Conference hbahba::cam_sports

    
    And now to appropriatly christen this note,
    
    
    "1940!, 1940!, 1940!, 1940, 1940!, ad nauseum"
    
    MikeL
    

    2-0-0 since Brian Leetch returned. 

    
    
    You should have waited until Tuesday to post the 2-1-0 record
    after the B's burn them tonight.
    
    

    
     A real beehive of activity in here.

    Ain't nice to kick 'em when they're down (haw haw). 
    More fun when their fans get all riled up for a fauxrun at the Cup
    only to be dashed again.
    
    Seems so familiar to me
    
    MikeL
    

    Yup they sure stunk it up this year especially the last few weeks. Lost
    7 of 8 at home. Blew 2 goal leads at home in the 3rd to Edmonton,
    Philadelphia, and Hartford. Lost to the Islanders in OT. Lost to the
    Devils in NJ having a 2 goal lead after a dominating first period. One
    could go on and on. Truly a pathetic series of events.
    
    The Crazy Met
    

    
    >>Yup they sure stunk it up this year especially the last few weeks. Lost
    
    
    They sure stunk up Madison Sq. Gahden lasted night. eh????
    
    GO PENS!!!
    
    JaKe
    

    Didn't see last nights game but sounds like a massacre. Incredible that
    at one point it was a 3-3 game.
    
    The Crazy Met
    

    
    >>           <<< Note 44.8 by ACESMK::FRANCUS "Mets in '93" >>>
    >>        -< Gahden is a Boston term - get your cities right :-) >-
                 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    
    
    Oops, sorry!!
    
    In New Yuck that Madison F--king Square G__damn Garden, right????
    
    (8^)*
    
    JaKe
    

    Nay JaKe,
    In true NooYawk fashion, only the Knicks play at the Gawden(dat about
    right TCM?). Who are the Rangers?
    
    MikeL
    

    Office pool here for when the Rangers will win their next Stanley Cup.
    Scott here pulled "Never" and right now, he's the odds-on favorite, so
    he's happy...
    
    - Jerry Girard on WPIX news...
    

    probably when the Red Sox win a championship.

    
    Yabbut I yam amazed that nobody mentioned that with Monday's loss, da
    Rangers have played themselves out of da playoffs!
    
    Interesting sidebar - in the entire history of the National Hokey
    League, only ONE other team failed to make da playoffs the year
    after winning their division!
    
    For 2 free "unset hidden" vouchers, name dat team!
    
    I remain,
    trivially knowledgeable
    Kev
    

    Well done, Karen, you finally got the date correct (1940!). After
    how many tries?? 8^)
    
    And Kev, the answer to yo' question is.... none other than Les
    Canadiens de Montreal, otherwise known as Les Habs or Les Ogres.
    Montreal, having won their division and the Cup de Stanley in 1968-
    1969, finished in fifth place in 1969-70, and the Broons led by
    Wunderkind Bobby Orr captured da Cup. Interestingly enough, Les
    Flying Frenchmen were done in by none other than the focus of
    this topic, the Strangers. The Rangers, in their last game of the
    season, needed a win AND mucho goals to edge out les Habs for the
    final spot du playoff. The Rangers pulled their goalie and scored
    (agin the Wings) around 9 goals to edge out les Habs by that
    tiebreaker( most goals). Les Habs cried foul, but we all knew that
    Montreal was, so to speak, a daid fowl.  Nyuck, nyuck.
    
    And I cannot gather myself up to heap scorn on this year's Ranger
    edition. As JD points out in the basenote, the Rangers are hockey's
    answer to the Red Sox. Angst lives in Manhatten! Let's just lay
    back and watch the NooYawk media and fans heap abuse on their darlins.
    Same thiong happens up here every winter. 
    One good thing tho. In yo' heart, Stan Fischler. Lessee, that's about
    15 times since the late 60's that Stan has picked NY to win the Cup.
    The Curse of the Bambino lives in NooYawk with the Curse of Stan!
    
    MikeL
    

re: Rangers beating Canadians on the goal tiebreaker.

On Saturday night the Candians pulled their goalie at the 
start of OT against the Caps because the Canadians had to get a win to
have any real chance at catching Quebec for 2nd place in the division.

btw who the heck played so well for Quebec this year??

The Crazy Met

    Sakic and Hextall for starters.
    
    Mark.

    	RE: Rangers beating the Canadiens on the tiebreaker
    
    	I remember it differently MikeL.  I thought the Canadiens were
    losing to the Red Wings and pulled their goalie with about 10 minutes
    to go in the third period to try and get a few goals to beat the
    Rangers in the goal tiebreaker.  The Red Wings scored 2 or 3 quick
    empty netters and the Habs put the goalie back in.  DaBroons� lost
    first place when Chicago beat them on a disputed goal 1-0 earlier
    that month, but DaBroons� crushed the Blackhawks in the playoffs
    4-0.  Also I believe that year the first place team played the third
    place team and 2 played 4.  The Rangers were the only team to beat
    DaBroons� in the playoffs that year, and if my memory hasn't been
    totally washed out by Canadien bi�re DaBroons� won game 5 of that
    series 3-2 on an Esposito breakaway goal (honest), when the series
    was tied 2-2. 
    
    				/Don

    Hmmm
    I thought the Rangers were the one who needed the win and most goals.
    Oh well, Habs wre hab-nots that year.
    Yeah and I remember that 1-0 game. Bill Friday sips! Even if EJ
    unnecessarily did the Stanislavsky in net to git Friday's attention.
    Damn cameras in the net!
    
    MikeL
    

ON Imus this morning, they said 


		And the Rangers have firmly cemented themselves
		as the most futile of all of New York's sports team


or something to that effect.....


They certainly don't lack talent, so I don't know what the problem is....


'saw

    
    Let me guess,  you listen to Imus because he is your intellectual
    peer and you can identify with him. Right?
    
    Kev_for_Tommy
    

>    
>    Let me guess,  you listen to Imus because he is your intellectual
>    peer and you can identify with him. Right?
    
Nope.  

I listen to him for the following reasons:

		a) right now, he's better than anything else

		b) he has interesting people call in or guest in
		   the studio

		c) I can't find Howard Stern

		d) I'm too lazy to turn the dial away from 660, because
		   I'd only have to move it back in the afternoon.....


		e) He's funny on occasion.......


'Saw

>                               -< IMUS >> Stern >-


I agree.  I was just kiddin' about Stern.  Stern is juvenile, Imus is
more cerebral....


'Saw

          <<< Note 44.25 by CAMONE::WAY "Don't start me to talkin'" >>>

>                               -< IMUS >> Stern >-


>> I agree.  I was just kiddin' about Stern.  Stern is juvenile, Imus is
>> more cerebral....


 I wouldn't even clasify Stern as a juvenile, how about just plain IDIOT...

 mike

I used to enjoy Stern's TV show, because there were SOME parts on occasion
that were hilarious.  But there were other parts that were pretty dumb.


'Saw

    	Imus cerebral?  When compared to Stern, I guess so.  Kind of
    like saying the Ranger fans who sit in the infamous blue seats are
    a peaceful lot when compared to the Hell's Angels.
    
    				/Don

Stern's radio show was funny when he first started in NY. His weekly
dial-a-date were hilarious.

The Crazy Met

Well, Slasher, I didn't say he was cerebral compared to say, William F. 
Buckley. ;^)

But I do learn a lot from his show -- he has some wicked interesting
people on -- Senators, columnists, Dave Jennings, Billy Taylor.....

'Saw

    
    Dont' have much time - but for me the Rangers season ended when they
    fired Nielson.
    
    I've always felt that as long as the Rangers are owned by the big
    Corporation, they will be merely a line item on the ledger sheet.  ITs
    frustrating, but one day, just like teh Sox, a Champeenship will come.
    
    Keenan would be an improvement.  Give him free reign.  And stop signing
    old Edmonton Oilers.
    
    JD

    The Rangers season ended when Leetch slipped on the (nonrink)ice. His
    talents masked numerous Ranger weaknesses a year ago especially that of
    his defense partner Jeff Beukeboom. 
    
    Keenan will help only if management treats him like they do Riley. He 
    needs to be given time. This franchise has been thru so many regimes
    since emile Francis left. First Shero takes them to finals in 1979 then
    has a faling out,then Herb Brooks,Ted Sator,Michelle Bergeron,Phil Espo
    and finally Roger Neillson. Was John Fergusopn in charge for a while?
    Who can remember. To this day Rangers are still paying for Espo's
    Marcell Dionne double fiasco. Everytime I watch Ridley and Miller play
    for the Caps I am reminded of Espo's bungling.
    
    The 1970 story.
    
    Rangers beat Detroit in afternoon 9-5. Montreal needs to score 5 goals
    at Chicago. They trail 4-2 in third period,pull goalie and give up 5
    empty netters as Chicago wins regular season title 9-2.

Rangers won both pre-season games in London a week or so back.

The Crazy Met

The Crazy Met

fit perfectly with the previous note.

The Crazy Met

October 5th, Bruins at NYR. My calendar says that is less than 2 weeks.

HtH

The Crazy Met

    /don, you should know by now that you can't be that subtle with TCM.

    	Speaking of the *real* hokey season did anybody see the remarks
    make by SuperMario regarding last year's Pengoons team.  Basically he
    said they wasted too much effort in the regular season and didn't have
    the same energy they had in the previous two Stanley Cup seasons.  You
    have to applaud his candor, but the owners who charge ridiculous money
    for basically exhibition games would probably ring his neck if he
    weren't the Michael Jordan of hokey.
    
    				/Don

/er Iknew exactly what you meant. Mac once again proved that he so easy to 
toy with that it's like taking candy from a baby.

The Crazy Met

    Glad I could make your day, TCM.  I hope that one day you will get a
    life.

    OK Craze,
    Time to come out from behind that curtain and put all your support
    behind the best team in hockey. Stop holtzin' around, son...
    
    Where are all the stRanger feigns?? They made the Broons look like
    a pond team. The Rangers have the best team in hockey period..
    Even wif Mario, the Pengoons are no match for this juggernaut.
    Jezz these guys do it all, skate,hit,skate,check; you wanna play
    any style, they'll beat ya. C'mon Craze be a main and put away that
    skirt. 
    
    If the Rangers don't win the Cup this year, barring injuries of course,
    then they are the supreme chokers. No doooooubt abooooout it.
    
    MikeL
    
    
    P.S. However will April showers bring May flowers (as in a funeral)
    to Manhatten thised spring??  
    Pressure's all on you, Rangers. You the best. Play with dat.
    

�    If the Rangers don't win the Cup this year, barring injuries of course,
�    then they are the supreme chokers. No doooooubt abooooout it.
    
    It took you this long to figure that out?  Didn't the Rangers have the
    best (or one of the best) records in hockey a year or two ago only to
    bow out ungracefully in the early rounds?

    
    The Rangers woefully underachieved last year, yes, and were made more
    vulnerable with the loss of Leetch. I hadn't seen this year's
    Ranger edition until lasted night, and they're appreciably *better*
    than last year's model. IMO, they're strides ahead of the 'Goons
    this year when last year they were neck and neck.
    However that spring sceptre looms!
    
    MikeL
    

    Rangers had best record in hockey in 1991-92 and were on a roll.
    PLayers strike hi. Rangers beat the Devils in 7 games and then played
    the Pens. Rangers led 2-1 in games, 4-2 in the 3rd period of game 4.
    Pens scored a goal from beyond the blue line, awful play by the Rangers
    goalie. Pens tied it late in the 3rd, won in OT. They then won game 5
    in MSG after leading 2-0, Rangers tied it at 2, Pens won with a goal
    late in the 3rd. Pens then won game 6 easily.
    
    re: injuries: Best Rangers teams in the last 4 decades were the 1971-72
    team and the 1990-91 team. The 1972 edition had the
    Ratelle-Hatfield-Gilbert line. Rateller broke his ankle, Rangers made
    it to the finals but lost to the Bruins in 6. 1990-91 team had Brian
    Letch break an ankle in March and that was it for their playoff
    chances. 1979 team made it to the finals, unexpetedly beating the hated
    Islanders in 6 games. Davidson was phenomenal in goal which is what got
    them that far. Canadians beat them in 5 games - last of their 4 in a
    row; Canadians were clearly the best team in hockey that year.
    
    And on, and on. Yeah this year could be the one, but you do understand
    that Ranger fans are a bit gun shy about making any predictions. Our
    hearts have been broken too many times - not as many as Red Sox or Cubs
    fans but nonetheless enough times.
    
    The Crazy Met
    

    re: .47
    
    one nit about last year. Leetch, Messier, Graves, Bukaboom were all
    injured.
    
    The Crazy Met
    

Leetch is playing with a plate in each ankle.  

I don't know about any of you, but I can't even begin to imagine what
that must feel like...

I do know that plates, while very helpful, make you ever more susceptible
to injury, as they strengthen the broken area, yet, if hit the right
way, put an incredible amount of stress on the area around the area they're
supposed to strengthen.

We had a guy on the Wanderers with a plate on his ulna.  It did a great
job healing the break, but 1� years later, he took a hit in the arm,
and the bone snapped right at the end of the plate.


I think the Rangers have to hope that Leetch stays really healthy, as he
seems to be a big part of their team.   And Messier is having a problem
with calcium deposits in his wrists....  

For the Rangers, it's imperative they stay healthy......


'Saw

    
    How about Messier on that breakaway. Takes the biscuit from the
    forehand to the backhand and beats the goalie glove side while moving
    across the crease. Amazing goal, and very difficult to do. Poor Vinny
    didn't know what to do.
    Yup, the Rangers sure did make the B's look like bantams, didn't they ?
    

    How anyone can expect this Rangers team to do well in the playoffs is
    beyond me. The Bruins were such a dominating team in their 6-3 win in
    NY that it will have to be a disappointment to their fans if they do
    not make it to the Stanley Cup finals. We Ranger fans will obviouslt
    have to be happy with them getting past the first round. 
    
    The Crazy Met
    

    REverse WHAMMY don't work, TCM.  Acting like the Rangers are a second
    rate team, when you obviously feel different(but ain't saying it) don't
    count fer nuthin.
    
    JaKe
    

    It is a mistake to try and place extra importance on any regular season
    hockey game. The real season starts in April.

    I am constantly amazed at replies in this notesfile. The key to reading
    my note was the title.
    
    The Crazy Met
    

	Ranger fans around the world are buying up brooms in preperation 
	for the 'real' season which starts in April.

	They're the best and you know it, TC*.  I can't believe you are
	still in denial.


	billl

Newsgroups: clari.sports.hockey
Subject: Rangers Send Gartner To Leafs
Keywords: urgent, general hockey news
Copyright: 1994 by The Associated Press, R
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]>
X-Supersedes: <[email protected]>
Date: Mon, 21 Mar 94 19:40:10 PST
Expires: Mon, 11 Apr 94 20:40:10 PDT
ACategory: sports
Slugword: Ranger-Trades
Priority: regular
ANPA: Wc: 332/0; Id: V0935; Src: ap; Sel: -----; Adate: 03-21-N/A; Ver: 0/1
Approved: [email protected]
Codes: APO-2040
Lines: 62

        CALGARY, Alberta (AP) -- The New York Rangers made four trades on
Monday, including a four-player swap with the Chicago Blackhawks
and a deal that sent Mike Gartner to the Toronto Maple Leafs for
two players and a draft choice.
        Facing the NHL's 3 p.m. EST trading deadline, the Rangers made
five deals, including a four-player swap with Chicago and a trade
that sent Mike Gartner to Toronto for two players and a draft
choice.
        ``We feel we've acquired some size and strength and
experience,'' Rangers coach Mike Keenan said. ``I think (general
manager Neil Smith) did a fabulous job in bring in four players
that will add to the depth of the club without diminishing the
skill level. ''
        The Rangers sent Gartner, 34, to Toronto for 33-year-old right
wing Glenn Anderson, as well as the rights to defenseman Scott
Malone and a fourth-round draft choice in 1994.
        In the deal with Chicago, the Rangers acquired left wing
Stephane Matteau and right wing Brian Noonan for right wing Tony
Amonte and the rights to left wing Matte Oates.
        The Rangers also traded defenseman Peter Andersson to the
Florida Panthers for a conditional draft choice in 1994, sent left
wing Phil Bourque to the Ottawa Senators for future considerations,
and traded center Todd Marchant to the Edmonton Oilers for center
Craig MacTavish.

    OK Craze,
    No excuses now. This team is loadin' up for the Big Kahuna this
    year period!! If they don't take the Cup, they surpass the BlowSox.
    
    BTW when do they add Gretzky and Kurri?
    
    MikeL
    
    

    General attitude in NY area towards trades is negative. Why did the
    Rangers jeapordize chemistry? They didn't fill either of needs-big
    defensman or playmaking center. The feeling is that Keenan is totally
    pulling strings,but Smith will take the fall if the y lose early.
    
    A breakdown:
    Gartner deal-Rangers get Gelnn Anderson who has 5 rings-may go to
    Europe next year 
    Chicago deal-Amonte was too small for Keenan,Rangers get two grinders.
    Peter Anderson for 9th rounder.He was worth a lot more.
    Phil Borque for future considerations-A big salary wo never played.
    McTavish deal- Marchant was too small,McTavish is a good face-off
    guy,who at 35 may retire.
    
    This is a do or die year for the Rangers. They are not a young team.
    

re: .59

If the Red Sox somehow win the WS in 1994 the Rangers would still
need 22 years to reach that level of futility.

The Crazy Met

It seemed that the Anderson deal was done because he has always performed
exceptionally well in the playoffs.

Nightmare scenario: Rangers-Maple Leafs final, Gartner dominates as the
Maple Leafs win :-(

The Crazy Met

   > If the Red Sox somehow win the WS in 1994 the Rangers would stillneed
   > 22 years to reach that level of futility.
    
   > The Crazy Met
    
    Not quite true, if'n you take into account the age of the league they
    play in.
    
    brews

    sigh :-( Rangers are going into their late season swoon oncve again and
    are now tied with the DEVILS for first in the division and most
    points in the league. For the moment Rangers have the first two
    tie-breakers. But if the two teams keep playing like they have over the
    last few weeks the Rangers will end up 8-10 points behind the DEVILS by
    the time the season ends.
    
    The Crazy Met
    

    	The StRangers and the PenGOONS (with Lemieux) are the best two
    teams in hokey.  The regular season exists so hokey fans can get
    drunk and hokey owners can make bundles of money.  When they drop
    the puck for real the StRangers/PenGOONS series will decide the
    Stanley Cup.
    
    				/Don

    
    
    	Yabbut hey there Neil Smith (Ranger GM), how do you feel know about
    the trades?
    
    
    ;^)

>    	The StRangers and the PenGOONS (with Lemieux) are the best two
>    teams in hokey.  The regular season exists so hokey fans can get
>    drunk and hokey owners can make bundles of money.  When they drop
>    the puck for real the StRangers/PenGOONS series will decide the
>    Stanley Cup.
    

/Don, I'd make a crack about your cynicism and lack of faith, but the 
sad part is, you're right on......

    There are very few NHL regular season games that mean anything.
    Tomorrow night there is actually a regular season game that does have
    some relevance. Rangers vs DEVILS.
    
    Winner of that division very liekly gets the #1 seed, second place team
    gets the #3 seed. That means that the winner gets an easier path in the
    playoffs.
    
    Rangers are 5-0 vs. DEVILS this year. Not good going into this kind of
    game.
    
    The Crazy Met
    

Worst possible first round matchup for the Rangers is to face
the Islanders. Those 2 teams always beat up on one another and
it would be nice for the Rangers to have an easier first round
this time around. Go Panthers!

The Crazy Met

    I dunno Craze,
    Dem Panthers could cause jest as bad a haidache as the Isles.
    Too bad the Broons are gonna end up 4-6, the stRangers coulda
    beat up on them. Watch out for Beezer..
    
    MikeL
    

Granted, the Panthers could be tough because of Beezer; in the NHL a hot
goalie in the playoffs can win a series. But the Islanders and Rangers
have a "history". They have both knocked the other one out of the playoffs
in upsets and besides winning the Stanley Cup would like nothing better than
to knock the other team off.

The Crazy Met

    The sandbagging has started already.

    Let's go Panthers!!!

Ain't no sandbaggin'

If you had ever followed the Islanders vs Rangers games since the 1976(I think
that was the Isles first year in the playoffs)playoffs you would understand why
the last team the Rangers want to meet in the first round, as heavy favorites,
is the Islanders.

Only a place that has 2 teams in the same sport that compete against
one another can really have this kind of a rivalry. Sure there are
inter-city rivalries that are very intense; but intra-city rivalries
are a different type of thing.

The Crazy Met

>>    The sandbagging has started already.

	Not really, Mac.  He's been singing that song all season.  Kind
	of a season long sandbagging jog, aka Knorrism.


	billl

    
      re intr-city rivals
    
      Care to point out where else this phenomena has occurred in the last
      20 years, Met? Jet-Giants? There's a real civil war fer ya. Clippers-
      Lakers? Blood in the streets. And when was the last time that these
      two teams, Islanders-Rangers, met in the playoffs? Are any of the
      players even old enough to remember? I guess Hype City needs some
      kind of angle for a first round playoff series and a supposed rival-
      ry is it? Boy, them Lakers-Celtics battles sure look like a shoving
      match at the playground compared to these two.

Tommy, 

I'll ignore your complete ignorance of history. Rangers vs. Islanders
is the kind of rivalry where even today when the regular season in the
NHL means very little, regular season games between these two teams
are played with the kind of intensity you only expect in the playoffs.
It doesn't matter how good one team is or how bad the other team is
when they play against each other the outcome is not predictable.
So for once in your life get a clue and then once you do maybe you can
have an intelligent conversation on the topic.

The Crazy Met

    
      I ain't buying what you're selling, Met. Rangers/Islanders
    bigger than Cowboys/Skins? Bigger than Raiders/Broncos? Bigger
    than Red Sox/Yankees? Bigger than Montreal/Quebec? Bigger than
    Duke/UNC? Maybe in the hype-addled brains of self-importatnt 
    New Yorkers but not to anyone with a shred of sanity. 
    
    

Tommy, sorry to diappoint you but whether your buyin' what I'm sellin'
doesn't matter a whole heck of a lot.

Rangers/Islanders is the kind of rivalry where the heavy favorite (in this
case the Rangers) would be a lot happier to not have to tangle with
the other team (in this case the Islanders) in the playoffs.

The Crazy Met

I'd rate Rangers/Islanders right up there with Montreal/Quebec, although
it would be hard to say which is the more "obnoxious" rivalry.   

Rangers fans and Islanders fans hate each other, and the teams do get
especially stoked up over it.

Since the Islander victory on Sunday, Ranger fans that I've heard (excluding
Met) have downplayed the Islander victory as meaningless because the 
Rangers have already clinched the best record, and are coasting in.  Islander
fans are acting like Moses just came off the mountain with stone tablets
that say "Islanders Win Cup, Film @ 11"


'Saw

    
      We're talking about one team that hasn't won it in 50 years 
     and another that not only hasn't won anything in more than ten,
     it hasn't been around all that long - period. And all that in a 
     city not really known for it's passion for hockey. To say that this
     rivalry is more intense than an inter-city rivalry like Denver
     -Raiders where the games often have a significance beyond the
     mere fact that the two teams and their fans hate each other is
     a bit hard for me to swallow. If either one or the other of the
     Islanders and Rangers had been very successful in the last ten
     years then maybe the rivalry would be at the level of Cowboys/
     Skins but as it is, it's just New York hype that this is a sort
     of Ali-Frazier rivalry. It sounds more like the one-sided Bruins-
     Montreal "rivalry" where the Bruins fans get all juiced up about
     the Habs but Canadiens fans could care less.

I don't think that you can necessarily compare hockey rivalries to say
football rivalries. 

Despite the fact that the Rangers haven't won it all since 1940 and it's
been a bunch o' years since the Islanders won their Cups, I don't think
that has much bearing on a rivalry.  

From my point of view, the rivalry starts with the fans, and that energy
carries into the team.   I know Islander and Ranger fans in this neck of
the woods, and it is a bitter rivalry.  Even if both teams were fighting
it out for the cellar it would be a bitter rivalry.


'Saw

Nope the comparison to Canadians-Bruins doesn't work, both these teams
do not like each other and haven't for a long time.

Islanders came into the league in 1972-73 (pretty sure of that). They
first made the playoffs in 1976 (also pretty sure). In the 1976 playoff
they faced the Rangers in the first round - a 2 of 3 set. Isles and Rangers
both had 88 points that season, Isles beat Rangers last game of the season;
but Rangers still had tie-breaker. Isles won game 1 in MSG, Rangers won
game 2 in NassauCol. Game 3 went to OT. JP Parise scored 11 seconds into
OT to give the Isles the game and series. It has been an incredible rivalry
since that playoff series. Islanders have been in the league for 22 seasons,
and this rivalry has been there for 18.

