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

#38 - 12.26.09 | New York Islanders @ New York Rangers | 7:00 PM - MSG (HD)

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
12-27-2009, 12:22 PM
  #501
Garfinkel1
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: CT
Posts: 3,446
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Inferno272 View Post
didnt look like a deflection to me, looked like a partial screen up high, but a straight wrist shot from the blueline that your goalie has to stop. it was lucky that it was in off the post, but still, he has to stop that. With regards to Kotalik, he hasnt done anything worthwhile that is worthy of keeping him up on this roster....if you can trade him, i would, but i think his play has been so bad you have to think about just getting him off the team because his play has hurt us. id rather play a tough guy or something that can fight or a banger that can make ppl want to keep their head up..at least a role player would be able to accomplish more than Kotalik is right now.
If Kotalik wasn't playing we might have won that game (Not giving up that SHG). Not saying we deserved too, just saying we might have. I think your right about Kotalik needed to be traded/waived. I think we could get a 2nd rounder for him at the deadline for a team looking to improve their PP.

Garfinkel1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-27-2009, 12:27 PM
  #502
NikC
Registered User
 
NikC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Country: United States
Posts: 3,594
vCash: 500
I liked Kotalik and thought he would be good here. He is about as 2-dimensional a player as you'll ever see. When he isn't scoring (most of the time) he does
practically nothing away from the puck.

I wouldn't mind packaging him and HIggins off somewhere.

NikC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-27-2009, 12:38 PM
  #503
CDirt
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 425
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by OverTheCap View Post
Lundqvist had no chance on that goal. I was at the game and thought it looked soft, but once I watched Rangers in 60 I realized it wasn't his fault.

Not only was the puck redirected by hitting Staal, but it deflected off the far post and went in. Lundqvist had zero shot of getting to the far post in time to make that save. From the overhead view, it actually looked like the shot may have been going wide had it not hit the post and banked in.
Lundqvist clearly has been the Rangers best player on the ice in these games. He got hung out to dry on the first two goals. Probably saved three or four that would have gone in against a more human goaltender.

Okoposo's OT goal? Those just happen from time to time. Even against the best. Okposo really should have been allowed that much time and space shooting from that spot to begin with.

CDirt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-27-2009, 01:05 PM
  #504
DBone19
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 43
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BleedsBlueforNYR View Post
There's no "c" in Henrik.

And Roloson wasn't better in my opinion. The Rangers make every goalie they play against look good because they take such low quality shots and can never bury their chances.

It's a recurring pattern. Look at Moose on the Thrashers when he was at the Garden a few games ago, Boucher on the Flyers... how many times have we made a team's backup look like a Vezina candidate?
Roloson didn't play better than Lundqvist?? Find one goalie who thinks they played well after letting in 3 goals on 22 shots. Roloson clearly outplayed him. And i don't think you give enough credit to a good back up. Hedberg and Boucher are quality goalies, given the fact they don't play almost every game. There are goalies who thrive on going in once every few games and those are a couple guys who do it very well. You can admit when your goalie is outplayed and has a bad game, you don't have to make excuses though....

DBone19 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-27-2009, 01:17 PM
  #505
BlueShirts88
Section 208 Row 15
 
BlueShirts88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Long Island, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 10,354
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to BlueShirts88
I couldn't believe the lack of Islander fans at this game. The few that were actually there weren't even loud until after the game, which I also find funny.

But that 3rd period goal with 47 seconds left, man I've never heard the Garden so energized. It was fun to be a part of that moment.

__________________
"Matteau! Matteau! Matteau!"~H. Rose
BlueShirts88 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-27-2009, 02:10 PM
  #506
Chimp
Registered User
 
Chimp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: In my food garden.
Country: Sweden
Posts: 10,478
vCash: 500
Those who think we outplayed the Islanders just because we got 40 shots on goal either didn't watch the game or are kidding themselves. The offense was lackluster and we really didn't create any scoring chances for 60 minutes. Maybe one or two. 35 logo shots won't win any games, against any goalie.

I think the Islanders created more and better scoring chances than we did.

