Comments on: This One’s on Lundqvist…and Maybe Richard S. http://www.nyrangerscast.com/blog/2008/02/19/this-ones-on-lundqvistand-maybe-richard-s/ Two die-hard NY Rangers fans host a popular fan-based podcast and accompanying blog Mon, 30 Jan 2012 18:32:01 -0500 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6 hourly 1 By: Mark http://www.nyrangerscast.com/blog/2008/02/19/this-ones-on-lundqvistand-maybe-richard-s/comment-page-1/#comment-181 Mark Wed, 20 Feb 2008 18:00:15 +0000 http://www.nyrangerscast.com/blog/2008/02/19/this-ones-on-lundqvistand-maybe-richard-s/#comment-181 Is it fair to put this one all on Hank? I say no. A lot of thinks went wrong when the Habs got on their roll, and while I do think that allowing 5 goals in 35 minutes is inexcusable for Lundqvist, you do have to agree that the team shut down in front of him and it was all he could do to get out of Montreal with even one point. What I think is a bigger issue that is going somewhat undiscussed was the shootout. Jagr, our captain, our leader, was right there to extend our life and give us a chance to win and yet it was another chance that slipped through his gloves. It's true that even if he scores the Habs still had a chance to put it away with their next shooter, but come on. Jagr needs to step it up. He had 4 assists last night but still failed to deliver in a clutch situation. In no way is it fair for Lundqvist to carry this one all by himself. In a game where a team blows a five goal lead in half a game, believe me there is plenty of blame to go around. And this entry is coming from a fan who split his hand open on a punching bag after watching his Blueshirts crumble before his very eyes. This Saturday has suddenly become a big game. They need to rebound and they need to rebound big. Is it fair to put this one all on Hank? I say no. A lot of thinks went wrong when the Habs got on their roll, and while I do think that allowing 5 goals in 35 minutes is inexcusable for Lundqvist, you do have to agree that the team shut down in front of him and it was all he could do to get out of Montreal with even one point. What I think is a bigger issue that is going somewhat undiscussed was the shootout. Jagr, our captain, our leader, was right there to extend our life and give us a chance to win and yet it was another chance that slipped through his gloves. It’s true that even if he scores the Habs still had a chance to put it away with their next shooter, but come on. Jagr needs to step it up. He had 4 assists last night but still failed to deliver in a clutch situation. In no way is it fair for Lundqvist to carry this one all by himself. In a game where a team blows a five goal lead in half a game, believe me there is plenty of blame to go around. And this entry is coming from a fan who split his hand open on a punching bag after watching his Blueshirts crumble before his very eyes. This Saturday has suddenly become a big game. They need to rebound and they need to rebound big.

]]> By: habslove http://www.nyrangerscast.com/blog/2008/02/19/this-ones-on-lundqvistand-maybe-richard-s/comment-page-1/#comment-180 habslove Wed, 20 Feb 2008 17:21:49 +0000 http://www.nyrangerscast.com/blog/2008/02/19/this-ones-on-lundqvistand-maybe-richard-s/#comment-180 Thank you for your summary of the game. It's refreshing to visit a Rangers blog that doesn't blame the officiating or the fans for the loss. Thank you for your summary of the game. It’s refreshing to visit a Rangers blog that doesn’t blame the officiating or the fans for the loss.

]]> By: Steven http://www.nyrangerscast.com/blog/2008/02/19/this-ones-on-lundqvistand-maybe-richard-s/comment-page-1/#comment-179 Steven Wed, 20 Feb 2008 15:50:57 +0000 http://www.nyrangerscast.com/blog/2008/02/19/this-ones-on-lundqvistand-maybe-richard-s/#comment-179 Great point about the 1-4. What's even more mind-boggling about it is that after 1, 2, 3, goals there's no excuse for not making the adjustment back. And Richard, totally agree about Orr. Not even so much that they missed his physical presence, but when Strudwick takes your place, you are sorely missed. Hate to beat a dead horse but geez Strudwick is as worthless a player as there is in the NHL. I thought in general the fourth line played its worst game of the season. Betts was caught out of position a couple of times (very un-Betts-like) and Hollweg stinks in general. They got burned and terribly exposed on the first two Montreal goals and really shouldn't have seen the ice again after that. Great point about the 1-4. What’s even more mind-boggling about it is that after 1, 2, 3, goals there’s no excuse for not making the adjustment back.

