Still at the end of the day you need those superstar player to lead you up front and I am not sure Richards and/or Gaborik are enough to qualify as that(same deal with St Louis)
I do think it would be a stretch for the Rangers to get to the finals this year. D is inexperienced and they still need more scoring and depth up front.
The big question for me is can Richards step up his game or not. While I think he is a great offensive talent I don't think the Rangers have the best system to get maximum use out of it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by PromNite
That's nice he had a great run 8 years ago on a team that was built around using his(as well as other high scoring players of that season) skill to it's fullest.
Wow, I've never seen so many cocky and stuck up fans in one thread. I mean really Predicting a first round upset of the Rangers when you don't even know who they are playing and other fans saying the Rangers are nothing special even though they just clinched the top seed in the East and are in the battle for the Presidents' Trophy. Just give credit where credit is due, they had to do something right to get to where they are.
Was it a fluke our team dominated your Flyers and swept them?
Take out your team's most important player for those games. Then take out Briere and JVR for 2 or 3 of those games. Not to mention all the other injuries the Flyers have had during those matchups and Bryzgalov didn't find himself yet. Sure it sounds like a lot of excuses, but they are legitimate.
While Staal was a big loss, you cannot replace the void of Chris Pronger who makes the Flyers dramatically better. Grossman also hasn't played once vs. the Rangers.
That's nice he had a great run 8 years ago on a team that was built around using his(as well as other high scoring players of that season) skill to it's fullest.
Point is, he's got a history of stepping his game up in the playoffs.
He's a vet on a young team and will have more insight into what it takes to win in the playoffs than anyone on the Rangers roster.
I'm glad you think it's "nice" that the Rangers have a Conn Smythe winning star on the roster. And they are currently built very much like the '04 Bolts team. Young stars, hard working vets, a hard-nosed coach, and a badass goaltender.
Point is, he's got a history of stepping his game up in the playoffs.
He's a vet on a young team and will have more insight into what it takes to win in the playoffs than anyone on the Rangers roster.
I'm glad you think it's "nice" that the Rangers have a Conn Smythe winning star on the roster. And they are currently built very much like the '04 Bolts team. Young stars, hard working vets, a hard-nosed coach, and a badass goaltender.
B Richards ,aka Rodney Dangerfield, guy doesn't get nearly the amount of respect that he deserves
I could be wrong but when Tampa won the cup didn't St Louis win the scoring title that season? Beyond that didn't that have 2 other top 10 scorers
Gaborik and Richards are analogous to St Louis, Richards and Lecavalier. Tampa had one more big scorer, but in terms of style I see a lot of similarities. Tortorella has them playing a tight defensive game, cloggin up the neutral zone and blocking shots, with a few top scoring threats and great goaltending on the back end. People think of the big scorers when Tampa made their run, but it was also the product of a similar tight checking system to what the Rangers have been playing.
Take out your team's most important player for those games. Then take out Briere and JVR for 2 or 3 of those games. Not to mention all the other injuries the Flyers have had during those matchups and Bryzgalov didn't find himself yet. Sure it sounds like a lot of excuses, but they are legitimate.
While Staal was a big loss, you cannot replace the void of Chris Pronger who makes the Flyers dramatically better. Grossman also hasn't played once vs. the Rangers.
No doubt, the Flyers are the better hockey team and showed why last night.
I'm glad you think it's "nice" that the Rangers have a Conn Smythe winning star on the roster. And they are currently built very much like the '04 Bolts team. Young stars, hard working vets, a hard-nosed coach, and a badass goaltender.
Tampa was built on a high octane offense(at least for 2004). St Louis won the Art Ross that season, Stillman and Richards were also top 10 in scoring. Beyond that they also had Vinny on the Second line to provide secondary scoring.
As it stands now the Rangers don't have St Louis, while Richards is not on par with what he did in that season(ie top 10 scorer). You can probably say Gaborik might be able to provide the Vinny secondary offense and lets say Richards does step up to be what he was 8 years ago they still lack the St Louis type guy(ie Richards linemate). The Rangers also lack the Dan Boyle(unless somehow Del Zotto can step up his game)
Quote:
Originally Posted by MojoJojo
Gaborik and Richards are analogous to St Louis, Richards and Lecavalier. Tampa had one more big scorer, but in terms of style I see a lot of similarities.
I think having the leading scorer(or one of the top scorers) in the league is a big deal personally. To say not having that top scoring linemate for your top center somehow isn't that big a deal is laughable. As I said above I do think Richards is an offensive talent but the rangers are not the best system(unlike the 2004 Lightening) to maximize his skills.
Take out your team's most important player for those games. Then take out Briere and JVR for 2 or 3 of those games. Not to mention all the other injuries the Flyers have had during those matchups and Bryzgalov didn't find himself yet. Sure it sounds like a lot of excuses, but they are legitimate.
While Staal was a big loss, you cannot replace the void of Chris Pronger who makes the Flyers dramatically better. Grossman also hasn't played once vs. the Rangers.