Chimp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-27-2009, 02:20 PM
  #507
OverTheCap
Registered User
 
OverTheCap's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 9,693
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chimp View Post
Those who think we outplayed the Islanders just because we got 40 shots on goal either didn't watch the game or are kidding themselves. The offense was lackluster and we really didn't create any scoring chances for 60 minutes. Maybe one or two. 35 logo shots won't win any games, against any goalie.

I think the Islanders created more and better scoring chances than we did.
Agreed... I was at the game and was shocked that the Rangers put up that many shots on goal. It certainly didn't seem like they had many high quality scoring chances, nor were they dominating the game. Considering that our defensemen alone combined for 11 SOG, it's clear that a lot of these shots were coming from the outside.

The Islanders made the most of their opportunities when they had to... they took advantage of the Rangers' poor defensive coverage. It's hard to believe the Rangers gave up only 22 SOG, because I thought all 6 defensemen played horribly.

OverTheCap is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-27-2009, 03:03 PM
  #508
Boom Boom Geoffrion*
CarciLOL
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: NYC
Country: Greece
Posts: 7,553
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DBone19 View Post
I wouldn't go that far. Anyone who plays the position (which i do) knows you shouldn't be on the goalline. That being said because of his size he thinks he can get away with it all the time, he plays way too deep. He's a hell of a goalie no question but if he challenges the shot a little more and gets off the red line and out of the blue paint, he would be even better.
You'll rarely see me play on the goal line when I play. I tried to rival the style of goaltending Richter played, which was a pretty textbook. I don't have any issue with Henrik playing so deep, aside from a few shots a game where I think he should come out and challenge the shooter. Guess it's a matter of picking your spots.

On that specific shot, Henrik was a little ahead of the goal line. He anticipated the initial shot so fast, that when it deflected he was caught.

Like others here mentioned, that goal not only changed direction, it also caught the inside of the post. Even if Henrik was on the top of his crease, I don't think he would have saved that shot.

Boom Boom Geoffrion* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-27-2009, 03:06 PM
  #509
Boom Boom Geoffrion*
CarciLOL
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: NYC
Country: Greece
Posts: 7,553
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jaromir Jagr View Post
Exactly. That was a terrible goal. I don't care if it was deflected. It was deflected almost at the blue line.

Lundqvist was down and out for the count as soon as the shot was taken. Good shot? Give me a damn break. Horrible goaltending.

However, he gets a pass for being elite and keeping us in the hunt in December.
More like, horrible evaluation. You're miles off here. That shot would have beaten most 'tenders.

The fact that you don't care it was deflected ultimately proves you don't know ****.

Boom Boom Geoffrion* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-27-2009, 03:09 PM
  #510
Inferno
HFB Partner
 
Inferno's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Atlanta, GA
Country: United States
Posts: 20,070
vCash: 500
didnt see the deflection, still cant see it from the replays because the quality is so low and i cant slow it down, but ill take your word for it...still though, it was a deflection 30 feet up high...youd like your goalie to stop that one, especially in a do or die type situation like that.

Inferno is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-27-2009, 03:11 PM
  #511
Loffen
Wen Kroy
 
Loffen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Soft euro
Posts: 17,420
vCash: 500
Hank's take on the OT Goal... http://rangers.nhl.com/club/recap.htm?id=2009020559

Quote:
“It hit Staalsie’s leg. It was going pretty much middle of the net, then hit his leg, and went post-in instead. I couldn’t reach it.”


Last edited by Loffen: 12-27-2009 at 03:18 PM.
Loffen is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-27-2009, 04:21 PM
  #512
lbrowne
Registered User
 
lbrowne's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Alberta
Posts: 2,131
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DBone19 View Post
I wouldn't go that far. Anyone who plays the position (which i do) knows you shouldn't be on the goalline. That being said because of his size he thinks he can get away with it all the time, he plays way too deep. He's a hell of a goalie no question but if he challenges the shot a little more and gets off the red line and out of the blue paint, he would be even better.
I agree about that play. Speaking from experience, he was way too deep on that shot, but that's how he plays. I know because I got burned by that kind of goal before, and I knew it was on me.