And Richard, totally agree about Orr. Not even so much that they missed his physical presence, but when Strudwick takes your place, you are sorely missed. Hate to beat a dead horse but geez Strudwick is as worthless a player as there is in the NHL. I thought in general the fourth line played its worst game of the season. Betts was caught out of position a couple of times (very un-Betts-like) and Hollweg stinks in general. They got burned and terribly exposed on the first two Montreal goals and really shouldn’t have seen the ice again after that.

]]> By: Richard S. http://www.nyrangerscast.com/blog/2008/02/19/this-ones-on-lundqvistand-maybe-richard-s/comment-page-1/#comment-178 Richard S. Wed, 20 Feb 2008 12:43:15 +0000 http://www.nyrangerscast.com/blog/2008/02/19/this-ones-on-lundqvistand-maybe-richard-s/#comment-178 I agree with Inferno, the 1-4 is crap. in football it is called the PREVENT defense, and all it really does is PREVENT you from winning. I agree with Inferno, the 1-4 is crap. in football it is called the PREVENT defense, and all it really does is PREVENT you from winning.

]]> By: UB BULL http://www.nyrangerscast.com/blog/2008/02/19/this-ones-on-lundqvistand-maybe-richard-s/comment-page-1/#comment-177 UB BULL Wed, 20 Feb 2008 11:15:17 +0000 http://www.nyrangerscast.com/blog/2008/02/19/this-ones-on-lundqvistand-maybe-richard-s/#comment-177 Steven you listed three excuses as to why the Rangers lost to Le Habs. They were as follows: "1. Lundy couldn’t make the game changing save 2. The Rangers stopped moving their feet and therefore got caught scrambling in their own zone. This also caused a complete abandonment of any sort of forecheck. 3. Tonight was as perfect an example of a home ice advantage. As classless as the crowd was in throwing things on the ice, you’ve got to give them credit for the noise that they were able to emit en route to the Canadiens comeback. I for one was very impressed. If this game was played at the Garden, the Rangers win it easily." To paraphrase a great UB baseball player Ron Couche: "Everyone has excuses and anal sphincter valves; and they all stink". It appears that the only thing the Rangers are doing now is working to prevent a ticket increase for next year. Steven you listed three excuses as to why the Rangers lost to Le Habs. They were as follows:

“1. Lundy couldn’t make the game changing save
2. The Rangers stopped moving their feet and therefore got caught scrambling in their own zone. This also caused a complete abandonment of any sort of forecheck.
3. Tonight was as perfect an example of a home ice advantage. As classless as the crowd was in throwing things on the ice, you’ve got to give them credit for the noise that they were able to emit en route to the Canadiens comeback. I for one was very impressed. If this game was played at the Garden, the Rangers win it easily.”

To paraphrase a great UB baseball player Ron Couche: “Everyone has excuses and anal sphincter valves; and they all stink”.

It appears that the only thing the Rangers are doing now is working to prevent a ticket increase for next year.

]]> By: Richard S. http://www.nyrangerscast.com/blog/2008/02/19/this-ones-on-lundqvistand-maybe-richard-s/comment-page-1/#comment-176 Richard S. Wed, 20 Feb 2008 08:53:13 +0000 http://www.nyrangerscast.com/blog/2008/02/19/this-ones-on-lundqvistand-maybe-richard-s/#comment-176 Talk about a jab at Steve that I made that totally blew up in my FACE! Never again will I seriously or fecitiously mention the "corner" ever again. My bad guys. My wife went to bed sick to her stomach, and I totally feel her pain. It was like the Rangers that we all thought this team was going to be showed up in the first half of this game, and the Rangers that this team is showed up in the second half. I never thought I'd say this, but man I did miss Colton Orr. Without his presence the Rangers were absolutley physically dominated without repercussions. Even at the beginning, they were dominated, they were just taking advantage of the Habs mistakes. Lets hope they can pull themselves together for Saturday. Talk about a jab at Steve that I made that totally blew up in my FACE! Never again will I seriously or fecitiously mention the “corner” ever again. My bad guys.

