Game Wrap-ups

NY Rangers Goal Breakdown: Kreider’s late goal wins it for Rangers

Captain Clutch comes through again

For the second time this week, the Rangers beat the Islanders. This time it was in Nassau. This time it was a last minute goal that sent the good guys home with a win. This time wasn’t a drubbing, but it was a hard fought win. And of course it was Chris Kreider who scored a last minute goal to send the Blueshirts home victorious.

Alex Georgiev held the Rangers in it with a stellar first period. The game was filled with penalties, but it was arguably the best game of the year for the Blueshirts. That makes it six of their last seven at Nassau Coliseum for the Rangers – always a fun stat to bring up.

Isles 1, Rangers 0

Oof, not a first minute goal but a last minute goal. Jacob Trouba with the rough turnover, and then no one wants to cover either guy in front. Nothing Georgiev could do on this one. But he did enough in the first to ensure a Rangers win.

Rangers 1, Isles 1

Usually these kinds of reviews go against the Rangers, but this is a good goal for Mika Zibanejad. Just trickled through, and Ryan Pulock made a valiant effort on the first save, but it goes off Semyon Varlamov and crosses the line.

Rangers 2, Isles 1

Tony DeAngelo out of the box with the snipe. No real breakdown on the Isles’ part here. Bouncing puck at the blue line leads to the turnover and the rush.

Isles 2, Rangers 2

Anthony Beauvillier gained speed through the neutral zone, something we’ve spoken about a lot here, and that’s what caused this goal. There isn’t really a systemic issue here, since Beauvillier dumped the puck in well before the blue line, and I didn’t really see a gap control issue since Brady Skjei was within sticks length. Beauvillier is just really fast and someone like him skating forward will blow by anyone skating backwards. Tap your stick and move on.

Rangers 3, Isles 2

It’s a powerplay goal for Chris Kreider to win it. This was good puck movement from Artemi Panarin to Tony DeAngelo, back to Panarin, then to Mika Zibanejad in the slot for the chance. The rebound went right to the league’s best net front presence and he doesn’t miss from there.

Shot Heatmap

The Isles really owned that first period, getting 69% of the shot attempts and 81.5% of the xG. But it was the Georgiev show to keep them in it. After that the Rangers woke up and really owned the rest of the game. It’s not how you start, it’s how you finish. This heatmap is very skewed to the first period, when the Isles were getting a lot of high danger shots.

Skater Results

Not as much good/fun as we’ve seen in the past. A lot of what you see here is skewed from the first period, but the Rangers continue to excel in being more fun than bad. That’s a win when you consider the beginning of the season.

This might have been the best game of the year for the Rangers, who get two days off before getting the Blue Jackets at home. They get one more game against the Isles at MSG two days later, then it’s ten days off for the bye week and the All Star Game.

Show More
  • Great win after a disastrous first period. Georgiev was brilliant.

    Look, I get it, Georgie is 23 and King is 38 or whatever he is. The King has been the face of the franchise his whole career, he is entitled to what he wants to do.

    You want to “blame” for cap issues? Here: Staal, Smith, Skjei, and now maybe Trouba. There is where your anger should be directed to.

    And, I have to give credit where credit is due: It looks like the coach is FINALLY seeing the light and recognizing how this team should play to be successful. There is tremendous improvement in the D side of the ice, last night’s first period not withstanding. I like the way they are playing, as a team right now. Excitement with responsibility. A good combination.

    Lastly, Chytil was dominant last night. Fantastic game. Fast was excellent as well. And CK upped his trade value, OR making it difficult for the Rangers to trade him. ADA is a MUST keep. Loved his reaction to that ridiculous non slash call on Eberle and then his penalty call. Tony gave it back to the coach too, lol. He is passionate. 🙂

    • Kreider is going to get a really nice return if the Rangers go in the sellers direction. He’s playing well at the perfect time.

      Still think it’s to early to be saying Trouba is a bad player. He’s been a good player his whole career and is still only 25.

      Agree with you on DeAngelo. He’s showing every game why he needs to be part of this teams future.

      • Trouba was always a “good” d-man but never considered a shut down type all star. Sadly in this hard core salary cap era, a team really can’t afford all star compensation for anything less in performance.

      • I don’t know what to think about Trouba. As you know I have wanted this guy to be on the Rangers’ top pair for 3 years. Not playing him on the PP really hurts because that’s where he was supposed to put up pts.

