MadDog2020

2014 Stanley Cup Playoffs thread

2,364 posts in this topic

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iZazaKeSvuA

 

Not that Boomer and Carlton have a clue what they're talking about half the time but..still a good listen to hear Rangers fans suffering a bit.

 

"MESSIER, CANYON OF HEROES, HIGH PRESSURE, BROADWAY LIGHTS, NEW YORK MEDIA, etc., etc...."

 

 

Ugh, Rangers talk radio is so F'ing predictable. They essentially talked for 3 minutes about absolutely nothing. Carton, who's the bigger tool of the two, is actually the only one to bring up stats, and that Nash has had over 50 shots on goal without a goal.

Edited by DJ Eco

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They looked as beaten as a team I've seen.  St. Louis looks lost, McDonagh looks hurt, Nash isn't making enough happen.  Your best players have to be your best players and right now the Rangers are not living up to that.

 

I agree with all of that wholeheartedly! I'm just wary of counting the chickens before they hatch.

 

With their backs to the wall, if they can somehow muster up a win in Pittsburgh, all of a sudden there will be a glimmer of hope for them heading back to MSG.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They looked as beaten as a team I've seen.  St. Louis looks lost, McDonagh looks hurt, Nash isn't making enough happen.  Your best players have to be your best players and right now the Rangers are not living up to that.

 

Lundqvist came up big in Game 7 in the last round, and Games 2 and 3 of this series can't be put on him, but if he turns in another performance like last night's, he's going to hear about it too. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Buying out Brad Richards should help things a bit although it will leave them a hole at center.  I think they can land a big free agent if they so desire.  The pipeline is starting to dry up a bit for them, but they really can't get much better without a big trade.

 

They arent in bad shape at C, but they would need to add one.  They've got Stepan and Brassard.  They could even decide between bringing either Boyle/Moore back for another year as the checking line C.

 

I don't see where the big free agent is for them.  They need to look at their defense a little bit to see if they can upgrade the PP and address the back 3 or 4 guys behind Girardi, Staal, McDonagh.  Dan Boyle might make some sense since the Rangers are pretty much now a "core" veteran team.  But I don't see a Vanek or Moulson acquisition for them.  I think they are similar to us in they have to trade.  I think this offseason is as ripe for trading as we've seen the last few years.  FA market is very limited.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They arent in bad shape at C, but they would need to add one.  They've got Stepan and Brassard.  They could even decide between bringing either Boyle/Moore back for another year as the checking line C.

 

I don't see where the big free agent is for them.  They need to look at their defense a little bit to see if they can upgrade the PP and address the back 3 or 4 guys behind Girardi, Staal, McDonagh.  Dan Boyle might make some sense since the Rangers are pretty much now a "core" veteran team.  But I don't see a Vanek or Moulson acquisition for them.  I think they are similar to us in they have to trade.  I think this offseason is as ripe for trading as we've seen the last few years.  FA market is very limited.

 

That's really not good shape, I mean it's fine for a playoff team but not one that has designs on the Stanley Cup.  Stepan's a nice player but I don't think he's all that great - I don't think he's one of the best 30 centers in the league.  Brassard's a nice complementary piece but the Rangers' QO on him will have to be 3.7M, and I'm not sure they want to go there for a guy who right now is their 3rd line center.  If they're your 1-2 center punch you have to be really excellent on the wing and on defense.

 

Stralman is really underrated and if the Rangers lose him, they'll be losing a good player.  I don't think there's much question that Stralman is better than Girardi.  I agree that Dan Boyle is an excellent fit for them, and if Zidlicky doesn't come back to the Devils I could see the Rangers being interested in him.  

