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

Favorite moment from "the classic 08' Brodeur-mortification series"?

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
08-06-2008, 01:34 PM
  #51
Mr Bojanglez
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Mr Bojanglez's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: From Jersey w/ Love
Country: United States
Posts: 10,922
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by ragshockey88 View Post
i mean i may be stating the obvious, but when us ranger fans go to devils games, does anyone notice most of the 9500 fans or so in attendence r drunk idiots who have no idea what they r talkin about...its pathetic i just needed to state that to the public
I forgot, New Jersey Devil fans are the only drunk, ignorant fans in the sports arena. Clearly all other teams fail in comparison.

Mr Bojanglez is offline  
Old
08-06-2008, 02:00 PM
  #52
JR#9*
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 7,733
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by billyH2O View Post

And JA... I don't like you
that really hurts!

please be my friend...

JR#9* is offline  
Old
08-06-2008, 02:02 PM
  #53
JR#9*
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 7,733
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by billyH2O View Post
I forgot, New Jersey Devil fans are the only drunk, ignorant fans in the sports arena. Clearly all other teams fail in comparison.
Ignorant yes, drunk we're not sure about because you guys have too small of a sample size to get a good read.

JR#9* is offline  
Old
08-06-2008, 02:11 PM
  #54
Black Tank
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: a NYer in England
Country: United Kingdom
Posts: 1,170
vCash: 500
If you're a Devils fan you've got to be worried about Brodeur's last two PO series. He's let in some stinkers and it's really hard to win a series with your goalie giving up freebies.

Black Tank is offline  
Old
08-06-2008, 02:19 PM
  #55
McRanger
Registered User
 
McRanger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 2,705
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by billyH2O View Post
I'm not sure he is trying to skew anything. Originally to get Lundqvists' stats, I went to nhl.com and it was easy cause he only had 3 years for total playoff exp. It was written clearly in the total's column.
To get Brodeur's, I did the same thing JIM did, the same method. When you use Jim's method, those are the numbers i got too. It makes sense the way he did it, correct? Do the numbers yourself, you'll get the same. There are some flaws somewhere... If someone can enlighten us, rather than just laugh... that would be better. I know GAA changes depending on how long you're in the game.
No it doesn't make sense, and its not accurate. You have to actually add the numbers together correctly, which took about 15 seconds longer than simply adding them together and dividing by 3. I seriously doubt that would have been done if Lundqvist had only played one great game or even just a minute in '06 because that would incorrectly made his numbers a lot better as opposed to a lot worse. Thats pretty much the definition of skewing statistics.

Honestly I do not understand the point of your post. I got the same number you did and agreed with you.

Quote:
Originally Posted by billyH2O View Post
To be honest... if your franchise goaltender is hurt, maybe it wouldn't have been the worst thing. Weekes OWNED the Devils in the playoffs up until that point. The Devils were laying the smack down on Carolina in 2002, and Irbe got pulled. Weekes got put in and the Devils didn't have an answer. Look at his stats for 2001-2002 playoffs. So realistically, it would not have been the worst case scenario. I mean, if he is the future of your team (and you still have Jagr signed for the next year)... then why risk hurting him? Clearly the staff, as well as Lundqvist, felt that he was well enough to play.
It was the first time the Rangers were in the playoffs in almost a decade and they were playing their arch rivals, there was no way they weren't going to start with their top goalie unless he was dead. And thats ignoring how bad Weekes was. Anyway, Lundqvist missed the last 2-3 weeks of the season only to return for the season finale, in an attempt to get him ready for the post season, and he got shelled. It was obvious BEFORE the playoffs he wasn't 100%. Even so, he was better than weekes who was so bad they didn't even stick with him when it was obvious the series was over. This isn't revisionist history here.

McRanger is offline  
Old
08-06-2008, 02:30 PM
  #56
Adam Larsson
Registered User
 
Adam Larsson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Jersey..
Country: Ireland
Posts: 3,779
vCash: 892
Quote:
Originally Posted by Black Tank View Post
If you're a Devils fan you've got to be worried about Brodeur's last two PO series. He's let in some stinkers and it's really hard to win a series with your goalie giving up freebies.
We're not worried trust me. Two staright vezinas and 4 out of the last 5. Last year was his second best season ever in my opinion. The playoffs only prove that he needs more rest during the regular season. He's not a spring chicken anymore. You guys matched up against us so well and I picked you guys to win in 5 games when they did the poll for this series on the main board. Good for you guys. I think next year should be a lot more even between our two teams. Only two more months to go. Feels like forever.