My wife went to bed sick to her stomach, and I totally feel her pain. It was like the Rangers that we all thought this team was going to be showed up in the first half of this game, and the Rangers that this team is showed up in the second half.

I never thought I’d say this, but man I did miss Colton Orr. Without his presence the Rangers were absolutley physically dominated without repercussions. Even at the beginning, they were dominated, they were just taking advantage of the Habs mistakes. Lets hope they can pull themselves together for Saturday.

]]> By: Inferno http://www.nyrangerscast.com/blog/2008/02/19/this-ones-on-lundqvistand-maybe-richard-s/comment-page-1/#comment-175 Inferno Wed, 20 Feb 2008 07:27:14 +0000 http://www.nyrangerscast.com/blog/2008/02/19/this-ones-on-lundqvistand-maybe-richard-s/#comment-175 Thanks for the kind words fellas. Taj, here are my top 3 reasons we lost. 1)Speed. When teams attack us with relentless speed, our weakness as a team is shown. By and large we are quite a slow team. Strudwick, Orr, Malik, Mara, Staal, Tyutin, Girardi, Shanny, jagr, etc. The list goes on and on. We have a team that is built on puck possession, not transition hockey. And by being back on our heels the entire 3rd, they were allowed to build up speed and penetrate the neutral zone and our defensive zone unimpeded. This speed was nullified in the first half by the Rangers attacking the guy with the puck immediately, causing the play to slow down. During the 2nd half, the puck carrier just skated around our guys like they werent even there. 2)Panic. The Rangers looked like a team unwilling to make a mistake. When you play scared, or overly cautious like that, you will lose. Its why I hate the 1-4 (which we definitely played in the 3rd) so damn much. It all but negates your offensive attack, meaning all mistakes are compounded with shots on your net. When you are scared to make a mistake, you invariably make a mistake. When you are confident that you wont make a mistake, that is when you are playing your best. 3)The 1-4. This whole thing started when we went to the 1-4, and took our foot off the pedal. Its the exact reason weve beaten the Habs twice this year while coming from behind. One team builds a large lead, goes into the 1-4, and the play gets jammed down their throat with a vengeance. If youve read my sight, you know my abhorrence for that style of play, to me it is the stupidest thing in sports. When you have a lead that you got by playing one way, why on earth would you switch up what you are doing in order to win?! It makes ZERO sense. Rangers should have stuck to the 1-2-2, and they should have clogged the neutral zone more. But because they were PANICING and afraid of the Habs SPEED, they were forced into playing back. If they had played more of a stand up game, and clogged the neutral zone as 5 men, they would have caused more turnovers, and brought the play to Montreal. And of course, the Habs played amazing, otherwise they wouldnt have made this historic comeback. Thanks for the kind words fellas.

Taj, here are my top 3 reasons we lost.

1)Speed. When teams attack us with relentless speed, our weakness as a team is shown. By and large we are quite a slow team. Strudwick, Orr, Malik, Mara, Staal, Tyutin, Girardi, Shanny, jagr, etc. The list goes on and on. We have a team that is built on puck possession, not transition hockey. And by being back on our heels the entire 3rd, they were allowed to build up speed and penetrate the neutral zone and our defensive zone unimpeded. This speed was nullified in the first half by the Rangers attacking the guy with the puck immediately, causing the play to slow down. During the 2nd half, the puck carrier just skated around our guys like they werent even there.

2)Panic. The Rangers looked like a team unwilling to make a mistake. When you play scared, or overly cautious like that, you will lose. Its why I hate the 1-4 (which we definitely played in the 3rd) so damn much. It all but negates your offensive attack, meaning all mistakes are compounded with shots on your net. When you are scared to make a mistake, you invariably make a mistake. When you are confident that you wont make a mistake, that is when you are playing your best.