 

The Rangers have some pieces for a trade but not many.  Kreider would be the most interesting piece, and I imagine some teams would really like to get a chance at having Cam Talbot.  JT Miller is a player that the coach doesn't have a ton of faith in right now.  Still, none of those bring back the superstar type player the Rangers probably would want.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

what's to say the rangers don't amnesty richards and go for statsny at a similar price? you don't think that's something on their radar?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

what's to say the rangers don't amnesty richards and go for statsny at a similar price? you don't think that's something on their radar?

I wouldn't put it past them. Stastny is going to have his choice of about six or seven ideal destinations though.

That's really not good shape, I mean it's fine for a playoff team but not one that has designs on the Stanley Cup. Stepan's a nice player but I don't think he's all that great - I don't think he's one of the best 30 centers in the league. Brassard's a nice complementary piece but the Rangers' QO on him will have to be 3.7M, and I'm not sure they want to go there for a guy who right now is their 3rd line center. If they're your 1-2 center punch you have to be really excellent on the wing and on defense.

Stralman is really underrated and if the Rangers lose him, they'll be losing a good player. I don't think there's much question that Stralman is better than Girardi. I agree that Dan Boyle is an excellent fit for them, and if Zidlicky doesn't come back to the Devils I could see the Rangers being interested in him.

The Rangers have some pieces for a trade but not many. Kreider would be the most interesting piece, and I imagine some teams would really like to get a chance at having Cam Talbot. JT Miller is a player that the coach doesn't have a ton of faith in right now. Still, none of those bring back the superstar type player the Rangers probably would want.

Supposedly the Rangers were sniffing on Zidlicky last offseason a bit. Miller looks like definite trade bait but his value isn't as high as the Rangers would probably like.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's really not good shape, I mean it's fine for a playoff team but not one that has designs on the Stanley Cup.  Stepan's a nice player but I don't think he's all that great - I don't think he's one of the best 30 centers in the league.  Brassard's a nice complementary piece but the Rangers' QO on him will have to be 3.7M, and I'm not sure they want to go there for a guy who right now is their 3rd line center.  If they're your 1-2 center punch you have to be really excellent on the wing and on defense.

 

Stralman is really underrated and if the Rangers lose him, they'll be losing a good player.  I don't think there's much question that Stralman is better than Girardi.  I agree that Dan Boyle is an excellent fit for them, and if Zidlicky doesn't come back to the Devils I could see the Rangers being interested in him.  

 

The Rangers have some pieces for a trade but not many.  Kreider would be the most interesting piece, and I imagine some teams would really like to get a chance at having Cam Talbot.  JT Miller is a player that the coach doesn't have a ton of faith in right now.  Still, none of those bring back the superstar type player the Rangers probably would want.

Yeah, not that I'm counting on NJ getting Stastny (think it's a possibility though), but I really don't want NYR in on the bidding. Maybe UFAs will start crossing NYR off their lists because so many have failed, but I know not to be that naive.

Lookint at their young guys, Talbot will either need to play well in the even of a prolonged Lundqvist injury or have a few more seasons like 2013-2014 to have any real value. His AHL numbers arent really all that special. I dont think Kreider gets moved because it seems like AV really likes him. Miller, maybe, but he has torn up the AHL and is really young

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Part of me is wondering after a season wanting of Stastny is if it's worth the length/term. I'm beginning to question it, but in the short term  I am fine with the signing, long term - I am nervous.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Part of me is wondering after a season wanting of Stastny is if it's worth the length/term. I'm beginning to question it, but in the short term  I am fine with the signing, long term - I am nervous.

 

If the Devils had a ton of prospects/young players, it would be a question.  They don't, so Stastny isn't going to make them make a difficult move with their youngsters.  And even though it's higher variance it's almost certainly better to put your free agent money into one top player than 2 middling players.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's looking like one ECF appearance (a loss to you-know-who of course) in all of Sather's time with the Rangers.  They've won a whopping 6 playoff series so far in his time there.  Yeah, I'm sure that was the plan when he was signed up.  There's definitely a crapshoot feel to the playoffs these days, but all Sather seems to know how to do is bring in expensive marquee names, even if they're clearly not what they were (Wade Redden).  Damned near zero creativity.

