msweet

congrats to the 2013-14 Champs, the Kings

833 posts in this topic

I'm really impressed with Carl Hagelin if anybody from the Rangers.  That kid can skate.  He burned the Kings defense multiple times and almost did it again with less than a minute to go in the 3rd period.  Huge stop by Quick saved the game

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

According to Boomer and Carton, aside from a couple of Ranger mistakes on the Kings' goals, the Rangers 'outplayed the Kings and would've won'. Lmfao. I guess they missed the middle of the second period on.

 

I thought the Rangers played well in the first period for sure and did a solid job applying pressure (and the Kings definitely got some breaks in that period), but the game swung in the Kings' favor pretty heavily as the game went on.  Not sure what Boomer and Carton were watching. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Carton said it was a 'gift win' for the Kings. You can't make this up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey, ranger fans, don't forget your 94 rangers lost game 1 in overtime too and you know how that ended up! (this line by happy homer bruce beck & nj.com).  Local coverage makes me barf!  LGK!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah Boomer and Carton mentioned that too eldon lol. The NY media is incapable of talking about the Rangers without mentioning 94.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah Boomer and Carton mentioned that too eldon lol. The NY media is incapable of talking about the Rangers without mentioning 94.

 

Heard Boomer telling Carton that.  I have never seen professional sports writers decide to throw away all their professionalism and experience of watching the sport and go with the Rags on this all because they have "destiny" on their side.  If they predict any other series in the NHL or any series in any sport based on what is basically them having a "gut feeling" then they would be ridiculed for it.

 

But nope, believing in "gut feeling" and "destiny" is A-OK now with the NY sports media now that the Rags are in the finals.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mike Keenan is on with them now, another 94 circle-jerk incoming lmao.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm really impressed with Carl Hagelin if anybody from the Rangers.  That kid can skate.  He burned the Kings defense multiple times and almost did it again with less than a minute to go in the 3rd period.  Huge stop by Quick saved the game

 

Yes and no. Carl Hagelin's role on the team is pretty much limited to Kovalchuk's role when he was a penalty killer. Force the brain fart or error, go on the breakaway. It's opportunism, and that's fine. But the Rangers don't expect that to be their gameplan every game, do they? Can't help but think the Kings take this extra day off (2 days until next game) and come out on Saturday and tighten up those mistakes they were making at the blueline. That absolutely cannot be how Rangers win a game in 2014, or a series; nothing but crossing your fingers in your zone and counterattack hockey?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nice win, LA seems focussed on playing a ags looked tired inthe thirdmore complete game in game 2.  Rags should have stolen that game, up 2-0, but clearly the Kings sizae mattered and the Rags looked tired inthe 3rd

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

cant believe some of the lucky bounces the rags got

how long is their luck gonna last.......yeah they lost tonight, but it shouldve been a laugh-er after 3 periods

thats what I kept cursing till my wife told me to shut up, every Fn bounce found a rags stick. I was waiting for another fluke ranger goal in OT

 

btw anyone else think nash looked clueless??

Edited by EdgeControl

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm considering laying serious money on the rags to lessen the blow if they win. If the kings do the job it'll be money happily spent

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

thats what I kept cursing till my wife told me to shut up, every Fn bounce found a rags stick. I was waiting for another fluke ranger goal in OT

 

btw anyone else think nash looked clueless??

yeah after the rags got out of that third period still tied...you knew they would get a lucky goal in OT...but the hockey gods are running out of hand-outs hopefully!

 

Nash has been.....Nash-like

Edited by The 29th Pick

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

By the way, I've never fooled around with sports betting, can you do it online and not get F'ed in the A?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm considering laying serious money on the rags to lessen the blow if they win. If the kings do the job it'll be money happily spent

I do this with ranger fans during the season....its a win win situation!

 

 

By the way, I've never fooled around with sports betting, can you do it online and not get F'ed in the A?

don't know 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This Kings team looks much different than the one we faced two years ago. I hope they win this series but I don't think it'll be the cakewalk I envisioned

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

thats what I kept cursing till my wife told me to shut up, every Fn bounce found a rags stick. I was waiting for another fluke ranger goal in OT

 

btw anyone else think nash looked clueless??

 

 

Nash could of redeemed himself late but he blew that 2 on 1 oportunity which was huge. Anybody who has watched film of Nash knows he always pulls that same move in transition so I forget who the defenseman was on the Kings who knocked the puck away but they must of knew it was coming.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nash could of redeemed himself late but he blew that 2 on 1 oportunity which was huge. Anybody who has watched film of Nash knows he always pulls that same move in transition so I forget who the defenseman was on the Kings who knocked the puck away but they must of knew it was coming.