        I think CK is trying to win the Rangers over and give him his contract.

      • Well he has a full, iron clad, NMC. He can do what he wants regardless of what the team wants, what the fans want, and what may be a good business move.

        Again, you have $20M in cap space tied up in players that don’t deserve it. Start there.

        • Really, Georgiev plays goalie not those other positions.
          If the queen is not traded he will be bought out.
          He doesn’t control that or his playing time.
          His time is past, Georgiev should stay.
          The fact that no one is interested in henrik with that cap hit says everything.

          • Way to not understand how contracts and no-movement clauses work, J Kass! Also, way to use sexist insults! You must be quite a guy yourself.

          • My point was about cap space and how, right away, the King’s $8.5M is keeping us from winning the Cup.

            The fact of the matter is that the Rangers are slightly above average in % of cap space allocated to goalies, in the NHL.

          • Far Queue
            I understand contracts perfectly, I guess you do not, and also have difficulty comprehending the written word.
            Sexist, are you saying a man cannot be a queen, that sounds sexist to me.
            And yes I am quite a guy, thank you.

          • To J Kass:

            We are in agreement that Lundqvist is a problem.

            BUT, Henrik is called the King. You are trying to demean him by referring to him as a queen. When you insult a man by calling him a girl, it is implied that girls are inferior — and so yes, your insult is sexist. Unlike Queue, I am not assuming that you understood the fact that your comment demeaned women, but please understand it now.

          • Raymond, your demeaning is YOUR OPINION, nothing to back it up.

            My praise is based on STATS and FACTS, everything backs it up.

            You insist on making the argument to fit your agenda. Same for the others that absolutely refuse to live in reality. Your opinion is much more biased than mine is.

          • J Kass

            No way he is bought out, too much dead cap space!!!!!!!

            Please understand the contract puts him in the drivers seat, and we’re there just for the ride!!!!!!!!!

          • Walt,

            There is another path. The Rangers can keep Georgiev and make it clear to Lundqvist that he will be bought out. They have to mean this. They can suggest to him that he retire as a face-saving gesture. When Hank retires, they can even reveal that they kept Georgi because Hank had told them he was planning to retire all along (and in fact he may have already done so).

            This is a gamble of course. If Hank holds fast, we have the dead cap space you don’t want. But the out of pocket cost to Lundqvist for retiring would be less than four million dollars and it saves him great embarrassment and enhances his legacy.

    • “It looks like the coach is FINALLY seeing the light and recognizing how this team should play to be successful.” Oh, really? Couldn’t it also be that the players have finally put it together and are playing the way that the coach has been urging them to?

      • No it couldn’t Joseph, because even David wrote here that Quinn changed his system recently. Did you read that article?

        You can have the best players and the best effort, but it’s the coach that mixes the ingredients to create success on the ice. If that’s not the case, then why even have a coach?

    • When someone says I get it, it nearly always means they don’t.

      On December 4, 2013, the Rangers gave Henrik Lundqvist a $60M contract. Did he deserve it? Hell, for the first eight years of his Ranger career, he was underpaid by at least $60M, so yeah. He earned it. Would I have done it? Absolutely. Cam Talbot had only played a handful of games and had no great pedigree (unlike Shesterkin) and Hank looked on top of his game. Indeed, ignoring the salary cap, there is nothing to regret here. Hank got money he earned.

      BUT, only a few weeks later, Hank was actually benched for a few games in a row because he was struggling – and indeed while we have seen flashes of the old Hank (Games 5,6,7 against Pittsburgh in 2014, outdueling Price in the 2016 playoffs), the contract has been a disaster. Most people don’t realize that the Rangers don’t even make the playoffs in 2014 without Talbot. The combination of Hank’s mediocre play, the cap hit, and the configuring of team defense to suit Hank’s style (things people blame Ruff for) led to the decline of a very strong team.

      But at some point, enough is enough. Yes, the Rangers have a number of bad contracts but the Lundqvist contract is most certainly the biggest one. Also the Rangers have two fine goaltenders and they do not need a third. Hank is in the way. He is taking time from better players. In contrast, Marc Staal and Brendan Smith are not. While it may have been too long in coming, Staal was benched somewhat permanently when DQ acknowledged that his play was simply not good enough. After his surgery, he has come back stronger and is clearly among the top six Ranger defensemen. Simply put, he is good enough to play and Lundqvist is not. As for Brendan Smith, well unfortunately, the Rangers simply lack twelve competent forwards.

