Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Elias26

Nhl Rumours Are Super Hot, Juicy

49 posts in this topic

Who the hell cares about the Art Ross trophy? When is the last time he did anything in the playoffs?....when he had Mario which was my point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Who the hell cares about the Art Ross trophy? When is the last time he did anything in the playoffs?....when he had Mario which was my point.

Who cares about the Art Ross Trophy? Uh, let's see, it only shows who the best scorer in the league is - not only did Jagr win it, he often won it going away or with 65 games played, he was that good.

The last time Jagr had Lemieux in the playoffs he was awful - in 2001 Jagr was a total non-factor against New Jersey, and it was clear he was sulking and wanted out of Pittsburgh. Without Lemieux it appears he scored 37 points in 26 playoff games from the years 98 to 2000 when he was racking up those Art Ross Trophies - yes, you're right, he did nothing. How do you say these things? Pittsburgh was atrocious without Jagr in the late 90s - a patchwork defense, patchwork up front, an average Tom Barrasso or horrid Ken Wregget in net. Jagr might be the greatest right wing of all time, and you think Mario Lemieux is responsible for his success? I just don't understand what you're talking about.

Edited by Triumph

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Although, in 1999 Jagr played practically on one leg for only about half a series for the Pens against NJ and, as I remember, beat us anyway. He had his moments.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Although, in 1999 Jagr played practically on one leg for only about half a series for the Pens against NJ and, as I remember, beat us anyway. He had his moments.

Right. There was talk of Scott Stevens being finished considering how well an injured Jagr played against him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Who cares about the Art Ross Trophy? Uh, let's see, it only shows who the best scorer in the league is - not only did Jagr win it, he often won it going away or with 65 games played, he was that good.

The last time Jagr had Lemieux in the playoffs he was awful - in 2001 Jagr was a total non-factor against New Jersey, and it was clear he was sulking and wanted out of Pittsburgh. Without Lemieux it appears he scored 37 points in 26 playoff games from the years 98 to 2000 when he was racking up those Art Ross Trophies - yes, you're right, he did nothing. How do you say these things? Pittsburgh was atrocious without Jagr in the late 90s - a patchwork defense, patchwork up front, an average Tom Barrasso or horrid Ken Wregget in net. Jagr might be the greatest right wing of all time, and you think Mario Lemieux is responsible for his success? I just don't understand what you're talking about.

Maybe I just don't associate Jagr with playoff hockey since he has only played 9 playoff games since 2001.

But he does have those Art Ross trophy's to polish every April.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So how is it Tri and Manta can take a thread with "Hot and Juicy" in the title and make it so... Tri and Manta? :doh1:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So how is it Tri and Manta can take a thread with "Hot and Juicy" in the title and make it so... Tri and Manta? :doh1:

Are you saything that "Tri and Manta" don't equal "Hot and Juicy"?

Is that it???

Or is it simply that there was no Stevens oggling in the thread anywhere...hmmm, PK???? :evil:

Edited by SueNJ97

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Right now, I would absolutely love to wager. Jagr was incredible last season, no doubt. But he provided 80% of the Ranger offense. He did great because there were no expectations and no pressure---everyone assumed based on the roster--- that they would finish last and were underestimated by everyone.

When the pressure is on Jagr disappears and is easily frustrated (see playoffs) and feigns injury. He does his best when he plays with Straka, whom I believe they maynot re-sign. Lunqvist is the goalie flavor of the year, but lets see how they respond early this season, when the refs don't make the early season calls they did like last year. I don't see alot of GREAT talent in their young players aside from Prucha and maybe Staal.

Pittsburgh, Florida and maybe Atlanta (if they have a goalie for the full season) will take the Rangers and Tampa spot for the final playoff spot.

Jagr only did what he did because of the damn Devils. If it was any other playoff opponent, that injury never happens. That's why I said all along they were the one team I wanted no part of.

Also, I wouldn't bet against Lundqvist. He's in the Brodeur mold.

Again, it depends on what they do this summer. If they sit on their asses, then I agree. But if they make the necessary changes, they will be back and won't be easy pickings next Spring.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Also, I wouldn't bet against Lundqvist. He's in the Brodeur mold.

Again, it depends on what they do this summer. If they sit on their asses, then I agree. But if they make the necessary changes, they will be back and won't be easy pickings next Spring.

