Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Ken Dryden on the Rangers

Expand Messages
  • Craig
    My favorite historical team has always been the late 60 s, early 70 s New York Rangers. While ultimately being unsuccessful in so far as winning a championship
    Message 1 of 16 , Sep 6, 2005
    • 0 Attachment
      My favorite historical team has always been the late 60's, early 70's New York Rangers. While ultimately being unsuccessful in so far as winning a championship goes, I always felt they were classy, (ie.. non-violent) and I loved the way they played the game (skilful, artistic, and speedy.)

      On the weekend I was glancing through a book called "The Rangers" by Brian McFarlane (who has written similar books on the original 6 teams.) In the chapter on the Emile Francis era (Francis was the coach and GM of the Rangers in the above mentioned era) there was an interesting quote from Ken Dryden. I'll paraphrase as I don't have the book with me but essentially Dryden said " The Rangers are strange. They always play at the same consistent level. They are rarely great, but almost always good. They will almost always beat a poor team, but don't raise the level of their game to beat a great team. In the playoffs with the possible exception of Walt Tkaczuk, they have no one who raises the level of their play."

      From a historical point of view do you all feel that this comment by Dryden is accurate?

      Craig







      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • sealshockey@aol.com
      Craig: I grew up rooting for those teams. Perhaps it s difficult for me to emotionally distance myself from them even after all these years. The talent was
      Message 2 of 16 , Sep 6, 2005
      • 0 Attachment
        Craig:

        I grew up rooting for those teams. Perhaps it's difficult for me to emotionally distance myself from them even after all these years. The talent was certainly there. The Rangers defeated the defending Stanley Cup champions three years in a row in the playoffs (1972, 73 and 74). They always seemed to fall just short of the Cup due to some kind of injury or fluke occurrence. In '72, had Jean Ratelle remained healthy...In '73 the Rangers defense lacked Rod Seiling and Jim Neilson and Brad Park was playing hurt...In '74, they were beaten up by the Flyers in a close, intense series.

        Rod Gilbert felt the Rangers lacked an enforcer that in that era would have put them over the top. Regardless, the team is one of the greatest in history never to win the Cup and an often overlooked team in hockey history.

        Giacomin...Park...Gilbert, Ratelle, Hadfield, Tkaczuk, Fairbairn, Stemkowski, Neilson, Seiling....the names bring back great memories of great hockey. Yet they always finished just short...


        Brad

        -----Original Message-----
        From: Craig <argonauts25@...>
        To: hockhist@yahoogroups.com
        Sent: Tue, 6 Sep 2005 05:59:40 -0400
        Subject: [hockhist] Ken Dryden on the Rangers


        My favorite historical team has always been the late 60's, early 70's New York
        Rangers. While ultimately being unsuccessful in so far as winning a championship
        goes, I always felt they were classy, (ie.. non-violent) and I loved the way
        they played the game (skilful, artistic, and speedy.)

        On the weekend I was glancing through a book called "The Rangers" by Brian
        McFarlane (who has written similar books on the original 6 teams.) In the
        chapter on the Emile Francis era (Francis was the coach and GM of the Rangers in
        the above mentioned era) there was an interesting quote from Ken Dryden. I'll
        paraphrase as I don't have the book with me but essentially Dryden said " The
        Rangers are strange. They always play at the same consistent level. They are
        rarely great, but almost always good. They will almost always beat a poor team,
        but don't raise the level of their game to beat a great team. In the playoffs
        with the possible exception of Walt Tkaczuk, they have no one who raises the
        level of their play."

        From a historical point of view do you all feel that this comment by Dryden is
        accurate?

        Craig







        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




        To unsubscribe from this mail list, send a blank message to hockhist-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

        Yahoo! Groups Links






        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      • Craig
        Thanks for the comments Brad, I had no idea that both Seiling and Neilson missed the 1973 semi-finals against Chicago. I had often wondered why they had put up
        Message 3 of 16 , Sep 6, 2005
        • 0 Attachment
          Thanks for the comments Brad,

          I had no idea that both Seiling and Neilson missed the 1973 semi-finals against Chicago. I had often wondered why they had put up such a minimal battle in that series after looking so impressive rolling over Boston in the first round.

          You raise an interesting point about Jean Ratelle in 1972. In your opinion if he had been healthy do you think he may have given the Rangers enough of an edge to defeat Boston in that finals?

          Craig




          ----- Original Message -----
          From: sealshockey@...
          To: hockhist@yahoogroups.com
          Sent: Tuesday, September 06, 2005 8:19 AM
          Subject: Re: [hockhist] Ken Dryden on the Rangers


          Craig:

          I grew up rooting for those teams. Perhaps it's difficult for me to emotionally distance myself from them even after all these years. The talent was certainly there. The Rangers defeated the defending Stanley Cup champions three years in a row in the playoffs (1972, 73 and 74). They always seemed to fall just short of the Cup due to some kind of injury or fluke occurrence. In '72, had Jean Ratelle remained healthy...In '73 the Rangers defense lacked Rod Seiling and Jim Neilson and Brad Park was playing hurt...In '74, they were beaten up by the Flyers in a close, intense series.

          Rod Gilbert felt the Rangers lacked an enforcer that in that era would have put them over the top. Regardless, the team is one of the greatest in history never to win the Cup and an often overlooked team in hockey history.

          Giacomin...Park...Gilbert, Ratelle, Hadfield, Tkaczuk, Fairbairn, Stemkowski, Neilson, Seiling....the names bring back great memories of great hockey. Yet they always finished just short...


