Jump to content

Lundquist and NYR


Fullright

Recommended Posts

Just can the ASG. It's tired. Let it return organically. Just feels forced now and nobody cares (players and fans).

I think scrapping the ASG jerseys would be a start. Go their normal white jerseys vs dark jerseys. This way I can ID some of these dudes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 69
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Eh, it still makes money for the league, and I recently read that it is still something team's clamor for (the cities get a nice cash injection, too). And fans LOVE the ASG... it just so happens that they're mostly children. You can bet the league will do everything they can to make young fans happy... not only are they a valuable demographic, but those kids will grow up and earn their own money, and the NHL will want it.

I couldn't agree more with your general outlook — I think it's very tired, and I haven't personally watched in many years. I do think it was much better in the 90's, but I'm also not discounting the likelihood that I mostly liked it because I was a kid. Anyway, from a business standpoint, it makes no sense to can it — not now, and not for the foreseeable future. 

I like the white vs dark jerseys idea, but I wonder if it would really work... even with light vs dark, that's a lotttt of colors and patterns and logos and stripes and socks. I bet it would look pretty damn confusing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

He was excellent against the Blackhawks last night but I am pretty sure smoke billowed from his ears when Chicago scored a junk goal - meaning poor gap by the D - with 1 second left. Getting the impression he's going to put an ax through someone's head eventually. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/9/2019 at 2:28 PM, stackem30 said:

Possibly the same waste Adidas' labor factories in China dumped into the ocean to begin with!

1 hour ago, Fullright said:

He was excellent against the Blackhawks last night but I am pretty sure smoke billowed from his ears when Chicago scored a junk goal - meaning poor gap by the D - with 1 second left. Getting the impression he's going to put an ax through someone's head eventually. 

My money is on Pionk or Tony DeItaliano.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And to be back on topic...I'm 50/50 on this.  Half of me feels like Stackem and wants to see Hank just stick it out and retire a Ranger, cup or not.  Which as of now, he has said, several times, he wants to do as well.  He's been quoted saying the Rangers have done so much for him that he wants to stick it out and see the rebuild through.  ***Half of me wants to see him dealt away ala Ray Bourque and see him finally lift Lord Stanley's Cup.  It would obviously be bittersweet seeing him do it in a sweater other than the Rangers' red white and blues but I would be happy for him none the less.  Hate him all you want, the man has given everything he has to give on the ice for the Rangers.  2014 was an absolute shame that so many bad calls ruined such a good series.  

***To take this a little further, half of me wants him to go for the reason I stated...winning a cup.  There is a small part of me also wants to see him go because the man is ruining this rebuild the Rangers are in the middle of haha.  There have been quite a few games this season that the Rangers had no business winning and it was all because Hank was playing in God mode.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, SaveByRichter35 said:

And to be back on topic...I'm 50/50 on this.  Half of me feels like Stackem and wants to see Hank just stick it out and retire a Ranger, cup or not.  Which as of now, he has said, several times, he wants to do as well.  He's been quoted saying the Rangers have done so much for him that he wants to stick it out and see the rebuild through.  ***Half of me wants to see him dealt away ala Ray Bourque and see him finally lift Lord Stanley's Cup.  It would obviously be bittersweet seeing him do it in a sweater other than the Rangers' red white and blues but I would be happy for him none the less.  Hate him all you want, the man has given everything he has to give on the ice for the Rangers.  2014 was an absolute shame that so many bad calls ruined such a good series.  

***To take this a little further, half of me wants him to go for the reason I stated...winning a cup.  There is a small part of me also wants to see him go because the man is ruining this rebuild the Rangers are in the middle of haha.  There have been quite a few games this season that the Rangers had no business winning and it was all because Hank was playing in God mode.  

You can truly see how bad this team is when Hank is in anything but God mode. Even playing above average for that team isn't good enough anymore. Hank and Gibson are two peas in a pod this season. 

Then you have the nameless backup who seems like a placeholder until Shestyorkin comes in with lofty expectations, then cracks under the dense shit-heap put upon his shoulders.

Also a word of warning; he split time with Hellberg and Koskinen, two NHL backups. So might not be as good as Rangers fans think, but I've been wrong before. Also SKA will give him several sacks of money to keep him there that an entry level deal pales in comparison to. Going from KHL royalty to AHL requires a tough mental game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, Moose75 said:

You can truly see how bad this team is when Hank is in anything but God mode. Even playing above average for that team isn't good enough anymore. Hank and Gibson are two peas in a pod this season. 

Then you have the nameless backup who seems like a placeholder until Shestyorkin comes in with lofty expectations, then cracks under the dense shit-heap put upon his shoulders.