No Islander fan forgets that it was the Rangers that knocked the Isles off 
in the semi-finals in 1979. Ranger fans don't forget 1976 or the 4 game
sweep in 1981 or 1982 when the Isles were in the middle of their 4 straight.
A undermanned Rangers teams then took the Isles to OT in game 5 of a best of
5 series in 1983 (last season Isles won the Cup). 

As opposed to football these teams meet 5 times during the season and often
can meet in the playoffs. Their fans can easily get to the away games. In
that sense it really is hard to compare an inter-city rivalry with an
intra-city one.

re: NY and hockey. Yes and no. Rangers have had generally full houses in good
times and bad times. Knicks need to be decent to really have full houses.

The Crazy Met

    Reminds me of the old rangers - americans rivalry almost as intense as
    the maroons - ch

re: .83

ok, how about filling us in on what you are talking about.

The Crazy Met

>    Reminds me of the old rangers - americans rivalry almost as intense as
>    the maroons - ch


Craze, 

He's referring to the New York Rangers - New York Americans rivalry 
and the old Montreal Maroons - Montreal Canadiens rivalry.

I think,
'Saw

>> No Islander fan forgets that it was the Rangers that knocked the 
>> Isles off in the semi-finals in 1979.

 Islanders fans are still upset that the hapless Rangers knocked them out 
 of the playoffs 15 years ago before the Isles went on to establish a
 mini-dynasty? Pardon me, if I can't suspend disbelief *that* much.

>> As opposed to football these teams meet 5 times during the season and often
>> can meet in the playoffs. Their fans can easily get to the away games.

 As opposed to football, in hockey damn near every team gets into the play-
 offs. One loss generally isn't a season breaker. When Denver and the Raiders 
 meet, you toss in the fact that they hate each other, with 16 games every
 game is crucial, they're in the same division with all the playoff im-
 plication that that has and they are both successful franchises. I don't 
 doubt that there is a rivalry between the Isles and the Rangers but it
 certainly isn't at the intensity level of some of the more storied and 
 longer running rivalries in sports.

    

> Islanders fans are still upset that the hapless Rangers knocked them out 
> of the playoffs 15 years ago before the Isles went on to establish a
> mini-dynasty? Pardon me, if I can't suspend disbelief *that* much.

Can a Red Sox fan EVER forget Bucky F***ing Dent in 1978?
Can a Red Sox fan EVER forget Ed Armbrister?
Can a Red Sox fan EVER forget Bill Bucker?

Can they NOT be upset over those things?

    <Craze,
    <
    <He's referring to the New York Rangers - New York Americans rivalry
    <and the old Montreal Maroons - Montreal Canadiens rivalry.
    
    Excellent 'Saw and with that Brimsek answer which is true if not
    correct (assuming no cheesie,bernie,terry sawchuk or don simmons etc
    winner) then try this one on for size
    
    Who was the Chicatoumi Cucumber?  Hint, not the titled wife of a
    certain Canada Governor General

>    
>    Excellent 'Saw and with that Brimsek answer which is true if not
>    correct (assuming no cheesie,bernie,terry sawchuk or don simmons etc
>    winner) then try this one on for size
>    

Yes, that was just a guess.  I don't believe Cheevers ever won it, but
on the other hand, in the old days, the award was almost automatic to the
goalies that won the Cup, or something like that.


>    Who was the Chicatoumi Cucumber?  Hint, not the titled wife of a
>    certain Canada Governor General

Let me think on it.....


'Saw

    Hey, Tommy, you have to admit, 'Saw knows rivalries.  Afterall, he was
    the one who made the call on the Giant/Cowboy rivalry.

    Kev, is a Long Islander.  What's his take on this "rivalry"?

>    Hey, Tommy, you have to admit, 'Saw knows rivalries.  Afterall, he was
>    the one who made the call on the Giant/Cowboy rivalry.

It's got nothing to do with Giants-Cowboys or anything else.

I know some Islander fans and I know some Rangers fans, and I know that what
TCM says is for the most part true.....at least according to what I see
and hear from my friends who are the aforementioned fans.....

'Saw

  >> Can a Red Sox fan EVER forget Bucky F***ing Dent in 1978?
  >> Can a Red Sox fan EVER forget Ed Armbrister?
  >> Can a Red Sox fan EVER forget Bill Bucker?

  >> Can they NOT be upset over those things?

     You can't compare the angst of fans of a seven year old franchise upon
     losing a *semi-final* series with the torment of fans of an ancient 
     franchise upon losing yet another *World Series*. No comparison. Es-
     pecially, when the Isles went on to win four stright. Bucky Dent, Ed
     Armbrister,et al would be a lot easier to forget if the Sox had man-
     aged to win four straight.
    

>     You can't compare the angst of fans of a seven year old franchise upon
>     losing a *semi-final* series with the torment of fans of an ancient 

Sure you can, if you know how rabid these fans are.

Seriously, I can see how the fans would be pumped up, on their way to
the Finals, and then get stopped by your cross-town rivals.  It could
be something that sticks.




>     franchise upon losing yet another *World Series*. No comparison. Es-
>     pecially, when the Isles went on to win four stright. Bucky Dent, Ed
>     Armbrister,et al would be a lot easier to forget if the Sox had man-
>     aged to win four straight.

Granted, winning four straight would go a long way.....

If that Sox had won that game 7, know one would remember Armbrister at 
all.....
    

Sure you can Tommy - but lets get back to history for a moment. In
1979 the Rangers beat the Islanders in 6 games. (fyi Rangers had never
won a game 7 until they beat the DEVILS in game 7 in 1992.)

By 1978 and 1979 the Islanders were favored to at least get to the finals
and have a shot at upending the Canadians. In 1978 they lost in the
quarterfinals to the Maple Leafs in 7 games; Lanny MacDonald, OT goal
in game 7 won the series for the Leafs.
1979 the Isles had a dominating team (only the Candians were better). 
The expectations, especially since they were playing the Rangers were
very high. Islanders won the two OT games - they have always been
good in playoff OT games - Rangers won the other 4; this was the playoff
season that Davidson was in a "zone" in the nets and nearly "stole" the Cup
from Montreal, but that is another story.

So yeah, that 1979 series really did rankle and still does now.

Everyone was expecting Islanders vs Canadians (Bruins almost stopped the
Candians, right?) and the Rangers threw the monkey wrench into it.

Suffice it to say that Tommy has never experienced this rivalry close-up.

The Crazy Met

I know this.  I know that the Islanders gave me one of my most enjoyable
moments in that marathon playoff game against Washington about 8 years
ago.   

Wow, what a game that was.  The guys were so tired that they couldn't even
really make their circles back around.  Instead they were almost stopping,
and turning and starting up ice again.....

Great game -- Hrudey was in the net for the Islanders if I recall....


'Saw

re: .96

That was truly an awesome game to watch. The only problem was that the
Islanders won. I think they came back from a 3-1 deficit in games in
that series. That marathon game was game 7. Ended about 2AM on Sat. night.

The Crazy Met

>That was truly an awesome game to watch. The only problem was that the
>Islanders won. I think they came back from a 3-1 deficit in games in
>that series. That marathon game was game 7. Ended about 2AM on Sat. night.

Ayuh.

I was so tired after watching it for that long, I could barely make it
to bed....

I was pulling for the Islanders, never having been much of a Caps fan.

    
     No, TCM, I've never experienced this rivalry close-up. I've never
    experienced Denver/Raiders or Duke/UNC closeup either but I don't
    have to. The rivalries are so bitter and the venom so free-flowing
    that you get full effect even in distant New England. Beyond the 
    natural geographic rivalry, this Islanders/Rangers still doesn't 
    sound anywhere near as big as you're trying painting it. After four 
    Stanley Cup victories and the general ineptness of the Rangers, I 
    find it incredibly hard to believe that Islanders fans looks back 
    to '79 with bitterness. Even if they do, I don't think you can
    place this rivalry above some of the others mentioned. It's been
    too one-sided for too long.

That is another place you are wrong. No matter how good - bad the teams
have been relative to one another when they play one another there is
no such thing as one-sided.

The Crazy Met

    Well I've never been to Montreal but I've been to Oklahoma *^)
    
    Well I lied, I've been to Habtown but never for a Broon-Ogre game;
    happened to be there when The Flower made his triumphant return
    to the Forum disguised as a Ranger. I gots to tell ya, all the
    Montrealers we ran into kept asking us if we were from NY and up
    to see the game. When we said "Boston", they all stated their
    profound dislike yet respect for les Bruins. They seemed to be
    ambivalent about the Rangers..
    Point is that I do not believe the Hab-Broon rivalry is so one-sided
    as Tommy suggests. Yes there is probably more feeling on the NE side,
    seeing that les Ogres have stolen,er, captured 20somethibng Cups to
    Boston's 4 or 5. However, the rivalry is quite strong and vehement up on
    the banks of the St. Lawrence. The Nords-Hab rivalry is strong but
    again more one-sided (Quebec). I liken the Nords-Hab rivalry to be
    similar to that of the Whalers-Bruins. One established team vs. newer
    franchise with strog geographical and/or ethnic flavor.
    
    I would surmise that the Habs' oldest and most fierce rivalry was
    with the Maple Leafs. However with the Leafs in another division,
    and being a league doormat until recently, the rivalry has done died
    down a bit. Had the Leafs met the Habs in the finals, it would have
    been hot and heavy between the two teams. Last time they met in the
    'offs was 1967 I believe with Toronto winning the Cup that year.
    
    Anyway from this Broons fan's outlook, I'd rate 'em lika thisa.
    
    
    1 (Tie) Mtl-Boston
    1.(Tie) Mtl-Quebec
    2.      Mtl-Toronto
    
    Any fans of the blue-blanc-rouge want to set us straight?
    
    MikeL
    

    
    I got this "respect" thing after thr Broons jinxed the jinx and
    have beaten the the Habs three outta the last four times they met.
    Small solace to the Cupless B's fans but at least a small monkey's
    off their backs.
    
    Well I'm sure some Canadien fans will say the Broons-Habs rivalry
    is intense and I ain't denying the Hab-Nord rivalry.
    
    MikeL
    

>    Well I'm sure some Canadien fans will say the Broons-Habs rivalry
>    is intense and I ain't denying the Hab-Nord rivalry.
    
I think the Habs-Nordiques thing almost transcends hockey and represents
something much deeper....    

yabbut, in NY hardly anyone knows about the Bruins-Montreal rivalry,
and by Tommy's definitions if a rivlary is not described in headlines
all over the country than it isn't a real rivalry.

The Crazy Met

    
  >> yabbut, in NY hardly anyone knows about the Bruins-Montreal rivalry,
  >> and by Tommy's definitions if a rivlary is not described in headlines
  >> all over the country than it isn't a real rivalry.

     It's been my assertion that there really isn't much of a Bruins-
     Montreal rivalry so thanks for backing me up.
    

I'm going to need my scorecard for this debate.  First it was Tommy
squaring off with TCM, then TCM is backing up Tommy against Mike....

What a melee!

Nah Tommy, you don't get off so easy.

Montreal-Toronto or Montreal-Quebec shouldn't count either.

The Crazy Met

> What a melee!


just a normal day in ::sprots

The Crazy Met

    Donnybrooke lad, donnybrooke!
    
    Unlike TCM, I ain't arguin' whether there is a_intense
    rivalry or not. I cain't speak from a Hab viewpoint. I enjoy the
    Broon-Hab er, matches, and I think there's a rivalry. But if Hab fans
    tell me it's one-sided, so be it.
    
    MikeL
    
    

>    Donnybrooke lad, donnybrooke!

Okay, I understand now....
    
>    Unlike TCM, I ain't arguin' whether there is a_intense
>    rivalry or not. I cain't speak from a Hab viewpoint. I enjoy the
>    Broon-Hab er, matches, and I think there's a rivalry. But if Hab fans
>    tell me it's one-sided, so be it.
    
Got it. 

I just got a tad confused there for a moment....    
    

    First one minor correction to my history lesson. Isles beat the Rangers
    in the first round in 1975, not 1976.
    
    re: this season
    
    Rangers did not win a home game against the Islanders this year. They
    were 1-2-2 against them for the season.
    
    The Crazy Met
    

    	Rangers   12
    	Islanders 0
    
    	Which will happen first.  The Islanders scoring a goal, or Craze
    finally admitting that the StRangers are legitimate Stanley Cup
    favorites?
    
    				  /Don

difference between saying they have a good chance at winning, and saying
they have to be the favorites. part 1 of the above is correct, part 2
is not correct - Pens with Lemieux have to be considered the favorites.

The Crazy Met

    Nope Craze.
    
    The Rangers, el Presidente Cup winner, has played the most consistent
    hockey all year. They are peaking right now from all accounts.
    Pens with Lemieux=Rangers but the Rangers are the favorites because
    they have been the most consistent. Anything less than a Cup is a
    choke.. And don't hand me that "hot goalie" stuff, if Canadiens
    survive the Broons, Rangers should still beat the Habs. We don't
    wanna hear no "Drydenesque" bleatings from the MSG sheep.
    
    MikeL
    

MikeL, I'm sooooo disappointed with you. You obviously cannot
qualify, excepting anything to do with ND, as an ObjectiveSportsAnalyst.

Here I am giving you the objective facts and you continue to live
on in your own dream world. soooo sad :-)

The Crazy Met

MikeL, .117 confirms my point. Besides the Pens being so good, history
plays a part as well; as a Red Sox fan you should certainly understand
that.

The Crazy Met

Note 44.118              Official New York Rangers Note               118 of 118
METSNY::francus "Mets in '94"                         6 lines  19-APR-1994 16:06
>>>                       -< such a hot start is worrisome >-

    And this is logic at its best?
    
    Admittance is the first step towards healing Craze. Say it slowly,
    "The Rangers are the favorites to win the Stanley Cup.".
    
    MikeL
    

Personally, I would expect that Rangers to take it all.  Pittsburgh
is a mere shadow of who they were.

Mario's back could go at any minute, especially if he doesn't feel like
playing that night.

Nope, I'd say that the Rangers have the talent, the hot goaltending,
the playoff experience in all those veterans like Messier, and should
kick Pittsburgh's ess all over the ice....

This year is the Ranger's year, no doubt about it......


'Saw

    	When the StRangers win the Stanley Cup they should FedEx a ring
    over to Glen Sather for all the Danny Cater for Sparky Lyle kinds
    of deals he made with New York.
    
    				  /Don

    MacTavish was just to give the guy a shot at a ring.  The others were
    money moves, right?

Well I am thankful to Sather for sending all those players to the Rangers
it certainly has helped. 

Before the Rangers can think about 
the Pens, they might have to play the defending champions, Montreal.
Montreal has great goaltending, and all that playoff experience.
If miraculously they get by the Canadians they need to find someway to get
by the Pens - the best team in the league. By that point they
could be too tired to beat anyone from the Western conference.

The Crazy Met

	Hey Craze, two of the teams that Montreal juggernaut beat on the 
way to the Stanley Cup last year (Quebec, Los Angeles) didn't even make it 
to the playoffs this year and they would not have beaten an injury depleted 
Broons� team last night had it not been for Patrick Roy.  The Gotham 
Millionaires should have no trouble with whoever wins the Broons/Habs 
series.  No trouble at all.

				  /Don

Its not just the teams they meet it is those ghosts in the attic.

> and they would not have beaten ... had it not been for Patrick Roy

and a hot goaltender can steal a series. so you're just confirming
my worst fears.

The Crazy Met

TCM has filled enough sandbags to hold back the Mississippi, the Ohio,
the Missouri, the Monongahela, and the Nile rivers at this point....

He's fast approaching Amazon territory.....


'Saw

    TCH - The Crazy Hedger(tm)

Hedging nothing. I will be ecstatic if the Rangers do win the Stanley
Cup and break the 50+ year dry spell. But I am realistic enough to know
that it will be a difficult and unlikely achievement. Just trying to
be Objective.

The Crazy Met

    
    
    
     Craze....
    
      Not to try to tie anything together but do you know when the last
    time the Rangers posted back to back shut outs in the playoffs????
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    Yea 1940.
    
    HTH
    
    quit sandbagging and own up to the fact that they are the team to beat.
    
    Jerry

    TCM - The Crazy Homer?
    

    to paraphrase Mz Piggy etal
    
    	Put away the pipe and pick up the horn

>    	Put away the pipe and pick up the horn

Zoot roolz!

re: back-to-back shutouts, yeah I knew about the 1940 stat.

The Crazy Met

    
     Boy, in a rivalry with the white-hot intensity of the Rangers-
    Islanders blood feud, you can just throw out the records because 
    anything can happen. If the Rangers ain't careful, the Islanders
    might actually score. You really called this one, TCM.
    

Yup, you do throw out the records. It took you a while Tommy but
I am glad to see that you are finally coming around to the correct
conclusion.

The Crazy Met

 Which do you think would be worst Craze, the Rangers loosing to the
 Bruins or the Pens????????

 mike

    Should be the Broons since they're shorthanded.

Bruins, I would expect the Pens to win.

The Crazy Met

                  <<< Note 44.140 by METSNY::francus "Mets in '94" >>>
    
    Bruins, I would expect the Pens to win.
    
    The Crazy Met
    
     -----------
    
    You're finally on record for predicting that the rangers can beat
    someone.  Now that broons have new hope I hope this series happens.

re: .141

misnterpreting my statements, again, huh?

The Crazy Met

>> Yup, you do throw out the records. It took you a while Tommy but
>> I am glad to see that you are finally coming around to the correct
>> conclusion.

    No doubt about it. This rivalry ranks right up there with the 
    Muhammad Ali/ Jerry Quarry rivalry of the '70s. 
    

Tommy, trying to be a standup comedian today? keep the day job.

The Crazy Met

 you mean you'd rather have Jake ridin; than \er and crew?????????

 ;^)

Pens beating the Rangers would not be an upset, by any definition - and
this statement has no implicit or explicit implications re: Bruins (the
billte exclusion :-)! - so JaKe could get his licks in, but it would be about
a series that the Pens, with all their talent, should win.

Ideally Rangers would beat both the Bruins and the Pens and the bunch of you
might shut up for a minute or two.

The Crazy Met

    Well, Tcm all I am trying to do is to get you to say..
    
    Rangers have a wagon this year, are red hot and we're going all the
    way.
    
    Then you can say, I'm worried here, the 'guins have Mario and we'll
    have to get a goon in to win this one, etc.
    
    And if you're wrong and rangers get knocked off then you go to the
    crow-bar and get it over with.  You're going to have to go there
    anyway.
    
    Let me show you how it's done
    
    	Toronto Mapleleafs will win the Stanley Cup

re: .147

In your dreams, buster!

The Crazy Met

    OK Craze,
    Tell us exactly what it is about this year's Ranger edition
    that causes you so much trepidation(and I don't mean history!) in
    being a main?  We'll axe Dave Lazarus his *honest(unlike you!)*
    opinion..
    
    The Rangers, as billte put it, have a DADGUM WAGON!
    Anything less than a Cup is underachievement.
    
    MikeL
    

In 1991-2 the Rangers had the best record,
then had an awful time against NJ and then that forgettable series with
the Pens. Much of the team is the same, though surprisingly the trades
that were made at the deadline turned out to be good moves. On to this
year.

Whatever did happen in the first 2 games agains the Islanders, the Islanders
are a team that always scared me when facing the Rangers. Ignore Tommy for
now and stick with what I know based on seeing that rivalry first hand for
many years. Assuming the Rangers got past the Isles they would
very possibly have to face Montreal. Montreal has (well had) a great goaltender
who excels in the playoffs and they are a team that often just finds a way
to win. Finally assuming they got to the conference finals they would likely
face the Pens who with a healthy Mario have to be considered as good, and
probably better, then the Rangers. Pens had 101? points with Mario only
playing in 22 games or so - anyway you look at it that is astounding.
So it is not so much the actual Rangers team that worries me, rather
it is that in each of the first 3 rounds the Rangers have a decent chance of
facing teams that for different reasons I would prefer they not have
to play. 

The Crazy Met

    Phhhhhhhht
    Paranoic statement.
    
    I repeat, Do the Rangers have a wagon or not?
    
    
    MikeL
    

MikeL, you ask for an answer and then refuse to pay attention. I'm
not sure why I even bother with you.

The Crazy Met

    Your answer was an obfuscation. I paid attention.
    
    Je repete, "Do the Rangers have a Wagon or not?".
    
    
    MikeL
    

If you explained what you are asking I might answer that question.

And no you did not pay attention.

The Crazy Met

	Let me try and help out my fellow Irishman on this one.  What he wants
	you to do TC* is stand up like a man and post, "I think the Rangers 
	can and will beat everyone in the NHL to finally win their first
	Stanley Cup since 1940."

	We kow you think this, so why not just come out and say it?  Are you
	ascared or sumfin?


	billl

and how do you KNOW that I think this??????? (you've both been havin'
too many Bushmills lately :-)

As an ObjectiveSportsAnalyst I certainly cannot state what you are looking
for.

The Crazy Met

    TCM,
    
    I've heard that men can be non-committal, but this is riduculous!
    
    j

so now there is soda all over my screen :-)

The Crazy Met

re: rest of you: dream on!

	That's what I figured.  What a wuss!


	billl

>>>                          -< but will you listen??? >-

    
    OK Craze, I'll prove I listened..
    
    
>>In 1991-2 the Rangers had the best record,
>>then had an awful time against NJ and then that forgettable series with
>>the Pens. Much of the team is the same, though surprisingly the trades
>>that were made at the deadline turned out to be good moves. On to this
>>year.
    
    What's the point? Have the Rangers struggled against the Isles?
    As you said, on to this year.

>>Whatever did happen in the first 2 games agains the Islanders, the Islanders
>>are a team that always scared me when facing the Rangers. Ignore Tommy for
>>now and stick with what I know based on seeing that rivalry first hand for
>>many years. 
    
    Believe it or not, I *do* understand a little fear on this one as I
    know the history of the rivalry. But that does not warrant the abject
    paranoia you are displaying. Remember, it's 12-0 Rangers at this point.
    And they have *dominated*.
    
 >>   Assuming the Rangers got past the Isles they would
     
    There, that wasn't so hard
    
>>very possibly have to face Montreal. Montreal has (well had) a great goaltender
>>who excels in the playoffs and they are a team that often just finds a way
>>to win. 
    
    So? Why not focus on the overall strengths of your team?? Your
    statement is true by itself but the Rangers would be prohibitive
    favorites, Craze, and you know it. Again, you obfuscate and bring
    up ghosts. Paranoia
    
>>>    Finally assuming they got to the conference finals 
     
    There, that wasn't so hard again, was it?
    
    
 >>   they would likely
 >>face the Pens who with a healthy Mario have to be considered as good, and
 >>probably better, then the Rangers. 
    
    Why? The Rangers have a better balanced team than thwe Pens, with or
    without Mario. I'd take the Rangers defense over Pittsburgh's anyday.
    Is this Craze the paranoic speaking or a hockey-knowledgeable fan?
    I'll take (A).
    
  >>  Pens had 101? points with Mario only
  >>playing in 22 games or so - anyway you look at it that is astounding.
    
    Who said the Penguins were nada without Mario? They certainly are
    strong.  Nothing astounding about 101 pts from a strong team.
    Pssst. Rangers are better..
    
>>So it is not so much the actual Rangers team that worries me, rather
>>it is that in each of the first 3 rounds the Rangers have a decent chance of
>>facing teams that for different reasons I would prefer they not have
>>to play. 

    Ah here is the rub,obfuscation,paranoia. So who woulsd you prefer they
    face? The Moncton Chiefs?  Your first phrase should be your rallying
    cry. Has anything *this year's* Ranger team done to warrant such
    negativism?
    
>>The Crazy Met
      ^^^^^
A poifect nom de plume.
    
    Craze, I listened, you obfuscated. You wax poetic about any possible
    negative possibilities but ignore your own team's strengths and
    accomplishment as well as my question.
    
    I won't ask you to predict a Rangers Cup because God knows you're
    a banana peel away from Bellevue so I'll ask you one thing again,
    
    "Do the Rangers have a wagon?" And don't tell me you don't understand
    what this means you meshugge..
     
    
    MikeL
    

	You know, TC*, for someone who is so quick to chase someone into 
	the Crow note, I'd a figured you for at least a little 'nads.

	I figure that until you come clean on this, you should stop worrying
	about how long it takes, or how well others their eat their crow.
	Just ban yourself from that hallowed ground that I've had the distinct
	pleasure of visiting and make no futher mention of it either.


	billl

    
    Okay, lets reverse the roles for a second.  Based on the last several
    notes, I expect MikeL and others to enter a reply in the crow note if
    the Rangers don't make it.  You are the ones so proudly stating they
    are the best.  The question becomes will you...
    
    Marc
    
    

    If the Rangers do not wein the Cup(I think they will) I will GLADLY,
    and I mean that literally, enter a note into the crow note.
    
    There Craze, I'm a main. Take off your skirt.
    
    MikeL
    

first of all when I blow a prediction I go to the Crow
note; so go blow!

second, now that I understand MikeL's question: yes the Rangers have
a very good and talented team; it takes a very good team to win 50+ games
and have 110+ points - it does not happen often. To deny all of that 
would be incompatible with  the role
of ObjectiveSportsAnalyst.