          Brad

          -----Original Message-----
          From: Craig <argonauts25@...>
          To: hockhist@yahoogroups.com
          Sent: Tue, 6 Sep 2005 05:59:40 -0400
          Subject: [hockhist] Ken Dryden on the Rangers


          My favorite historical team has always been the late 60's, early 70's New York
          Rangers. While ultimately being unsuccessful in so far as winning a championship
          goes, I always felt they were classy, (ie.. non-violent) and I loved the way
          they played the game (skilful, artistic, and speedy.)

          On the weekend I was glancing through a book called "The Rangers" by Brian
          McFarlane (who has written similar books on the original 6 teams.) In the
          chapter on the Emile Francis era (Francis was the coach and GM of the Rangers in
          the above mentioned era) there was an interesting quote from Ken Dryden. I'll
          paraphrase as I don't have the book with me but essentially Dryden said " The
          Rangers are strange. They always play at the same consistent level. They are
          rarely great, but almost always good. They will almost always beat a poor team,
          but don't raise the level of their game to beat a great team. In the playoffs
          with the possible exception of Walt Tkaczuk, they have no one who raises the
          level of their play."

          From a historical point of view do you all feel that this comment by Dryden is
          accurate?

          Craig







          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




          To unsubscribe from this mail list, send a blank message to hockhist-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

          Yahoo! Groups Links






          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



          To unsubscribe from this mail list, send a blank message to hockhist-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com




          ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS

          a.. Visit your group "hockhist" on the web.

          b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
          hockhist-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

          c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.


          ------------------------------------------------------------------------------



          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        • zpmboca@aol.com
          In a message dated 9/6/2005 2:27:43 PM Pacific Standard Time, argonauts25@sprint.ca writes: You raise an interesting point about Jean Ratelle in 1972. In your
          Message 4 of 16 , Sep 6, 2005
          • 0 Attachment
            In a message dated 9/6/2005 2:27:43 PM Pacific Standard Time,
            argonauts25@... writes:


            You raise an interesting point about Jean Ratelle in 1972. In your opinion if
            he had been healthy do you think he may have given the Rangers enough of an
            edge to defeat Boston in that finals?

            Craig
            I saw all 6 games and can say that it was a very tight series that the
            Bruins won only because Orr stood head and shoulders above everyone else. While
            such opinions are obviously impossible to prove, a healthy Ratelle would probably
            have made a difference. The series might well have gone the full 7, but I'm
            reluctant to say that Ratelle could have overcome Orr's brilliance.

            Regarding Dryden's comment about the Rangers not raising their level of play
            when needed, despite having great respect for Dryden's intellect, I'm not sure
            I agree completely. If the team beat the previous SC winner 3 straight years,
            that's a pretty good measure of their ability to raise their game. The
            Rangers always played very well during that era, but only one team can win the Cup
            each year. As much talent as they had, they lacked a spectacular superstar of
            the Bobby Hull, Bobby Orr, Jean Beliveau type who could take over a game by
            himself. Their success depended on team play by the Ratelle-Gilbert-Hadfield line
            as well as Tkaczuk, Fairbairn, Park, etc. They were a very fine team and very
            enjoyable to watch.

            I do agree with Gilbert that an enforcer would have helped the Rangers; they
            did have a reputation of being a somewhat soft team.

            Z. Peter Mitchell


            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          • sealshockey@aol.com
            Craig: Ratelle had 109 points in 63 games before getting injured and was fighting Phil Esposito for the league scoring crown. He broke his ankle when Dale
            Message 5 of 16 , Sep 6, 2005
            • 0 Attachment
              Craig:

              Ratelle had 109 points in 63 games before getting injured and was fighting Phil Esposito for the league scoring crown. He broke his ankle when Dale Rolfe took a shot from the point which hit Ratelle who was attempting to screen Gilles Meloche of the Seals in goal. Ratelle appeared in the finals against Boston but was hardly the same player. The Rangers moved Bobby Rousseau up to the first line with Hadfield and Gilbert and it just wasn't the same. Giacomin also played with a wonky knee in the finals. Are these excuses? Yes. Would things have been different with a healthy Ratelle? You have to figure he was worth one game to at least force a game seven but who really knows? Rooting for the Rangers of the Emile Francis years was a learning experience about coming so close and yet so far to the ultimate goal. Still, those guys were great. BTW, Ratelle's 109 points remains the Rangers all-time single season scoring record despite the fact that he played in only 63 games that year.

              Brad

              -----Original Message-----
              From: Craig <argonauts25@...>
              To: hockhist@yahoogroups.com
              Sent: Tue, 6 Sep 2005 17:25:44 -0400
              Subject: Re: [hockhist] Ken Dryden on the Rangers


              Thanks for the comments Brad,

              I had no idea that both Seiling and Neilson missed the 1973 semi-finals against
              Chicago. I had often wondered why they had put up such a minimal battle in that
              series after looking so impressive rolling over Boston in the first round.

              You raise an interesting point about Jean Ratelle in 1972. In your opinion if he
              had been healthy do you think he may have given the Rangers enough of an edge to
              defeat Boston in that finals?

              Craig




              ----- Original Message -----
              From: sealshockey@...
              To: hockhist@yahoogroups.com
              Sent: Tuesday, September 06, 2005 8:19 AM
              Subject: Re: [hockhist] Ken Dryden on the Rangers


              Craig:

              I grew up rooting for those teams. Perhaps it's difficult for me to
              emotionally distance myself from them even after all these years. The talent
              was certainly there. The Rangers defeated the defending Stanley Cup champions
              three years in a row in the playoffs (1972, 73 and 74). They always seemed to
              fall just short of the Cup due to some kind of injury or fluke occurrence. In
              '72, had Jean Ratelle remained healthy...In '73 the Rangers defense lacked Rod
              Seiling and Jim Neilson and Brad Park was playing hurt...In '74, they were
              beaten up by the Flyers in a close, intense series.