      A final note: I agree with you in part. The contracts that most concern me at this time are Skjei and Trouba. The Rangers are shelling out over $13M per year for five years (and more in Trouba’s case) for two defensemen who frankly do not look like a top pair. Superficially, they appear worse than the other two pairs, an illusion created by the fact that they face the toughest opposition. But unlike Staal-Pionk, clearly overmatched last year as top pair, they are paid to be a top pair for years to come.

      So, while it is clear that the Lundqvist, Staal, Smith contracts are now bad ones, they will all be gone in eighteen months and have limited impact on the rebuild. OTOH, the Skjei contract (which I initially opposed) and the Trouba contract (which I supported) could be serious albatrosses. [Of course, they may still turn out well.]. I would trade Skjei incidentally, but I would not expect to get much for him. I’d take a 4th rounder if that was all I could get.

      • Raymond, why do people dismiss the facts?

        Eli Manning is done, he showed that. Henrik is not done, the stats bear that out. If he were not worth the contract then I would be on board just like everyone else. But he’s still playing at a high level. That’s not my opinion, that’s a fact, again, based on high danger shots faced.

        David has posted it here many times. It CLEARLY shows that Hank is the best goalie on the team. Please don’t give me “well this game or that game.” Over the LONG HAUL Hank is still the best goalie on the team.

        If you and everyone else that screams “that cap hit” do not want to accept those facts, then there’s nothing to discuss. I try, since I am a huge Hank fan, to bring stats into play as opposed to my opinion. The stats speak for themselves. The numbers don’t lie, you just refuse to accept them.

        • “If he were not worth the contract then I would be on board just like everyone else.”

          This is untrue.

          There are two kinds of stats. There are stats that measure things that absolutely certainly matter and there are stats which are hypothetical in value. I have not seen one shred of evidence that suggests that using high danger shots as a measure of goalie effectiveness tells us something useful about goalies. When Henrik Lundqvist is on the ice, there are six or fewer Rangers on the ice and one of those six or fewer Rangers allowing high danger shots is Henrik Lundqvist. This matters very much because there are many ways in which the goalie helps the team out. For starters, the team is configured in part to the goalie’s liking. Goalies make useful poke checks to thwart attacks (less likely from a goalie who plays deep). Goalies handle the puck. Goalies prevent rebounds. I believe some goalies give useful directions in game to teammates. [And I have not even gotten to the point that high danger shots are a subjective not an objective judgment.]

          Here is one undeniable fact. Over the course of Hank’s contract, the probability of winning a particular game has been lower when Hank starts than when he does not start. The Rangers stand to do better by not using him than by using him. If high danger shots are so important, do not use the goalie who allows more than any other. Using GAA and save percentage, Hank has not done particularly well. An amazing fact – since the start of the 2013-2014 season, the majority of shutouts by Ranger goalies have been posted by people other than Hank.

          Hank has 50 shutouts before his current contract (2005-2014) and 13 so far on his current contract.

          Looking at Hank’s first four years – and I hope you can agree the Ranger defense was not stellar in those days – Hank played 80% of the games. He had 20 shutouts and won 55% of his games. His backups (basically Weekes and Valiquette) had only 3 shutouts and won 42% of their games. That’s what a great goaltender looks like. One can spot greatness without “metrics”. So, if metrics tell you someone who is not obviously great is great, they are likely wrong.

          “I try, since I am a huge Hank fan, to bring stats into play as opposed to my opinion. The stats speak for themselves. The numbers don’t lie, you just refuse to accept them.”

          Both you and I quote stats. We are similar in that we both accept our own stats and disparage the other person’s stats. But bear in mind in mind a simple fact. Neither of is unbiased. When Lundqvist signed his new contract in December 2013, both of us worshipped him. Both of us loved the Pittsburgh series and the game sevens. When one person does an about face because of stats and the other uses the stats to support their biases, who is really looking at the stats?

          Henrik Lundqvist is still an NHL goalie. He would be a top two goalie on almost any team in the league. [And Marc Staal would be a top six defenseman on almost any team in the league BTW.]. But not being one of the top 20 tenders in the league and one of the top two tenders on your own team is a far more serious deficiency than being unable to play first pair defense – or even top four.