3)The 1-4. This whole thing started when we went to the 1-4, and took our foot off the pedal. Its the exact reason weve beaten the Habs twice this year while coming from behind. One team builds a large lead, goes into the 1-4, and the play gets jammed down their throat with a vengeance. If youve read my sight, you know my abhorrence for that style of play, to me it is the stupidest thing in sports. When you have a lead that you got by playing one way, why on earth would you switch up what you are doing in order to win?! It makes ZERO sense. Rangers should have stuck to the 1-2-2, and they should have clogged the neutral zone more. But because they were PANICING and afraid of the Habs SPEED, they were forced into playing back. If they had played more of a stand up game, and clogged the neutral zone as 5 men, they would have caused more turnovers, and brought the play to Montreal.

And of course, the Habs played amazing, otherwise they wouldnt have made this historic comeback.

]]> By: Anubh Purushothaman http://www.nyrangerscast.com/blog/2008/02/19/this-ones-on-lundqvistand-maybe-richard-s/comment-page-1/#comment-174 Anubh Purushothaman Wed, 20 Feb 2008 05:27:34 +0000 http://www.nyrangerscast.com/blog/2008/02/19/this-ones-on-lundqvistand-maybe-richard-s/#comment-174 Hey Steve, Just wanted to let you know I've been listening to the podcast for a while and this game really compelled me to comment on your blog for the first time. I couldn't agree with you more that Henrik has to win this game for us now that he's a top-paid goaltender. Inferno, I agree with you that it is the team's fault but don't you think now that the rangers have designated him as a franchise player that he has a responsibility to step up in games like this late in the season. Hey Steve,
Just wanted to let you know I’ve been listening to the podcast for a while and this game really compelled me to comment on your blog for the first time. I couldn’t agree with you more that Henrik has to win this game for us now that he’s a top-paid goaltender. Inferno, I agree with you that it is the team’s fault but don’t you think now that the rangers have designated him as a franchise player that he has a responsibility to step up in games like this late in the season.

]]> By: Steven http://www.nyrangerscast.com/blog/2008/02/19/this-ones-on-lundqvistand-maybe-richard-s/comment-page-1/#comment-173 Steven Wed, 20 Feb 2008 05:23:15 +0000 http://www.nyrangerscast.com/blog/2008/02/19/this-ones-on-lundqvistand-maybe-richard-s/#comment-173 While I agree that maybe its a little harsh to pin ALL the blame on Lundy, I think that the guy is being paid right now to be a top 5 goaltender. He's being paid to be a goalie that curbs the momentum of the opposition when his own team is reeling. I truly believe that he should have gotten at least one or two of those tonight and by not doing so allowed the Canadiens to keep pouring it on. All the Rangers needed tonight was some sort of break in the the barrage and Henrik couldn't do it for them. If they can't rely on him to do that sort of thing, then he doesn't deserve the money that he just got. And Taj, here's my top three: 1. Lundy couldn't make the game changing save 2. The Rangers stopped moving their feet and therefore got caught scrambling in their own zone. This also caused a complete abandonment of any sort of forecheck. 3. Tonight was as perfect an example of a home ice advantage. As classless as the crowd was in throwing things on the ice, you've got to give them credit for the noise that they were able to emit en route to the Canadiens comeback. I for one was very impressed. If this game was played at the Garden, the Rangers win it easily. While I agree that maybe its a little harsh to pin ALL the blame on Lundy, I think that the guy is being paid right now to be a top 5 goaltender. He’s being paid to be a goalie that curbs the momentum of the opposition when his own team is reeling. I truly believe that he should have gotten at least one or two of those tonight and by not doing so allowed the Canadiens to keep pouring it on. All the Rangers needed tonight was some sort of break in the the barrage and Henrik couldn’t do it for them. If they can’t rely on him to do that sort of thing, then he doesn’t deserve the money that he just got.

And Taj, here’s my top three:
1. Lundy couldn’t make the game changing save
2. The Rangers stopped moving their feet and therefore got caught scrambling in their own zone. This also caused a complete abandonment of any sort of forecheck.
3. Tonight was as perfect an example of a home ice advantage. As classless as the crowd was in throwing things on the ice, you’ve got to give them credit for the noise that they were able to emit en route to the Canadiens comeback. I for one was very impressed. If this game was played at the Garden, the Rangers win it easily.