              Rod Gilbert felt the Rangers lacked an enforcer that in that era would have
              put them over the top. Regardless, the team is one of the greatest in history
              never to win the Cup and an often overlooked team in hockey history.

              Giacomin...Park...Gilbert, Ratelle, Hadfield, Tkaczuk, Fairbairn, Stemkowski,
              Neilson, Seiling....the names bring back great memories of great hockey. Yet
              they always finished just short...


              Brad

              -----Original Message-----
              From: Craig <argonauts25@...>
              To: hockhist@yahoogroups.com
              Sent: Tue, 6 Sep 2005 05:59:40 -0400
              Subject: [hockhist] Ken Dryden on the Rangers


              My favorite historical team has always been the late 60's, early 70's New York

              Rangers. While ultimately being unsuccessful in so far as winning a
              championship
              goes, I always felt they were classy, (ie.. non-violent) and I loved the way
              they played the game (skilful, artistic, and speedy.)

              On the weekend I was glancing through a book called "The Rangers" by Brian
              McFarlane (who has written similar books on the original 6 teams.) In the
              chapter on the Emile Francis era (Francis was the coach and GM of the Rangers
              in
              the above mentioned era) there was an interesting quote from Ken Dryden. I'll
              paraphrase as I don't have the book with me but essentially Dryden said " The
              Rangers are strange. They always play at the same consistent level. They are
              rarely great, but almost always good. They will almost always beat a poor
              team,
              but don't raise the level of their game to beat a great team. In the playoffs
              with the possible exception of Walt Tkaczuk, they have no one who raises the
              level of their play."

              From a historical point of view do you all feel that this comment by Dryden is

              accurate?

              Craig







              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




              To unsubscribe from this mail list, send a blank message to
              hockhist-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

              Yahoo! Groups Links






              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



              To unsubscribe from this mail list, send a blank message to
              hockhist-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com




              ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS

              a.. Visit your group "hockhist" on the web.

              b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
              hockhist-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

              c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.


              ------------------------------------------------------------------------------



              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




              To unsubscribe from this mail list, send a blank message to hockhist-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

              Yahoo! Groups Links






              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
            • goaliedave
              ... Craig, I totally disagree. Coincidently, I just finished reading a book on the rangers of the late 70s.... 1979-80 to be exact, Thin Ice - the story of a
              Message 6 of 16 , Sep 6, 2005
              • 0 Attachment
                > Date: Tue, 6 Sep 2005 05:59:40 -0400
                > From: "Craig" <argonauts25@...>
                > Subject: Ken Dryden on the Rangers
                >
                > My favorite historical team has always been the late 60's, early 70's New
                > York Rangers. While ultimately being unsuccessful in so far as winning a
                > championship goes, I always felt they were classy, (ie.. non-violent) and
                > I loved the way they played the game (skilful, artistic, and speedy.)


                Craig,
                I totally disagree. Coincidently, I just finished reading a book on the
                rangers of the late 70s.... 1979-80 to be exact, "Thin Ice" - the story of a
                journalist who followed the rangers for a whole season or two and wrote what
                they told him. I have a feeling the NHL used this book to develop a course
                for players on why not to talk to the media. It is simply shocking what is
                in the book, even for the day. Which players hated whom, the divisions,
                everything that happened at Studio 54, how many women and what they did and
                what was in the letters they wrote the players... the bottom line is there
                is nothing classy about 90% of the Rangers that year.

                Again coincidently... I was at the Ottawa Corel Centre tonight for a meeting
                and asked Sens Super Scout Anders Hedberg (former ranger) about the book. He
                said he couldn't believe it had been written and claims not to have read it
                and had unkind words for the author BUT he did say the essence of it was
                true. The Westchester guys hated the downtown guys, and the downtown guys
                (and some of the Westchester guys) were totally out of control. I pity any
                celebrity who must work in NYC, especially during those late 70s days, but
                there is no way you can have respect for any of the Rangers after reading
                that book.

                Now... if you are talking about the 60s Rangers, they were not gritty and
                that's why they never won a cup. I'd say the key word is grit, and that your
                classy-nonviolent choice is incorrectly posed.

                Dave in Whitby
              • Craig
                Dave, I was referring to the Emile Francis era, in particular 1969-1974. I have read the book you are referring to and while entertaining it doesn t apply to
                Message 7 of 16 , Sep 7, 2005
                • 0 Attachment
                  Dave,

                  I was referring to the Emile Francis era, in particular 1969-1974. I have read the book you are referring to and while entertaining it doesn't apply to the era I asked about. (It certainly did make me raise my eyebrows in surprise though!)

                  I would still stick by my choice of words (ie.. classy, non-violent.) The key members of that Ranger team players like Jean Ratelle, Rod Gilbert, etc didn't fight or play dirty (if you ignore Gilbert's scrap in game 8 of the 1972 Summit). Other like Brad Park, Steve Vickers, Bob Nevin, Walt Tkaczuk etc would fight if provoked or attacked, however if left alone preferred to play a skill based game

                  Craig



                  ----- Original Message -----
                  From: goaliedave
                  To: hockhist@yahoogroups.com
                  Sent: Wednesday, September 07, 2005 2:26 AM
                  Subject: [hockhist] Re: Ken Dryden on the Rangers


                  > Date: Tue, 6 Sep 2005 05:59:40 -0400
                  > From: "Craig" <argonauts25@...>
                  > Subject: Ken Dryden on the Rangers
                  >
                  > My favorite historical team has always been the late 60's, early 70's New
                  > York Rangers. While ultimately being unsuccessful in so far as winning a
                  > championship goes, I always felt they were classy, (ie.. non-violent) and
                  > I loved the way they played the game (skilful, artistic, and speedy.)


