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

Lundqvist and the NHL Playoffs

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
04-15-2014, 03:49 PM
  #51
Callahan Auto
Rational Police
 
Callahan Auto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Country: United States
Posts: 1,592
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by GWOW View Post
Lundqvist has never beaten a team he wasnt supposed to beat...
Neither has Tuuka Rask, MAF, etc. Since 2011:

1-2 against teams with a higher seed
2-1 against teams with a lower seed

I'm sure you'd find pretty similar records for most goalies unless they were on a low seed that was actually better than their regular season record (like LA two seasons ago).

Callahan Auto is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-15-2014, 03:51 PM
  #52
Crease
Registered User
 
Crease's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 9,833
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by GWOW View Post
Lundqvist has never beaten a team he wasnt supposed to beat, unless you want to count the Thrashers.

Strange. Lots of mediocre teams with no-name goalies have upset Cup favorites in early rounds.
Yep. This is the type of thing that will be scrutinized when his playing career is over and we're trying to place him properly among all-time greats. His regular season resume is up there with the best of the best. But he's not going to have a chance to displace guys like Hasek, Roy, Dryden, Brodeur and other Top-10 guys unless he has playoff runs like those goalies did. Roy in '86 and '93. Dryden in '71. Brodeur in '07. Hasek in '99. Those performances carry significant weight in their all-time ranking. And it's not like carrying your team on your back is reserved for only the greatest of them all. Belfour, Cujo, Kolzig stole series. Giguere, Quick, Richter stole series. Cam Ward stole a series.

No doubt Lundqvist is better than those last few guys. The question is whether he's going to do something in the playoffs that puts him on Mt. Vezina.


Last edited by Crease: 04-15-2014 at 03:57 PM.
Crease is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-15-2014, 04:03 PM
  #53
Jersey Girl
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 3,915
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crease View Post
Yep. This is the type of thing that will be scrutinized when his playing career is over and we're trying to place him properly among all-time greats. His regular season resume is up there with the best of the best. But he's not going to have a chance to displace guys like Hasek, Roy, Dryden, Brodeur and other Top-10 guys unless he has playoff runs like those goalies did. Roy in '86 and '93. Dryden in '71. Brodeur in '07. Hasek in '99. Those performances carry significant weight in their all-time ranking. And it's not like carrying your team on your back is reserved for only the greatest of them all. Belfour, Cujo, Kolzig stole series. Giguere, Quick, Richter stole series. Cam Ward stole a series.

No doubt Lundqvist is better than those last few guys. The question is whether he's going to do something in the playoffs that puts him on Mt. Vezina.
Well said. Agree with every word.

Jersey Girl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-15-2014, 04:05 PM
  #54
mrhockey193195
Registered User
 
mrhockey193195's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 3,540
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crease View Post
In your eyes, has he done enough in the NHL Playoffs up until this point to be considered a "money" player yet?
Absolutely. Especially given how he played in the past two playoffs.

Every goalie has bad games, even in their best playoffs years. Including Roy and Brodeur. I think a lot of people here hold Hank to unreasonable expectations. Games 1 and 2 against Boston wasn't great last year, but overall Hank was outstanding last playoffs.

mrhockey193195 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-15-2014, 04:07 PM
  #55
GWOW
Two Pucks, One Cup
 
GWOW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Country: United States
Posts: 15,501
vCash: 500
In his seven postseasons, Lundqvist finish top-5 in postseason GAA three times.

In four of his seven postseasons (2007, 2011, 2012, 2013) he finished top-5 in SVPCT.


Lundqvist's career in the first round: 20-18
Lundqvist's career after the first round: 10-19

His career SVPCT/GAA for the postseason is .920/2.28. In his 29 games beyond the 2nd round, eight of those games his SVPCT was below .900, while 15 were above .920. The other six were between .900 and .919

GWOW is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-15-2014, 04:08 PM
  #56
Bob Richards
Global Moderator
Mr. Mojo Risin'
 
Bob Richards's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Jersey
Country: United States
Posts: 47,165
vCash: 50
The two games that stick out to me in his playoff career are:

Game 5 vs. NJ in 2012

Game 2 vs. Washington in 2013. Might have been the single best game I have ever seen him play and we still lost.

Those are just extremes but overall I think his play has been good.