He only had to be at the top of his crease and his exact motion to make the save stops the puck. He was deep and he still almost got it.

I don't think that shot goes in on most goalies in the NHL. Had it a D man if they were in the hash marks yes - but not out where he was.

Whatever, Henrik played a huge role in us having 4 game winning streak and grabbing 9 out of a possible 10 points in that stretch.

We're getting secondary scoring finally, on to the next game please!

lbrowne is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-27-2009, 04:25 PM
  #513
nyr2k2
Can't Beat Him
 
nyr2k2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Washington, DC
Country: United States
Posts: 23,377
vCash: 500
Awards:
Henrik plays deep for a reason. He makes a lot of lateral saves that he wouldn't be able to if he were playing further off his line. It's a trade off. Playing deep isn't an outright flaw in his game. A lot of people realize this but a lot of others don't seem to.

__________________

It's just pain.
nyr2k2 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-27-2009, 04:29 PM
  #514
lbrowne
Registered User
 
lbrowne's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Alberta
Posts: 2,131
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by nyr2k2 View Post
Henrik plays deep for a reason. He makes a lot of lateral saves that he wouldn't be able to if he were playing further off his line. It's a trade off. Playing deep isn't an outright flaw in his game. A lot of people realize this but a lot of others don't seem to.
Exactly - I'll take that goal, and I know Henrik lost sleep about it. It happens to the best in the business, Henrik being an example of that.

But for every other save he makes that goes in on most goalies, don't think I'd want him to change his style!!

lbrowne is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-27-2009, 04:48 PM
  #515
Bleed Ranger Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 14,930
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by nyr2k2 View Post
Henrik plays deep for a reason. He makes a lot of lateral saves that he wouldn't be able to if he were playing further off his line. It's a trade off. Playing deep isn't an outright flaw in his game. A lot of people realize this but a lot of others don't seem to.
Agreed.

Remember the great kick save Lundqvist made about a minute into OT? He probably doesnt make that if hes out further in the crease.

People seem to act like Lundqvist coming to to challenge shooters more would make him the perfect goaltender. No. It would expose other issues.

Ill take Lundqvist the way hes played his entire career here.

Bleed Ranger Blue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-27-2009, 04:53 PM
  #516
Carl Hagelins Flow
Flow Status: AMAZING
 
Carl Hagelins Flow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Long Island, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 4,232
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleed Ranger Blue View Post
Agreed.

Remember the great kick save Lundqvist made about a minute into OT? He probably doesnt make that if hes out further in the crease.

People seem to act like Lundqvist coming to to challenge shooters more would make him the perfect goaltender. No. It would expose other issues.

Ill take Lundqvist the way hes played his entire career here.
Most of the people who complain he plays too deep either 1) Never played goalie in hockey or 2) Know nothing about physics or goaltending and simply played as a forward only concerned with scoring.

Henrik is probably the best goalie in the league and stopping low shots and as a result has weaknesses elsewhere. But whenever I'm reading neutral (non-Ranger bias) articles and publications that discuss Lundy, they always complement his ability in that regard.

And Chimp would absolutely agree with me with anything pro-Lundqvist anyway

Funny, I said to myself last night when I was going onto HFboards "I bet there are like 5 people who are screaming for Lundy's head and Chimp is flaming them saying 'how can you blame that on Hank? It's the defenses fault'" hehehe love ya man, lets go sverige

Carl Hagelins Flow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-27-2009, 05:12 PM
  #517
Boom Boom Geoffrion*
CarciLOL
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: NYC
Country: Greece
Posts: 7,553
vCash: 500
When all is said and done, Henrik's positioning will ultimately prevent more goals than it will allow.

It's just one of those things people here have to accept. I'm talking about maybe a dozen or so of you's, since it seems most guys here have already made peace with Henrik's flaws.

Boom Boom Geoffrion* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-27-2009, 05:19 PM
  #518
Bleed Ranger Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 14,930
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boom Boom Geoffrion View Post
When all is said and done, Henrik's positioning will ultimately prevent more goals than it will allow.