 

 

Sometimes, the best moves you make are the ones you don't. He broke up a team that reached an ECF. Looks like I was right about the Nash trade. Dubinsky was a key cog who Tort misused. Subtracting him hurt their identity. They also lost Prust and Anisimov. I hated the AV hiring but he's done a respectable job. The problem is they still don't have a top line center and lack a power play QB. The second one hurts big time. You can't rely on an aging Richards with no true point. McDonagh probably is playing with a separated shoulder.

 

Not even the most negative Ranger fan could've predicted Nash's demise. Concussions didn't help. His puck possession stats are good but he's paid to finish. I actually feel for him. He's trying but just looks like a shell. Too much on perimeter. The best thing AV did was turn Kreider into a power wing. He uses his size, strength and speed around the net. It still doesn't excuse the lack of adjustments with the PP. Kreider is an important player because he's their fastest skater and is one of the few who drives the net. When your bravest guy is Zuccarello, that just won't cut it. Zuke plays with balls. His line with Brassard and Pouliot are the only one that gets any consistent pressure.

 

Obviously, Game 4 was a flat out embarrassment. But also highlighted their weaknesses. When you subtract a Callahan who's your leader, you risk becoming soft. The Rangers are as vanilla as it gets. I can't explain St. Louis. Obviously, it becomes more clear with his Mom's tragedy. Supposedly, she was sick for a while which might be the truth behind why he wanted to come here. That's a horrible thing. Feel for MSL and his family.

 

My biggest issue with the team is their lack of guts. Are they really about to go belly up to a Pens team that isn't what we'd call great by any stretch? At some point, enough is enough. Every good team shows a pulse. I took the Pens in 7 because I thought it would be hard fought. I don't think I'm asking for a lot for my team to show up for Game 5 and get the series back to MSG. I'm fed up with the excuses. Vigneault was a whiner with Vancouver. I don't need to hear about the schedule or how disappointed he and the players are about the booing. I don't believe in booing. There aren't enough real fans at the games anymore. I don't even care enough to go. That's what Dolan wanted. They priced out the diehards. The old MSG was much better.

 

CR, this isn't about the goalie anymore. It's about how poorly constructed they're built. Lundqvist is a top 3 goalie. I get into debates all the time about whether I'd put him ahead of Richter. I still wouldn't. Richter knew how to win the big games. But he also benefited from much better talent. It's not even a contest. My fear is that as long as Sather is running the ship, Hank's remaining good years will be wasted. He's getting older. He's not the reason they're down. 25 giveaways. Imagine that happening under Tort. No toughness. Easy to play against.

 

FWIW, Montreal looks like the better team than Boston. They lost on a fluky goal but I like how they play. They're not big either but play with much more ferocity. And boast the biggest power play weapon. Subban. Price looks locked in. I originally took the Bruins but think it might be the Habs year. Either one of those teams should reach the SCF. Glad the Ducks woke up and got back in that series. The Hawks look pretty tough. Love how the Wild compete at home. That'll be a tough Game 4. I think it's Kings and Hawks out West which would be a rematch. A toss up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

D21, I still think Lundqvist is a good goalie, and wasn't trying to imply that a series loss here would be his fault (if he has a terrible Game 5 though, he's got to get some of the blame).  Let's face it, in the NHL, the goalie often gets either too much of the credit or the blame.  Regardless of what happens, is it Lundqvist's fault that his team suffered back-to-back shutouts?  In all fairness, the only series I really remember him being dreadful in was 2005-06, and he had a lot of help on that one. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rip to Marty St Louis' mother. If he plays tonight it's gotta be tough.

Also on Nash- I really don't think it has much to do with pressure, I just don't think he's all that great, and in the playoffs when your playing top teams they'll be more adept at shutting down your best offensive weapon, especially when you don't have many other threats.

