fbpx

Email Exchanges

Blogs • Email Exchanges • Yankees

Feb 21, 2013

The State of the Yankees: Spring Training Edition

Opening Day is less than six weeks away and with spring training having started, Sweeny Murti made his first appearance of 2013 for an email exchange.

Opening Day is 39 days away. That’s right. Thirty-nine days! And it wouldn’t feel like baseball season is just around the corner without starting the season off the right way.

WFAN Yankees beat reporter Sweeny Murti (the Voice of Reason) joined me for the first time in 2013 for an email exchange to talk about the Yankees now that spring training has started.

Keefe: So we meet again, Sweeny. It’s been a while, but it’s that time of the year again when your phone makes a noise because you have a new email and then you check your email and see that it’s from me only to wonder why you ever gave me your email address to begin with. It’s good to have you back because if we’re talking it means that baseball is back and it’s almost really back.

The last time we talked Derek Jeter didn’t have a plate and screws in his ankle, A-Rod’s performance-enhancing drug use was a thing of the past, Russell Martin and Nick Swisher were still Yankees and I still hated Kevin Youkilis. A lot has changed since Phil Coke closed the book on the 2012 Yankees and judging by the offseason and the word “budget” I would completely understand if you changed your email address without telling me or blocked me altogether from contacting you.

Even though doom and gloom are on everyone’s minds with the 2013 Yankees, I’m actually optimistic about this team. The Yankees are coming off an ALCS appearance, yes it was one in which they were embarrassed, but they were still a 95-win, division champion team that reached the ALCS for the third time in four years. They aren’t the 93-loss Red Sox and they didn’t blow the whole thing up in search of a rebuilding year. I understand that they didn’t have a “sexy” offseason like the Blue Jays or Angels, but like you always say, “Teams like that make those moves to compete with the Yankees.”

So before we get into individual storylines, let’s start with the simple question of why is everyone treating the Yankees like they didn’t win 95 games last season?

Murti: I’m sorry, but I don’t recognize your name and email address. Who are you again?

Seriously, I recognize the name, but you can’t be the real Neil Keefe. You sound way too reasonable and levelheaded to be that Neil Keefe. Oh, well. Whoever you are, here’s my answer.

My guess is that getting swept out of the ALCS made the season feel like a miserable failure and that 95 wins happened almost by accident since they couldn’t possibly be that good. Besides, the Yankees are old now and Derek Jeter, Mariano Rivera and Andy Pettitte are all coming off injuries. Sure, the Yankees had to re-sign Rivera and Pettitte and Hiroki Kuroda and Ichiro Suzuki, but these guys were already here. Yankee fans don’t want their old toys rewrapped and put under the tree. They want all new toys!

I’m glad you realize, “Neil,” that winning the World Series was always very hard to do and is getting even harder now. And when you get to October, the gap between teams is very close and can make a series go either way. It’s hard to think an NFL team with 14 wins can lose a playoff game to a team with eight wins, but it’s entirely possible for a 100-win team to lose a playoff series to an 85-win team. We’ve seen baseball’s postseason turn into a tournament almost like NCAA’s March Madness. But in this Fall Frenzy, the Yankees are like Kentucky or Duke or North Carolina in that they are almost always a 1-seed, but rarely able to complete the journey to a championship.

What you or any Yankee fan should want is a chance and that’s what this organization always gives you: a chance. And for some reason, there are many fans who feel as if watching a team that doesn’t virtually guarantee a championship and make other teams want to quit before Opening Day is a waste of time. I’m glad you don’t fall into that category because that other Neil Keefe certainly is one of them. In fact, I’m almost certain that’s why I haven’t heard from him in months since he’s too paralyzed by grief from last October to even get off his couch.

Keefe: It’s me, Neil. It’s really me. I think the only reason why I’m so optimistic is because it’s Feb. 20, which means there’s less than six weeks until Opening Day against the Red Sox. Talk to me in the top of the first of that game when there are two on and two out and Joe Girardi is going to the mound to talk to CC Sabathia. Let’s just hope Sean Rodriguez isn’t somehow up and Carlos Pena is on deck…

The 2012 season ended when I watched Derek Jeter fall to the ground in Game 1 of the ALCS and not get up causing me to nearly throw up all over John Jastremski, who was next to me in the right field bleachers. I left the Stadium that night knowing that the series was over because 1.) You DON’T lose a game at HOME in YANKEE STADIUM in the PLAYOFFS that you trail by four runs and come back to tie before losing in extra innings. You just dont. And 2.) You’re not winning a series when you just lost your best offensive player and captain for the rest of the postseason.

All of these years the Yankees’ problem in postseason losses has been pitching (outside of Game 5 of the 2011 ALDS and all of the 2012 playoffs) and here the Yankees were getting gems from CC Sabathia, Andy Pettitte and Hiroki Kuroda over and over only to not be able to get men on base or even get the ball out of the infield. But enough about the 2012 Yankees. They failed. (See what you’ve made me do!) Let’s look at the 2013 Yankees and let’s start with the man with the new ankle.

This is the last year of Jeter’s deal before his $8 million player option for 2014 and everyone is saying that at age 39 (in June) and after coming back from ankle surgery, Jeter can’t possibly hit the way he did in 2012. Most of these people are the same people that attribute success and failure in baseball to “luck” and in that case, Derek Jeter has been lucky since 1996 and on top of that, he is the luckiest hitter to ever play for the Yankees since he is the only player in franchise history to reach 3,000 hits. Do you think he will come with me on my next trip to Las Vegas and just sit next to me at the Blackjack table since he apparently exudes an unprecedented amount of luck?

In 2013, I think Jeter will offensively be the same player he was last year. Sure, his range might be declining, but it has been for a while and he’s not about to move to the right any better than he did a year ago, especially with that ankle. But I think his hitting will still be there. At least I keep telling myself it will be the way I keep telling myself he will play forever.

Do you recognize this Neil Keefe yet?

Murti: Well you’re doing a pretty fair impression of Neil, whoever you are. You’ve obviously done your homework.

What Jeter did in 2012 is enough reason not to doubt his ability to hit in 2013, but the injury does add an interesting layer to the discussion. He’s overcoming a major injury, but the time between meaningful at-bats is the same as it is every offseason for Jeter (October to April). If you want to believe that he’s going to still be a good hitter, I won’t stop you.

Of course, we must look at the realization of Jeter’s 39th birthday approaching this June. But rather than predicting Jeter’s decline, watching him for all these years makes me realize it’s smarter to just wait for it to happen. It might be this year. It might be in three years. But Jeter wants you to think it’s right now, because he seems to enjoy saying, “I told ya so” almost as much as Michael Jordan, who I believe celebrated a birthday recently. I’m not sure, I think I saw something about that somewhere.

Before we can find out the answer it will be a daily exercise in spring training to gauge how well Jeter is running and moving. I might even suggest that he change his walk-up song to Bobby Brown’s “Every Little Step.” How do you feel about that?

Keefe: I always liked when he used “Nasty Girl” by B.I.G. or even when he started using Puff Daddy’s “Come With Me” (the remake of “Kashmir”) even if A-Rod used to use it. So I guess I’m OK with him switching to Bobby Brown.