                  Craig,
                  I totally disagree. Coincidently, I just finished reading a book on the
                  rangers of the late 70s.... 1979-80 to be exact, "Thin Ice" - the story of a
                  journalist who followed the rangers for a whole season or two and wrote what
                  they told him. I have a feeling the NHL used this book to develop a course
                  for players on why not to talk to the media. It is simply shocking what is
                  in the book, even for the day. Which players hated whom, the divisions,
                  everything that happened at Studio 54, how many women and what they did and
                  what was in the letters they wrote the players... the bottom line is there
                  is nothing classy about 90% of the Rangers that year.

                  Again coincidently... I was at the Ottawa Corel Centre tonight for a meeting
                  and asked Sens Super Scout Anders Hedberg (former ranger) about the book. He
                  said he couldn't believe it had been written and claims not to have read it
                  and had unkind words for the author BUT he did say the essence of it was
                  true. The Westchester guys hated the downtown guys, and the downtown guys
                  (and some of the Westchester guys) were totally out of control. I pity any
                  celebrity who must work in NYC, especially during those late 70s days, but
                  there is no way you can have respect for any of the Rangers after reading
                  that book.

                  Now... if you are talking about the 60s Rangers, they were not gritty and
                  that's why they never won a cup. I'd say the key word is grit, and that your
                  classy-nonviolent choice is incorrectly posed.

                  Dave in Whitby



                  To unsubscribe from this mail list, send a blank message to hockhist-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com




                  SPONSORED LINKS Sports fund raising Sports psychology degree Hockey trophy
                  Sport nutrition Hockey jersey Air hockey tables


                  ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                  YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS

                  a.. Visit your group "hockhist" on the web.

                  b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                  hockhist-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

                  c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.


                  ------------------------------------------------------------------------------



                  [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                • Craig
                  Peter, Good point about Orr in that series. I could not believe how well he played on basically one knee. Craig Craig I saw all 6 games and can say that it was
                  Message 8 of 16 , Sep 7, 2005
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Peter,

                    Good point about Orr in that series. I could not believe how well he played on basically one knee.

                    Craig

                    Craig
                    I saw all 6 games and can say that it was a very tight series that the
                    Bruins won only because Orr stood head and shoulders above everyone else. While
                    such opinions are obviously impossible to prove, a healthy Ratelle would probably
                    have made a difference. The series might well have gone the full 7, but I'm
                    reluctant to say that Ratelle could have overcome Orr's brilliance.

                    Regarding Dryden's comment about the Rangers not raising their level of play
                    when needed, despite having great respect for Dryden's intellect, I'm not sure
                    I agree completely. If the team beat the previous SC winner 3 straight years,
                    that's a pretty good measure of their ability to raise their game. The
                    Rangers always played very well during that era, but only one team can win the Cup
                    each year. As much talent as they had, they lacked a spectacular superstar of
                    the Bobby Hull, Bobby Orr, Jean Beliveau type who could take over a game by
                    himself. Their success depended on team play by the Ratelle-Gilbert-Hadfield line
                    as well as Tkaczuk, Fairbairn, Park, etc. They were a very fine team and very
                    enjoyable to watch.

                    I do agree with Gilbert that an enforcer would have helped the Rangers; they
                    did have a reputation of being a somewhat soft team.

                    Z. Peter Mitchell


                    [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



                    To unsubscribe from this mail list, send a blank message to hockhist-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com




                    SPONSORED LINKS Sports fund raising Sports psychology degree Hockey trophy
                    Sport nutrition Hockey jersey Air hockey tables


                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                    YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS

                    a.. Visit your group "hockhist" on the web.

                    b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                    hockhist-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

                    c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.


                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------



                    [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                  • zpmboca@aol.com
                    In a message dated 9/7/2005 2:55:06 AM Pacific Standard Time, argonauts25@sprint.ca writes: I would still stick by my choice of words (ie.. classy,
                    Message 9 of 16 , Sep 7, 2005
                    • 0 Attachment
                      In a message dated 9/7/2005 2:55:06 AM Pacific Standard Time,
                      argonauts25@... writes:


                      I would still stick by my choice of words (ie.. classy, non-violent.) The key
                      members of that Ranger team players like Jean Ratelle, Rod Gilbert, etc
                      didn't fight or play dirty (if you ignore Gilbert's scrap in game 8 of the 1972
                      Summit). Other like Brad Park, Steve Vickers, Bob Nevin, Walt Tkaczuk etc would
                      fight if provoked or attacked, however if left alone preferred to play a skill
                      based game
                      I completely agree with your choice of words, Craig. They were clearly a
                      skill-based team, which is precisely why it is unfortunate that they never quite
                      won the Cup.

                      Peter


                      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                    • Karkoski James
                      ... I m not sure that a healthy Giacomin would have made a difference. Between 1967-70 when Eddie G. played in all the regular season games, he played pretty
                      Message 10 of 16 , Sep 7, 2005
                      • 0 Attachment
                        On 2005.9.7, at 12:16 PM, sealshockey@... wrote:

                        > Giacomin also played with a wonky knee in the finals.


                        I'm not sure that a healthy Giacomin would have made a difference.
                        Between 1967-70 when Eddie G. played in all the regular season games,
                        he played pretty badly in the playoffs and the Rangers annually flushed
                        out in the first round and the argument was that Giacomin had played
                        too much in the regular season and was worn out by playoff time. In
                        1970 the Rangers brought in Villemure and made it clear that he was
                        going to play 25-30 games, which Giacomin wasn't happy about it because
                        he didn't think he needed the two goalie system. Of course, Eddie and
                        Gilles had great seasons in 1970-71 and the controversy was put to rest.


