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

Rangers at Lightning 11/25/13

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
11-25-2013, 11:19 PM
  #151
Dr. Ogrodnick
Registered User
 
Dr. Ogrodnick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,549
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by chosen View Post
Right. Bishop didn't play well. Sure.

Some of you act like the Rangers losing a road game after winning a bunch of them in a row is an indictment of the team. Some of you would feel likewise if they won 20 in a row and had the audacity to lose a game.
How many tough saves did (insert goalie here) have to make? 2? Maybe 3? My concern is the Rangers continued inability to score, no matter who the goalie is. If they continue to score 1 goal or less more than 40% of the time like they have done so far this season, then they probably won't make the playoffs.

Dr. Ogrodnick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-25-2013, 11:28 PM
  #152
chosen
Registered User
 
chosen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 5,715
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr. Ogrodnick View Post
I for one like a little production from my 7.8 million per season player, but I'm weird that way.
So if a guy is standing near the net and a puck bounces in off him and he is credited with a goal and he did zero the rest of the game, would your analysis determine that he had a better game than Nash did tonight?

The guy is coming back from a concussion. Did you expect a barrage of goals right away?

I know everyone here loves Kreider, but he hasn't exactly been lighting the lamp this year, but we cut him slack because we understand he is playing well. Nash was far better than Kreider tonight, no matter what set of metrics you want to use, not to mention the naked eye test.

Salary isn't the issue. How one plays is what matters, and no matter how you want to spin it, the Rangers were outplayed in every phase of the game. It happens. A loss doesn't always necessitate the naming of a goat. Sometimes, you just lose a game and get outplayed.

When the Rangers win, they played great. When they lose, they were terrible. Never mind that there was another team on the ice. They are totally irrelevant. It's all about the guys we root for.

chosen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-25-2013, 11:33 PM
  #153
SnowblindNYR
Registered User
 
SnowblindNYR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Posts: 18,407
vCash: 500
The Rangers are shooting at a 6.25% clip. Anyone know the record low?

SnowblindNYR is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
11-25-2013, 11:34 PM
  #154
chosen
Registered User
 
chosen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 5,715
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr. Ogrodnick View Post
How many tough saves did (insert goalie here) have to make? 2? Maybe 3? My concern is the Rangers continued inability to score, no matter who the goalie is. If they continue to score 1 goal or less more than 40% of the time like they have done so far this season, then they probably won't make the playoffs.
Lots of tough saves, actually. This includes putting himself in the right position before the shot was on its way. Positioning is more important than looking good when making a save.

If Lundqvist had played Bishop's game, people would be creaming their pants and calling him the king.

When you make 37 saves and give up zero goals you played a heckuva game, and most of the shots were not from a distance or bad angle. There was often chaos in front of his net.

chosen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-25-2013, 11:36 PM
  #155
Riche16
McCready guitar god
 
Riche16's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: FL
Country: United States
Posts: 3,739
vCash: 500
Egg laid

Riche16 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-25-2013, 11:36 PM
  #156
Dr. Ogrodnick
Registered User
 
Dr. Ogrodnick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,549
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by chosen View Post
So if a guy is standing near the net and a puck bounces in off him and he is credited with a goal and he did zero the rest of the game, would your analysis determine that he had a better game than Nash did tonight?

The guy is coming back from a concussion. Did you expect a barrage of goals right away?

I know everyone here loves Kreider, but he hasn't exactly been lighting the lamp this year, but we cut him slack because we understand he is playing well. Nash was far better than Kreider tonight, no matter what set of metrics you want to use, not to mention the naked eye test.

Salary isn't the issue. How one plays is what matters, and no matter how you want to spin it, the Rangers were outplayed in every phase of the game. It happens. A loss doesn't always necessitate the naming of a goat. Sometimes, you just lose a game and get outplayed.

When the Rangers win, they played great. When they lose, they were terrible. Never mind that there was another team on the ice. They are totally irrelevant. It's all about the guys we root for.
Nash has 2 goals in his last 22 games played for the Rangers, I believe. That's not very good any way you slice it, even with slack being cut for the recent concussion.

In a salary capped league, salary versus production is always an issue.

The Rangers are terrible at scoring goals. It reared its ugly head again tonight. As long as it remains a problem this team will be mired in .500 mediocrity and will struggle to make the playoffs.

