Blogs – Page 207 – Keefe To The City

Mar 19, 2014

Revising My Dirty Dozen Bracket Rules

It’s been three years since I wrote the 12 rules I follow when I fill out my bracket and now it’s time to look back at those rules and make revisions.

Three years ago I wrote My Dirty Dozen Bracket Rules. I can’t believe its already been three years since then. It’s actually kind of sad. It’s even more sad that I haven’t picked the NCAA Tournament champion correctly since then.

In 2011, I went with Kansas and they lost in the Elite Eight to VCU. In 2012, I went with Kansas again, and this time they lost to Kentucky in the championship. And last year, I went with … you guessed it … Kansas. This time they lost to Michigan in the Sweet 16.

As you can see, I clearly have a problem when it comes to picking Kansas. Going back to I would say seventh grade, I believe I have picked either Kansas or Duke to win the championship every year (there might have been a Syracuse in there somewhere, but not in 2003 when they won it). That means in the last 15 years, I have picked two schools that have won a combined three titles. It’s not because those two teams were always the best team entering the tournament, it’s just that they have always seemed like a safe, trustworthy pick with not a lot of risk involved. But this year, I’m not picking Kansas or Duke. This year I’m not picking a 1-seed and that’s because 1-seeds are no longer 1-seeds.

The committee threw everyone a curveball with their seeding and I’m talking about an El Duque-like 54-mph curveball. So much so that Joe Lunardi has probably been drinking heavily and doing advanced math since the bracket was announced on Sunday night and questioning whether he even wants to do Bracketology anymore. (I’m guessing the answer is he wants to continue doing it since he predicts teams that will make a basketball tournament for a living.) But you get the point: the committee made a lot of questionable decisions. And these questionable decisions were a product of conference realignment, mainly stemming from college football destroying the real Big East, stacking the ACC and creating an odd rogue conference with the American Athletic Conference.

So with the NCAA Tournament a day away and the start of two of the best days in sports a day away I thought I would look back at those 12 rules I created three years ago to help fill out the NCAA Tournament bracket and see what has changed and make revisions to the rules. Here are the 12 rules as originally written with my 2014 Revision following each rule.

1. The 1s and 2s Are Locks
I feel like DJ Pauly D talking about the 1s and 2s. This rule is obvious. Put the No. 1 seeds and the No. 2 seeds through to the Sweet 16. If they lose before then, just tip your hat to the team they lose to.

Don’t try to be a hero and predict the next Bucknell or Vermont upset. Chances are everyone else in your pool had them winning too, so you aren’t going to be missing out. Well, unless you had them in the Final Four or as your champion. If that’s the case, better luck next year, and hopefully you didn’t wager on your bracket.

2014 Revision: Yes, three years ago Jersey Shore was relevant. And it would still be relevant to this day if MTV had changed the cast every year because each new cast would have tried to one-up the previous casts to the point that it would still be must-watch TV.

This first rule still holds true and likely always will. The only thing that matters when it comes to the 1s and 2s early on is if they are going to cover their large double-digit spreads, which I tend to stay away from.

2. Trust The Big East But Don’t Trust Them Too Much
Since I’m from the Northeast, I favor the Big East. Usually I favor them to a fault. Every year I give the Big East way too much credit because there’s always a lot of hype around the conference and just about every year they don’t come through and let me down, and in the process, destroy my bracket.

This year I have six Big East teams in the Sweet 16, two in the Elite Eight and two in the Final Four. In the past it would have been much, much more, but I have taken off my Big East blinders.

2014 Revision: Considering the Big East is no longer the Big East, this rule is worth nothing. The Big East Championship came down to Creighton and Providence, one school who wasn’t a part of the Big East before (and rightfully so since they are from Nebraska and “East” is kind of in the name of the conference) and one school who has been a doormat for Big East competition. So while it used to make sense to trust the Big East to a degree, it’s hard to say you should trust them at all anymore since it’s hard to know just how competitive the league is with this being the first time they have been missing their most important teams heading into the NCAA Tournament.

3. Stay Away From ACC Teams Not Named Duke or North Carolina
There are few things more overrated in sports than ACC basketball. I don’t trust Clemson or Florida State. I don’t trust any ACC team that isn’t Duke or North Carolina.

2014 Revision: Thanks to college football, the conference I spent years putting down in support and defense of the Big East is now essentially the Big East. After taking Miami and Virginia Tech in 2004 and Boston College in 2005, the ACC stole Syracuse, Pittsburgh and Notre Dame this season and will have Louisville in the conference next year. Forget the ACC’s plans to move their conference tournament to the Barclays Center in Brooklyn, they might as well kick the Big East out of the Garden and have it there since they have taken everything else from the Big East. So now I trust more than just Duke and North Carolina (and this year I don’t trust North Carolina at all and will be taking Providence) when it comes to the ACC and I trust their teams more than any other conference as a whole.

4. Remember Who Gave You The Middle Finger In The Past And Who Gave You A Prayer
“Hokie, Hokie, Hokie, Hi!” I will never forget the commentator screaming that when Virginia Tech rallied from 13 points down with eight minutes to play against the Illinois in the first round of the 2007 tournament. And if Virginia Tech had made it back this year I probably would have given them at least one win for helping me out in the past. (Even if it goes against Rule No. 3.)

You can’t forget the teams that screwed you in the past (ex: Marquette, Wisconsin, Vanderbilt) and the ones that kept you alive (ex: Kansas State, Louisville, Purdue).

2014 Revision: This year it’s actually hard to pick a lot of the first-round games (and by first round I mean the Thursday and Friday games since those are the first round, not the Tuesday and Wednesday games) according to this rule because a lot of teams I would usually advance without thinking are playing each other and the teams that I will always remember for screwing me over are also playing each other. Except for Ohio State, that is. I will be picking Dayton to pull off the in-state upset over the Buckeyes and show everyone why Ohio State won’t schedule regular-season games against the Flyers.

5. Give Xavier and Butler Respect
I put these two teams together because to me they are the same team. That probably sounds weird to people, but I can’t help it.