As for A-Rod, is anyone surprised at this new report that he might have used performance-enhancing drugs again? I’m not sure how anyone could be surprised that a former user decided to use again with his career in serious decline to the point that he became a bench player in the postseason. My only problem with A-Rod using performance-enhancing drugs is that if he was using them during the postseason, he might want to try a different brand.

This is your 13th spring training with the Yankees and I can’t imagine that any spring was as chaotic as 2009 with the Yankees coming off their first postseasonless year since 1993 and new free agents CC Sabathia, Mark Teixeira and yes, that guy A.J. Burnett in pinstripes and the anticipation of opening a new Stadium and the Sports Illustrated report breaking A-Rod’s PED use and then A-Rod missing the beginning of the season due to hip surgery that forced Cody Ransom (just the name makes me think about drinking in the morning) into the starting lineup. I don’t think any spring could match up with that one during your time covering the team, but tell me if I’m wrong.

And when I think about everything that happened in February and March of 2009, months before the Yankees went on to win the World Series, it makes me think about how little of a deal all of this attention being paid to A-Rod’s second PED problem and the aging lineup and Mark Teixeira telling the Wall Street Journal that he’s overpaid and now Phil Hughes’ back problem in the first week of baseball. All of this seems like a walk in the park.

Sorry, I got off track there for a minute. I know A-Rod’s situation is much more complicated than anyone realizes and unless the Yankees hit a massive parlay, he will be collecting that $114 million from them. My question to you is: Over/under 0.5 games for A-Rod as a Yankee ever again?

Murti: Okay, now I recognize you, Neil. We really have to work on this A.J. Burnett fixation of yours. Although I would like to point out to you Game 2 of the 2009 World … oh, never mind.

Spring training highlights of the past 13 years? Oh there have been plenty: A-Rod ripping Jeter in Esquire in 2001; Ruben Rivera stealing Jeter’s glove in 2002; David Wells’ book fiasco in 2003; Kevin Brown being Kevin Brown, Randy Johnson’s love child, Carl Pavano’s bruised buttocks, Hideki Matsui’s wedding, Shelley Duncan fighting the Rays, Kei Igawa running like Forrest Gump, A-Rod and Jason Giambi and every PED story for the last 10 years and Joba Chamerlain and the trampoline. I won’t even pretend to rank these spring training stories in any order. Let’s just say they are all my very special children. “It Happens Every Spring,” as they say.

I’m going to take the over on your wager. As I explained here a few weeks ago, getting rid of A-Rod is wishful thinking. Will he be any good when he comes back? That’s a question none of us can answer. But I think we are pretty certain he’s never going to be a 40-home run threat again. Unless you’re talking about two or three years worth. Then maybe.

Keefe: Speaking of A.J. Burnett, Russell Martin used, “Wow” to talk about Burnett’s first bullpen session of the spring. Maybe Martin has short-term memory loss from when they were both Yankees in 2011 or maybe he forgot that Burnett was throwing to just him with no one in the box and no runners on base and no game to be won or lost and no wild pitches being counted. But hey, let’s give the Pirates their moment in February.

I’m going to miss Russell Martin. Sure, there were times when Chris Stewart or Steve Pearce gave me more confidence at the plate than Martin, but he came up with big, clutch hits and played great defense for the Yankees, and I think it was a mistake to let him leave.

The other reason I’m going to miss him is because right now the Yankees’ Opening Day catcher is either going to be Austin Romine and his 20 career plate appearances or Francisco Cervelli, who belongs anywhere other than a Major League roster.

Now I’m always the first person to say that anything the Yankees receive offensively from their catcher is a plus, and if people are going to blame the catcher for the team’s offensive problems (a lot of people did this with Martin) then they are identifying the real problem (the heart of the order). But how worried should I be about the catching situation?

Murti: I guarantee you’re going to be the one who complains when the combination of Stewart/Cervelli/Romine doesn’t get a hit in a big spot. This is where you truly become Neil Keefe again.

And I’m fairly certain Stewart will end up catching Opening Day with CC Sabathia on the mound, but that’s neither here nor there.

The Yankees don’t have a 120-game, every day type of catcher. Losing Martin hurts, but it won’t kill them. The cumulative effect of losing so many home runs might (A-Rod, Swisher, Martin, Ibanez, Chavez). It’s a pretty significant dropoff. But to your original point, the Yankees will have enough defefensive options behind the plate and will have to deal with the offensive shortcomings. It makes you realize what a luxury it was having Jorge Posada all those years. Even if he wasn’t a Gold Glove winner behind the plate, his offense was something you don’t normally see from that position.

A trickle-down effect of not having an offensive catcher, however, is the construction of your bench. Late in a game the Yankees could have two pinch-hit options if Nunez and, say Stewart are due up against a righty. If a righty started the game, chances are the Yankees starting lineup would already have all their lefty hitters in the game (Gardner, Granderson, Suzuki, Cano, Hafner). But they will likely not have more than one lefty bat on that bench (I’m assuming Dan Johnson if he makes the team). Otherwise you will have a bench that includes some combination of Nix and Nunez and Matt Diaz.

The last two years the Yankees could boast a bench that had over 600 career home runs between Eric Chavez and Andruw Jones. The bench won’t be quite so deep anymore, at least in terms of experience.

Keefe: Nothing says Opening Day in the Bronx like Chris Stewart being announced as the starting catcher! I guess things could be worse. Carl Pavano could be starting the Opening Day starter like he was in 2007.

For the first time in a long time and the first time in our now fourth season of these exchanges I’m not worried about the starting pitching. But if I’m not worried about something that’s never a good sign. Maybe it’s time to start worrying.

CC Sabathia, Andy Pettitte and Hiroki Kuroda are as good of 1-2-3 in the American League. Behind them there’s Phil Hughes, David Phelps and Michael Pineda and thankfully not Freddy Garcia. Hughes is already having back problems and Pineda is looking at a midseason return to the rotation. If Hughes’ bulging disc prevents him from being ready for the season and with the Yankees having just one off day in the first two weeks of the season and just two in all of April, who would be the strongest candidate for the opening spot?

Murti: Ivan Nova fell that far off your radar, huh?  Maybe you have forgotten all about him, and now you’re worried again.

Nova is a good bet to win a rotation spot, I think. And even though Phelps pitched well last year and could again this spring, I think his versatility is a key to the bullpen and makes him a good long man/spot start candidate. This is how I would draw it up, but so many things can happen when Opening Day is still more than a month away.

As for Pineda, there will be few daily updates on his progress since he isn’t on the same program yet as the rest of the pitchers. It’s still less than a year since his shoulder surgery. The important updates on Pineda will be in April and May with a hope that he is big league ready again in June or July. The Yankees don’t want to rush him back. They would prefer not to have any setbacks considering the investment they have made in him.

I’m sure, Neil, you will have plenty of time to moan and groan about Pineda. It just won’t be at the start of the season.

Keefe: I didn’t forget about Nova … I wanted to forget about him. There’s no doubt in my mind that Nova will be given every chance to succeed as a starter and (most likely) ultimately let me down.