]]> By: Taj Patel http://www.nyrangerscast.com/blog/2008/02/19/this-ones-on-lundqvistand-maybe-richard-s/comment-page-1/#comment-172 Taj Patel Wed, 20 Feb 2008 05:04:46 +0000 http://www.nyrangerscast.com/blog/2008/02/19/this-ones-on-lundqvistand-maybe-richard-s/#comment-172 Inferno, like I said, I agree with you that it was the team's fault as a whole. As a loyal reader of your website, I would love to hear your top 3 reasons for today's loss. Perhaps you could do the same thing as well Steve. Thanks guys! Inferno, like I said, I agree with you that it was the team’s fault as a whole. As a loyal reader of your website, I would love to hear your top 3 reasons for today’s loss. Perhaps you could do the same thing as well Steve. Thanks guys!

]]> By: UB BULL http://www.nyrangerscast.com/blog/2008/02/19/this-ones-on-lundqvistand-maybe-richard-s/comment-page-1/#comment-171 UB BULL Wed, 20 Feb 2008 04:59:42 +0000 http://www.nyrangerscast.com/blog/2008/02/19/this-ones-on-lundqvistand-maybe-richard-s/#comment-171 Steven never mention a corner again. If you do it may be necessary to assist Inferno in his ideas for you. As opposed to him I know where you live. Steven never mention a corner again. If you do it may be necessary to assist Inferno in his ideas for you. As opposed to him I know where you live.

]]> By: michael balter http://www.nyrangerscast.com/blog/2008/02/19/this-ones-on-lundqvistand-maybe-richard-s/comment-page-1/#comment-170 michael balter Wed, 20 Feb 2008 04:54:19 +0000 http://www.nyrangerscast.com/blog/2008/02/19/this-ones-on-lundqvistand-maybe-richard-s/#comment-170 steven you are in the heat of the moment, and i agree with both inferno and the "new" guy taj...we will come back with a vengence on saturday and i will be there cheering them on. the only thing to do after this, is just put it behind us. steven you are in the heat of the moment, and i agree with both inferno and the “new” guy taj…we will come back with a vengence on saturday and i will be there cheering them on. the only thing to do after this, is just put it behind us.

]]> By: Scummy http://www.nyrangerscast.com/blog/2008/02/19/this-ones-on-lundqvistand-maybe-richard-s/comment-page-1/#comment-169 Scummy Wed, 20 Feb 2008 04:51:00 +0000 http://www.nyrangerscast.com/blog/2008/02/19/this-ones-on-lundqvistand-maybe-richard-s/#comment-169 Good point. Let's just agree that it was a disappointing night for the faithful and hopefully we can step back up on saturday. Good point. Let’s just agree that it was a disappointing night for the faithful and hopefully we can step back up on saturday.

]]> By: Inferno http://www.nyrangerscast.com/blog/2008/02/19/this-ones-on-lundqvistand-maybe-richard-s/comment-page-1/#comment-168 Inferno Wed, 20 Feb 2008 04:29:13 +0000 http://www.nyrangerscast.com/blog/2008/02/19/this-ones-on-lundqvistand-maybe-richard-s/#comment-168 Scummy, I totally agree with your sentiment that this was a team loss. I just dont agree with the notion that it is on Henrik because he didnt steal one for us. I just never understood that line of thinking. If you want to lump him in with the whole team and call them all ******* mother ******* for blowing this ******* lead, then by all means, do so, and youll get a a resounding agreement from me. BUt i dont believe in putting the onus on Henrik unless he basically gave up 5 soft goals. which we can all agree, he didnt. Also, I hate to break this to you, but even Patrick Roy had games where he gave up 5+ goals, and didnt play poorly. It happens, sometimes the team around you pull an epic fail. Scummy,

I totally agree with your sentiment that this was a team loss. I just dont agree with the notion that it is on Henrik because he didnt steal one for us. I just never understood that line of thinking.