Edited by dmann422

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

FWIW, Montreal looks like the better team than Boston. They lost on a fluky goal but I like how they play. They're not big either but play with much more ferocity. And boast the biggest power play weapon. Subban. Price looks locked in. I originally took the Bruins but think it might be the Habs year. Either one of those teams should reach the SCF. Glad the Ducks woke up and got back in that series. The Hawks look pretty tough. Love how the Wild compete at home. That'll be a tough Game 4. I think it's Kings and Hawks out West which would be a rematch. A toss up.

 

i really dont know how anyone could think that MTL is the better team... watching games Boston ALWAYS has the puck. They control everything. Mtl has to wait for opportunities they really dont create anything other than odd man rushes once in awhile since everyone is always in their end .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i really dont know how anyone could think that MTL is the better team... watching games Boston ALWAYS has the puck. They control everything. Mtl has to wait for opportunities they really dont create anything other than odd man rushes once in awhile since everyone is always in their end .

 

Montreal looks really good when Subban is on the ice. Not so much when he is on the bench.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Douglas Murray is such an incredible disaster.  I complain about Salvador but this guy is way worse - I'm not even sure he could be decent in the AHL at this point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i really dont know how anyone could think that MTL is the better team... watching games Boston ALWAYS has the puck. They control everything. Mtl has to wait for opportunities they really dont create anything other than odd man rushes once in awhile since everyone is always in their end .

 

Ya but SHOT QUALITY is what MTL has going for them. Bruins just take softies from center ice trying to drive up their CORSI.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ya but SHOT QUALITY is what MTL has going for them. Bruins just take softies from center ice trying to drive up their CORSI.

 

Man you're cool. Like really. I hope your friends knows how cool you are on the internet. Be sure to tell them

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Man you're cool. Like really. I hope your friends knows how cool you are on the internet. Be sure to tell them

 

It was just a chirp. Relax.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It was just a chirp. Relax.

 

how can i possibly relax, you just acknowledged me, thats huge. Coolest guy on the internet actually acknowledged me. This is unreal. I gotta call a few people, gotta have to take screen shots. Theres no way they'd believe me. 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sometimes, the best moves you make are the ones you don't. He broke up a team that reached an ECF. Looks like I was right about the Nash trade. Dubinsky was a key cog who Tort misused. Subtracting him hurt their identity. They also lost Prust and Anisimov.

 

 

You bring up a TON of good points, man... When I'm not getting in a good-natured shouting match with a Rangers fan, but actually talking flat out hockey, you said a lot of the things I've been saying all season. The loss of Dubinsky and Prust hurt a lot more than anyone would've ever guessed. Two of those "intangibles" players, you can't really explain it.

 

 

 

 

When your bravest guy is Zuccarello, that just won't cut it. Zuke plays with balls. His line with Brassard and Pouliot are the only one that gets any consistent pressure.

 

This pretty much explains the Rangers' season in a nutshell.

 

 

 

 

I don't believe in booing. There aren't enough real fans at the games anymore. I don't even care enough to go. That's what Dolan wanted. They priced out the diehards. The old MSG was much better.

 

Yup. I went to MSG for a few games during the Rangers' "dark years". I felt the fan intensity back then, got booed for the jersey I was wearing, got heckled everywhere, all the fun things associated with going to an away arena. I went to the two games at MSG this season to check out the renovations. Both games were absolute THRILLERS. First one Rangers and Devils were going tit-for-tat with goals until Carter scored the winner with a few minutes left. Second game, Rangers answered back at the end of the third period to force overtime, which Gelinas scored the winner in. Regardless, they were both incredible games. But I didn't hear one peep, not one heckle all game. I didn't hear more than 3 or 4 loud "Let's Go Rangers!" chants all game, the building was so quiet. Even this year's intro music and video on the jumbotron seems sanitized, forced, and corporate. The renovations were nice, but the atmosphere was horrible. I've seen more excitement at the Nassau Coliseum every time I've been (8-9 times, I think). The people in the seats aren't real fans, it's become just another tourist or upscale client-meeting attraction in midtown, which is a bummer, from a neutral hockey fan's perspective. On a very basic level, I enjoy and appreciate the hostility and intensity of an away fanbase at an away arena.

