So do You Play Rempe Game 2?

[Br4d]

The Panthers were hitting really hard the first half of the game.  The Rangers were in trouble down 1-0.

 

Those are both things that cannot continue if we want the Rangers to win a Stanley Cup.

 

The Bennett hit on Trocheck was something that can't continue because nobody can take hits like that and keep playing well over time.

[mbob]

8 hours ago, Scott said:

Bad ice according to CJK, said it was no excuse but he had to go there and in quite a bit of detail.  Kinda wish he didn't say it because well it was no excuse and both teams played on it obviously which he acknowledged. He gets the hall pass after the last game.  Way too many passengers last night imo. Time to pick it up all the way around tomorrow.

Ice complaints in MSG has been bad since …. forever. 

[Br4d]

8 minutes ago, mbob said:

Ice complaints in MSG has been bad since …. forever. 

 

There's an event at MSG almost every night.  It's probably hard to keep taking up the false surface and then placing it again post-game.

Edited May 24 by Br4d

[Pete]

5 minutes ago, Br4d said:

 

There's an event at MSG almost every night.  It's probably hard to keep taking up the false surface and then placing it again post-game.

As far as I understand it they don't cover the ice after games. It only takes them 2 hours to convert, so most likely they're doing it the morning of an event.

[BrooksBurner]

42 minutes ago, Pete said:

Explain what this has to do with the conversation we were having? 

 

Losing a debate, so we shift to a personal attack. Par for the course. 

Nothing personal there. You were trying to invalidate Messier’s opinion like he doesn’t know hockey, which is funny to me. How many Cups does he have again? You want to bank on ”the stats” here, but think calling out -7 in 4 games by Panarin is just whining. Surely you see the irony.

 

I didn’t listen to the coaches post game because it doesn’t mean anything. I wouldn’t expect them to tell their unfettered truth after a game, especially game one. Maurice doesn’t want the Rangers to change anything. Laviolette isn’t going to excotiate his own team after the first game. I’ll say again, if the Rangers don’t approach things differently, it’s going to be over quickly. It needs to change. 

[Pete]

8 minutes ago, BrooksBurner said:

Nothing personal there. You were trying to invalidate Messier’s opinion like he doesn’t know hockey, which is funny to me. How many Cups does he have again? You want to bank on ”the stats” here, but think calling out -7 in 4 games by Panarin is just whining. Surely you see the irony.

 

 

All I see is a bunch of moving goalposts some what-about-ism that has nothing to do with the original debate. You're bringing Panarin and into it for what reason? Got literally zero to do with this conversation in this thread. 

 

Quote

I didn’t listen to the coaches post game because it doesn’t mean anything. I wouldn’t expect them to tell their unfettered truth after a game, especially game one. Maurice doesn’t want the Rangers to change anything. Laviolette isn’t going to excotiate his own team after the first game. I’ll say again, if the Rangers don’t approach things differently, it’s going to be over quickly. It needs to change. 

 

And I wouldn't expect Messier to do anything other than push the ESPN narrative around physicality and therefore call for Rempe ... Even though both coaches said the game wasn't overly physical.

 

Both coaches, CSA, NST, and MoneyPuck all disagree with you

 

Look, you're welcome to your take, and I've said it before in certain situations that I don't care about the numbers, what I see is XYZ. 

 

But the data set and multiple opinions overwhelmingly disagrees with you. 

 

Frankly, I don't think you're aligned with Messier because you think he knows better, I think you're aligned with him because he's the only notable voice that even remotely supports your viewpoint. It's the same with CSA versus NST, you prefer NST because it gives you the numbers you want to see. Meanwhile many NHL teams use CSA and you've been trying to discredit their data for weeks now.

Edited May 24 by Pete

[Vodka Drunkenski]

Wrong thread

Edited May 24 by Vodka Drunkenski

[BrooksBurner]

1 hour ago, Pete said:

All I see is a bunch of moving goalposts some what-about-ism that has nothing to do with the original debate. You're bringing Panarin and into it for what reason? Got literally zero to do with this conversation in this thread. 