Adam Larsson is offline  
Old
08-06-2008, 02:47 PM
  #57
Mr Bojanglez
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Mr Bojanglez's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: From Jersey w/ Love
Country: United States
Posts: 10,922
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by McRanger View Post
No it doesn't make sense, and its not accurate. You have to actually add the numbers together correctly, which took about 15 seconds longer than simply adding them together and dividing by 3. I seriously doubt that would have been done if Lundqvist had only played one great game or even just a minute in '06 because that would incorrectly made his numbers a lot better as opposed to a lot worse. Thats pretty much the definition of skewing statistics.

Honestly I do not understand the point of your post. I got the same number you did and agreed with you.


It was the first time the Rangers were in the playoffs in almost a decade and they were playing their arch rivals, there was no way they weren't going to start with their top goalie unless he was dead. And thats ignoring how bad Weekes was. Anyway, Lundqvist missed the last 2-3 weeks of the season only to return for the season finale, in an attempt to get him ready for the post season, and he got shelled. It was obvious BEFORE the playoffs he wasn't 100%. Even so, he was better than weekes who was so bad they didn't even stick with him when it was obvious the series was over. This isn't revisionist history here.
My original point, was that I don't think JIM deliberatly tried to skew the stats. Sure, he did. But I think he made a mistake. I was trying to say how I could understand how he came to his conclusion.

As for '06.... you still skipped over my point about Weekes' playoff performance. Using Lundqvist's injury is such a huge scape goat. If he got shelled in that last game, and it was so "obvious" he wasn't 100%... then why risk him? You're talking about playing the arch rival, and your goalie did horrible just before the playoffs... and continued into the first game, then why not rest him the second game? I'm not sure how hurt he was, that's all. Clearly he was well enough to play... 4 straight games (i forget which game Weekes played... so at least 4/5 games).

If you think Lundqvist was that hurt, putting in Kevin Weekes' who's playoff record up until that point was stellar... especially against the Devils, would have been the better option. You have a franchise goalie (who is *your* future) and you still have Jagr and Nylander and whoever... so its not like its your last chance.

Sometime's players (like Weekes) need to be in serious competition to excel. Look at Oliver Perez on the Mets. He blows most nights, but kicks butt against the rivals. Weekes came in at the end of the series when it didn't really matter. Had he started from the beginning who knows?

Bottom line, you won't convince me and I won't convince you. I won't buy that "he was hurt" scape goat anymore. I told you why I don't believe it. Take it or leave it.

Mr Bojanglez is offline  
Old
08-06-2008, 02:55 PM
  #58
LiquidClown
Registered User
 
LiquidClown's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Huntsville, Al
Country: Germany
Posts: 6,640
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to LiquidClown Send a message via AIM to LiquidClown

LiquidClown is offline  
Old
08-06-2008, 03:07 PM
  #59
JR#9*
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 7,733
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by billyH2O View Post
My original point, was that I don't think JIM deliberatly tried to skew the stats. Sure, he did. But I think he made a mistake. I was trying to say how I could understand how he came to his conclusion.

As for '06.... you still skipped over my point about Weekes' playoff performance. Using Lundqvist's injury is such a huge scape goat. If he got shelled in that last game, and it was so "obvious" he wasn't 100%... then why risk him? You're talking about playing the arch rival, and your goalie did horrible just before the playoffs... and continued into the first game, then why not rest him the second game? I'm not sure how hurt he was, that's all. Clearly he was well enough to play... 4 straight games (i forget which game Weekes played... so at least 4/5 games).

If you think Lundqvist was that hurt, putting in Kevin Weekes' who's playoff record up until that point was stellar... especially against the Devils, would have been the better option. You have a franchise goalie (who is *your* future) and you still have Jagr and Nylander and whoever... so its not like its your last chance.

Sometime's players (like Weekes) need to be in serious competition to excel. Look at Oliver Perez on the Mets. He blows most nights, but kicks butt against the rivals. Weekes came in at the end of the series when it didn't really matter. Had he started from the beginning who knows?