Still at the end of the day you need those superstar player to lead you up front and I am not sure Richards and/or Gaborik are enough to qualify as that(same deal with St Louis)
Boston might be the exception because they have 3 solid lines that can score, I don't see the Rangers having that level of offense. there is also that Chara guy on the blueline who is a game changer. Anaheim might be another example that had a Superstar defenseman(actually 2) and a scoring by committee offense.
I don't think there's that much pressure on them at all, this isn't 1994 when Neil Smith basically took a gamble to grab the cup that year. The next few years will be pretty exciting when Kreider, Erixon and Miller come on board. I sure as hell didn't think we would clinch the east the season, which was a pleasant surprise. The general consensus amongst Ranger fans is the ECF or 2nd round, anything beyond that is a bonus.
Quote:
Originally Posted by duffy9748
Take out your team's most important player for those games. Then take out Briere and JVR for 2 or 3 of those games. Not to mention all the other injuries the Flyers have had during those matchups and Bryzgalov didn't find himself yet. Sure it sounds like a lot of excuses, but they are legitimate.
While Staal was a big loss, you cannot replace the void of Chris Pronger who makes the Flyers dramatically better. Grossman also hasn't played once vs. the Rangers.
Great...Pronger might never play another game in the NHL so that point is completely moot.
If you want to talk about injuries. Sauer is out for the year. Imagine him on our bottom pair. He was our #3 last season and would crack the top 4 on almost any team in the NHL.
Hagelin who is now our top lw also didn't play against you guys at the start of the year along with Staal.
You can make excuses all day long, fact is, your team lost every game against the Rangers this year and to use injuries as an excuse, especially Prongers is just pathetic.
Was it a fluke our team dominated your Flyers and swept them?
Big whoop, so did the Habs a few years ago, and how did our playoff series against them end up again? Find out please, i'll be here waiting.
Playing regular season, and playing under the gun are two different games.
I do think the path for them will be tough though. Not in terms of opponents really.
The Rangers are #1 in the conference not because of pure skill, I'm not saying they aren't skilled as a team but they are no where near the most skilled team in the conference (Penguins..). The Rangers are in first because Tortorella gets them to give it their all every single game, day in and day out. They are by far the most consistent team in the NHL.
I'm not sure if they have another level to push it to come playoff time, that does remain to be seen. If they can't find another level (as in, if they've already showed us what their playoff hockey is about) I don't think they'll make it to the SCF. Teams that go far in the playoffs need to elevate their games.
The only other real issue is the wear and tear playing tight games will have on them. Their offense has picked up lately so it may not be a problem but having to win every game 1-0 or 2-1, etc. takes alot out of you mentally. It's hard to win 16 tight games, you need some easy ones.
I'd put my money on them because like I said, they are the most consistent team in the NHL. The ball is in other team's court IMO though. We've already seen the Rangers peak and its pretty darn good.. I'm not sure we've seen the Penguins, Flyers, Bruins or Devils peak (the other teams I think have a shot, in that order..).
I agree. Rangers are the best all-around team in the east IMO. Hard to not like the Penguins, either, the way they're playing.
For people saying Flyers are in the picture: I doubt it - especially if they draw Pittsburgh in the first round. Their 0-6 record against the Rangers is alarming. Not to mention Bryzgalov is as streaky a goaltender as you will ever see.
I just don't see a cup winner when i see the Rangers play. Not dynamic enough offensively, relies heavily on their goalie, and relatively inexperienced. I honestly think the Pens or Bruins would wreck them in a playoff series. I could see them losing to Washington in the first round too.
I do think the path for them will be tough though. Not in terms of opponents really.
The Rangers are #1 in the conference not because of pure skill, I'm not saying they aren't skilled as a team but they are no where near the most skilled team in the conference (Penguins..). The Rangers are in first because Tortorella gets them to give it their all every single game, day in and day out. They are by far the most consistent team in the NHL.
I'm not sure if they have another level to push it to come playoff time, that does remain to be seen. If they can't find another level (as in, if they've already showed us what their playoff hockey is about) I don't think they'll make it to the SCF. Teams that go far in the playoffs need to elevate their games.
The only other real issue is the wear and tear playing tight games will have on them. Their offense has picked up lately so it may not be a problem but having to win every game 1-0 or 2-1, etc. takes alot out of you mentally. It's hard to win 16 tight games, you need some easy ones.
I'd put my money on them because like I said, they are the most consistent team in the NHL. The ball is in other team's court IMO though. We've already seen the Rangers peak and its pretty darn good.. I'm not sure we've seen the Penguins, Flyers, Bruins or Devils peak (the other teams I think have a shot, in that order..).
Well said, and I agree 100%. I'm curious to see how we're going to do, to be honest. Let's see who the Rangers play first as well.
Regardless of who: the regular season means nothing come playoff time.
The big question for me is can Richards step up his game or not. While I think he is a great offensive talent I don't think the Rangers have the best system to get maximum use out of it.
That's nice he had a great run 8 years ago on a team that was built around using his(as well as other high scoring players of that season) skill to it's fullest.
You have to realize whos coaching richards now, torts, same coach as richards conn smythe year. If theres one coach who knows how to get the most out of richards its torts. Theres no doubt IMO richards can still step up his game, hes a big game player.