When I think of Xavier, I think of Butler and vice versa and I think of the black jerseys and I think of two teams that have produced some nasty daggers for me over the years. In the past I would have foolishly picked against them in the first round. Well, not this year. Not anymore. I have them both advancing this year. I have Xavier losing to Syracuse in the second round and Butler falling to Pittsburgh in the second round.

2014 Revision: Well, you can throw this rule out too. Xavier lost their play-in game against NC State on Tuesday night, so they’re out, and the only reason to give Butler respect in the past was because of head coach Brad Stevens (the original rules were written before the 2011 Tournament and before his second consecutive championship appearance, so this rule was valid), but he is with the Celtics now and Butler finished the season 14-17.

6. Don’t Go Overboard On Upsets
Every year I start to fill out the bracket and think, “What if this year there aren’t any upsets in the first round? Should I just pick the higher seeds and play it safe?” The answer is there are always upsets. I’m soft when it comes to picking upsets and determining upsets.

My friend Forman is the master at the upsets. His resume when it comes to picking Cinderella stories and making ridiculous predictions is scary. On the other hand, I’m always too worried about picking early upsets and then watching that team get smoked and thinking to myself that I should have just played it safe and gone with the higher seed.

The problem with me is that I usually play it too safe in the first round and second round, and then I turn into Joe Girardi trying to manage a bullpen late in the game in the Sweet 16 and later. I start getting fancy and changing and rearranging my picks and before I know it, my Final Four is full of No. 3 and No. 4 seeds, and that’s just not going to happen. Like Girardi I need to trust who got me to that point and just believe in the top talent.

2014 Revision: Like I said in the opening, this year it’s hard to evaluate true upsets rather than seed numbers because of realignment and because the committee seeded teams as if they were picking schools and corresponding seed numbers out of a hat.

As for Forman, he has still been picking upsets at an unbelievable success rate since the original rules were written (and really since middle school when we started filling out brackets). In order to document his upset picks, I asked him to send them to me for the first round. Here they are:

No. 12 Harvard over No. 5 Cincinnati

No. 12 ND State over No. 5 Oklahoma

No. 11 Tennessee over No. 6 UMass

7. Location, Location, Location
I never really gave this much attention in the past and that’s as stupid as a poker player not paying attention to where the button is. Venues are a huge part of this tournament. Playing on the road, switching time zones and playing against hostile crowds at what is supposed to be a neutral setting is a big deal for college athletes.

It’s why San Diego State seeing Anaheim as an eventual destination makes me believe in the Aztecs over Duke in the Elite Eight after thinking back to what happened to Duke at MSG against St. John’s. And you know what city isn’t far from Notre Dame? Chicago. Guess where the Fighting Irish are set up for the first weekend. That’s right.

2014 Revision: My girlfriend is a Colorado alum and bleeds black and gold and I’m pretty sure she would adopt a buffalo if she could and have it live in a Manhattan apartment. I’m picking Colorado to beat Pittsburgh in the first round because of her and because if I were to pick Pittsburgh and they were to win, I’m sure the locks would be changed when I got home. (I’m also picking against Pittsburgh because they destroyed my North Carolina -105 pick in the ACC Tournament.) But once Colorado gets by Pittsburgh, they have a second-round meeting against Florida in … Orlando. What’s worse than having to play the No. 1 overall seed, who happens to be a state school, in their home state? Nothing.

This year, no one appears to have a crazy advantage for the second weekend with the regionals in Memphis, Anaheim, New York and Indianapolis. If you think Villanova can get to MSG and bring their fans from Philly to New York to make it a home crowd on the road, don’t. Villanova is a bad, bad 2-seed, they won’t make it to MSG and even if they did, they just lost to Seton Hall there last week.

8. Pick That “One Game” Correctly
It’s hard to do, but if you can pick the one low seed that is going to go to the Sweet 16, you’re golden. Easier said than done.

Every week during the NFL season there’s one game (well, at least one game) that just destroys the spread, and if you pick it correctly, you can turn off the TV after the first quarter with a smile on your face knowing you covered the spread. The problem is it’s usually the game you don’t want to touch because it’s too scary to even think about. The same goes with the first round of the tournament.

I sat and looked at St. John’s-Gonzaga for much longer than I should be looking at any college basketball matchup. I thought about the rejuvenated St. John’s program and the loss of D.J. Kennedy and what it will mean to New York City for the Johnnies to make a run here. I thought about how much I hate Gonzaga, how I hated them when they played UConn in the Elite Eight in 1999, how I hated them when people thought Adam Morrison was better than J.J. Redick and how I still hate them for ruining my bracket the last 12 years.

I went with St. John’s though I’m fully prepared for Gonzaga to devastate me the way they always have and make a decent run in this thing. It was the hardest decision I had to make out of the entire 32 matchups in the first round.

2014 Revision: If you have a pipe dream about winning that $1 billion from Quicken Loans or coming in their Top 10 and winning $100,000, well you’re going to need to be perfect when it comes to Rule No. 8.

“Those” games in the first round this year to me are Connecticut-St. Joe’s, Gonzaga-Oklahoma State, Oregon-BYU, Kentucky-Kansas State. And those are the games that you absolutely have to get right in the first round because the winners of those games have the opportunity to upset the 1- and 2-seeds they would then play in the second round. Don’t eff those up.

9. When In Doubt, Find A Reason Or Make One Up
It’s weird. I’m usually a No. 8 seed guy (meaning I take the 8s over 9s usually), but I’m also a No. 10 guy (I take the 10s over the 7s) too. It really doesn’t make sense, but that’s just the way it is. A lot of time I have no idea who to pick in these matchups. So, when in doubt, I dig deep for a reason to pick one team over the other.

For example: No. 7 Temple vs. No. 10 Penn State. I have no clue. I won’t be confident with either pick. But over the weekend I went to a wedding in Washington D.C. Between the ceremony and the reception, I went to a bar with some other people from the wedding and at the bar a bunch of Penn State fans were watching the Penn State game. They were doing the “WE ARE … PENN STATE!” chants every 90 seconds and just going nuts every time Penn State scored. It was weird. Now it could have been a Penn State bar. It probably was. But when I see Penn State in this bracket I think of these kids getting excited about a team that enters the tournament with a 19-14 record and I can’t help but pick Temple. Great basketball analysis.