Bottom line, you won't convince me and I won't convince you. I won't buy that "he was hurt" scape goat anymore. I told you why I don't believe it. Take it or leave it.
you guys want to say Ranger fans always scape goat the Lundy injuries from '06 but how about applying the same logic to you and your fellow Devil fanboys saying how Marty is simply too tired each and every yr he s^%& the bed for the last 3 playoffs in a row as an excuse every time?

Marty Brodeur is the king of excuses amoung goalies in the NHL!

JR#9* is offline  
Old
08-06-2008, 03:22 PM
  #60
Mr Bojanglez
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Mr Bojanglez's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: From Jersey w/ Love
Country: United States
Posts: 10,922
vCash: 50
Did I *personally* say Brodeur was too tired? No. So don't put words into my mouth.
Even if he was, I realize it doesn't take away from the fact that he didn't play well. Bottom line, he played and performed the way he did... with whatever reasons behind him.

Did McRanger *personally* say that Lundqvist was hurt? Yes, he did. So my feeling is... he played, and gave you the performance he did... with whatever reasons behind him. I personally don't believe he was that hurt, because Weekes had a decent playoff run against the Devils in 2002 (a point you fail to mention) and would not have been a horrible option.

And he %#$% the bed the past 3 seasons? I'd say maybe the past 2 seasons, cause Carolina wasn't his fault in 2006, and clearly he was ok against NY. They had only 5 goals in the 4 games they lost to the Canes. Sure, he gave up a ton of goals in the first one... but his team was shutout so did it really matter in the end?

2007 he wasn't horrible. He shutout Tampa in one game. He just wasn't "stellar", but the team as a whole wasn't stellar. So it all comes down to, one bad playoff series. And once again, its not like the Devils' gave him that much offensive support.

So was he amazing in the past 2 seasons? Clearly not. But he wasn't horrible like you're making him out to be. One bad playoff series... but hey, you can exaggerate and go over the top with it like you always do.


Last edited by Mr Bojanglez: 08-06-2008 at 05:22 PM.
Mr Bojanglez is offline  
Old
08-06-2008, 03:24 PM
  #61
DubiDubiDoo
Registered User
 
DubiDubiDoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Garden City, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 2,927
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to DubiDubiDoo
Quote:
Originally Posted by JA#11 View Post
you guys want to say Ranger fans always scape goat the Lundy injuries from '06 but how about applying the same logic to you and your fellow Devil fanboys saying how Marty is simply too tired each and every yr he s^%& the bed for the last 3 playoffs in a row as an excuse every time?

Marty Brodeur is the king of excuses amoung goalies in the NHL!
Marty Brodeur is one of the greatest of all-time, without a doubt, but I think Devils fans ar so harsh on Hank because his rise is at the same time as Marty's decline. It was like watching the Devils turn into a great team in the late 90's as we faded away, it made us hate them even more.

Before we go bashing eachother any further, what division has anything like
Brodeur-Lundqvist-Fleury-Dipietro-Biron

DubiDubiDoo is offline  
Old
08-06-2008, 03:26 PM
  #62
McRanger
Registered User
 
McRanger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 2,705
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by billyH2O View Post
My original point, was that I don't think JIM deliberatly tried to skew the stats. Sure, he did. But I think he made a mistake. I was trying to say how I could understand how he came to his conclusion.

As for '06.... you still skipped over my point about Weekes' playoff performance. Using Lundqvist's injury is such a huge scape goat. If he got shelled in that last game, and it was so "obvious" he wasn't 100%... then why risk him? You're talking about playing the arch rival, and your goalie did horrible just before the playoffs... and continued into the first game, then why not rest him the second game? I'm not sure how hurt he was, that's all. Clearly he was well enough to play... 4 straight games (i forget which game Weekes played... so at least 4/5 games).

If you think Lundqvist was that hurt, putting in Kevin Weekes' who's playoff record up until that point was stellar... especially against the Devils, would have been the better option. You have a franchise goalie (who is *your* future) and you still have Jagr and Nylander and whoever... so its not like its your last chance.

Sometime's players (like Weekes) need to be in serious competition to excel. Look at Oliver Perez on the Mets. He blows most nights, but kicks butt against the rivals. Weekes came in at the end of the series when it didn't really matter. Had he started from the beginning who knows?

Bottom line, you won't convince me and I won't convince you. I won't buy that "he was hurt" scape goat anymore. I told you why I don't believe it. Take it or leave it.
I do not see what there is to debate.