However, having talent and winning the championship do
not always go hand in hand. And I've already explained earlier what I
fear in each of the first 3 rounds.

and re: .163

If the Pens do not win the cup I will be THRILLED to post in the Crow note.
The PLEASURE will be ALL mine.

The Crazy Met

    >> Ignore Tommy for now and stick with what I know based on seeing 
    >> that rivalry first hand for many years. 

       Yeah, stick with what TCM knows and you'll be a perennial p-name bet
       loser just like him. He's been dead wrong about this series so far
       and there's really no reason to expect that to change, especially
       if past performance is (and it is) any indication of future returns.
       The Rangers are hotter than July in hell and the Islanders are lucky
       to be there and it is all painfully obvious. If this Rangers team
       does anything less than make it to the Finals then they will have
       choked a choke that only a Big Apple can induce.
    

>first of all when I blow a prediction I go to the Crow
>note; so go blow!
    
    

Once again Tommy is basing his statements on 2 games on the Rangers
home ice and ignoring any facks that don't neatly fit into his theory.

The Crazy Met

re: .166

Buffalo over Dallas in back-to-back years, many though that to be
insane predictions.

The Crazy Met

	Marc, I think you must first consider the reason for the Crow note.
	It's, to me anyhow, the place where one should take the cane lashings
	one deserves for making bold, and sometimes rediculous, statements
	or predictions regarding a given sporting event, providing said
	statements do not turn out to be correct.  This especially holds true
	if said perpatrator is, in their own words a 'lifelong' fan of said
	team.  If one is not a fan of that team then in ::sprots terminology
	the team performed a Deanski (choked on the chicken bone).

	Now, having said that, I think the Pens are the best team in the NHL.
	So if the Pens get knocked out before reaching their goal of their
	third Cup in four years, you can count on me being in the Crow note.
	You see, I am not pulling the sandbag routine, ala TC*.  I think
	the Rangers are the second best team.  Therefore, if the Rangers
	get beat before the meet the Pens, they choked.  

	The point that MikeL and myself are trying to make is that TC* is 
	making excuses, sandbagging, so he won't have to make any entries
	in the Crow note should HIS team, the Rangers, loose.  By the way,
	he's had some very good teachers at this in ::sprots.


	billl

    Actually, I was just sandbagging to jerk around TCBeerSpiller some.
    
    In reality, if the Pens and the Rangers meet, the Pens will wipe up the
    ice with the Rangers.  The cry "1940, 1940, 1940" will again ring true.
    
    If the Pens don't make it that far, then they surely will have choked.
    
    Their performance the other night, even though they won, was abismal
    after the first period.  Barrasso was awesome, but the Pens only
    managed 1 shot on goal in the final period.
    
    If they extract their craniums from their rectums, and they will, they
    should get their third cup.
    
    And, if the Pens meet the Rangers in the playoffs, TCBeerSpiller will
    be wearing the p-name of my choice for a while once the Pens dispatch
    the Rangers.
    
    JaKe
    

    re: many,many back - a Tommy note
    
    Tommy just wanted to make sure you knew that the Islanders scored a
    goal tonight.
    
    I may have overestimated the threat the Islanders posed to the Rangers
    in the playoffs. However, I do wish to note that the Islanders are one
    of the only teams to come back from a 3-0 deficit and win a playoff
    series. The Islanders did it in 1975 against the Penguins.
    
    The Crazy Met
    

    	The tally for this "great rivalry series" is now Rangers 17
    Islanders 1.  The only question that remains is will anybody even
    win one game from this talented Broadway Bulwark?
    
    				/Don

    
    >> I may have overestimated the threat the Islanders posed to 
    >> the Rangers in the playoffs. 
    
       Your grasp of the obvious is unparalleled.
    
    >> However, I do wish to note that the Islanders are one of the only 
    >> teams to come back from a 3-0 deficit and win a playoff series. The 
    >> Islanders did it in 1975 against the Penguins.
    
       O' appropriately-named, Crazy one, in your quest to set a new standard 
       in SPORTS sandbagging (at which you are succeeding brilliantly), you
       have put to shame MikeL, Mike Heiser, Lou Holtz and several others
       who have been exposed as rank amateurs by your sandbagging prowess.
       I marvel at your acuity and the poker-faced manner in which you go
       about building this Great Wall of Sandbags. Please continue building
       this wonderful monument to bulls**t. It is amazing to behold.

    17-1 Craze and all you quote is 1975..tsk tsk
    
    Rangers should roll on...and you know it.
    
    MikeL
    

If the Rangers fail to win the Cup this season, it will be a
greater Underachievement than all of Snuffy's combined.....

    Craze must be licking his wounds. So Dionne Warwick of SPROTS, when
    does this Islander curse begin to jump up and bite the stRangers on the
    arse?  Are aren't you getting a vision?
    
    17-1 and he's trembling
    
    MikeL
    

    
       Craze has the fatalistic outlook of the hardcore Sox fan 
      down pat. The glass isn't just half empty, but isn't that a
      shard of glass down at the bottom there? It's no wonder that
      TCM looked all blissed out at Fenway Monday - he was at the
      shrine of St. Almost, patron saint of blue balls and losing
      lottery tickets. In game 4 with the Rangers up 6-0 in the third 
      period with time running out, Po' Po' Craze will be waiting for 
      the other shoe to drop. Sure Craze marched right down to the
      Crow night over his awful (I know I picked 'em too) Buffalo
      picks but this is deeper. There's emotion at stake here. And
      just like a Sox fan, Craze just knows that it's not a matter
      of if they'll lose but how and when even though they're holding
      all the cards. In a previous life, Craze was a Sox fan no doubt
      about it and in this one he's a closet Sox fan. Po' Po' Craze.

re .180


	That's the Note of the Year if I ever saw one.....

    One item of paranoia gone: Rangers win 5-2 and sweep the series with
    the Islanders.
    
    MikeL: Last time the Rangers swept a series (in fact only other time)
    was in the 1972 semi-finals against Chicago - Bruins won the Stanley
    Cup that year.
    
    re: next round. Unlike basketball the next round in the hockey playoffs
    are not set. If the Caps beat the Pens then the Rangers would play the
    Caps in the next round. So Rangers could end up playing Washington,
    Buffalo, or the winner of Montreal-Boston in the next round. They start
    the next round next Sunday.
    
    The Crazy Met
    

TCM, 

Based on the way that the Pens are playing, there is absolutly no reason
why the Rangers should not be heavily favored to win it all.

In fact, I think that for all your sandbagging, we should make you go to the
Crow note if they do win it all....8^)


'Saw

> In fact, I think that for all your sandbagging, we should make you go to the
> Crow note if they do win it all....8^)

I already said that if the Pens do not win the Cup I will gladly go
to the Crow note. You want it if the Rangers win?? hmm, an itriguing
thought; in the unlikely event that that happens, we'll see.

The Crazy Met

MikeL, didn't have fingernails before the series began.

HtH

The Crazy Met

btw the team that most dominated a series were the Bruins in a 4
game sweep of the Hawks in which they outscored the Hawks by 20 goals.

Weren't the experts saying "the last team the Rangers want to face in the
playoffs is the Islanders" ?

I just hope the same outcome holds for the Knicks in their series with
"the last team they want to face (NJ)".

    Rangers would most like to see Boston,NJ and Washington in round 2.
    Pittsburgh still has the most talent and Montreal the best goalie. The
    Islander's series was an aberration.
    
    Hextall's confidence was shattered early and the Isles lost their fight
    except for Ferraro,Hogue and Thomas. Turgeon disappeared and Malikov
    was terrible. Isles like Kasitanov were shocked that Rangers didn't
    fall for their attempted chippoiness and kept a businesslike approach.
    
    There is a long(sigh) way to go in the playoffs. The Rangers must use 
    more than 4 defensemen if they are to win. They will certainly face
    some type of adversity;Richter will let in a bad goal
    somewhere,injuries are always possible with an older team.
    
    I have no trouble relating to TCM's fears-it comes with the territory.
    
    But this week has sure been fun..

> I have no trouble relating to TCM's fears-it comes with the territory.

well folks, so there you have it from someone that you
said would give an honest and dependable opinion.

The Crazy Met
 

 >> well folks, so there you have it from someone that you
 >> said would give an honest and dependable opinion.
    
    Only the truly paranoid would be happy to hear, "They really are out 
    to get you." The Rangers are the hottest team in hockey and the team 
    to beat right now and it's amazing to me that you don't realize how
    much you poor-mouthing before the Isles series sounds a hell of a lot
    like, "This is the best Navy team we've ever faced." Would the Rangers
    not winning the Cup be a major choke? In all honesty no. BUT they will
    be favored in every series from here on in and have momentum on their
    side and no amount of paranoid ranting changes that fact.

>    Only the truly paranoid would be happy to hear, "They really are out 
>    to get you." The Rangers are the hottest team in hockey and the team 
>    to beat right now and it's amazing to me that you don't realize how
>    much you poor-mouthing before the Isles series sounds a hell of a lot
>    like, "This is the best Navy team we've ever faced." Would the Rangers
>    not winning the Cup be a major choke? In all honesty no. BUT they will
>    be favored in every series from here on in and have momentum on their
>    side and no amount of paranoid ranting changes that fact.

Well put Tommy.

But I do feel it would be a big choke.  I mean, they are favored to
win it all.   They've got the talent, and contrary to popular opinion
the BEST goalie in the playoffs is Richter, not Patrick "Oh My God
I've Got Fake Appendicitis" Roy.

If the Rangers don't make it to the finals it will be the biggest choke
of all times.   I'll cut them some slack in the finals, since they
haven't been there in twenty-two years, and they might not remember
what it's like.....


Rangers should take it all.....


'Saw

 >>    "This is the best Navy team we've ever faced." 

	This line is definately going down in history as the difinative
 Holtz........

 hahahahahahhhaaaaaaaaaaa!!!!!!1

 thankfully MikeL is abit more objective when it comes to ND......

 mike

>
> thankfully MikeL is abit more objective when it comes to ND......
>


YEP, he's not afraid to blast Lou for sandbagging.....

 Saw, as a history buff, did the captain jump ship on the Titantic??

 mike

>
> Saw, as a history buff, did the captain jump ship on the Titantic??
>


Nope, he went down with the ship, as did the ship builder who happened to
be aboard (fairly young man) and the first officer.

I remember hearing somewhere though that the first officer had been in
several situation before where ships had been sunk from beneath him before
he came on board the Titanic.

If memory serves me correctly, the highest ranking officer to survive was
the second officer.

Trivia for the day:  lookouts Fred Fleet and Reginald Lee, who spotted the
iceberg and reported it dead ahead, did survive.....


'Saw

> the BEST goalie in the playoffs is Richter, not Patrick Roy

hard to tell. Richter did have to stop some tough shots but the Islanders
rarely got to the Rangers net. Roy has had to stop lots of shots.

The Crazy Met

> hard to tell. Richter did have to stop some tough shots but the Islanders
> rarely got to the Rangers net. Roy has had to stop lots of shots.


 but how tough is it to stop shots that are always hitting you in the chest
 or belly??????

 mike

    But you gotta figure that with 90+ shots in 2 games more than 3 would
    get in.
    
    The Crazy Met
    

 not when we're talkin' Bruins..........

 mike

    
    The Crazy Met
    

    Rangers play the Caps in the next round. As I posted earlier the
    Rangers should win this series. The Caps goaltending has been superb
    and they have been playing good D. I see a good close series, but the
    Rangers should prevail.
    
    The Crazy Met
    

    	Good, close series?  The sandbagger supreme strikes again! 
    I expect the Manhattan Millionaires to win in 4 or 5 games.
    
    				  /Don

    
      Met, stop embarassing yourself with your ridiculous predictions.
     Unless, of course, it is your *goal* to lump yourself in with some
     SPORT's lesser lights because you're succeeding quite famously.

    Well Craze, I don't disagree with ya much on this one.
    I pick the Rangers in 6. Caps don't look as futile as the
    LawnGuylanders. 
    
    Anyone know the season series between Caps-Rangers?
    
    MikeL
    

yo MikeL this one is for you (thanks MikeC):

This is the best Caps team the Rangers have ever faced


re: .203 
your lack of understanding of hockey becomes more and more evident
with each note you write.

re: .202
/er I expect to see you in note 50 by the time this series ends.

The Crazy Met

    HAHAHA Craze(or your ghost writer Childsey)
                                              
    Just remenber that Lou was quite correct in stating "This is the
    best Navy team we've ever faced." Ya gotta remember that Navy has
    been abysmal and Holtz was makin' a relative statement. So in fack
    he never extolled their virtues but in a nice way said,"This Navy
    team don't suck as bad as the others we've faced." Andyou guys
    run roughshod on po' Lou. That's how this anti-Lou feeling crops
    up, pure misinterpetation of Lou's woids. Sigh, he's so misunderstood.
    Speakin' of Navy, when the hail we gonna drop this series?
    
    So Craze, are all the denizens of Times Sq gaga with the Rangers
    and Knick? Have they spent some time away from the stage lights to take
    a peek at their beloved(HAHA only when they win) teams??
    
    MikeL
    
    
    

>> your lack of understanding of hockey becomes more and more evident
>> with each note you write.

    You predicted the Isles-Rangers to go 6 or 7, the Penguins to
    beat the Caps, accused Jake of sandbagging when the Penguins
    were down 3-1 and wouldn't count the Isles out when they were
    down 3-0 in the series and had only scored a single goal. Your
    above statement applies more to you than anyone, dude.

    

>    You predicted the Isles-Rangers to go 6 or 7, the Penguins to
>    beat the Caps, accused Jake of sandbagging when the Penguins
>    were down 3-1 and wouldn't count the Isles out when they were
>    down 3-0 in the series and had only scored a single goal. Your
>    above statement applies more to you than anyone, dude.
    
    Well, yes, Tommy, but in your ignorance you've neglected to point out
    what happened with the Isles-Rangers in 1975, when the NYC cops had to
    called in to quell the feverous near-riot conditions at the Garden...
    
    glenn
    

thanks Glenn, can always count on you :-)

The Crazy Met

    With the all the big guys dropping, TC*, you ain;t got no excuses.
    
    brews

  >> With the all the big guys dropping, TC*, you ain;t got no excuses.
    
     Of course, that won't preclude him from making them.
    

    TCM, tell us all about that great Caps/Rangers rivalry!

one more time (sheesh can't win in this place) Rangers should beat
the Caps. 

Mac, go back to Scotland for a few more months.

The Crazy Met

�Mac, go back to Scotland for a few more months.
    
    Love to, haven't been there in years.  I keep trying to find a way to
    get a business trip to our sister plant in Ayr.

how about this:

Mac, go back to England for a few more months and don't have access to
the EASYnet.

The Crazy Met

    
    >>Love to, haven't been there in years.  I keep trying to find a way to
    >>get a business trip to our sister plant in Ayr.
    
    Misread it and thought you wanted to plant yer sister in Ayr..got any
    West Virginian in ya MAC???
    
    JaKe
    

    Many notes back -'Saw said the Rangers haven't been to a final in 22
    years. It's actually 1979-they lost to Montreal.
    
    They should beat Washington.FWIW,I think the Caps would beat either
    survivor(NJ-Buf,Bos-Mtl) in the other bracket. But you're right about
    us Ranger fans. We can't find any matchup that isn't treacherous.
    
    It must be remembered that so many of the Rangers have won before that
    they won't feel the burden of 1940. Only the fans do.

>
>    Many notes back -'Saw said the Rangers haven't been to a final in 22
>    years. It's actually 1979-they lost to Montreal.
>

That's right.  I couldn't find any resources to check when I wrote
that, and took a chance on a positive memory of 1972.  I stand
corrected.

    
'Saw

Rangers take game 1 6-3. Caps had cloed to 5-3 and were putting on a lot
of pressure. Messier scored on a breakaway and thats all she wrote.
Good game by the Rangers though they looked a bit tired towards the middle
of the 3rd period. Stamina should come back now that they are playing again.

What was the Rangers record against the B's this year? I know they
were 6-0 against the DEVILS.

The Crazy Met

>What was the Rangers record against the B's this year? I know they
>were 6-0 against the DEVILS.

I know that the B's lost at least one to the Rangers....

    Well Craze you sandbagger supreme,
    
    Things are shaping up quite nicely for the ManhattanChokesters.
    Pengoons,Wings,Flames,Habs all gone. Looks like a massive conspiracy
    by the NHL gurus to let the stRangers cakewalk to a Cup.
    Not that they needed any help by the looks of things. If Rangers
    don't win the Cup now, it'll be the biggest choke in the history
    of sports.
    I still think the Caps will extend the mighty Blueshirts to 6 but
    after that, cake! Thet'll smoke either the 16Wers or B's and decimate
    the Sharks in da finals.
    
    And you missed your chance to predict a Cup for the MSGers. Any
    such crowing now would be blatant cowardice!
    
    MikeL
    

    
    re.	"biggest choke in the history of sports"
    
	How soon we forget ND-BC 1993.....football that is.
    
    	Glad I could help jog your memory.  :*)
    
    Claybone

>    re.	"biggest choke in the history of sports"
>    
>	How soon we forget ND-BC 1993.....football that is.
>    
>    	Glad I could help jog your memory.  :*)
    
Not even close, BoneMan....

    Careful 'Bone..
    
    Or I'll have to continually remind ya how Ara's Irish *owned*
    Bear's Tide....
    
    But you knew dat..
    
    MikeL
    

>    Or I'll have to continually remind ya how Ara's Irish *owned*
>    Bear's Tide....
>    
>    But you knew dat..
    
Don't be bringin' that up Mike, or I'll get mad at you too.....    

 I'd have to say Dean second round 94 as the biggest chokejob of the year,
 not quite as big as 84 but still mighty big......

 professional sports will never have a choker as big Dean. All Pro teams
 have quality players, some more than others but when you consider the
 obvious talent gap betwen Dean's crew and other college teams well the
 bone just has to be bigger........

 mike

re: B's - Rangers

B's beat the Rangers once at MSG. They also tied one game in Boston.
So we are at 1-1-1, they played 4 games.

The Crazy Met

re: .221

Yeah having the Red Wings, Pengoons, and Canadians gone is nice.

And 'ya know what if the Rangers win the cup I will enjoy it even more
given the potential problems they had to overcome.

HtH,

The Crazy Met

>>And 'ya know what if the Rangers win the cup I will enjoy it even more
>>given the potential problems they had to overcome.

	Quick! More sandbags!  The river still hasn't crested!


	billl

    NY may not be the greatest place to live,but for a sports fan nothing
    comes close. Nine teams in the four major sports! No better rivarly in
    hockey than Rangers-Isles.  Having followed this scene for 30
    years,here is how I would rank the teams in popularity:
    
    1)Giants-very loyal fans too.
    2)Yankees-Most successful franchise ever
    3)Knicks-the chic team in town right now
    4)Rangers-very few living fans have seen a championship
    5)Mets-They've acquired most of ex Dodgers and Giant fans
    6)Jets-Should go back to Queens. Will never eclipse the Giants
    7)Isles-Mainly because of 4 titles in 80's-play in empty Nassau
    Mausileum
    8)Nets-Moving up on Isles-big attendance icrease
    9)Devils-Can't even sell out playoff games
    
    The above list takes into account how the local stations report on
    their games when many of them are playing at the same time.
    
    Hoping for a Rangers-Devils series. It would mostly be home games for
    Rangers.

Games in NJ are similarly almost home games for the Knicks.

2 comments on the ordering in .230

Rangers almost always sell out even when they are not a real good
team, Knicks attendance depends on how good they are much more than
Rangers attendance.

Yankees-Mets. Everything being equal that is likely true. But the focus
is generally on the team that is doing well. Except for 1984-5 (especially '85)
that has not happened at the same time.

The Crazy Met

  >> NY may not be the greatest place to live,but for a sports fan nothing
  >> comes close. Nine teams in the four major sports! 

     And only two or of them have a rabid fan base wherein they sell out
     *every* game.

  >> No better rivarly in hockey than Rangers-Isles.

     Hasn't this already been exposed a a big untruth?

  >> 1)Giants-very loyal fans too.
  
     Yep.

  >> 2)Yankees-Most successful franchise ever

     Only sellout when they're rolling,

  >> 3)Knicks-the chic team in town right now

     During Game 1 of the Knicks-Nets series the announcers exclaimed
     that all games for the series had been sold out. Whee!

  >> 4)Rangers-very few living fans have seen a championship

     Anmother team with a solid fan base (of sandbagging geeks).

  >> 5)Mets-They've acquired most of ex Dodgers and Giant fans

     Judging by the empty seats at Shea, those oldsters aren't going to 
     games .


  >> 6)Jets-Should go back to Queens. Will never eclipse the Giants

     Or 18 of the 28 teams in the NFL.

  >> 7)Isles-Mainly because of 4 titles in 80's-play in empty Nassau
  >> Mausileum

     "Empty"? "Rivalry"? Is it me?

  >> 8)Nets-Moving up on Isles-big attendance icrease

     One minor downturn and the fans will dump 'em like they was Digital stock.

  >> 9)Devils-Can't even sell out playoff games

     Nuff said.
    

 Celtics and the Canadians are certainly as successful if not more successful
 than the Bums........

 mike

    
    
        PLease, not even close!!!!

>    
>        PLease, not even close!!!!
>

I'll post the records in a minute, but I think you'll find that the
Canandiens have more championships than any other professional sports
team, including the Yank-Mes.....

Acutally, they're tied, by my count with 22 apeice, but I might have
missed some -- left my glasses home today....

 and the Celtics probably have a better percentage of championships...

> >> No better rivarly in hockey than Rangers-Isles.
> Hasn't this already been exposed a a big untruth?

how? Because the Rangers dominated in this last series??? Every rivalry
has games or series that are blowouts. That does not mean that no
rivalry exists. By your narrow definition if the Broncos dominate the
Raiders for a few games that would mean they no longer have a rivalry.
How absurd can you get????


btw nake Fenway a stadium with 45K seats and you will most certainly
start seeing empty seats during bad seasons.

The Crazy Met

Celtics have 16 championships??? So they have a 35.5% success rate.
Yankees, starting with the founding of the AL (were called Highlanders
at the time) in 1900, and skipping the year there was no WS are at
about 23%

When was the NHL formed??

The Crazy Met

>Celtics have 16 championships??? So they have a 35.5% success rate.
>Yankees, starting with the founding of the AL (were called Highlanders
>at the time) in 1900, and skipping the year there was no WS are at
>about 23%

My series records start at 1903.

>When was the NHL formed??

Not sure -- early on though.  My list here at work only starts from 1927....


'Saw

|>When was the NHL formed??
|
|Not sure -- early on though.  My list here at work only starts from 1927....

Here's a list that came off the internet, I updated it for lasted year.


