Neil Keefe

Feb 11, 2015

The Latest Alex Rodriguez Apology

You know what happened the last time A-Rod used PEDs, lied about using them and then apologized? The Yankees won the World Series.

We have been here before with Alex Rodriguez. Six years ago, A-Rod apologized at spring training after telling Peter Gammons on ESPN that he used PEDs in 2001, 2002 and 2003 with Texas, but only after Selena Roberts of Sports Illustrated told everyone that the man who could pass PED-user Barry Bonds’ home-run record was in fact a PED user himself.

I never believed that A-Rod stopped using PEDs before he got to the Yankees. If he had used them for three seasons in Texas, in which he hit 156 home runs with 395 RBIs, why would he stop taking anything that he took in Texas (and possibly Seattle) now that he was headed for a big market? If A-Rod truly wanted to play in Boston or New York after having watched his best friend Derek Jeter win four World Series in his first eight years in the league and after having watched all the attention placed on the 2003 ALCS as he was sitting home as AL MVP of a last-place 71-91 team, he certainly wasn’t going to risk a drop in production as he headed for either of baseball’s hottest markets as the focal point of the rivalry. Jesse Spano wasn’t about to stop using caffeine pills as she made a run at Stanford while also being part of Hot Sundae as they tried to become the girl version of New Kids on the Block and A-Rod wasn’t about to stop using whatever made him the best hitter in the league as he made a run at becoming the best player ever.

I didn’t care that A-Rod used PEDs in Texas, and since I never believed he stopped using them when he became a Yankee, I didn’t care about that either. And I certainly don’t care that he used them again, lied, got caught lying and is now admitting to his lies. I don’t care that he tried to sue the Yankees and withdrew his lawsuits or that the Yankees might have to pay him $6 million when he hits his sixth home run of the season.

The only thing I care about is that A-Rod’s off-the-field actions have once again caused all Yankees-related discussion to not be about actual baseball, and that discussion isn’t ending any time soon. We still have nine days until pitchers and catchers report and 14 days until the full team reports to Tampa and once the team reports, A-Rod will have to give another apology directed to his teammates and fans, identical to the one he gave six spring trainings ago. In a city where the basketball teams suck and the mainstream media pretends hockey doesn’t exist until the playoffs, the timing of A-Rod meeting with the Yankees couldn’t be better. When it comes to winter and A-Rod, Opening Day can’t come soon enough.

I won’t boo A-Rod on Opening Day because of what he did and I won’t boo him if he hits his 660th home run at the Stadium to tie Willie Mays or if he hits his 661st there to pass him the same way I didn’t boo him when he hit 600th there in 2010. (I would say I didn’t boo him when he hit his 500th either, but back then his quest for the record wasn’t tainted.) I won’t boo A-Rod for using PEDs or chasing an already-tainted record. I care about the Yankees winning and a healthy and good A-Rod helps the Yankees win. (But I would boo him if he went 0-for-32 or consistently came up short in a late-and-close situation.)

In the movie Celtic Pride, after Daniel Stern’s character Mike O’Hara splits up with his wife again, he has this exchange with Dan Akroyd’s character Jimmy Flaherty.

Mike: Carol and I split up again.

Jimmy: Really?

Mike: Yes, what are you smiling about?

Jimmy: Last time you broke up, the Celtics won the championship.

Mike: That thought crossed my mind.

So what am I smiling about? Well, the last time A-Rod got caught using PEDs, lied about it and then had to apologize, the Yankees went 103-59 in the regular season and won the World Series and A-Rod went 19-for-52 (.365) and hit six home runs with 18 RBIs in the postseason.

That thought crossed my mind.

Blogs • Opening Day • Yankees

Feb 10, 2015

The State of the Yankees’ Rotation

Here was the Yankees’ 2014 Opening Day rotation: 1. CC Sabathia 2. Hiroki Kuroda 3. Masahiro Tanaka 4. Ivan Nova 5. Michael Pineda And here is how many starts each of those pitchers made in

Here was the Yankees’ 2014 Opening Day rotation:

1. CC Sabathia
2. Hiroki Kuroda
3. Masahiro Tanaka
4. Ivan Nova
5. Michael Pineda

And here is how many starts each of those pitchers made in 2014:

1. CC Sabathia: 8
2. Hiroki Kuroda: 32
3. Masahiro Tanaka: 20
4. Ivan Nova: 4
5. Michael Pineda: 13

And here are the other pitchers who made at least one start for the Yankees in 2014:

David Phelps: 17
Brandon McCarthy: 14
Shane Greene: 14
Vidal Nuno: 14
Chase Whitley: 12
Chris Capuano: 12
Esmil Rogers: 1
Bryan Mitchell: 1

What does all of this mean? It means the 2014 Yankees got 85 starts from pitchers who weren’t in the Opening Day rotation and 53 percent of the season was started by pitchers who weren’t in the Opening Day rotation.