__________________
"New day, new hope. Richards Buyout 2014". -Ail
Bob Richards is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-15-2014, 04:10 PM
  #57
Bleed Ranger Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 15,112
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crease View Post
Yep. This is the type of thing that will be scrutinized when his playing career is over and we're trying to place him properly among all-time greats. His regular season resume is up there with the best of the best. But he's not going to have a chance to displace guys like Hasek, Roy, Dryden, Brodeur and other Top-10 guys unless he has playoff runs like those goalies did. Roy in '86 and '93. Dryden in '71. Brodeur in '07. Hasek in '99. Those performances carry significant weight in their all-time ranking. And it's not like carrying your team on your back is reserved for only the greatest of them all. Belfour, Cujo, Kolzig stole series. Giguere, Quick, Richter stole series. Cam Ward stole a series.

No doubt Lundqvist is better than those last few guys. The question is whether he's going to do something in the playoffs that puts him on Mt. Vezina.
Name one - just to keep it in the family of the Rangers.

I think this is really subjective -- not only the who should be beating who argument, but also placing the entire outcome of single series on a goaltender.

Bleed Ranger Blue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-15-2014, 04:12 PM
  #58
Richter Scale
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 1,079
vCash: 500
Posted in the middle of last year's playoffs:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Originally Posted by Richter Scale
Quote:
Originally Posted by Originally Posted by NYR Boyler87
I would like to look at the teams those players have played for. Hasek played for the Wings. Roy the Habs and the Avs. Broduer won how many Cups? That helps pad stats.
No doubt that every single one of those teams were great - but they all also lived or died with their goaltenders. And by bringing this up, you are right that there are a lot of factors that can influence whether a team goes far in the playoffs or not. Just because you have a hot goalie, doesn't mean the team is going to make a deep playoff run if the rest team in front of them isn't up to snuff.

But the one constant is that if you don't have a goalie that has elevated their game come playoff time, you generally won't be winning a Cup.

In the seasons that the Red Wings had subpar playoff goaltending, they didn't win cups. Same goes for the Devils and the Avs.

- If Brodeur doesn't play out of his mind in the playoffs, there is no way the Devils have all of those cups.

- If the Wings don't get career performances from Mike Vernon in 96-97 (.927 SV % and 1.76 GAA), Chris Osgood in 97-98 (.918 SV % and 2.12 GAA), and Ozzy again in 07-08 (0.930 SV %, 1.55 GAA) they don't win any of those cups.

- If Hasek doesn't become a brick wall, there is no way the Sabres make it to the Stanley Cup Finals against the Stars. On the Wings' most recent Cup win, Hasek actually got pulled in the playoffs, and Ozzy played amazingly for them for the remainder of the playoffs (.930 SV%, 1.55 GAA). That doesn't happen, the Wings don't win the cup in 07-08.

- In the seasons that Roy gave up bad goals in the late 90s (often against the Wings) in the playoffs, the Avs got knocked out. Those were amazing Avs teams.

Did it generally help that those goalies had good teams in front of them? Sure. But in the years that those goalies didn't put up stunning performances in the playoffs or gave up a few too many softies, their team didn't win the cup. They were still on great teams those years that they lost. That didn't change.

Of course, I'd agree the Rangers aren't on those teams' levels - at least not that we've been shown so far this year - but that just emphasizes the point all the more; in order for them to succeed, Hank needs to play lights out.


Some #s to add to the food for thought (and because I'm a stats nerd)...

Stats for the goalies of the teams you brought up in the years they won the cup compared to career #s (+ Dom's 98-99 run):

Goalie Team Season Career SV % Career GAA PO SV % PO GAA
Patrick Roy Canadiens 85-86 0.910 2.54 N/A 1.93
Canadiens 92-93 0.910 2.54 0.929 2.13
Avalanche 95-96 0.910 2.54 0.921 2.10
Avalanche 00-01 0.910 2.54 0.934 1.70
Mike Vernon Red Wings 96-97 0.890 2.98 0.927 1.76
Chris Osgood Red Wings 97-98 0.905 2.49 0.918 2.12
Red Wings 07-08 0.905 2.49 0.930 1.55
Dominik Hasek Sabres 98-99 0.922 2.20 0.939 1.77
Red Wings 01-02 0.922 2.20 0.920 1.86
Martin Brodeur Devils 94-95 0.913 2.23 0.927 1.67
Devils 99-00 0.913 2.23 0.927 1.61
Devils 02-03 0.913 2.23 0.934 1.65