If you want to lump him in with the whole team and call them all ******* mother ******* for blowing this ******* lead, then by all means, do so, and youll get a a resounding agreement from me. BUt i dont believe in putting the onus on Henrik unless he basically gave up 5 soft goals. which we can all agree, he didnt.

Also, I hate to break this to you, but even Patrick Roy had games where he gave up 5+ goals, and didnt play poorly. It happens, sometimes the team around you pull an epic fail.

]]> By: Taj Patel http://www.nyrangerscast.com/blog/2008/02/19/this-ones-on-lundqvistand-maybe-richard-s/comment-page-1/#comment-167 Taj Patel Wed, 20 Feb 2008 04:21:36 +0000 http://www.nyrangerscast.com/blog/2008/02/19/this-ones-on-lundqvistand-maybe-richard-s/#comment-167 Inferno, I couldn't agree with you more. This team was absolutely dominated for 30 minutes. Henrik deserves as much blame as everyone else on the team, who simply stopped skating after 30 minutes. I particularly blame the fourth line, who had two miserable shifts which resulted in the first two Montreal goals. Let's try to move on, as hard as it is right now. But to blame it solely on Henrik, is absolutely ridiculous Steve. Cmon! Inferno, I couldn’t agree with you more. This team was absolutely dominated for 30 minutes. Henrik deserves as much blame as everyone else on the team, who simply stopped skating after 30 minutes. I particularly blame the fourth line, who had two miserable shifts which resulted in the first two Montreal goals. Let’s try to move on, as hard as it is right now. But to blame it solely on Henrik, is absolutely ridiculous Steve. Cmon!

]]> By: Scummy http://www.nyrangerscast.com/blog/2008/02/19/this-ones-on-lundqvistand-maybe-richard-s/comment-page-1/#comment-166 Scummy Wed, 20 Feb 2008 04:17:57 +0000 http://www.nyrangerscast.com/blog/2008/02/19/this-ones-on-lundqvistand-maybe-richard-s/#comment-166 Lundqvist is to blame. Renny is to blame. Jagr is to blame. We can't point the finger(s) at a specific player, the team just folded about midway through the second we can say? Or no, maybe the third, either way... you can't really blame ONE guy for tonights disappointment. Although Steve does have a point, correct me if I'm wrong but isn't Hank now the highest payed goalie in the NHL? I mean, the man can't be a brick wall, nobody is, every goaltender professional or peewea lets in goals... but a 5-0 lead turning into a 6-5 loss? The guy between the pipes definatly is responsible, not 100% but by no means innocent. Also Steve is right again, one hell of a hockey game from an unbias standpoint. That OT was nonstop both ends of the ice. These two teams in the playoffs would be epic indeed. Lundqvist is to blame. Renny is to blame. Jagr is to blame. We can’t point the finger(s) at a specific player, the team just folded about midway through the second we can say? Or no, maybe the third, either way… you can’t really blame ONE guy for tonights disappointment.

Although Steve does have a point, correct me if I’m wrong but isn’t Hank now the highest payed goalie in the NHL? I mean, the man can’t be a brick wall, nobody is, every goaltender professional or peewea lets in goals… but a 5-0 lead turning into a 6-5 loss? The guy between the pipes definatly is responsible, not 100% but by no means innocent.

Also Steve is right again, one hell of a hockey game from an unbias standpoint. That OT was nonstop both ends of the ice. These two teams in the playoffs would be epic indeed.