Also a word of warning; he split time with Hellberg and Koskinen, two NHL backups. So might not be as good as Rangers fans think, but I've been wrong before. Also SKA will give him several sacks of money to keep him there that an entry level deal pales in comparison to. Going from KHL royalty to AHL requires a tough mental game.

I'm proud of the run the Rangers have made in the past 10-12 years.  Its been a wild ride.  Again, I think 2014 would have gone way differently if not for a few absolute horrible calls.  I am excited to see what the future brings.  As for the present?...  #loseforhughes 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, SaveByRichter35 said:

I'm proud of the run the Rangers have made in the past 10-12 years.  Its been a wild ride.  Again, I think 2014 would have gone way differently if not for a few absolute horrible calls.  I am excited to see what the future brings.  As for the present?...  #loseforhughes 

Yeahhh I remember some bad calls, but it was a 5-game series, and a fairly convincing one for the Kings. I think ultimately, they were just matched up against a superior team, and things went accordingly.

Believe me, I was singing the blues when the Devils lost to the Kings in 2012. They lost the first two games in OT, and their were so many opportunities and bounces where the Devils could have just as easily been up 2-0. They got beat handily in Game 3, and then they won the next two games. Then there was that Steve Bernier boarding major at the beginning of Game 6, and it all came crumbling down in a pretty decisive manor.

As a Devils fan (and someone who was personally obsessed with the notion of Marty winning one more Cup late in his career) it was very easy to play "what if" with the first two games and that major penalty in Game 6. But deep down I knew that in the end, we were beat by a better, deeper team that was just on a tear. Hindsight has only fortified that notion. The Rangers had a great run and it wasn't as lopsided a series as 5 games suggests, but I believe they were beat pretty squarely by a superior team.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, SaveByRichter35 said:

I'm proud of the run the Rangers have made in the past 10-12 years.  Its been a wild ride.  Again, I think 2014 would have gone way differently if not for a few absolute horrible calls.  I am excited to see what the future brings.  As for the present?...  #loseforhughes 

The only thing I can say I like about the Rangers in the last 10 years or so is that they stopped throwing money at big names who were past their prime just for the sake of having big names on the bill. Maybe it's partly due to the salary cap, or not, but the last 10 years or so they actually were getting some new fresh young guns on the team. Even today, guys like Kreider and Zuch.

As for 2014, the^y didn't have a chance really, I knew it from the start, it was the Titanic, lofty visions, but doomed. I'm a NYR fan since 1979, and I didn't even watch the series cuz I knew it would just be a let down (ok, I'm in Europe, so there's the time-zone difference too). I have NHL TV so I could watch the games later. But I'd wake up each day to check the score, and then just couldn't bring myself to watch the replay.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That 2012 kings cup run was insane. Winning series 4-1, 4-0, 4-1 and 4-2 the Devils were the only ones who even slowed them down even a little bit, but realistically that series wasn't even close. Coming in as the 8th seed, it just goes to show that you never know what can happen once you're in. 

The 2014 cup run was less of a sure thing, with the Kings having to win three game 7s. Let's be honest, the real final was LA vs Chicago. Whoever won that series was winning the cup. The Rangers weren't even close to contending in that series. I knew the Kings were winning game 5, I had tickets in my cart, and decided to watch at home instead. Oops.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, stackem30 said:

Yeahhh I remember some bad calls, but it was a 5-game series, and a fairly convincing one for the Kings. I think ultimately, they were just matched up against a superior team, and things went accordingly.

Believe me, I was singing the blues when the Devils lost to the Kings in 2012. They lost the first two games in OT, and their were so many opportunities and bounces where the Devils could have just as easily been up 2-0. They got beat handily in Game 3, and then they won the next two games. Then there was that Steve Bernier boarding major at the beginning of Game 6, and it all came crumbling down in a pretty decisive manor.

As a Devils fan (and someone who was personally obsessed with the notion of Marty winning one more Cup late in his career) it was very easy to play "what if" with the first two games and that major penalty in Game 6. But deep down I knew that in the end, we were beat by a better, deeper team that was just on a tear. Hindsight has only fortified that notion. The Rangers had a great run and it wasn't as lopsided a series as 5 games suggests, but I believe they were beat pretty squarely by a superior team.

You are not remembering that series very well then.  Yes, it was a 5 game series which the Rangers lost 4-1 but let me refresh your memory on how convincing it actually was.