Every year a new goalie is in the Brodeur mold: Ward, Legace, Giguere, Nabokov, etc. Talk to me in five years then MAYBE you can consider "thinking" about that kind of comparison.

Right now Lundvist is nothing more than the new Dunham until proven otherwise.

I do agree, it depends on what happens in the off season, right now I am not impressed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Every year a new goalie is in the Brodeur mold: Ward, Legace, Giguere, Nabokov, etc. Talk to me in five years then MAYBE you can consider "thinking" about that kind of comparison.

Right now Lundvist is nothing more than the new Dunham until proven otherwise.

I do agree, it depends on what happens in the off season, right now I am not impressed.

I don't usually do this. But I am so sick of it. So I'm going to tell you how I feel. When Lundqvist dominates the fvcking division for the next decade and leads the Rangers to a Cup and wins multiple Vezinas, what will you have to say then?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't usually do this. But I am so sick of it. So I'm going to tell you how I feel. When Lundqvist dominates the fvcking division for the next decade and leads the Rangers to a Cup and wins multiple Vezinas, what will you have to say then?

Can we wait until he does it?

I ask because after Brodeur won the Calder and then a Stanley Cup with the Devils I still knew plenty of Ranger fans who insisted he was a flash in the pan and, in fact would never be anything, no matter how many awards or Cups he won, until he beat Richter in a playoff series. I still know some who insist that, since he never beat Richter in anything but the Olympics, he will still never compare to Mike. This despite 3 Cups and 2 Vezinas.

So maybe we just shouldn't go here, Derek.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't usually do this. But I am so sick of it. So I'm going to tell you how I feel. When Lundqvist dominates the fvcking division for the next decade and leads the Rangers to a Cup and wins multiple Vezinas, what will you have to say then?

And if he doesn't? Derek, what's wrong? You've been getting pissy in your posts lately. Chill and remember this is a DEVILS board, not the rag cafe. You can bow at the altar of Lundquist all you want there, but Manta is right, he is still a work in progress.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Can we wait until he does it?

I ask because after Brodeur won the Calder and then a Stanley Cup with the Devils I still knew plenty of Ranger fans who insisted he was a flash in the pan and, in fact would never be anything, no matter how many awards or Cups he won, until he beat Richter in a playoff series. I still know some who insist that, since he never beat Richter in anything but the Olympics, he will still never compare to Mike. This despite 3 Cups and 2 Vezinas.

So maybe we just shouldn't go here, Derek.

I am sick of Manta labeling our star players. For once, I am going to be bold. Lundqvist was the best damn goalie in the Eastern Conference all year until he got hurt. And he gives me the same feeling Richter did. And I believe he'll be an even better netminder.

I am that confident that he'll reach that elite level and backstop the team to a fifth Cup.

And if he doesn't? Derek, what's wrong? You've been getting pissy in your posts lately. Chill and remember this is a DEVILS board, not the rag cafe. You can bow at the altar of Lundquist all you want there, but Manta is right, he is still a work in progress.

Nothing wrong. Manta likes to trash our players, even Jagr. I feel like dishing back for a change.

You won't see me calling Brian Gionta's 48-goal season a fluke.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just wanted to add something to what Sue said about Brodeur. I'm not one of those fans who thought he was a fluke back in '94. I was convinced he was a great goalie after that. And he proved to be.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't usually do this. But I am so sick of it. So I'm going to tell you how I feel. When Lundqvist dominates the fvcking division for the next decade and leads the Rangers to a Cup and wins multiple Vezinas, what will you have to say then?

I don't know that Lundqvist will lead the Rangers to a Cup or win multiple Vezinas. I feel like he will have serious competition with M.A Fleury, Kari Lethonen, and Roberto Luongo for the Vezina every year, meaning he might win a few but it's not a guarantee, and as for the Cup, he'll have to get it soon because Jagr ain't here forever and when he leaves the Rangers will be in serious trouble.

I do know that he is way better than Legace and Nabokov. He is not a flash in the pan, and I would be willing to bet on that as well. This isn't Jim Carey - he already has a gold medal and is a stellar goaltender. I just have no idea how you can compare him to Mike Dunham - he's not Mike Dunham.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't know that Lundqvist will lead the Rangers to a Cup or win multiple Vezinas. I feel like he will have serious competition with M.A Fleury, Kari Lethonen, and Roberto Luongo for the Vezina every year, meaning he might win a few but it's not a guarantee, and as for the Cup, he'll have to get it soon because Jagr ain't here forever and when he leaves the Rangers will be in serious trouble.