]]> By: Inferno http://www.nyrangerscast.com/blog/2008/02/19/this-ones-on-lundqvistand-maybe-richard-s/comment-page-1/#comment-165 Inferno Wed, 20 Feb 2008 04:14:37 +0000 http://www.nyrangerscast.com/blog/2008/02/19/this-ones-on-lundqvistand-maybe-richard-s/#comment-165 Well, if your contention is he should have stole us a game, im not really sure how to respond to that. I mean, when you depend on a godlike performance from your goalie to win a game, then i not so sure you are a team that even deserves to be in the playoffs. the key word there is depending on it. Sure, he could have made the saves, he could have also taken the puck and fired it down the length of the ice and scored the game winning goal, does that mean im going to kill him for not doing that? no, because its asking something i wouldnt ask from any player. Henrik made the kind of saves a club needs in order to win a game in this one. He made the easy saves, he made the average saves, and he made quite a few eye popping saves as well. Just because he didnt make all of the eye-popping saves in this game doesnt mean he played poorly. I dont know, like i said, im not sure how to respond to that. I personally am not of the belief that you can blame your goalie when he doesnt give up a single goal you expect him to stop. I mean, if we agree that none of those goals were on him, then im not sure how hes the one to blame. *shrugs* On the plus side, I saw the new Knight Rider show and it totally kicked butt! Well, if your contention is he should have stole us a game, im not really sure how to respond to that. I mean, when you depend on a godlike performance from your goalie to win a game, then i not so sure you are a team that even deserves to be in the playoffs. the key word there is depending on it. Sure, he could have made the saves, he could have also taken the puck and fired it down the length of the ice and scored the game winning goal, does that mean im going to kill him for not doing that? no, because its asking something i wouldnt ask from any player. Henrik made the kind of saves a club needs in order to win a game in this one. He made the easy saves, he made the average saves, and he made quite a few eye popping saves as well. Just because he didnt make all of the eye-popping saves in this game doesnt mean he played poorly.

I dont know, like i said, im not sure how to respond to that. I personally am not of the belief that you can blame your goalie when he doesnt give up a single goal you expect him to stop. I mean, if we agree that none of those goals were on him, then im not sure how hes the one to blame.

*shrugs*

On the plus side, I saw the new Knight Rider show and it totally kicked butt!

]]> By: Steven http://www.nyrangerscast.com/blog/2008/02/19/this-ones-on-lundqvistand-maybe-richard-s/comment-page-1/#comment-164 Steven Wed, 20 Feb 2008 04:08:38 +0000 http://www.nyrangerscast.com/blog/2008/02/19/this-ones-on-lundqvistand-maybe-richard-s/#comment-164 Inferno, I'm really not in the heat of the moment. If you read the end of my entry, it says pretty much what you just said. The Canadiens are an exceptional hockey team and I think your analysis of the game is dead on. I still believe in the Rangers very much right now and by no means think this is the end of them. All I am saying is that Lundqvist is paid to win games for the Rangers. Were any of the goals "bad goals" or "his fault," probably not. But the Lundqvist that we all love to call "The King" has stolen games. He needed to find a way in this one. He was fine, but not spectacular in the second half. When the Rangers needed their big money goalie to bail them out while they were reeling, he couldn't come up with the big money save...plain and simple. Inferno, I’m really not in the heat of the moment. If you read the end of my entry, it says pretty much what you just said.

The Canadiens are an exceptional hockey team and I think your analysis of the game is dead on. I still believe in the Rangers very much right now and by no means think this is the end of them.

All I am saying is that Lundqvist is paid to win games for the Rangers. Were any of the goals “bad goals” or “his fault,” probably not. But the Lundqvist that we all love to call “The King” has stolen games. He needed to find a way in this one.

He was fine, but not spectacular in the second half. When the Rangers needed their big money goalie to bail them out while they were reeling, he couldn’t come up with the big money save…plain and simple.