23      1992-93--Montreal Canadiens
        1991-92--Pittsburgh Penguins
        1990-91--Pittsburgh Penguins
        1989-90--Edmonton Oilers
        1988-89--Calgary Flames
        1987-88--Edmonton Oilers
        1986-87--Edmonton Oilers
22      1985-86--Montreal Canadiens
        1984-85--Edmonton Oilers
        1983-84--Edmonton Oilers
        1982-83--New York Islanders
        1981-82--New York Islanders
        1980-81--New York Islanders
        1979-80--New York Islanders
21      1978-79--Montreal Canadiens
20      1977-78--Montreal Canadiens
19      1976-77--Montreal Canadiens
18      1975-76--Montreal Canadiens
        1974-75--Philadelphia Flyers
        1973-74--Philadelphia Flyers
17      1972-73--Montreal Canadiens
        1971-72--Boston Bruins
16      1970-71--Montreal Canadiens
        1969-70--Boston Bruins
15      1968-69--Montreal Canadiens
14      1967-68--Montreal Canadiens
        1966-67--Toronto Maple Leafs
13      1965-66--Montreal Canadiens
12      1964-65--Montreal Canadiens
        1963-64--Toronto Maple Leafs
        1962-63--Toronto Maple Leafs
        1961-62--Toronto Maple Leafs
        1960-61--Chicago Blackhawks
11      1959-60--Montreal Canadiens
10      1958-59--Montreal Canadiens
9       1957-58--Montreal Canadiens
8       1956-57--Montreal Canadiens
7       1955-56--Montreal Canadiens
        1954-55--Detroit Red Wings
        1953-54--Detroit Red Wings
6       1952-53--Montreal Canadiens
        1951-52--Detroit Red Wings
        1950-51--Toronto Maple Leafs
        1949-50--Detroit Red Wings
        1948-49--Toronto Maple Leafs
        1947-48--Toronto Maple Leafs
        1946-47--Toronto Maple Leafs
5       1945-46--Montreal Canadiens
        1944-45--Toronto Maple Leafs
4       1943-44--Montreal Canadiens
        1942-43--Detroit Red Wings
        1941-42--Toronto Maple Leafs
        1940-41--Boston Bruins
        1939-40--New York Rangers
        1938-39--Boston Bruins
        1937-38--Chicago Blackhawks
        1936-37--Detroit Red Wings
        1935-36--Detroit Red Wings
        1934-35--Montreal Maroons
        1933-34--Chicago Blackhawks
        1932-33--New York Rangers
        1931-32--Toronto Maple Leafs
3       1930-31--Montreal Canadiens
2       1929-30--Montreal Canadiens
        1928-29--Boston Bruins
        1927-28--New York Rangers
        1926-27--Ottawa Senators
        1925-26--Montreal Maroons
        1924-25--Victoria Cougars
1       1923-24--Montreal Canadiens
        1922-23--Ottawa Senators
        1921-22--Toronto St. Pats
        1920-21--Ottawa Senators
        1919-20--Ottawa Senators
        1918-19--No champion
        1917-18--Toronto Arenas

23      1992-93--Montreal Canadiens
        1991-92--Pittsburgh Penguins
        1990-91--Pittsburgh Penguins
        1989-90--Edmonton Oilers
        1988-89--Calgary Flames
        1987-88--Edmonton Oilers
        1986-87--Edmonton Oilers
22      1985-86--Montreal Canadiens
        1984-85--Edmonton Oilers
        1983-84--Edmonton Oilers
        1982-83--New York Islanders
        1981-82--New York Islanders
        1980-81--New York Islanders
        1979-80--New York Islanders
21      1978-79--Montreal Canadiens
20      1977-78--Montreal Canadiens
19      1976-77--Montreal Canadiens
18      1975-76--Montreal Canadiens
        1974-75--Philadelphia Flyers
        1973-74--Philadelphia Flyers
17      1972-73--Montreal Canadiens
        1971-72--Boston Bruins
16      1970-71--Montreal Canadiens
        1969-70--Boston Bruins
15      1968-69--Montreal Canadiens
14      1967-68--Montreal Canadiens
        1966-67--Toronto Maple Leafs
13      1965-66--Montreal Canadiens
12      1964-65--Montreal Canadiens
        1963-64--Toronto Maple Leafs
        1962-63--Toronto Maple Leafs
        1961-62--Toronto Maple Leafs
        1960-61--Chicago Blackhawks
11      1959-60--Montreal Canadiens
10      1958-59--Montreal Canadiens
9       1957-58--Montreal Canadiens
8       1956-57--Montreal Canadiens
7       1955-56--Montreal Canadiens
        1954-55--Detroit Red Wings
        1953-54--Detroit Red Wings
6       1952-53--Montreal Canadiens
        1951-52--Detroit Red Wings
        1950-51--Toronto Maple Leafs
        1949-50--Detroit Red Wings
        1948-49--Toronto Maple Leafs
        1947-48--Toronto Maple Leafs
        1946-47--Toronto Maple Leafs
5       1945-46--Montreal Canadiens
        1944-45--Toronto Maple Leafs
4       1943-44--Montreal Canadiens
        1942-43--Detroit Red Wings
        1941-42--Toronto Maple Leafs
        1940-41--Boston Bruins
******  1939-40--New York Rangers **************
        1938-39--Boston Bruins
        1937-38--Chicago Blackhawks
        1936-37--Detroit Red Wings
        1935-36--Detroit Red Wings
        1934-35--Montreal Maroons
        1933-34--Chicago Blackhawks
        1932-33--New York Rangers
        1931-32--Toronto Maple Leafs
3       1930-31--Montreal Canadiens
2       1929-30--Montreal Canadiens
        1928-29--Boston Bruins
        1927-28--New York Rangers
        1926-27--Ottawa Senators
        1925-26--Montreal Maroons
        1924-25--Victoria Cougars
1       1923-24--Montreal Canadiens
        1922-23--Ottawa Senators
        1921-22--Toronto St. Pats
        1920-21--Ottawa Senators
        1919-20--Ottawa Senators
        1918-19--No champion
        1917-18--Toronto Arenas

    	So Craze, will you finally step up to the plate like a main
    and admit that the StRangers should win the Stanley Cup?  Let's
    not forget one thing about the Canadien "dynasty".  Prior to either
    1967 or 1969 Montreal had their choice of the first two french canadien
    players before the other teams even drafted.  Pretty hard *not*
    to succeed given those ground rules.
    
    				   /Don

The Rangers have better talent than any of the teams that are now
left in the playoffs. Maple Leafs are the team that I would most 
feel uneasy about facing and that in large part has to do with the
way Potvin has been playing in goal. Also, I would prefer the Rangers
faced the DEVILS, Bruins have played better this year against the
Rangers than the DEVILS have.

The Crazy Met

 >> how? Because the Rangers dominated in this last series??? Every 
 >> rivalry has games or series that are blowouts. That does not mean 
 >> that no rivalry exists. By your narrow definition if the Broncos 
 >> dominate the Raiders for a few games that would mean they no longer 
 >> have a rivalry. How absurd can you get????

    Did I say "no rivalry exists"? O' Crazy One, I watched most of the
    Isles-Rangers series after hearing what a great rivalry it was and
    frankly, it's no wonder Rip Van Winkle was a New Yorker. If that's
    what passes for sports excitement in that town then you'd think narco-
    lepsy would be at epidemic levels down there. Even in game one, before
    it was obvious that it wasn't going to be a competitive series, I didn't 
    get the sense of electricy in the crowd that I was expecting after 
    reading your note. It certainly wasn't at  the levels that I saw
    and felt during the Bruins-Canadiens series each and every game.
    And now we hear how the Isles play in "near empty Nassau Mausoleum"?
    What kind of alchemy is at work when you have a "great rivalry" even
    "the best rivalry" and one team doesn't even have a rabid fan base?
    I watch the Bruins and their fans really put the Celts fans to shame
    (and Celts fans are no slouches). Here, the Isles are not even selling
    out every game, they stink and have for a few years. And yet those Isles 
    can hold up one half of hockey's greatest rivalry? I don't think so.

    

>    I watch the Bruins and their fans really put the Celts fans to shame
>    (and Celts fans are no slouches). Here, the Isles are not even selling

The most amazing feat accomplished by Bruins fans was the night that
Denny, /Don, Chap and I managed to squeeze our butts into those tiny
little seats....


8^)

    

re: .246

Nassau Coliseum was sold out for the games against the Rangers - it always
is sold out for games against the Rangers even if they only get 5000 fans
on a normal night.

The Crazy Met

> btw nake Fenway a stadium with 45K seats and you will most certainly
> start seeing empty seats during bad seasons.
    
    I can see why in bad times many NY baseball fans avoid that raw sewage 
    dump in Flushing that doubles as a LaGuardia landing strip marker.  I 
    still don't understand what it's going to take to bring Yankee fans back 
    to such a great historical landmark-- and great ballpark period-- as 
    Yankee Stadium.  I've been a big defender of the preservation of the 
    Stadium against the evil designs of George Steinbrenner, but I'm 
    beginning to see his point.  It seems that the NY baseball teams 
    actually have to win the pennant first before there's much paying 
    interest.  Even with the supposed optimism around the current season,
    the Yankees have already been under 20,000 for a few Friday and 
    weekend games so far, in good weather.  That's unheard of anymore in 
    Boston, even in the worst of seasons.
    
    The above argument concerning Fenway doesn't hold water, at least not
    in a comparison with the situation in a city like New York with a metro 
    population of 15M.  You put a park of the quality and beauty of Yankee 
    Stadium in Boston, with a capacity of 55,000, and yearly average 
    attendance goes up from where it's been the last 10 years.  There's no 
    question about it.  A mediocre .500 Red Sox team would draw 3 million a 
    year without breaking a sweat, capitalizing on the big overflow crowds 
    for weekend and rivalry games that are currently lost in Fenway.  Why do 
    you think Sox management has started publicly negotiating for just the 
    rights to a plot of land on which they themselves will gladly pay to 
    build a bigger ballpark? 
    
    glenn
      

The only reason I can see for fans not wanting to go to Yankee Stadium
is because it is in what is perceived to be a bad area.

I don't know.  I haven't been down to New York City in 10 years anyway, and
the last time was to go to Yankee Stadium.

It's a classic ball park, no doubt about it, and, like Fenway, the structure
reverberates with ghosts and the history is thick there.   I believe the
A's won that day against the Yankees, and it was a nice sunny afternoon
and on the whole, thoroughly enjoyable...

But, we went down on a bus, didn't have to worry about parking or walking
around in the area....


'Saw

re:  Yanks attendance

The area is a problem, but has never bothered me.  The biggest deterrent
is the time you spend getting there and back.  I was on LI, left at 10am
for a 1pm game, and didn't get back until almost 6:30pm.


The Rangers appear to be 2nd with loyal fans (to the Giants, in terms of
attendance year-in-and-year-out).


WFAN noted yesterday that the Rangers' path to the Stanley Cup looks like
an *exorcise* of ghosts past...Islanders (numerous occasions), Bruins ('72),
Maple Leafs ('40).

> Maple Leafs ('40)

yabbut, the Rangers won that series.

The Crazy Met

    I will look it up but the list provided is of Stanley Cup champions
    since nhl only was invited to participate.  Prior to '17 the Cup was
    contested between Western League and NHL.
    
    And NHL earlier had merged with another league (1908ish).
    
    At the inception the Cup could be challenged for by any team; that goes
    back to the 90s.
    
    And btw the "Bums" are not Yankees but the Dodgers.  And former
    dodger,giant makeup of mets fans has been replaced by certifiable crazy

 that's right Bill. Thanks for the correction. Hope you don't mind though
 that I still consider the Yankees' BUMS!!!!!!!

 ;^_

    Re: .230
    
    There are so many reactions that I would like to comment on,so here are
    some random thoughts:
    
    Re: The Yankees vs Montreal 
    The Yankees are the most successful franchise ever-regardless of how
    many titles Mtl. has. It must be remebered that the Canadians won a
    large majority of them in a 6 team league,while the Yankees won thier
    first 18 against 16,their next two in a 20 team setup and their last
    two in a 24 team alignment. Reaching the World Series(33 times) was
    just as idfficult as winning the NHL. Simply put,the Yanks are the best
    and I don't like the Yankees.
    
    Re: The popularity rankings:
    This is an all things considered listing. When the Mets are winning and
    the Yankees aren't there will be some movement,but the Yankees fan base
    is far larger than the Mets. 
    
    Re: Attendance
    NY fans of some teams are front runners(Knicks and Mets come to mind.
    
    Re: Rangers/Isles rivalries
    There is nothing quite like it in sports right now. Even though the
    Isles don't draw well for everyone,against the Rangers it's always a
    sellout,embelleshed by Ranger fans. If you have never lived in this
    area,you may not understand how deeply rooted this is. On Long Island 
    there are so many people who commute to the city everyday and have been
    long time Ranger fans-who finally abandoned their old team when the
    Islanders became dominant in the 80's.
    
    
    
    

>    Re: The Yankees vs Montreal 
>    The Yankees are the most successful franchise ever-regardless of how
>    many titles Mtl. has. It must be remebered that the Canadians won a
>    large majority of them in a 6 team league,while the Yankees won thier
>    first 18 against 16,their next two in a 20 team setup and their last
>    two in a 24 team alignment. Reaching the World Series(33 times) was
>    just as idfficult as winning the NHL. Simply put,the Yanks are the best
>    and I don't like the Yankees.


First off, you're skewed on the baseball thing.   In their
first 18 they played against *7* other teams until the last 4-7 ball games,
so at best they had to be better than *8* others, which is not so different
than the 5 that the Habs had to play.

And it is generally accepted that the bottom of the each league in those
days were dregs -- lovable perennial losers -- so you could, albeit reaching
a bit, cut that 7 down to say, 5 decent teams.

Percentage-wise in terms of wins/series-appearance I think the Habs take
it, because I don't remember them losing too many series.....



I'm not a Yankee fan, nor am I a Habs fan, but I think your skew needed
a little straightening out....


'Saw

  >> There is nothing quite like it in sports right now. Even though the
  >> Isles don't draw well for everyone,against the Rangers it's always a
  >> sellout,embelleshed by Ranger fans. If you have never lived in this
  >> area,you may not understand how deeply rooted this is. On Long Island 
  >> there are so many people who commute to the city everyday and have been
  >> long time Ranger fans-who finally abandoned their old team when the
  >>  Islanders became dominant in the 80's.
    
    If these people "abandoned their old team" (New Yorkers - loyal until
    you lose) then honestly how passionate can their hatred of their old
    team be? Not very from what I saw. It seemed like the Rangers were 
    starting to look pretty good to those bandwagon jumpers. The best rivalry 
    in sports right now, for my money, is Duke-NC in college basketball. 
    I say that and I don't like either team. They're both very good teams 
    with extremely rabid fans and they're right next door to each other. 
      
    
    

    Saw- good points...but.
    
    In the NHL-you didn't have to win in the regular season-just make the
    top 4. The NHL wasn't exactly a paragon of top-to-bottom strength
    either-so we can continue down this rathole or just agree that the
    Yanks are one of the two or three finest franchises ever.
    No time to argue. Where's George M when I need him? (*^8

    Rangers/Isles is bigger than Red Sox/Yankees?  Redskins/Cowboys? 
    Raiders/Broncos?
    
    Well, maybe if you're used to that great Giant/Cowboy rivalry...

    C'mon Mac,
    The sun rises and sets on the general NYCregion doncha know??
    Just axe TCM...The Crazy Myopic. 
    Hey I think te Rangers-Isles is a dang good rivalry but it needs
    the time and richness of the Yank-RedSox etc...
    
    MikeL
    

 both teams may stink but it still makes my season to see the Celtics
 trash the Lakers........

 UNc/Duke rivalry is a good one almost as good as Georgetown/Syracuse...

 mike

    UNC/Duke is probably the top rivalry going right now. Rivalries must be
    broken into local and national. Local are more of a Civil War type
    where your brother may be on the enemy side.
    
    I know there is no way a NY pointy of view has a chance in a New
    England dominated forum. The Yanks-Sox is a great rivarly with lots of
    history that is totally one-sided.
    
    Still there is nothing like two teams in each others' backyard.
    Only LA,SF and Chicago have anything like the rivalries we have in NY.
    
    Re: Celtics and Lakers-great when West battled Russell and Magic
    against Bird,but what will it be like in the 90's when both teams sip?
    
    That is the true test. Rangers-Isles games are always intense-even
    exhibitions.

>    I know there is no way a NY pointy of view has a chance in a New
>    England dominated forum. The Yanks-Sox is a great rivarly with lots of
>    history that is totally one-sided.
    
    Not based on the passion of the fans stacked on each side, which
    seemed to be the chief criterion when the Rangers were blowing away 
    the Islanders in completely routine fashion (that was intense? on 
    the ice?).  I have to agree with Tommy; I have questions about the 
    quality of a local rivalry that must be sustained by Ranger fans 
    trekking out to Long Island to an otherwise empty building.  I've 
    even heard the Islanders' fan "tradition" made light of by WFAN 
    hosts, as something talked up by a vocal minority but which pales in 
    comparison to the Rangers' following.  It seems that there should at 
    least be some general respect and support for the franchise by the 
    city before there can be a great rivalry present, with anyone.  This 
    lack of general support for one team was not present with a *real* 
    intra-city rivalry like Dodgers-Giants. 
    
    I do agree with you that the Yankees' 20 World Series victories in the 
    40 seasons from 1923-62 is the greatest feat in the history of team 
    sports, having come during the golden age of sports in which baseball 
    was unquestionably dominant.  The Canadiens' stranglehold in a small, 
    regional league dominated by Canadian players (and as noted, Canadian 
    draft rules), or the Celtics' run in a minor-league NBA in which a HOF 
    player could be successfully acquired for the arena rights to a circus 
    date just don't compare.
    
    glenn
    

|    
|    Well, maybe if you're used to that great Giant/Cowboy rivalry...
|


Non sequiter....TCM is a Jets fan...

 Glenn, must you belittle the Celtics just to make baseball seem supreme.
 We know how you feel on the subject but NBA was hardly minor league when
 the Celts were raising all those flags. Didn't the Yankees buy Babe Ruth
 for a Broadway show and probably a lot more players besides him?

 I'll conceed that the Yankees' feat was no less spectacular than either
 the Celtics or Canadians but greater no way........

 You know it just dawned on me, maybe if the Rangers had actually been
 competitive they might have a great rivalry with one of the 6 originals
 but because they were always Torr-ing out they had to pick on an upstart
 like the Isles for a rivalry.......

 mike    

>    Saw- good points...but.
>    
>    In the NHL-you didn't have to win in the regular season-just make the
>    top 4. The NHL wasn't exactly a paragon of top-to-bottom strength
>    either-so we can continue down this rathole or just agree that the
>    Yanks are one of the two or three finest franchises ever.

Okay, I think we can agree on that.  I just didn't want you getting
away scot free with your skewed data 8^) 8^) 8^)


>
>    No time to argue. Where's George M when I need him? (*^8
>

Hey, no fair pulling out the dreaded Triple-May-wee-ski!


'saw

�    Still there is nothing like two teams in each others' backyard.
�    Only LA,SF and Chicago have anything like the rivalries we have in NY.
    
    Well, if you're going to use teams that only play each other in
    exhibition games, I guess we'll have to accept that the Rangers/Isles
    is one of the greatest rivalries ever.

> Glenn, must you belittle the Celtics just to make baseball seem supreme.
> We know how you feel on the subject but NBA was hardly minor league when
> the Celts were raising all those flags. Didn't the Yankees buy Babe Ruth
> for a Broadway show and probably a lot more players besides him?
    
    Babe Ruth was only in a Yankee uniform for four World Series victories
    (he was in a Red Sox uniform for three).  That just helps put those 20
    titles in perspective-- they weren't achieved around Babe Ruth, who
    didn't even play for the very best, consistently great Yankee clubs.  
    As for the Celtics, I'm not belittling them.  They did what they had to
    under the conditions of the time, which in the early years centered
    around the financial survival of the league.  Baseball *was* supreme at 
    that time, but isn't now (no denying that).  The fact is that the 
    Celtics winning those early championships (before sparse crowds) wasn't 
    that big a deal even in Boston, much less nationally.
    
    glenn
    

 well the circus comment seemed like belittlement to me. While you
 address Babe Ruth what about the Yankees I guess 1940 through
 1960 I guess you consider that the golden era of this team. How many
 players did they buy and how many were groomed through their farm
 system?

Could baseball's reign as supreme back then have more to do with the fact
that it was still a "white mans' game", while football and basketball were
accepting and starring more and more black players?

mike    

>
>    No time to argue. Where's George M when I need him? (*^8
>

>>Hey, no fair pulling out the dreaded Triple-May-wee-ski!
>>
>>'saw
    
    I thought he was talking about George Mikan who was the star of a fair
    dynasty, the Minneapolis Laker dominance of nba from late 40s to bill
    russell.  Those were the years Glenn was talking about.  By the 60s 
    the nba was big time but without the tv contracts of baseball and nfl.
    But college basketball also was in a depression with the great city
    teams from Philly,NY and WashJersey replaced by regional state
    universities.  Ncaa tournement then was a jewel like the olympics but
    not followed on the scale of major league baseball.
    
    College football in the 50s was greater than nfl to a greater degree
    than college basketball to nba or maybe on a par.
    
    Finally Yankees used their money to buy minor league stars like
    dimaggio and heinrich and more so to scout these players.  To contend
    with this brooklyn and stlouis built large "farm" systems with players
    contractually bound to them from their teens.  Still many future stars
    originally signed with the big triple A teams and said owners raffled
    them off to major league clubs or if affiliated sold the contract via
    agreed upon terms.
    
    I for one would like to see all reserve clauses, drafts, compensations
    etc abolished asof 1/1/95 and let the the old chips fall where they
    may.
    
    and btw where is ol' George M ?

>    
>    and btw where is ol' George M ?
>

Billte, Don't tempt me.....

From:	US4RMC::"[email protected]"  5-MAY-1994 12:50:57.62
To:	dzign::robichaud
CC:	
Subj:	Tales of woe

?don -

The best team in hockey, ever, skates tonight vs.
the DEBILS! at the venerable garden.  It looks like
my po' overachieving Rangers, filled with past their
prime veterans, cast offs, and grocery clerks, led by
a rookie coach are headed for a showdown with the Broons.
After an emotionally draining series against the
tradition-rich, gutsy Islanders, and the Pengoon
slayer, tradition rich Capitals.  

jd

% ====== Internet headers and postmarks (see DECWRL::GATEWAY.DOC) ======
% Received: from inet-gw-1.pa.dec.com by us4rmc.pko.dec.com (5.65/rmc-22feb94) id AA17660; Thu, 5 May 94 12:58:48 -040
% Received: from gateway.xyvision.com by inet-gw-1.pa.dec.com (5.65/21Mar94) id AA16448; Thu, 5 May 94 09:51:24 -070
% Received: by gateway.xyvision.com (5.65/DEC-Ultrix/4.3) id AA04332; Thu, 5 May 1994 12:52:51 -040
% Received: by clyde.xyvision.com (5.65/DEC-Ultrix/4.3) id AA02773; Thu, 5 May 1994 12:47:22 -040
% Message-Id: <[email protected]>
% To: dzign::robichaud
% Subject: Tales of woe
% Date: Thu, 05 May 94 12:47:22 -0400
% From: [email protected]
% X-Mts: smtp

He forgot the part about the stRangers having a defensemen who's one 
leg is made out of aluminum and the other made out of tin.....

    
      JD comes from the Mike Barnicle School Of Journalism. He has
     about five different themes and just keeps posting different 
     variations of them. It's like eating turkey for a month after
     Thanksgiving. Even peanut butter and tuna fish sandwiches start
     to sound pretty good after a while.

>    
>      JD comes from the Mike Barnicle School Of Journalism. He has
>     about five different themes and just keeps posting different 
>     variations of them. It's like eating turkey for a month after
>     Thanksgiving. Even peanut butter and tuna fish sandwiches start
>     to sound pretty good after a while.
>

Hey, Vivaldi made a GREAT living doing that, so you can't blame JD
for taking after one of the Masters....

'Saw


PS  So did you like come down here to the surface in a shuttle
    craft or can you guys like, use a transporter?

    Rangers played their best game of this series and won 3-0.
    
    The Crazy Met
    

    
> Hey, Vivaldi made a GREAT living doing that, so you can't blame JD
> for taking after one of the Masters....
    
    So who is more like Vivaldi, JD or Mike Barnicle?  This could be on 
    an SAT test or something...
    
    Decent column by Barnicle yesterday, I thought.  Here I was swearing
    (uh, through the TV) at someone I thought was just another nameless
    faceless suit, too important to take off his jacket and tie at a
    ballgame, for interfering with a ball in play (against the home team no
    less), when Barnicle identifies the cretin as the CEO of Fleet Bank and 
    publicly humiliates him in print.  This country needs more of this kind 
    of thing...
    
    glenn
    

    36-8 Craze, seven in a row and counting.
    
    Why these "overachieving" Rangers are dispatching opponents like
    Secretariat did.
    
    Yawn..but we'll hear how anything can
    happen,onesmallturnofeventscanturnasweriesaround,whyiftheCapsmanageto
    eekoutavictoryingame4,anythingcanhappen,whytheRangerscouldbebackon
    theirheelsandtheCapscouldgettheallimportantmomentumandcrushNYRangerfans
    hopes!WashingtonwillroarintotheGarden,wingame5gohometoafrenziedcrowd
    towingame6onpureemtionandthenthey'llreturntomsgwheretheFatLadyusuallyseen
    aroundFenwaywillstrollintothegardenwheretheRangerswillturntojellyand
    WashingtonwilldestroytheRangers,thecrowdwillhurlabuseatthepo'po'Rangers
    havingbeensaddledwith54yearsofextremepressureandchokedagain!!
    
    Yea Craze and
    'they'recomingtotakeyouawayhahaheeheehohotothefunnyfarm..."
    
    MikeL
    
    
    
    

Mikel, Tommy, Mac, billl this ones for you:


The thing that concerns me about the Rangers series with the Caps is that
they have scored fewer and fewer goals in each game.

The Crazy Met

	TC*, you're the only guy I know who, after his team WINS, will
	have to make a trip to the Cafe de Crow.



	billl

    
    
       re .280
    
       Save it, Craze. You've done irreparable damage to your already 
       suspect reputation. The Craze, who was keeper of the watch when
       noter after noter had his team go down in flames ("ACC Chris watch
       day 37"), turns out to be a bigger sandbagger than anyone would 
       have thought possible. We expect those sappy "this rag tag team"
       lines from JD when he's referring to the players that the Rangers
       have assembled and who have more finals appearances than Susan Lucci. 
       But we expected better from you and we've been sorely disappointed.
       If the Rangers win (and they probably will) don't come in here cel-
       ebrating. You haven't earned the right. Take a cue from messieurs
       Garbarino, Lazarus and Chapalonis, your fellow New Yorkers, on the
       proper way to root for your team.

    	While channel surfing between the two hokey games lasted night
    I heard the following line from Gary Thorne during the Washington/New
    York game... "The Capitals are playing very, very hard right now,
    but they're just being out-talented by the Rangers".  So true.
    