Dr. Ogrodnick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-25-2013, 11:43 PM
  #157
Dactyl
💙NASH💙
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: NY
Country: United States
Posts: 10,065
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr. Ogrodnick View Post
Nash has 2 goals in his last 22 games played for the Rangers, I believe. That's not very good any way you slice it, even with slack being cut for the recent concussion.

In a salary capped league, salary versus production is always an issue.

The Rangers are terrible at scoring goals. It reared its ugly head again tonight. As long as it remains a problem this team will be mired in .500 mediocrity and will struggle to make the playoffs.
cherry picking stats is fun.

in his first season as a ranger he was on pace for roughly 40 goals and 40 assists.

Dactyl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-25-2013, 11:43 PM
  #158
Dr. Ogrodnick
Registered User
 
Dr. Ogrodnick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,549
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by chosen View Post
Lots of tough saves, actually. This includes putting himself in the right position before the shot was on its way. Positioning is more important than looking good when making a save.

If Lundqvist had played Bishop's game, people would be creaming their pants and calling him the king.

When you make 37 saves and give up zero goals you played a heckuva game, and most of the shots were not from a distance or bad angle. There was often chaos in front of his net.
If Lundqvist got to play the Rangers tonight, he would have played Bishop's game. That's the problem, it doesn't matter who the opposing goalie is, the Rangers make him look better than he is. The Rangers have the lowest shooting percentage in the league and are tied for the second lowest goals per game. They are simply too terrible at goal scoring to be the barometer for any goalie's hotness. Bishop could have left the ice to get a cheeseburger and the chances were greater that the Rangers would have found a way to hit him in the chest as he applied ketchup out in the concourse than they were that they would score on the empty net.

Dr. Ogrodnick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-25-2013, 11:44 PM
  #159
Dr. Ogrodnick
Registered User
 
Dr. Ogrodnick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,549
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dactyl View Post
cherry picking stats is fun.

in his first season as a ranger he was on pacs for roughly 40 goals and 40 assists.
So he's in rapid decline? that sucks.

Dr. Ogrodnick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-25-2013, 11:44 PM
  #160
JCrusher*
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 4,313
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by chosen View Post
So if a guy is standing near the net and a puck bounces in off him and he is credited with a goal and he did zero the rest of the game, would your analysis determine that he had a better game than Nash did tonight?

The guy is coming back from a concussion. Did you expect a barrage of goals right away?

I know everyone here loves Kreider, but he hasn't exactly been lighting the lamp this year, but we cut him slack because we understand he is playing well. Nash was far better than Kreider tonight, no matter what set of metrics you want to use, not to mention the naked eye test.

Salary isn't the issue. How one plays is what matters, and no matter how you want to spin it, the Rangers were outplayed in every phase of the game. It happens. A loss doesn't always necessitate the naming of a goat. Sometimes, you just lose a game and get outplayed.

When the Rangers win, they played great. When they lose, they were terrible. Never mind that there was another team on the ice. They are totally irrelevant. It's all about the guys we root for.

I thought both nash and kreider were two of the few who played pretty well. The problem is that stepan callahn and richards have all been in a funk the last 5-6 games

JCrusher* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-25-2013, 11:52 PM
  #161
SnowblindNYR
Registered User
 
SnowblindNYR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Posts: 18,407
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr. Ogrodnick View Post
If Lundqvist got to play the Rangers tonight, he would have played Bishop's game. That's the problem, it doesn't matter who the opposing goalie is, the Rangers make him look better than he is. The Rangers have the lowest shooting percentage in the league and are tied for the second lowest goals per game. They are simply too terrible at goal scoring to be the barometer for any goalie's hotness. Bishop could have left the ice to get a cheeseburger and the chances were greater that the Rangers would have found a way to hit him in the chest as he applied ketchup out in the concourse than they were that they would score on the empty net.
That's hilarious considering the first goal he gave up. We had plenty of chances tougher than that that Bishop stopped.

SnowblindNYR is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
11-25-2013, 11:55 PM
  #162
Dr. Ogrodnick
Registered User
 
Dr. Ogrodnick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,549
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SnowblindNYR View Post
That's hilarious considering the first goal he gave up. We had plenty of chances tougher than that that Bishop stopped.
2-3 hardly counts as plenty, and the Rangers certainly don't score on that chance on any goalie.