The SC winners since 2000:

Team Goalie Season Career SV % Career GAA PO SV % PO GAA
LA Kings Jonathan Quick 11-12 0.915 2.32 0.946 1.41
Boston Bruins Tim Thomas 10-11 0.921 2.48 0.940 1.98
Chicago Blackhawks Antti Niemi 09-10 0.917 2.34 0.910 2.63
Pittsburgh Penguins Marc-Andre Fleury 08-09 0.910 2.66 0.908 2.61
Detroit Red Wings Chris Osgood 07-08 0.905 2.49 0.930 1.55
Anaheim Ducks J.S. Giguere 06-07 0.913 2.53 0.922 1.97
Carolina Hurricanes Cam Ward 05-06 0.910 2.74 0.920 2.14
Tampa Bay Lightning Nikolai Khabibulin 03-04 0.908 2.72 0.933 1.71
New Jersey Devils Martin Brodeur 02-03 0.913 2.23 0.934 1.65
Detroit Red Wings Dominik Hasek 01-02 0.922 2.20 0.920 1.86
Colorado Avalanche Patrick Roy 00-01 0.910 2.54 0.934 1.70


The only two teams to win in that time with goalies not beating their career (or season #s) were the 08-09 Penguins and the 09-10 Blackhawks. All the others elevated their performances significantly.

I love Hank, and I think he's great. But it is really true that he, in general, needs to find another gear in the playoffs. It is not a coincidence that the one year he put up monster #s in the playoffs which were even better than his regular season performance (career avg and in that particular season) was a year in which the Rangers made their deepest run in over a decade - last year. It is also not a coincidence that the one series in which his play dropped off that year, was the series that the Rangers lost (0.906 SV %, 2.5 GAA). If the Rangers want to go far, he needs to be stellar.


Last edited by Richter Scale: 04-15-2014 at 04:17 PM.
Richter Scale is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-15-2014, 04:12 PM
  #59
Richter Scale
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 1,079
vCash: 500
Second wall of text comin' your way:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Originally Posted by Richter Scale
In the majority of the analyses that I do below, I do not include Pittsburgh or Chicago’s Stanley Cup winning teams, as they are teams that won the cup despite relatively poor performances from their goalies. In my opinion, they represent outliers / an exception to the rule that you simply need good goaltending to win a cup.


As with all stats, they don’t tell the full story. But here are some stats that support both sides of the argument:

Hank's Team Needs to Do Better In Front of Him:

Avg shots per game faced by goalies:

Team Goalie Season Avg Shots Per Game
NYR Henrik Lundqvist 12-13 36.2
11-12 29.6
LA Kings Jonathan Quick 11-12 28.4
Boston Bruins Tim Thomas 10-11 36
Detroit Red Wings Chris Osgood 07-08 24.2
Anaheim Ducks J.S. Giguere 06-07 27
Carolina Hurricanes Cam Ward 05-06 27.4
Tampa Bay Lightning Nikolai Khabibulin 03-04 27.7
New Jersey Devils Martin Brodeur 02-03 27.6
Detroit Red Wings Dominik Hasek 01-02 26.4
Colorado Avalanche Patrick Roy 00-01 28.8


When looking at last year, Hank supporters can’t really fall back on this argument. This is, however, clearly a problem with this year’s team so far in the playoffs.


# of Playoff Games in Which the Goalie’s Team Outshot Their Opponent vs. Opponent Outshooting the Goalie’s Team:

Team Goalie Season # of Games Team Outshot Opponent # of Games Opponent Outshot Team
NYR Henrik Lundqvist 12-13 4 5
11-12 11 9
LA Kings Jonathan Quick 11-12 12 7
Boston Bruins Tim Thomas 10-11 9 16
Chicago Blackhawks Antti Niemi 09-10 12 8
Pittsbugh Penguins Marc-Andre Fleury 08-09 17 7
Detroit Red Wings Chris Osgood 07-08 17 0
Anaheim Ducks J.S. Giguere 06-07 10 6
Carolina Hurricanes Cam Ward 05-06 11 10
Tampa Bay Lightning Nikolai Khabibulin 03-04 11 12
New Jersey Devils Martin Brodeur 02-03 15 6
Detroit Red Wings Dominik Hasek 01-02 16 7
Colorado Avalanche Patrick Roy 00-01 10 11