Despite 60 percent of the rotation missing nearly the entire season and 80 percent of it missing a lot of the season and despite the offense somehow being worse than 2013’s, which featured Travis Hafner, Vernon Wells, Kevin Youkilis and Lyle Overbay, the Yankees missed the playoffs by four games. With the five-team, two wild-card playoff format, the Yankees are always going to be in the mix for a playoff spot and over the last two years they have proved that if they can just stay afloat and even barely over .500, they will be in the playoff picture down the stretch.

For the last two years I would have done a lot of unimaginable things for the Yankees to have clinched one of the two wild-card berths. (That’s depressing to think about and write about considering the team went to the playoffs in 17 of 18 years from 1995-2012.) The same playoff format I vehemently spoke out against had become my best friend and the second wild card that I hated more than the idea of a pitch clock had become the Yankees’ entrance to the playoffs. Back in 2012, had I known the Yankees would be decimated by injuries for two straight years, I probably would have been leading the campaign to add a playoff team and turn a six-month, 162-game grind for two teams into a one-game playoff for a trip to the division series.

The problem is no one wants to be in the one-game playoff (especially the team that clinched the first wild card and wouldn’t have to play a one-game playoff if it were still 2012). If it’s a last resort, that’s one thing. But on Opening Day, no Yankees fan is saying, “I hope we get a wild-card berth this year!” That thought process is saved for Mets, Cubs, Blue Jays, Mariners and Twins fans. It’s all about winning the division and guaranteeing yourself a five-game series in October and not one game where anything can happen (Hello, Oakland) even if both World Series teams last year were wild-card winners.

This year the Yankees are using the same slogan they have for the last two years. I’m not talking about their “Our history. Your tradition.” I’m talking about the “Hope and If” mentality they have settled on, which is equivalent to “We hope we hit a 16-team parlay!” It’s the same strategy the 2013 Red Sox used and it worked out for them, so the Yankees have decided to bank on the idea that it can work for them by hoping that a combination of health and low-risk, high-reward players pay off and the big-name players play to their career numbers. “We hope this thing will go in our favor” and “If this happens we will be good”.

Right now, the Yankees’ infield is Mark Teixeira (.216/.313/.398), Stephen Drew (.162/.237/.299), Didi Gregorius (.226/.290/.363) and Chase Headley (.262/.371/.398). Their outfield is Brett Gardner (.256/.327/.422), Jacoby Ellsbury (.271/.328/.419) and Carlos Beltran (.233/.301/.402). There’s a good chance by Memorial Day I could be longing for the days of Overbay, Wells and Hafner. With an offense as unpredictable since … ever … the Yankees are going to have to heavily rely on their rotation to win low-scoring games. The issue there is that on paper the names in the rotation are attractive, but hearing about a devastating injury to the rotation that could destroy the rotation and derail the season could once again happy at any second.

I have never really liked James Shields and I never wanted the Yankees to sign him. I would have much rather had Jon Lester or Max Scherzer. But over the last week, as his signing somewhere became more imminent, I started to join the “Get me James Shields” movement for the sole reason that the Yankees’ rotation (and therefore season) hinges on the health of Masahiro Tanaka and Michael Pineda, who made a combined 33 starts last season. So when Shields signed with the Padres for a not-so-ridiculous four years and $75 million, I wondered why the Yankees didn’t sign up the pitcher who hasn’t pitched less than 203 1/3 innings in any of his eight full seasons in the league and who is a reliable front-end starter.

Brian Cashman talked with Mike Francesa on WFAN on Friday about the overall state of the franchise heading into spring training next week, so I did the only thing I know how to do when Cashman speaks and that is to comment on his comments. This time I focused on his comments on the rotation.

On if he’s worried about Masahiro Tanaka.

“You have to be cautious, you have to be honest. There is risk, nonetheless, no matter what. Tanaka had a great winter. He finished the season as a healthy player. He wasn’t prescribed any different regimen because of what happened last year. He went back to his normal throwing routine, rest routine, all that stuff … We hope he can be Tanaka.”

