best hairstyles for women with thinning hair

The Goal Breakdown: Rangers at Bruins

If you want one word to sum up the New York Rangers tonight feel free to use sloppy. The Rangers were defeated 3-1 by the Boston Bruins and were second best in almost every facet. Throughout the season the goals in each game (as well as a brief game summary) will be broken down right here so keep on coming back. Let’s get in to it.

Boston 1 Rangers 0

The Rangers got caught on a line change for Boston’s first goal. David Krejci was fed the puck, cross ice, from Andrew Ference and being completely wide open, was able to get off a low shot from the boards which Henrik Lundqvist was only able to push out in front to a streaking Lucic who banked it home from the top of the crease around the fourteen mark of the first. It was a sloppy goal all round from the Rangers especially when you consider how Staal failed to cover Lucic in front. Missed coverage, easy finish.

Boston 2 Rangers 0

The Bruins got their second (midway through the second) once again, directly off a bad change by the Rangers. Following a breakout by the Bruins, essentially Dan Paille was wide open because the back checking Ranger was late back because of the poorly timed change. Whether it was traffic or a deflection (actually, both) Lundqvist was unable to stop Paille’s high shot which hit the post and proceeded to bank off Lundqvist before trickling over the goal line. Boston’s second was another sloppy goal conceded by the Rangers given the badly timed change and poor coverage. Several breakdowns occurred on the goal.

Boston 2 Rangers 1

This is what you pay big bucks for: As the Rangers broke out of their own zone the puck came to Nash who – driving to the middle – made a smart spinning move on the defenseman before getting a strong, low shot off. Eventually the puck came back to Richards and with his second attempt he sent a rising shot over Rask’s blocker to cut the lead to one. The goal featured a first point as a Ranger for Nash as well as Girardi’s first assist of the year. The goal was one of the very few times throughout the entire game where the Bruins seemed a little disorganised in their own zone.

Boston3 Rangers 1

The Bruins won a faceoff in the right circle by Bergeron, and as the puck came back to Johnny Boychuck the blueliner simply shot the puck back towards goal from near the boards, from just inside the blueline. With several players in front of Lundqvist and with possible multiple deflections (Richards then Bergeron) the Rangers goalie couldn’t see anything as it sneaked in on the right hand side. Cruel goal for Lundqvist to concede as his vision of the puck was minimal but good play from Bergeron to win the face off and head streak to the goal to block the netminder’s view. Simple, effective hockey.

Summary:

The Rangers were sloppy; they were second best along the boards, physically overall and were unable to get much momentum offensively, barring a few extended shifts in the Bruins zone in the second half of the middle period. Despite this, the Rangers were unlucky. Two fortunate goals for the Bruins with two sloppy changes for the Rangers were critical factors in the game.

That said, the Rangers failed to capitalise on special teams including a potential game changing 5 on 3 while they relied heavily on the brilliance of Lundqvist. Indeed, despite being just the first game of the year Lundqvist sprawling glove save off David Krejci will be a save of the year candidate: awesome reflexes and side to side ability on show by the King.

The Rangers never managed to deal with the Krejci – Horton – Lucic line all night, got next to nothing from most of the lines and really only Richards, Nash and in spurts Gaborik were visible offensively for the Rangers. With the Penguins up next tomorrow night the Rangers will need to shake off what looks like rust. The Bruins seemed better prepared/ready to play and executed better. Boston deserved the victory even if the way it came about was fortunate.

Ranger of the game: Henrik Lundqvist – spectacular despite three goals against.  (honourable mention to Rick Nash)

Must do better award: Carl Hagelin (invisible if it were not for the penalty box)

24 Responses to “The Goal Breakdown: Rangers at Bruins”

  1. Tim B says:

    When the first penalty of the game happened, I knew the Rangers would have trouble staying out of the box. And it cost them. Torts was especially frustrated. This looked liked an ECHL game. I agree that it was sloppy out there but it’s only the first game. What do you expect? Rangers winning 5-0? Look at the Whale. They have many good scorers however it was the beginning of the season where they couldnt win a game and had a tough time defending. Scoring was also an issue. But now they have improved

  2. rickyrants13 says:

    For the most part And grant it its the first game of the year and no preseason. Del Z, Halpern, Hagelin, Cally and Kreids were either lost or disingaged. Lundy was rusty as hell. His best save might not have really been a save.

