Game Thread: STANLEY CUP FINAL: Los Angles Kings vs. New York Rangers

[postmaster]

I'd probably flip a coin or maybe go with whoever had the recent history (who was "hottest" to end the season).

Are you going to at least attempt to answer mine sometime?

Why would I? My first response to your response of who was the BEST STANLEY CUP FINAL GOALIE MATCHUP was in your response to Luongo Rask and it happened to be Quick had a better save percentage in the playoffs than Luongo .... I don't see why I have to go on and explain myself more.

 

[DragonfromTO]

LMAFO

You're seem to be saying that like Fleury has been fantastic in the regular season. At first glance I'd guess his regular season SV% has been better than league average maybe once in ten seasons? 2007-8 definitely was but that was only 35 games

 

[dare2be]

You're seem to be saying that like Fleury has been fantastic in the regular season. At first glance I'd guess his regular season SV% has been better than league average maybe once in ten seasons? 2007-8 definitely was but that was only 35 games

I wouldn't say fantastic, but compared to his playoff performance, there is quite a drop-off once the playoffs come around. It seems only fair that since MAF is primarily judged by his playoff performance (or lack thereof), then judging others on playoffs only would be fair game.

 

[IPostedWhat]

 

[dare2be]

Logic isn't flashy.

 

[postmaster]

I tend to have that effect

 

[DragonfromTO]

Why would I? My first response to your response of who was the BEST STANLEY CUP FINAL GOALIE MATCHUP was in your response to Luongo Rask and it happened to be Quick had a better save percentage in the playoffs than Luongo .... I don't see why I have to go on and explain myself more.

Not that it matters but Luongo didn't face Rask, he faced Thomas. I assumed that the goalie "rankings" that we were using to judge the matchups were simply "where would/should this guy have been ranked overall at the start of the finals?". So I'm asking where I'm going wrong in not ranking Quick higher overall. His SV% seems to be telling an inaccurate/incomplete story if he should be ranked as one of the best in the world. So I'm merely asking for an explanation of how/why it is inaccurate so that I can understand why I should be ranking him higher.

 

[DragonfromTO]

I wouldn't say fantastic, but compared to his playoff performance, there is quite a drop-off once the playoffs come around. It seems only fair that since MAF is primarily judged by his playoff performance (or lack thereof), then judging others on playoffs only would be fair game.

I can't imagine you've ever seen me do that.

 

[postmaster]

Not that it matters but Luongo didn't face Rask, he faced Thomas. I assumed that the goalie "rankings" that we were using to judge the matchups were simply "where would/should this guy have been ranked overall at the start of the finals?". So I'm asking where I'm going wrong in not ranking Quick higher overall. His SV% seems to be telling an inaccurate/incomplete story if he should be ranked as one of the best in the world. So I'm merely asking for an explanation of how/why it is inaccurate so that I can understand why I should be ranking him higher.

So Luongo only played 1 playoff series and faced Thomas .... or are you only jumping back to finals? I can't keep track of what you are doing. I know Quick won 1 finals and likely 2 now.

 

[DragonfromTO]

I will ask one question, who would you take in the playoffs .... Quick or Luongo?

I'll also add that if the choice is between 2013-14 Quick and 2010-11 Luongo I'd take Luongo.

 

[DragonfromTO]

So Luongo only played 1 playoff series and faced Thomas .... or are you only jumping back to finals? I can't keep track of what you are doing. I know Quick won 1 finals and likely 2 now.

You wrote this about the previous discussion

who was the BEST STANLEY CUP FINAL GOALIE MATCHUP was in your response to Luongo Rask

which is what I was referencing.

 

[postmaster]

I will no longer contribute to hijack this thread.

 

[pixburgher66]

Some of those Avalanche teams with Roy in net were ridiculous.

Definitely. That's probably the last one I could mention in a similar vein, but I was fairly young to really appreciate those teams.

 

[forty_three]

So doughty or Williams for conn smythe?

Gaborik?

Empty net plays better than Hank
Maybe he starts next game

I can sense a groundswell of "Cam Talbot should start". Which is just stupid. With the exception of the OT winner in game one, Hank hasn't misplayed anything.

McDonagh, Girardi, Staal on the other hand...

I laughed my Andre Fleury off.

So does Dragon come back and say how Quick is far from elite?

I originally quoted this to say I would be willing to state it if Dragon didn't come back to say it. But he did.

I still don't like Quick's style. His mechanics are a mess. And he's always a quarter inch from disaster. But he does seem to make it happen when it counts.

Kind of like Grant Fuhr.


So, why in the hell would AV decide that if you're playing a stifling checking team like LA, that trying the stretch pass is a good idea? How many passes were picked off?

When they chipped to the corner, they got their first, but then they just got stuck on the perimeter or behind the net. Did they just not go to the slot, or could they just not get there?

 

[forty_three]

Girardi putting some ice on his nose.

 

[mattola]

I can sense a groundswell of "Cam Talbot should start". Which is just stupid. With the exception of the OT winner in game one, Hank hasn't misplayed anything.

i dont get that at all. and where do you sense that from? not the fanbase on SportsHoopla, not on twitter and I follow rangers fans and get their retweets, I dont see where that comes from. Talbot is also injured isnt he and not even backing up Hank, he has no dressed in sometime

 

[forty_three]

i dont get that at all. and where do you sense that from? not the fanbase on SportsHoopla, not on twitter and I follow rangers fans and get their retweets, I dont see where that comes from. Talbot is also injured isnt he and not even backing up Hank, he has no dressed in sometime

Who was that guy here all playoffs who was saying Hank is overrated and Talbot should start? I looked back through the last few days and he hasn't been around for some reason.

I know Talbot is hurt. I should have included this smiley:

No caffeine and no caffeine make 43 something something.

 

[Nasty_Magician]

Really hope the Kings don't Prince Oberyn this series.

 

[forty_three]

Weak.

 

[Comeds]

I do think the Rangers deserve credit for stretching the series to at least four games.