Last year in my 2014 Yankees’ Order of Importance, Masahiro Tanaka was No. 5. (CC Sabathia was No. 1.) This year, Tanaka is going to be No. 1. When healthy, he is in the elite tier of starting pitchers in baseball. I wouldn’t take him over Clayton Kershaw or Felix Hernandez, but he is right there, right after them.

The problem is his health and the problem is that his elbow may or may not be one pitch away from putting him on the shelf for a calendar year and possibly destroying his career. That pitch could come on Feb. 21. It could come on April 6. It could come sometime in July. It could come in September. It may never come. Every time I sign on Twitter or hear Tanaka has a bullpen session or during any of his starts, there could be news that he is going to have to undergo Tommy John surgery, so I will have to live on the edge of my seat.

But like Cashman said, “There is risk, nonetheless, no matter what,” and that’s true of any pitcher.

On the durability of Michael Pineda.

“In terms of the shoulder, he had a healthy season. What we saw was very exciting, very promising and again, if he can maintain health and stay on the field we believe we’re going to have a very quality arm every five days to take the that position.”

I like to believe that Michael Pineda is going to pitch a full season for the Yankees at some point. Then again, I also believe that March 1 is the start of spring.

When Pineda pitched last season, he was great. He was as good as advertised when the Yankees traded for him three years ago and as good if not better than he was in the first half of 2011 with the Mariners. Watching a young starter consistently deliver front-end performances was refreshing after watching Phil Hughes do the exact opposite for seven years.

But the key with Pineda has always been health (or a total disregard for wear he places his pine tar). If he can finally pitch a full season for the Yankees for the first time in his four years with the team, they have a top No. 2 starter or even a No. 1-A. Another “if”.

On what he’s expecting from CC Sabathia and if he needs to reinvent himself.

“He’ll be a cautious guy for us in the spring just because of the surgery he came off on the knee. He’s working hard. I saw CC at the Stadium last week … There might be some tweaks here and there. Again, as these guys become older they make some adjustments. We saw Pettitte go through that. He’s an amazing pitcher. We believe he’s going to be a healthy player. We know pitchability is there. I don’t know if we’re going to see the No. 1 or 2, but we do expect to get the 200 innings and the high-end pitchability.”

(My computer knows “pitchability” is a word because of these Brian Cashman “State of the Yankees” addresses.)

Here’s what I wrote about CC Sabathia in the 2014 Yankees’ Order of Importance when I ranked him No. 1:

He’s still No. 1 on the list and has been since he got here in 2009. The only way it will change is if Sabathia really hasn’t figured out how to pitch with less velocity like his former teammate Andy Pettitte and his so-called best friend Cliff Lee (who he couldn’t convince to come here after the 2010 seas0n). If Sabathia tries to pitch with a power-pitcher mentality and tries to pitch the way he did pre-2013 then he won’t be No. 1 on this list a year from now. If he isn’t No. 1 on this list a year from now then the 2014 season will end the same way the 2013 season did.

Apparently, Cashman and I are on the same page when it comes to CC needing to learn how to pitch and realizing that he can’t just blow people away when he needs to get out of a jam anymore.

The thing to notice here is how confident Cashman is that CC is healthy and that he will give the Yankees 200 innings. Usually, Cashman uses words like “hope” to project his players’ seasons, but his word choice of “believe” and “expect” make me think that Sabathia will be a full-season pitcher. What kind of full-season pitcher?

It would be nice if CC could be 2009-2012 CC, but there’s a better chance it’s going to be 60 degrees here in New York tomorrow than there is of that happening. But 2013-2014 CC isn’t going to cut it. We need something between 2012 (15-6, 3.38) and 2013 (14-13, 4.78). Somewhere between that would be 14.5 wins, 9.5 losses and a 4.08 ERA. Sign me up right now for 15-10, 4.08. Please sign me up for that right now.

On what he likes about Nathan Eovaldi.

“He’s not a finished product. He’s got a big arm. I know every time I talk to Larry, he’s excited about the player’s makeup, work ethic … The player is motivated. He hit 200 innings last year and 24 years old. So again we have someone with that type of ability, you connect him with Larry, it gives you a chance to dream a little bit more.”

Clearly, Cashman thinks highly of Larry Rothschild.