I always thought Carl Pavano getting embarrassed by the Red Sox in a 17-1 loss at the Stadium on May 28, 2005 would be the worst starting pitching performance I ever attended, but then Ivan Nova had his night against the Orioles on July 31 last season when he blew a 5-0 first-inning lead by allowing seven runs in the second inning on six hits, including a grand slam, and a walk. He allowed nine earned runs (isn’t this when you and Bald Vinny do your “Nine!” thing?) in the game and followed it up by allowing seven earned runs in Detroit six days later. And then he followed that up with 10 strikeouts against the Blue Jays five days later. Ivan Nova has me so confused, but he finished the season with a 5.02 ERA and if he’s given a rotation spot, I’m scared he will get too many chances before he’s removed of it. (See: Freddy Garcia, 2012.)

This Saturday will be the first baseball of the year even if it’s fake and in less than six weeks we’ll be in the Bronx for real, actual, meaningful baseball. I would like to think that between now and Opening Day I won’t need to bother you to be reassured that this isn’t the year when the Yankees finally bottom out like the 2012 Red Sox, but I know there will be an issue to address between now and April 1 at 1:05 p.m. I will keep your email and phone number handy.

Murti: Jeter joked the other day that he didnt’ get to talk to Mariano very much this winter because Mariano changed his phone number. Not that I’m comparing either of us to either of them, but it does give me an idea.

Read More

Blogs • Email Exchanges • Rangers

Feb 13, 2013

Dreaming of a Rangers-Bruins Postseason Series

The Rangers and Bruins met for the last time during the regular season, so an email exchange with Mike Hurley was needed to look back at the three meetings between the teams.

Thanks to some awesome scheduling from the NHL, the Rangers and Bruins won’t meet again this season unless it’s in the postseason. After 12 games, the Rangers and Bruins have played their entire three-game schedule against each other for 2012-13 and it’s going to take a seven-game series this spring if the growing rivalry is going to get a new chapter this season.

With the season series coming to an end, I decided to fill the email inbox of Mike Hurley from CBS Boston with garbage until he finally responded and agreed to an email exchange. OK, so I really didn’t have to beg him since he had nothing else going on (and usually doesn’t), but he wanted me to make it sound like it was really hard to get him to do this exchange since he’s “really busy.”

Keefe: I wanted to be in Boston last night for Rangers-Bruins and I wanted to be at Halftime Pizza before the game eating the best slices in Boston (there are only one or two others place in the entire city worth eating pizza sober at) and pounding their massive draft beers that for some reason taste better than draft beers from anywhere else. But the NHL went and scheduled the second and last meeting between the two teams on a Tuesday night, so I did watch the Rangers-Bruins game and I did eat pizza and drink draft beers, but I did it over 200 miles from TD Garden.

After blowing a two-goal lead to the Bruins in the third game of the season at Madison Square Garden, the Rangers blew a three-goal lead in the last 11:16 on Tuesday night. And while you have to credit the Bruins’ heart (or their “hearts of lions” as Jack Edwards referred to it) for their miraculous late-game comeback, I’m going to also discredit the Rangers’ shot-blocking strategy, which is actually more of a negative than a positive for the team’s defense and the reason for the Bruins’ third-period effort.

Henrik Lundqvist is the best goalie in the world. The best goalie in the world needs to see the puck and he needs to see the shot. He doesn’t need to be playing from behind screens and trying to anticipate whose stick the puck will end up on when Ryan Callahan and Dan Girardi simultaneously sacrifice their bodies and seasons like Secret Service members trying to protect the President. Yes, the Bruins erased a three-goal deficit in the third period and scored twice with an empty net, but none of it would have been possible without some perfect rebounds courteous of too much traffic created in front of the Rangers’ net by the Rangers themselves.

The Rangers did come away with two points and managed to get four of a possible six points against the Bruins this season, but they let the Bruins pick up points in the final minutes of each of the last two games. And while it was good to see the Rangers win their third straight and win on the road in Boston, I get the feeling that no one in Boston views last night’s loss as a loss and that’s not good for the Rangers or me or anyone. These two teams will hopefully meet again this spring and the last thing the Rangers need is the Bruins believing they can always come back against them and that they are never out of a game, and despite losing twice to the Rangers, the Bruins must feel like they have the Rangers’ number. If the Bruins are practicing today, I’m sure the mood in their locker room is of a team that won on last night and not of one that lost.

I guess whenever anything goes wrong like it did in the third period there is someone to blame and someone to praise, but am I am discrediting the Bruins’ comeback too much and placing too much of the blame on the Rangers? And did you get a goody bag with your TD Garden dinner on Tuesday night that looked like everything you would find at a five-year-old’s birthday party?

Hurley: For the record, because of awful traffic due to the blizzard, I got to the Garden late and had no time for dinner, so I ate an oreo brownie, a fudge roll, a big pretzel with mustard, a cup of popcorn and a plate of M&M’s and gummy worms for dinner in the press box. I am 7 years old and everyone knows it, so it’s OK.

I do think you’re right to discredit the Rangers a bit. On 99 out of 100 nights, Anton Stralman’s weak wrister doesn’t beat Tuukka Rask, and on probably 90 out of 100 nights, Derek Stepan’s shot gets stopped easily with the glove. So on a night when they don’t have a somewhat gift-wrapped 3-goal lead, they might not be so fortunate to leave the building with two points.

That said, the Bruins do deserve some credit. They realized against that mess of bodies and No. 30 in net, the only way they were scoring was going to be on a rebound. Andrew Ference’s point shot was intentionally low, and Nathan Horton banged home the rebound. Dennis Seidenberg intentionally shot at Milan Lucic in the slot, and the redirect on Lundqvist led to an open net for David Krejci. And though Brad Marchand just got a lucky break for his goal, that was a pretty good snipe. So it’s not as if the Rangers blew the lead to the Flames or anything.

But it was a blocked shot that led to that opportunity for Marchand to score the game-tying goal, which allowed the B’s to walk away from the season series with four out of six points in the season series as well. So you’re not crazy for thinking the shot-blocking strategy can work against them. You are crazy for a lot of reasons, but not that one, I suppose.

Keefe: For the record, you told me about four hours before the game that you were going to eat healthy and detox after your brother’s wedding weekend. But really, I don’t think you had any plans other than to eat those things for dinner whether there was traffic or not.

When I see Rick Nash do the things he did to the Bruins defense and then to Tuukka Rask, I can’t help but think how they would have gotten past the Devils last May if they had traded for Nash last February. (Yes, I would still trade Chris Kreider for Nash if it was still an option.) And when I see the things that Marian Gaborik does like Nash, I can’t help, but think about how the Bruins have no one like Nash or Gaborik though Tyler Seguin will one day be Boston’s version of those two. And when I realize that the Bruins don’t have a true superstar (even though Pierre McGuire thinks Patrice Bergeron’s is one of the best players in the league), I wonder how they are so good even without Tim Thomas. But then you watch them play and you realize why they are so good.

