hockeyfan1
New member
Los Angeles Kings vs New York Rangers
If one were to ask someone to choose a winner, there is certain to be a slight hesitation. How can one decide when one has two of the best teams in these playoffs going against each other in this year's Stanley Cup Final?
Well, for starters, the Los Angeles Kings have already made the NHL history books, as being the only team to have won 21 games (all three rounds and in come-from-behind fashion too).
The Kings disposed of the Sharks, the Ducks, and then the defending Cup champion Chicago Blackhawks, with their usual array of scoring depth, sound goaltending (Jonathan Quick rose to the fore even after some shaky perfoemamces), plus the team's incredible resiliency. No matter what the situation, even down 3 games to 1 (as was the case against San Jose in the first round), L.A. kept persevering and eventually prevailed.
Of course, some might say, when a team has enough deep depth and talent in all areas, as the Kings had, they can overcome anything. Point well taken.
The Broadway Blueshirts as the New York Rangers are often referred to, had their own story to write, er, play, too. They handily disposed of the Flyers, the Penguins (yes, those Penguins), and then battled the Montreal Canadiens to six games, winning it all with aplomb -- a series-winning OT goal by Domenic Moore -- ending Les Glorieux's glorious playoff run.
The goal by Moore demonstrated the role of the Rangers' depth with the offensive contributions from it's "lesser lights" -- guys like Pouliot and Moore -- who aren't exactly scoring powerhouses. Of course, at one point, many of New York's star players, Nash, St.Louis, Zucarello, Kreider, Hamelin, etc., weren't setting the league on fire. The Rangers powerplay was at one point a dismal 0 for 34 extending into these playoffs, until the offence finally got going and it was no looking back since.
Then there's the case of "King" Henrik Lundqvist, who backstopped the Blueshirts admirably. Lundqvist is hardly one to have a bad game especially in these playoffs, perhaps slightly more consistent in that category than the Kings Quick, but then even when King Henrik did (as demonstrated in Game 5 against the Canadiens), he comes bouncing right back a la Conn Smythe Trophy style.
Between these two teams, it's too close to call. They both have assets -- depth both ways, top-notch netminders, excellent systems, great coaching, etc.,etc. Some might say that the Kings survived the tougher opponents and that they have the capacity to win the Cup better than the Rangers. Others may say that the Rangers took better care of their opponents while the Kings made it harder on themselves by having to always comeback.
Either way, no matter how one looks at it, this Stanley Cup Final has all the makings to be a classic.
Puckdrop!
If one were to ask someone to choose a winner, there is certain to be a slight hesitation. How can one decide when one has two of the best teams in these playoffs going against each other in this year's Stanley Cup Final?
Well, for starters, the Los Angeles Kings have already made the NHL history books, as being the only team to have won 21 games (all three rounds and in come-from-behind fashion too).
The Kings disposed of the Sharks, the Ducks, and then the defending Cup champion Chicago Blackhawks, with their usual array of scoring depth, sound goaltending (Jonathan Quick rose to the fore even after some shaky perfoemamces), plus the team's incredible resiliency. No matter what the situation, even down 3 games to 1 (as was the case against San Jose in the first round), L.A. kept persevering and eventually prevailed.
Of course, some might say, when a team has enough deep depth and talent in all areas, as the Kings had, they can overcome anything. Point well taken.
The Broadway Blueshirts as the New York Rangers are often referred to, had their own story to write, er, play, too. They handily disposed of the Flyers, the Penguins (yes, those Penguins), and then battled the Montreal Canadiens to six games, winning it all with aplomb -- a series-winning OT goal by Domenic Moore -- ending Les Glorieux's glorious playoff run.
The goal by Moore demonstrated the role of the Rangers' depth with the offensive contributions from it's "lesser lights" -- guys like Pouliot and Moore -- who aren't exactly scoring powerhouses. Of course, at one point, many of New York's star players, Nash, St.Louis, Zucarello, Kreider, Hamelin, etc., weren't setting the league on fire. The Rangers powerplay was at one point a dismal 0 for 34 extending into these playoffs, until the offence finally got going and it was no looking back since.
Then there's the case of "King" Henrik Lundqvist, who backstopped the Blueshirts admirably. Lundqvist is hardly one to have a bad game especially in these playoffs, perhaps slightly more consistent in that category than the Kings Quick, but then even when King Henrik did (as demonstrated in Game 5 against the Canadiens), he comes bouncing right back a la Conn Smythe Trophy style.
Between these two teams, it's too close to call. They both have assets -- depth both ways, top-notch netminders, excellent systems, great coaching, etc.,etc. Some might say that the Kings survived the tougher opponents and that they have the capacity to win the Cup better than the Rangers. Others may say that the Rangers took better care of their opponents while the Kings made it harder on themselves by having to always comeback.
Either way, no matter how one looks at it, this Stanley Cup Final has all the makings to be a classic.
Puckdrop!