It's just one of those things people here have to accept. I'm talking about maybe a dozen or so of you's, since it seems most guys here have already made peace with Henrik's flaws.
Well said. I mean, you can nitpick just about anything if you want to.

Over the last 4 and a half seasons, Lundqvist has shown me that goaltending is not a position really worth worrying about on this team. Hes that good.

Im much more concerned about, in no particular order, acquiring or developing 4 more top 6 forwards in addition to the 2 we have, acquiring or developing a mean/crease clearing defenseman, and purging this franchise of the Redden/Drury/Rozsival contracts.

Bleed Ranger Blue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-27-2009, 05:24 PM
  #519
Garfinkel1
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: CT
Posts: 3,446
vCash: 500
This team NEEDS a Holmstrom type player in terms of being an effective ES player who can play in front of the net and deflect/screen/bury rebounds.

(Yes I know Holmstrom is great on the PP in front of the net but he is still effective when Detroit sets up.

Garfinkel1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-27-2009, 06:03 PM
  #520
Blueshirt Special
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Blueshirt Special's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 3,121
vCash: 500
I'd be happy with anyone willing to stay in front of the net for more than 2 seconds

Blueshirt Special is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-27-2009, 06:04 PM
  #521
nyr2k2
Can't Beat Him
 
nyr2k2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Washington, DC
Country: United States
Posts: 23,377
vCash: 500
Awards:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blueshirt Special View Post
I'd be happy with anyone willing to stay in front of the net for more than 2 seconds
Cally will do that. Avery, too, but he goes down incredibly easily for various reasons. Voros would, but he generally sucks.

nyr2k2 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-27-2009, 06:05 PM
  #522
Carl Hagelins Flow
Flow Status: AMAZING
 
Carl Hagelins Flow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Long Island, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 4,232
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blueshirt Special View Post
I'd be happy with anyone willing to stay in front of the net for more than 2 seconds
Avery and Cally, while I applaud their effort in trying to stand in front of the net, just aren't big enough to do it.

They get thrashed around and crosschecked out of the crease. Voros is pretty good at standing there because he's big and can handle the D-men, but he is a worthless piece of crap when it comes to skill, so that option is out.

Carl Hagelins Flow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-27-2009, 06:10 PM
  #523
nyr2k2
Can't Beat Him
 
nyr2k2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Washington, DC
Country: United States
Posts: 23,377
vCash: 500
Awards:
Quote:
Originally Posted by BleedsBlueforNYR View Post
Avery and Cally, while I applaud their effort in trying to stand in front of the net, just aren't big enough to do it.

They get thrashed around and crosschecked out of the crease. Voros is pretty good at standing there because he's big and can handle the D-men, but he is a worthless piece of crap when it comes to skill, so that option is out.
Agreed. Also, when Avery senses contact, he enters rag-doll mode, where he flops around everywhere.

nyr2k2 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-27-2009, 06:27 PM
  #524
Garfinkel1
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: CT
Posts: 3,446
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BleedsBlueforNYR View Post
Avery and Cally, while I applaud their effort in trying to stand in front of the net, just aren't big enough to do it.

They get thrashed around and crosschecked out of the crease. Voros is pretty good at standing there because he's big and can handle the D-men, but he is a worthless piece of crap when it comes to skill, so that option is out.
Unlike Voros, Holmstrom has the hand-eye co-ordinatation to actually bang in those rebounds to go along with his size.

Garfinkel1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-27-2009, 06:27 PM
  #525
Blueshirt Special
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Blueshirt Special's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 3,121
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BleedsBlueforNYR View Post
Avery and Cally, while I applaud their effort in trying to stand in front of the net, just aren't big enough to do it.

They get thrashed around and crosschecked out of the crease. Voros is pretty good at standing there because he's big and can handle the D-men, but he is a worthless piece of crap when it comes to skill, so that option is out.
agreed, they have the gonads, but not the durability.

Find this player and you find the missing 1-2 goals per game that make all the difference.

It would also free up the perimeter guys to make better passes & shots

I'v been saying this for a few years now.

Blueshirt Special 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 01:27 PM.

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.