2014 Revision: There are plenty of games to make up reasons for this year aside from actual real analysis. Here are reasons for a few of my 8-9 and 7-10 decisions:

No. 8 Colorado over No. 9 Pittsburgh: My girlfriend.

No. 7 New Mexico over No. 10 Stanford: Someone I know, who I wish I didn’t, went to Stanford. They could start LeBron James and Kevin Durant against New Mexico and I would pick against them.

No. 9 George Washington over No. 8 Memphis: Aside from gambling losses this season picking for Memphis, I haven’t liked them since John Calipari coached them and watched them implode in the final minute and overtime to my Kansas pick in the 2008 Tournament.

No. 7 Texas over No. 10 Arizona State: Texas won me money this year. Arizona State didn’t.

10. Go With The Coach On Coin Flips
I like Rutgers coach Mike Rice (I know they’re not the in the tournament). He did a good job in his first season and seems like the right candidate to build Rutgers into a tournament team. But what I don’t like about Rice was how insane and demonstrative he acted in the Big East tournament.

Then I look at coaches like Coach K or Bob Huggins or Roy Williams — guys who have won silly amounts of games — and the only time you ever see them going nuts is when they are going nuts on one of their own players. I think the only thing scarier than having to witness a Red Sox-Mets World Series would be being a 19-year-old kid and having Bob Huggins or Bobby Knight back in the day just ripping into you. They have probably made more kids cry than some coaches in the tournament have total wins in their careers. And that’s why it’s hard for me to pick against the big names. I believe their kids will come through because they’re too scared to not come through.

2014 Revision: So about my thoughts on Mike Rice … (crickets, crickets, crickets)

His time at Rutgers really went over well. I couldn’t have been more wrong about him being the right choice for the future of Rutgers, but at least I was right about his “insane and demonstrative” actions.

Without my favorite coach (Brad Stevens) in college basketball anymore and without my second-favorite coach (Frank Martin) in the tournament, my underdog coaches to pull for in the tournament are Ed Cooley (Providence) and Greg McDermott (Creighton) even if the Bluejays are a 3-seed, they are still an underdog as far as I’m concerned.

11. Don’t Trust Teams Without Last Names On Their Jerseys
It’s always puzzling to me when Division 1 basketball programs don’t have the last names on their jerseys. You’re not the Yankees. No one knows your names. Put your names on your jerseys, please.

Most of the time it’s the low-seeded teams that don’t have their names on their jerseys and it feels like the Hawks playing the Ducks (in the first District 5 uniforms, of course). There’s nothing worse than turning on CBS and needing a 12-seed to win and finding out that they have to wash their own jerseys because they don’t have a team manager. Chances are you made the wrong decision.

2014 Revision: If you’re not the Yankees, it’s not acceptable to not have the last name on your uniforms. Not in 2014. That’s why if you’re thinking of taking Arizona State to beat Texas, just remember the Sun Devils still are nameless on their uniforms and their players are probably wearing the same uniforms worn by the players when I wrote the original rules three years ago. Deion Sanders said, “If you look good, you feel good. If you feel good, you play good.” Well, if you’re showing up to the NCAA Tournament with some ragtag uniforms, chances are you’re going to be back in class on Monday.

12. There’s UConn and Duke
UConn and Duke are two teams that always play essential roles for better or worse in my bracket. Let me explain.

I grew up in Connecticut where people love their Huskies and no one really cares how much money Jim Calhoun makes or what NCAA rules he breaks as long as the team wins. I have never once picked UConn to win it all. Rarely do I even pick them to make it past the Sweet 16, and I’m probably the only Connecticut native that doesn’t. I think the only time I ever picked them go to the Final Four was the year they lost to George Mason and I learned my lesson.

As for Duke, I have this weird love/hate relationship with Duke. I like what they represent: winning, tradition, prestige and the intimidation factor. I have always like that they are the Yankees of NCAA basketball. But at the same time part of me really hates them. It’s weird. Like I want them to lose, but nearly every year I pick them to win it all no matter their regular season or tournament, except for last year, obviously, and they won.

The first thing I do after putting the 1s and 2s through to the Sweet 16 is look at the paths for UConn and Duke and figure out how far I want them to go, or if I want them to go far at all. This year I have UConn losing to San Diego State in the Sweet 16, and Duke losing to San Diego State in the Elite Eight. I’m putting a lot into my rule about venues (Anaheim) and the fact that I saw the Fab Five documentary on ESPN the other night and have become a Steve Fisher fan.

2014 Revision: Three years ago I was wrong about UConn as they won the championship after winning the Big East Championship in memorable fashion. This year UConn is a very hard to team to read. They gave Florida one of their only two losses this year and went 3-0 against Memphis, but they went 0-3 against Louisville and were run out of Kentucky with a 81-48 loss not even two weeks ago. The Huskies cant certainly hang with top-tier teams and even upset some, and if they can get by St. Joe’s, they are set up to make a run to the Sweet 16, which is where I have them going and losing to Iowa State.

Duke is going to lose in the Sweet 16 as well and send Michigan to their second consecutive Elite Eight, but the Wolverines will send Louisville to their third consecutive Final Four and eventually their second consecutive championship.

Final Four: Florida, Arizona, Michigan State, Louisville

Championship: Florida vs. Louisville

Champion: Louisville

Blogs • NHL

Mar 17, 2014

The 2013-14 NHL All-Animosity Team

It’s time for the second annual NHL All-Animosity Team and there are a few new faces to go along with a few old ones from last year’s team.

The Rangers aren’t in the stretch run to the playoffs. They are in the playoffs. Every game the rest of the way is a playoff game for a team that has forgotten how to score goals in what are now the most important games of the season. But I’m used this by now with the Rangers and their annual March meltdown.

