God it hurts when you say it that bluntly..
- MeanestOfTimes

Gotta face the pain, it's very therapeutic.

Stralman's minutes were way up last night, and Del Zotto's were way down because of his struggles. Moore played more than Del Zotto. Eminger barely played at all. And Girardi and Mac played half the game. War horses those guys are.

Stralman's minutes were way up last night, and Del Zotto's were way down because of his struggles. Moore played more than Del Zotto. Eminger barely played at all. And Girardi and Mac played half the game. War horses those guys are.
- Pete V

Stralman has quietly been unsung back there, very solid, makes good decisions, actually provides a little offense. Girardi and Mac are animals. I just hope they get over their road woes that have plagued the team all season long.

Wow what a game last night. What an atmosphere. I lost my voice during the national anthem

Brassard is unbelieveble

Stralman has quietly been unsung back there, very solid, makes good decisions, actually provides a little offense. Girardi and Mac are animals. I just hope they get over their road woes that have plagued the team all season long.
- Blueshirts4ever

Yea aside from delzotto and eminger I thought the other 4 D were tremendous. And for all the ballyhooing ovechkin gets, has he done anything in this series? He got a lucky bounce right to him to score in game 1 but he's been invisible. Mcd made a few outstanding stops vs him last night

Nash has been MIA for us tho but at least others are stepping up.

Yea aside from delzotto and eminger I thought the other 4 D were tremendous. And for all the ballyhooing ovechkin gets, has he done anything in this series? He got a lucky bounce right to him to score in game 1 but he's been invisible. Mcd made a few outstanding stops vs him last night

Nash has been MIA for us tho but at least others are stepping up.
- Slimtj100

Nash is starting to worry me. The secondary guys have really stepped up but at some point they are going to need Nash to perform.

Nash is starting to worry me. The secondary guys have really stepped up but at some point they are going to need Nash to perform.
- Blueshirts4ever

The thing is once he gets the puck he gets smothered. I think he needs to not carry the puck and have Stepan or whoever feed him the puck. The playoffs are different in that the opposition is game planning vs the other teams best player. An giving him extra attention. It almost seems like he's getting shadowed and double teamed at the same time. But he def needs to do more. He was lazy on 2 GAs last night

The thing is once he gets the puck he gets smothered. I think he needs to not carry the puck and have Stepan or whoever feed him the puck. The playoffs are different in that the opposition is game planning vs the other teams best player. An giving him extra attention. It almost seems like he's getting shadowed and double teamed at the same time. But he def needs to do more. He was lazy on 2 GAs last night
- Slimtj100

I'm wondering if Oates adjusts his match ups to account for Brassard. Which might end up freeing Nash up a little bit. Scoring depth will do that. Give the Caos secondary scoring credit too. The Caps are a tremendous home team, the Rangers need to find a way tomorrow night. Not liking the prospect of game 7 there.

I'm wondering if Oates adjusts his match ups to account for Brassard. Which might end up freeing Nash up a little bit. Scoring depth will do that. Give the Caos secondary scoring credit too. The Caps are a tremendous home team, the Rangers need to find a way tomorrow night. Not liking the prospect of game 7 there.
- Blueshirts4ever

The Rangers are going to need Hank to steal one down there. This is an interesting series in that the secondary players are playing really well for both teams, and the big guns (for the most part) haven't really broken out yet. I would make the Caps a favorite in the series, simply by virtue of the fact that they have home ice, but the series is going to come down to who gets the better goaltending, and possibly whose stars breakout first.

only 1 in 73 years my friend....the Isles and Devils have combined for 7 since 1980....
- Blueshirts4ever

While this is indeed a sucky fact, it does need to be taken into context. (Sorry for this post. Some history though I am speaking off the cuff and not all my dates are 100%)

Many will say that being an original six franchise that Rangers should have more cups and rightfully so, but it is important to understand that the NHL before expansion was vastly different. So too the ownership's view of "winning." The Rangers won 3 cups in their first 15 years but WWII gutted what could have been a perennial powerhouse and for a while ownership put its onus on money with little regard for winning hockey.

It wasn't until the 1950's or so that the Rangers even played home playoff games due to the (frank)ing circus coming to MSG. Imagine the Rangers having to play all their games on the road? I'm surprised they won cups at all.

Also the NHL was geared towards allowing the Canadian franchises to have first rights to players. Montreal and Toronto would to sign the highest level of talent before the Rangers could even speak to these players. There were a few players that slipped through like Gordie Howe and you can see the difference in cups between the Rangers and the Wings.

It is more apt to look at the other original 6 american franchises and their history.
Chicago 4 cups - 1 since expansion (and some top 5 picks to build around)
Boston 6 cups - 3 since expansion (signed Bobby Orr and broke a string of 8 straight Canadian Franchise cups)
Detriot 11 cups- 4 since expansion (Model franchise in the last 20 years but was preceded by years of futility. Also won 4 cups in 5 years in the early fifties with Howe in his prime.)