          • First of all, let’s get one thing straight, they are not MY stats, I do not come up with them. They are compiled by people who are objective.

            So, if you want to rely on “boxscore” stats and say that 3+ GAA does not cut it, then that’s your prerogative. Which brings us back to the ole “every SOG is the same” discussion. They ARE NOT all the same. A softball from the blue line is not the same as a scoring chance in the blue paint, for which the King is at the top or near the top of the list in the NHL, in facing those high quality shots.

            I mean if you play Hank and Georgiev each 50 games each, I have zero doubt who would be the better goalie (it’s Hank), even with the age advantage to Georgiev. Georgie played 6 out of 8 games a couple of weeks ago and looked ordinary by the end of that stretch, BTW.

            And I’m not tarnishing Georgie, he’s been great, but this “our back up goalie is the best goalie” saying has been going on for years. And proven wrong every time.

            But go ahead, continue to beat this drum.

          • “First of all, let’s get one thing straight, they are not MY stats, I do not come up with them. They are compiled by people who are objective.”

            You know very well that when I distinguish between your stats and my stats, I am referring to the stats we accept, not those we compile personally. It is a simple fact that I am giving weight to “boxscore” stats and you are giving weight to “metrics.

            Let us try to understand metrics for a moment. Undoubtedly not all SOG are the same. The premise of goalie metrics is that one can construct a model for shot difficulty and develop a better evaluation standard than boxscore stats. As to the creators of metrics, I would expect that they are sincerely attempting to create an objective standard. And indeed, at some other point in my life, this is something I might have attempted to do.

            The problem is that creating a useful system of goalie metrics is extremely hard. And when something is hard, there is big difference between trying and actually succeeding. Are they succeeding? Well, testing is hard. There is very little feedback to determine whether you are getting good results or not. I have seen no evidence – perhaps there is some. Here is a hypothetical. Metrics say that last year that it was tougher to play in Columbus than Florida. Bobrovsky’s save percentage goes up when he moves. That would be positive evidence if those things were true. But we seldom get good comparisons.

            Why are metrics hard? First, shot difficulty is not independent of the goaltender. Different goalies fare better against different kinds of shots. You don’t really want to reward Rinne for stopping shots difficult for Lundqvist and reward Lundqvist for stopping shots difficult for Rinne. You might trust that things even out, but by the. same argument, shot difficulty evens out. Things don’t even out. Ranger defenders know Hank’s weaknesses and try to prevent those shots. Also, Ranger opponents know Hank’s weaknesses and try to achieve those shots. Different goalies will simply get a different mix.

            Second, the goalie himself contributes to the defense and the opponent’s shot selection. Rinne should face fewer high quality shots than Hank simply because he himself is preventing them. Strictly speaking, this isn’t a flaw in the metrics themselves, but shows metrics will undervalue a Ring in a way that GAA does not.

            Third, what exactly is a high danger shot? The best answer is to use subjective judgment, but unless one is willing to have maybe ten people look at every shot, bias will doom the effort. So we try objectivity. But I don’t see how exactly. Suppose we have two shots – identical except one is taken by Ovechkin and the other by Michael Haley. Is it really objective to call the Ovechkin shot high danger and the other not? Nonetheless, it is likely what a truly fair subjective observer would decide. How do you evaluate how good a screen is? Is there really an objective way to handle sight lines? And how do you assess defensive harassment of the shooter? Often it comes down to the quality of the defender – which you can’t objectively factor in, but each goalie works behind the same guys over and over.

            So, an unbiased observer accepts the possibility that metrics, while desirable, might be rubbish. And we look for evidence. All the evidence I have seen tells me that metrics greatly overvalue Hank. There was a year 3-4 years back when metrics said Hank had a great year – the goalie equivalent of Wayne Gretzky in his prime. Yet he got no Vezina consideration and did not outperform his backup by boxscore stats. Implausible. Travis Lost said metrics showed Hank saved a goal a game. Again, just add a goal to every game and see where it left the Rangers – no they were simply not that bad. If stats are speculative and give implausible results, they are bogus. Sorry.