I do know that he is way better than Legace and Nabokov. He is not a flash in the pan, and I would be willing to bet on that as well. This isn't Jim Carey - he already has a gold medal and is a stellar goaltender. I just have no idea how you can compare him to Mike Dunham - he's not Mike Dunham.

Gosh, the finals aren't even finished and it seems people can wait to see their predictions for next year.

Here's for you "juicy", the comparison to Dunham:

Allusion I: For those who can remember: When the Rangers first got Dunham from Nashville after Richter went down it was considered a steal by many Ranger fans. After he won his first few games he considered "Broder like" to many Ranger fans and the press. That soon disappeared as the novelty wore off and he actually played a full season his star began to fade. Lunqvist, in his honeymoon period, lets see how this novelty plays out.

Allusion II: Lunqvist is actually closer to Dunhams achievements than "Brodeur-like"

QUOTE(Derek21 @ Jun 14 2006

I don't usually do this. But I am so sick of it. So I'm going to tell you how I feel. When Lundqvist dominates the fvcking division for the next decade and leads the Rangers to a Cup and wins multiple Vezinas, what will you have to say then?

-IF he does, I will admit that I was wrong. But that is a pretty big IF. IF he wins multiply Vezina's and a few Stanley Cups, THEN you can talk about him being in the "Brodeur mold" To date: he has not achieved anything close to Marty aside from your skewed imagination/potential.

QUOTE(Derek21 @ Jun 14 2006

I am sick of Manta labeling our star players. For once, I am going to be bold. Lundqvist was the best damn goalie in the Eastern Conference all year until he got hurt. And he gives me the same feeling Richter did. And I believe he'll be an even better netminder.

-What star players??? You have one--Jagr. I stated that he will probably not have as good a year as last year because team won't underestimate the Rangers as they did early in the season.

I stated that Jagr is about 80% of your offense, and that I don't see him repeating this as:

A) there is no-layoff that will effect veterans players

B) the officiating will not be as beneficial to the Rangers as they were Sept-Nov. when breathing on the opposition was a penalty.

Let's see how magical Lundqvist is when he isn't playing with a lead and not winning games.

This year there ARE expectations in NY, if it starts out frustrating for Jagr, and he sulks (last years in Pitt and Washington) the Rangers are done.

I don't know that Lundqvist will lead the Rangers to a Cup or win multiple Vezinas. I feel like he will have serious competition with M.A Fleury, Kari Lethonen, and Roberto Luongo for the Vezina every year, meaning he might win a few but it's not a guarantee, and as for the Cup, he'll have to get it soon because Jagr ain't here forever and when he leaves the Rangers will be in serious trouble.

I do know that he is way better than Legace and Nabokov. He is not a flash in the pan, and I would be willing to bet on that as well. This isn't Jim Carey - he already has a gold medal and is a stellar goaltender. I just have no idea how you can compare him to Mike Dunham - he's not Mike Dunham.

Gosh, the finals aren't even finished and it seems people can wait to see their predictions for next year.

Here's for you "juicy", the comparison to Dunham:

Allusion I: For those who can remember: When the Rangers first got Dunham from Nashville after Richter went down it was considered a steal by many Ranger fans. After he won his first few games he considered "Broder like" to many Ranger fans and the press. That soon disappeared as the novelty wore off and he actually played a full season his star began to fade. Lunqvist, in his honeymoon period, lets see how this novelty plays out.

Allusion II: Lunqvist is actually closer to Dunhams achievements than "Brodeur-like"

QUOTE(Derek21 @ Jun 14 2006

I don't usually do this. But I am so sick of it. So I'm going to tell you how I feel. When Lundqvist dominates the fvcking division for the next decade and leads the Rangers to a Cup and wins multiple Vezinas, what will you have to say then?

-IF he does, I will admit that I was wrong. But that is a pretty big IF. IF he wins multiply Vezina's and a few Stanley Cups, THEN you can talk about him being in the "Brodeur mold" To date: he has not achieved anything close to Marty aside from your skewed imagination/potential.

