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

Sather Speaks: Lack of Puck Possession Had "A lot to do" with Torts' firing

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
06-28-2013, 01:40 AM
  #276
GWOW
Two Pucks, One Cup
 
GWOW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Country: United States
Posts: 14,554
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleed Ranger Blue View Post
Are we just going to ignore how Lundqvist has saved this team's bacon for the last 8 years? Considering hes on the wrong side of 30, I'd say this franchise is at a critical point.
What's this "wrong side of 30" BS? He's not a running back.

Why is 30 the cut off? Why not 32? Why not 29? What about 37?

Please give me some factual data supporting this theory of yours that Lundqvist, if he stays, will somehow not perform like he has before because of a number.

People used to say Hasek will break down, Brodeur will break down, Roy will break down, Belfour would break down.

This idea that Henrik is going to start breaking down because of a meaningless date of birth is clown ****. The guy has shown no sign of wear.

GWOW is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-28-2013, 06:53 AM
  #277
Glen Teflon Sather
Like A Boss
 
Glen Teflon Sather's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Bloomfield, NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 4,908
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Glen Teflon Sather
Quote:
Originally Posted by GWOW View Post
What's this "wrong side of 30" BS? He's not a running back.

Why is 30 the cut off? Why not 32? Why not 29? What about 37?

Please give me some factual data supporting this theory of yours that Lundqvist, if he stays, will somehow not perform like he has before because of a number.

People used to say Hasek will break down, Brodeur will break down, Roy will break down, Belfour would break down.

This idea that Henrik is going to start breaking down because of a meaningless date of birth is clown ****. The guy has shown no sign of wear.
Because his style of play causes severe stress on his hips and knees.

Glen Teflon Sather is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-28-2013, 06:56 AM
  #278
NikC
Registered User
 
NikC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Country: United States
Posts: 3,590
vCash: 500
If there's any position where the BS wrong side of 30 theory is disproved it goalie...

NikC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-28-2013, 07:44 AM
  #279
SupersonicMonkey*
DROP THE PUCK
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: USA
Country: United States
Posts: 15,193
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NikC View Post
If there's any position where the BS wrong side of 30 theory is disproved it goalie...
Its true. And for the better goaltenders in history, its especially true.

SupersonicMonkey* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-28-2013, 08:37 AM
  #280
GWOW
Two Pucks, One Cup
 
GWOW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Country: United States
Posts: 14,554
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clowe Knows Best View Post
Because his style of play causes severe stress on his hips and knees.
Severe?

So he's a ticking time bomb like DP?

Not buying it. Great goalies stay healthy. They just do.

The idea that the Rangers are in a terrible positional from an organizational standpoint because Lundqvist is 31 and might get injured -- a notion based on the fact that other goalies have been injured before -- is as logical as saying your life is in danger because a piano might fall from the sky and kill you.

Besides, he is far from overworked. His GP has gone down in each of the last three seasons. He played only 62 games in a year his team won a Conference.

Lundqvist an injury concern? The helicopter pessimists and Debbie Downers can only wish for it.

GWOW is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-28-2013, 10:19 AM
  #281
shinchanyo
Registered User
 
shinchanyo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Here
Posts: 2,383
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by GWOW View Post
Severe?

So he's a ticking time bomb like DP?

Not buying it. Great goalies stay healthy. They just do.

The idea that the Rangers are in a terrible positional from an organizational standpoint because Lundqvist is 31 and might get injured -- a notion based on the fact that other goalies have been injured before -- is as logical as saying your life is in danger because a piano might fall from the sky and kill you.

Besides, he is far from overworked. His GP has gone down in each of the last three seasons. He played only 62 games in a year his team won a Conference.

Lundqvist an injury concern? The helicopter pessimists and Debbie Downers can only wish for it.
Wow what an overreaction to an overreaction. You're right he shows no signs of wear and they are overreacting but it's not completely out of the realm of possibility and there is plenty of precedence for athletes of his age to start to decline despite showing no signs of decline previously.

shinchanyo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-28-2013, 11:58 AM
  #282
GWOW
Two Pucks, One Cup
 
GWOW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Country: United States
Posts: 14,554
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by shinchanyo View Post
Wow what an overreaction to an overreaction. You're right he shows no signs of wear and they are overreacting but it's not completely out of the realm of possibility and there is plenty of precedence for athletes of his age to start to decline despite showing no signs of decline previously.
That's fine, but what does being 31 years old have to do with it? That's my point. For 8 seasons fans have been praying he doesnt get hurt because of his value, and he hasnt been hurt. As long as Henrik takes care of himself the way he has for the last 8 years, there's no reason to believe he's going to break down any time soon.

30 is an arbitrary number when it comes to elite goalies. While I think the Rangers need to find a real backup to develop as a contingiency, the way the current team is built, there's no reason to think they would become the Islanders or Oilers with one injury.

Since 2011, the Rangers are 22-14-3 without Henrik. Somebody please expalin how such an apparently weak, talentless, overrated, one-dimensional, thinly-constructed team/roster/organization managed to have a .610 winning percentage without the one guy who apparently is the ONLY reason they compete?

