It was a great goaltending show but while Marty and the Devils won, I for one, would be hardpressed to admit that Marty outdueled Henrik. Honestly he didn't. Marty won the game and made 51 saves. Henrik, with 45 saves, lost in the fourth round of the shootout to that other Devil nemesis, Petrik Elias.
The Rangers got more shots but the Devils had the better scoring chances. In the shootout it was Parise, Langenbrunner, Zajac and Elias against Christensen, Kotalik, Gaborik and Dubinsky. You tell me who you would rather face.
However, it was a classic game and as good as it gets for a 0-0 game for 65 minutes. Don't tell me that a shootout is the way to end a game like this. I fear for the day when the exalted czar of hockey decides that we need shootouts in the playoffs, starting with the opening rounds. Trust me, its coming.
For the Rangers, the good news is that Lundqvist is on top of his game. It was only the eighth time in twenty three meetings that Brodeur has beaten Lundqvist and this was the 16th game in the last 19 that Lundqvist has given up two or less goals in a game. So the future bodes well for the Rangers and also for the Swedish Olympic team.
ICINGS: I would be remiss if I didn't mention the outstanding job that Mike Emerick did in announcing the game on VS. I know of no other hockey announcer who would bring such excitement to a 0-0 hockey game. Mike is truly the greatest.
Leafs' Matthews (upper body) out vs. Bruins
2 hours ago
I can’t stand Mike Emerick. His use of utensils to describe simple hockey plays drives me crazy. I was at the game and found it very exciting without his nonsensical commentary. I do agree with you that Lundqvist outplayed Marty. Brodeur flopped around and left a lot of big juicy rebounds, unfortunately no Ranger seemed to want to go to the net and take advantage.
Remember the days when the Rangers used to play for the shootout and would win more often than not? Is this a better team that Jagr's last season (07-08)?
Emerick doesn't bother me, but I like Sam better.
Every now and then, I write the team off for being without heart (justifiably, I think), and then I see a game like this. I kept telling my friends "You should have seen this game, it was like the playoffs".
It is why everytime I saw a crap effort from the team, I called it that. It's been the big problem over the last couple of years...don't play at 50% effort and then expect people to buy the "Rangers just don't have the talent" excuse. They may need more talent, but lack of effort is very identifiable.
Conversely, effort makes people love the team and support them to the end.
This was a BEAUTIFUL game to watch. Very clean, very spirited. All these Western Conference fanss (very bigoted in their dismissal of the Eastern conference) I live with out here, well I wish they would have seen this game.
I'm not saying it was perfect. And screw the analysts who poke too many holes in that game, they are missing the point. There is no such thing as perfect, and who cares with a display like this game?
The only shitty thing is that the Devils won because Elias has a nice wrist shot and Hank has a less than stellar glove hand.
The overtime was too short. Rangers were out-chancing them and looking better in the 4-on-4.
I hate listening to Emerick too. He's kind of crotchety and overbearing. Even though he was on, I barely heard him during this game.
Yes, I've been rambling, but this game was exhilerating, made me so proud to be a Rangers fan.
Go Rangers!!
(but don't forget to re-tool and lose the players who play one good game in 5, if that)
Anonymous- There must be one of those dog shields around the net that zaps a player when he gets near the net.
Wes-No.
SAM IS TOO MUCH A HOMER.
bow-me-down-Its ok to ramble. It was a good one. Unfortunately the Rangers don't play too many good games in a row and they can't score goals.