  • I have to admit Quinn’s tough love strategy has worked with ADA. As much as I think DeAngelo would love to punch Quinn in his jaw he would also punch out the person who would badmouth Quinn too. Typical love/hate relationship that’s paying off for the team and especially DeAngelo’s future as a player and person. Who won the Stepan trade now?

  • Great game and fun to watch. It’s always good to beat the Islanders, and I’m delighted this once glorious rivalry seems to be rekindled in earnest! It’s been too long. LGR!!!!

  • – That was a fun game to watch, definitely nice to have a “playoff vibe” feel for a change since the start of the rebuild. And always nice to out-chant the fishstick frauds at “the Mausoleum”. Do the Rangers have the most “Home arenas” in the NHL? They have to.

    – Over these past few weeks I’m so torn about Kreider…I know the writing is on the wall that he’s gonna probably get traded. But just watching how he interacts with the team from cutaway shots on the benches can tell the man is a leader on the team. If he would take a decent cap hit with a low term on a deal I would say give it to him. He scores most of his goals (most in the NHL I believe I saw that stat the other day), and that’s not something that’s gonna fade with age like speed. Planting your ass in front of a net is a mindset that is built for longevity. Yea the MO on him has always been that he disappears alot but I just feel he can be an asset to this young and upcoming team.

    Should be an interesting trade deadline this year. LGR! FUFishsticks!

    • In my opinion, Chris Kreider should be retained if the Ranger can come to an agreement with him and he should also be the captain of the team.

    • What’s the alternative? Buying out Lundqvist is the only one I see. They clearly see Shesty as the successor (so do I). We all know you can’t keep 3 goalies for a whole year. What would you do?

  • We have bad starts and give up goals late in periods.

    I think #8 needs a better pairing to be himself. #76 has not shown enough mustard at all this season, I thought last season was a hiccup, I think he is not as good as his contract, I think it’s obvious.

    #72 – he is growing into a continuous threat and I am loving it.

    #17 – this guy! you!!!! you!!!!!

    can it be possible for a team to have this many good problems… 3 goalies, a few guys you just dont wanna trade….
    youngsters still coming up soon…

    Jeff Gordan – I like him, I like Him a lot!

    it’s not a good thing when Richter1994 said “maybe Trouba” – I hope #8 turns that frown upside down, because he is right about him. He smelled too many times again last night, please stop getting your shots blocked by the guy in front of you!!!


  • On Trouba: He is playing Mack Truck minutes for the team, playing against the top lines and carrying a heavy load. I think he is performing pretty well in that role. I also think that the adjustments to the system that have been taking place recently will help him out. I like the guy, he is physical, can skate, has a canon of a shot and is a big boy. He is only 25 and he will be a fixture on the top pair for a long time. He will play better.

    On Tony D: The young fella has something you can’t teach: Great hands and good wheels. Unless you get someone in return with the same qualities you don’t trade away guys like that. For the love of all that is holy, how many times must the Rangers trade away skilled offensive defensemen before that lesson is learned? They need to keep him. I also like his feisty, mouthy Jersey boy attitude that makes him want to box guys a foot taller, so long as he doesn’t let his emotions run amok. He seems to have learned to control that enough. They need guys like that too.

    Jesper Fast: By Jove, I think he’s got it! His play has gotten markedly better recently. Funny how playing with skilled players can make that happen!

    Chytil: Getting better and better, and the best is yet to come.

  • Assuming both Smith and Staal’s contract’s are bought out or traded (retaining similar buyout amounts), this is the financial predicament the NY Rangers are in for next few year regarding Salary Cap….

    Unless the NY Rangers unload Skjei or Lundqvist’s contract(s), the Rangers can only keep one of Kreider or DeAngelo. The Strome or Buch contract still doesn’t free up enough Cap Space.

    Further to this, a Kreider contract beyond 3 years is projected to cause considerable pain to our Cap starting in 23-24 season. This assumes a Mika resigning in 2022-23 for a paltry $10mil so the pain is likely much worse unless he respects Panarin discount. This assumes DeAngelo slides into Brady’s contract value and you have 4 Forwards being paid $7mil_+ by 23-24 (Panarin, Kreider, Zib, and Chyti)l. Kappo would command similar money the year after that. This assumes reasonable bridge deals are done for the young RFAs.

    In summary, Kreider beyond 3 years make a mess of things. As does not being able to trade Skjei. This is going to be a very complicated year on the trade front fro the rangers. As a side note, trading Lundqvist does very little outside taking on salary in a trade in order to rid ourselves of certain players.