I was devastated when the Yankees traded Martin Prado. He was the most reliable hitter in the 36 games he played for the Yankees last year. He was supposed to be the most important piece of Joe Girardi’s lineup for the next two years since he has played first base, second base, third base, shortstop, left field and right field in his career. But now he is a Marlin.

If Eovaldi can put it all together as a hard-throwing, 24-year-old starting pitcher he will be much more valuable than the 31-year-old Prado. But like most of the Yankees, he’s an unknown, with one full season of starts in his career (2014) and in that season he allowed the most hits (223) in the league.

For a third straight year, the offense is full of question marks that the Yankees hope go their way, and because the offense is full of overpaid underachievers, the Yankees will again rely on the rotation to carry them. The 2015 Yankees: Hope and If.

Blogs • Rangers

Feb 9, 2015

Life without Henrik Lundqvist

Rangers fans will get a glimpse at what it’s like to not have Henrik Lundqvist in net, but fortunately, it’s just a glimpse and nothing something that will ruin the season.

Henrik Lundqvist has always had to prove himself. He had to prove himself when he was selected in the seventh round, 205th overall in the 2000 draft by the Rangers (62 picks behind goaltender Brandon Snee, who the Rangers picked two rounds ahead of Lundqvist). He had to prove himself when he was splitting time with Kevin Weekes in the 2005-06 season. He had to prove himself when he let up six goals against the Devils in Game 1 of the 2005-06 Eastern Conference quarterfinals and was benched for Weekes in Game 2. Even after winning the 2011-12 Vezina, leading the league in shutouts twice, becoming the Rangers’ all-time wins leader and being the sole reason for any of their success since the 2004-05 lockout, he somehow needed to more to shut people up.

Last spring when Lundqvist single-handedly carried the Rangers back against the Penguins to save the season by allowing just three goals total in Games 5, 6 and 7 and then led them to a series win over the Canadiens and then did everything he could but score goals to try to beat the Kings in the Final, he finally silenced most of the critics. That’s “most” not “all”. There’s still this idea that Lundqvist needs to put his name on the Cup to solidify what he has accomplished or that it won’t mean anything. But the people that believe that notion are people like Michael Kay (and most likely his listeners too, if there are any) and not people that live in real life. Because under that theory, Corey Crawford, Antti Niemi, Marc-Andre Fleury, Chris Osgood and every lesser goalie that has gotten their name on the Cup is better than Lundqvist.

For nearly his entire career, Henrik Lundqvist has been the Rangers. He has stood on his head in the regular season and done it again in the playoffs, doing everything humanly possible someone who can’t score goals can do. He has been surrounded by horrific offensive teams for most of his career and watched the organization decide to build a defensive core from scratch while he entered his prime. Despite this, the Rangers have been in the playoffs in eight of the nine seasons since the 2004-05 lockout, thanks to Lundqvist.

In the last six seasons, the Rangers have reached the postseason in five of those six years. In that time, they are 32-37, which means Lundqvist is 32-37 in the playoffs over that time (the go-to argument point for any Lundqvist critic is always his playoff record). In those 37 playoff losses, the Rangers have scored 57 goals or 1.54 goals per game. Here is the breakdown by goals scored in the losses and how many times they scored each amount of goals:

0 goals: 8
1 goal: 10
2 goals: 14
3 goals: 3
4 or more goals: 2

That’s 18 playoff losses when the Rangers couldn’t score more than one goal and 32 when they couldn’t score more than two.

I was always worried that Glen Sather would waste Lundqvist’s prime and career by building mediocre teams around him and wasting the chance at having a Vezina-winning franchise goalie. I figured Lundqvist’s career would come and go and we would be stuck watching another Mike Dunham-esque era eventually, always waiting for another Lundqvist to come around. But over the last few years, as that young defensive core grew into reliable and stable veterans, Sather has turned over the forwards on the team to build a consistent source of offense. And magically, the Rangers made it to the Stanley Cup Final last year and have appeared in two of the last three Eastern Conference finals.

When I heard that Lundqvist was missing Wednesday night’s game against the Bruins because he was hit in the throat two games prior on Saturday, I was nervous, but thought it was for precautionary reasons. (Then again, if the Rangers were going to be cautious, wouldn’t he have been removed from Saturday’s game or not have played on Monday?) When I heard that he could miss a few weeks, I was a little more than nervous. When I heard he could miss four to six weeks, I was depressed. When I heard he could have had a stroke as a result of the injury, I was in shock. How could the face of the franchise, who is signed up to be the Rangers goalie through 2020-21, not be looked at more carefully than he was after withering around in pain on Saturday? How could he have been not checked enough with a potentially life-threatening risk in play?