When it comes to Rangers hockey in March, the games mean more, the points feel more valuable, the clock ticks faster while trailing and slower while leading. Old rivalries are heightened and new enemies are made and they are made easier than they would be at any other point of the season. And because between now and Game 82, I will likely have a gripe with every Rangers player (except for Henrik Lundqvist, Rick Nash and Martin St. Louis of course), it means I will also have that much of a gripe and that many more gripes (I don’t think I ever used the word “gripe” in any column ever and just used it four times in one thought) with their opponents. So I figured what better time than now to announce the 2013-14 All-Animosity Team?

A tradition I started in 2012 with baseball, this is now the second annual NHL All-Animosity Team. This team is primarily made up of players who their fans love because they are on their team, but would hate if they were on another team. Except for Matt Cooke (who actually made the 2012-13 team, but didn’t make this year’s) since I don’t think anyone likes “Cookie” and that includes his own teammates. The team is made up of players that have caused me heartache or distress or really any emotion any Rangers fan would get from watching Anton Stralman play another game in the NHL this season.

For the returning players, here is the 2012-13 All-Animosity Team if you want to reference what was said about them last year in addition to my new thoughts on them.

(Note: Once again, Brian Boyle wasn’t eligible to make the team. Neither was Dan Girardi.)

FORWARDS

Milan Lucic
Welcome back, Milan! After leading the 2012-13 team, Lucic is back to lead the 2013-14 team.

Lucic has been one of the best power forwards in the game for a few years and might be the best combination of scoring and fighting ability in the game. However, for some reason, Lucic’s desire to fight has slowly declined since entering the league. Since his rookie season (2007-08), Lucic has had 13, 10, 4, 7, 6, 5 (shortened season) and 5 (this year) fighting majors. Either Lucic no longer feels the need to prove himself (which he doesn’t), is more valuable to his team now than he was six years ago and doesn’t want to waste minutes sitting in the box, or he is very picky about picking his spots at this point in his career (also very likely), but Lucic doesn’t drop the gloves the way he used to. I guess it’s fine since he did give us the legendary toe-to-toe battle with Joel Rechlicz during the preseason.

Lucic won’t always go with the most even opponent and might do things like try to mix it up with Ryan McDonagh or take a run at Ryan Miller, and he won’t ever become Cam Neely 2.0 the way Boston wanted him so badly to be, but he will continue to be the No. 1 guy in the NHL you hate, but you would love to have on your team.

Alexander Ovechkin
Since being named to the 2012-13 team, Ovechkin had another seven-game series against the Rangers in the Eastern Conference quarterfinals and once again had a letdown performance with just one goal and one assist, so I guess I should actually like him at this point.

Since the lockout (no not the most recent one, but the second-most recent one … is it bad there are so many that I have to clarify?), I have had to actually defend Sidney Crosby in arguments with those who believe Ovechkin is the better player. Or should I say “believed” Ovechkin is the better player since I don’t think anyone can still argue that Ovechkin is better than Crosby and take themselves seriously. So not only do I not like Ovechkin for what he has done against the Rangers in his career (mostly the regular season), but because I have had to use so much energy debating against his supporters.

Chris Kunitz
In the last Rangers game before the Olympic break against the Penguins, I did an email exchange about the two teams and said the following about Kunitz:

Chris Kunitz is the luckiest man in the world. Or at least the luckiest hockey player in the world. A solid player and reliable scorer through the majority of his career, Kunitz did have 161 points in 163 games with the Ducks between 2006-07 and 2007-08 seasons. But prior to the 2012-13 season, Kunitz’s career single-season high for goals was 26, which he scored in 82 games in 2011-12 with the Penguins. And then last season as a linemate of Sidney Crosby’s, Kunitz’s production took off and he scored 22 goals … in 48 games! This season, also as a linemate of Crosby’s, Kunitz has 27 goals in 56 games and is on pace for at least a 40-goal season.

(He now has 31 goals in 65 games.)

I feel like you could stick pretty much anyone and I don’t mean just any NHL player, but rather any actual person on a line with Crosby and they would be good for 15-20 goals.

There isn’t a doubt in my mind that the Rangers will falter down the stretch here, get into the playoffs on the last day of the season as the second wild card and then have to face the Penguins in the first round rather than the Flyers. And there isn’t a doubt in my mind Kunitz will probably score seven goals in the series (because of Crosby) and end my hockey season.

DEFENSEMEN

Zdeno Chara
It’s weird to think that the Bruins will retire Chara’s number one day considering the team they were when they signed him and the team they have become now seven years later. But Chara is as big of a reason as anyone in the Bruins’ turnaround from finishing the 2006-07 season with 76 points to eventually winning the Cup and being in another Cup Final. It felt like it would be at least another three decades until the Bruins won again when Chara arrived in Boston and he should be recognized for … wait a second … this is supposed to be about why I don’t like Chara. In that case, let me repurpose what I said about him last year:

Jack Edwards will likely tell you that Chara is the best defenseman in the league, but he’s the same guy who thinks fights are decided by whichever plays ends up on top of the other player on the ice. Is there anything worse than when broadcasters talk about Chara’s 108-mph slap shot in the Skills Competition in a real game? No, there’s not. Because there are a lot of times in real games when you get to sprint untouched from the blue into a still puck in the slot and rip a bomb into an open net. But that’s just the tip of the iceberg that is the lovefest for the 6-foot-9, one-time Norris Trophy winner.

It’s tough to say that Chara won’t fight or fight frequently since there aren’t many willing opponents to go against his reach, but unlike Lucic, when Chara picks his spots, he picks them correctly, except when he intentionally tries to injure someone like Max Pacioretty (listen to Jack Edwards blame it on the geometry of the rink), which I wrote about after it happened. But it’s not tough to say that outside of being a massive body on the ice with the longest stick in the league, Chara’s game is overrated by everyone and anyone willing to form an opinion based on his name alone (except for maybe Mike Milbury who thought that Chara, Bill Muckalt and the pick that turned into Jason Spezza was worth Alexei Yashin).

Dion Phaneuf
The second of two additions to this year’s team is the captain of the Maple Leafs. This selection is a product of HBO’s 24/7, which couldn’t have painted a more unlikable picture of Phaneuf in just a four-episode series.