 

 

And I wouldn't expect Messier to do anything other than push the ESPN narrative around physicality and therefore call for Rempe ... Even though both coaches said the game wasn't overly physical.

 

Both coaches, CSA, NST, and MoneyPuck all disagree with you

 

Look, you're welcome to your take, and I've said it before in certain situations that I don't care about the numbers, what I see is XYZ. 

 

But the data set and multiple opinions overwhelmingly disagrees with you. 

 

Frankly, I don't think you're aligned with Messier because you think he knows better, I think you're aligned with him because he's the only notable voice that even remotely supports your viewpoint. It's the same with CSA versus NST, you prefer NST because it gives you the numbers you want to see. Meanwhile many NHL teams use CSA and you've been trying to discredit their data for weeks now.

This is just whining

Edited May 24 by BrooksBurner

[BrooksBurner]

 

Why is Valley calling for Rempe if the Rangers played well in game 1?

[Pete]

 

47 minutes ago, BrooksBurner said:

This is just whining

I'll take the win.

[Pete]

29 minutes ago, BrooksBurner said:

 

Why is Valley calling for Rempe if the Rangers played well in game 1?

You're misstating the case. The Rangers played well enough to win. They could have played better. So could Florida. They scored 2 flukes and an empty netter. If you were a Florida you, you'd be complaining about how that's not going to get it done.

 

The other assertion you're making, that if Florida plays every game like Game 1, they'll win the series, is not supported by any statistics. If that game were to be played over with Igor playing up to his standards, it probably ends much differently.

 

I'd also welcome Rempe in the lineup just for the entertainment. I don't think it would have changed game 1 though.

 

Edited May 24 by Pete

[BrooksBurner]

3 minutes ago, Pete said:

You're misstating the case. The Rangers played well enough to win. They could have played better. So could Florida. They scored 2 flukes and an empty netter. If you were a Florida you, you'd be complaining about how that's not going to get it done.

 

The other assertion you're making, that if Florida plays every game like Game 1, they'll win the series, is not supported by any statistics. If that game were to be played over with Igor playing up to his standards, it probably ends much differently.

 

I'd also welcome Rempe in the lineup just for the entertainment. I don't think it would have changed game 1 though.

 

 

No.

 

Wrong. Maybe.

 

Yes.

[Pete]

3 minutes ago, BrooksBurner said:

 

No.

 

Wrong. Maybe.

 

Yes.

You're entitled to your alternative facts. I gave data that you're just denying, but have at it.

 

Edited May 24 by Pete

[mbob]

2 hours ago, Pete said:

As far as I understand it they don't cover the ice after games. It only takes them 2 hours to convert, so most likely they're doing it the morning of an event.

 

Never underestimate the ability for people to screw up the process.

Edited May 24 by mbob

[BrooksBurner]

17 minutes ago, Pete said:

You're entitled to your alternative facts. I gave data that you're just denying, but have at it.

 

 

I prefer to combine data and eye test. I've been doing it all year. You can't just live in a stat sheet and pretend you didn't watch the game

[Pete]

1 minute ago, BrooksBurner said:

 

I prefer to combine data and eye test. I've been doing it all year. You can't just live in a stat sheet and pretend you didn't watch the game

Twp people can watch the same thing and interpret it differently. 

 

You've been saying all year how they can't do this or that, yet here they are in the ECF. So, I feel pretty good about my assessments.

 

Yea you can try and cheapen it by saying they had it easy vs WSH, but how'd they get there? By going 1st place wire to wire and earning the right to play the 8th seed. You also said Carolina was going to catch and pass them, that didn't happen either.

 

I'm not saying all of this to just say "You're wrong about everything", I'm saying it to illustrate the point of seeing the same thing and interpreting it differently, maybe your outlooks just skew way too far into the doom and gloom area? It's never, ever, been as bad as you've made it out to be.