It sounds like Lundqvist is getting better and will be better with time. The problem is the whole “time” thing. Fortunately, the Rangers’ 18-5-0 run from Dec. 8 through the announcement that Lundqvist would miss Wednesday’s game has them with 65 points in 51 games and even if they were to go say 16-15-0 and play one-game-over-.500 hockey for the rest of the season, they would finish with 97 points, which would be one more than total from last season. And let’s say the Rangers did play .516 hockey for their last 31 games, the Panthers, who are in the ninth spot in the East would have to win 20 of their 31 remaining games or find a way to get 40 points in those games just to tie the Rangers. The Rangers are going to the playoffs. They just need Lundqvist to be 100 percent healthy and 100 percent ready when they get there.

If the Rangers hadn’t gone on that two-month run and built up enough of a cushion to be in the thick of the playoff picture rather than on the bubble of it where they usually are, we would have gotten to see what life is like without Lundqvist. We would have gotten to see what life is like not knowing what it’s like to know you have an all-world goalie in your net every night and someone who can steal games and build winning streaks. We would have gotten to see what would have happened if some insane fans had gotten their way last season and Sather didn’t give Lundqvist a contract extension. It’s not a life any Rangers fan should want to live. Thankfully four wins and eight points separate the Rangers from the closest non-playoff team and hopefully that lead never gets to the point of worrying about.

The Rangers are now 1-1-1 without Henrik Lundqvist and with Cam Tablot as their starter. On Wednesday, Talbot became the first Rangers goalie not named Henrik Lundqvist to beat the Bruins since April 8, 2006. On Saturday, he allowed three goals in a tough loss to the league-best Predators. On Sunday, he gave up three goals in an overtime loss to the Stars. It’s as exactly .500 as you can get from a backup goalie with the good, bad and so-so results that come with a win, loss and a tie. But it’s exactly what the Rangers need. It would be nice if Talbot could become Lundqvist 2.0, which he has looked like at times, but it’s unnecessary. They just need him to keep the team afloat, which is what they didn’t have in 2010-11 when Lundqvist was asked to start the last 25 games of the season after Martin Biron broke his collarbone. (And luckily Lundqvist did as the Rangers made the playoffs on the last day of the season.)

The Rangers are going to the playoffs unless a Mets-like collapse happens and all Tablot has to do is make sure that doesn’t happen while Lundqvist is out. It doesn’t matter what seed the Rangers are or who they play once they get in. The other seven Eastern Conference playoff teams are all capable of making a run to the Stanley Cup Final this season and the path to get there could be the hardest ever. They’re going to have to get by three of the seven teams to get back to where they were last June and all of them present a difficult challenge.

This team can survive for now without Henrik Lundqvist. But that’s for now. Eventually they will need their king back if they want to get to where they were last year and where they haven’t been in 21 years.

Blogs • Email Exchanges • Rangers

Feb 6, 2015

Rangers-Bruins Sets Up Rubber Match

The Rangers finally beat the Bruins and the win sets up a decisive third and final game in March in Boston for the season series.

For a while now when the Rangers and Bruins play, we usually get a 1-0 or 2-1 games featuring Henrik Lundqvist and Tuukka Rask. But thanks to an odd Alain Vigneault lineup decision and an unfortunate injury, Lundqvist hasn’t played the Bruins either time this year and instead we’ve seen Cam Talbot. But Talbot did something on Wednesday night at MSG against that no Rangers goalie aside from Lundqvist has done since Kevin Weekes on April 8, 2006: beat the Bruins.

Mike Miccoli, who covers the Bruins for The Hockey Writers and was also my freshman year of college roommate, joined me for an email exchange to talk about the Rangers’ win over the Bruins, what changes both teams could make at the trade deadline and Rick Nash’s incredible season.

Keefe: I can’t believe Pete Carroll did what he did and I can’t believe there was a parade down Boylston and Tremont Street right past where we watched one 10 years ago to celebrate a Patriots Super Bowl win. Ten years ago! I’m going to go cry now.

