rounds in 2010?
Maybe just try and watch the games instead of looking at stats for this one because Halak was clearly the reason Montreal made it past Pittsburgh and Washington.
BTW, Montreal and NYR faced two completely different Washington teams. The one Halak faced, Ovechkin was on, Washington was playing high powered fast paced offense that complimented their game. The one Lunqvist faced was an offensive team that was trying to play a defensive system. Not to mention their best player played absolutely awful all series.
If you take away the stats, this isn't even close.
Are you seriously trying to say Lundqvist first two rounds in 11-12 are more impressive than Halaks first two rounds in 2010?
Maybe just try and watch the games instead of looking at stats for this one because Halak was clearly the reason Montreal made it past Pittsburgh and Washington.
BTW, Montreal and NYR faced two completely different Washington teams. The one Halak faced, Ovechkin was on, Washington was playing high powered fast paced offense that complimented their game. The one Lunqvist faced was an offensive team that was trying to play a defensive system. Not to mention their best player played absolutely awful all series.
If you take away the stats, this isn't even close.
Lundqvist was the reason they made it past Ottawa and Washington. Ovechkin also had 4 points that series.
Lundqvist clearly put up better numbers on a team that was clearly less talented offensively. You criticize me for using stats, but you're just ignoring stats, which are facts.
Lundqvist was the reason they made it past Ottawa and Washington. Ovechkin also had 4 points that series.
Lundqvist clearly put up better numbers on a team that was clearly less talented offensively. You criticize me for using stats, but you're just ignoring stats, which are facts.
Montreals key players were Cammalleri, Plekanec and Gionta (top 3 scorers, only Cammalleri average PPG in the playoffs and the highest in the season was Plekanec with 70.)
Rangers key players - Gaborik, Richards, Callahan. NYR star power is clearly better, not to mention the defense for the Rangers is clearly better.
Now lets look at opposition:
Montreal:
Pittsburgh-Crosby, Malkin, Staal
Washington-Ovechkin, Backstrom, Semin, Green (they were a much better team in 2010 than in 2012)
Rangers:
Ottawa - Alfredsson (past prime), Karlsson, Turris(?), Michalek(?) (this doesn't even come close to comparing with Pittsburghs star power)
Washington- Ovechkin (You can't argue he was a shell of himself this year, he played terrible), Backstrom, Semin (These guys weren't as effective without Ovechkin playing his best.
I mean, it's a little ridiculous that you think the Rangers had a harder challenge and had less offensive power than the Canadiens did that year. Also something I haven't mention yet is the Rangers were #1 facing #8, and #7 while Montreal was #8 facing #1, 2. The drop in the standings for Washington should tell you enough about them.
2009-10 Playoffs: average 5.978 goals per game
2011-12 Playoffs: average 4.837 goals per game
Yes, Montreal scored more than the Rangers did last year, but that was largely because there was more scoring overall two years back - probably having to do with reffing standards working better for defensive systems last year.
New York made it past Ottawa and Washington because New York has a more complete roster, pretty much top to bottom. New York was a dominant defensive team.
What difference does star power or non-star make if they aren't playing like they should be?
And poor Montreal with Cammalleri who scored 19 points in the playoffs.
If the Rangers didn't have a challenge, why did the first two rounds go to 7 games?
And whatever, this thread is about St. Louis vs the Rangers. If a player's post-season of three years ago is what makes you think they will win, then lol.
What difference does star power or non-star make if they aren't playing like they should be?
And poor Montreal with Cammalleri who scored 19 points in the playoffs.
If the Rangers didn't have a challenge, why did the first two rounds go to 7 games?
And whatever, this thread is about St. Louis vs the Rangers. If a player's post-season of three years ago is what makes you think they will win, then lol.
The difference is those star players were playing like they should be in 2010, not so much in 2012.
Are you telling me Cammalleri is better than Gaborik or Richards in terms of goal scoring ability?
I don't know why they went 7 games, but Washington was much better in 2010 than they were in 2012 and Pittsburghs 2010 team was much better than Ottawa in 2012, you're kidding yourself if you think otherwise.
I only started talking about this because you were saying that Lundqvist had a better playoffs when I don't think he did. I don't know how Halak would play in the playoffs because he was injured last year playing for St. Louis. I wasn't the one who started this topic but I felt the need to contribute to it. As for NYR vs St. Louis, I haven't said one way or another in this thread and don't really care to make a prediction. I will say, however; that St. Louis won the only meeting last year and seems to play very well against Eastern Conference teams. Playoffs are a completely different story though.
Montreals key players were Cammalleri, Plekanec and Gionta (top 3 scorers, only Cammalleri average PPG in the playoffs and the highest in the season was Plekanec with 70.)
Rangers key players - Gaborik, Richards, Callahan. NYR star power is clearly better, not to mention the defense for the Rangers is clearly better.
Now lets look at opposition:
Montreal:
Pittsburgh-Crosby, Malkin, Staal
Washington-Ovechkin, Backstrom, Semin, Green (they were a much better team in 2010 than in 2012)
Rangers:
Ottawa - Alfredsson (past prime), Karlsson, Turris(?), Michalek(?) (this doesn't even come close to comparing with Pittsburghs star power)
Washington- Ovechkin (You can't argue he was a shell of himself this year, he played terrible), Backstrom, Semin (These guys weren't as effective without Ovechkin playing his best.