 

For example, you kept saying Rangers suck 5v5 yet they were break-even in GF and GA, and not too far off of Carolina in 5v5GF this season, and the Rangers beat them. They never "sucked". They were just average.

 

Point being, it's the ECF and were very much in Game 1 by every metric. Maybe it's time to use the eyeballs to acknowledge that?

[Valriera]

Would be surprised not to see him tonight. Team was flat even though they were roughly in the game to the end. Extra juice is always welcome.  

 

 

[BrooksBurner]

4 minutes ago, Pete said:

Twp people can watch the same thing and interpret it differently. 

 

You've been saying all year how they can't do this or that, yet here they are in the ECF. So, I feel pretty good about my assessments.

 

Yea you can try and cheapen it by saying they had it easy vs WSH, but how'd they get there? By going 1st place wire to wire and earning the right to play the 8th seed. You also said Carolina was going to catch and pass them, that didn't happen either.

 

I'm not saying all of this to just say "You're wrong about everything", I'm saying it to illustrate the point of seeing the same thing and interpreting it differently, maybe your outlooks just skew way too far into the doom and gloom area? It's never, ever, been as bad as you've made it out to be.

 

For example, you kept saying Rangers suck 5v5 yet they were break-even in GF and GA, and not too far off of Carolina in 5v5GF this season, and the Rangers beat them. They never "sucked". They were just average.

 

Point being, it's the ECF and were very much in Game 1 by every metric. Maybe it's time to use the eyeballs to acknowledge that?

 

Break even is not good at 5v5. Edmonton was +40. Dallas +32. Florida +36. The Rangers were +1. Now why were those teams so significantly in the positive and the Rangers weren't? You haven't been honest about it all year and that's ok. You can call it doom and gloom if you want, it's just the reality of the situation. Some might say you like to look at a dog turd and call it an ice cream sundae.

 

You continually mistake my takes that are based around the odds of something happening, with saying something is going to happen with certainty. There's a reason the game is still played. There's a reason people gamble or play the lottery. Hey, you never know! I don't see the big deal in acknowledging that the short comings of the Rangers are more glaring than the other teams. I really don't care about people being optimistic, but yours isn't deeply rooted. You pounded the statistical drum for 2 years with Gallant because you didn't like him, and ignored the same stats all year long this year. You say you disproved that but your arguments against that were flimsy. You're a faux optimist right now.

[Pete]

10 minutes ago, BrooksBurner said:

 

Break even is not good at 5v5. Edmonton was +40. Dallas +32. Florida +36. The Rangers were +1. Now why were those teams so significantly in the positive and the Rangers weren't? You haven't been honest about it all year and that's ok. You can call it doom and gloom if you want, it's just the reality of the situation. Some might say you like to look at a dog turd and call it an ice cream sundae.

 

You continually mistake my takes that are based around the odds of something happening, with saying something is going to happen with certainty. There's a reason the game is still played. There's a reason people gamble or play the lottery. Hey, you never know! I don't see the big deal in acknowledging that the short comings of the Rangers are more glaring than the other teams. I really don't care about people being optimistic, but yours isn't deeply rooted. You pounded the statistical drum for 2 years with Gallant because you didn't like him, and ignored the same stats all year long this year. You say you disproved that but your arguments against that were flimsy. You're a faux optimist right now.

Well, when the turd wins the President's Trophy, maybe you're just wrong for calling it a turd? You like to live in the extremes. If you're not the best, then you're the worst! Nah, that's not how this works.

 

And now you're (again) trying to make it personal by saying my optimism isn't deeply rooted, right after you said I look at a turd and call it a sundae...How is that not deeply rooted LOL? I didn't hate on GG's teams because I hated GG, I hated GG because of the way the team performed. And it's been validated at every step, both out of the player's own mouths and by the way they've handled their business this year.

 

You're all over the place and contracting yourself. I think some of it has to do with the fact that I've been supportive of the team all year long, you haven't, and it's not worked out well for you to this point because everything you said they couldn't do, they've done.