After his first three seasons, it seemed like Phaneuf would be a star in the league for a very, very long time. His combination of youth, punishing hits and ability to score made him feared with and without the puck and was the kind of all-around defensive staple that every team wants. But over the last few years, Phaneuf has regressed and has never developed into the superstar it looked like he would become after gracing the cover of NHL ’09. But that hasn’t stopped many from talking about him as if he has reached his star potential and it didn’t stop the Maple Leafs from paying him as if he were one. (I’m not mad at Phaneuf for signing a seven-year, $49 million deal since that’s on the front office for even offering it, but I’m still going to talk about it.)

Phaneuf’s new contract is the type of ridiculous that Ryan Callahan’s would have been had the Rangers met his demands. Starting next season, Phaneuf will be the fifth-highest paid defenseman in the game, according to cap hit ($7 million). His cap hit will be more than fellow All-Animosity Team teammate Zdeno Chara, who despite my animosity, turned around a franchise, won the Cup, a Norris and is the captain of the best team in the Eastern Conference. His cap hit will also be more than 2011-12 Norris winner Erik Karlsson and two-time Cup champion and gold-medal winner and 2009-10 Norris winner Duncan Keith. It will also be more than Alex Pietrangelo, Mike Green, Brent Seabrook and Jay Bouwmeester. Basically the Maple Leafs paid Phaneuf the same elite money that Callahan wanted because of a letter on his jersey rather than his abilities. Thankfully, Glen Sather isn’t as much of a pushover (at least anymore) as Dave Nonis is.

GOALIE

Martin Brodeur
Like last year … was there any other choice? And unless you’re a Devils fan or have changed your stance on the Ten Commandments, then you will agree with Brodeur as the starting goalie once again.

I’m still not sure what happened during the Trade Deadline Day when Brodeur was supposedly on the move and then not on the move and then never on the move, but it was a weird day for Devils and even Rangers fans. There are some players that are just supposed to play for one franchise forever and Brodeur is one of those players, considering he has been on the Devils since I was in kindergarten. Yes, I said KINDERGARTEN! Very rarely does a Ray Bourque-like move work out and instead it just gets weird when someone like Brian Leetch, who was a Ranger for 17 years, ends up playing 15 games for the Maple Leafs and 61 games for the Bruins at the end of his career.

If Brodeur doesn’t start on Saturday against the Rangers and doesn’t play next season and never faces the Rangers again, then the last time he will have ever played against them was at Yankee Stadium. In that game, Brodeur was embarrassed, giving up six goals on 21 shots and then asking out of the game before the third period by making up the excuse that he wanted Cory Schneider to experience an outdoor game. But that wasn’t the only excuse that Brodeur gave as part of that game, saying after the game, “It was the worst ice I ever played hockey on.” I’m sure the conditions weren’t exactly perfect or equal to the quality of ice he is playing on, but Henrik Lundqvist also played on the same ice and after giving up three goals in the first, shut out the Devils for the final 43:53 of the game, 20:00 of which Brodeur willingly spent on the bench. I will miss Martin Brodeur when he retires, but my animosity for him will stay the same.

Blogs • Rangers

Mar 13, 2014

Closure to the Ryan Callahan Trade

It’s been over a week since Ryan Callahan was traded and it’s time to finally put an end to a Rangers era by analyzing the former captain’s own words.

It’s been over a week since the Rangers traded their captain and the Martin St. Louis era started in New York. The Ryan Callahan negotiations started at eight years, $60 million over the summer and ended with him becoming a Tampa Bay Lightning thanks to a combination of misunderstanding the market, an inaccurate self-evaluation and bad advice.

On Wednesday, Ryan Callahan talked with Mike Francesa on WFAN and it went pretty much as I thought it would with the exception of Callahan calling Francesa “guy” at the end of the interview. Callahan went into detail about his trade and the negotiations and his new team to give closure to the Ryan Callahan era.

On his feelings on being traded.

“I think at first, obviously, there was a little bit of initial shock when you realize you’re moving to a different team, but now that I’m here in Tampa, the organization here has been great welcoming me and the team and after getting a couple of games under my belt I’m definitely comfortable and really happy here.”

I’m not sure Ryan Callahan is “definitely comfortable” playing hockey in Tampa Bay a week after he was the captain and No. 2 face of an Original Six franchise. But if he says he is comfortable there then I will pretend that the Rochester native really already enjoys playing hockey for the Lightning and playing home games at the Tampa Bay Times Forum rather than Madison Square Garden. (If his answer has to do with the year-round weather outside the rink then it makes a lot more sense.) If the “initial shock” is gone then what form of shock is Callahan experiencing now because he certainly experiencing some level of it.

On if he would have done anything different during negotiations.

“No, I don’t think so. We knew this was a possibility if both sides didn’t agree on something and at the end of the day we couldn’t find something that both sides liked and we knew this could happen and you have no bad feelings toward the Rangers organization or anybody there. It’s an unfortunate part of the business and you have to move on now.”

Even though Callahan says he knew it was a “possibility” I don’t think he ever thought it was actually a possibility. To him, he thought he had it made given his status as the captain, his homegrown and fan-favorite pedigree, the Rangers being in a win-now window and that Glen Sather never stands his ground against making bad financial decisions. But for the first time in Sather’s Rangers tenure, he decided he wasn’t going to give in to Callahan’s ridiculous, yes ridiculous, asking price and jeopardize the future of the franchise for a 20-goal-scoring third-liner.

The rumors and negotiations are only over for now. Callahan will have to go through this all over again once he is officially a free agent. Since the trade, Callahan’s agent, Steve Barlett, has said, “You can take 10 percent less in Florida than New York and have it be the same amount of money,” which essentially reads like an agent who realizes he was called on his bluff and is trying to change perception before Callahan inevitably ends up taking much less money than what the Rangers’ final offer was to him.