And even if Henrik does get hurt, the chances of it being career-threatening are slim to none. Injuries happen, but elite goalies have proven to bounce back.

The franchise will not crumble if a 33-year-old Lundqvist pulls a groin or gets a concussion and misses half a season. That idea is just plain friggin stupid.

GWOW is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-28-2013, 01:22 PM
  #283
Inferno
HFB Partner
 
Inferno's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Atlanta, GA
Country: United States
Posts: 20,057
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by GWOW View Post
That's fine, but what does being 31 years old have to do with it? That's my point. For 8 seasons fans have been praying he doesnt get hurt because of his value, and he hasnt been hurt. As long as Henrik takes care of himself the way he has for the last 8 years, there's no reason to believe he's going to break down any time soon.

30 is an arbitrary number when it comes to elite goalies. While I think the Rangers need to find a real backup to develop as a contingiency, the way the current team is built, there's no reason to think they would become the Islanders or Oilers with one injury.

Since 2011, the Rangers are 22-14-3 without Henrik. Somebody please expalin how such an apparently weak, talentless, overrated, one-dimensional, thinly-constructed team/roster/organization managed to have a .610 winning percentage without the one guy who apparently is the ONLY reason they compete?

And even if Henrik does get hurt, the chances of it being career-threatening are slim to none. Injuries happen, but elite goalies have proven to bounce back.

The franchise will not crumble if a 33-year-old Lundqvist pulls a groin or gets a concussion and misses half a season. That idea is just plain friggin stupid.
how often would the Rangers bench Henrik for a game against an upper echelon team VS benching him for a game against a weak team?

backups get the easier draw.

Inferno is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-28-2013, 01:42 PM
  #284
Bleed Ranger Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 14,811
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by GWOW View Post
That's fine, but what does being 31 years old have to do with it? That's my point. For 8 seasons fans have been praying he doesnt get hurt because of his value, and he hasnt been hurt. As long as Henrik takes care of himself the way he has for the last 8 years, there's no reason to believe he's going to break down any time soon.
Define "anytime soon." You listed Brodeur, Roy, and Hasek. 3 of the greatest of all-time. Part of the reason they are considered the greatest is their longevity. Other than these 3 guys the NHL is littered with goaltender whose performances took a nosedive around the age of 35. Maybe Lundqvist will avoid that, maybe he wont.

I find it difficult to have a conversation with you because you latch onto something and produce meandering and confusing arguments. This all started because you said that the Rangers are not at a critical time when it comes to winning now. I guess you think Lundqvist will be playing at the SAME level in 5-7 years? Thats a suckers bet coming from a real sucker. Those 3 greats above didnt even do that. And when Lundqvist begins to decline, which is inevitable, the position players will need to pick up the slack.

Bleed Ranger Blue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-29-2013, 09:11 AM
  #285
GWOW
Two Pucks, One Cup
 
GWOW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Country: United States
Posts: 14,554
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleed Ranger Blue View Post
Define "anytime soon." You listed Brodeur, Roy, and Hasek. 3 of the greatest of all-time. Part of the reason they are considered the greatest is their longevity. Other than these 3 guys the NHL is littered with goaltender whose performances took a nosedive around the age of 35. Maybe Lundqvist will avoid that, maybe he wont.

I find it difficult to have a conversation with you because you latch onto something and produce meandering and confusing arguments. This all started because you said that the Rangers are not at a critical time when it comes to winning now. I guess you think Lundqvist will be playing at the SAME level in 5-7 years? Thats a suckers bet coming from a real sucker. Those 3 greats above didnt even do that. And when Lundqvist begins to decline, which is inevitable, the position players will need to pick up the slack.
Yup. I said "not now". Amazing how you can't differentiate between "now" and "in 5-7years". And even in 5-7 years, there's no way you can prove an elite, HOF-caliber goalie like Lundqvist will struggle to the point where the franchise is devastated by it simply because of his age.

And I'm glad you admit to having difficulty understanding. Every time you respond to one of my posts, you contradict yourself, get called out on it, then you disappear.

Is Henrik not an elite goalie? Is he not on a Hall of fame path like Brodeur, Roy and Hasek? Belfour? Glenn Hall won two Vezinas and a Conn Smythe between 35-37. Plante led the league in GAA twice and won a Vezina after the age of 40. Sawchuk won a Vezina at 35. Tim Thomas won two Vezinas and Conn Smythe after the age of 34.

Lundqvist is comparable to all of them. He's the best goalie of his generation and is regarded as such by most everyone.

The group of downward-spiraling goalies you are trying to lump him with -- the Kiprusoffs, the McLeans, the Barassos of the world -- don't even come close to touching his resume, at least in the regular season.

GWOW is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-29-2013, 11:39 AM
  #286
GWOW
Two Pucks, One Cup
 
GWOW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Country: United States
Posts: 14,554
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Inferno View Post
how often would the Rangers bench Henrik for a game against an upper echelon team VS benching him for a game against a weak team?

backups get the easier draw.
So it's a knock on the team for beating teams they are supposed to beat?

I thought that was the mark of a good team, not a team in tatters because they without their star goalie.

GWOW 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 04:03 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.