Lundqvist was hurt at the end of the season. He missed almost 3 weeks and only came back for the season finale. He played awful and looked nothing like he did before he got hurt, and that carried over into the playoffs. He continued to play because the injury was reported to be one that wouldn't get worse if he played through it (hip), because of Weekes awful awful regular season play, and of course because of the extreme importance of the situation. The end results were what they were.

The devils would have beaten the rangers with or without a healthy Lundqvist and Jagr, so I have never seen why Devils fans bristle so much when people mention the injuries. Especially in a case like this when we aren't even discussing the outcome of the series but a single players performance. Sorry, but if you feel that Lundqvist or whoever getting hurt takes away from the Devils playoff spanking of the Rangers than thats your problem.

McRanger is offline  
Old
08-06-2008, 03:29 PM
  #63
Mr Bojanglez
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Mr Bojanglez's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: From Jersey w/ Love
Country: United States
Posts: 10,922
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by DubiDubiDoo View Post
Marty Brodeur is one of the greatest of all-time, without a doubt, but I think Devils fans ar so harsh on Hank because his rise is at the same time as Marty's decline. It was like watching the Devils turn into a great team in the late 90's as we faded away, it made us hate them even more.

Before we go bashing eachother any further, what division has anything like
Brodeur-Lundqvist-Fleury-Dipietro-Biron
I just want to say, I'm not trying to be harsh on Hank. I picked him for my fantasy team last year, and believe he can be great. But I'm being completely objective in what he has done so far. I've seen flashes of brilliance, as well as phases of mediocrity. He has not show, in my opinion, consistent brilliance. I never doubt him, and think he can do it this year.

I just think, and perhaps its from both sides, that some fans are quick to exaggerate the shortcomings of Brodeur. He is still the king of the NHL until proven otherwise. To be honest, I thought Luongo was going to take the crown last year. But he didn't. This year, I feel the same as last year.. that his play will drop off. However, I've only been trying to evaluate what has already happened.

Mr Bojanglez is offline  
Old
08-06-2008, 03:33 PM
  #64
Mr Bojanglez
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Mr Bojanglez's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: From Jersey w/ Love
Country: United States
Posts: 10,922
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by McRanger View Post
I do not see what there is to debate.

Lundqvist was hurt at the end of the season. He missed almost 3 weeks and only came back for the season finale. He played awful and looked nothing like he did before he got hurt, and that carried over into the playoffs. He continued to play because the injury was reported to be one that wouldn't get worse if he played through it (hip), because of Weekes awful awful regular season play, and of course because of the extreme importance of the situation. The end results were what they were.

The devils would have beaten the rangers with or without a healthy Lundqvist and Jagr, so I have never seen why Devils fans bristle so much when people mention the injuries. Especially in a case like this when we aren't even discussing the outcome of the series but a single players performance. Sorry, but if you feel that Lundqvist or whoever getting hurt takes away from the Devils playoff spanking of the Rangers than thats your problem.
i was debating the seriousness of his injury. I might have lumped you in with another point I was trying to make about his being a scape goat, which is where I thought you were going. I see now you were applying it more towards his stats, which is a personal achievement, not towards the playoff series... a team achievement. so sorry about that.

Mr Bojanglez is offline  
Old
08-06-2008, 03:36 PM
  #65
JR#9*
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 7,733
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by billyH2O View Post
Did
So was he amazing in the past 2 seasons? Clearly not. But he wasn't horrible like you're making him out to be. One bad playoff series... but hey, you can exaggerate and go over the top with it like you always do.
who is exaggerating now trying to state that he had only one bad playoff series over the last 3 yrs?

he sucked vs TB and let in at least one disgusting goal a game and he was outplayed by Ward in '06 as well as Emery in '07 and we all know what happened in '08 where once again he let in at least one terrible goal per game and always at the most crucial times which wound up being the deciding factor in almost each game!

But you right, you're a straight shooter and it was only the Ranger series where he played poorly...

JR#9* is offline  
Old
08-06-2008, 03:40 PM
  #66
Mr Bojanglez
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Mr Bojanglez's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: From Jersey w/ Love
Country: United States
Posts: 10,922
vCash: 50
He let up at least one disgusting goal against Tampa?
So how did he shut them out that one game? Your argument is flawed.