QUOTE(Derek21 @ Jun 14 2006

I am sick of Manta labeling our star players. For once, I am going to be bold. Lundqvist was the best damn goalie in the Eastern Conference all year until he got hurt. And he gives me the same feeling Richter did. And I believe he'll be an even better netminder.

-What star players??? You have one--Jagr. I stated that he will probably not have as good a year as last year because team won't underestimate the Rangers as they did early in the season.

I stated that Jagr is about 80% of your offense, and that I don't see him repeating this as:

A) there is no-layoff that will effect veterans players

B) the officiating will not be as beneficial to the Rangers as they were Sept-Nov. when breathing on the opposition was a penalty.

Let's see how magical Lundqvist is when he isn't playing with a lead and not winning games.

This year there ARE expectations in NY, if it starts out frustrating for Jagr, and he sulks (last years in Pitt and Washington) the Rangers are done.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lundqvist cannot be compared to Dunham. Where is Dunham's Olympic gold medal? In fact, when did Mike Dunham lead a team to the playoffs? When Dunham was Lundqvist's age, he was the starter in Albany not a Vezina contender. His achievements are far closer to Brodeur because Brodeur took the league by storm in 94 as well, winning a Calder - with Ovechkin and Crosby in the picture, Lundqvist probably won't get one, but any other year he would have - like if Brodeur had come up in 93, he would have lost to Teemu Selanne.

Anyway, I'm done with this thread - anyone comparing Henrik Lundqvist to Mike Dunham either doesn't know what they're talking about or is purposely looking to start fights.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What is a better comparison, Jim Carey to Mike Dunham or Jim Carey to Martin Broduer? The point isn't that Lundqvist won't be a superstar, the point is that there have been amazing goaltenders after 1 season who went on to flop and so to compare a goalie with one fantastic year to a goalie with a fantastic career isn't a good comparison.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What is a better comparison, Jim Carey to Mike Dunham or Jim Carey to Martin Broduer? The point isn't that Lundqvist won't be a superstar, the point is that there have been amazing goaltenders after 1 season who went on to flop and so to compare a goalie with one fantastic year to a goalie with a fantastic career isn't a good comparison.

In terms of Lundqvist's desire to win, it's similar to the great Brodeur. The guy hates losing. After how bad it ended, I'll bet any amount of money that he is working his ass off to be stronger so that injuries aren't an issue. I expect him to come into camp refocused and determined.

I have supreme confidence in Henrik.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lundqvist is a very athletic goalie.

But his fundamentals as a goalie are not as good as other young goalies like Miller or Cam Ward even.

That said, there would be 12-14 teams fighting themselves to pencil him in as their #1 goalie.

I think Lundqvist's injuries had to do with several things.

1. He faced a considerably longer season as an NHL starter, and he played in the Olympics.

2. He had a god-awful set of defense pairings in front of him, and was tested hard, especially the latter portion of the season.

I still like how fluid he can be at times in the crease, but he has some work to do on the finer points of being a goalie. Whether or not he masters them will decide how good he truly can be.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You forgot one other thing. Lundqvist was rail thin which had to contribute to his hip flexor. He admitted after the season that he needed to get stronger.

If there is one flaw in his goaltending, maybe it's upstairs. Though earlier in the season his glove was lightning quick. Not so much that it wasn't at the end. But blocker side high is an area that needs work.

He stays very square to the shooter and tries to take away anything down low. And relies on quick reflexes for high shots. But blocker side sometimes leaves room.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What is a better comparison, Jim Carey to Mike Dunham or Jim Carey to Martin Broduer? The point isn't that Lundqvist won't be a superstar, the point is that there have been amazing goaltenders after 1 season who went on to flop and so to compare a goalie with one fantastic year to a goalie with a fantastic career isn't a good comparison.

Thanks Devils731; at least someone is paying attention.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Anyway, I'm done with this thread - anyone comparing Henrik Lundqvist to Mike Dunham either doesn't know what they're talking about or is purposely looking to start fights.

Or you're not really comprehending the point. Take some deep breath's there Juicy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pratts kind of a goof and his show sucks bag, i have been hearing that he said on his show the other day that Nonis (mr timbit himself!) will be announcing the new Canucks coach soon, possibly tomorrow, not that anyone here cares, just thought i'd throw it out there

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
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0