 

could've (could have)

must've (must have)

 

I know, Grammar Police Alert...but that's right up there with you're/your and there/their/they're...what's so complicated?

 

Anyway, five career playoff goals for Nash in 37 playoff games (on 4.1% shooting)...always amazing how some guys just seem to disappear come playoff time, for whatever the reasons (Tri would probably say Nash's shooting% is a result of bad luck and that no conclusions can really be drawn from the three small isolated samples that make up Nash's NHL playoff resume).  FWIW, Nash's shots per game is about the same:  about 3.46 in the regular season and 3.32 in the playoffs.

Edited by Colorado Rockies 1976

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

could've (could have)

must've (must have)

 

I know, Grammar Police Alert...

 

i had an english teacher in high school that would give you an F - and wouldn't change it - on any paper or assignment that made this mistake. i can excuse the they're there their as homonyms are a bit harder (not much).

 

but "would of" to me is as "as per" is to Triumph.

Edited by sundstrom

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyway, five career playoff goals for Nash in 37 playoff games (on 4.1% shooting)...always amazing how some guys just seem to disappear come playoff time, for whatever the reasons (Tri would probably say Nash's shooting% is a result of bad luck and that no conclusions can really be drawn from the three small isolated samples that make up Nash's NHL playoff resume).  FWIW, Nash's shots per game is about the same:  about 3.46 in the regular season and 3.32 in the playoffs.

 

Are you disagreeing with what you think Tri would say and believe that he is someone who disappears during the playoff time?

 

FWIW Jonathan Toews had a stretch of 4 goals in 34 playoff games between 2011-2013 with similar shooting percentage numbers. Just the way it goes over a period of time. He's obviously put up ridiculous runs to like in 2010 and these playoffs.  It's a shame that a player as good as Nash had only been in the playoffs once in his first nine seasons. Maybe, he'd have a chance to put up some insane shooting percentage playoff run to quiet any critics. Instead we only have a body of work of 30 something games...really not enough.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are you disagreeing with what you think Tri would say and believe that he is someone who disappears during the playoff time?

 

FWIW Jonathan Toews had a stretch of 4 goals in 34 playoff games between 2011-2013 with similar shooting percentage numbers. Just the way it goes over a period of time. He's obviously put up ridiculous runs to like in 2010 and these playoffs.  It's a shame that a player as good as Nash had only been in the playoffs once in his first nine seasons. Maybe, he'd have a chance to put up some insane shooting percentage playoff run to quiet any critics. Instead we only have a body of work of 30 something games...really not enough.

 

Not disagreeing with Tri, more pointing out that some people don't link lack of playoff success to anything more than short-sample futility (most playoff samples are bound to be very short in relation to a full season) and the level of luck during such samples...it's the main reason people with that thought process tend to dispel the idea of "clutch".  I brought up the shots per game specifically to show that there isn't that obvious smoking gun to point to; if anything, a lot of people would claim that Nash's insanely low shooting% can't possibly be sustainable over a larger sample. 

 

I do think that some players' games don't translate as well to playoff competition (especially since they're facing better opponents on a game-to-game basis, and the number of games against the same opponent (four to seven) allows opposing coaches to continually make game-to-game adjustments to try to take away the things that a given player does best.  It's a different challenge than the regular season.

 

I've always wondered how the human element factors in over time.  ANYONE can have a meh playoff season, followed by another one, and it really could have to do almost entirely with bad luck, not with being "unclutch" or "soft" or "having trouble with the spotlight".  But then there's a third meh playoff season...and the negative articles start getting written.  Heading into a fourth playoff season, does that player who, for whatever the reasons, hasn't had success on the level of his regular season already start gripping his stick tighter, or start overthinking almost before the puck for the first playoff game is even dropped? 

 

But anyway, the short answer is I'm not saying I disagree with Tri, though he tends to discount the human element in these things...I do believe that some people embrace the big moments and find ways to flourish in them more than others.  Nash's playoff story isn't off to a good start, but it's not a complete book yet.  And if (bleech) the Rangers win the Cup, no one will be talking about his playoff numbers that much...especially if he has a key goal or two in the Finals.

Edited by Colorado Rockies 1976

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

btw anyone else think nash looked clueless??

 

Especially that 3 on 1 late in the game. He's skating at full pace, THEN HE CUTS BACK?????? All he needed was a tiny nudge and he's sending the puck to 1 of the 2 other open men rushing in on Quick. Really makes me scratch my head sometimes..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nash will never be a player who uses his teammates well.  3 on 1s where he has the puck aren't ever going to be his strong suit.  Still, the Rangers are a playoff team for the forseeable future and those numbers should get a little better.  We shouldn't expect them to even out - that's the gambler's fallacy - and so Nash will probably always have below-average playoff numbers for his career, and that'll be a knock on him.  

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