Dr. Ogrodnick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-26-2013, 12:02 AM
  #163
Florida Ranger
Bring back Torts!
 
Florida Ranger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Tampa, FLA
Country: United States
Posts: 6,004
vCash: 500
Just got back from the game. The effort was surely there, but Lundqvist didn't play his best game. Obviously a difference maker, plus Bishop made a few tough saves and came up big when he had to. The team has a problem getting in high scoring areas.

What it comes down to is that the Lightning were flat out the better team.

We lost. Move on to the next one.

Florida Ranger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-26-2013, 12:05 AM
  #164
Championship*
#Joel&Ellie
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 3,499
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Florida Ranger View Post
Just got back from the game. The effort was surely there, but Lundqvist didn't play his best game. Obviously a difference maker, plus Bishop made a few tough saves and came up big when he had to. The team has a problem getting in high scoring areas.

What it comes down to is that the Lightning were flat out the better team.

We lost. Move on to the next one.
Seems to be the case when the Rangers play a team that's better than them. They can't beat the good teams in the league consistently. Mediocre. Gross.

Championship* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-26-2013, 12:07 AM
  #165
SnowblindNYR
Registered User
 
SnowblindNYR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Posts: 18,407
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr. Ogrodnick View Post
2-3 hardly counts as plenty, and the Rangers certainly don't score on that chance on any goalie.
That's ridiculous. We had a bunch of great chances. We just didn't bury them like all season. Even more ridiculous to say that we don't score on a bad angle one timer that squeezes through the goalie. Did this kid who scored have some skill that the Rangers don't possess? What a ridiculous thing to say. Any NHL player that can fire a one timer into the body of a goalie can score when a goalie gives up a bad goal. He did nothing that Brian Boyle for example can't do, much less Nash or Stepan. In fact Boyle's goal this season was somewhat similar, except it was a wrist shot and from a good angle.

SnowblindNYR is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
11-26-2013, 12:08 AM
  #166
SnowblindNYR
Registered User
 
SnowblindNYR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Posts: 18,407
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Florida Ranger View Post
Just got back from the game. The effort was surely there, but Lundqvist didn't play his best game. Obviously a difference maker, plus Bishop made a few tough saves and came up big when he had to. The team has a problem getting in high scoring areas.

What it comes down to is that the Lightning were flat out the better team.

We lost. Move on to the next one.
They were better. But they were a 1 or 2 goal win better, not a 5 goal win better. In other words I didn't feel like we got outclassed at all. Not that the Lightning are some world beaters without Stamkos.

SnowblindNYR is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
11-26-2013, 12:16 AM
  #167
Dr. Ogrodnick
Registered User
 
Dr. Ogrodnick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,549
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SnowblindNYR View Post
That's ridiculous. We had a bunch of great chances. We just didn't bury them like all season. Even more ridiculous to say that we don't score on a bad angle one timer that squeezes through the goalie. Did this kid who scored have some skill that the Rangers don't possess? What a ridiculous thing to say. Any NHL player that can fire a one timer into the body of a goalie can score when a goalie gives up a bad goal. He did nothing that Brian Boyle for example can't do, much less Nash or Stepan. In fact Boyle's goal this season was somewhat similar, except it was a wrist shot and from a good angle.
The Rangers are tied for the second worst goals per game in the league, so therefore its not ridiculous at all to say that they don't score on chances that other teams do. I don't know what to tell you, after buzzing a little in the 1st, the Rangers hardly tested Bishop for most of the rest of the game. What's more likely, in a cruel twist of scheduling fate, the Rangers are always running into the hot goalie, or that they simply aren't very good at scoring?

Dr. Ogrodnick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-26-2013, 12:21 AM
  #168
RangersHank*
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 2,009
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr. Ogrodnick View Post
The Rangers are tied for the second worst goals per game in the league, so therefore its not ridiculous at all to say that they don't score on chances that other teams do. I don't know what to tell you, after buzzing a little in the 1st, the Rangers hardly tested Bishop for most of the rest of the game. What's more likely, in a cruel twist of scheduling fate, the Rangers are always running into the hot goalie, or that they simply aren't very good at scoring?

choice a: hot goalie
choice b: not good at scoring

choice b

RangersHank* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-26-2013, 12:46 AM
  #169
SnowblindNYR
Registered User
 