This chart is interesting – it clearly shows that compared to most championship teams in the last decade, the Rangers need to do a better job in this department. Only about 50 % of their games are they outshooting their opponent. This is an issue. In 7 of the last 11 Stanley Cup winners the winning team typically outshot their opponent. Obviously this doesn’t tell you whether they were quality chances or not – but I think it certainly indicates something; not necessarily a surprise that a championship team outshoots their opponent more often than not. The interesting thing in this chart is that there were so many – 4 out of 11 – where the winning team only outshot their opponent about 50 % of the time, or were actually outshot more often than not. Seems to show pretty clearly that a goalie elevating their performance can take a less talented/dominant team to the cup.


---

Hank needs to do a better job for his team to have a chance at the cup:

- In the last 29 playoff games Hank has played, he has a much worse win % both when his team is outshooting their opponent and when they are being outshot than goalies on championship teams.
- Perhaps most concerning is that when the NYR are outshooting their opponent, Hank is just 7-7 (0.500). Goalies on championship teams have a win percent almost 25 % higher than Hank’s in those types of games, at 0.739 (minus Pitt and Chi).
- Also of concern is that when NYR is outshot Hank is 7-8 (.467). Goalies on championship teams again have close to a 20 % higher win rate than Hank at 0.653. While the Rangers need to do a better job of not letting this happen as much as they do (per the charts in the above section), Hank needs to steal more of these types of games.

Both of those figures need to improve.

Here is the relevant chart (Record in games where team outshot opponent vs. got outshot by opponent):

Team Goalie Season Record in Games When Team Outshoots Opponent Win % in Those Games Record in Games When Team is Outshot by Opponent Win % in Those Games
NYR Henrik Lundqvist 12-13 2-2 .500 2-3 .400
11-12 5-6 .455 5-4 .556
Total 7-8 .467 7-7 .500
 
LA Kings Jonathan Quick 11-12 9-3 .750 6-1 .857
Boston Bruins Tim Thomas 10-11 4-5 .444 12-4 .750
Detroit Red Wings Chris Osgood 07-08 13-4 .765 N/A – 0 games N/A
Anaheim Ducks J.S. Giguere 06-07 8-2 .800 4-2 .667
Carolina Hurricanes Cam Ward 05-06 10-1 .909 4-6 .400
Tampa Bay Lightning Nikolai Khabibulin 03-04 7-4 .636 9-3 .750
New Jersey Devils Martin Brodeur 02-03 12-3 .800 2-4 .333
Detroit Red Wings Dominik Hasek 01-02 11-5 .688 5.2 .714
Colorado Avalanche Patrick Roy 00-01 8-2 .800 7-4 .636
Total 82-29 .739 49-26 .653


# of games giving up 3 goals or more:

Team Goalie Season # Games Giving Up 3 Goals or More # Games Keeping Opponent to 2 Goals or Less
NYR Henrik Lundqvist 12-13 5 4
11-12 8 12
LA Kings Jonathan Quick 11-12 3 17
Boston Bruins Tim Thomas 10-11 9 16
Detroit Red Wings Chris Osgood 07-08 5 13
Anaheim Ducks J.S. Giguere 06-07 5 12
Carolina Hurricanes Cam Ward 05-06 8 15
Tampa Bay Lightning Nikolai Khabibulin 03-04 8 15
New Jersey Devils Martin Brodeur 02-03 7 17
Detroit Red Wings Dominik Hasek 01-02 9 14
Colorado Avalanche Patrick Roy 00-01 8 15

In 3 rounds last year, Hank had just as many – or more – 3+ goal games as most of the winning goalies did in 4 rounds. Only 2 games into the second round this year, Hank is on pace to far exceed that # unless he steps it up.

Also of relevance is the distribution of these 3+ goal games: Are they evenly spread throughout 4 rounds, or clumped in a few rounds typically? I went through and looked at this – and the short answer is that they are typically spread out. The interesting tidbit is that on the championship winning teams, if their goalie gave up 3+ goals more than three times in a single round, that round went to 7 games all but one time (excluding Pitt and Chi) in the past 12 years. Of 11 times that a goalie on a championship team gave up 3+ goals in a single round, 10 of those series went to game 7.