The Bruins, for some unknown reason, find a way to score despite true scoring ability and a power play that makes even the Rangers not feel so bad about their man advantage and more importantly they find a way to win and win all types of games. I can’t explain it and I’m not sure if it’s even explainable because a team with that roster shouldn’t be this good without their best player (the Conn Smythe winner turned social media guru).

I know you’re probably going to say depth and defense and you might even talk about Claude Julien (I said “might”), but help me out here: Why are the Bruins so good? And why are they so good even without a single player whose jersey you would want to buy and wear?

Hurley: Well for one, Rask is a great goalie in his own right. He led the league in goals-against and save percentage in 2009-10, so it’s not like he’s some stiff off the street. Then you have Julien’s system, which above all else requires responsibility in your own end. That’s why Seguin barely played as a rookie — he wasn’t going to be put onto the ice until he could learn to play in the defensive system. Something tells me that as a kid, back-checking and getting sticks in passing lanes wasn’t drilled into the head of a kid as talented as Seguin.

So with that system, they’re rarely out of games. The 3-0 deficit against the Rangers was odd in that regard. And while they may not have a Steve Stamkos, they’re not short on talent up front. Nathan Horton is a big-time player. All the guy does is score big goals. The Bruins wouldn’t have made it out of the first round in 2011 if not for Horton, and his absence last spring was the reason the Bruins were wiped away in the first round.

Patrice Bergeron lacks flash, but if you were to assign grades to parts of his game, he’d get A-minuses across the board. He’s also won 63.6 percent of his faceoffs, which quietly goes a long way toward earning victories. Brad Marchand has a bad reputation for just being an agitator, but he’s a talented player who has a knack for scoring and has never been afraid of any moment or situation. David Krejci can be a wizard with the puck on his stick (still not a Marc Savard, but a decent knockoff) and Seguin is always a scoring threat every time he’s on the ice.

Add in third-liner Rich Peverley, who’d likely be a top-six forward in a lot of cities, and a fourth line that contributes while rarely making mistakes, and you just have a solid hockey team.

(I said hockey in case you were confused if I was talking about a football team or something.)

Oh, I should’ve mentioned, they’re also big on saying things like “compete level.” Julien hasn’t done an interview in the past five years without assessing his team’s compete level, and it’s spread to Peter Chiarelli and Cam Neely and now everyone who talks about the team.

It means “trying hard.” Yes, the millionaire hockey players need to be rated on whether they’re trying hard or not.

Regardless of its apparent stupidity, it really seems to work. It’s very rare you see the Bruins just lay a complete stinker, and teams know when they’re playing the Bruins that they’re in for a long battle. A lot of teams can’t handle it.

Keefe: Is Andy Brickley saying “compete level” yet or is he too busy talking about “points being at a premium” the way Edzo drops “active sticks” on everyone?

Everyone is talking about the Rangers and Bruins meeting again in the postseason for the first time since the 70s, you are one of these people, but a lot of these people are saying it’s going to happen. A lot of people said this last year too, but they forgot that eight teams make the playoffs in the Eastern Conference and just because people want a series to take place doesn’t it mean it will. And if it doesn’t take place in the quarterfinals then a lot has to go right for it to happen at all.

It’s been so long since these two teams have met in the playoffs and the New York-Boston rivalry has taken so many twists in the last 10 years that I don’t know what to expect if this series ever takes place and I don’t know if I even want it to. When the Yankees play the Red Sox, the Yankees are supposed to win. When the Knicks play the Celtics, the Celtics are supposed to win. When the Giants play the Patriots, the Giants always win. But what happens if these two teams meet again this year in the postseason? Who would have the upper hand? I can’t imagine this series would be good for my blood pressure especially coming in the beginning of baseball season. Maybe I will just pull for Rangers-Devils again.

Hurley: I’d like to see it happen because unofficially, without looking it up, I can state with complete confidence that every single Bruins-Rangers game in the past four years has been on a Saturday or Sunday afternoon and has been a one-goal game, almost always 1-0 one way or the other. That’s all factual. Don’t look it up though.

What happens if they meet? That’s why we want them to meet — it’s impossible to predict. The Rangers have the edge in offensive firepower, but so did the Canucks in 2011. It would be captivating hockey, and honestly whichever team emerged from that series would probably be too beaten, bruised and exhausted to go on a Cup run. But I wouldn’t mind watching it. Maybe even while enjoying some Halftime.

Keefe: OK, I looked it up. Here are the last 15 Rangers-Bruins games going back to 2009-10, which are the four years you told me to not look up.

NYR 4, BOS 3 (SO)
NYR 4, BOS 3 (OT)
BOS 3, NYR 1
BOS 2, NYR 1
NYR 4, BOS 3
NYR 3, BOS 0
NYR 3, BOS 2 (OT)
NYR 5, BOS 3
NYR 1, BOS 0
BOS 3, NYR 2
NYR 3, BOS 2
BOS 2. NYR 1
NYR 3, BOS 1
NYR 3, BOS 2
NYR 1, BOS 0

That’s 11 of 15 games that were decided by one goal. You were close.

It does feel like all of their games have been on Saturday or Sunday afternoons and they were all started by Tuukka Rask, which is weird considering over that time period Tim Thomas was the best goalie in the NHL. (Well, he was according to voters, but anyone who watched Henrik Lundqvist play behind awful teams know that it was King Henrik who has been the best goalie in the league for several years now.)

Only three of those games weren’t decided after three periods and one of them was on Tuesday night. While shootouts are fun when your teams wins, they are usually a letdown unless Rick Nash gives you a YouTube-worthy goal or unless Pavel Datsyuk is participating in the shootout. You have been a strong advocate of getting rid of the shootout and I’m on board with the idea. But what’s the solution? Is it 10 minutes of 4-on-4? Is it five minutes of 4-on-4 and then five minutes of 3-on-3? How can we make it so that the action that we saw in the five minutes of overtime on Tuesday night doesn’t end abruptly to have a breakaways decide a great game?

Hurley: 1. Rask started most of those games because Timmy T couldn’t handle the lighting at MSG! Remember? The lights were different for Tim!

2. You’re such an awful person for throwing my 10-minute, 4-on-4 period in there like you thought of it. Let the record show that’s my solution.

Actually, for years I (mostly jokingly) argued that the NHL should have five minutes of 4-on-4, and if it’s still tied, then five minutes of 3-on-3, and if it’s still tied then 2-on-2, and if it’s still tied then GOALIE DEATHMATCH AT CENTER ICE.

Because that’s a little extreme, and because we’d run out of goalies pretty quickly, I propose a simple 10-minute period of 4-on-4 hockey. I freaking love 4-on-4 hockey. I’ve been to three games at the TD Garden this season that have featured full five-minute periods of overtime, and they’ve all been thrilling. It’s like taking the best players on the planet and throwing them into an arcade game for five minutes. D-men get forced out of their comfort zones to be a part of odd-man rushes, then they get stuck out of position and lead to another odd-man advantage going the other way. Goalies are forced into hyper-mode, and the game is an all-out frenzy for 300 seconds.

Then they stop it abruptly and start a breakaway contest.