]]> By: Inferno http://www.nyrangerscast.com/blog/2008/02/19/this-ones-on-lundqvistand-maybe-richard-s/comment-page-1/#comment-163 Inferno Wed, 20 Feb 2008 04:00:50 +0000 http://www.nyrangerscast.com/blog/2008/02/19/this-ones-on-lundqvistand-maybe-richard-s/#comment-163 Sorry, I just can't agree with you on this one. I personally think you, like most Ranger fans right now, are in the heat of the moment, and want to break stuff and blame someone. Hey, it happens, ive done it, youve done it, everyone has done it. But the long and the short of it is, the Habs dominated us for the final 30 minutes. They put on a clinic of how to play hockey. Seriously, I dont know if its possible to play better hockey than they did in the final 30 minutes of the game. The only reason this one hurts so much is because we led 5-0. But the fact of the matter is, we played fantastic in the first half, they played fantastic in the 2nd half, and we split the regulation point. If there was no shootout, and we still lived in the era of ties, I dont know if anyone would be as pissed as they are now. But because we "lost" a game from the gimmicky shootout (which i support by the way) everyone is up in arms. Frankly, for a while now theyve been the team Ive been kinda picking to win the cup. They have a phenomenal attack game, and some of the best passing i have ever seen. It happens, lets all take a step back, do something else, and come back, and I bet people wont be so anxious to put the blame on one person, right or wrong. Sorry, I just can’t agree with you on this one. I personally think you, like most Ranger fans right now, are in the heat of the moment, and want to break stuff and blame someone. Hey, it happens, ive done it, youve done it, everyone has done it. But the long and the short of it is, the Habs dominated us for the final 30 minutes. They put on a clinic of how to play hockey. Seriously, I dont know if its possible to play better hockey than they did in the final 30 minutes of the game. The only reason this one hurts so much is because we led 5-0. But the fact of the matter is, we played fantastic in the first half, they played fantastic in the 2nd half, and we split the regulation point. If there was no shootout, and we still lived in the era of ties, I dont know if anyone would be as pissed as they are now. But because we “lost” a game from the gimmicky shootout (which i support by the way) everyone is up in arms.

Frankly, for a while now theyve been the team Ive been kinda picking to win the cup. They have a phenomenal attack game, and some of the best passing i have ever seen.

It happens, lets all take a step back, do something else, and come back, and I bet people wont be so anxious to put the blame on one person, right or wrong.

]]> By: Steven http://www.nyrangerscast.com/blog/2008/02/19/this-ones-on-lundqvistand-maybe-richard-s/comment-page-1/#comment-162 Steven Wed, 20 Feb 2008 03:51:44 +0000 http://www.nyrangerscast.com/blog/2008/02/19/this-ones-on-lundqvistand-maybe-richard-s/#comment-162 Listen Inferno, I don't think he should have stopped all of the shots. And now that I think about it, that first goal is absolutely NOT on Lundqvist. But 4 of those 5 were possible saves. I don't really care about the proximity of the shots, he could have gotten them. Luongo wins that game. Brodeur wins that game. Top goalies win that game. Lundqvist is now paid to be a TOP goalie. Do most goalies in the league win tonight? Probably not. But he needs to find a way in this one. Listen Inferno, I don’t think he should have stopped all of the shots. And now that I think about it, that first goal is absolutely NOT on Lundqvist.

But 4 of those 5 were possible saves. I don’t really care about the proximity of the shots, he could have gotten them. Luongo wins that game. Brodeur wins that game. Top goalies win that game. Lundqvist is now paid to be a TOP goalie. Do most goalies in the league win tonight? Probably not. But he needs to find a way in this one.

]]> By: Inferno http://www.nyrangerscast.com/blog/2008/02/19/this-ones-on-lundqvistand-maybe-richard-s/comment-page-1/#comment-161 Inferno Wed, 20 Feb 2008 03:47:30 +0000 http://www.nyrangerscast.com/blog/2008/02/19/this-ones-on-lundqvistand-maybe-richard-s/#comment-161 He could have had 5? Lets see 2 goals had deflections 5-7 feet from the goal line, Kovalev gets a 1-timer from the bottom of the right wing circle on a cross ice pass, that Henrik saves but is poked in afterwards. Kovalev gets a 1-timer from the slot with nobody around him. And the other goal escapes me. I dont have a problem calling Henrik out when hes in the wrong, but not only were none of those goals on him, but he made at LEAST 7 game saving saves. We dont get a point in this one if Vally is in net, hell im not sure any goalie in the league picks up 2 points for us. He could have had 5?

Lets see 2 goals had deflections 5-7 feet from the goal line, Kovalev gets a 1-timer from the bottom of the right wing circle on a cross ice pass, that Henrik saves but is poked in afterwards. Kovalev gets a 1-timer from the slot with nobody around him. And the other goal escapes me. I dont have a problem calling Henrik out when hes in the wrong, but not only were none of those goals on him, but he made at LEAST 7 game saving saves. We dont get a point in this one if Vally is in net, hell im not sure any goalie in the league picks up 2 points for us.

]]>