                        With Giacomin rested, the Rangers had pretty high playoff expectations
                        and they did get out of the first round but Tony Esposito outplayed him
                        in the 71 semis. And as great as Orr played in the 72 Finals, I also
                        think that the Bruins goalies outplayed the Rangers goalies. It was a
                        series where the B's always scored first and the Rangers were always
                        chasing them. I seem to remember the Rangers really being frustrated
                        with the 4th game loss because they thought they it really could have
                        been 3-1 in their favor. Orr played great in the 6th game, but so did
                        Gerry Cheevers.


                        I think that Dryden's comments about not "raising the game in the
                        playoffs" are right on when it comes to Eddie G. at least because the
                        Rangers really never really got great playoff runs out of their
                        goaltending.

                        >
                        > I had no idea that both Seiling and Neilson missed the 1973
                        > semi-finals against
                        > Chicago. I had often wondered why they had put up such a minimal
                        > battle in that
                        > series after looking so impressive rolling over Boston in the first
                        > round.
                        >


                        The Bruins 1973 playoff misfortunes was tied to goaltending. Cheevers
                        had signed with the WHA and Eddie Johnston had terrible season and the
                        Adams and Brooks up from the minors weren't much better. The team knew
                        that it wasn't going to last long in the playoffs with the goaltending
                        it had. So, they got Jacques Plante in March and he played really great
                        down the stretch which made every think that the goaltending was
                        straightened out. Plante started the first two games against the
                        Rangers at home and got bombed and the B's were behind eight ball and
                        never got out of it.


                        James
                      • sealshockey@aol.com
                        James: I know Giacomin tended to be tired prior to 71 come playoff time. In 72, he was playing hurt and he and Villemure split the load and both were playing
                        Message 11 of 16 , Sep 7, 2005
                        • 0 Attachment
                          James:

                          I know Giacomin tended to be tired prior to 71 come playoff time. In 72, he was playing hurt and he and Villemure split the load and both were playing hurt. Had Eddie been healthy, he may have been able to at least equal the Bruins dynamic duo of Cheevers and Johnston.

                          In 73, the B's had questionable goaltending but Eddie played very well against Boston. He also played exceptionally well against the Flyers in the seven game 74 semis, but Parent was even better. In game 7 at Philly, Giamomin played a fantastic game but it wasn't quite enough...

                          For whatever reason, Eddie and the Rangers always came up just short come April and May...

                          -----Original Message-----
                          From: Karkoski James <austin@...>
                          To: hockhist@yahoogroups.com
                          Sent: Thu, 8 Sep 2005 10:57:56 +0900
                          Subject: Re: [hockhist] Ken Dryden on the Rangers



                          On 2005.9.7, at 12:16 PM, sealshockey@... wrote:

                          > Giacomin also played with a wonky knee in the finals.


                          I'm not sure that a healthy Giacomin would have made a difference.
                          Between 1967-70 when Eddie G. played in all the regular season games,
                          he played pretty badly in the playoffs and the Rangers annually flushed
                          out in the first round and the argument was that Giacomin had played
                          too much in the regular season and was worn out by playoff time. In
                          1970 the Rangers brought in Villemure and made it clear that he was
                          going to play 25-30 games, which Giacomin wasn't happy about it because
                          he didn't think he needed the two goalie system. Of course, Eddie and
                          Gilles had great seasons in 1970-71 and the controversy was put to rest.


                          With Giacomin rested, the Rangers had pretty high playoff expectations
                          and they did get out of the first round but Tony Esposito outplayed him
                          in the 71 semis. And as great as Orr played in the 72 Finals, I also
                          think that the Bruins goalies outplayed the Rangers goalies. It was a
                          series where the B's always scored first and the Rangers were always
                          chasing them. I seem to remember the Rangers really being frustrated
                          with the 4th game loss because they thought they it really could have
                          been 3-1 in their favor. Orr played great in the 6th game, but so did
                          Gerry Cheevers.


                          I think that Dryden's comments about not "raising the game in the
                          playoffs" are right on when it comes to Eddie G. at least because the
                          Rangers really never really got great playoff runs out of their
                          goaltending.

                          >
                          > I had no idea that both Seiling and Neilson missed the 1973
                          > semi-finals against
                          > Chicago. I had often wondered why they had put up such a minimal
                          > battle in that
                          > series after looking so impressive rolling over Boston in the first
                          > round.
                          >


                          The Bruins 1973 playoff misfortunes was tied to goaltending. Cheevers
                          had signed with the WHA and Eddie Johnston had terrible season and the
                          Adams and Brooks up from the minors weren't much better. The team knew
                          that it wasn't going to last long in the playoffs with the goaltending
                          it had. So, they got Jacques Plante in March and he played really great
                          down the stretch which made every think that the goaltending was
                          straightened out. Plante started the first two games against the
                          Rangers at home and got bombed and the B's were behind eight ball and
                          never got out of it.


                          James







                          To unsubscribe from this mail list, send a blank message to hockhist-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

                          Yahoo! Groups Links






                          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                        • Craig
                          Jim, Good note! I have heard that Eddie was usually pretty well finished by the time the playoffs started due to all his work in the regular season before
                          Message 12 of 16 , Sep 8, 2005
                          • 0 Attachment
                            Jim,

                            Good note! I have heard that Eddie was usually pretty well "finished" by the time the playoffs started due to all his work in the regular season before the 1970-71 season.

                            Looking at the 1971 semi-finals however with the exception of game 4 (7-1 for Chicago) all the games were very close and fairly low scoring. 3 of them went into OT and one (game 6) went into triple OT. That tells me it was an evenly played series with both sides getting very strong goaltending.