He was outplayed by Ward? Cam Ward, the Conn Smythe of the Stanley Cup winning team? For shame... for shame

And as a personal opinion, Emery's playoff run 2 years ago was the most exaggerated thing I ever heard of. Case in point this past season. The devils did not get quality shots on him. He had a couple of good saves, but he really wasn't that solid. That's why he got lit up against Anaheim. Parise, who was solid in the first round against Tampa did nothing against the Sens. Who would you make better saves against? a line of Healtey, Alfredson, Spezza... or Gomez (who doesn't shoot), Elias and Parise (who stunk it up).

do you put a in all your posts? Does it help validate your points?

Mr Bojanglez is offline  
Old
08-06-2008, 03:54 PM
  #67
JR#9*
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 7,733
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by billyH2O View Post
He let up at least one disgusting goal against Tampa?
So how did he shut them out that one game? Your argument is flawed.

He was outplayed by Ward? Cam Ward, the Conn Smythe of the Stanley Cup winning team? For shame... for shame

do you put a in all your posts? Does it help validate your points?
so who is making excuses now?

So he got one shut out but my logic that he was dogs$%^ against TB and was outplayed by TB's putrid goalies that year is inaccurate as a result?

Who is being the homer here because even your fellow Dev fans know how bad he was that TB series where he let in at least 3 goals simply by not hugging the post.

And now because Ward won the Conn Smythe it makes it OK that the alltime great Marty was outplayed by the kid during the series.

You claim my logic is falwed but you points are so ridiculous that it isn't even funny.

BTW- what do you think of Marty putting his own personal quest for individuals #'s ahead of his teams playoff success by demanding to play 78-80 games a yr?

and I use the smileys and what not to mock guys like you as my points validate themselves.

JR#9* is offline  
Old
08-06-2008, 04:29 PM
  #68
Ola
Registered User
 
Ola's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Sweden
Country: Sweden
Posts: 17,565
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SiLLsOn View Post
We're not worried trust me. Two staright vezinas and 4 out of the last 5. Last year was his second best season ever in my opinion. The playoffs only prove that he needs more rest during the regular season. He's not a spring chicken anymore. You guys matched up against us so well and I picked you guys to win in 5 games when they did the poll for this series on the main board. Good for you guys. I think next year should be a lot more even between our two teams. Only two more months to go. Feels like forever.
From my point of view, I am defenitly not worried about playing a team with Marty in the net.

He looks great in the slowtempo regular season games when few teams manage to match NJ's match by match approch. When few teams have the patient to play as patient as you need to beat the NJD.

But when it matters; like in the PO's and the last Olympics -- when NJ's defense can't match the offense of other teams -- its obvious just how overrated Marty is right now. He is defenitly not among the best in the league. All you need to do is get Marty to move around and throw some pucks on the net.

Well, thats atleast my humble opinion.

Ola is online now  
Old
08-06-2008, 04:31 PM
  #69
Ola
Registered User
 
Ola's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Sweden
Country: Sweden
Posts: 17,565
vCash: 500
Whats very interesting though is the question -- if NJ's defense can win Brodeur a Vezina in 08' despite Brodeur poor game; what kind of goalie would Brodeur have been if he played for another team then NJD?

Would he have been a Vezina Candidate or more of a JSG type of goalie?

Lundqvist have atleast proved himself on a team with a poor defense. Brodeur have never done that.

Ola is online now  
Old
08-06-2008, 04:39 PM
  #70
Adam Larsson
Registered User
 
Adam Larsson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Jersey..
Country: Ireland
Posts: 3,779
vCash: 892
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ola View Post
From my point of view, I am defenitly not worried about playing a team with Marty in the net.

He looks great in the slowtempo regular season games when few teams manage to match NJ's match by match approch. When few teams have the patient to play as patient as you need to beat the NJD.

But when it matters; like in the PO's and the last Olympics -- when NJ's defense can't match the offense of other teams -- its obvious just how overrated Marty is right now. He is defenitly not among the best in the league. All you need to do is get Marty to move around and throw some pucks on the net.

Well, thats atleast my humble opinion.

It's not a very humble opinion. you look very silly saying Marty is not among the best in the league. But I don't expect anything better from you. You sound like Muttley talking about the Rangers.