Last year, Hank gave up 3+ goals in 2 games vs Ottawa, 2 games vs. Washington, and 4 games vs. New Jersey. A good argument could be made that he needs better goal support in the OTT and WSH series that year. But he absolutely didn’t help himself – or his team – in that New Jersey series by giving up 3+ goals in four out of six games. This year? We’ll see. 3 games in which he gave up 3+ goals against WSH – series goes to 7 games (shouldn’t be a surprise based upon the above stats). So far, 2 games against Boston. We’ll see how things go from here…

---

Last thing I wanted to examine was the goal support argument. So I looked at record and win % dependent upon goals allowed.

Record and Win % in 3+ Goal Games vs. 2 Goal Or Less Games:

Team Goalie Season Record in 3+ Goal Games Win % in 3+ Goal Games Record in 2 Goal or Less Games Win % in 2 Goal or Less Games
NYR Henrik Lundqvist 12-13 2-3 .400 2-2 .500
11-12 0-8 0.000 10-2 .833
Total 2-11 .154 12-4 .750
LA Kings Jonathan Quick 11-12 0-3 0.000 16-1 .941
Boston Bruins Tim Thomas 10-11 4-5 .444 12-4 .750
Detroit Red Wings Chris Osgood 07-08 2-3 .400 12-1 .923
Anaheim Ducks J.S. Giguere 06-07 3-2 .600 10-2 .833
Carolina Hurricanes Cam Ward 05-06 3-5 .375 13-2 .867
Tampa Bay Lightning Nikolai Khabibulin 03-04 1-7 .125 15-0 1.000
New Jersey Devils Martin Brodeur 02-03 1-6 .143 15-2 .882
Detroit Red Wings Dominik Hasek 01-02 3-6 .333 13-1 .929
Colorado Avalanche Patrick Roy 00-01 4-4 .500 12-3 .800
Total 21-46 .313 123-16 .885


As I said earlier: It is a fact of life that scoring declines and games tighten up in the playoffs. In order for your team to have a good shot at winning the game, your goalie typically needs to keep the opposition to 2 goals or less.

Goal support was a fine argument to make about last year’s team – they were awful in this regard. That they could not win even once in the 8 games Hank gave up 3+ goals is pretty sad. But despite this, they did win most of the games he kept the opponent to less than 3 goals. This year, however, Hank has gotten that goal support to a degree (though it is an admittedly small sample size). The team needs to do a better job this year of winning the games he keeps the opponent to 2 goals or less, but they’ve also bailed him out of just as many games in which he gave up 3+ goals.

---

Seems to me from all of that information that there isn’t one clear cut answer. Hank needs to be better, but so does the team in front of him. At the end of the day – both extremes in this argument seem to be wrong. Hank needs a stronger team (whether that is personnel or effort is up for debate) in front of him. But the team also needs Hank to do better come playoff time. Those on the side of the argument who refuse to allow any blame to be laid at Hank’s feet miss the point many reasonable posters are making: It isn’t that he is a bad goalie. It is that he simply needs to be better and more consistent when it comes to the playoffs. Maintaining his regular season stats aren’t going to be enough to win a cup. He needs to find another level in the playoffs.


Last edited by Richter Scale: 04-15-2014 at 04:19 PM.
Richter Scale is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-15-2014, 04:18 PM
  #60
haveandare
Registered User
 
haveandare's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 6,485
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by GWOW View Post
Lundqvist has never beaten a team he wasnt supposed to beat, unless you want to count the Thrashers.

Strange. Lots of mediocre teams with no-name goalies have upset Cup favorites in early rounds.
Can't you say that the Rangers have never (since Hank) beaten a team that they weren't supposed to beat?

Hank has been the reason they won some series that they were supposed to, because the scoring was so poor that he had to work double time to keep the team alive.

I don't get why his playoff pedigree is being questioned, honestly. We've seen the same problem screw this team for multiple postseasons, and it hasn't been goaltending.

haveandare is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-15-2014, 04:19 PM
  #61
GWOW
Two Pucks, One Cup
 
GWOW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Country: United States
Posts: 15,501
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Callahan Auto View Post
Neither has Tuuka Rask, MAF, etc. Since 2011:

1-2 against teams with a higher seed
2-1 against teams with a lower seed

I'm sure you'd find pretty similar records for most goalies unless they were on a low seed that was actually better than their regular season record (like LA two seasons ago).
Its not necessarily about seeding. Its about beating a team nobody expected you to beat.