    				   /Don

    If Moses Malone were playing for the Ranger we'd be hearing:
    
    Fo', Fo', Fo', Fo'.

in my dreams.

The Crazy Met

The only excitement left in this Stanley Cup run (and I know nothing
about hockey, really), is:

	-  when will the Rangers lose a game ?

	-  will Mike Gartner and Toronto face them in the Finals ?

    Rangers might lose a game if they meet Joisey in the conference finals.
    And the might lose one game or two if they face the Leafs or Canucks
    for the Enchilada. Two maybe three losses at most for the Broadway
    Blueshirts
    
    
    If me beloved Broons face the stRangers I'm afeered brooms will be
    the order of the day..
    
    
    MikeL
    

    who's sandbaggin now??
    
    Very unlikely that in a Rangers-Bruins series either team will sweep.
    
    The Crazy Met
    

    Not moi buckeroo.
    
    You think that my lowly B's can match up at tall with the lordly
    Rangers. What you smokin'?  Onliest way the B's could steal a game
    from the Blueshirts is if they commit mayhem.
    
    But we need to hoffa-ize the devils first.
    
    MikeL
    

    
    	Yer all a bunch of sandbaggers!  
    
    	"My team has the best record but I'm scared."
    
    	"My team sips and doesn't have a chance against yours.  Everybody
    	knows it."
    
    Claybone

    Hold on a sec bone.
    
    I never said mah team sipped. They're a good club but I don't believe
    they have a chance against Manhattan'sMonstahs.
    
    BTW I thought Craze would be in here all a paranoic. The end is near
    Craze!!
    
    MikeL
    

re: .294

CAM was down last night.

re: other stuff

Caps won a game from the Rangers, so no question the B's should be able
to do at least as well.

You know I said that the Rangers would probably win in 6 against the Caps.
Could still happen. So Tommy crawl back into the hole you been hiding in and
don't let the sunlight blind you.

The Crazy Met

>    I never said mah team sipped. They're a good club but I don't believe
>    they have a chance against Manhattan'sMonstahs.
    
All Noo Yawk has to do is wait for the breakaway, and it's like
an automatic goal.....


'Saw

Richter got pulled in game 4, tonight is the real test for him.

The Crazy Met

    Saturday night was not Richter's fault. Steve Larmer had an
    uncharacteristically bad game for him,several bad clearances. 
    
    I thought the Rangers lost the game when they couldn't score on a 2
    minute 5-3 advantage in first period. It looked like past night
    mares-too much passing.
    
    Hopefully,they will right themselves tonight.

Didn't see the game on Sat. night. Should finally be able to catch
a game tonight. Great Stars/Canucks game lasted night.

The Crazy Met

>Didn't see the game on Sat. night. Should finally be able to catch
>a game tonight. Great Stars/Canucks game lasted night.

I don't get the Deuce and it kind of bugs me that I can't watch hockey....



btw, TCM, stop sandbagging.  Tonight is a test for Richter.  Gimme
a break.  The guy has been unconscious all year, and he's been
yanked by "Hit the Panic Button" Keenan before.  It's not any more
of a test than it is for me to hit the bowl when I'm stone cold sober....


'Saw

    
      Po' po' Craze. The Rangers finally lose one and he's sitting
     on the bathroom floor with a Bic disposable razor pressed to his
     wrist. O' the ignominy! Fear not, Wacky One. Your boys just needed 
     a night off. They're still the best team going. Still the odds-on 
     favorite to win it all. And you still haven't made a correct pre-
     diction all playoffs long.

well if the Rangers win the series against the Caps then I got one of
'em right.

The Crazy Met

    For a while tonight I had visions of game 4 of the 1992 series against
    the Pens. Rangers lead by 2 goals, Ron Francis scores from the red
    line; this game Rangers lead by 2, Hatcher scores from 170 feet away.
    Pens tie the game in the 3rd; Caps tie the game in the 3rd. Fortunately
    this edition of the Rangers found a way to win, 4-3. Great play by
    Zubov and Leetch. Richter made some realy big saves after he gave up
    that bad bad bad goal.
    
    a sigh of relief. mind you even if the Rangers had lost tonight it
    would not have been quite the same as that loss to the Pens but ...
    
    The Crazy Met
    

    
      TCM predicted this series to go six games. It went five games.
     In an effort to get off that big donut that he's riding TCM is
     now predicting something as simple as "we'll have sunshine all
     day". Naturally, there's an eclipse today. Po' po' TCM.

>    
>      TCM predicted this series to go six games. It went five games.
>     In an effort to get off that big donut that he's riding TCM is
>     now predicting something as simple as "we'll have sunshine all
>     day". Naturally, there's an eclipse today. Po' po' TCM.


The Rangers are annihilating everything in their path, with a record so
far of 8-1.   How TCM can sit there and sandbag like he does is
beyond me. 

Everyone and their brother KNOWS that the Rangers will be the next set of
names on Lord Stanley's Cup.....


Who's gonna stop 'em?


'Saw

    Is it in another note?  

Eclipse in NE at 1:47 - something like that - this afternoon.

'Saw did you watch last night's game????

The Crazy Met

 according to Slasher the Sharks are going to stop them.

 if it can't be our Bruins I'd love for it to be the Maple Leafs...

 mike

No, I had drill last night and didn't see any TV....

The best I could muster (no pun intended) was a static-filled replay of the
radio call on WFAN on some save that Richter made with 12 seconds left.

'Saw

well the Rangers got totally outplayed in the 2nd period and a huge 
chunk of the 3rd period. Last nights game was hardly an annihilation,
a win yes, an easy one, nope. Caps kept games 1,2,5 close for most of the game.
Rangers completely dominated game 3. Caps won game 4.

The Crazy Met

    	I said the StRangers would win this series in four or five games
    and Craze said I would have to go to the CROW note for my prediction.
    I say Craze should make a trip over there because of his prediction
    that my prediction was of the CROW variety.  What do you think?
    
    				/Don

yabbut, 4 of the 5 games were close.

The Crazy Met

> yabbut, 4 of the 5 games were close.

 hahahahahahahaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa

    
    I predicted a six game Ranger victory and a tougher series than
    the Islander massacre. Didn't quite happen but the Caps did prove that
    they could play with the Rangers in games 4 and 5. 
    This Ranger team is still the powerhouse it was built up to be and I
    thought the club needed a tough series from the Caps to prepare them
    for the semis and finals. They haven't run into any adversity yet
    so I'm gonna predict that they'll hit some vs Jersey (if it's the
    Devils they face; they'll make mincemeat outta the Broons).
    Jersey is big, can skate, and will play that boring, strangling
    defensive hockey that can give clubs fits.
    
    But the Rangers stood up to the Caps after being outplayed in Game 4
    and playing even in Game 5. But Rangers will prevail over Jersey in
    5 close games and go on to dump the Leafs/Canucks in 5 tough games.
    
    Oh, yer still sandbaggin' Craze, cuz this team is destined, but it
    ain't gonna be a piece of cake...
    
    MikeL
    
    P.S. I hope my warnings are making you more paranoic, oh Bellevue-bound
    
    it won't be 
     

They actually ought to call them "Roilers" -- they're really not Rangers
as much as former Oilers -- that's why after 40 years they'll win the Cup.


'Saw

re: .315

who cares. if it happens it will still be very very sweet.

MikeL: why do you think the DEVILS will give the Rangers more
trouble than the B's. The regular season may not mean all that much
but the Rangers were 6-0 against the DEVILS and lost at least 1 to
the B's in MSG.


The Crazy Met

    Oilers and Blackhawks...
    

re: .317

.316 still applies.


The Crazy Met

    Of the Big 10 forwards:
    
    Oilers(5)-MacTavish,Anderson,Messier,Graves,Tikanen
    Blackhawks(3)-Noonan,Mattau,Larmer
    Soviets(2)-Nemchinov,Kovalev
    
    Defense
    
    Oilers(2)-Beukeboom,Lowe
    Russians(2)-Karpovtsev,Zubov
    Homegrown-Leetch
    
    Goalies
    Homegrown-Richter
    Isles-Healy
    
    
    Like Craze says-we don't care who we have to beat and what players do
    it,after 54 years we'll take anything.
    
    

    
    
      The Crazy Sandbagger Watch - Day 1.

    
      The Crazy Sandbagger Watch - Day 4 (in dog years).

    I think he said he won't be back until Tuesday night.

    Sunday night loss was helped by a colossal coaching blunder by Keenan.
    Nursing a one goal lead in the final minute he elected to pair smaliish
    defenseman Zubov with Leetch. Devils crowded net and scored with 53
    seconds left. 
    
    

    I'm still sticking with the GothamGoliaths. They have the better team.
    Joisey cannot possibly have any real home ice advantage with theRangers
    enjoying a much bigger fan base than the 16Wers. 
    
    Rangers will rebound. 
    
    MikeL
    

I'd like to see Toronto win the whole thing.

    
    
     The Crazy Sandbagger Watch - Day 26 (in dog years).

    I'd like to see Bobby Carpenter finally get a ring.
    
    Mark.

	The Toronto GM was a riot the other night. "If the Rangers go to the
finals they would have been on the road for 3 days, If we go to the finals
we would have been on the road for 3 weeks."

	When you really think about it, what a tough travel schedule for
the Rangers. They had to spend a weekend in DC.

Ron

    If Toronto sweeps their series, it's not as long a time on the road...
    

     That's the priveledge you get when your the best. The Rangers earned
    that by winning 8 of 10 playoff games.
    

>     That's the priveledge you get when your the best. The Rangers earned
>    that by winning 8 of 10 playoff games.

That's not the point.

Toronto had the second best record in the Western Conference, but the NHL
has any of the Pacific teams playing a 2-3-2 series instead of a 2-2-1-1-1
series.

That increases the travel time for the teams like Detroit and Toronto
who face teams from the Pacific.   In effect, teams like Detroit and
Toronto really should be in the East, if they are going to have to
do the 2-3-2 format with Pacific teams, but that would make the league
all lopsided.


At any rate, if the well-rested Rangers blow this series, it will be
the biggest choke job in any sport in a long, long time.....


'Saw
    

>     That's the priveledge you get when your the best. The Rangers earned
>    that by winning 8 of 10 playoff games.

     The fact is that the Rangers are playing 2 of their 3 playoff
     series against teams in their home area.  They didn't earn that, it was
     just a fluke, but it would give the Rangers a big edge in travel as
     compared to anyone else.

	Toronto is still PO'ed at the NHL for not moving them into the
Eastern Conference. They have wanted to move for years.

Ron

    	Much as I would like to see TheLittleEngineThatCouldDEBILS win
    this series I'm afraid all that Sunday night's win did was stir
    the awesomely talented StRangers from the stupor of having played
    teams like the Islanders and Capitals, where all they had to do was
    throw their skates on the ice to win (in this series they'll have
    to shuffle their skates across the ice every now and then to win).
    I'll stick with my original...
    StRangersHaveTheTalentToSweepButJoiseyHasTheHeartToMakeTheSeriesGoSix
    prediction.           
    				  /Don

     I still say that if Toronto was good enough to win 8 of their first 9
    playoff games no one would bitch about being tired cause they were on
    the road so long. That's just what happened, I did'nt say that Toronto
    deserved it, but you can't blame the NYR for it.
    

    Tommy, see 10.1802. For someone who claims to be objective you sure
    like to ignore facts.
    
    
    Nice win by the Rangers in game 2. Hopefully game 1 woke them up and
    they will get back to playing like they did in the first 7 games of the
    playoffs. tight defense and no mercy when they have a team down.
    
    The Crazy Met

>    Nice win by the Rangers in game 2. Hopefully game 1 woke them up and
>    they will get back to playing like they did in the first 7 games of the
>    playoffs. tight defense and no mercy when they have a team down.
    
They were tanking game 1 because the bookies told them too.

They'll take this series in 6 games.  There's no way this team can lose
the Cup.  If they do, it'll be the biggest choke job ever.....

    
     Thr Rangers win and TCM returns. Coincidence?

see .297 - after a Rangers loss, see 10.1802. One of these days I'm sure
you'll learn to deal with facts. Until then I suppose we all need to have
the kind of patience that dealing with 2 year olds require.

=Bob= ya' think Melanie can give Tommy some pointers on how to assess
facts??


The Crazy Met

|=Bob= ya' think Melanie can give Tommy some pointers on how to assess
|facts??

Hey, leave me outta this, I dunno notin' 'bout hokey...

    
       The Rangers win and TCM shows up. Coincidence?

>       The Rangers win and TCM shows up. Coincidence?


A case for the X files, surely!

neat, haven't had to deal with someone with the Terrible Twos since
I last saw my nephew. The answer to .338 is that I show up win or lose.

'Saw

What is the X Files??

The Crazy Met

>'Saw
>
>What is the X Files??
>
>The Crazy Met

It's this pretty neat show on Fox on Friday nights at 9pm.  (At least that's
where Fox shows it in my neighborhood, probably nationally too).

It's about these two FBI agents that deal with paranormal stuff, 
extra-terrestrial stuff etc etc.   The female agent, Scully, floats
my boat, that's for sure, and the writing and the plots are good....


This is for Tommy:  Trust No One....


'Saw

    it's on at 8pm here

>                           -< life in the wild west >-
>
>    it's on at 8pm here


That's because you guys don't do the MDT thing, right?  You're on 
Standard time year round?


'Saw

    that's correct.

    
    I could have sworn the lineup in the MST was 7:00 for Brisco and 8:00
    for x-files.  That is NOT the same time as everyone else is saying.
    
    Marc
    

    Sheer exhaustion from just watching game 3. Rangers win 3-2 in double
    OT. Both goalies were phenomenal. As the game progressed I kept
    thinking about Bruins-Canadians game 5; Bruins kept coming and then the
    Candians won. Fortunately for the Rangers they managed to win.
    Game 4 in NJ on Saturday night.
    
    The Crazy Met
    

I heard that Gregson let a lot of cheap shots go during the game....

Let's see who the Leafs get stuck with tonight.....


'Saw

    Last night'sd game erased any minutae of doubt I had about the
    stRangers. They took all New Jersey had (I don't believe the Devils
    can play better than that) and still outplayed them for the win.
    Rangers controlled this game and Brodeur stoned 'em till the OT goal.
    Both goalies were unconscious in OT.  Better team won. Rangers will
    win the next two games; they'll be tough but NY is the cream of the
    crop.
    
     I questioned the trades that the Rangers made near the end of the
    season but it looks like Smith and Keenan know what they're doing.
    Noonan and Matthieu are providing that erxtra muscle and size the
    Rangers needed. Noonan's been the most consistent Ranger. These two
    guys provide the definite edge NY has over NJ. Was that trade
    with Chicago Amonte for both Noonan and Matthieu? Or was another
    player sent to the Hawks?
    
    One thing I don't agree with is Glenn Anderson for Gartner. Anderson
    provides nothing more than Gartner did. Gartner's a better player.
    Was that trade with the Leafs even up(Gartner for Anderson?)? Or was
    there additional compensation?
    
    MikeL
    

    Think Nicholls will get suspended?
    

>
>    Think Nicholls will get suspended?
>    

Probably not.  Some guy (forget who) absolutely leveled Thomas Sandstrom
a couple of years ago, and didn't get much, if anything, if I remember
right...


'Saw

    
   >> As the game progressed I kept thinking about Bruins-Canadians game 5; 
   >> Bruins kept coming and then the Candians won. 
    
      Gee, TCS. You sure can weave a story.

    The game wasn't televised in the NY area unless you get
    Sportschannel-which I don't have. I would have been able to see all of
    a Bruins-Rangers game on MSG which comes with my cable package.
    
    Big win for the Rangers. The teams have now squeezed 13 periods of
    hockey into 3 games. Hopefully,this may break the Devils' spirit and
    the Rangers can come up big in game 4. But anybody who thinks TCM is a
    sandbagger doesn't know what they're talking about. This is one tough
    series!

>    the Rangers can come up big in game 4. But anybody who thinks TCM is a
>    sandbagger doesn't know what they're talking about. This is one tough
>    series!

Oh PUL-LEEZE.

I cannot believe this.  Here the Rangers have their best team in 50+
years.  They've bought, sold, traded, and Keenan probably sold his
soul to Beelzebub for this shot at the Cup.  By rights they should
call the team the New York Blackhawk-Oilers.

Anyone who knows anything at all about hockey knows that the Rangers
are a lock, and that anything less is Capitol Felony Sandbagging.


If the Rangers don't win the Cup, it will be the biggest choke job
in the history of hockey....

The sad part is that Rangers fans are tainting it with all their
sandbagging, yet when all is said and done they'll be in here crowing
as if they knew it all along....


Sad, man, really sad.....

'Saw

    The question is, which team had more fans at the game?
    
    					Steve

    'Saw
    
    you're missing the point; the Rangers have always found a way to
    lose/choke whatever. That is why Rangers fans expect something,
    anything to happen that will make them lose again.
    
    re: .357
    
    fans was about 50% each.
    
    The Crazy Met
    

    
      Here we go with the 'woe is me' cry of the poor abused Rangers
     fans. Only po' po' abused Latoya Jackson could garner more symp-
     athy than the po' po' Rangers who have lost all of two games
     all playoffs long. I, for one, predicted a good series but only
     because of the styles involved. NJ has to play their best to beat
     the Rangers. They can't afford to relent for a second. The Rangers
     by virtue of the huge talent gap could beat NJ on an off night. 
     We saw the Rangers pour it on Nj in game two when they needed a
     win. NY can do that almost at will. 

    
    Yup, Rangers are playing good hockey, but until they finally win the
    Stanley Cup for the first time since 1940 their fans won't believe that
    it is really happening. Real simple. Red Sox fans and Cubs fans would
    have the same attitude.
    
    Its 1978, Yankees come into town 4 games back for a 4 game set. Before
    the series began Boston papers were lamenting the real chance of a
    sweep. Pullleeeeeze, those Red Sox had an awesome awesome lineup and
    their pitching was pretty good as well. Losing 3 of 4 or splitting,
    maybe, but why all the trepidation ahead of time?????? Because Red SOx
    fans expected and expect the worse. Same with Rangers fans.
    
    The Crazy Met
    

    
       The difference of course if that the Red Sox-Yankees is/was a real
      rivalry and not just a NY media creation like a rivalry or two that
      I could name. "Boston papers were lamenting the real chance of a sweep"?
      And what came to pass, TCS? Who won the WS that year, TCS? The Red Sox 
      were a potent team with good not great pitching. The Yanks were no 
      slouches either. The Sox weren't a team of championship-hardened merc-
      enaries that were heads and shoulders above everyone like the Rangers 
      are. Po' po' abused Rangers fans. It's enough to make you want to
      cry.

>    Its 1978, Yankees come into town 4 games back for a 4 game set. Before
>    the series began Boston papers were lamenting the real chance of a
>    sweep. Pullleeeeeze, those Red Sox had an awesome awesome lineup and
>    their pitching was pretty good as well. Losing 3 of 4 or splitting,
>    maybe, but why all the trepidation ahead of time?????? Because Red SOx
>    fans expected and expect the worse. Same with Rangers fans.
>    

If the Red Sox were EVER head and shoulders above their opponents like
the Rangers are, you might make the case....

The Rangers will pull one of the most monumental chokes in sports history
should they not win the Cup this year.   Any Ranger fan whining that's
contrary to that fact is pure and umitigated sandbagging.....


'Saw

    

> The difference of course if that the Red Sox-Yankees is/was a real
> rivalry 

sorry guy but rivalry has nothing to do with the topic under discussion.
topic is teams that seem to always find a way to blow it.

> Po' po' abused Rangers fans. It's enough to make you want to
> cry.

thanks. we all knew that deep down you were a New Age sensitive guy
and you are finally showing your true colors. much appreciated.

The Crazy Met

 >>sorry guy but rivalry has nothing to do with the topic under discussion.
 >>topic is teams that seem to always find a way to blow it.

    It must have been a different Crazy Sandbagger that said that in an 
    intense rivalry the records go out the window and anything can happen.
    Or maybe it's the same Crazy Sandbagger backtracking again.

    

huh??? yup I did say that about rivalries. But what we're talking about now
is a different subject, namely fans of snake-bitten teams always assume
the worst.

The Crazy Met

>is a different subject, namely fans of snake-bitten teams always assume
>the worst.

YOu could do that if you had a team that we equal to the others.

But what you Rangers fans have is the equivalent of a mercernary armed with
an M60 machine guy fighting Zulu Warriors armed with spears.

You've got the hired gun coming into a town of peace loving citizens who
might have a .22 to plink varmints....


If you assume the worst in that case, you're SANDBAGGING.....

>    Its 1978, Yankees come into town 4 games back for a 4 game set. Before
>    the series began Boston papers were lamenting the real chance of a
>    sweep.  Pullleeeeeze, those Red Sox had an awesome awesome lineup and
>    their pitching was pretty good as well.
    
    Yep, things were really looking up going into that series, pretty much
    as with the current NY Rangers' situation.  After all, we had the staff
    ace and pitching immortal Jim Wright going, and then there was 
    minor-league wild thing and kid phenom Bobby Sprowl making his first 
    ML start.  Not to mention Dennis Eckersley, who in anticipation of this
    big series was holding himself to a strict pre-game limit of a six-pack
    of beer, two shots of the hard stuff.  And let's not forget Mike
    Torrez, who could always be counted on in the big one.  Plus, through 
    the sheer guts and determination typified by Butch Hobson and his 
    medically-marveled calcified elbow, the team had managed to play nearly 
    .500 ball since the All-Star break.  Yeah, I was surely encouraged...
    
    glenn
     

    
       re .365
    
        And when better to fear the worst than against an evenly-
       matched bitter rival? As it all played out, we were correct
       to be concerned. Were we not? Your fears about the Islanders 
       obviously weren't as well grounded. I'm beginning to think 
       that you like being miserable. This feeling sorry for yourself
       is incredibly boring for the rest of us but apparently it gives 
       you a sense of purpose. The worst thing that could happen to you 
       would be for the Rangers to win then you couldn't play the po' 
       po' victim. 

    I would be thrilled if the Rangers win. Anyway if you're getting so
    bored with this you could opt out of the discussion.
    
    re: Red Sox
    
    yeah with all that miserbale pitching they still won 99 games in 1978,
    the gloom and doom before that 4 game set had to have some other cause
    besides their pitching; that cause was the chant 1918! 1918!
    
    The Crazy Met
    

                <<< CAM::$1$DUA5:[NOTES$LIBRARY]SPORTS.NOTE;1 >>>
                                  -< SPORTS >-
================================================================================
Note 44.341              Official New York Rangers Note               341 of 369
MSBCS::BRYDIE "TCM - World's Greatest Sandbagger"     2 lines  18-MAY-1994 13:46
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
       The Rangers win and TCM shows up. Coincidence?
    
    sigh :-(, it would have been real nice if the Rangers (and Knicks) had
    won but they didn't so I guess I'll have to be in here, as always,
    after a loss. DEVILS win 3-1 to tie the series at 2. DEVILS played an
    exceptional game and a mistake late in the 3rd by Healy allowed the
    easy 3rd goal to score. Game 5 at MSG on Monday, game 6 in NJ on
    Wednesday.
    
    GO RANGERS!
    
    The Crazy Met
    

    Anyone got the press release on the Bernie Nicholls suspensdion for
    Game4?  I saw the replay of that crosscheck and it coulla been worse. 
    I've seen worse. Not excusing Nicholls cuz he's a hatchet man, but
    what about his slash of Huscroft by Nicholls, Roy kicking at Wesley,
    Bukeboom's deliberate "knee" on Carpenter, and Corson's vicious
    crosscheck of Bourque a few back?
    
    No suspensions on any of these but as soon as dictator Keenan open
    his complainin' yap, bang, Nicholls is suspended. Where's the
    consistency? Looks like Bettman and Burke gots their cranium up inside
    G&W (Keenan, Smith, NYR) backside. Boy does NHL HQ want a Ranger Cup.
    But guess what, it backfired. DEvils won.
    
    Craze, I was actually rooting a wee bit for the Rangers to so it,
    but no more. Typical NY bleating followed by the BowToMecca obligatory
    reaction by NHL HQ. Go Devils (until they meet Vancouver).
    
    MikeL
    

    I'd suspend a guy who crosschecks a guy to the head anytime...
    

>    yeah with all that miserbale pitching they still won 99 games in 1978,
>    the gloom and doom before that 4 game set had to have some other cause
>    besides their pitching; that cause was the chant 1918! 1918!
    
    No, most of the trepidation leading into that particular series was
    securely grounded in the present, and was only marginally reinforced by
    the past.  As I said, the Sox had played below .500 ball since the 
    All-Star Game up to that point, and had already seen 10 games sliced 
    off that 14-game lead over the Yankees.  The pitching staff was falling 
    apart and the injuries were mounting.  Even if the Sox had lost only 3 
    of 4 to New York in that series, with a month to go things were still 
    not looking good.  There was just a bit more *objectivity* to the bad 
    feelings at that point in the season than some irrational fear of what 
    the Islanders had done to the Rangers in some little-known infant 
    rivalry series almost 20 years before, in 1975.
    