It makes no sense.

If you were showing an alien around earth and wanted to introduce it to the sport of hockey, you could show it five minutes of 4-on-4 overtime and the little freak would be in love with hockey forever. Five more minutes of that, and how many ties would we really end up with? You’d have to think that with 10 minutes of all that open ice, one team is going to be able to bury one goal.

And why do we hate ties so much to begin with? Is it really because fans don’t like the feeling of going home after a tie? For one, since when does the NHL give a crap about how fans feel? But even more so, when has that ever been a consideration in a league deciding the rules which govern its standings?? That’s insane. And thirdly (I could go until 12thly but I’ll stop), don’t fans feel worse when they leave a game which their team lost in a shootout than they would if their team had just tied? This isn’t rocket science here. Why are we having shootouts?

Oh, and if you take away the automatic point of making it to overtime, with a tie resulting in one point apiece and an OT win giving two points to the victor and bupkis to the loser. That would only make that 10 minutes of 4-on-4 overtime even better.

And I’m not even someone who out and out hates the shootout. I just prefer watching hockey.

Keefe: You told me today you were going to give short, concise answers because no one wants to really hear what you have to say. So much for that like your diet.

I don’t really miss ties because I had seen my fair share of ties in real life as a child, but you’re right the NHL doesn’t care about the fan at all, so why start by eliminating ties and changing the record books and point system and goalie’s records? It doesn’t make sense. If Gary Bettman is going to be the worst commissioner to ever run a major sports league in North America, he might as well go all the way with it.

Bring back ties! Bring back the red line! Add “obstruction” to penalties again since penalties aren’t already the result of “obstructing” something! Have North America vs. the World for the All-Star Game and bring back the Goalie Goals competition to the Skills Competition! Sign a deal with FOX! Let them make the puck glow again!

The NHL.com video player is currently the worst piece of technology available and it works like something from 1999, so why not just change everything in the league back to a time when Jaromir Jagr led the league in scoring with the Penguins, Ron Tugnutt posted a 1.79 GAA and Byron Dafoe was playing goal for the Bruins? There’s a good question: What happened to Byron Dafoe? That might be an entire email exchange itself. “Bruins Goalies Between Andy Moog and Tim Thomas.” I think I know what our next email exchange will be about. And if it isn’t about that I’m sure we’ll talk again between now and Opening Day in the Bronx.

Hurley: I’m not sure what happened, but I’m nearly positive your brain just completely stopped working for a few paragraphs there. I’m not sure how it all came out in English. I don’t even know what to say. I don’t know when we’ll talk again, but how about this — don’t email me. I’ll email you.

Read More

Blogs • Email Exchanges • Rangers

Jan 31, 2013

Rangers and Penguins Searching for Consistency

The Penguins are back in New York for their second game against the Rangers and with both teams struggling early on this season it called for an email exchange with James Conley of PensBurgh.

The Rangers and Penguins were supposed to be the class of the Eastern Conference. And they still might be at the end of the season, but after six games the East’s best two teams from last year are both 3-3-0.

James Conley of PensBurgh joined me for an email exchange to talk about what’s wrong with the Penguins right now, what happened in the playoffs against the Flyers last year and how Matt Cooke completely changed his style of play.

Keefe: From the moment the lockout ended until Game 1 of the season, I told anyone who would listen to me that the Rangers, Penguins and Bruins would be the class of the East (in no particular order). But after six games, only the Bruins have held up their end of my preseason prediction bargain. The Rangers and Penguins? They’re both 3-3-0 with one-eighth of the season gone.

The Rangers’ three losses have come against the Bruins, your Penguins and the Flyers. Three postseason teams a year ago, and two of the three teams I believed to be the best in the East this year.

The Penguins’ three losses have come against the Maple Leafs, Jets and Islanders. Three non-postseason teams a year ago and having seen the Leafs against the Rangers on Saturday night, I can’t believe the Penguins lost to them.

After starting out 2-0 against the Flyers and Rangers, the Penguins are 1-3-0 and have been outscored 14-6 against some very inferior opponents (on paper). It’s early, but then again with only 48 games, it’s not that early.

Let’s open this up with how concerned you are, if at all, about the Penguins right now.

Conley: Concern is a good word for the Penguins right now. The shortened season really makes it hard to implement changes and it’s becoming apparent that something must change. The margin for error is just so, so slim. Like you mentioned, it’s only six games at 3-3-0, but it’s still a significant chunk of the season. If the Penguins decide they need to make some changes — whether that’s matching lines, new personnel or going deep and making an organizational change — they aren’t going to have the kind of time they’d like to let something new work itself out.

The other concern, and maybe this is related to the first, is their inability to make tactical changes and apply them within a 60-minute game window. It started in Pittsburgh last Wednesday with Toronto. The Maple Leafs pressured the Penguins in one-on-one battles where the Flyers and Rangers didn’t, and the Pens weren’t able to respond. Teams are feasting on the Penguins’ cute setups and turning them into goals. That has gone on for the last four games, and it seems like every team that is willing to do the work can upset the Penguins’ game plan exactly as the Flyers were able to do last Spring.

Is it just rust? It stands to reason that a team that relies on high-skilled, timing plays would need some adjustment time to account for the joke training camps following the lockout. But the Penguins’ problems seem to go back to late last season, when the team quit “beating” their opponents and simply outscored them. It seems like they’re hesitant to beat clubs by playing the physical game, by cycling the puck, by chipping and chasing. The team was successful in the spring of 2011 even after Sidney Crosby and Evgeni Malkin went down with injuries because they adjusted their game plan to address their weaknesses. With those two in the lineup, it seems like no one wants to make the smart, simple but boring plays that a team has to make a thousand times in any one game if they want to be successful. That it carried over from last year’s playoff thud to now seems less like an aberration and more like a fundamental flaw. I’m not sure that’s a problem that can be addressed with line-matching and a bag skate.

Keefe: I know what it feels like to be concerned because I feel the same way with the Rangers. Maybe not to the extent that you do since the Rangers’ losses were against the Bruins, Penguins and Flyers, but because every loss is that magnified this season and every win seems to feel like things are fixed. But I also like that each game and each game’s two points are so significant and that each week is packed with three-plus games and the postseason is just three months away.

You mentioned last season, which I wanted to talk about because I don’t think anyone could have envisioned it ending the way it did for the Penguins. They were the four seed in the playoffs even though they had the second-best record in the East (Ladies and gentlemen, the NHL playoff system giving the division winners the top seeds!) and missed out on having the No. 1 overall seed by a point. But then they lost to the Flyers in six games, after having a 2-1 series lead, (though I don’t think I need to remind you), because of 30 goals allowed in a six-game series! 30! Three … zero! (Not that the Flyers were that much better having allowed 26, including 10 in Game 3.)

Despite the Rangers’ No. 1 seed last year, I thought the Penguins were the best team in the league. And if the season were 83 games instead of 82 then maybe the Penguins win the East and their playoff path changes and they are spending the summer with the Cup. But for a team that struggled to get by the Flyers in the first round, maybe it didn’t matter who the Penguins faced last season in that their early postseason exit was inevitable.