I’m glad that Callahan doesn’t have any bad feelings toward the Rangers since why would he? The Rangers went over the top and came dangerously close to his asking price and damaging their eventual cap space and it still wasn’t good enough for Callahan. Trades and negotiations are an unfortunate part of the business, but asking for a nearly 50 percent salary increase for the years in which you will be at the end of and out of your prime isn’t unfortunate, it’s ill-advised.

On if he was surprised to be traded.

“I was surprised. I knew there was that chance definitely and we were talking the last couple of days and I really thought something would get done. But at the end of the day, like I said, we couldn’t find something mutual and the Rangers had to move on.”

And that ill-advised process came from Callahan and his agent, who somehow started negotiations with the Rangers over the summer at eight years, $60 million ($7.5 million average annual) for a player whose career stats closely resemble former Rangers Brandon Dubinsky and Nikolai Zherdev. Here is what I wrote last week about the comparisons:

What if John Tortorella had named Dubinsky the captain before the 2011 season? He was coming off a 24-30-54 season and was younger, as blue-collar as Callahan and just as homegrown as him too. Would it be reasonable for Dubinsky to ask for an eight-year, $60 million contract?

The answer is no. Callahan was fortunate that he was named the captain over Dubinsky (because Tortorella preferred Callahan over Dubisnky and was never really a Dubinsky fan) and then Callahan and his agents went on to overplay their hand by thinking a “C” on a jersey was worth elite scorer money. But I guess that can be expected from an agent who does things like retweet a Matthew Barnaby tweet saying, “Saw Steve Bartlett at the game today. One of the classiest agents out there.” Andrew Ference is also an NHL captain, so it would only make sense that he ask for Zdeno Chara money when it’s time for him to negotiate a contract, right Steve?

On where he thought the Rangers were headed.

“I thought we had a good chance to do something special. We started off the year kind of tough, but we were really starting to find out stride there of late. It’s so tight in the East Conference, we were in that playoff battle, so I was excited about going on a run with them, but things change and now I’m doing it with Tampa.”

The Rangers’ chances of doing something have improved by the subtraction of Callahan and the addition of St. Louis. That’s not because Callahan was detrimental to the team’s success, but because St. Louis at times has the ability to be one of the best players in the league. The Rangers needed to change their brand of hockey, which has meant an annual early exit from the playoffs (with the exception of 2011-12 when they needed to come back down 3-2 in the first two rounds) and they needed to add real scoring, even if it seems like their scoring depth has improved with this year’s roster and Vigneault’s offensive system. The Rangers lost an on-ice leader, a penalty killer, a shot blocker and a true grinder, but they have enough of those. What this team needed and has needed since the end of the 2007-08 season is more than one person who can be relied on to score and now they have that.

On what he will remember most from his years with the Rangers.

“There are a lot of things. I spent almost eight years there just from playing at the Garden, the fans there are unbelievable how they treated me how they accepted me. I think the biggest things though are the friends I have made. Lifelong friends within the organization and teammates that I have played with. There are a lot of good memories in New York and it’s something that I’ll miss.”

I think it’s safe to say that Brad Richards isn’t one of the lifelong friends that Callahan made in New York. Richards took some shots about Callahan’s locker room leadership in the New York Post, which included saying, “Nothing is really going to change in the way we approach things in the room.”

Now I’m sure Richards could care less about Callahan leaving since in return it brought the Rangers Martin St. Louis, who helped make Richards the player he is today, or at least the player he used to be and the one the Rangers thought they were getting. With Richards on the same line as his old Tampa Bay teammate and with Callahan gone and an extension not typing up additional money, it means Richards’ chances of staying with the Rangers and not being bought out have improved, which is all Richards should care about. Because it’s a business, right?

Nothing I write that seems to be anti-Callahan and none of the negativity that has stemmed from the negotiations and his eventual trade is about Ryan Callahan the New York Rangers captain. It’s about Ryan Callahan the impending free agent and businessman.

Callahan is certainly missed for what he brought to the Rangers in every game he played. But in a couple years when his best days are behind him and his heart-and-soul style isn’t as valuable as it was in his 20s, those who were against Sather’s decision to not commit to overpaying to keep him will understand.

On how playing for Alain Vigneault was different than playing for John Tortorella.

“Well, obviously the philosophies change and coaching styles change, I think everybody can see that … a little bit more of an offense-minded game. Like I said, we had a tough start to season and I think that’s just adjustment and getting used to everybody, the new coaching staff, the new systems. As of late before I got traded there, I felt like the past couple months we’ve been playing good hockey.”

Alain Vigneault has said the right things about Ryan Callahan and his captaincy all along, but there’s after St. Louis, the happiest person to have St. Louis on the Rangers is Vigneault and I don’t think he cares that it came at the price of losing a captain he inherited.

On if he thought he was going to stay with the Rangers.

“Yeah, I mean I wanted to stay there. I thought I was going to. The whole time in my head I never thought about getting traded or leaving at free agency time. My goal was to get something done with New York and unfortunately it’s the part of the business that’s not fun. We couldn’t find something that both sides could agree upon and were happy with and this is where it ends up.”

“I was optimistic right on through. I knew the way negotiations go. There was going to be difference in opinions and there was going to be difference in numbers, but I truly felt, as I said in the media all along, that I thought something was going to get done and I was trying to get something done.”

If Callahan wanted to stay here, he could have and he would have. I think he “wanted” to stay here in the sense that “I want to stay if the Rangers meet might ridiculous price,” but clearly he didn’t “want” to stay in the sense that “I am willing to come off my number and give somewhat of a hometown discount to be a career Ranger. He only wanted to stay if the Rangers met him at his number and not if they met him even close to that number.

We are a week removed from Ryan Callahan being a Ranger and a week into Martin St. Louis being one. It’s time to move on. I have.

Blogs • Rangers

Mar 6, 2014

The Ryan Callahan Trade

Ryan Callahan is no longer a Ranger and the only reason is because he didn’t want to be one.

Sixty million dollars. That’s what Ryan Callahan wanted from the New York Rangers when he began his negotiations over the summer. An average annual salary and cap hit of $7.5 million was the initial asking price for the captain of the Rangers and it was the initial moment that Ryan Callahan began his exit from New York.