    It now looks as if the Rangers truly are in some legitimate trouble
    against a team that is not included on TCM's list of voodoo-cursed
    "rivals", but he's cried wolf for so long and hard on these easy, 
    worry-free series like those cakewalks over the fired-up Islanders 
    and Caps that he's ceded any real right to sympathy.  Choke, baby, 
    choke!
    
    glenn
    

The NHL would never suffer a Vancouver-New Jersey series.  The refs
will pull out all the stops to get the Rangers in the finals.....


'Saw

    Wasn't my point whether Nicholls warranted a suspension or not, Walt.
    
    There's no consistency. If Nicholls were a Canadien do you think he
    would have sat? Nay...
    
    MikeL
    

    I haven't seen the calls you mentioned so I can't use them for
    comparison.  If Nichols plays that game on the Deuce, maybe not.
    Whether or not it's Keenan, I don't know.

sigh, Glenn you're almost ad bad with teh facts as Tommy. I said the
Rangers should beat the DEVILS. If they lose to the DEVILS it will
bad news.

re: 'Saw about the Rangers being far superior to any other team.

Just want to point out that the Rangers had 112 points this season,
DEVILS had 106, Pens had 102 or 101. So they were better but not
by the margin you would have us believe.


re: all those doubting the 1940 stuff.

SI, Boston Globe both had stuff about that over the last week. Now the
Globe never struck me as a mouthpiece for NY teams but at least they
can understand that kind of frustration.

The Crazy Met

>re: 'Saw about the Rangers being far superior to any other team.
>
>Just want to point out that the Rangers had 112 points this season,
>DEVILS had 106, Pens had 102 or 101. So they were better but not
>by the margin you would have us believe.


Only because they coasted down the stretch.  

The Rangers were the DOMINANT team this season and in the playoffs.
The have bought the talent they needed to win dominate the league
and win the Cup.

If they fall short, it will be one of the biggest chokes in the history
of sport.

But take heart, the NHL cabal would never allow a Vancouver-NJ final....


'Saw

    
> sigh, Glenn you're almost ad bad with teh facts as Tommy. I said the
> Rangers should beat the DEVILS. If they lose to the DEVILS it will
> bad news.
  ^^^^^^^^
    
    It's alright, TCM, you can say the word.  "Bad news" isn't exactly what 
    we're looking for.  "Bad news" is more like what's currently happening
    to the Mets.  Bad, but expected.  It's not my fault that your
    credibility is shot to pieces because you finally picked the Rangers to 
    cruise by the one team that I heard a few truly objective hockey 
    analysts say had one of the best chances to beat the Rangers.  That's
    what you get for practicing voodoo analysis...
    
    glenn

'Saw Rangers were 11-1-1 in their last 13 games, hardly coasting, sorry guy
that argument won't wash.

re: DEVILS - nope I picked the Rangers in 6, hardly cruising by them.

The Crazy Met

    
     TCS, you've picked the Rangers to go 6 or 7 games in every series
    so far. That they actually will in this one, doesn't exactly restore
    your long lost credibility.

    do or die for the Rangers. On the verge of continuing the frustration
    for another year. DEVILS played a great game 5, Rangers gave up a
    really bad goal once again when down by only a goal. Rangers had no
    business losing the first game, but they gave up that goal with 47
    seconds left in the 3rd. Hopefully all that playoff experience the
    Rangers have will make something happen the next 2 games, but the
    ghosts of 1940 are coming ever closer.
    
    The Crazy Met
    

    Devils have now controlled the last two games Craze, much like the
    Rangers basically controlled the first three. I expect the Rangers to
    rebound and play a stronger game;they have to. 
    
    Nice cheap shot by Bukeboom on Richer. Nothing like slamming a guy face
    first into the boardsw when he's on his knees. No paralysis, no call.
    
    MikeL
    

    Good point glenn.
    
    The glenn andersons, craig mactavishs, kevin lowes, esa tikkanens
    steve larmers have disappeared in the third period. Messier and Graves
    have been throttled. The Devils are wearing the Blueshorts out just like they
    did to the Broons. Kevin Lowe is ripe, put him out to pasture. 
    Even Leetch is running around in circles.
    
    Are the vultures also circling?
    
    Yabbut you know the hostile Joisey crowd at 16W will unnerve the
    Rangers..yea right, especially with 1/2 the crowd wearing Ranger blue.
    
    MikeL
    
    
    

	ACK, ACK, GAG, HHHOOOOAARRRKKK, GAG, ACK, ACK


Somebody call 911.

Does anyone know the Heimlich Manuever?


	ACK, ACK, GAG, HHHOOOOAARRRKKK, GAG, ACK, ACK


I used to know it but haven't done it for over *50* years!


	ACK, ACK, GAG, HHHOOOOAARRRKKK, GAG, ACK, ACK


Is there a doctor in the house??????

    They were saying on the news last night they thought Beukeboom might be
    suspended.
    

    
    Beukeboom could have sealed his own fate when the camera caught him
    mouthing off at the Devils' bench as he was skating back to NY's bench.
    A_course he followed up with a merde-eating grin that was caught
    close-up.  Mssr Burke might not be too enamored of that grin..
    
    MikeL
    

re: age

before the series began Barry Melrose (LA Kings coach) who is in the
studio for ESPN for the playoffs said that the longer the series
goes on the better the DEVILS chance. DEVILS, he said, are a younger team
and could deal with the grind of a 6-7 game series better than the
Rangers. 

Beukeboom should be suspended for that check on Richer. Especially, with
Nicholls having been suspended.

Winner of game 6 will win the series. If the Rangers can get back to
game 7 at MSG they'll win, it is game 6 that I have very little
confidence in their being able to win it.

Rangers have to:

1. Take the puck in to the DEVILS zone. DEVILS have been backing up 
8 ft inside the Blue line. Rangers have been shooting the puck in
and chasing it, but the DEVILS always get to it first.

2. Once they take it in they need to put shots on net. Even 30 footers and
make Brodeuer work a little and also send players to the net for the 
rebound.

3. A gamble that might be worth taking: Start Healy in goal in game 6.

4. Play all 4 lines so that the players all get a little extra rest.

5. Come out playing a solid game and turn it up a notch with 7-8
minutes gone in the 1st period. In the last few games they have come out
flying to start the game. See if they can lull the DEVILS a little
bit.

The Crazy Met

For that matter, why does JaKe always capitalize STEELERS?

�                    -< Why do we always capitalize DEVILS? >-
    
    It's a long SPORTS tradition.  When noting in the DEVILS topic, it was
    required that you set your capslock key.
    
�For that matter, why does JaKe always capitalize STEELERS?
    
    Who knows why JaKe does anything.

    	I don't buy that Rangers being tired stuff.  They had a four
    game sweep followed by a five game series, both against very inferior
    teams, while Joisey had a seven game series with Buffalo and were
    down 2-0 to the Broons.  Jeff BeukeGoon will be suspended because
    he committed his sin in front of the camera.
    
    				  /Don

    Mike Keenan is once again showing why he can coach teams to regular
    season point titles but not win Stanley cups. He is being outcoached
    all over the place by the Montreal duo of Lemaire and Larry Robinson.
    
    The Rangers have not adjusted their style to the Devils and Keenan is
    showing his frustration by playing head games with his beleagured 
    team. Nobody buys his injury excuses for benching Messier and Leetch .
    
    I see little hope for a game 6 miracle from this team. TCM,'Saw really
    doesn't believe his "biggest choke in history" stuff,but he's having a
    lot of fun being in a no-lose situation.
    
    

>    I see little hope for a game 6 miracle from this team. TCM,'Saw really
>    doesn't believe his "biggest choke in history" stuff,but he's having a
>    lot of fun being in a no-lose situation.


Hyperbole.  Hyperbole.

At any rate, with Boston out of it, and the Maple Leafs sucking serious
pond water, there's no one for me to root for really, so the Cup has
gotten very boring.

I suppose if I had to root for someone, it'd be Vancouver at this point.
Why?  Well, Dave Babytch used to come into the packy where my dad works
and the two of them talked hockey a bit.   Murray Craven (always called him
Wes) played in Hartford and you figure that after being traded to Hartford
and then from Hartford he deserves a Ring...  (worked for Ron Francis
and Ulf, right?)...  Guess that'll do for the Canucks I suppose.


On a serious note, I don't see the Rangers winning game 6, mostly for
the reasons stated above.  Keenan is as one-dimensional as Dean Smith.
If the system isn't working, keep banging your head against the wall
and maybe it will, before you end up losing...

'Saw
    
    

It would be fun seein the Canucks in the finals, whoever they play.
Dynamite style.

1. Rangers vs Canucks would match 2 teams with similar styles.
2. DEVILS vs Maple Leafs would match 2 teams with similar styles.

Matchup #1 would have some wide open hockey. Matchup #2 would have a lot
of 1-0, 2-1 type games.

Of course at the moment

DEVILS vs. Canucks is the most likely scenario. Be interesting to see
how the two teams adjust.

The Crazy Met

    I thought the correct spelling was DEBILS

    Dave,
    
    What's the poop in then NY papers? All over Keenan? How about the
    players? Hell the Ranger team that won games 2 and 3 certainly are
    shadows of the team that lost games 4 and 5.
    
    It was eeerie to watch the game wind down last night. It was the
    *first* time I have seen the end of a NY team where the fans were
    neither booing or cheering. Just silence. They are either shocked
    or resigned to the possibilty of one more year of frustration(we'll
    see).
    
    I'd ask Craze but he's backpedaling so fast in abject denial of being
    a Ranger fan at this point. I wonder if he was Simon Peter in a
    previous life.. 8^)'s of course..
    
    MikeL
    

NY papers are starting to get on Keenan. Especially that "injury" jive
he pulled; bull**it; Messier and Leetch were not injured.

Last time I saw a crowd at a Rangers game sit in stunned silence
was after game 5 against the Pens in 1992. Pens won on a goal by Jagr
very late in the 3rd after the Rangers came back from a 2 goal
deficit.

The Crazy Met

    
    I thought about putting this in the BoSox note but since it's
    Stanley time....
    
    Joe Bflstsks of L'il Abner fame doth live. I saw him exiting mah
    building last night. The po' lost soul was wearing a NY Ranger Tshirt
    and a Boston Red Sox baseball cap. Talk about tempting fate..
    I made sure I did not follow his route outta the area.
    
    MikeL
    

    Rangers were too impatient in game 5.  Home ice doesn't mean anything
    except possibly to help R's in #7 (IF).
    
    LeMaire took advantage by pulling is defense back to from blue line and
    sucking the ranger forwards in and getting the breakaways.
    
    I will take the rangers tonight and then in game 7 in overtime (second
    or third).

re: .400

from your mouth .....

OT in game 7, not sure I could stand it :-(, though given some of
the alternatives.

The Crazy Met

    When have the Roadrunners won a cup?  The Suns, a title?
     

    	Now we'll know just how much of a FantastikBall like commissioner
    Bettman will be.  With the lowly Canucks already in the Finals there's
    no way he should let the New York TV ratings go down the crapper.
    By any means necessary the Rangers must win this series.
    
    				   /Don

/er you "conspiracy theoriticians" were already wrong about the NBA draft.
But, in this case I hope you are right :-)

The Crazy Met

    HEY TCM:
    
    1940
    
    1940
    
    1940
    
    1940
    
    
    Hope the ghost of 1940 shows up tonight and the Rangers fall
    
    

re: .406

Thanks JaKe; I hope I have the pleasure of stuffing those words
down your throat in a few weeks. Sadly, I don't think that is
the likely scenario.

The Crazy Met

    
    >>Thanks JaKe;
    
    Anytime TCMucking_Fets_fan.
    
    JaKe
    

interesting p_name JaKe, but I can't imagine that Denise would
pay any ransom for you. Though, she might pay them to keep you.

The Crazy Met

�    no way he should let the New York TV ratings go down the crapper.
    
    New York/New Jersey, it's all the same to the marketing and TV execs.

NY/NJ - not to the NHL marketing folks. Rangers are likely to be
a much larger ratings draw than the DEVILS.

Of course, ESPN will be blacked out in the NY area no matter which of
them gets in, unless there is some provision that ESPN has exclusive
rights to the Stanley Cup Finals. I recall that part of the hangup 
over ESPN signing on to cover the NHL had to do with coverage of
the Stanley Cup Finals.

The Crazy Met

    The p_name is one of them excuses to use when ya come home about 5am
    and the Mrs. is still waiting up, with rolling pin in hand.
    
    Only trouble is, it only works once, not one of those you cain use
    repeatedly.
    
    JaKe
    

    Re: NY papers:
    
    I live in NJ and the Newark Star Ledger,which has a regular reporter
    for both teams,is giving preferential treatment to the Devils,but not
    as provincial as you would think.
    
    I can't imagine the Rangers winning this series. I see a 5-2 Devils'
    victory tonight. If they do win,the NY area could be blacked out of the
    finals totally,because of Sportschannel. And that in a nutshell would
    underscore why the Devils,Isles and Nets will never seriusly compete
    for NY area attention.
    
    

    was 1940 the year that Lester Patrick (at the age of nearly mine) came
    out of the stands to play goal because of an injury to starter and
    opponents (probably toronto) wouldn't allow a decent replacement?
    
    Lester won the game in to
    
    I will try to look this up and if there is any interest will post some
    1940 vignettes  (okay, tcm doesn't count - they don't call me bill the
    just for nothing)
    
    billte

    
    Mark Messier was quoted in all the NY papers on Wednesday saying the
    following about game 6. "We know we have to win it. We can win it. And
    we are going to win it."
    
    After the first period tonight his prediction looked pretty lame.
    Rangers were down 2-0. Neither team had come back from a 2 goal
    deficit to even tie the game in this series. DEVILS were dominating the
    game until midway into the 2nd period. Richter was awesome in goal and
    stopped the DEVILS from scoring even more goals.
    Kovalev scored with 1:30 left in the 2nd to make it 2-1.
    
    Rangers came out flying in the 3rd and Messier, who assisted on
    Kovalev's goal, scored less than 3 minutes into the game to tie
    it at 2. It was Brodeur's turn to play incredible hockey. 
    Rangers finally got a 3-2 lead, goal
    by Messier with 7-8 minutes left. Then after missing a blatant penalty
    on the DEVILS, the ref called slashing on Anderson with 2:49 left.
    DEVILS pulled the goalie with 1:50 left and had a 2 man advantage. One
    of the risks in going for an empty net from behind the blue line is
    that there can be an icing call if you miss. But the Rangers were
    shorthanded so icing would not be a problem. Messier got the faceoff
    and shot it into the empty net from behind the Rangers blue line.
    Messier completes the hat trick on the shorthanded goal.
    
    And all this means is that the Rangers have somehow survived to get to
    a game 7. This was the first game that they needed more than talent to
    win. A real gut check and hopefully it will carry into game 7. But as
    we are all aware game 7 is a crapshoot. In the NHL the visiting team
    wins game 7 on a fairly regular basis, while in the NBA that hasn't
    happened since 1982.
    
    Magical words - game 7. Here we go again.
    
    The Crazy Met
    
    

    Dave, you should be able to help with this. The last game the Rangers
    and DEVILS played in the regular season was a 4-2 Rangers win. DEVILS
    were within 2 points of the Rangers at that point. Did the DEVILS rush
    out to a 2-0 lead and then give up 4 goals to lose?? Seem to recall
    this but can't remember.

    other stuff:
    Keenan is not a great game coach, he fiddles too much. However, he mde
    one move tonight that really paid off. He put Kovalev on the same line
    as Messier and Graves in the 2nd and that really made things happen.
    
    Rangers better remember they have to win another game and not assume it
    will be easy like the 1971 Bruins did after winning game 6 in Montreal.
    
    The Crazy Met
    
    

    Rangers moved up a notch in my book last night.  Huge win in a
    gut-check situation.
    
    Bernie Nicholls should be caned.
    
    Mark.

Re Lester Patrick:

	No, I don't think it was 1940, I think it was earlier than
	that -- my brother knows approximately when.  If I can
	catch him before he goes away for the weekend, I'll post 
	it.



>    Rangers moved up a notch in my book last night.  Huge win in a
>    gut-check situation.

Huge is not the word -- phenomenal comes closer ;^)

    
>    Bernie Nicholls should be caned.
    
Yeah.  I couldn't believe the crap he pulled.   I've watched hockey for
a lot of years, and his conduct in this series has been what even I 
would term reprehensible....


'SAw

    
     I was just talking to a Great ranger fan.., And he was saying that
    maybe Nicholls is still upset about being  trading away from the
    Rangers... Old well the Devils shouldn't put up with that kind hockey
    player.  
    
    Go Rangers
    Bobby C

    Hey Coach, what's going on?
    
    There's setting the tone for a game and it's another to shoot a puck at
    a guy's butt intentionally.   No need for it...

  
    Well, it just wouldn't be a real heartbreak if it didn't happen in a
    Game 7, now would it?  ;-)
    
    Try as I might, I just can't summon the hatred in my heart for the
    New York Rangers as is reserved for the Knicks and Mets or in a
    completely separate league the Yankees.  In a perverse sort of way 
    it wouldn't be bad to see these guys win, leaving the undisputed
    heartbreak championship of the world to the beloved Red Sox (sorry, 
    the consistent futility of the Cubs and White Sox, while certainly 
    great, just doesn't measure up in the gut-wrenching anguish
    department...)  
    
    glenn
    

re: .419

Nicholls was quoted "I can't believe the Rangers traded me, even if it
was for Messier." nuf said

re: .421

yeah, Rangers still have to win game 7.

Sounds like your feelings about the Rangers are similar to mine
about the Red Sox. Unless they were playing the Mets it would be
kind of nice to see their fans finally savor a championship after
so many disappointments.

The Crazy Met

>    
>    There's setting the tone for a game and it's another to shoot a puck at
>    a guy's butt intentionally.   No need for it...
>

Agreed Walt.

You wanna set the tone, you knock the fillings out of someone's teeth with
a good, hard check.

You don't give them a two-handed to the back of the helmet (can you
say "pole-axed?"  Sure I knew you could) of shoot the puck at someone.

This is twice that Nicholls has shot the puck at someone....


'Saw

> Unless they were playing the Mets it would be
> kind of nice to see their fans finally savor a championship after
> so many disappointments.
    
    Only if you're buying the real stuff, TCM!  You better believe that
    when the Sox finally win it there'll be 5 bottles of the good stuff
    lined up and ready to go (as there were on my father's 50th birthday,
    October 25, 1986...).  ;-(
    
    glenn
    

Was Nicholls the one who swung the stick at ??? head late
in the 3rd??

Rangers are better off for now not sending tapes to the league office.
No need to give the DEVILS any "motivation"


The Crazy Met

>Was Nicholls the one who swung the stick at ??? head late
>in the 3rd??



Yes.  That's what actually precipitated the whole incident I believe.

Anderson was coming up ice, and Nicholls stood him up with a high
elbow to the chops.  Anderson kind of swung around with a low
slash, and then started to go.  Nicholls did a 360 and his best
Lord High Executioner impression, and WHAMMO.

A few seconds later, the puck was in the Devil's zone and Nicholls
shot it at Anderson's butt.

In the melee that ensued, one of the Rangers and one of the Devils
actually were starting into a stick swinging fight, and all I could
imagine was the Ted Green incident, helmets or no....


'Saw

re: champagne, absolutely! I have a bottle of very very very good
stuff ready for ....... It is, what you call, the "real" stuff, and
not "methode champagnois(sp?)". Then again I have had some exquisite
bubly that was "methode champagnois(sp?)".

I may pick up some more, but only if it seems like the Rangers really
have it. Way too soon to do that now; heck even if they win game 7 they
still have another series to go. 2-3-2 format minimizes the home ice
advantage. Then again in the current series each team has won twice on the
road.

The Crazy Met

>I may pick up some more, but only if it seems like the Rangers really
>have it. Way too soon to do that now; heck even if they win game 7 they
>still have another series to go. 2-3-2 format minimizes the home ice
>advantage. Then again in the current series each team has won twice on the
>road.

TCM, I heard them say at one point during the Sharks-Toronto series that
no matter who was playing, the Finals would be 2-2-1-1-1.....


'Saw

well if it is 2-2-1-1-1 the games could be played on

Tuesday,Thursday,Saturday,Monday

game 5 might move to Thursday - extra travel day, Saturday, Monday.

That would cover ESPN's Sunday/Wednesday problem.

Anyone have the actual schedule??

What puzzles me about this is that for a number of years all 
series were 2-2-1-1-1 except the Finals which were 2-3-2.

The Crazy Met

    I pulled a 'Saw prior to game 6. I bashed the Rangers saying they were
    done. If they lost I could say I was right.
    
    The finals will be 2-2-1-1-1. The final Rangers-Devils regular season
    game was at the Meadowlands. Joisey jumped out to a quick 2-0 lead.
    Rangers scored 4 in second -last on a giveaway to McTavish with 2.7
    seconds reamining in the period.
    
    I didn't get to hear (we were blacked out again) the first two periods.
    Put on game midway thru third. Olczyk played for injured Noonan and
    Lidster for supended Beukeboom-both for first time in post season. Lidster 
    came over from Vancouver as part of VanBiesbrouck trade.
    
    Risky move by Lemaire backfired-taking out goalie with Devils on
    powerplay-giving Messier the opportunity to shoot towards empty net
    with no fear of icing. Heroic effort by Messier-one that could be
    legendary if the Rangers win Friday night.
    
    I don't dare make a prediction-but what the Rangers do to their fans
    reminds me of the Al Pacino line in Godfather III.
    
    "Everytime I want to get out-they pull me  back in again"  I had pretty
    much given up on them after game 5. If the hockey gods think it's the
    right time for a Rangers title it will happen-if not it's been a great
    ride and noone said it would be easy.

>
>    I pulled a 'Saw prior to game 6. I bashed the Rangers saying they were
>    done. If they lost I could say I was right.
>    

The way they were playing I thought they were done.

    
>    Risky move by Lemaire backfired-taking out goalie with Devils on
>    powerplay-giving Messier the opportunity to shoot towards empty net

I'd have done what Bill Clement (I think it was Clement) suggested, and
that was to start out with Brodeur in net, but then "sneak" him off
and "sneak" the extra guy in.  Might have had a better chance...


>    with no fear of icing. Heroic effort by Messier-one that could be
>    legendary if the Rangers win Friday night.

I'm not a Ranger fan by a long shot, but I do believe I saw one of the
best individual performances in a playoff hockey game in a long, long
time.  The man came to get it done, and he did get it done...


    
'Saw

�    Rangers better remember they have to win another game and not assume it
�    will be easy like the 1971 Bruins did after winning game 6 in Montreal.

	Not one Broons� fan could correct this?  In 1971 Boston was 
clobbered in game 6 by like a 7-3 score.  Craze rewrites history again.  
Boy quite a performance by Messier last night.  Almost like it was out of a 
script...

				   /Don    

    
    	Guys, please let the Devils win because my son is a Devils' fan
    	and it would make him happy.  Thanks alot. ;-)
    
    	Live from Charger Central....Glenn
    

MikeL,

you posted the scores from the B's-Canadians series in 1971. Was it game
5 or 6 the B's won easily??

The Crazy Met

re: .434

How long has your son followed the DEVILS? Wait a minute, when/how did
he become a DEVILS fan??

The Crazy Met

    The Devils used to be the Colorado Rockies.

    Cleveland Barons too, right?
    

Walt,

Cleveland and Colorade two different clubs.

btw someone sent me this a couple of year ago and I've hung onto it
for reference....


'saw


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


FRANCHISE HISTORY NHL........

LOCATION        CLUB NAME      NHL SEASONS        FRANCHISE ACTIVITY

Atlanta         Flames         1973-80           transferred to Calgary
Boston          bruins         1925-todate   
Brooklyn        Americans      1942 one year     formerly NY Americans
Buffalo         Sabers         1971-todate       
California      Seals          1968             renamed Oakland mid-season
Calgary         flames         1981- to date    transferred from Atlanta
Chicago         Blackhawks     1927- to date    


*****************************
Cleveland       Barons         1977-78          transferred from Oakland
                                                merged with Minnesota

Colorado        Rockies        1977-82.       . transferred from kansas city
****************************                                          


Detroit         cougars        1927-30..........renamed Falcons 1931
                falcons        1931-33..........renamed red wings 1934
                red wings      1934- to date
Edmonton        oilers         1980- to date.....from wha franchise
Hamilton        tigers         1921-1925.........sold to NY Americans
Hartford        whalers        1980- to date.....wha franchise
Kansas          scouts         1975..............1976 tranferred to Colorade
Long Island     NY Islanders   1973- to date
LA              kings          1968- to date
Minnesota       north stars    1968- to date......merged with cleveland
Montreal        Canadiens      1918- to date
Montreal        wanderers      1918 one year
Montreal        maroons        1925-38
New jersey      devils         1982- to date......tranferred from Colorade
New york        Americans      1926-41...........shifted to Brooklyn 1942
new york        rangers        1927- to date
Oakland         seals          1968-76............formerly California
                                                  transferred from Cleveland
Ottawa          senators       1918-31...........did not play in 1932.
                               1933-34...........transferred to St.louis.
Philadelphia    Quakers        1931
                flyers         1968-to dates
Pittsburgh      pirates        1926-30............transferred to philly.
                penguins       1968- to date
Quebec          bulldogs       1920................transferred to hamilton
                nordiques      1980- to date......from wha.
St.Louis        eagles         1935               transferred from ottawa
                blues          1968-to date
Toronto         Arenas         1918,1919........renamed St.patricks
                St.patricks    1920-26 .........renamed Maple leafs
                maple leafs    1927- to date
Vancouver       Canucks        1971- to date
Washington      Capitals       1975- to date
Winnipeg        jets           1980- to date.....wha franchise



Coach....
    

re: Lester Patrick in goal.