SnowblindNYR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Posts: 18,407
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr. Ogrodnick View Post
The Rangers are tied for the second worst goals per game in the league, so therefore its not ridiculous at all to say that they don't score on chances that other teams do. I don't know what to tell you, after buzzing a little in the 1st, the Rangers hardly tested Bishop for most of the rest of the game. What's more likely, in a cruel twist of scheduling fate, the Rangers are always running into the hot goalie, or that they simply aren't very good at scoring?
They aren't good at scoring, but you make it seem like they're not getting chances. You also absurdly said that they couldn't score the goal that the Russian kid scored tonight. Unless you think that no one on this team can connect on one timer that the goalie would screw up on and let in a goal through him, from a bad angle mind you, then that's ********. If we switched goalies this is probably a 2-2 game or so. Maybe a 3-2 loss for us, maybe a 3-3 tied. Something in that vicinity. Not because the Rangers are good at scoring, but because Lundqvist didn't come up big once (I think he made one or two nice saves) and let in a weak goal.

SnowblindNYR is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
11-26-2013, 01:14 AM
  #170
Tawnos
A guy with a bass
 
Tawnos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Charlotte, NC
Country: United States
Posts: 12,347
vCash: 500
In a different context, it might pay to learn from Canucks fans who would look at this game and think: oh, we recognize this. It was one of those games. They happen under AV.

Unfortunately, our context is that we haven't been scoring and we're still not completely recovered, record-wise, from our abysmal start. We can't really afford to have one of those games.

So, that sucked.

Tawnos is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
11-26-2013, 01:23 AM
  #171
Callahan Auto
Rational Police
 
Callahan Auto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Country: United States
Posts: 1,592
vCash: 500
I was there tonight. The Rangers looked like the better team for most of the game but the difference was in the severity of the mistakes the two clubs made. When the Rangers made mistakes they were huge blunders that lead to goals. The Lightning were constantly on the defensive but were able to prevent anything catastrophic. The game was lost on mental errors by the Rangers as they seemed to control the game physically. Didn't help that the Rangers were missing the net on some of their better looks while the Lightning netted every great chance.

Rangers looked extremely prone on the counter, which is a weakness that should be addressed. There are certain good teams that don't really push the puck on the counter and we've played them well. But a team like Tampa forces a turnover and pushes hard to try to score quickly. That killed us tonight. Our D-Men need to do a better job recognizing where the other team is, even as we're on offense. We're still learning the new system and Vigneault is probably trying to get our defenders to feel more comfortable taking chances but tonight was a good wake up call in how some teams play.

Also, I've never been as hard on Del Zotto as some posters but he straight up looked scared as he played tonight. He was indecisive and looked scared to force plays. He's a mess right now. John Moore was a little sloppy, too, but it might help to acquire a veteran RHD that Moore can play next to and learn at the NHL level comfortably.

Callahan Auto is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-26-2013, 01:32 AM
  #172
Glennsoe
Horndog
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Country: Norway
Posts: 4,189
vCash: 500
We were due a shout out any game now anyways..

What do you mean we had several games already where we didn't score..

That's downright scary..

Glennsoe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-26-2013, 01:34 AM
  #173
n8
WAAAAAAA!!!
 
n8's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: san francisco
Country: United States
Posts: 7,407
vCash: 500
wasn't Callahan playing fine when he was with Hagelin and Richards before Nash returned?

n8 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-26-2013, 01:40 AM
  #174
Callahan Auto
Rational Police
 
Callahan Auto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Country: United States
Posts: 1,592
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by n8 View Post
wasn't Callahan playing fine when he was with Hagelin and Richards before Nash returned?
The Nash-Richards-Callahan line did not look good but Nash-Richards-Hagelin looked good in limited time tonight and so did Pouliot-Brassard-Callahan. I would expect to see that next game. Hagelin stretches the defense better than Cally so he fits better with Nash/Richards. Likewise, Callahan and Pouliot can grind behind the net and be fed chances by Brassard, if things pan out like I hope.

What I really want to see is the Rangers acquiring a pass-first center so we can move Richards to the wing. He's played his best hockey there this season.

Callahan Auto is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-26-2013, 03:05 AM
  #175
lbrowne
Registered User
 
lbrowne's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Alberta
Posts: 2,147
vCash: 500
I'm so tired of when we take shots in the offensive zone and hearing "...wide"

lbrowne 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 02:10 PM.

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.