Game 1:  3-2 Kings in OT, Rangers never trailed in the game until they lost it in OT.   Convincing?
Game 2:  5-4 Kings in double OT, again the Rangers never trailed the game until they lost it in 2OT.  IIRC this was the infamous goalie interference non call.  Convincing??
Game 3:  3-0 Kings, the only game in the series not to be a one goal game.  I specifically remembered thinking wtf, THIS is how you assholes play in the first Final game at The Garden in 20 years????? lol
Game 4:  2-1 Rangers, Hank was a man on a mission in this game.  Again, a game the Rangers never trailed.  Convincing???
Game 5:  3-2 Kings, again in double OT.  Led for most of this game and iirc there was another awful non call on a trip on Zucc which lead to either the Kings tying goal or the game winning goal.  I don't remember for sure which.  Convincing????

It was the same way for the Rangers, a different bounce here, a call made there, this was a totally difference series.  The Rangers actually dominated most of this series.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, IPv6Freely said:

...

The 2014 cup run was less of a sure thing, with the Kings having to win three game 7s. Let's be honest, the real final was LA vs Chicago. Whoever won that series was winning the cup. The Rangers weren't even close to contending in that series. I knew the Kings were winning game 5, I had tickets in my cart, and decided to watch at home instead. Oops.

Lol ok guy...see my post above.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, SaveByRichter35 said:

You are not remembering that series very well then.  Yes, it was a 5 game series which the Rangers lost 4-1 but let me refresh your memory on how convincing it actually was.

 Game 1:  3-2 Kings in OT, Rangers never trailed in the game until they lost it in OT.   Convincing?
Game 2:  5-4 Kings in double OT, again the Rangers never trailed the game until they lost it in 2OT.  IIRC this was the infamous goalie interference non call.  Convincing??
Game 3:  3-0 Kings, the only game in the series not to be a one goal game.  I specifically remembered thinking wtf, THIS is how you assholes play in the first Final game at The Garden in 20 years????? lol
Game 4:  2-1 Rangers, Hank was a man on a mission in this game.  Again, a game the Rangers never trailed.  Convincing???
Game 5:  3-2 Kings, again in double OT.  Led for most of this game and iirc there was another awful non call on a trip on Zucc which lead to either the Kings tying goal or the game winning goal.  I don't remember for sure which.  Convincing????

It was the same way for the Rangers, a different bounce here, a call made there, this was a totally difference series.  The Rangers actually dominated most of this series.

No, I cannot say I'm particularly convinced by your breakdown. I watched every single game, and I remember it just as well as the next guy. As I said, 5 games doesn't really illustrate how competitive the series was. I fully acknowledge the Rangers were right there with the Kings in every game, save for Game 3. Hockey is a game with a million bounces and plenty of ifs, ands, or buts. But the better teams usually find a way to win over the course of a 7 game series. And this series didn't go 7... it went 5. Even if the games are close, 5 games means something.

You can say the games were competitive. You can say the Rangers were a very worthy opponent. You can say 5 games doesn't adequately portray how closely the teams wee matched up. But to say the Rangers dominated the Kings when they lost in 5 games is absurd. I think the Rangers fan in you is clouding your memory a bit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, stackem30 said:

No, I cannot say I'm particularly convinced by your breakdown. I watched every single game, and I remember it just as well as the next guy. As I said, 5 games doesn't really illustrate how competitive the series was. I fully acknowledge the Rangers were right there with the Kings in every game, save for Game 3. Hockey is a game with a million bounces and plenty of ifs, ands, or buts. But the better teams usually find a way to win over the course of a 7 game series. And this series didn't go 7... it went 5. Even if the games are close, 5 games means something.

You can say the games were competitive. You can say the Rangers were a very worthy opponent. You can say 5 games doesn't adequately portray how closely the teams wee matched up. But to say the Rangers dominated the Kings when they lost in 5 games is absurd. I think the Rangers fan in you is clouding your memory a bit.

I'd counter with I think the Devils fan in you is clouding yours.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, SaveByRichter35 said:

Lol ok guy...see my post above.

IPV6 is right. Majority of people saw the CHI/LA final as the "True Final". It was a showcase of two dynasty teams at the peak of their talent, duking it out to 7 games in some highly skilled, rough and entertaining hockey. If CHI got the win, I would confidently say they would have won another stanley cup over the Rangers.

Still one of the best series I have ever watched.

22 hours ago, SaveByRichter35 said:

I'd counter with I think the Devils fan in you is clouding yours.

LA was the dominant team that series. If Hank wasn't Hank, that 5 game stat would have been far more convincing. LA outshot NY in every game except the 3-0 win. Some games even 2:1 ratio.

20 hours ago, Max27 said:

Lol exactly

Were you even old enough 5 years ago?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...