 

 

 

 

I get into debates all the time about whether I'd put him ahead of Richter. I still wouldn't. Richter knew how to win the big games. But he also benefited from much better talent. It's not even a contest. My fear is that as long as Sather is running the ship, Hank's remaining good years will be wasted. He's getting older. He's not the reason they're down. 25 giveaways. Imagine that happening under Tort. No toughness. Easy to play against.

 

I agree 100% with everything you said. People underestimate the intangibles in some of the goalies we call "top goalies". There's an animal instinct that the best goalies have, to win the big game. Ten years might go by and Henrik could still be an incredibly talented but losing goalie, and Rangers fans will still be entirely blaming the team in front of him. That's fair and all, but the BEST goalies have carried the team, won the big games, stolen games or whole series even. That's just one of the qualities wrapped up in being "a great". What solidifies Brodeur to me as the #1 or at least #2 goalie in the history of the game is not only that he was able to win championships with a well-built and balanced team, but the way he played when the team wasn't well-built and balanced. The only equivalent would be Henrik Lundqvist winning a few Stanley Cups and THEN keeping the team in first place/top of the league for 4-5 years with the Tortorella team he had in 2012. But yeah, didn't mean to make this a Henrik-Brodeur debate; I agree with you that he's just not in that league, not for lack of skill but the intangibles.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Richter was a terrific goalie for a while...but injuries and playing on some meh teams hurt him.  He was better than his numbers suggest. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Derek is getting too nostalgic about the Richter years. Lundqvist is the better goalie. You don't think Lundqvist could have won the Cup with 1994 team? Do you think prime Richter is leading the Rangers of the last 7-8 years very far?  Henrik  had an incredible run in 2012 on a team that didn't have much business being there.

 

Richter played quite well in 1994. Lundqvist has played just as well in the playoffs, but just never had the benefit of being on a team nearly as good as the 1994 team.

Edited by devilsrule33

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Derek is getting too nostalgic about the Richter years. Lundqvist is the better goalie. You don't think Lundqvist could have won the Cup with 1994 team? Do you think prime Richter is leading the Rangers of the last 7-8 years very far?  Henrik  had an incredible run in 2012 on a team that didn't have much business being there.

 

Richter played quite well in 1994. Lundqvist has played just as well in the playoffs, but just never had the benefit of being on a team nearly as good as the 1994 team.

 

Not saying that I disagree with your overall point, but in 2012 the Rangers were a top seed in the East and won the division.  They had a very good season (even if some will claim it was luck), and rightfully deserved to be in the ECF.  I'm not saying that they were the 80's Oilers, but you're selling that team and, by extension, the 2012 Devils, short of what they were.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not saying that I disagree with your overall point, but in 2012 the Rangers were a top seed in the East and won the division.  They had a very good season (even if some will claim it was luck), and rightfully deserved to be in the ECF.  I'm not saying that they were the 80's Oilers, but you're selling that team and, by extension, the 2012 Devils, short of what they were.

 

They most likely won the Atlantic and the East only because Crosby played 22 games, but  Lundqvist was excellent and the main reason they won the Conference. He won the Vezina, .930 save percentage, 8 shutouts. They scratched, clawed and barely survived  past the 7th and 8th seeds to get to the conference finals (Lundqvist had a .945 and .927 save percentage in those series)

 

The 2012 Devils weren't all that. Remember, they needed OT wins in game 6 and 7 to beat the Panthers. Devils got hot offensively for a few weeks, and didn't play against very tough teams. It was a fun ride, and that's all that matters.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now