If you’re not still drunk from Sunday night or if you’re not still hungover from then, maybe you watched the Rangers-Bruins game last night? The Rangers won 3-2 and it was the first time they beat the Bruins since Game 4 of the 2012-13 Eastern Conference semifinals (May 23, 2013) and the first time they beat them in the regular season since Feb. 12, 2013. And they did it without Henrik Lundqvist.

I’m sure you probably could care less about what happened on Wednesday night at MSG since a regular-season hockey game in the beginning of February isn’t as meaningful as the ecstasy that comes with winning the Super Bowl, but I know a little part of you isn’t happy about the loss.

Miccoli: Going from watching the Super Bowl to the Bruins vs Rangers game on Wednesday was like going from riding a roller coaster that stops running at the last second (heh) to a merry-go-round. Total snoozefest and remotely stressfree. Did you know that the last time the Rangers beat the Bruins in regulation was on March 4, 2012? That’s almost three years ago!

So as you can imagine I was thinking, much like the Bruins apparently, that this would be a bit of an easy game. The Bruins had only one regulation loss in their last 14 games and would be playing a team they had dominated recently without their best player in net. See? Easy.

It wasn’t, as I’m sure you saw. The Rangers speed was too much for the Bruins to handle. You mentioned me still being hungover from Sunday night – no way. The Bruins sure as hell looked it, though. And while you’re right that it’s just a Wednesday night hockey game at Madison Square Garden in February, it’s still a big deal to the Bruins who are now the second wild card team, yet only seven points out of first place in the Eastern Conference. This is a weird season.

Keefe: Being the second wild card sounds bad, but unlike MLB where it is bad, it doesn’t matter in the NHL since home-ice advantage barely exists anymore. I remember going on a tour of the Boston Garden before it closed and there was beat-up wooden planks, which served as the walkway from the visitors’ locker room to the ice. I’m surprised players didn’t elect to walk in their socks to the bench and then put their skates on there. But now? Every rink pretty much looks and sounds the same and aside from oldies like Joe Louis and Nassau Coliseum, which are both on their last legs, they all feel the same. We need more small visitors’ locker room. We need to take away the glass behind the benches the way it used to be in the Montreal Forum. We need to teams to stop being so accommodating toward their opponent.

The Eastern Conference playoff picture is pretty much set. The eight teams in right now are going to be there in two months, barring a wild run from the Panthers and a disastrous collapse from one of the other eight. The only team the Panthers really have in their sight right now with games played and points is the Bruins. Imagine the Bruins missing out on the playoffs a year after being the favorite in the Eastern Conference and two years removed from a Stanley Cup appearance? I think that would make you quickly forget about Pete Carroll handing Bill Belichick the Lombardi Trophy.

Miccoli: I’ll take it a step further: there is still chicken wire, rather than plexiglass, surrounding the ice at one of the old rinks I used to play hockey at in Rhode Island. Forget walking on planks, good luck ever play a road game there.

The Bruins will make the playoffs. In fact, the Bruins might not even be one of the wildcards and could make it in as one of the top three teams in the Atlantic Division. I think I may have mentioned this before, but the one team that the Bruins should be concerned about is Montreal. If the Bruins were to somehow be the wildcard and play a team like the New York Islanders, they’d win in six games at the very most. Of course, it all depends on what happens at the trade deadline.

Due to their cap restrictions, the Bruins won’t make a big add, but as you saw last night, the defense has to improve. A second pairing of Dennis Seidenberg and Adam McQuaid is going to get lit up when facing other teams’ top two lines. Before, the need was more prevalent for a forward but as time goes on, it’s becoming obvious that a weakness of the Bruins’ is something that used to be a strength. Ironically enough, the Bruins could use a guy like Johnny Boychuk, but we don’t talk about that anymore.

Keefe: I would talk about Johnny Boychuk and take some shots at the Bruins trading away a key piece of their defense because of the genius of Peter Chiarelli putting the team in a cap debacle, but Boychuk is now an Islander, and we don’t talk about the Islanders here.

I never cared about the Islanders. They were just sort of there. They hadn’t been really relevant since the early- and mid-90s and have sucked for pretty much the last 20 years. Now that they have have been good for four-plus months, the last 20 years have been forgotten by their fans who have proclaimed the Islanders as the “Best Team in New York.” They have earned it to some degree by beating the Rangers handily in all three of their meetings this year and by leading the Metro for a good part of the year. But they will learn that title is made after Game 82.

