|
Post by habsorbed on Jun 11, 2014 0:26:29 GMT -5
Anyone feeling sorry for the Rangers? Looks like their puck luck has run out (see AGal's crossbar). And try as they might to injure Quick, it ain't happening.
|
|
|
Post by stoat on Jun 11, 2014 14:23:14 GMT -5
For all Price's prowess with the puck, I find he makes more bad plays than good. I don't think his play with the puck would have made much of a difference. Uninjured, we win at the very least game 2. That in itself makes it a different series. Not trying to take anything from Tokarski, cause he was fantastic. Price, despite his "bad" plays, has an impressive winning record against the impeccable Rask and the dominating Bruins. He accomplished this despite a poorer defensive unit. That's enough evidence to rest on for me to disagree with your opinion, although I'm pretty sure you'll have some comeback on this issue. As for a "different" ECF series, the Habs would have had to play a lot better than they did. Did you underestimate the Rangers? Except for the 7-4 games, they outdid the Habs in what was supposed to be their biggest asset: speed.
|
|
|
Post by CentreHice on Jun 11, 2014 15:33:45 GMT -5
I agree, stoat. It's an intangible….but a palpable one, IMO. Again….just my opinion here. Price's injury was like kick in the gut to the entire Habs' organization….media, fans included. Price was a huge reason we beat Boston. His presence brings a confidence that can't be denied. Yes, we still can't clear the zone….but there's a different feel to it….like L.A. with Quick. The Rangers have had a lot of good looks and Quick, like Price for us, has made the crucial stops. It's part of the mental aspect of the game that leads to a flow/rhythm on the ice. The Kings KNOW Quick can bail them out. Maybe it's just my lens, but when Price went down we became more tentative. Even though Tokarski played admirably, we weren't the same "confident" team that beat Boston. Game 5 was an anomaly as almost every good chance beat Lundqvist. Very uncharacteristic of him…and Talbot played no better. (I mean, WHEN do you think we'll see another Rene Bourque hat-trick?) Bottom line: A healthy Price….and we very well may be the team about to be swept by L.A. Which is why the Rangers' MVP in our series was Crash Kreider. He also ran Tokarski….and threw Doughty into Quick in Game 3. I expect more tonight. Saw this on Facebook today.
|
|
|
Post by blny on Jun 11, 2014 17:51:56 GMT -5
For all Price's prowess with the puck, I find he makes more bad plays than good. I don't think his play with the puck would have made much of a difference. Uninjured, we win at the very least game 2. That in itself makes it a different series. Not trying to take anything from Tokarski, cause he was fantastic. Price, despite his "bad" plays, has an impressive winning record against the impeccable Rask and the dominating Bruins. He accomplished this despite a poorer defensive unit. That's enough evidence to rest on for me to disagree with your opinion, although I'm pretty sure you'll have some comeback on this issue. As for a "different" ECF series, the Habs would have had to play a lot better than they did. Did you underestimate the Rangers? Except for the 7-4 games, they outdid the Habs in what was supposed to be their biggest asset: speed. His ability to play the puck and his impact on winning the series are two completely different things. As for 'comeback', no need to chirp.
|
|