If Callahan had received that deal and started earning $7.5 million in 2014-15, his contract would have the same cap hit as Steven Stamkos and Pavel Datsyuk and a higher cap hit than Drew Doughty, the Sedins, Patrick Kane and Jonathan Toews.

If you don’t think that’s ridiculous, maybe trying to figure out who these three players are will make you think it is.

Player A: 28 years old, 450 GP, 132 G, 122 A, 254 PTS

Player B: 27 years old, 478 GP, 95 G, 176 A, 271 PTS

Player B: 29 years old, 421 GP, 132 G, 122 A, 261 PTS

Player A is Ryan Callahan. Player B is Brandon Dubinsky. Player C is Nikolai Zherdev. That’s right. The player who started this fallout by asking for $7.5 million per year has very similar stat lines to two former Rangers, who were and are viewed to have much less value. The difference is Dubinsky will make $4.65 million this year ($4.2 million cap hit) and Zherdev plays in the KHL and hasn’t played in the NHL in three years. What if John Tortorella had named Dubinsky the captain before the 2011 season? He was coming off a 24-30-54 season and was younger, as blue-collar as Callahan and just as homegrown as him too. Would it be reasonable for Dubinsky to ask for an eight-year, $60 million contract?

Callahan is 28 years old (he will be 29 on March 21). He has scored 22-plus goals three times and has eclipsed the 50-point mark once (54 in 2011-12). He has missed 18 games this season; he missed three last season, six in 2011-12, 22 (and the playoffs) in 2010-11 and five in 2009-10. And the games played isn’t going to improve once he’s on the other side of 30 and mucking it up in the corners and blocking shots with his face.

Yes, he was the captain, homegrown and possesses the “intangibles” that make rooting for him easy and watching him enjoyable. And it’s because of these qualities and attributes that negotiations carried on for as long as they did and forced Glen Sather to continue to up his offer as far as he did, no matter how financially unsound it would be to pay first-line money to a third-liner. But blue-collar players don’t make white-collar money, and even if sometimes you would like them to, in this NHL they can’t.

So Callahan left Glen Sather no choice. The Rangers couldn’t afford to commit over nine percent of their payroll to a player of Callahan’s level and Sather’s offer turned out to not be enough for Callahan, even though it was actually too much for him.

The Rangers’ captain is now with the Lightning and not because he wasn’t wanted here or because the Rangers didn’t do everything they could to retain him. He isn’t here because he overvalued himself (or his agent Steve Barlett overvalued him) and he wasn’t able to take advantage of a perfect storm even if the Rangers gave him the opportunity to do so. That perfect storm was the idea that the Rangers would have to re-sign their captain in a win-now window to please their fans and their locker room. And they almost did. They almost overpaid for their captain, but thankfully they didn’t over-overpay for him the way he wanted.

The Rangers are a better team with Martin St. Louis than they were with Ryan Callahan. They now have an elite player and the scoring depth they have lacked and needed for so long and all it cost them was an impending free agent unwilling to accept his true value and two draft picks, who will likely never make an impact in the NHL.

This trade wasn’t the Rangers trading their captain for St. Louis. This trade was the Rangers’ captain forcing the Rangers to trade him for something before he walked in free agency and left them with nothing. It just happened to work out that St. Louis became available and only wanted to play one team and that happened to be the Rangers. And for the first time in the history of a team trying to re-sign a homegrown player, let alone their captain, the majority of the fans sided with the team. (I said “the majority” even though I wanted to say “every fan,” but I’m sure there’s someone out there who thinks he’s worth what he’s asking for.)

There is nothing to bash Callahan about for what he did for the Rangers on the ice since getting called up at the end of the 2006-07 season. He was a good Ranger and a good captain and an integral piece of getting the team over their first-round playoff hump and eventually into a conference finals appearance. But he certainly deserves to be bashed for his off-the-ice actions and negotiating tactics in which his demands would have tied too much money up in a third-liner and would have prevented the Rangers from getting over the conference finals hump for the first time in 20 years.

Callahan had the right to overvalue himself and to ask for more than he’s worth as an impending free agent and (somewhat of a) businessman. He wants to get paid what he thinks he’s worth or what his agent tells him he should think he’s worth. Unfortunately, for him and the Rangers and their fans, his self-evaluation has been and still is wrong.

If you’re ecstatic that the Rangers now have an elite talent and real scoring depth, you should be. If you’re sad that Ryan Callahan is no longer a Ranger, don’t be. Ryan Callahan could have stayed, but he didn’t care about being a Ranger. If he did, he would still be one.

Blogs • Email Exchanges • Rangers

Feb 27, 2014

The Break Is Over for the Rangers and Blackhawks

The Rangers begin the post-break schedule and stretch run of the season against the Blackhawks and that calls for an email exchange with Tab Bamford of Committed Indians.

The break is finally over. After 20 days without Rangers hockey, the Blueshirts return from the Olympic break without their leading scorer, but with three challenging games over the next four days. The Rangers host the Blackhawks on Thursday, head south to see the Flyers on Saturday and then back home to play the Bruins on Sunday. Now that there are just 23 games left in the season, we are officially in the stretch run and it all starts against the defending champions.

With the Rangers and Blackhawks playing for the second and last time this year, I did an email exchange with Tab Bamford of Committed Indians to talk about Patrick Kane’s performance in the Olympics, if Blackhawks fans trust Corey Crawford and what it’s like to be on top of the hockey world.

Keefe: The Olympics are over and they didn’t end the way I wanted them to for Team USA and that’s because they couldn’t score enough or actually when it came to playing Canada or Finland, they couldn’t score at all.

Patrick Kane is the face of hockey in the United States. He is the best American-born player in the NHL and was the best player on the 2014 version of Team USA. It was Kane who everyone turned to control and carry Team USA’s offense in the Olympics and lead them offensively to the gold-medal game, but he never got going. Kane seemed to hit a rough stretch just as the Olympics began and appeared to be in a funk and snake-bitten when it came to breakaways, penalty shots and shootouts as well as a couple of shots that were inches away from tying the semifinal game against Canada. But I’m sure Kane will have his goal-scoring abilities back when the NHL returns and the Blackhawks visit Madison Square Garden on Thursday night, and I wouldn’t be surprised if he had the Patrick Kane-type of game we expected in the Olympics against the Rangers.

