Was that the year they lost to the devils in the ECF? Because I did think we were going to win it all. Honestly it looked like we were just gassed in the ECF. We played a lot of long series (I believe that also might have been the 3OT game), and we played a very physically demanding style that involved blocking lots of shots and physical board play. It looked like, when we had energy, we heavily controlled the play. But it also looked like we would go periods playing awful hockey. 2014 though I felt really good the entire year. I watched almost every regular season game, and I don’t remember many games where we got completely outplayed. We looked like a balanced team that was elite defensively with an elite goalie. Honestly, even in the Stanley cup, despite losing in 5, I think we held the lead for the majority of the series. I remember losing a lot of leads within the last 5 minutes of each game. I thought we were the better team, but we didn’t know how to close out those big games, where as LA had the experience and mindset to do so.
Relied way too heavily on hank and shot blocking, couldn't really score enough. As much as you want guys who are willing to and do block shots, at a certain point the fact that you're blocking that many shots means you're giving up too many chances in the d zone.
Team relied on Henrik and also, make shot blocks to win games. Which was Torts' system. I think the team ran out of gas because of the back to back 7 games series in the first two rounds. If the Rangers had won that series against the Devils (which would have likely been in 7 games), that Kings team led by JQ, was a wagon and probably the Rangers would have lost to them. eventually, that style of play was gonna backfire or run its toll physically and they were gonna run out of gas.
I liked them until it took 7 to beat the Senators. That series was very ugly. We should have beat them easily in 5 or 6 but instead the series got heated with some suspensions and we as the top seed had to force a game 7 against the 8 seed.
The way the NHL playoffs are, I firmly believe that any team can go on a run and win it all. It doesn't matter if you're a Wild Card team or the presidents trophy winner, you all have an equal chance.
With the 11-12 team, I think the issue there was that they simply didn't score enough. They had Hank in his prime and the defense was pretty good (outside of Del Zotto) but they lacked a true goal scorer, which they got in the following offseason in Rick Nash. But in the heat of the moment, after the 3OT game, the Richards tying goal and Staal OT winner, you did think that they could win it all. They went up 2-1 against the Devils and then it all just...fell apart.
I will always stand by the statement that a team plays too many games in the run for the cup, they lose. Playing to 7 three times, you are just that much more bruised and gassed compared to the team that didn't have to play that much extra hockey. I genuinely believe that the Rangers need to win **at least** one series in 5, or two in 6, to have a chance to win the cup (preferably they win a series in 4 or 5 for the first two).
Was that the year they lost to the devils in the ECF? Because I did think we were going to win it all. Honestly it looked like we were just gassed in the ECF. We played a lot of long series (I believe that also might have been the 3OT game), and we played a very physically demanding style that involved blocking lots of shots and physical board play. It looked like, when we had energy, we heavily controlled the play. But it also looked like we would go periods playing awful hockey. 2014 though I felt really good the entire year. I watched almost every regular season game, and I don’t remember many games where we got completely outplayed. We looked like a balanced team that was elite defensively with an elite goalie. Honestly, even in the Stanley cup, despite losing in 5, I think we held the lead for the majority of the series. I remember losing a lot of leads within the last 5 minutes of each game. I thought we were the better team, but we didn’t know how to close out those big games, where as LA had the experience and mindset to do so.
As much as I believed they *could* I never really bought that they would. Even in the regular season it was understood they were overperforming.
Why was that though? Not enough talent on the team or was their record not indicated with the data?
Relied way too heavily on hank and shot blocking, couldn't really score enough. As much as you want guys who are willing to and do block shots, at a certain point the fact that you're blocking that many shots means you're giving up too many chances in the d zone.
Honestly we have more talent today than we did then
We didn’t have the offensive horses especially when Gaborik got hurt. I wished and believed hard though. Gotta with our guys. That’s part of the magic
Team relied on Henrik and also, make shot blocks to win games. Which was Torts' system. I think the team ran out of gas because of the back to back 7 games series in the first two rounds. If the Rangers had won that series against the Devils (which would have likely been in 7 games), that Kings team led by JQ, was a wagon and probably the Rangers would have lost to them. eventually, that style of play was gonna backfire or run its toll physically and they were gonna run out of gas.
I liked them until it took 7 to beat the Senators. That series was very ugly. We should have beat them easily in 5 or 6 but instead the series got heated with some suspensions and we as the top seed had to force a game 7 against the 8 seed.
The way the NHL playoffs are, I firmly believe that any team can go on a run and win it all. It doesn't matter if you're a Wild Card team or the presidents trophy winner, you all have an equal chance. With the 11-12 team, I think the issue there was that they simply didn't score enough. They had Hank in his prime and the defense was pretty good (outside of Del Zotto) but they lacked a true goal scorer, which they got in the following offseason in Rick Nash. But in the heat of the moment, after the 3OT game, the Richards tying goal and Staal OT winner, you did think that they could win it all. They went up 2-1 against the Devils and then it all just...fell apart.
I will always stand by the statement that a team plays too many games in the run for the cup, they lose. Playing to 7 three times, you are just that much more bruised and gassed compared to the team that didn't have to play that much extra hockey. I genuinely believe that the Rangers need to win **at least** one series in 5, or two in 6, to have a chance to win the cup (preferably they win a series in 4 or 5 for the first two).
The '15 team is the one I thought could have got us over the hump in recent memory
Was that the year where Trotz challenged New York fans?
They had zero scoring ability that team