Every series the Rangers were expected to lose, they lost. They've also list series they were expected to win.


2006 Devils, Sabres, Penguins, 2010-11 Caps, 2013 Bruins. Virtually everyone expected the Rangers to lose those series, and they did.

Several goalies on mediocre teams have pulled massive upsets. Healey in 1993 was a massive upset. Irbe in 1994 was a massive upset. Beezer in 1986 was a massive upset. Giguere in 2003, Roloson in 2006, Halak in 2010, Beezer in 1996, Casey in 1991 etc etc.

GWOW is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-15-2014, 04:23 PM
  #62
Crease
Registered User
 
Crease's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 9,833
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleed Ranger Blue View Post
Name one - just to keep it in the family of the Rangers.

I think this is really subjective -- not only the who should be beating who argument, but also placing the entire outcome of single series on a goaltender.
Richter stole the '97 ECSF against the Devils. Rangers were the #5 seed. Devils the #1 seed.

Game 2: 2-0 W, 32/32, Outshot 32-21
Game 3: 3-2 W, 33/35, Outshot 35-26
Game 4: 3-0 W, 35/35, Outshot 35-27
Game 5: 2-1 W, 46/47, Outshot 47-31


Last edited by Crease: 04-15-2014 at 04:29 PM.
Crease is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-15-2014, 04:30 PM
  #63
GWOW
Two Pucks, One Cup
 
GWOW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Country: United States
Posts: 15,501
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleed Ranger Blue View Post
Name one - just to keep it in the family of the Rangers.

I think this is really subjective -- not only the who should be beating who argument, but also placing the entire outcome of single series on a goaltender.
He had a .965 save percentage and two shutouts in the1997 Devils series. The Rangers finished 18 points behind the Devils that season, and they scored 10 goals in a series they won in five games.

GWOW is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-15-2014, 04:36 PM
  #64
GWOW
Two Pucks, One Cup
 
GWOW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Country: United States
Posts: 15,501
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by haveandare View Post
Can't you say that the Rangers have never (since Hank) beaten a team that they weren't supposed to beat?

Hank has been the reason they won some series that they were supposed to, because the scoring was so poor that he had to work double time to keep the team alive.

I don't get why his playoff pedigree is being questioned, honestly. We've seen the same problem screw this team for multiple postseasons, and it hasn't been goaltending.
Its being questioned because he's the highest paid goalie in the league who has yet to reach a SCF.

People can argue aaasaaaassalllll day about it, but the truth (sad or not) is that 99.9 percent of all great players are measured by postseasons/championships.

Lundqvist has been in the league since 2006. This is his ninth shot at a Stanley Cup. Until he gets there - regardless of the team in front of him - he will have to deal with two different legacies.

Hell. Peyton Manning has won a SB, and he still gets **** on for his postseason record.

GWOW is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-15-2014, 04:38 PM
  #65
Bleed Ranger Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 15,112
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by GWOW View Post
He had a .965 save percentage and two shutouts in the1997 Devils series. The Rangers finished 18 points behind the Devils that season, and they scored 10 goals in a series they won in five games.
Luckily Lundqvist has potentially 8 post-seasons left.

Considering you just cherry picked a week in Richter's 15 year career, maybe we should wait until Lundqvist's career is done before this weird subjective stuff keeps coming up.

Bleed Ranger Blue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-15-2014, 04:45 PM
  #66
GWOW
Two Pucks, One Cup
 
GWOW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Country: United States
Posts: 15,501
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Richter Scale View Post
Second wall of text comin' your way:
Outstanding work.

Its a symbiotic relationship. The Rangers need Lundqvist as much as Lundqvist needs the Rangers.

Its not like 1999 with Hasek. It's like 1993 with Roy. Roy essentially promised to keep the game tied long enough for his skaters to score OT goals.

Roy, Hasek and Brodeur were devastating with a one-goal lead. Quick was like that in 2012. I'd like to see Henrik do so against the better teams in the postseason. At least with more consistency.

GWOW is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-15-2014, 04:47 PM
  #67
GWOW
Two Pucks, One Cup
 
GWOW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Country: United States
Posts: 15,501
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleed Ranger Blue View Post
Luckily Lundqvist has potentially 8 post-seasons left.