It’s disappointing that Kane wasn’t his usual self in Sochi because had he been, Team USA could have gotten past Canada and could have ended the now 34-year drought since this country’s last gold medal. But he shared his frustration with the media after the loss to Finland and looked like one of a few Team USA players that wanted to be playing in the bronze-medal loss.

Are you disappointed with Kane’s performance in the Olympics and him missing out on the chance to become a bigger name and face for the game?

Bamford: Not at all. If you look around that USA roster, there were plenty of guys not pulling their weight, especially at the center position. Kane, like Zach Parise, needed to be a bigger part of the scoring, but Team USA simply didn’t have the horses to put together two or three quality lines that could generate consistent offense.

Keefe: Henrik Lundqvist is now in his ninth season in the NHL and out of the eight prior seasons, Lundqvist has been to the playoffs seven times, losing in the first round three times, the second round three times and the conference finals once. Any success the Rangers have had in the post-lockout era can be attributed to Lundqvist, but here in New York, casual fans or Islanders and Devils fans like to cite his Cup-less career as a reason why Lundqvist isn’t what his stats suggest, despite playing at a Vezina-worthy level since his rookie season.

I always say if the Blackhawks had Henrik Lundqvist as their goalie, it’s scary to think of the type of record they would have and the type of dynasty they could build. If the Blackhawks can have the type of regular season they had last year and then the postseason they had, winning their second Cup in four years, with Corey Crawford, it’s hard to imagine what they could do with someone like Lundqvist.

Last year in the playoffs it seemed like the Blackhawks’ biggest concern, especially in the Final against the Bruins, was how Crawford would play. Do you trust Crawford in net after having now won, or is goaltending still a concern for Blackhawks fans?

Bamford: I trust the Blackhawks’ group of defensemen and the combination of Crawford and Antti Raanta to be good enough … and that’s the key. Crawford has his moments of Vezina-caliber brilliance and others that leave you wondering how the hell he ever made an NHL roster. But, for the most part, he’s been good enough to win games. He was overused and banged up early this season and how he performs down the stretch will be important.

Keefe: I went to college in Boston and know a lot of people that were either at Game 6 of the Stanley Cup Final or were watching it with the belief that the Bruins were forcing a Game 7 in the final couple minutes back in June.

What were the emotional changes like at the end of Game 6 and those 17 seconds that changed hockey history? Going from looking at a Game 7 at home for the Cup to looking at overtime to either win the Cup or go to that Game 7 to looking at winning the Cup so quickly must have been hard to handle.

Bamford: Truthfully, I think there was a lot of disbelief on both benches. To have an empty-net and tie the game is one thing, but to score again 17 seconds later to pull ahead in any game is almost unfathomable, much less in a Stanley Cup-clinching game.

Keefe: The last time the Rangers won the Stanley Cup I was in second grade. It will be 20 years this June since the Rangers beat the Canucks in seven games and the MSG Network is running out of storylines to overkill into making documentaries about from that season. The Rangers need to start making new memories since their best memories in the last 20 years are losing to Flyers in the 1996-97 conference finals and losing to the Devils in the 2011-12 conference finals.

Prior to the Blackhawks winning the Cup in 2009-10, they hadn’t been to the finals since 1991-92 and hadn’t won it all since 1960-61. But after almost 50 years without winning the Cup, the Blackhawks have now won it twice in the last four years.

What is it like to be on top of the hockey world, for someone who forgets what that feels like or means? As a Yankees fan, I have never bought into the idea of a grace period and treat every season as if the Yankees haven’t won the World Series in decades. When it comes to Blackhawks, do you believe in a grace period or would you be devastated if the season ended any other way than with the Cup back in Chicago?

Bamford: It’s surreal. You talk about the Rangers drought … the Hawks hadn’t won the Cup since 1961 before 2010. But, beyond the lack of a championship, the Blackhawks hadn’t even been relevant in almost a full generation. After they burned down a roster loaded with Hall of Famers like Chris Chelios, Ed Belfour, Steve Larmer, Denis Savard and Jeremy Roenick, fans in Chicago were left with a team that was ranked the worst in professional sports (not just hockey) by Forbes less than five years before they hoisted the Cup.

Any fan that’s been around the team for longer than five years will tell you it didn’t make sense that they were champions for a while in 2010 because of how far they had come in such a short amount of time. They were among the last place teams in wins, attendance, revenue, All-Star and postseason appearances. They couldn’t get a call back from an agent, much less sell season tickets. Now there’s a waiting list for tickets that’s thousands of names deep. In a town that had the Cubs, White Sox and Hawks all down for so long, having the Hawks rise to the top has been a wonderful experience for fans.

Keefe: I attended the Rangers-Blackhawks game in Chicago in January. It was my first time in Chicago and my first time at the United Center and it was an awesome experience that was made even better by the Rangers’ 3-2 win.

In that game, the Rangers led 2-0 after the first, but blew that lead (which came as no surprise), before Carl Hagelin broke the tie in the third. It was an encouraging win, beating the defending champions in their building, and since that game, the Rangers have gone 10-4-0 and have positioned themselves as the current 2-seed in the Metropolitan.

Before the break, the Rangers were playing their best hockey of the year (with the exception of a 2-1 home loss to the Oilers on Feb. 6). Now with what will have been 20 days off between games and without Mats Zuccarello for the next few weeks, I’m not sure what to expect from the Rangers as they return from the break.

What kind of game do you expect on Thursday night and are you concerned with how the Blackhawks will play coming off the break?

Bamford: It’s hard to know what to expect out of either of these teams with the number of Olympians returning to the ice. For Chicago, there’s looking back at the Olympics and forward to Saturday night’s outdoor game against Pittsburgh as distractions surrounding a big game against a quality opponent at MSG. The first five minutes to begin the game and the last 10 minutes of the third period will show us a lot about how ready both of these teams are for the home stretch.