The problem is if the Rangers and Islanders meet in the playoffs, the Rangers are effed At least I think they are. They aren’t a good matchup for the Islanders. The only thing working in my favor is that I hope the Islanders go 5-0 against the Rangers in the regular season and then they meet in the playoffs. As the 2007 Yankees taught me (when I begged for them to play the Indians in the 2007 ALDS rather than the Angels because they owned the Indians) is that the playoffs are different animal and eventually things will likely even out. The Yankees were done in four games, the Red Sox swept the Angels and then came back down 3-1 to the Indians and won the World Series. That Yankees team was the only team that had the Red Sox’ number and they never got to play them because of the Indians. The effing Indians.

You say that the Bruins could beat the Islanders and I don’t doubt it. I hope they play each other. Let the Rangers play the Penguins or the Capitals. I just don’t want to see the Islanders, Lightning or Canadiens early.

Who else do you fear besides Montreal?

Miccoli: To be fair, and even though I think they won’t beat the Bruins, I’m rooting for the New York Islanders to do well. I think they deserve to have a strong season after so many years of just being utterly awful. I think Boychuk is a big part of that culture change, though it was slowly getting better in year’s past as their core grew. But if I’m a Rangers fan, I’m nervous about the Islanders overtaking the title of best hockey team in New York, similar to how the Clippers finally eclipsed the Lakers in Los Angeles.

Aside from Montreal, I think the Tampa Bay Lightning pose the greatest threat to the Bruins. Of course, the two teams who would actually give the Bruins issues in the postseason are two teams they could likely face as early as the second round. Realignment is awesome! The other playoff teams in the Eastern Conference don’t present a problematic matchup to the Bruins as currently put together. What it is about the Lightning, anyway? I think the Rangers could beat the Canadiens again but even when I was talking with my old roommate about it, he said he feared Tampa most of all. Is it because of all of the old Ranger players on the Lightning roster? Callahan, Boyle, Stralman, am I forgetting any? In a seven game series, I’d pick Bruins over the Lightning just because old habits die hard, but I don’t know if I’d pick the Rangers.

Keefe: I don’t know why the Rangers can’t beat the Lightning or why they didn’t this season. They played all three games against each other in 18 days from Nov. 13 to Dec. 1 and the Rangers lost by a combined 15-7. But since their Dec. 1 loss to the Lightning and then their 3-2 loss to the Red Wings on Dec. 6 (the Rangers blew a 2-0 lead), the Rangers have gone 19-5-0. They have put themselves in a position that if they were to go 16-17-0 over their last 33 games, they would still finish with 96 points this season, which is what they finished with last season. Maybe it’s the Lightning that “lit” a fire in the Rangers? If they are to meet in the playoffs, I don’t think I could handle losing a playoff series to Callahan and Boyle. I would rather get swept by any other team in the first round than lose to them at any point.

Something I noticed about the Bruins on Wednesday night was how easy the Rangers were able to get in the offensive zone, and once in there, how easy it was for them to do whatever they wanted. Sure, they only won 3-2, but Rask made a few remarkable saves that kept the game from getting out of reach. Is it possible that the Bruins’ defense, their strength for the last five or six years, isn’t what it used to be? Am I right to not be scared of the Bruins the way I was in 2012-13 and 2013-14?

Miccoli: Absolutely. I think the Bruins are suffering from a bit of a transition this season. Zdeno Chara is no longer the most feared defenseman in the league. He’s still in the top 10, no question, but it’s very evident that he’s slowing down due to his age. Dougie Hamilton is in this weird phase where he’s in between being good and great at times. He’s the guy the Bruins will build their blue-line around going forward, and while Torey Krug is a strong puck-moving defenseman, there are still lapses in his game in his own end. And that’s it. Seidenberg isn’t a top guy anymore and neither is McQuaid (he never was, really). The Bruins have a top-pairing and then a bunch of No. 4 through No. 6 guys.

So I wouldn’t say you shouldn’t be scared of the Bruins anymore because who knows which team will show up for the rest of the season and in the playoffs. The team’s defense has been really vulnerable in their own end and that has caused opponents to really take advantage of them. You can look at the numbers and see that this isn’t the Bruins of recent years. Still, I think if they can add some depth come the trade deadline, things might seem more stable.

I asked my buddy what he thought the Rangers needed at the deadline and he said centers and talked about how bad New York was on the face-off. After watching the game last night, I’m pretty sure I could win a face-off against them. What do you think?