                            As for the 1972 finals Cheevers had some very strong games but it wasn't a poor series for the New York goalies. Game one was 6-5 for Boston and New York came back with a series of goals at the end to make it close. That may have been the one game their goaltending let them down. The other games:2-1 Boston in game 2, 5-2 Rangers in game 3, 3-2 Boston in game 4, 3-2 New York in game 5, and 3-0 Boston in game 6 were all fairly even and it is hard to blame either Giacomin or Villemure for those losses. Also the Rangers goalies outplayed by a large margin both Ken Dryden and Tony Esposito in the first 2 rounds.

                            Craig



                            ----- Original Message -----
                            From: Karkoski James
                            To: hockhist@yahoogroups.com
                            Sent: Wednesday, September 07, 2005 9:57 PM
                            Subject: Re: [hockhist] Ken Dryden on the Rangers



                            On 2005.9.7, at 12:16 PM, sealshockey@... wrote:

                            > Giacomin also played with a wonky knee in the finals.


                            I'm not sure that a healthy Giacomin would have made a difference.
                            Between 1967-70 when Eddie G. played in all the regular season games,
                            he played pretty badly in the playoffs and the Rangers annually flushed
                            out in the first round and the argument was that Giacomin had played
                            too much in the regular season and was worn out by playoff time. In
                            1970 the Rangers brought in Villemure and made it clear that he was
                            going to play 25-30 games, which Giacomin wasn't happy about it because
                            he didn't think he needed the two goalie system. Of course, Eddie and
                            Gilles had great seasons in 1970-71 and the controversy was put to rest.


                            With Giacomin rested, the Rangers had pretty high playoff expectations
                            and they did get out of the first round but Tony Esposito outplayed him
                            in the 71 semis. And as great as Orr played in the 72 Finals, I also
                            think that the Bruins goalies outplayed the Rangers goalies. It was a
                            series where the B's always scored first and the Rangers were always
                            chasing them. I seem to remember the Rangers really being frustrated
                            with the 4th game loss because they thought they it really could have
                            been 3-1 in their favor. Orr played great in the 6th game, but so did
                            Gerry Cheevers.


                            I think that Dryden's comments about not "raising the game in the
                            playoffs" are right on when it comes to Eddie G. at least because the
                            Rangers really never really got great playoff runs out of their
                            goaltending.

                            >
                            > I had no idea that both Seiling and Neilson missed the 1973
                            > semi-finals against
                            > Chicago. I had often wondered why they had put up such a minimal
                            > battle in that
                            > series after looking so impressive rolling over Boston in the first
                            > round.
                            >


                            The Bruins 1973 playoff misfortunes was tied to goaltending. Cheevers
                            had signed with the WHA and Eddie Johnston had terrible season and the
                            Adams and Brooks up from the minors weren't much better. The team knew
                            that it wasn't going to last long in the playoffs with the goaltending
                            it had. So, they got Jacques Plante in March and he played really great
                            down the stretch which made every think that the goaltending was
                            straightened out. Plante started the first two games against the
                            Rangers at home and got bombed and the B's were behind eight ball and
                            never got out of it.


                            James






                            To unsubscribe from this mail list, send a blank message to hockhist-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com




                            ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                            YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS

                            a.. Visit your group "hockhist" on the web.

                            b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                            hockhist-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

                            c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.


                            ------------------------------------------------------------------------------



                            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                          • zpmboca@aol.com
                            As for the 1972 finals Cheevers had some very strong games but it wasn t a poor series for the New York goalies. Game one was 6-5 for Boston and New York came
                            Message 13 of 16 , Sep 8, 2005
                            • 0 Attachment
                              As for the 1972 finals Cheevers had some very strong games but it wasn't a poor
                              series for the New York goalies. Game one was 6-5 for Boston and New York came
                              back with a series of goals at the end to make it close. That may have been the
                              one game their goaltending let them down. The other games:2-1 Boston in game 2,
                              5-2 Rangers in game 3, 3-2 Boston in game 4, 3-2 New York in game 5,>>>

                              Regarding G5, Bobby Rousseau, taking Ratelle's place, was the hero with 2 goals. This is why it's hard to speculate on how the series would have gone had Ratelle played. Who would've expected Rousseau, though a very good player in his prime to essentially win a game by himself at that point? Otherwise, the Rangers might've gone down in 5 games.

                              Peter




                              -----Original Message-----
                              From: Craig <argonauts25@...>
                              To: hockhist@yahoogroups.com
                              Sent: Thu, 8 Sep 2005 06:52:13 -0400
                              Subject: Re: [hockhist] Ken Dryden on the Rangers


                              Jim,

                              Good note! I have heard that Eddie was usually pretty well "finished" by the
                              time the playoffs started due to all his work in the regular season before the
                              1970-71 season.

                              Looking at the 1971 semi-finals however with the exception of game 4 (7-1 for
                              Chicago) all the games were very close and fairly low scoring. 3 of them went
                              into OT and one (game 6) went into triple OT. That tells me it was an evenly
                              played series with both sides getting very strong goaltending.

                              As for the 1972 finals Cheevers had some very strong games but it wasn't a poor
                              series for the New York goalies. Game one was 6-5 for Boston and New York came
                              back with a series of goals at the end to make it close. That may have been the
                              one game their goaltending let them down. The other games:2-1 Boston in game 2,
                              5-2 Rangers in game 3, 3-2 Boston in game 4, 3-2 New York in game 5, and 3-0
                              Boston in game 6 were all fairly even and it is hard to blame either Giacomin or
                              Villemure for those losses. Also the Rangers goalies outplayed by a large margin
                              both Ken Dryden and Tony Esposito in the first 2 rounds.