Throughout most of the Rangers history they have not truly had fair odds at winning. Granted Boston and Detroit, with Howe and Orr were the exceptions and not the rule. The Rangers have never benefited from a block of top draft picks picks to build around like the isles and devils save for the early sixty that were very weak drafts due to the most players having already been signed by the Toronto and Montreal. They try to win every season and while a 54 year drought is significant, the Rangers for a lot of that time were.

^^^^Again sorry for the previous post^^^^

^^^^Again sorry for the previous post^^^^
- climbdenali12

Why you sorry? Good post.

Why you sorry? Good post.
- Pete V

I'm not usually that long winded

^^^^Again sorry for the previous post^^^^
- climbdenali12

No worries and very accurate. Of the original 6, Chicago and the Rangers were at a distinct disadvantage. Imagine having Toronto's history? (Although without having it in front of me probably had higher rate of success with Montreal very early on) Whats their excuse? They had first crack at Ontario's talent, although I guess Detroit provided competition for them. The Rangers had first crack at the hockey hot bed that was Hell's Kitchen and Weehauken

I'm not usually that long winded
- climbdenali12

Long winded is good when you bring something to the table

Long winded is good when you bring something to the table
- Blueshirts4ever

Thanks, While I understand the Devils have been a well run franchise the last two decades with cup wins and playoff success and the Isles with their run of four, I think looking at cup numbers are not a fair way of comparing these franchises.

Thanks, While I understand the Devils have been a well run franchise the last two decades with cup wins and playoff success and the Isles with their run of four, I think looking at cup numbers are not a fair way of comparing these franchises.
- climbdenali12

Certainly not post expansion. I would agree

While this is indeed a sucky fact, it does need to be taken into context. (Sorry for this post. Some history though I am speaking off the cuff and not all my dates are 100%)

Many will say that being an original six franchise that Rangers should have more cups and rightfully so, but it is important to understand that the NHL before expansion was vastly different. So too the ownership's view of "winning." The Rangers won 3 cups in their first 15 years but WWII gutted what could have been a perennial powerhouse and for a while ownership put its onus on money with little regard for winning hockey.

It wasn't until the 1950's or so that the Rangers even played home playoff games due to the (frank)ing circus coming to MSG. Imagine the Rangers having to play all their games on the road? I'm surprised they won cups at all.

Also the NHL was geared towards allowing the Canadian franchises to have first rights to players. Montreal and Toronto would to sign the highest level of talent before the Rangers could even speak to these players. There were a few players that slipped through like Gordie Howe and you can see the difference in cups between the Rangers and the Wings.

It is more apt to look at the other original 6 american franchises and their history.
Chicago 4 cups - 1 since expansion (and some top 5 picks to build around)
Boston 6 cups - 3 since expansion (signed Bobby Orr and broke a string of 8 straight Canadian Franchise cups)
Detriot 11 cups- 4 since expansion (Model franchise in the last 20 years but was preceded by years of futility. Also won 4 cups in 5 years in the early fifties with Howe in his prime.)

Throughout most of the Rangers history they have not truly had fair odds at winning. Granted Boston and Detroit, with Howe and Orr were the exceptions and not the rule. The Rangers have never benefited from a block of top draft picks picks to build around like the isles and devils save for the early sixty that were very weak drafts due to the most players having already been signed by the Toronto and Montreal. They try to win every season and while a 54 year drought is significant, the Rangers for a lot of that time were.
- climbdenali12

Nice post, I wasn't aware of some of those facts. Back in the day, at least player wise it seems the Canadiens and Leafs were basically like the NYR of the 90's and 00's with being able to pick up who they wanted.

No worries and very accurate. Of the original 6, Chicago and the Rangers were at a distinct disadvantage. Imagine having Toronto's history? (Although without having it in front of me probably had higher rate of success with Montreal very early on) Whats their excuse? They had first crack at Ontario's talent, although I guess Detroit provided competition for them. The Rangers had first crack at the hockey hot bed that was Hell's Kitchen and Weehauken
- Blueshirts4ever

you mean Gretz wasnt born in Hoboken?

Nice post, I wasn't aware of some of those facts. Back in the day, at least player wise it seems the Canadiens and Leafs were basically like the NYR of the 90's and 00's with being able to pick up who they wanted.
- pcjr307

Free agency really didn't exist til Bobby Orr. It was more like the Canadian teams got the first ten picks in the draft every year and the american team made due with finding a gem in the later rounds. More like Edmonton of recent years.

Apparently Staal just didn't feel comfortable out there and didn't want to put the team in jeopardy from what I read. That is a lot better than what I originally thought when I heard the news.

Apparently Staal just didn't feel comfortable out there and didn't want to put the team in jeopardy from what I read. That is a lot better than what I originally thought when I heard the news.
- pcjr307

You could tell on that hit by Brouwer in the corner that he wasn't ready. I don't think I've seen him get hit like that ever since his brother hit him.

My prediction is looking like it's going to come true...

My prediction is looking like it's going to come true...
- Blackstrom2

What was your prediction?

What was your prediction?
- Pete V

Rags in 6.

Caps gave up last night. There's no reason to continue on. I don't want to see them give up in more games...

We're cursed. no Cup for at least 10 more years, or however long Ovi has on that retarded contract.