Keefe: The Rangers are miserable at face-offs and it’s clearly the weakest part of their game, and that’s obviously a big problem for any team, especially one expected to get back to the Stanley Cup Final and even win it. I say expected to win it since they lost it last year and now the only thing for them to do is win it. And the Rangers with expectations are a lot like the New York Football Giants with expectations and that’s not a good thing.

It seems weird that the trade deadline is nearly here because it feels like 15 minutes ago I was writing thousands upon thousands of words on why the Rangers need to trade Ryan Callahan. But here we are again with the deadline approaching. We are still a few days or so away from real rumors being generated and finding out exactly who is available, but the Rangers really do need to target someone who can win a face-off in a big spot, or at least give them a better chance at competing in the circle than what they have now. Who that is right now? I’m not sure, but I hope it’s someone.

I was wondering if you saw who scored the first Rangers goals last night? It was someone wearing number 61. He leads the league in goals with 33. I only ask you this because I remember you saying … let me find it … oh, yeah, this:

Here’s the thing with Nash: I think he’s one of the most overrated players in the NHL.

I didn’t just write that. You said that back in an email exchange on Jan. 23, 2013 at the start of the shortened season:

What do you have to say for yourself now? Rick and I would like an apology.

Miccoli: It took you five emails to address the NHL’s leading goal scorer. I’m almost surprised.

Yes, I did say that Rick Nash was overrated because, well … he was. Before the Rangers traded for him, he had only 30 goals and 29 assists in 2011-12 with Columbus. For comparison, Loui Eriksson had 26 goals and 45 assists in that same period of time. Loui Eriksson. Eriksson is a third-line player on the Bruins, but I digress. After that, he became a point per game player in the shortened 2013 season before putting up 39 points (!!!) in 65 games in the 2013-14 season. Lest we forget how invisible he was in the playoffs.

Now, he’s having a great season and should rightfully be in consideration for the Hart Trophy at the end of the year. My question is if he’ll be able to carry this over next season. If this habit continues, looks like he’s due for a bit of a drop off. Come back to me next year at this time when Nash should be the Rangers best player but isn’t.

Keefe: I was expecting a better apology than that. But I guess I will accept that for now. However, if Nash scores 50-plus goals this year with two other 40-goal seasons on his resume, I’m going to need a longer and more heart-felt apology to Ranger Rick and me.

There’s only one game left between these two teams now this season and it’s not until March 28. So I guess I will let you have your time to celebrate the Super Bowl win that was more of a Super Bowl gift and we can reconvene in seven weeks when hopefully the snow is gone, it’s 60 degrees in the Northeast and the Rangers and Bruins are playing for playoff seeding.

Miccoli: If Nash scores 50 goals, I’ll be sure to publish something about what a legend he is. At the very least, he’s more of a Hart candidate than that guy in Dallas who used to play for Boston whose name escapes me.

I’m happy the Rangers won last night. This third game really feels like an actual rubber match and that means something. Even though it took the Rangers three years to win in regulation against the Bruins, let’s hope Lundqvist is finally in net on March 28. The rosters might look different so if anything, this will be a better way to gauge just who the better team is this season. Plus, it’ll be a segue to the other Boston/New York games coming up this year.

Podcasts • Rangers

Feb 5, 2015

Podcast: Brian McGonagle

The Rangers beat the Bruins. It doesn’t happen often and hasn’t happened in almost two years, so when it does it’s important to talk about it.

The Rangers beat the Bruins. Writing that sentence doesn’t happen often, so let me write it again: The Rangers beat the Bruins. The Rangers blew a 1-0 lead, but overcame a 2-1 deficit to beat the Bruins 3-2 on Wednesday night at MSG for their first win over the Bruins since Game 4 of the 2012-13 Eastern Conference semifinals on May 23, 2013 and their first regular-season win over them since Feb. 12, 2013. It was their first regulation win over the Bruins since March 4, 2012.

Brian McGonagle, who is also known as Rear Admiral, of Barstool Sports Boston joined me to talk about the Rangers and Bruins, the worst matchups for the Eastern Conference playoffs, what Boston used to be like and the emotions of the final minute of Super Bowl XLIX.

Author: Neil Keefe

The Latest Alex Rodriguez Apology

The State of the Yankees’ Rotation

Life without Henrik Lundqvist

Rangers-Bruins Sets Up Rubber Match

Podcast: Brian McGonagle