    Once again the Rangers dont look like they have a plan on the PP.

    And can someone please tell me why PROFESIONAL players that are suppose to be playing at this time of the year arent in shape? What did they do during the lockout drink?

    Well on the bright side Nash is as advertised. he will be alot of fun to watch all year.

    I would love to know whats going on with Kreider. He has all the speed in the world but can not seem to controll the puck and skate all at the same time.

    And the other note is with this kind of talent on d why do we have so much trouble getting the puck out of our own zone. And it doesnt just happen when the third pair is on the ice. Is it the D or is it the way the other players come back and position themselves to help out. We saw it tonite and we saw it last year just how many times the other teams seem to want it more then we do. Could that be it? Do they want it more them we do?

  3. agentsmith says:

    get hags off line 1. please

  4. Jeff P says:

    Rangers biggest problems are
    1. Faceoffs
    2. Horrendous breakouts.
    Every time B’s D men had the puck, it would make it’s way out of the zone. Not so for the Rangers.

  5. Seahorse says:

    they just got rolled. and the bruins were goin tick tack toe out of the zone every single time

  6. pal says:

    Unfortunately Gabs still has a tendency to pass the puck to the other team as often as he does to his own teammates; it appears Hagelin took lessons from Gabs on passing. They both gave the puck away unnecessarily several times in the first half of the game.

  7. Chris says:

    It was bad but there’s also no need to panic. I do think the Rangers need to improve at getting out of their own zone and they need to get to the corners quicker. Bruins got away with getting out of their own zone too easy. That said, this could all be sharpness and timing. I’d be concerned if they were making the same mistakes in 5 games. Also, don’t forget Bruins are a hell of a team too.

  8. Mikeyyy says:

    Wow my view was totally different.

    Nash still has a lot to prove. One nifty move up in the slot is not enough. Too bad no one was crashing the net for rebounds.

    Can someone please hit a streaking ranger with a pass.

    Gabby and hags had people beat dead to rights but no one would pass the puck. Everyone is playing timid.

    Cally had a good game throwing his body around. But he needs to get to the net.

    Our D looked ok for the most part. Mdz poised, Girardi a wall. Staal throwing the body.m McD running deep when needed.

    Our forwards need some work.

    In other news. People we could have had… Kovalev scored 3 points. Jagr puts up a sweet goal. And AA hits the game tying goal and scores in the shoot out…..which is more than Nash did on his first game!

    Sloppy yes. Fixable. .. Better start now. Torts is gone unless he can release his putt bull hold on the players. Let them play. We looked so good on paper…..then I wiped.

    • agentsmith says:

      agree. how the f*** s kreider not on special teams at least 2nd pp unit. stop trying to protect the guy.

  9. Jakki says:

    Actually Bruins second goal came from the mistake of Anton Stralman. Having advandced down low in the offensive zone, he gives the puck weakly away to a Bruinsplayer(think it was Paille, but not sure) who accelerates through the middle. Considering Stralman was way out of position, this leaves Boyle to cover Paille. Boyle is lost looking at Campbell which makes him lose Paille while Stralman just does not make it back, and therefore we had a 2-0 lead to the Bruins.

  10. Tim B says:

    Former Rangers who had a point were the following:
    Wolski (1G, 1A), Mitchell (1G), Kovalev (1G 2A), Tyutin (2A), Anisimov (2G, however 1 came in the shootout), Prospal (1A), Korpikoski (1G), Jagr (2G,2A)

    Notice a pattern?
    They score more when they aren’t on the Rangers

  11. ranger17 says:

    Sorry sorry sorry Ranger fans give the guys a break lets see if we hav 13 or 14 points after the first 10 games. Did anyone watch some of the other games last night . Vanc Duh Washy Duh Det Wow Carolina duh . St louis i guess is going to win the Cup because no one will score a goal on them this year . If we go 47 and 1 can we bring Torts back or will he still have to prove himself

  12. Walt says:

    The boys got their butt handed to them last night! It’s the first game of the season, so no need to panic yet. We will come back tonight against Cindy, and the girls!!!!