I am pretty sure it happened against the Montreal Maroons which means
it was 1928. Other than 1928 and 1940 the Rangers only won the Stanley Cup
in 1933. The wins in 1933 and 1940 were both against the Maple Leafs. So
1933 is the only other possibility. But 1928 would be my bet.

The Crazy Met

    It was KC, not Cleveland, that's right Cleveland merged with the Stars.
    

Okay, so that i can update the list,


	We've got some new teams, and I can't remember the order
	in which they came:


		San Jose Sharks
		Ottawa Senators
		Tampa Bay Lightning
		Florida Panthers
		Anaheim Mighty Ducks


	Did SJ, Ottawa and TB all come in at the same time?  And that
	was in the 1992-1993 season?

	The in 1993-1994 Florida and Anaheim came in?


Is that correct?


'SAw

    San Jose 1991-92
    Ottawa,Tampa 92-93
    Anaheim,Florida 93-94

    
    	MacNeal hit it on the nose.....The Devils used to be in Colorado
    and that's one reason why my boy likes them.  So, make sure they win.
    Got it!
    
    	Live from Charger Central.....Glenn
    

re: 1971

I asked around and some big Bruins fans seem to recall the Bruins winning
game 6 in Montreal. Will try and look it up.
 
The Crazy Met

one more from JD:

Subject:whew
- --------
Saw -

The Rangers barely beat the Debils last night in
an inspired upset on hostile ice.  Playing without
one of their best defensemen, ravaged by injuries, and
playing a tough, defense-minded team away, things
looked bleak.

But their scrappy Captain, a retreaded discard from
the ancient Edmonton dynasty, ralled the troops, despite
playing with injuries that would make a front line
medic swoon.  No, the undermanned, outgunned, but
gutsy collection of retreads, cast-offs and role 
players overcame adversity not seen since the London
blitz.  Messier and Churchill, with some Audie Murphy
thrown in.

Don't know if the Rangers will have enough left to 
skate one more game - but I can only hope that they
don't get blown away by the young studs from Jersey.

JD

      
     re .428
    
      Only a New York "hockey fan" could give such a chi-chi discourse
     on champagne. I thought it was kind of odd when the fans at MSG were
     drinking beer with their pinkies extended. Now I know why.

    
    Craze,
    Put the books down main.. In 1971 Boston creampuffed lesOgres at home
    in Game *5*, sept-trois, then tyravelled to MtRoyal where they
    sleepwalked to a 5-2(??) loss in the Forum. They came back to the
    Gahden in Game 7 and FrankieM and KenOctopi put 'em out to pasture.
    
    And the city of Boston remained shellshocked for weeks..
    
    MikeL
    

    No area sports fan has had the opportunity the New Yorker haa had this
    past week: They could have been to seven straight days of playoff games
    in a 10 mile radius.
    
    Saturday night 5/21 - Rangers at Devils game 4 semis
    Sunday Aft 5/22     - Chicago at Knicks game 7 quarters
    Monday night 5/23   - Devils at Rangers game 5 semis
    Tuesday night 5/24   -  Indiana at Knicks game 1 semis
    Wednesday night 5/25   - Rangers at Devils game 6 semis
    Thursday night 5/26   -  Indiana at Knicks game 2 semis
    Friday night 5/27     -  Devils at Rangers game 7 semis
    
    Add the team with the best record in baseball and it just doesn't get any 
    better than this. 
    
    With the winter arenas in Boston,Philly,Detroit and Washington
    gathering dust,I could see other cities resentment towards NY.

well however they are drinking beer at MSG, at least they still
have games to go to. 

The Crazy Met

So Craze,

What do you think of the Rangers chances in game 7?

TTom

    
     Craze is still busy trying to find that SI article on the glorious
    Rangers-Islanders rivalry. Aren't you, Craze?

    Mikel and Don,
    	It is my recollection that facing elimination in 1971 the bruins
    went up to montreal and beat les habs 3-0.  If it is on record that
    they lost game 6 then they must have beat the canadians in game 4, won
    game 5 at home and then lost 6 in canada thinking they would win finale
    at home.  
    
    	If that is the case then winning #4 in montreal was equivalent to a
    game 6 (almost) since it would have killed them.  The 3-0 game was an
    Orr masterpiece.
    
    billte

re: game 7: from my entry in 44.389

>Winner of game 6 will win the series. If the Rangers can get back to
>game 7 at MSG they'll win, it is game 6 that I have very little
>confidence in their being able to win it.

Game 7's are always a crapshoot; despite that and the 53 year drought
I like the Rangers chances tonight.

re: SI, I checked at home and only have the last 2 issues. 

The Crazy Met

    does the road team have a better game 7 record in the NHL than it does
    in the NBA?

Yeah road team has a much better record in game 7 on the road in the NHL than
in the NBA.

Some results from the last two years (probably missing some from last year):

Last year: Islanders beat Pens in Pittsburgh
           Canadians beat Quebec in Quebec (?)
           
This year: Vancouver beat Calgary in Calgary
           San Jose beat Detroit in Detroit

           Toronto beat SJ at home this year. 
           Devils beat Buffalo at home this year
           Bruins beat Canadians at home this year

The Crazy Met

While winning on the road in Game 7 in the NBA may not be the easiest
thing to do, I'm pretty sure it aint oh-fer.

I seem to recollect Jerry West and the Lakers losing to Bill Russell and
the Celtics at L.A. Jack Kent Cooke was the owner and he had a big
celebration planned with balloons up in the roof and all. Wilt didn't
want to risk fouling out so he took himself outta the game at the stretch
and once again Boston one.

TTom

    TTom, since they went to the current 16-team playoff format in the
    early '80s ('84 I think), the home team is undefeated in game 7.

    	Bill, I'm positive the Broons lost game 6.  Went like this, Broons
    won game 1-3-5 and lost 2-4-6-7.
    
    				   /Don 

     I'm sure you Guys and Gals  have seen this already.
    
                    Stanley Cup Schedule
    
     Vancouver at   ?         Tues  May  31st  game 1
     Vancouver at   ?         Thurs June  2rd  game 2
        ?      at  Vancouver  Sat   June  4th  game 3
        ?      at  Vancouver  Tues  June  7th  game 4
     Vancouver at   ?         Thurs June  9th  game 5
        ?      at  Vancouver  Sat   June 11th  game 6
     Vancouver at   ?         Tues  June 14th  game 7
        

1969 Celtics beat Lakers in game 7 in LA
1973 Knicks beat Celtics in game 7 in Boston
1982 Sixers beat Celtics in game 7 in Bosotn

Since 1982 no NBA team has won a game 7 on the road.

re: .461

That is what I figured since it misses Wed and Fri when ESPN has
baseball commitments.

I wonder if game times in NY.NJ will be 7:30EDT or 8.
I assume games in Vancouver will have a 9PM EDT start.

The Crazy Met

Is it possible for the NBA to be finished before the NHL this year?
Assume 2 4 game sweeps and then a 4 game sweep in the Finals, when
would the NBA Finals be over?? Conference finals could be over, theoretically,
on Monday.

The Crazy Met

    Slash and Billte,
    
    In '71, the Broons won games 1,4,5, lost 2,3,6,7.
    
    Game #4 i Montreal was the Orr masterpiece. The Habs had shut down
    the B's in Game 3 but HisWorship completely dominated Game 4 as
    the B's won 3-0. Broons fed off that win and destroyed lesOgres
    in Game 5 back at the Gahden 7-3 wif Mike"Shakin'allOver"Walton potting
    2 or 3. After that it was sayonnara time..
    
    And what does this have to do wif the Rangers? Not the '71 Broons
    but the last two Broon Cup winners('70 and '72) beat the Rangers
    both years in the playoffs on their march to Cup de Stanley.
    
    MikeL
    

    Come on ghost of 1940, come on ghost of 1940, come on ghost of
    1940.......
    
    JaKe
    

    Usually I miss watching lots of games on weekend. Friday night I was
    at friends who had the game on, yes! Glenn, from Charger central, I
    hope that your kid was able to watch this game. Despite what /er would
    have you believe, Game 7 was hockey at its best. Only 2 penalteis,
    great forechecking, great goaltending, end-to-end rushes. A classic
    classic game to end a series for the ages. It has to rank right up
    there with the top series of all time.
    
    One team, DEVILS, wanted R-S-P-E-C-T that they felt no one was giving
    them even though they had 106 points in the regular season. The other
    team has frustrated its fans for 53 years; JaKe, when the DEVILS scored
    with 7.7 seconds left to tie the game all the ghosts of 1940 came
    rushing in. Fortunately they were kept at bay for a little longer.
    
    Rangers are favored to beat Vancouver, but they better not take
    Vancouver lightly. Ideal scenario for this fan is a angers win in 5
    games, that way they can win it at MSG. Only other way that can happen
    is if they win in 7(more likely than 5), but given a choice I would
    prefer to never see the Canucks with a chance to clinch the series.
    As I said about the DEVILS series, Rangers should win; but until the
    clock says 00:00 after their 4th win, or an OT goal giving them their
    4th win in the series I won't believe it.
    
    The Crazy Met
    

    Friday night was one of the most riveting games I have ever seen.
    Brain Leetch's goal midway thru the second period was a classic Bobby
    Orr 360 spin and a trickle shot that somehow eluded Brodeur. 
    
    Brodeur was magnificent as the Devils remained a gola behind. Then with 
    7.7 seconds the nightmare: Valery Zelepukin stuffs in a rebound and all
    the ghosts are back. At that point I thought -well if they lose they
    deserve it for not being able to clear the puck and clear people away
    from the front of their goal.
    
    And while they dominated the first overtime period ,I kept thinking
    about all the times a dominant team had been thwarted by one
    counterattack. That appeared to be the case when NJ had a 2 on 1 early
    in the OT,but Richter was up to the task. Finally Stephane Matteau 
    put in a wraparound off Fetisov's skate and this amazing game and
    series was over. My wife was astounded by my reaction. She had never
    seen me this excited about a sporting event.
    
    Too bad,there is another series left and the Canucks are going to be
    tough.
    

    When Matteau scored it wasn't at all clear what had happened; suddenly
    Gary Thorne is shouting score. On the way to NY on Saturday night the
    guy who has the midnight-6AM show replayed Howie Rose's call of the
    winning score, yowza!.
    
    For all you folks who can't stand the thought of a NY team winning
    anything, you should root for the Knicks to make it to the finals.
    By my calculation the only times both the Knicks and Rangers were in
    the finals in the same year was 1950 and 1972. In 1950 both teams lost
    in 7 games; in 1972 Rangers lost in 6, Knicks in 5.
    
    Canucks will be tough.
    
    re: .467 - winning goal
    
    I sat in stunned silence, my friends just couldn't understand what was
    going on.
    
    The Crazy Met
    

>>  I sat in stunned silence

	That'll be the day!


	billl

|>>  I sat in stunned silence
|
|	That'll be the day!

I for one was jumping all around the house....   I hate the Devils, always
have, always will, and I think the only team I dislike more is the
Penguins.


It was a good game -- one of the best hockey games I've seen so far.  I think
one thing worth noting is how strong the Rangers came out after giving up
the tying goal with 7.7 left.  That had to have been tough, and I think
Keenan got the troops together, and man, they came out swinging in OT.

I knew if the Rangers kept up the pressure it would only be a matter of
time, but as the Devils started to step up their game, I had a feeling
we could see a couple of more OTs.

You knew that after all those games (like the equivalent of 8 or 9 I think
they said) it was going to be a flukey goal that won the game, no matter
which way it went.


The FUNNIEST thing happened the next morning.  I had an early job so
I had to set the alarm.  I wake up to WFAN and I hear Howie Rose's call -- 
great call IMO.

The first caller was this weenis from New Jersey complaining that Howie
Rose's call was a homer call.  I'm thinking to myself -- so what.  It's the
Ranger's radio network and the guy calls their games all season.  So what
if he was a bit of a homer for a minute....    That New Jersey Fan (named
Pat) gets the Whiney Sore Loser award...


Gonna be a good Stanley Cup Final (much better than if the Devils were there).


'Saw

                          <<< Note 44.400 by AKOCOA::BREEN >>>
                         -< then rangers lose in 5 to canucks >-
    >   I will take the rangers tonight and then in game 7 in overtime(second
    
    Tcm,
    	You knew I wouldn't put you in that overtime without letting you
    go.  For your sake, the Canuck's in 5 is not ESP like the rangers to
    take #6 and then win in 2nd ot - that was a vision - I was the only one
    not surprised at 19.53 of the 3rd.
    
    I'll try to "see" the cup for you, met
    
    Billte

    re: .400
    
    Fantastic!! Imagine the aggrivation I could have saved myself if I had
    your powers!

    dave,
    	I can't help you just tcm.  don't know how it works.
    
    

yup, billte called it perfectly!

The Crazy Met

    
  >> yup, billte called it perfectly!

     Which immediately disqualified him from being able to call himself
     an "objective analyst" though lord knows why he'd want to anyways
     given the company (TCS and Ack) that he'd be keeping.
The Crazy Met

    

Saw -

Like those few who saved London, heck, all of England,
heck the whole free world, the Rangers conjure up images
of those Spitfire pilots, overcoming incredible odds
to neutralize, and then get the upper hand, on the
Luftwaffe - or the Debils, in this case.

Led by the heriocs of their gimply, cast-off, aged
Captain, the Rangers, an assortment of individuals 
that reminds one of the make up of the WWII fighting
squad - the grizzled veterans, the lunch pails, the 
peach fuzz faced innocents - up against the creme 
de la creme of the Debils. 

And now, they face perhaps the finest offensive 
weapon on the planet of the earth - the Russian
Rocket - the Canadian Northwest's own version of
the V-2 = capable of sending event he most seasoned
of veterans scurrying.

The Canucks are led by one of the great minds of
hockey in Pat Quinn, and have a tough, and FAST
team.  Quinn's advantage over the Rangers Young
Rookie Leader, coupled with the Canucks youth and
speed advantage over the cast of unwanted souls that
make up the Rangers, is enough to make one shudder.

Like shell shocked vets, each with the 1000 yard
stare, the Rangers are once again thrown into the
breech to face a vastly superior, better armed
opponent.  

Can they once again pick themselves up and move 
onward, storming Fortress Stanley on the sheer will and 
determination of their Captain and their other 
past prime players.  

East meets West in a classic showdown.  The greatest
player in the world must be shackled. 

This series should be on the A&E station.

JD


************

The Crazy Met

I sent JD some mail this morning and told him of how I watched the
game on Friday.  I told him that since the Rangers were now in the
Finals, I needed a new Sandbag from him to put into the Rangers topic.
As usual, JD promptly obliged:




=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
From:	US3RMC::"[email protected]" 31-MAY-1994 13:03:27.52
To:	cam::way
CC:	[email protected], metsny::francus
Subj:	Re: Po' Po' Rangers.... 

Saw -

Like those few who saved London, heck, all of England,
heck the whole free world, the Rangers conjure up images
of those Spitfire pilots, overcoming incredible odds
to neutralize, and then get the upper hand, on the
Luftwaffe - or the Debils, in this case.

Led by the heriocs of their gimply, cast-off, aged
Captain, the Rangers, an assortment of individuals 
that reminds one of the make up of the WWII fighting
squad - the grizzled veterans, the lunch pails, the 
peach fuzz faced innocents - up against the creme 
de la creme of the Debils. 

And now, they face perhaps the finest offensive 
weapon on the planet of the earth - the Russian
Rocket - the Canadian Northwest's own version of
the V-2 - capable of sending even the most seasoned
of veterans scurrying.

The Canucks are led by one of the great minds of
hockey in Pat Quinn, and have a tough, and FAST
team.  Quinn's advantage over the Rangers Young
Rookie Leader, coupled with the Canucks youth and
speed advantage over the cast of unwanted souls that
make up the Rangers, is enough to make one shudder.

Like shell shocked vets, each with the 1000 yard
stare, the Rangers are once again thrown into the
breech to face a vastly superior, better armed
opponent.  

Can they once again pick themselves up and move 
onward, storming Fortress Stanley on the sheer will and 
determination of their Captain and their other 
past prime players.  

East meets West in a classic showdown.  The greatest
player in the world must be shackled. 

This series should be on the A&E station.

JD

re .476


	NOTES COLLISION.....86)

    
     Yeah, notes collision! Too bad they didn't destroy each other then
    we wouldn't have been subjected to all that corn. Does JD have some
    kind of program that randomly generates esssentially the same notes
    on different topics? At least Van Meter has finally taken away JD's 
    title for "Absolute Worst Poetry Ever Written". And that weren't no
    mean feat.

yabbut  it is very nice being able to sandbag about a hockey team in
June. Tommy, you wish you could do that! heh

The Crazy Met

    
    >> yabbut  it is very nice being able to sandbag about a hockey team in
    >> June.
     
       And you do it very well. You could give lessons.
    
    >> Tommy, you wish you could do that! heh
  
       No, I don't. Unlike you pansy-assed, woe-is-us New Yorkers, we
       hardy New Englanders find those crybaby antics to be unmanly.
       
    

    TCS, is it safe to assume by now that you made up that whole thing
    about the SI article on the Rangers-Islanders rivalry.

 does anyone see any simularities between TCS and JD and Rocky and Muggsy
 of Buggs Bunny fame???????

 ;^)

                 
    Yeah, after what I saw them accomplish in Games 6 and 7, no real
    Rangers fan should be moaning about the fates regardless of what happens
    the rest of the way.  This is one of those deals where you've already
    gotten every amount of effort and achievement you could have ever asked 
    for and then some.  Hey all you cowardly Rangers fans, forget about
    1940 and all of the rest of that crap, and make like your boys did in 
    the Game 7 OT and show some cajones...
    
    glenn
    

Tommy, safe nothing. I don't have the old SI's, never keep more than
2-3 issues and frankly it's not worth my time trying to find the
past issues somewhere. 

>  >> Tommy, you wish you could do that! heh

>No, I don't. Unlike you pansy-assed, woe-is-us New Yorkers, we
>hardy New Englanders find those crybaby antics to be unmanly.

does that mean you don't want to see the Bruins playing
in June?? What kind of a fan are you??

GO RANGERS!!! 

re: MikeL - I'll believe it when I see it, not before.

The Crazy Met

re: .485

Glenn,

that is like saying enjoy the way the Red Sox came back in game 5 of the
1986 ALCS and then won the pennant after being down 3-1 in games and
5-1 in the top of the 9th of game 5. y'all should have just enjoyed
that moment and not care that you then lost the WS.

The Crazy Met

    
 >> Tommy, safe nothing. I don't have the old SI's, never keep more than
 >> 2-3 issues and frankly it's not worth my time trying to find the
 >> past issues somewhere. 

    For you newbies, this means "yes, I did make that up but never expected
    to get caught. So leave me alone."
    
>  >> Tommy, you wish you could do that! heh

>No, I don't. Unlike you pansy-assed, woe-is-us New Yorkers, we
>hardy New Englanders find those crybaby antics to be unmanly.

�does that mean you don't want to see the Bruins playing
�in June?? What kind of a fan are you??

    This is too dumb to merit response.
    

                        
> that is like saying enjoy the way the Red Sox came back in game 5 of the
> 1986 ALCS and then won the pennant after being down 3-1 in games and
> 5-1 in the top of the 9th of game 5. y'all should have just enjoyed
> that moment and not care that you then lost the WS.
    
    I did.  Even though I don't believe that the Sox' shaky overall 
    performance in the ALCS compares with the dramatic effort that the 
    Rangers just put forth, nor do I expect the Rangers to experience
    anything like the 1986 World Series, after ALCS Game 5 (and then 6 
    and 7) I found it impossible to get down on the players who made the 
    WS possible in the first place, including Bill Buckner and Rich Gedman 
    (I did make an exception for Calvin Schiraldi, who was hacking and 
    wheezing throughout it all, and the whiny RangersFan-like manager, who 
    won't be mentioned here by name).  That was a gutsy team, and even 
    though the end was shocking and painful as the weaker elements of the 
    team came falling apart under the pressure of the moment, 1986 still 
    did not go down in my book as unappreciated nor as a failure of 
    character...
    
    glenn
     

> 1986 still did not go down in my book as unappreciated nor as a failure of
> character...

fair enough. but how many other Red Sox fans really feel
this way? Not too many would be my guess.


re: newbies

Yes, Tommy is always a big pain; lovable in a wierd sort of way, but
definitely a pain. And remember never let the facks get in the way of
a good argument.


The Crazy Met

JD's sandbagging makes me laugh, so I like it.


One question I did have:

	Why on earth did John Thorn (from ESPN), after Matteau's goal,
	shout in this big "I just creamed my pants" voice:

		The Ghost of 1940 is gone!


	I mean, hey asswipe, they've still not won the Cup!



'Saw

    Thorn used to do the Devils games... I know he's a Met announcer...
    who knows...
    

    Rangers refuse to make it easy. Rangers came out flying, Canucks took
    some time to get going. 1-0 Rangers lead in the first on a goal by
    Larmer. Lead was 1-0 going into the 3rd. Messier was stopped on a
    short-handed breakaway early in the 3rd. A breakdown in their defensive
    zone by the Rangers led to a Canucks goal with about 9 minutes gone. A
    few minutes later Kovalev scored on a great pass from Leech.
    With about 1:30 left the Canucks got into the Rangers zone; they scored
    with 1 minute left on a wierd deflection. Here we go again *^%*&$&*%^&.
    
    Then as often happens in OT one team dominates but can't get the goal
    and the other team then scores. Rangers dominated, they had a shot hit
    the crossbar with under a minute left in the 1st OT. Canucks came in on
    a 2 on 1 and Adams scored with under 30 seconds left in the 1st OT.
    
    Arrghhhhhh!
    
    The Crazy Met
    

    Result of game 1 makes me doubly glad that this series is 2-2-1-1-1.
    If it were 2-3-2 then even if the Rangers win game 2 the Canucks could
    have won the series without having to go back to NY.
    
    Rangers better take care of business on Wednesday night or the drought
    will very likely continue for another year.
    
    The Crazy Met
    

Thursday night, Craze.

But I hear you.  It was damned frustrating.

Quite honestly, the way I saw it last night, the Rangers, except for a couple
of small lapses, outplayed the Canucks.  It was just that MacLean
was like a stone wall....

Oh well....


'Saw

    Exquisite.
    
    MacLean was *unconscious* last night.  Richter was nearly as good, but
    this game was a perfect example of how a hot money goalie can steal a
    game, and even a series.  
    
    Are you listening, Harry?
    
    Mark.

    Thrilling game.  Man, that crossbar showed some homerun power on that
    rebound, didn't it?  But unlike so-called Rangers' fans like TCM, I have
    the utmost confidence that steely veterans like Messier and Leetch and 
    Richter will come right back and knot this thing up, then settle in to
    the task of winning it.  These Rangers are not simpering, wimpering 
    cowards...
    
    glenn
    

>    Are you listening, Harry?
    
He should be.

Casey  isn't in the same league with those two guys.  Not by a long shot.

But, I truly believe that MacLean is playing over his head.  I do think
that he is.   Normally, he's not that great.   I think that over the
long haul, Richter has been much more consistently great.  So time
will tell if MacLean will cool off.....


'Saw

    This is getting tiresome! 8^*(( Three times in last 5 home games
    Rangers have been unable to hold one goal lead in final minute.
    
    I have said this in each case: A team that cannot take care of its own
    goal crease at the end of a game(especially at home) does not deserve
    to win the cup. 
    
    Even with McLean's great play,Rangers win the game in regulation if
    they take care of the front of their net.

Maclean to the Rangers in 1994 like Dryden to the B's in 1971???

Turning points in season of some NY teams.

Terry Pendleton HR against the Mets Sept 11, 1987
Mike Scoscia 2 run HR, 9th inning game 4 1988 NLCS
Ron Francis goal from the red line, game 4 against the Pens, 1992

Gelinas, last miunte goal game 1 against the Canucks, 1994?????


Rangers have lost 2 games this year where they led going into the 3rd.
Game 1 against the DEVILS, game 1 against the Canucks.
Reminds me of the 1987 St. Louis Cardinals who lost only one game all
year when they led going into the 9th - game 6 of the WS against KC.