Conley: All about the matchup. The Penguins took the regular season series from the Rangers 4-2. Ditto the Bruins (3-1-0), Capitals (2-1-1) and Panthers (3-1-0), and split their series’ with the Devils (3-3-0) and Senators (2-2). The Flyers were the only East playoff team of a year ago to have a winning record against the Penguins (4-2-0).

That’s not to say another team couldn’t have beaten them. In fact, the losses now are definitely indicative of problems that first surfaced late last year and were loudly exploited by a fast, smart Flyers team (as in the Pens outscoring teams as opposed to actually outplaying them, as I mentioned before). The Flyers had the formula for success against the Pens before anyone else, and now we’re seeing other teams implement that game plan. It was definitely the worst possible matchup they could have drawn. But as we’ve seen in the losses this year, clubs are taking cues from the Flyers — pressuring the Pens into making bad plays, capitalizing on their turnovers and slamming the door shut on Bylsma’s infuriating faith in the stretch pass. The Pens like to talk ad nauseum about “getting to their game.” Opposing teams are starting to get to the Pens’ game regularly. These things do have a shelf life.

At this point, the book is out on how to beat the Pens. It only took two games to figure out the new power play, which after Wednesday’s practice had Malkin on the point and James Neal back to the position where he scored 18 power play goals last season. Still, the other elements of their game — high-risk puck retrieval, using the boards to make the tip-pass deep into the offensive zone, the blue line power-play drop pass — all those things have been figured out. Simply showing up and competing at a level commensurate to their opponents would be a good place to start, but there need to be serious, systemic changes to the breakout and power play if they ever plan to adjust to the clubs which have already adjusted to them.

Keefe: I hope John Tortorella has time to read this before Thursday’s game as you give away the Penguins’ never-changing game plan because the Rangers haven’t defeated the Penguins since Jan. 6, 2012 and have lost the last five matchups.

On Tuesday night, the Islanders’ Colin McDonald became the second player suspended by Brendan Shanahan this season when he ran the Penguins’ Ben Lovejoy from behind.

Matt Cooke has been suspended five times (four with the Penguins), including the first round of the 2010-11 playoffs for his ridiculous actions. Cooke changed his game following that suspension and played in all 82 games last season, the first time he had done so in nine years, and scored a career-high 19 goals and posted his highest points total (38) in nine years as well. He also recorded a career low in penalty minutes with 44.

If someone started watching hockey and the Penguins in 2011-12 for the first time, they would have thought Cooke was an effective player and a great secondary scoring option for the Penguins. But for anyone who watched Cooke was prior to last season, it seems unfathomable that he could completely change his style of play and not be the most dangerous and reckless player in the league.

To me, Matt Cooke will always be the guy extending his elbow after hitting Marc Savard in the head or the guy who created the textbook video for boarding when he rocked Fedor Tyutin from behind. But that doesn’t mean that’s the case for everyone.

What do you think of Cooke now and what’s your perception of his style of his play pre-2011-12 and post-2011-12?

Conley: The change certainly seems to be genuine. The players obviously have great respect for Ray Shero, and I can’t imagine a more influential voice in all of hockey than Mario Lemieux. Both of them laid out an ultimatum for Cooke. Cooke’s obviously an intelligent player and person, so it’s not unfathomable that he could make that change.

I think for a lot of guys, that style of play used to be their ticket into the league. It almost became Cooke’s ticket out. Every player is doing what he needs to do to stick, whether it’s score goals, block shots or fight and piss people off. For Cooke, the agitator role was his meal ticket. The culture of the game changed, so he had to change with it.

For fans who only see Cooke a few times a year, that reputation is going to precede the player. Maybe that’s why no one thought Cooke could reinvent his game at his age. But I think being a little older played to his advantage, being experienced enough to know what was at stake. The reputation before his suspensions was obviously awful, and at least in Pittsburgh the shift in his style was a big story last year. I don’t know how he’s perceived league-wide, or whether all is forgiven, but anyone who can’t acknowledge that he has adapted and adopted a cleaner style is probably still a little salty about his past.

Read More

Blogs • Email Exchanges • Rangers

Jan 23, 2013

Rangers Better Be Ready for Rematch with Bruins

The Rangers haven’t won a game and the Bruins haven’t lost a game, so obviously it was time for an email exchange with Mike Miccoli.

The bad news is the Rangers are winless. The good news it’s only been two games. However, the troublesome news is that the season is only 48 games long and there really isn’t any time for a losing streak.

Mike Miccoli, who covers the Bruins for The Hockey Writers, contributes to this site and also happened to be my roommate for freshman year of college, joined me to talk about what happened between the Rangers and Bruins on Opening Night in Boston and what to expect this season, including their rematch on Wednesday night at Madison Square Garden.

Keefe: The first thing I thought of when I heard the lockout was over was that I wouldn’t be able to read your sarcastic tweets about not being able to watch hockey anymore. Actually I take that back. The first thing I thought was “Woooooooooooooooo!” and then I thought about your tweets. After two games I’m not so sure I want hockey back.

The Rangers are 0-2 and for someone who takes regular season losses like season-ending losses (see: my take on the Yankees), this start sucks. The Rangers lost in Boston on Saturday and then were embarrassed at home on Sunday. Henrik Lundqvist was pulled in Game 2 of the year after not being pulled once in 2011-12. He has given up seven goals in two games. I think he gave up seven goals all of last year.

But I’m sure you don’t want to hear me complain. The Patriots were just destroyed at home by the Ravens with a Super Bowl trip on the line and Tom Brady’s legacy took another hit. But hey, at least your hockey team is 2-0 and will be when I walk in the MSG doors for the first time this year on Wednesday night.

Miccoli: Tom Brady is a legend even though he can’t throw the ball and catch it at the same time. You should have learned that last year. But seriously, how are things in New York? Is Torts on the hot seat? Lundqvist demand a trade yet? Think about this for a second: by Thursday morning, the New York Rangers could be 0-3. That’s six percent of the 2013 season completely wasted for a team that so, so many predicted to come out of the East.

Now I know what you’re thinking: it’s early. Of course it is, but when will the Rangers gain traction? For me, the biggest issue is all of the passengers. Guys like Marian Gaborik, Chris Kreider and Carl Hagelin have been invisible so far. When three of your supposed, All-Star top-six forwards are just watching, that’s a major problem.

The Bruins, on the other hand, have been firing on all cylinders. Did you watch the Winnipeg game? Ondrej Pavelec owes his two posts a steak dinner and a six-pack each for bailing him out so many times. Realistically speaking, the Bruins should have won that game 8-1, maybe even 9-1 if it wasn’t for so many dings. In net, Tuukka Rask is making Bruins’ fans forget about Tim Thomas quicker than they forgot about the lockout once they charged hundreds of dollars to their credit cards for crappy balcony seats.

I just hope the renovations at MSG are complete enough so that Rask doesn’t have to use that excuse on Wednesday.

Keefe: It’s too bad about the Patriots. I was really hoping they would win the AFC Championship and head to their sixth Super Bowl in 12 years. It’s really too bad.