I mean, it's a little ridiculous that you think the Rangers had a harder challenge and had less offensive power than the Canadiens did that year. Also something I haven't mention yet is the Rangers were #1 facing #8, and #7 while Montreal was #8 facing #1, 2. The drop in the standings for Washington should tell you enough about them.
Quote:
Originally Posted by stlblues9
The difference is those star players were playing like they should be in 2010, not so much in 2012.
Are you telling me Cammalleri is better than Gaborik or Richards in terms of goal scoring ability?
I don't know why they went 7 games, but Washington was much better in 2010 than they were in 2012 and Pittsburghs 2010 team was much better than Ottawa in 2012, you're kidding yourself if you think otherwise.
I only started talking about this because you were saying that Lundqvist had a better playoffs when I don't think he did. I don't know how Halak would play in the playoffs because he was injured last year playing for St. Louis. I wasn't the one who started this topic but I felt the need to contribute to it. As for NYR vs St. Louis, I haven't said one way or another in this thread and don't really care to make a prediction. I will say, however; that St. Louis won the only meeting last year and seems to play very well against Eastern Conference teams. Playoffs are a completely different story though.
Looking at that Montreal team from this perspective is irrational. Montreal played like a team, it was one of the best team performances I have ever seen.
And while Halak had some outstanding performances against Washington (he also had some lacklustre ones too, game 2 for example), he wasn't the deciding factor against Pittsburgh. In fact, up until game 6, Fleury was outperforming him and the Pens were getting a lot of their goals from the PP, not even strength.
The whole Halak worship thing is ridiculous for that playoffs.
Kreider would easily replace Mr. Ten Goal Dubinsky. 5 goals in 18 games. I'll round to 5 in 20. That means Kreider would score 20+ goals in an 82-game season. Remember, he had 2 pts less than Stepan while playing much less.
The difference is those star players were playing like they should be in 2010, not so much in 2012.
Are you telling me Cammalleri is better than Gaborik or Richards in terms of goal scoring ability?
I don't know why they went 7 games, but Washington was much better in 2010 than they were in 2012 and Pittsburghs 2010 team was much better than Ottawa in 2012, you're kidding yourself if you think otherwise.
I only started talking about this because you were saying that Lundqvist had a better playoffs when I don't think he did. I don't know how Halak would play in the playoffs because he was injured last year playing for St. Louis. I wasn't the one who started this topic but I felt the need to contribute to it. As for NYR vs St. Louis, I haven't said one way or another in this thread and don't really care to make a prediction. I will say, however; that St. Louis won the only meeting last year and seems to play very well against Eastern Conference teams. Playoffs are a completely different story though.
NJD went 2-0-0 against LAK.
Quote:
Originally Posted by KidRobot
Yeah, the Rangers getting past the 7 and 8 seed was way more impressive than the Habs getting past the 1 and 2.
The devils lost to an 8th seed.
Quote:
Originally Posted by porknbeans1000
I dont expect to see either team anywhere near the scf anytime soon. Why have the rangers become so overrated all of a sudden?
For comparison i think that canadiens team could have beat new jersey
I think they need to get more points then TML, NYI, WIN, and ANH.
To be honest, I didn't think the Rangers looked very strong in any series last year.
They didn't, but in the first two rounds, they really lacked offense. In the third round, they just lacked almost everything. Staal was also just returning to norm. They were also using pretty much only three defensemen during the playoffs.
They just traded for Nash, giving up nothing much and Staal should finally be at 100%.
Maybe they weren't impressive in the playoffs, but they were strong for 82 games and have shown that they could beat anyone on a regular basis.
As an LA fan, I would say that St. Louis' getting swept by LA shouldn't be held against them in a matchup against NYR. Against NJD or BB, ok sure. STL had a very impressive series win against SJS, which to me is a more similar team compared to NYR than LAK is to NYR.
Also, STL is more about team defense and offense rather than any single player's ability...per Hitchcock. Comparing Halak to Lundy is irrelevant to me because you're not facing Halak, you're facing that team D in front of Halak.
The reason why LA had such success was because our forecheck broke down their team D and also the team was distracted by the hit and injury to Pieterangelo, plus the absence of him on their special teams.
As an LA fan, I would say that St. Louis' getting swept by LA shouldn't be held against them in a matchup against NYR. Against NJD or BB, ok sure. STL had a very impressive series win against SJS, which to me is a more similar team compared to NYR than LAK is to NYR.
Also, STL is more about team defense and offense rather than any single player's ability...per Hitchcock. Comparing Halak to Lundy is irrelevant to me because you're not facing Halak, you're facing that team D in front of Halak.
The reason why LA had such success was because our forecheck broke down their team D and also the team was distracted by the hit and injury to Pieterangelo, plus the absence of him on their special teams.
How are the Rangers more comparable to the Sharks than the Kings? They aren't similar at all.. The defense and goaltending aren't even close to similar. The Rangers goaltending is more similar to the Kings, but the defense is incredibly similar to the Blues. I don't get the SJS comparison at all.
The Rangers are also all about team defense, which is obvious, and also faced injuries to Staal and Sauer.
And like the Blues, you will have to get past the Rangers defense, but if you actually do, you will have to then face Lundqvist.
As much as I hate Torts, the guy knows hockey. He obviously didn't think Kreider was capable of playing a regular shift
Yeah you're right that must be why Kreider averaged about 16 minutes a game in the series. He got benched in game 6 because he screwed up on one of the Devil's goals and Torts is extremely tough on young players.
Even with that benching only Brad Richards and Ryan Callahan got significantly more ice time out of the forwards.
nice excuse. It couldnt be because NJ played well?