                              Craig



                              ----- Original Message -----
                              From: Karkoski James
                              To: hockhist@yahoogroups.com
                              Sent: Wednesday, September 07, 2005 9:57 PM
                              Subject: Re: [hockhist] Ken Dryden on the Rangers



                              On 2005.9.7, at 12:16 PM, sealshockey@... wrote:

                              > Giacomin also played with a wonky knee in the finals.


                              I'm not sure that a healthy Giacomin would have made a difference.
                              Between 1967-70 when Eddie G. played in all the regular season games,
                              he played pretty badly in the playoffs and the Rangers annually flushed
                              out in the first round and the argument was that Giacomin had played
                              too much in the regular season and was worn out by playoff time. In
                              1970 the Rangers brought in Villemure and made it clear that he was
                              going to play 25-30 games, which Giacomin wasn't happy about it because
                              he didn't think he needed the two goalie system. Of course, Eddie and
                              Gilles had great seasons in 1970-71 and the controversy was put to rest.


                              With Giacomin rested, the Rangers had pretty high playoff expectations
                              and they did get out of the first round but Tony Esposito outplayed him
                              in the 71 semis. And as great as Orr played in the 72 Finals, I also
                              think that the Bruins goalies outplayed the Rangers goalies. It was a
                              series where the B's always scored first and the Rangers were always
                              chasing them. I seem to remember the Rangers really being frustrated
                              with the 4th game loss because they thought they it really could have
                              been 3-1 in their favor. Orr played great in the 6th game, but so did
                              Gerry Cheevers.


                              I think that Dryden's comments about not "raising the game in the
                              playoffs" are right on when it comes to Eddie G. at least because the
                              Rangers really never really got great playoff runs out of their
                              goaltending.

                              >
                              > I had no idea that both Seiling and Neilson missed the 1973
                              > semi-finals against
                              > Chicago. I had often wondered why they had put up such a minimal
                              > battle in that
                              > series after looking so impressive rolling over Boston in the first
                              > round.
                              >


                              The Bruins 1973 playoff misfortunes was tied to goaltending. Cheevers
                              had signed with the WHA and Eddie Johnston had terrible season and the
                              Adams and Brooks up from the minors weren't much better. The team knew
                              that it wasn't going to last long in the playoffs with the goaltending
                              it had. So, they got Jacques Plante in March and he played really great
                              down the stretch which made every think that the goaltending was
                              straightened out. Plante started the first two games against the
                              Rangers at home and got bombed and the B's were behind eight ball and
                              never got out of it.


                              James






                              To unsubscribe from this mail list, send a blank message to
                              hockhist-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com




                              ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                              YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS

                              a.. Visit your group "hockhist" on the web.

                              b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                              hockhist-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

                              c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.


                              ------------------------------------------------------------------------------



                              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




                              To unsubscribe from this mail list, send a blank message to hockhist-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

                              Yahoo! Groups Links






                              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                            • Karkoski James
                              ... Peter, game 1 was a really big win for the Bruins because they had lost a similar game against the Canadiens in the playoffs the year before. They had 5-1
                              Message 14 of 16 , Sep 8, 2005
                              • 0 Attachment
                                On 2005.9.9, at 03:09 AM, zpmboca@... wrote:

                                >
                                > As for the 1972 finals Cheevers had some very strong games but it
                                > wasn't a poor
                                > series for the New York goalies. Game one was 6-5 for Boston and New
                                > York came
                                > back with a series of goals at the end to make it close. That may have
                                > been the
                                > one game their goaltending let them down. The other games:2-1 Boston
                                > in game 2,
                                > 5-2 Rangers in game 3, 3-2 Boston in game 4, 3-2 New York in game 5,>>>
                                >


                                Peter, game 1 was a really big win for the Bruins because they had lost
                                a similar game against the Canadiens in the playoffs the year before.
                                They had 5-1 lead in game two of the 71 semis against Montreal and they
                                ended up losing it 7-5 which has the start of a series loss that was
                                really painful for the defending champs in a series they were
                                commanding favorites to win. Then it started again in the first game of
                                the finals.......There was a collective sigh of relief when Bailey, a
                                third liner, scored late in the game. He got the B's off the choke-line.


                                James
                              • Karkoski James
                                ... Craig, I m not trying to blame anyone for the losses, but I am taking up Dryden s point about rising to the occasion that you posted. Let s take a look at
                                Message 15 of 16 , Sep 8, 2005
                                • 0 Attachment
                                  On 2005.9.8, at 07:52 PM, Craig wrote:
                                  >
                                  >
                                  > Game one was 6-5 for Boston and New York came back with a series of
                                  > goals at the end to make it close. That may have been the one game
                                  > their goaltending let them down. The other games:2-1 Boston in game 2,
                                  > 5-2 Rangers in game 3, 3-2 Boston in game 4, 3-2 New York in game 5,
                                  > and 3-0 Boston in game 6 were all fairly even and it is hard to blame
                                  > either Giacomin or Villemure for those losses. Also the Rangers
                                  > goalies outplayed by a large margin both Ken Dryden and Tony Esposito
                                  > in the first 2 rounds.


                                  Craig, I'm not trying to blame anyone for the losses, but I am taking
                                  up Dryden's point about rising to the occasion that you posted. Let's
                                  take a look at the goalie stats game by game:



                                  Game 1- Rangers out shot the Bruins 33 to 27 and battled back from a 5
                                  to 1 mid-second period deficit to tie the game before losing on an Ace
                                  Bailey late goal in the third Period. Cheevers stopped 12 of 15 shots
                                  in the 3rd Period, Giacomin stopped 7 of 8.