Considering you just cherry picked a week in Richter's 15 year career, maybe we should wait until Lundqvist's career is done before this weird subjective stuff keeps coming up.
You asked and you received, and now you get defensive.

Im sorry you were in Tibet in May of 1997.

GWOW is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-15-2014, 04:52 PM
  #68
Bleed Ranger Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 15,112
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by GWOW View Post
You asked and you received, and now you get defensive.

Im sorry you were in Tibet in May of 1997.
Im not getting defensive - it was a good reference, but that 2nd round matchup in '97 wont stop me from thinking your position is quite unreasonable.

You are simultaneously doing a great disservice to Lundqvist's career while virtually ignoring the inadequate rosters playing in front of him.

Bleed Ranger Blue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-15-2014, 04:54 PM
  #69
GWOW
Two Pucks, One Cup
 
GWOW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Country: United States
Posts: 15,501
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleed Ranger Blue View Post
Name one - just to keep it in the family of the Rangers.

I think this is really subjective -- not only the who should be beating who argument, but also placing the entire outcome of single series on a goaltender.
You have every right to think the way you do. I get it.....you cant win games without goals being scored. Fine.

Some goalies have relied less on their skaters than others. As much as you'd like to, you're not going to rewrite history. We've been arguing this for a few seasons now, and its obvious you feel like Lundqvist has gotten a raw deal.

I dont think he has.

My question has: worse goalies with worse skaters have advanced deeper than any of the 2006-2013 Rangers.

Why?

GWOW is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-15-2014, 04:57 PM
  #70
Bleed Ranger Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 15,112
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by GWOW View Post
You have every right to think the way you do. I get it.....you cant win games without goals being scored. Fine.

Some goalies have relied less on their skaters than others. As much as you'd like to, you're not going to rewrite history. We've been arguing this for a few seasons now, and its obvious you feel like Lundqvist has gotten a raw deal.

I dont think he has.

My question has: worse goalies with worse skaters have advanced deeper than any of the 2006-2013 Rangers.

Why?
Could be anything.

But in no cases - none at all - not even Hasek in 1999, was it 100% because of the goaltender.

Bleed Ranger Blue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-15-2014, 04:58 PM
  #71
GWOW
Two Pucks, One Cup
 
GWOW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Country: United States
Posts: 15,501
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleed Ranger Blue View Post
Im not getting defensive - it was a good reference, but that 2nd round matchup in '97 wont stop me from thinking your position is quite unreasonable.

You are simultaneously doing a great disservice to Lundqvist's career while virtually ignoring the inadequate rosters playing in front of him.
You think Im unreasonable for thinking Lundqvist can play better?

I thought the same in December, everybody went into in uproar, then three months later Lundqvist publicly admits he could have been better.

I don't want him traded. I want him to put the playoff performance debate to bed.

GWOW is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-15-2014, 05:06 PM
  #72
mrhockey193195
Registered User
 
mrhockey193195's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 3,540
vCash: 500
Are we not counting the Caps last year as a team that we "weren't supposed to beat"? Or Hank's back-to-back shutouts (especially the shutout in game 6) to help the team win the series as "taking over a series"?

mrhockey193195 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-15-2014, 05:23 PM
  #73
richardsequalscup*
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 1,329
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crease View Post
In your eyes, has he done enough in the NHL Playoffs up until this point to be considered a "money" player yet?
Lundqvist has never had one team in his career in the playoffs that could actually score goals. When he does, he won't lose a series.

richardsequalscup* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-15-2014, 05:29 PM
  #74
mike14
Registered User
 
mike14's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Melbourne
Country: Australia
Posts: 4,405
vCash: 500
I'd say Lundqvist's play this season pretty much sums up his playoff career. He's been good, at times lights out, but in every series there have been those goals where you've been left thinking "that kind of shot never got past him in the regular season before".

mike14 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-15-2014, 07:43 PM
  #75
Bleed Ranger Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 15,112
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by mike14 View Post
I'd say Lundqvist's play this season pretty much sums up his playoff career. He's been good, at times lights out, but in every series there have been those goals where you've been left thinking "that kind of shot never got past him in the regular season before".
Happens to every goalie at some point, even in the playoffs. Brodeur and Roy not only gave up bad goals, but clownishly bad ones. They seem to get remembered less when theres a team in front that could perform and mitigate mistakes.

Bleed Ranger Blue 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 06:24 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.