  13. Vince R. says:

    Looks like a lot of panic here. I’m going to save judgement for a few games. Game 1 after a one week training camp vs a cup contender just isn’t enough to judge. We need some gelling and to shake some D rust off, but it wasn’t all doom and gloom. Whoever thinks Hank wasn’t in midseason form or that Nash wasn’t making plays all over the ice was not watching the same game as me.

    Let’s see how we do over the next couple games.

  14. rocketroy says:

    Heh Ranger Fans…This is Real Simple….GAME # 1….Bruins Coach made better use of his one week training camp than did John Torterella..They looked twice more prepared than we did…END OF STORY….I said a week ago, we are two 20 Goal Scorers short & One Def Man short…Have not changed my mind…..Lets be Real here, the only change from last MAY is Rick Nash….!!!!!!
    RocketRoy – Ohio

    • Vince R. says:

      When we were a goal and a game from the Stanley Cup finals, so yeah, Nash.

      I will say the Bruins did look more prepared, but it probably didn’t help we went to the box early and often. That will throw off any momentum/gelling. With that said, the B ‘s were still the sharper, more disciplined team.

  15. rickyrants13 says:

    First off if you think letting in three goals And two of them soft ones is Mid season form then were in trouble lol.

    As for Nash he looked great and will def be well worth the trade Unless Torts style pisses him off.

    And I am not talking doom and gloom Because most of the way I feel about this team comes from Torts and is the same thing that we suffered from last year.

    PP doesnt score.

    D still blocking shots (With a goalie that is suppose to be so good. Why is that?)

    Players Profesional players at that still unprepared.

    And a D that can not get out of their own zone.

    Everyone of thos things I mentioned was happening in the playoffs So no they will not get fixed after 5 games or so.

    • Vince R. says:

      So the stops he made on the penalty kills don’t count? And the stop, the post rebound off his back and a goal he couldn’t see were bad goals? Bad rebound on the first goal, Not but there were errors that led to it and errors after it. Not everything can be stopped and this game could have easily been 6-1 or worse. There is a lot of stuff he makes look easy.

      Soft goals?! Really?!

      • rickyrants13 says:

        Say what you want but Im tired of it allways being someone elses fault. When he steals a game its all him. But hwen we lose someone else allways made a breakdown or a bad pass. The Bruins are a good team and we will not beat them everytime we play them. But two of the goals dont get in on most nights. Sorry if you see it differently.

        • Vince R. says:

          I’m just saying it’s not always about fault, two goals just seemed like bad luck, one he shared in mistakes, but he’s going to have 3+ goal games this year, even if he plays well…He’ll also have a stinker or two, along with every other goalie in the league. I thought he played well last night; good positioning, good saves,a few pucks got by but he kept it a close game. There were 31 shots that did not go in, not all of them easy, including one goal robbed. Whether it crossed the line or not, he got his glove on it which was amazing enough. So it’s not about fault for me, but he was merely great, but not insane last night.

          Fyi, accidentally gave you the above thumbs down when trying to tap reply, sorry.

    • agentsmith says:

      agree. i liked what i saw from nash. now for the other 21 players…

  16. rocketroy says:

    What Improvements Needed vs Penguins…..What was a big Deficiency last year & PLAYOFSS….Horrible PP…I was really hoping Torts would add a Asst Coach for special teams, especially the PP, as it is not his or Sullivans strong suit…Just think with our Fire Power and a (2) man advantage, NO GOALS..Who Knows if we score there…WE MUST take a quik lead tonite.
    Just Saying!!!! RocketRoy-Ohio