Please don’t bring up the MSG renovations. It was one of the last remaining buildings that had that old-school feel to it and now it looks like every other modern arena on the inside. Sure, the amenities are awesome and the new seats are better than the cheap Metro North-like plastic seats (or the T commuter rail seats for you and I know you’re used to those), but I will miss the look and feel of the old interior. It might as well be the cement block with no character on Causeway Street in Boston. Actually, I take that back. Nothing can be that bad.

You’re right about Gaborik and Kreider and Hagelin. Too many times have they been out there for Sunday Skate watching the play rather than being in the play or trying to make something happen. But you know who hasn’t stood around and watched the play happen? Rick Nash.

When it comes to Nash, I haven’t been this excited for a player’s arrival in New York since Alex Rodriguez in 2004. And that’s either a good thing when you think about the two AL MVPs and arguably the best postseason for anyone ever in 2009. Or it’s a bad thing when you think about the 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2010, 2011 and 2012 postseasons, the admission to using performance-enhancing drugs or any of the 9,817 headlines he made for non-baseball related events.

We’ll get to your Bruins, but after two games of seeing Rick Nash as a Ranger, he has been the player I thought he would be and the player I was willing to trade the whole system for last February. He scored his first goal as a Ranger on Sunday against the Penguins and had several other high-quality scoring chances in the game as well as on Saturday against the Bruins. If his play continues at this level and the rest of the team realizes that the season has started and Derek Stepan and Michael Del Zotto are taking off the first unit on the power play, Nash will have quite the season.

Miccoli: I’m actually elated that Rick Nash ended up in New York since I was getting sick and tired of hearing about how he’d look good in a Bruins uniform for the past year. Little did I know that Glen Sather would be able to frisk Scott Howson in the deal, making it one of the more lopsided trades in recent memory.

Here’s the thing with Nash: I think he’s one of the most overrated players in the NHL. I get that he never had any help in Columbus and the best center he played with was a past-his-prime Sergei Federov but for his $7.8 million cap hit, he’s going to end up as more of a burden than a savior for a Rangers team that’s already pretty well stacked. Sure, he’s a physical player who will help get the momentum going eventually and score a decent number of goals but I think he could crack under the pressure in New York. I mean, he was playing in Columbus and only scored 40-plus goals twice in nine seasons, eclipsing 70-plus points once. ONCE! Want to know who has a similar trend in point totals in fewer seasons? David Krejci. And he’s not even the Bruins’ No. 1 center.

If Nash couldn’t pad his stats in Columbus where he was the entire show, I don’t know how he could in New York when there are plenty of other scorers who could pose a threat to opposing teams. I should probably mention his postseason experience of a whopping four games since 2002-03, but I’d rather you not go Andy Bernard on me and punch a wall this early in the season.

But I guess when you can acquire an All-Star player who is consistent for spare parts that you were looking to get rid of anyway, it’s not a terrible thing.

Keefe: “Newsflash. It’s not funny. In fact, it’s pretty freakin’ unfunny!”

Woah, woah, woah. I didn’t think the conversation was going to go this way. Overrated? Overrated? Overrated? I feel like Derek Zoolander screaming, “One look?! One look?! One look?!” “Rick Nash” and “overrated” should never be used in the same sentence. This falls in line with my unnecessary Dennis Seidenberg bashing last week

As a 19-year old, Nash led the NHL in goals with 41 goals for Columbus. That team finished the year with 62 points, which was good enough for 27th place in the league and 29 points out of the eighth seed in the West. Their top assist man was David Vyborny. Da-vid Vy-born-y. He had 31 assists! 31!

As a 24-year old, Nash scored 40 goals again for a Columbus team that finished seventh in the West and was swept in the first round in their only playoff series ever, though Nash had three points in that series.

The man has scored at least 30 goals in seven of his nine NHL seasons and one of the two years he didn’t was when he was an 18-year-old rookie (he scored 17). Sure, you could make the case that he always has more goals than assists (290-259 career), but who was he supposed to pass to all those years in Columbus? Kristian Huselius? R.J. Umberger? A washed-up Sergei Fedorov? The answer is no one. So he didn’t pass. He just dangled through entire teams by himself and produced goals like this.

I think he did a fine job trying to pad his stats in Columbus, but he couldn’t because there was literally no help on the team … at all … for nine years! Nine years! It was a one-man show and he did the best he could, which was an average of 32 goals a year on the worst team in the league for the last decade. I think he will do a much better job putting up even better and more even and balanced numbers with other stars surrounding him and guys who can actually feed him the puck and do some of the work for him. He will make what is usually an embarrassing power play dangerous and will be the difference maker for this team in the postseason (if they can win a game first).

There’s a reason I was willing to give up everything for him a year ago and why I believe he would have been the difference between playing the Kings for the Cup and losing to the Devils in six games. There’s a reason he was part of the first line for Team Canada in the 2010 Olympics and on their first power play unit. There’s a reason why his cap hit is $7.8 million. And there’s a reason why I’m not worried about it. Rick Nash is the real deal.

Miccoli: I look forward to your demeanor six months from now if the New York Rangers aren’t crowned Stanley Cup Champions. Don’t get me wrong, the Rangers are a good team, a really good team, but that’s exactly it: they’re a team. Rick Nash can produce as much as possible but if they’re not getting contributions from other stars like Gaborik and Richards, production from their depth players and secondary scorers and a strong effort on the blue line, the season could take a turn.

And what about Lundqvist? Seven goals in two games seems like a billion for a guy known for being stingy in net. (Hey, that’s almost four times as many goals that Rask has allowed!) For a goalie that has carried a team on his back for years, wouldn’t it be ironic for him to suddenly falter?

Now don’t get me wrong, I still think King Henrik is still one of the best netminders in the world, even if he makes glove saves after the puck has crossed the goal line. He made some tremendous saves in Boston, allowing only three goals on 34 shots, which seems like a lot for a team synonymous with throwing their bodies in front of pucks as if they were crash test dummies. Can’t say I’d do the same if I was out there, so there’s that, but the Rangers shot blocking was one of the main reasons why they were so successful last year.

Now the power play…yeah, I feel your pain. At least you don’t have to endure the “Bruins are 0-for-(insert number of past Bruin here) on the power play” tweets like I have to. Easily the worst trend to come out of the Bruins’ Cup run … and there were some doozies.

Keefe: Henrik Lundqvist entered the Derek Jeter, Mariano Rivera and Eli Manning level of respect from me in that I won’t say something bad about him … ever. (However, there are some “Ladies and gentlemen, Eli Manning” tweets floating around there from the final weeks of this season.) The only difference is that Lundqvist hasn’t won a championship. Actually, there’s another difference: Lundqvist has never really had much help in seven years. That’s why this year is supposed to be different.