Adam Larsson is offline  
Old
08-06-2008, 04:50 PM
  #71
Mr Bojanglez
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Mr Bojanglez's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: From Jersey w/ Love
Country: United States
Posts: 10,922
vCash: 50
so who is making excuses now?
What excuse? If you mean the Emery thing... my point is that Emery didn't outplay him. He won, yes... but that doesn't automatically mean he outplayed Brodeur. Tell me, since you know all... what did he do to "outplay" Brodeur? You're acting like Emery was a god in that series. I'm not making any excuses... NJ lost. Did he get outplayed? No, he didn't. Emery's playoff season was greatly exagerrated.

So he got one shut out but my logic that he was dogs$%^ against TB and was outplayed by TB's putrid goalies that year is inaccurate as a result?

Yes, when you basis for him sucking against Tampa is because "he gave up a disgusting goal every game" then yes... your argument is flawed. I didn't say anything about your logic. Don't put words into my mouth, how many times do we need to go through this? And no, he was NOT outplayed. What evidence do you have to back that up? By the way, this is a point (your accusation that holmqvist outplayed Marty" was not in your previous post. I responded to Marty's giving up a bad goal each game. You're acting like i even tackled this new point.
Just because a guy may win a game or two, doesn't automatically mean he "outplayed" someone. It just means he won.The Devils beating Buffalo in the 95 playoffs... Hasek outplayed Brodeur, but still lost. This is ALL IRRELEVANT TO MY INITIAL POINT... that Brodeur was not garbage... just not stellar against Tampa. He gave the team a chance to win, which they did. That doesn't make him horrible.. which is my point.

Who is being the homer here because even your fellow Dev fans know how bad he was that TB series where he let in at least 3 goals simply by not hugging the post.

I didn't say he was amazing in that series. You said he was garbage (paraphrase). I'm saying he couldn't have been all that bad if he A) got a shutout and B) the team won the series. A horrible goalie won't do that. Sure, he could have been better. If you want to say by "His standards" he was horrible, then maybe I'll buy that


And now because Ward won the Conn Smythe it makes it OK that the alltime great Marty was outplayed by the kid during the series.


My only argument was that I wouldn't "fault him". Just because Ward outplayed him doesn't mean Brodeur played bad. Brodeur was outplayed, but still played very well and I can't hold those losses against him.

You claim my logic is falwed but you points are so ridiculous that it isn't even funny.
My points are not ridiculous. If you take the time to see what I write, and see the facts (shutting out Tampa = not getting scored on every game). Its not about your logic, i never mentioned your logic. I said your argument is flawed. Clearly it was!

If you look at the arguments I raised, and the points I made... you will see my points are not ridiculous. When you change topics, and act like i said things that I didn't...

BTW- what do you think of Marty putting his own personal quest for individuals #'s ahead of his teams playoff success by demanding to play 78-80 games a yr?

Do you have quotes or any other certified notes that say... or even allude to Brodeur's demanding to start that many games? And don't say "oh come on, everyone knows that..." Cause no, not everyone knows that. You're assuming something you don't know
Besides, doesn't the coach decide who starts? You think Sutter is going to play favorites to his stars? HE ripped the Captaincy away from Elias. Why is Brodeur any different? Suter was a player, he doesn't care about your status. Isn't that what happened with the Isles and DP last year? The coach decided to play Dubie.
And honestly, if Brodeur doesn't start all those games maybe we don't even make the playoffs. He had a bad series this year for sure, but he was money 90% of the season.
If he is so selfish, why did he take a paycut so the team could sign higher-priced talent?

and I use the smileys and what not to mock guys like you as my points validate themselves.

Clearly they don't, and you twist things around but whatever. You can shake your head at me all you want. I'm just amazed at how many times you use it.


Last edited by Mr Bojanglez: 08-06-2008 at 05:09 PM.
Mr Bojanglez is offline  
Old
08-06-2008, 05:54 PM
  #72
Alcoolique*
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Prudential Center.
Posts: 1,275
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ola View Post
From my point of view, I am defenitly not worried about playing a team with Marty in the net.

He looks great in the slowtempo regular season games when few teams manage to match NJ's match by match approch. When few teams have the patient to play as patient as you need to beat the NJD.

But when it matters; like in the PO's and the last Olympics -- when NJ's defense can't match the offense of other teams -- its obvious just how overrated Marty is right now. He is defenitly not among the best in the league. All you need to do is get Marty to move around and throw some pucks on the net.