 

But don't worry, there is still the rest of the series where Florida just might beat the Rangers and you can celebrate being right, because we all know that's what you're hoping for.

 

 

Edited May 24 by Pete

[BrooksBurner]

3 minutes ago, Pete said:

Well, when the turd wins the President's Trophy, maybe you're just wrong for calling it a turd? You like to live in the extremes. If you're not the best, then you're the worst! Nah, that's not how this works.

 

And now you're (again) trying to make it personal by saying my optimism isn't deeply rooted, right after you said I look at a turd and call it a sundae...How is that not deeply rooted LOL? I didn't hate on GG's teams because I hated GG, I hated GG because of the way the team performed. And it's been validated at every step, both out of the player's own mouths and by the way they've handled their business this year.

 

You're all over the place and contracting yourself. I think some of it has to do with the fact that I've been supportive of the team all year long, you haven't, and it's not worked out well for you to this point because everything you said they couldn't do, they've done.

 

But don't worry, there is still the rest of the series where Florida just might beat the Rangers and you can celebrate being right, because we all know that's what you're hoping for.

 

 

You’re the only one trying to convince everyone that they played well game 1. You’re going hard to the paint to fight it here because deep down you know they didn’t look good. You are admitting it just by your actions, not your words.

 

Enjoy the game tonight. I hope they adjust and play a bit better. They’re close enough in the overall playoff grind that a few bounces going their way can be the difference.

[Pete]

6 minutes ago, BrooksBurner said:

You’re the only one trying to convince everyone that they played well game 1. You’re going hard to the paint to fight it here because deep down you know they didn’t look good. You are admitting it just by your actions, not your words.

 

Enjoy the game tonight. I hope they adjust and play a bit better. They’re close enough in the overall playoff grind that a few bounces going their way can be the difference.

Let's clarify here.

 

I said they played well enough to win. Eyeballs, two coach's POV and statistics from 3 sites run through different models supports that. That's not the same as saying they played well and there's no room to improve.

 

I enjoy the game because I find it infinitely more enjoyable to watch and look at what they're doing right instead of being miserable for 2.5 hours just looking at what could be better. Something can always be better. I don't need a perfect game or 60 minutes of domination (neither ever happen) to be satisfied.

 

I just want that for you, too, homie. The constant state of grievance will eat up your guts and I don't want to see that happen to you!

Edited May 24 by Pete

[BrooksBurner]

1 minute ago, Pete said:

Let's clarify here.

 

I said they played well enough to win. Eyeballs, two coach's POV and statistics from 3 sites run through different models supports that. That's not the same as saying they played well and there's no room to improve.

 

I enjoy the game because I find it infinitely more enjoyable to watch and look at what they're doing right instead of being miserable for 2.5 hours just looking at what could be better. I just want that for you, too, homie. The constant state of grievance will eat up your guts and I don't want to see that happen to you!

 

You should enjoy Kreider for the same reasons then 

 

Hope you're enjoying your soapbox, because 

 

[Pete]

3 minutes ago, BrooksBurner said:

 

You should enjoy Kreider for the same reasons then 

 

Hope you're enjoying your soapbox, because 

 

It's a good thing I don't care what you believe and I don't have to prove anything to you!

 

[RangersLEETCH]

unbelievable how ESPN announcers rips the Rangers apart in game 1 … not that the Rangers did anything to help themselves but now ES”fucking”PN does a story on MATT REMPE and how he can ignite stuff get the Rangers going… these guys at ESPN suck 

LGR!! 
 

https://www.espn.com/nhl/story/_/id/40210775/rangers-matt-rempe-awed-greats-calling-him

[Scott]

14 hours ago, Albatrosss said:

Kreider gets no pass!  He scored a hattrick in a second round. He didn’t score a hat trick to win the cup. Lets stop with Kreider fellacio

Try doubling up on the edibles. Need to relax a little, it's not good on the BP or heart. Maybe think a little less about fellacio. Or move on from the Rempe thread.  Don't want you leaving here with a bad taste in your mouth for no reason.

Edited May 24 by Scott