lazer Posted January 3, 2012 Share Posted January 3, 2012 Oh yea. Btw, this happened. aaaah crap don't hit me! Just got it in my gut! I think their offense will take care of this one though. Kovalchuck is due for a 2G game! yeah this didnt happen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CarpathianForest Posted January 3, 2012 Share Posted January 3, 2012 They haven't learned from the 3-0 lead against Florida dude what makes you think they will learn from this one? Now I just feel like they're lucky if they win after being up going into the 3rd. Don't forget the lead against San Jose, not to mention the leads we've almost blown. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ohms law Posted January 3, 2012 Share Posted January 3, 2012 You know perfectly well that the Devils will draw the Rangers and yea...use your imagination as to what I'm thinking would happen in that series. Actually, the Rangers wouldn't be a bad draw. They're a good team, but they seem... I don't know, "soft" I guess. Not terribly so, but they're not the equals of the Bruins or Detroit. Regular season standings lie, slightly. Always have, always will (in Hockey at least... come summertime when we're talking baseball [or I am, at least] it's a completely different story.) Hold on, Speedy. We gotta make the playoffs first. Oh, we're making the playoffs this season. It's not guaranteed of course, but we should make it. Middle of the pack, but we'll be in there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CarpathianForest Posted January 3, 2012 Share Posted January 3, 2012 (edited) Actually, the Rangers wouldn't be a bad draw. \ The Rangers would be a terrible draw. We'd most likely have Marty in net for at least 4 or more starts in the series. As a matter of fact I'm not sure the Devils would be able to win a series againt any of the teams 1-8. Edited January 3, 2012 by CarpathianForest Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScoreMoreThan3 Posted January 3, 2012 Share Posted January 3, 2012 (edited) The Devils have been blown out like, what, once versus Colorado? Every other game is tight, I just think that's how the entire season is going to be. To call us a laughing stock is definitely your frustration being translated into text. The only laughing stock in the league is Columbus, maybe Anaheim and NY Islanders... As far as the Bruins game, Devils will win. I'm calling it now. I've been to 3 straight home games and they've won them all. And this is my last game attending for the season before I am relegated to my lame Florida life again. They'll win! You're right but all I can say is I hope you're right. I'm just angry because these aren't all losses like the one against Carolina. It seems like every loss they're leading and just can't hold it. They are terrible at finishing. I just don't get it. There are more veterans than young players on this team so it shouldn't be happening. yeah this didnt happen Oh I meant 2 minute penalty..not 2G...typo Don't forget the lead against San Jose, not to mention the leads we've almost blown. Oh trust me I remember that game. up 2-0 ..tied 2-2 within what like 1:30 seconds? Yea, that seems to be the starting point of all this. I think the Devils were about to go on a nice 4 game winning streak when that happened. Edited January 3, 2012 by ScoreMoreThan3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NJDevs4978 Posted January 3, 2012 Share Posted January 3, 2012 Actually, the Rangers wouldn't be a bad draw. They're a good team, but they seem... I don't know, "soft" I guess. Not terribly so, but they're not the equals of the Bruins or Detroit. Regular season standings lie, slightly. Always have, always will (in Hockey at least... come summertime when we're talking baseball [or I am, at least] it's a completely different story.) Standings may 'lie' at times, but consistent results over the last five years do not. It's been proven Marty cannot beat Lundqvist. Can't do it. 6-21 against him lifetime. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Triumph Posted January 3, 2012 Share Posted January 3, 2012 Standings may 'lie' at times, but consistent results over the last five years do not. It's been proven Marty cannot beat Lundqvist. Can't do it. 6-21 against him lifetime. Totally ridiculous. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CarpathianForest Posted January 3, 2012 Share Posted January 3, 2012 Totally ridiculous. Elaborate on your point. Why is this totally ridiculous? I understand that there's too many variables to let it come down to this, but this stat only serves to help not hinder the argument that Marty is no good against the Rangers in their most recent incarnations. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ohms law Posted January 3, 2012 Share Posted January 3, 2012 Standings may 'lie' at times, but consistent results over the last five years do not. It's been proven Marty cannot beat Lundqvist. Can't do it. 6-21 against him lifetime. I agree with respect to the "consistent results over five years" point, certainly. However... I don't put much into the Goalie vs. Goalie direct matchups. It's not as though the Goalies score on each other, after all. Lundqvist has certainly been better at stopping the Devils, but it is the playoffs. The only point though is that if it's a choice between the Rangers or the Bruins, I'd definitely pick the Rangers. I'd prefer Florida, or even Philly (sorta... that's kind of a draw though), but the choice is more likely to be Boston or New York. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CarpathianForest Posted January 3, 2012 Share Posted January 3, 2012 Bottom line: The Devils won't get to the second round if they make the playoffs. They don't have the roster to manage a playoff series. Hell, they don't even have the stamina to go three periods most days. In a 9-10 day stretch they'd lose. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amberite Posted January 3, 2012 Share Posted January 3, 2012 I'm honestly almost to the point of thinking we should immediately take a penalty every time we get a power play and just battle it out 4-on-4. Our PP is beyond horrendous, and I'm pretty sure it has cost us more games than power plays have won us. We're 3-8-1 in games where we've given up a SHG, and I'm pretty sure our record when scoring a PPG can't offset that by too much. Also, the lack of momentum and the subsequent extra momentum the other team gets from our pitiful attempts have to play a role as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NJDevs4978 Posted January 3, 2012 Share Posted January 3, 2012 Elaborate on your point. Why is this totally ridiculous? I understand that there's too many variables to let it come down to this, but this stat only serves to help not hinder the argument that Marty is no good against the Rangers in their most recent incarnations. And that Lundqvist is sensational against the Devils, particularly against Marty (who tends to give up a soft goal every game against the Rangers now). Lundqvist has certainly been better at stopping the Devils, but it is the playoffs. And he was plenty good against us in the playoffs a couple years back, one of the few playoff series the Rangers have won in the last fifteen years Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScoreMoreThan3 Posted January 3, 2012 Share Posted January 3, 2012 (edited) Standings may 'lie' at times, but consistent results over the last five years do not. It's been proven Marty cannot beat Lundqvist. Can't do it. 6-21 against him lifetime. Well today was a prime example of why Brodeur can't beat Lundqvist. I'm guessing you watched both games. Hank gave up 2 goals but the Flyers were in the right place at the right time on the first and they scored another on a fast break moving Hank around (these are the only way he can be beaten). The goals Brodeur gave up were pretty weak. Hank is pretty much how Brodeur used to be. I think we both know Hank wouldn't have given up goal #2 tonight in the Devils/Sens game. Also the 6-21 mark is just unreal. Doesn't that mean Brodeur would be something like 48-17 vs the Rangers all time if Hank never happened? lol Edited January 3, 2012 by ScoreMoreThan3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CarpathianForest Posted January 3, 2012 Share Posted January 3, 2012 Well today was a prime example of why Brodeur can't beat Lundqvist. I'm guessing you watched both games. Hank gave up 2 goals but the Flyers were in the right place at the right time on the first and they scored another on a fast break moving Hank around (these are the only way he can be beaten). The goals Brodeur gave up were pretty weak. Hank is pretty much how Brodeur used to be. I think we both know Hank wouldn't have given up goal #2 tonight in the Devils/Sens game. Also the 6-21 mark is just unreal. Doesn't that mean Brodeur would be something like 48-17 vs the Rangers all time if Hank never happened? lol Add to the fact that the Rangers actually have a pretty d-core. One definitely head and shoulders above the on the Devils have. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScoreMoreThan3 Posted January 3, 2012 Share Posted January 3, 2012 Add to the fact that the Rangers actually have a pretty d-core. One definitely head and shoulders above the on the Devils have. Yea are defense is pretty blah to say the least. I guess the Rangers have been making the right moves over the years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScoreMoreThan3 Posted January 3, 2012 Share Posted January 3, 2012 (edited) Why is it so hard to find Brodeurs stats vs the Rags? And holy crap what a game between Stanford and OSU Ok never mind found it 43-26-20 with a 2.13 GAA and eight shutouts in 89 career games against NY. He's 6-21 vs Hank....um...so he's 37-5 vs the Rangers with out Hank? Wait...is that correct? Edited January 3, 2012 by ScoreMoreThan3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CarpathianForest Posted January 3, 2012 Share Posted January 3, 2012 Why is it so hard to find Brodeurs stats vs the Rags? And holy crap what a game between Stanford and OSU Ok never mind found it 43-26-20 with a 2.13 GAA and eight shutouts in 89 career games against NY. He's 6-21 vs Hank....um...so he's 37-5 vs the Rangers with out Hank? Wait...is that correct? You gotta consider for a decent chunk of Marty's career that Devils were really good and the Rags weren't really good. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Triumph Posted January 3, 2012 Share Posted January 3, 2012 lol @ the rangers having a good d corps. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CarpathianForest Posted January 3, 2012 Share Posted January 3, 2012 lol @ the rangers having a good d corps. Definitely better than ours. And a more disciplined team in all that puts in 60 minutes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScoreMoreThan3 Posted January 3, 2012 Share Posted January 3, 2012 You gotta consider for a decent chunk of Marty's career that Devils were really good and the Rags weren't really good. Who would have thought I mean with the signing of Gretsky, Jagr, Bure, etc. ..you figure Brodeur wouldn't have ever won a game vs them. Anyway to be 35-7 and then 6-21 ...that's pretty much night and day pathetic if you ask me. Sad. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScoreMoreThan3 Posted January 3, 2012 Share Posted January 3, 2012 Definitely better than ours. And a more disciplined team in all that puts in 60 minutes. I have to agree here Triumph ..Staal, Girardi, Del Zotto... I mean those are 3 solids right there. The Devils have maybe one solid in Salvadore? I mean really? That sucks. Foster isn't going to work. Greene, never liked him. Tallender, eh. Larrson is the future so we can only hope. Atrain is good but always hurt..defense is lame man. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steven M. Posted January 3, 2012 Share Posted January 3, 2012 Once again a New Jersey Devils Game Day Thread that ended in a loss devolves into a discussion about the New York Rangers. I'll never understand, I guess. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ohms law Posted January 3, 2012 Share Posted January 3, 2012 Yea... Oh well. I guess that I'm partially to blame too. Damn. *sigh* Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScoreMoreThan3 Posted January 3, 2012 Share Posted January 3, 2012 Once again a New Jersey Devils Game Day Thread that ended in a loss devolves into a discussion about the New York Rangers. I'll never understand, I guess. It all stemmed from Brodeur's soft goal he gave up tonight. The man has won many games for the Devils but unfortunately tonight I think he might have cost us one. He isn't 100% to blame. You have to be able to score more than a couple of goals in order to win a game but the goal he gave up needs to be stopped by an NHL goalie. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CarpathianForest Posted January 3, 2012 Share Posted January 3, 2012 It's devolved into a Rangers thread because they came back from a 2-0 lead and won 3-2 while we lead by a 2-0 lead and lost in OT by a score of 3-2. In addition I think some are having a hard time realizing that the Rangers lead the east while the Devils are barely managing to stay in the hunt. Finally, they are our rivals. Knowing our luck we'll end up playing the Rangers. I mean we did have 3 straight seasons 07-08 to 09-10 of playing teams in the playoffs that weren't the best matchups for us. We have an aging goaltender who has a horrible record against the Rangers as of late so yeah, we're going to talk about the Rags. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.