Well, thats atleast my humble opinion.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Ola View Post
Whats very interesting though is the question -- if NJ's defense can win Brodeur a Vezina in 08' despite Brodeur poor game; what kind of goalie would Brodeur have been if he played for another team then NJD?

Would he have been a Vezina Candidate or more of a JSG type of goalie?

Lundqvist have atleast proved himself on a team with a poor defense. Brodeur have never done that.
Oh yeah, like the last 2years the Devils defence was that good.. Oh right, you know, having Vish, Rachunek, Mottau, Brookbank , a bunch of Ahlers, is soooooo damn good.

lol

Marty have been carrying this team on his back for the last 2years. Actually, he's been the core of that Defence for the last 15years or so. Pretty simple as that.


Last edited by Alcoolique*: 08-06-2008 at 05:59 PM.
Alcoolique* is offline  
Old
08-06-2008, 06:02 PM
  #73
Harrison Ford
Registered User
 
Harrison Ford's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 19,978
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ola View Post
From my point of view, I am defenitly not worried about playing a team with Marty in the net.

He looks great in the slowtempo regular season games when few teams manage to match NJ's match by match approch. When few teams have the patient to play as patient as you need to beat the NJD.

But when it matters; like in the PO's and the last Olympics -- when NJ's defense can't match the offense of other teams -- its obvious just how overrated Marty is right now. He is defenitly not among the best in the league. All you need to do is get Marty to move around and throw some pucks on the net.

Well, thats atleast my humble opinion.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA. omg. that is great stuff right there.

thats sig material right there. You just defined ignorance.


Harrison Ford is offline  
Old
08-06-2008, 06:36 PM
  #74
DonCherrysSuit
Powerplay Pass Party
 
DonCherrysSuit's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Buffalo
Country: United States
Posts: 918
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harrison Ford View Post
HAHAHAHAHAHAHA. omg. that is great stuff right there.

thats sig material right there. You just defined ignorance.

Hey, I'm a Devil's fan, and I think that by laughing at what someone said and not making any points of my own, I'm making a strong argument.

The truth is, saying Marty is not the stellar goaltender he used to be is not that ridiculous of a statement. The guy went from champion to choke artist and you all had to know he'd start declining sooner or later.

DonCherrysSuit is offline  
Old
08-06-2008, 06:39 PM
  #75
DubiDubiDoo
Registered User
 
DubiDubiDoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Garden City, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 2,927
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to DubiDubiDoo
Quote:
Originally Posted by billyH2O View Post
I just want to say, I'm not trying to be harsh on Hank. I picked him for my fantasy team last year, and believe he can be great. But I'm being completely objective in what he has done so far. I've seen flashes of brilliance, as well as phases of mediocrity. He has not show, in my opinion, consistent brilliance. I never doubt him, and think he can do it this year.

I just think, and perhaps its from both sides, that some fans are quick to exaggerate the shortcomings of Brodeur. He is still the king of the NHL until proven otherwise. To be honest, I thought Luongo was going to take the crown last year. But he didn't. This year, I feel the same as last year.. that his play will drop off. However, I've only been trying to evaluate what has already happened.
Of course Rangers fans exaggerate the shortcomings of Brodeur, we hate him because he killed us for years. But what do you expect to find on the Rangers board, a bunch of Rangers fans chatting about how great we think Brodeur is??? Even if we wanted to, we wouldn't do it, because you would see it, and we cant give you that satisfaction. So we joke and exaggerate about Marty (and there have been a few games that he's cost the Devils that we harp on) but no different than Devils fans yapping about Lundqvists pads even though there legal, its the game we all play where we try and take any sense of accomplishment away from eachothers team..
Rangers are original six,
Devils have won the most recent cup,
the Garden is world famous,
The Rock is new and nicer,
Brodeur is a cry baby,
Hank wears huge pads
I wouldn't have it any other way, if it was then playing the Devils would be like playing the Panthers or Sabres..
People just need to relax and not take things so personal. I post funny Marty pics and crap, but its all in fun, I know all too well how good he is.
i can promise you the first time something tragic happens to a Devils player off the ice it will be us Ranger fans over on your board offering condolensces, just as I'd expect the same from Devils fans...
We have a kinship, based on making eachother miserable, like my family
and i wouldn't change a thing

DubiDubiDoo is offline  
Closed Thread

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 05:20 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.