  • Listen, I won’t suggest Shesty isn’t the future … but he has played just 2 NHL games. A Georgiev-Shesty tandem will really keep each of them on their toes. Competition is good and if the NHL has taught us anything over the last few years it’s that the days of goalies playing 65 games in the regular season are over — if you want to be truly competitive come playoff time.

    As far as the alternative just keep the 3 goalie system … something will give and who’s to say a draft day deal isn’t the best option? Or that Hank might not see the writing on the wall and retire, or accept a trade, or … the possibilities aren’t necessarily limited unless we make them so.

    Hey I love Hank, but I love the Ranger team as a whole even more … I favor what’s best for the team moving forward, the operative word here being forward.

    • I tend to agree with 99% of your posts but this falls into the 1% because of the expansion draft after next season. No point in not trading one (Gorg) if you can’t keep both around beyond next season. And Rangers brass are not going to disrespect Lundqvist by carrying 3 goalies next year.

      Not sure if Toronto can handle the cap hit, but if you really want to trade Skeij in order to retain DeAngelo then Gorg is the sweetener on that trade. Its likely wishful thinking on my part because Toronto likely can’t take on the life of Skeij’s contract. Maybe if Kapanen or Johnsson comes our way it works.

      • You only have to protect Georgiev, Shesty doesn’t need protection and Hank’s contract will expire — so no issue there.

        • Agree with your detail, but you still need to make available one goalie for the expansion draft. Not sure if a two way contract counts so you are suggesting carrying another $1mil plus goalie contract that wont get picked?

          • We’re going to have to do that anyway unless you’re OK with losing Georgiev for nothing. 2 way contract are fine.

  • It will be difficult to resign Kreider and I believe he will be traded…..hope I’m wrong, but it’s looking that way…….WE ARE IN CAP HELL…………………………………………….

    • Rocky Ranger

      While others want to take on some more cap space, just to rid us of a player, without thinking about the long term implications!!!!!!! YOUR RIGHT ON THE MONEY WITH YOUR POST…………..

  • Igor has been waiting for his shot and by all account will be the chosen one….Regardless of Igor playing just two games, the kid can play goal and has always excelled at all levels…….. Georgiev will be the odd man out…..leadership will not disrespect Hank and let’s face it….if we had no Hank during our playoff years…..we would be complaining about the lack of playoff appearances during the last 10-15 years or so because many of those playoff teams were bubble teams or worse without Hank.

    • So you put an individual player in front of what’s good for the team? They don’t have to do this in a way as to disrespect Hank.

      • I suspect almost all of us would put an individual player ahead of the team. I was pretty upset last year when the Rangers traded Zuccarello.

        • Well I surely don’t and I suspect many of us don’t. Doesn’t mean I wouldn’t be sad or that it doesn’t give me pause, doesn’t mean I hate Hank or dislike him … but this is the reality of the situation, Hank is the past and Igor and Georgiev are the present and future. Time marches on and waits for no one, there’s no “I” in team and I value the team over the individual if push comes to shove. Besides I’ve never suggested that we have to trade Hank, just continue the 3 goalie rotation and play them based on current merit. It may not be the ideal situation, but it’s more than likely the best one unless someone floors us with a trade proposal that’s too good to pass up.

          • I think your attitude is admirable and it may be that many share it. But sometimes it is hard to divorce love of the Rangers from love of individual Rangers. Obviously so many do not wish to disrespect Hank even if he is the third best goaltender – and, if necessary, they can convince themselves that he is not the third guy if one wants to insist on pretending to put the team first.

            Incidentally, as I see the world now, trading Zuccarello was correct.

    • No, in the first half of the last decade, the Rangers had good teams. Hank did not get them into the playoffs. In fact, the 2013-2014 team made the playoffs because of their success when Hank was not playing, not because of the games he played.

      Yes, the first few years, Hank carried bad teams into the playoffs, but the teams that had deep playoff runs were good teams. The problem with not disrespecting Hank is that it leads to disrespecting everyone else that wore a Ranger uniform during the Lundqvist era.

  • I loved watching the game, I have a bunch of islander fans in my family who have been dissing on me and My team. so great to see us beat
    them fishsticks. LGR

  • Back to top button