One would have thought the Rangers would have learned by now to just ice 
the damn puck - it takes 5-6 seconds off the clock and the Rangers are
doing very well in winning face offs.

Damn crossbar! A shot that finally beats MacLean, and ....

On to game 2.

The Crazy Met

    Met,
    	the best I can get you in this series is into game 6 in vancouver.
    
    	I've been working on that curse I put on you in .400 (in jest) and
    thought I could expunge it but it wouldn't work except to get it from 5
    to 6 and that will take work.
    
    	But at least this thing will get you a win tomorrow and back to the
    garden.  Perhaps a few bears at the gr'ound (on you) and a lot of work
    will get you a sixth.  But I'm only human.
    
    bill the seer

    I expect the Rangers to whack the Canucks upside the haid in Game 2
    just like they did to the Devils. If the Rangers could muster a few
    dominating games like they're capable, this sojourn would resemble
    the '83 Sixers.. fo' fo' fo' fo'..
    
    NYOilers in 6.
    
    MikeL
    

�One question I did have:

�	Why on earth did John [Gary] Thorn (from ESPN), after Matteau's goal,
�	shout in this big "I just creamed my pants" voice:

�		The Ghost of 1940 is gone!

	Well 'Saw, Thorn basically blew it.  He was supposed to scream this
"Do you believe in miracles?  YES!!" wannabe line when the Rangers won the 
next series (like it was written in the script), not the DEBILS series.  But
since the media has conveniently made nothing out of the faux pas and only
the more astute (like myself and you) of the public picked up on it, he may 
even try using it again after the Rangers win this series.  But my guess is 
that NHL marketing is busy right now coining a new wannabe phrase for Thorn 
to improvizationally blurt out.

				   /Don

 hopefully Thorn will never get to use the new catchy phrase....

 very pleased by last night's results. Hope it continues...

 mike

    
    A Keenan coached team in 1992 lost game 1 of the finals in a similar
    way to last night's game 1.  Here's hoping that games 2,3 and 4 follow
    the same way.

 yup JD will be in here to tell us how right he was and wrong the experts
 were.......

 mike

    	Last night's game was for dramatic effect.  This thing may go
    seven so the New Yorkers can wax poetic about how their StRangers
    overcame so much in winning the Cup.
    
    				   /Don

what happened in game 1 of the 1992 series.

re: .508

I'd just as rather have the Rangers win in 5 and not wax poetic.

The Crazy Met

    In 1992, 'Hawks were leading late in the third period by a goal
    outplaying the Pens badly (Barrasso was outstanding that
    night). With about a minute to go the Pens scored to tie the game. Then
    with a couple of seconds left in the game and the face off at the
    'Hawks end, Lemiuex buries a face off for the win.   Keenan and the
    'Hawks were then snakebitten losing 2, 3 and 4.

Another fun stat to add to the pile.

The NY Times had a chart yesterday of years in which one of the finalists
played 5 games in the semi-final round and the other finalist played
7 games in the semi-finals. There were 6 or 7 such years. In every year
but one the team that won the semi-finals in 5 games won the Stanley Cup.
The only year that did not happen was when Detroit beat the Rangers 
in 1950.

The Crazy Met

Saw -

The upcoming Stanley Cup finals will take on the look
and feel of a War - much like the Mighty World War
II.  And just like WWII, the Big One, there will
be plenty of side battles.

One to watch will be Russia vs. Finland.  In WWII, the
po' overmatched Finns gamely held out against the 
vastly superior Stalinist forces for much longer than
anticipated.  In this battle, the Rangers 'Finn' will be
old man cast off Esa Tikkanen, who will try to stop the
firepower of Vancouver's Russian Rocket - Pavel Bure.
Guarding Bure makes one feel like a Wehrmach officer
told he was being sent to the "Eastern Front".  Bure
is young, fast, explosive.  Tikkanen can only hope to
muster some of the strenght and fortitude that his
forefathers showed when they gamely held out, chewing
on cold reindeer fat, fighting tanks with musket
loading rifles, cross country skiing against a vastly
more mobile foe. 

Can the aged legs of Esa keep up with the explosive 
might that the Rocket can muster?  Will Pavel Bur-ey
the Rangers like a barrage of Kavilslov rockets?  

And that's not to mention the toothpaste man in the 
net - Kirk MacLean, the hottest goalie around.  

The Rangers have weathered their Dunkirk, their
Kasserine Pass, now they need to weather another 
onslaught.  

JD

************

The Crazy Met

    
    
        That's it I'm on the Knicks and Ranger Bandwagon. There are too
    many NY bashers in here. :-)
    
    
    
    Chap

    
      A war metaphor for sports? How original! What will that JD think 
     of next?

Thanks for nothin' Chappy :-)

The Crazy Met

>>        That's it I'm on the Knicks and Ranger Bandwagon. There are too
>>        many NY bashers in here. :-)

	One can only hope that's the final KOD they needed.



	billl

    JD's been joystickin' too much this spring. Time for the evil
    Canucks to dash his dreams.
    
    BTW, is anyone in the NHL any uglier than Tim Hunter? Jayzus I could
    rototill mah yard with that probiscus..
    
    MikeL
    

    Rangers finally survive the final minute of the 3rd period with a one
    goal lead. Richter turned in some real good saves and one awesome one
    with about 13 seconds left. Leetch then got the empty netter for the
    3-1 final. MacLean was superb once again.
    
    Rangers got the first goal - Linter - 6 minute into the game. Cancuks
    tied the game towards the end of the 1st on a shot that went by Richter
    and stopped at the goal line and then was knocked in. Rangers took the
    lead in the second on a short-handed goal. Messier took the puck in,
    stayed with it and passed to Anderson who scored.
    
    Then came the 3rd, this time the Rangers survived it.
    
    On to Vancouver. Rangers need to win at least one game in Vancouver to
    win the Stanley Cup. Hopefully they will do so in game 3 and if not
    then in game 4. If they wait to game 6 it won't be a great scenario.
    
    The Crazy Met
    

    TCM,you leave out one important point about last night's game.
    Vancouver hit the post or crossbar four times. The hockey gods smiled
    on the Rangers last night after ignoring them Tuesday.
    
    Mike keenan called it "Retributive justice " in his postgame comments.

I'm glad I wasn't the post last night -- EVERYONE was hitting the post
or crossbar.

This is turning out to be a GOOD series.  

Richter as superhuman all game -- especially in the 3rd, and Leech's
goal to ice it was pretty, a nice backhand flip that landed flat and
went the length into the open net.

Lidster got the first, Messier and Anderson combined on a SWEET shorthanded
goal for the second.

Vancouver's goal was a flukey one, where it slip oh-so-slowly between
Richter's pads and onto the line and Momessmo poked it in.


There have been a lot of those kind of flukey goals in the Stanley Cup
playoffs season, but in my mind, none beats the goal against Rooo-WAH(wah wah)
in the Bruins series that rolled about 10 feet....8^)


'Saw

    	That one shot by Tikkanenenenenenenenenenen (that hit the pipe)
    	was so loud I thought for a moment I was at MSG.
    
    	Common taters mentioned a lot of pipe bangers (TM) in this
    	series.
    
    	I like the goalcam.
    
    	Scott

    Geez, tcm, isn't it Lidster?  He does play for the Rangers, you could
    get his name right...
    

There were at least 6 shots that hit the post last night.

The nice thing in this series is that we finally are getting to see
some wide open hockey. That is somewhat unusual for the playoffs.
Both teams are confident that their goalies will stop shots and the
2 teams are getting back on defense and forechecking well. But, the teams
are able to move with the puck; there is no molasses feel to the games like
there was against the DEVILS and to some degree against the Caps.

The Crazy Met

    Lidster's goal was a cutie. Nice jump at the goalie to jam it in.
    
    Messier seemed to wake up in the middle of the 2nd period. Rangers
    2nd goal was pure Messier hustle. Great player.
    
    MikeL
    

    	If the StRangers are allowed to invade the goal crease with
    impunity, Vancouver will not win another game.
    
    				   /Don

How good/bad was Vancouver defensively this year? any late acquisitions?

The Crazy Met

    
    
     got Jeff Brown (D) from St Louis.....

    Hey mod(s)??!!
    
    If the stRangers blow the Cup, is there any way of changing this note
    from #44 to er, #40??
    
    MikeL
    

    Game 3 update. After 1 Rangers lead 2-1.
    
    Bure scored 1:03 into the game. Leetch scored on a "pass" to the net,
    MacLean went down and it hit his blocker and went in. Rangers got their
    second goal in the last minute of the period on a tip in by 
    Anderson on a Nemchinov shot. Big news at
    the moment is that Pavel Bure leveled Wells with a shot to the face
    with his stick. It drew blood. 5 minute major on Bure - Rangers stay on
    the power play even if they score a gaol AND Bure is automatically
    ejected from the game. Announcers were saying that they can't even
    think of an excuse that Bure might have - talked about his mean streak.
    Be interesting to see what happens the next 2 periods (or more).
    
    THe Crazy Met
    

    Rangers regain home ice with a 5-1 win. If the Rangers win the series
    the turning point will be the 2 fluke goals that they scored; in this
    game the Canucks could  generate little offense without Bure, but he
    will not be suspended and will play in game 4.
    
    Leetch scored on a rebound with less than a minute left in the 2nd.
    Kovalev got a power play goal on a nifty move in the 3rd. Larmer got
    the other fluke goal that hit two Canucks and went past MacLean.
    Richter made some nice saves. Kovalev's goal was the first power play
    goal in this series, for either team.
    
    re: officiating.
    
    Von Helliman called a tight game after the Rangers got the 4-1 lead. He
    refused to let the game get out of hand. Rangers did not counter with
    Kocur and they did not retaliate but took the power play. I hope they
    can stay on an even keel. This is the first "easy" game the Rangers
    have had since game 3 against the DEVILS. Hopefully they will keep it
    going in game 4 and not do what they did against the Caps and DEVILS in
    game 4 which is lose concentration and lose the game. At the moment
    they have the Canucks down and MacLean thinking a bt instead of only
    reacting. It would be a shame for them to let the Canucks back in with
    a win in game 4.
    
    Canucks need a big save or two from MacLean at the start of game 4.
    Rangers will probably come out trying to score early in game 4 and then
    put the game away. Some saves by MacLean, him back in "the zone" is
    very likely to help the Canucks.
    
    Keeping my fingers crossed.
    
    See you at game 4 at GR in Chelmsford on Tuesday.
    
    The Crazy Met
    

    The Rangers and Knicks seem to playing off each others' successes or
    failures: Recently the results have been in groups of 4: Hopefully it
    will stop this week.
    
    After last Wednesday the New York haters were gathering a head of
    steam,but:
    
    Thursday  June 2 - Rangers win game 2 against Canucks
    Friday    June 3 - Knicks win 6th against Pacers
    Saturday  June 4 - Rangers win game 3 against Canucks
    Sunday    June 5 - Knicks win 7th against Pacers
    
    The streak that had gotten their hopes up:
    
    Saturday     May 28  - Knicks lose 3rd  against Pacers
    Monday       May 30  - Knicks lose 4th  against Pacers
    Tuesday      May 31  - Rangers lose game 1 against Canucks
    Wednesday    June 1  - Knicks lose 5th against Pacers
    
    And then the previous great streak:
    
    Tuesday      May 24  - Knicks win game 1 against Pacers
    Wednesday    May 25  - Rangers win game 6 against Devils
    Thursday     May 26  - Knicks win game 2 against Pacers
    Friday       May 27  - Rangers win game 7 against Devils
    
    
    

    The Knicks have their game 3 -the Rangers' problem game seems to be 4.
    This is a critical one coming up-a win and the Rangers can clinch in NY
    on Thursday. If precedent means anything,Ranger fans shouldn't even
    bother watching game 4. In the last three years they are a dismal 1-4
    in game 4's. They need the following to win:
    
    1) A healthy Zubov
    2) A shakey McLean
    3) A sharp Richter
    4) A tightly officiated game that will curtail the Canucks' gooning.

Who did Pat Quinn play for in the NHL?

Was it the Flyers?

    	Game 4 is in the bag for New York.  If Bure scores another goal
    he's out again.  The StRangers will win the Cup at home.
    
    				   /Don

    
    ...Pat Quinn played for Toronto and was famous with Boston fans the
    night he laid-out Orr with an elbow. And I mean, laid-out. Orr was out
    for a good 5 minutes and the Garden crowd wanted Quinn's head on a
    platter. After Toronto, I forget where he went.
    
    ...Mel

|    ...Pat Quinn played for Toronto and was famous with Boston fans the
|    night he laid-out Orr with an elbow. And I mean, laid-out. Orr was out
|    for a good 5 minutes and the Garden crowd wanted Quinn's head on a
|    platter. After Toronto, I forget where he went.

Don't remember Quinn with Toronto, just Philly...

>>>    4) A tightly officiated game that will curtail the Canucks' gooning.

	And this from a Knicks fan!?  hahahahahahahahahahahaha!


	billl

    Was Quinn with the Kings too?
    

    	I think Quinn played for about 5-6 teams.
    
    				   /Don

    When he played in the minors, wasn't he known as Quinn the Eskimo?
    
    MikeL
    

Who wrote that song - one of the lines is

"when Quinn the Eskimo gets here everybodies gonna jump for joy" ??

The Crazy Met

    re: .542
    
    Didn't Dylan write "The Might Quinn"?

    Manfred Mann.
    
    Mark.

    
    Cancucks take a 2-0 lead on goals by Linden - set up by a magnificent
    move by Bure and by ???
    
    Leetch is stopped on a breaway. Bure is stopped on a penalty shot. I
    love penalty shots - one of those great one-on-one moments.
    
    Leetch ties the game at 1. Zubov scores with 15 seconds left in the 2nd
    on a power play to tie the game at 2. With 4 minutes or so left in the
    3rd Rangers get a power play and Kovalev scores on a magnificent pass
    by Leetch. Larmer with 2:08 left throws the puck into the Canucks zone;
    it deflects off a Canuck and goes past McLean.
    
    If McLean is as hot as he was in games 1 and 2 he maybe stops one or
    two of the first 3 goals. Gola 4 never has a chance. Richter made some
    great saves in sequence to hold the Canucks at 2 goals.
    
    Rangers lead series 3-1 and hopefully can close it out in Madison
    Square Garden on Thursday. Canucks came back from a 3-1 deficit against
    Calgary.
    
    

    At the get-together at the GR, Glenn W brought up the too many men on
    the ice penalty againt the B's in 1979 in game 7 against the Habs; he
    mentioned that it was an obvious call that just had to be made.
    Ironically, towards the beginning of the 3rd period the Rangers were
    called for too many men on the ice. Nothing came of it, Canucks got a
    penalty about 30 seconds later; but it was a fascinating coincidence.
    
    Canucks came into the game 0-18 on the power play; they got 1 power
    play goal in 10 chances and are now 1-28.
    
    Now just one more win! I hope the Rangers win in game 5 and do it
    easily, too much frustration for too many years for them to once again
    toy with the fans.
    
    The Crazy Met
    

    
    Looks like we cleared out of the place just at the right time, before
    the start of the 3rd period...
    
    glenn
    

    TCM you got game chronoligy wrong. Linden scores to make it 1-0,Roning
    on 4-4 makes it 2-0. Leetch scores to make it 2-1,Zubov on Powerplay
    scores from the point to tie it just before the end of the 2nd period.
    Kovalev takes a great pass from Leetch to score on a powerplay with 5
    minutes left and Larmer scores on a fluke shot off Babych's skate with
    2:20 left to clinch it 4-2.
    
    One to go!!!!!!!!!!!!!

From [email protected] Wed Jun  8 09:56:30 1994
To: [email protected]
Subject: resend...
Date: Wed, 08 Jun 94 09:54:19 -0400
From: [email protected]
X-Mts: smtp


------- Forwarded Message
Subject: Wear a hear on yer sleeve -
Date: Wed, 08 Jun 94 09:43:14 -0400
From: devlin
X-Mts: smtp


- --------
Gentlemen -

Once again, the never-say-die NY Rangers rallied 
behind their gimp-legged defenseman, Brian Leetch,
to somehow stave off disaster at the hands of the
cruising Canucks.  Down by two , the season teetering
on the brink of disaster, they fought back.  Somehow,
Mike Richter became an ABM site and fought off the
MIRV that is Pavel Bure.   By difusing that megatonnage
blast, Richter was able to save the evening for the
proud Ranger team.

Not until the last period, were they able to complete
the rally.  And, in what has become this gutsy
team's trademark, they did it by sheer will, overcoming
adversity to somehow find a way to win.  

The name to remember is Brian Leetch.  He of the
savaged leg, a leg so brutally injured last year, that
he's barely able to pull his socks on without fainting
from pain.   the Brian Leetch who's shoulder hangs on 
by tattered tendons.  An athlete that somehow performs
above the level that could be expected of anyone.

This team is like something out of a Rudyard  Kipling
tome.  And though it seems unfair to ask - or even
expect - anything else from them - I can only hope
that these tattered, battered warriors, proud and true,
can rise up once more and somehow win the Cup.  I truly
doubt that they'll have enough strength to even carry
the cup should they be fortunate enough to survive
the impending onslaught of Hurricane Vancouver.  The worst
to first Cinderella story is almost finished.  But
will the ending be one of joy or one of crushed hopes.

The Rangers - the team with the biggest heart!

JD

****************

The Crazy Met

    
      If JD is going to insist on using those tired-assed military
     metaphors he ought to use an event that's a tad more realistic
     like the Prague Spring or Tianemen Square. The Rangers have been
     favored all along and they're simply doing exactly what was ex-
     pected. Only a Hype City habitu� could paint that gang of multi-
     millionaire mercenaries as "lunchpail" or "tattered". Create
     a .dis list Craze and send it to people who want it rather
     than annoy everyone else with it. 

>> Down by two , the season teetering on the brink of disaster, they fought back.

	Okay, they were down 2-0 in this game, but they were ahead 2-1 in games,
	so I fail to see how this makes any sense.  I guess you gotta be a
	New Yuck fan to understand JD.


	billl

     >> I guess you gotta be a New Yuck fan to understand JD.
    
        Or appreciate him.

	Given the amount of raw hockey talent on the Rangers, I think 
	the "trash-noting" by JD and TCS is going to get a lot worse
	before it gets any better.


	billl

> rather than annoy everyone else with it. 

One of the best reasons to keep posting JD's stuff in
here.

The Crazy Met

    
     And you wonder why Mike Lynch (and I) made those comments about
    unbearable and obnoxious New York fans. Enjoy your hard bought
    victory, TCS. 

	Just remember who said StRangers in 5 and who told Craze while he 
was in a hand-wringing fit when the score was 2-0 that New York would win 
last night.

			       Nostra/DONus

    Since NY fans decide for themselves what is fact and could care less about 
    generally accepted truths I nominate for jd's Kipling Tome:
    
    	The Village that Voted the Earth was Flat

Tommy it is more along the lines of

be careful what you wish for, you might get it.

blame yourself as much as anything else. not nice when expectations
come home to roost, is it?

The Crazy Met

I like Recessional myself, but it don't apply to the rangers.

Maybe Danny Deever....nah.....

billthe

you got that ALL wrong.

NYers' consider the Earth to be round, with NY as the center and 
everything revolving around it.

Puleeze get your facks right.

hth

The Crazy Met

   >> be careful what you wish for, you might get it.

   >> blame yourself as much as anything else. not nice when expectations
   >> come home to roost, is it?

      It isn't about wishing at all, Wacky One. It is/was a statement of 
      fact that you and my New York friends verified yourselves. In fact,
      you said yourself that obnoxiousness and rudeness is part of New York's
      charm (which I guess goes a long way to explaining why you live in Cam-
      bridge). If it was about getting my wishes, I'd wish you New Yorkers
      could do as *Kipling* stated in "If" and meet triumph and disaster
      and treat those two impostors just the same. But no, when you lose
      you are tragic figures of Homerian proportions and when you win
      you're loudmouthed braggarts.
    

> But no, when you lose
> you are tragic figures of Homerian proportions and when you win
> you're loudmouthed braggarts.

Tommy, why are you bringing Red Sox and Celtics fans into a discussion
about the Rangers??

The Crazy Met

    
     TCS brings out the old tried and true "I know you are but
     what am I?" Oh, you wisecracking New Yorkers are just too 
     much!

    I give the Rangers credit of pulling the trigger when needed.
    If the Red Wings had the guts to trade a Primeau or an Yzerman
    to get a real goalie, they might be the ones battling the Rangers
    right now...

Tommy brings out the old tried and true when you can't respond to an
argument confuse the issue.

The Crazy Met

    
      See .564 and then see .565 and then see that .568 applies
     more to yourself than anything. And then see a shrink because
     you need help.

> And then see a shrink because you need help.

Tommy seems to be starting to take all of this very personally. hmm,
I wonder if he is the one who can't handle things.

The Crazy Met

    
      Once again you're just confusing the issue and not respond-
     ing to the argument but if you didn't you wouldn't be the "Johnny 
     One-note" TCS that we've come to know and tolerate. In all seriousness,
     Wacky One it won't really bother me all that much if the Rangers
     win but the ridiculous stuff (stuff is as strong a word as I'll
     use in this particular forum) that we've seen posted by you
     and JD (he never posted anything but silliness, really) about
     a team that has been heavily favored all along (and will no
     doubt be favored to repeat) is/was way too much. All the trepid-
     ation and handwringing, the "lunchpail" and "the Yanks at Bastogne",
     you really covered yourselves in shame on this one.
    

Heavily favored all along??  when the playoffs first started
the Rangers were among the teams that were thought of as legitimate
contenders; however, the Penguins were considered the favorites to
win the Stanley Cup.

Favored to repeat? Not necessarily. Many of the key players on
the Rangers are "old" - over 30. They do have a core of younger players,
Leetch, Kovalev, Richter, Zubov to name some; but many of their players are
past what is considered their prime. In addition there is no telling
what other teams will do in the off-season. Red Wings could come up with
a legitimate goalie. DEVILS could come up with a top scorer or 2. 

And of course you still haven't explained the difference between the
trepidation on the part of Rangers and Red Sox fans or how obnoxiousness
on the part of Celtics fans is different than what you claim about NY
fans.

> it won't really bother me all that much if the Rangers win 
then I guess I'll just have to work extra hard at being insufferabl :-)

The Crazy Met

> Heavily favored all along??  when the playoffs first started
> the Rangers were among the teams that were thought of as legitimate
> contenders; however, the Penguins were considered the favorites to
> win the Stanley Cup.

  Only in your mind.  Most hockey analysts thought the Penguins had a good
  chance, but rated the Rangers slightly better.  I wouldn't say they were
  heavily favored, but they were the favorites.

> Favored to repeat? Not necessarily. Many of the key players on
> the Rangers are "old" - over 30. They do have a core of younger players,
> Leetch, Kovalev, Richter, Zubov to name some; but many of their players are
> past what is considered their prime. In addition there is no telling
> what other teams will do in the off-season. Red Wings could come up with
> a legitimate goalie. DEVILS could come up with a top scorer or 2. 

  While their age may prohibit a 4-or-5-season dominance, I would expect the
  Rangers to be the favorites agains next year, barring unforseen retirements.

> And of course you still haven't explained the difference between the
> trepidation on the part of Rangers and Red Sox fans or how obnoxiousness
> on the part of Celtics fans is different than what you claim about NY
> fans.

  The only difference is in degree.  Celtic fans were obnoxius in their great
  years, but not quite in the class of NY fans in their prime years.  There
  really isn't much difference between Ranger and Red Sox fans, from what I
  can see.

> Only in your mind

Add Bill Clement, John Davidson to the list that had the Penguins listed
as favorites.

The Crazy Met

    
     You don't have to work at being insufferable, you're plenty
    insufferable. I just don't get all that worked up about the Rangers.
    I'd be much more irritated if it was the Yankees cruising to a title.
    As for the difference between the Rangers fans and the Red Sox fans
    voicing trepidation, the Rangers are up 3-1 in the Finals and are
    cruising to the Cup. The Red Sox have come close but never *that*
    close. To every one who was truly objective (and not those unreal-
    istically calling themselves so like yourself) the Rangers were the 
    odds on favorite to win it. I heard it from every hockey fan who came 
    into where I bartend and from every other unbiased hockey fan I know 
    without exception. It was just so obvious that this was their year.
    But you can't bring yourself to admit that. Instead you played Chicken
    Little and pointed to where the sky seemed to teetering as in the
    Islanders series. The Sox, on the other hand, have never been the odds-
    on favorite in my lifetime. As for Celts fans  being obnoxious, that may 
    be and probably is at least partly true. But you're the guy who pretty 
    much boasted about the rudeness and obnoxiousness of New Yorkers even 
    to the point of telling me that you'll have to be more insufferable.
    Wait until the Rangers win it and you'll see records broken for
    arrogant, obnoxious fans. The previous record was set after the Giants
    won it in 1986.
    

.575

re: favored: see .574

The Crazy Met