Bantering Points: New York Rangers Winning All Types Of Games

-Would the Rangers be a top 5 team in the Eastern Conference right now if Henrik Lundqvist was not playing all season?

NO FREAKIN WAY!!!!

Not a chance – hank has my vote for a vezina but I don’t think hank really cares about a vezina, he talked about his hunger for a cup after last years playoff exit – lastly I’m not worried, other guys find ways to put the puck in the back of the net and it’s only a matter of time b4 gabby starts finding the back of the net, he finds those tricky areas of the ice to bury his chances, whenever he is on he is a scoring threat and I love and always loved having gab on our team

1) definitely not
2) Jon Quick or Tim Thomas have a slight edge right now over Henrik
3) no not really, if Torts keeps Hags-Step-Gaby together they should go on a tear soon

1-No, I still think we’re in the playoff mix though, but a few games (classic for example) aren’t wins with Biron in net, however solid he’s been. He doesn’t steal games.

Always hard to put away homer bias, but yes, have to pick Henrik. He’s got one of the top GAAs in the league (Raask is better but he’s only played 16 games, Elliot’s is better but he’s played 22 games and St. Louis plays a suffocating Hitchcock defensive style.) He’s tied with Elliot in save %, though Hank has face almost DOUBLE the amount of shots. Raask’s is the highest, but again, only 400 and change in shots and 16 games.

I think Hank’s only competition is really from Quick, who has quite similar numbers, and has played more games and faced more shots.

Lastly, I wouldn’t call the ‘norm’ of the top line fantastic. I liked Hagelin on that line though, his quickness in the offensive zone really helped them cycle the puck. That line needs to start generating offense and controlling the play more, not just score every once in a while and then dissapear for a few games.

1) Not sure

- The rangers have played without two of their top 4 dmen this season and are in a position to take the conference… Biron has played well and definitely looks like he could step up and save the team, no pun intended, if lundqvist were to go down with an injury… Further the team is committed to team defense, blocking shots and while there is the open look every now and then, many shots that our goaltenders seem to face are shots along the perimeter.

2) If not Lundqvist, Brian Elliot or Jimmy Howard

- Elliot in my mind won’t play enough this year to warrant a Vezina trophy, Jimmy Howard has been an absolute rock for Detriot and drug that team through their early struggles… Thomas makes too many bone headed mistakes for me… Jon Quick has an underachieving team in front of him… Lundqvist has proved through his consistency that he is one of the best goaltenders in the league, if not the best…

3) We got into the playoffs last year without Dubinsky for a portion of the season, Callahan for the end of the season, and a slumping Marian Gaborik for the duration of the season, this team hates to lose and they’ve shown that they have the will to win, and sometimes that’s enough to get you through a mini slump…

This team is very similar to last years, and I guess this years Bruins but with a little more high end talent IMO. Where they’re similar is that like some of you have already said, they hate to lose and when they do, they respond very well thus avoiding prolonged losing streaks. I think thy’re most like Boston (especially during last years playoff run) in the sense that they get production from 4 lines, are all willing to outwork the opponent, out hit the opponent, commit to D and forecheck pressure and have an elite goalie between the pipes to bail them out of the few mistakes they make. Defenitely a great sign at the halfway point. Long way to go so keep it up, boys!

Chara and Alfredsson named ASG captains

Im concerned about Marian Gaborik, yes….He did this his first season here. Tore it up the first half slowed down the second. Either way Ive got his back hopefully he pots one soon.

One thing I’m starting to have a problem with is people saying without Lundqvist we’d be nothing? What’s the difference between having a guy that gets 100 points a year and having a goaltender that is probably the best in hockey? Yeah he wins games for us, what is he supposed to do not win games for us? This stuff baffles me… he’s a great goaltender and he’s ours… I’d love to have Stamkos, Crosby, Malkin, Sedins… they wing games for their respective teams…

Considering all the discussion about what type of team we’d be without Lundqvist, you’ll be happy to know that the almighty ESPN has an Insider article (which I can’t read because I’m cheap and not paying to actually read something from that site) stating that the Rangers are one of the top teams expected to have a second-half slump and fail miserably for the rest of the year.

Isn’t it interesting how the Rangers have managed to mostly sustain the success they’ve been having the whole year (barring the first few games) and yet they’re still predicted to tank? I understand the Rangers haven’t had past success but they’ve weathered some small slumps this year in good fashion and have earned the benefit of the doubt IMO.