OT: 2022-23 NHL thread….Devils & Rangers & Islanders
- Thread starter zappaa
- Start date
I'm neutral on the game and yes that was an embarrassment of a goal. Just terrible. Rangers have been a step slow all game.
Lazy play by the Rangers but hell of a job by Palat to create that and nice patience by McLeod to finish it!
Not sure if it was lazy, it was STUPID. If you want to wait for the PP, maybe the neutral zone would be better.
And another bad goal given up by the Rangers - just standing there watching the Devils flying by...
Devils are so much more skilled than the Rangers.
I think the Rangers are equal in skill, but the Devils are just so much faster. Can't compete with the speed they bring.
I've always hated this cliche. If you're up by one, are you better off not scoring? I understand the premise though, this game isn't over yet.
I'm with you - it's just a dumb saying. Who in their right minds would rather be up 1-0 than 2-0? That's right, nobody. They say it in soccer too, where it's just as stupid.
I agree with this. It's better speed and, at least tonight, intensity. Tough combo to beat.
Well I’d rather be at 3-0 than 2-0.
That’s where I was going.
But a 2-1 does change things. Which I think others were going with.
That's not what it means. One goal lead you're still on edge. Two goal lead, you can get complacent.
Rangers getting schooled by a structured forecheck and breakout system.
Rangers have neither
Rangers have neither
I would love to see the Rangers forecheck just once like the Devils do dozens of times per game. Absolutely listless performance.
Totally agree....and yet the Devils did have a 2 goal lead in game 7 back in 1994 if I recall correctly.
Three of their top 6 (Zibanejad, Panarin and Kane) want to play on the perimeter and avoid body contact, so they can’t get a forecheck going.
No I get it, but it's an exaggeration because obviously a 1-0 lead is worse than a 2-0 lead. And then suppose you're up 2 and give up a goal, well now you're back to a 1 goal lead so taking the saying at face value, you'd be better off for having given up that goal.
I don't know whether that IS a penalty by NHL standards. but it should be. If you are going to allow 'big time hits', you also have to hold the big time hitters responsible when they miss the body and hit the head, regardless of whether or not it is was on purpose. I don't think he meant to hit the head, but he did nonetheless.
He didn’t miss the body and hit the head. Meier’s head was a lot lower than it should be and got in the way of a hit to the shoulder.
I'm watching this replay over and over and can't tell at what point you're seeing Meier lower his head. We must be talking about different hits.
The problem is, you can't ask the defender to play "shorter" either. Trouba's posture never really changed.
IDK if I saw it that way. Didn’t look like Timo ducked down. He barely moved.
I’m talking about the same one the announcers agreed wasn’t a penalty because of Meier’s head position.
Well that's it. 3 on 1. Nuff said.
You're tying yourself into silly knots. There is no world in which a 2 goal lead is worse than a 1 goal lead.
Sure you can. This isn't the 70s anymore. Hockey isn't about huge dudes posturing while they carry the other guy off on a stretcher any more. The NHL doesn't need that anymore, and what they do need is to protect the skill players.
Woooooooooo.
Lets go Devils!!!
Lets go Devils!!!
Looks like this is the end for Rangers. Let's Go Devils. I gave up my Devils season tix after their last cup. I may need to buy them again.
So the net effect of the play/rule is shorter players are allowed to get concussions?
Disagree. The hit was clean, the result was unfortunate.
Scott Stevens says hello. Pretty sure nobody complained when he unleashed on people; also NOT penalties.