                                  Game 2- Rangers out shot the Bruins 28 to 25. Johnston saved all 10
                                  third period shots, Villemure saved 5 of 6.


                                  Game 3-Rangers out shot the Bruins 39 to 34. Giacomin stopped 13 of 14
                                  first period shots and all 14 third period shots.


                                  Game 4-Bruins out shot the Rangers 24 to 23. Orr scored twice in the
                                  first period where Giacomin faced 5 shots. Johnston stopped all 6 first
                                  period shots.


                                  Game 5-Bruins out shot Rangers 38 to 26 and Rousseau scored twice in
                                  the third period for the win. Villemure stopped all 17 third period
                                  shots.


                                  Game 6 Rangers out shot the Bruins 33 to 27 with Cheevers posting a
                                  shutout. Orr scored in the first period where Villemure stopped 7 of 8
                                  shots. Cheevers stopped all 9 first period shots.



                                  Giacomin in game 3 and especially Villemure in game 5 played very well,
                                  but I'm sure Giacomin wasn't too happy about game one, nor that he
                                  allowed two goals on five shots in game 4. And I'm sure that Villemure
                                  wasn't pleased about his third period in game 2 where he gave up the
                                  winning goal only facing 6 shots. It's not always how many goals you
                                  give up, it's also when you give them up and the circumstances that you
                                  give them up. I don't think you would want your goalies in the finals
                                  to be giving up the winning goals during periods where you've faced 6
                                  and 5 shots respectfully. And let's not forget the fact that the
                                  Rangers outshot the B's in 4 of the 6 games.


                                  Dryden's point is that to be a winner you have to step up to the
                                  occasion, and I don't think that Giacomin nor Villemure were too happy
                                  about their play in this SC Final.


                                  James
                                • Craig
                                  James, Point well taken! I can t argue with you here. By the way if you have the box scores for those games is there anyway I could get them from you? Craig
                                  Message 16 of 16 , Sep 9, 2005
                                  • 0 Attachment
                                    James,

                                    Point well taken! I can't argue with you here. By the way if you have the box scores for those games is there anyway I could get them from you?

                                    Craig

                                    ----- Original Message -----
                                    From: Karkoski James
                                    To: hockhist@yahoogroups.com
                                    Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2005 9:37 PM
                                    Subject: Re: [hockhist] Ken Dryden on the Rangers



                                    On 2005.9.8, at 07:52 PM, Craig wrote:
                                    >
                                    >
                                    > Game one was 6-5 for Boston and New York came back with a series of
                                    > goals at the end to make it close. That may have been the one game
                                    > their goaltending let them down. The other games:2-1 Boston in game 2,
                                    > 5-2 Rangers in game 3, 3-2 Boston in game 4, 3-2 New York in game 5,
                                    > and 3-0 Boston in game 6 were all fairly even and it is hard to blame
                                    > either Giacomin or Villemure for those losses. Also the Rangers
                                    > goalies outplayed by a large margin both Ken Dryden and Tony Esposito
                                    > in the first 2 rounds.


                                    Craig, I'm not trying to blame anyone for the losses, but I am taking
                                    up Dryden's point about rising to the occasion that you posted. Let's
                                    take a look at the goalie stats game by game:



                                    Game 1- Rangers out shot the Bruins 33 to 27 and battled back from a 5
                                    to 1 mid-second period deficit to tie the game before losing on an Ace
                                    Bailey late goal in the third Period. Cheevers stopped 12 of 15 shots
                                    in the 3rd Period, Giacomin stopped 7 of 8.


                                    Game 2- Rangers out shot the Bruins 28 to 25. Johnston saved all 10
                                    third period shots, Villemure saved 5 of 6.


                                    Game 3-Rangers out shot the Bruins 39 to 34. Giacomin stopped 13 of 14
                                    first period shots and all 14 third period shots.


                                    Game 4-Bruins out shot the Rangers 24 to 23. Orr scored twice in the
                                    first period where Giacomin faced 5 shots. Johnston stopped all 6 first
                                    period shots.


                                    Game 5-Bruins out shot Rangers 38 to 26 and Rousseau scored twice in
                                    the third period for the win. Villemure stopped all 17 third period
                                    shots.


                                    Game 6 Rangers out shot the Bruins 33 to 27 with Cheevers posting a
                                    shutout. Orr scored in the first period where Villemure stopped 7 of 8
                                    shots. Cheevers stopped all 9 first period shots.



                                    Giacomin in game 3 and especially Villemure in game 5 played very well,
                                    but I'm sure Giacomin wasn't too happy about game one, nor that he
                                    allowed two goals on five shots in game 4. And I'm sure that Villemure
                                    wasn't pleased about his third period in game 2 where he gave up the
                                    winning goal only facing 6 shots. It's not always how many goals you
                                    give up, it's also when you give them up and the circumstances that you
                                    give them up. I don't think you would want your goalies in the finals
                                    to be giving up the winning goals during periods where you've faced 6
                                    and 5 shots respectfully. And let's not forget the fact that the
                                    Rangers outshot the B's in 4 of the 6 games.


                                    Dryden's point is that to be a winner you have to step up to the
                                    occasion, and I don't think that Giacomin nor Villemure were too happy
                                    about their play in this SC Final.


                                    James










                                    To unsubscribe from this mail list, send a blank message to hockhist-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com




                                    SPONSORED LINKS Sports fund raising Sports psychology degree Hockey trophy
                                    Sport nutrition Hockey jersey Air hockey tables


                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                    YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS

                                    a.. Visit your group "hockhist" on the web.

                                    b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                                    hockhist-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

                                    c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.


                                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------



                                    [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                                  Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.