Last year I pleaded with anyone who would listen about why the Rangers had to trade Rick Nash. My reasoning was simple: You can’t keep wasting years of Henrik Lundqvist’s prime. The Rangers didn’t add a scorer in Nash and they couldn’t score consistently in the playoffs and they lost in the Eastern Conference Finals. I don’t know for sure that Nash would have had produced a Rangers-Kings series, but I like to believe that I know for sure that he would. Instead the Rangers relied on lucky bounces and garbage goals, which they relied on for a lot of their regular season wins that got them the No. 1 seed, but when those bounces stopped finding them, they lost. They needed seven games to knock off the No. 8 Senators and the No. 7 Capitals and then they couldn’t solve a 40-year-old Martin Brodeur, who looked 80 at times, and an offense that had very similar problems. But it probably didn’t matter because I don’t think any team was beating the Kings last spring and summer. Though I’d like to think a team with Henrik Lundqvist in net would have had a better chance.

Up until last year, the Rangers’ game plan was score the first goal and then hope for a shutout. It’s why their postseasons only lasted one round for a few years. Last year things looked like they would start to be different and there was some secondary scoring added around Marian Gaborik. Now the team has Gaborik and Nash and Brad Richards and Ryan Callahan and Carl Hagelin and Chris Kreider and Derek Stepan. There’s no reason the 2010-11 game plan of playing for one goal and if you’re really, really lucky, two goals should still be the plan.

Like I said, I won’t fault Lundqvist for any of the team’s problems through two games (I have to remind myself it’s only been two games) and even though seven goals in two games is a problem, the Rangers have allowed 73 shots in 60 minutes. I’m not sure that’s a recipe for success and I’m not sure going 1-for-9 on the power play is one either.

As for the shot blocking, that’s what everyone always wants to talk about with the Rangers. And while it shows a blue-collar mentality and a lunch pail and hard hat image for New York City, it can do just as much bad for the team as it can good. It seems like most goals Lundqvist allowed last year were a product of blocked shots off Rangers that screened him or deflected. That hasn’t necessarily been the case this year, but letting the Penguins play “Rebound” in front of him isn’t exactly a good idea.

On Saturday, the Rangers lost to a better “team.” I’m not sure the Bruins will be the better team after Game 48 (I just wanted to write that to see how weird it sounded and read coming off the fingers onto the screen), but right now the Bruins are the better “team” with less new faces and more chemistry than the Rangers. The same goes for the Penguins. I’m not sure 96 hours is enough time for the Rangers to get it together since seeing the Bruins, but I would like to think they took the time on Monday and Tuesday to try some line combinations that will last more than one shift.

But I said it: The Bruins are a better team … right now. And that’s without crazy man Tim Thomas in net.

Miccoli: The Bruins are one of a few teams that could actually benefit from a 48-game season. Aside from the obvious Tim Thomas departure (which still bugs me, but I’ll get to that), only Benoit Pouliot, Joe Corvo, Greg Zanon and Brian Rolston have left the team. Five years from now, this will be more forgettable than that time the Bruins had Yan Stastny, Petr Tenkrat and Stanislav Chistov on the roster. The additions to the lineup Chris Bourque, Dougie Hamilton and even a healthy Nathan Horton, give the Bruins an instant upgrade from when we saw them last, leaving the ice after Game 7 of the Eastern Conference Quarterfinals. I can preach about the importance of chemistry (which the Bruins have), the benefits of a positive locker room (this, too) and even the crucial depth needed to win the Stanley Cup (hey, the Bruins have this too!), but I think that’s best saved for their play on the ice.

The Bruins have the opportunity to be a Stanley Cup contender for a long time. They have incredible depth playing in Boston right now and a boatload of prospects who should be NHL-ready as soon as next season. Factor in the development of players like Tyler Seguin, Brad Marchand and Tuukka Rask and you have a wide-open championship window for Boston. That’s exciting, since no other Boston sports team is in a situation quite like the Bruins. Everyone hates the Red Sox, the Celtics are old and too many people are whining about the Patriots. Never in a million years did I think that the Bruins would be the toast of the town. But now they are and they know it, too.

Bruins coach Claude Julien said on Monday that he was aware of the team’s obligation to the city. Andrew Ference is tweeting about how much he loves the city and how the team loves playing in front of the fans every night. Patrice Bergeron even talked about how much of an honor it was to wear the Bruins jersey and play at the TD Garden every night. Call it clichéd, but this team genuinely gets how important hockey is to the city. David Krejci said that the whole team is having a lot of fun out there and it sure looks it, since they’re firing on all cylinders. All of the vibes surrounding this team right now are overwhelmingly positive.

Which brings me to Tim Thomas. I don’t know why Thomas decided to pack up his bags and move to Colorado. I don’t know why Thomas thinks he’s an automatic lock for the U.S. Olympic team in 2014 after, you know, just not playing for a year. I don’t know why Thomas’ sudden affinity for social media fascinates everyone, either (I’m curious if everyone was like this when their parents joined Facebook? I know I was.). What I do know is that without Tim Thomas, the Boston Bruins do not win the Stanley Cup and are not in the same position that they’re in today. Sure, Thomas was a distraction last season with all of the off-the-ice crap and his statistics dipped too. To me, the two share zero correlation. Thomas’ was never going to replicate his 2010-11 season again and while under every single spotlight in Boston, every move he made was criticized. It got sickening fast and I think Thomas started to play it up a little because really, there was nothing else for him to do.

I remember Tim Thomas as being the guy who won a Stanley Cup for the Boston. That’s how I choose to think about it. With that, I’m more than ready for the Tuukka Rask era to begin.

Keefe: Ah, Petr Tenkrat. There’s a name I forgot about for a reason and never expected to hear again. There’s a blast from the past and a name I forgot and didn’t expect to hear ever again. As for Tim Thomas, I hope my friend in Boston, who got a tattoo on his arm of Thomas holding the Cup is thinking about Thomas the same way as you. Otherwise he has a guy with a well-known Facebook page in a Bruins jersey holding the Cup tattooed on his body for life.

I’m happy to see your dream come true of the Bruins being the focal point of Boston once again like it’s the 70s or late 80s or early 90s there. I only wish this had been the case when I was still living in Boston, so there would have been excitement in the city for hockey. Or maybe it would have been nice if Gary Bettman didn’t cancel the season in the year that we lived together just blocks from the then-FleetCenter. Gary Bettman! What a guy!

All of this positive talk about the Bruins makes me wish I could talk the same way about the Rangers. I can feel the excitement and jubilation from you through the computer screen. Instead the Rangers are winless with the Bruins coming to the Garden and looking at Philadelphia twice, Toronto and Pittsburgh for the rest of January. Things need to turn around and they need to turn around starting against your team.

Miccoli: All is not lost … at least not yet. It’s still early and luckily for you, they only hand out the Stanley Cup after the first few games of the season in Toronto. As far as the Bruins and Rangers go, it’s sad to see their season series concluding in just two weeks when the Blueshirts visit the Garden on Feb. 12. But the end for these two teams? Not a chance. I think this is finally the year that the Rangers and Bruins meet in the Eastern Conference playoffs. And if that happens, I can’t possibly think of a better way to expedite years off of my life.

Here’s my quick confession: the New York Rangers are the team to beat in the East, even if they look like a PeeWee youth hockey team playing in their first game after tryouts right now. They just have all of the pieces and once they click, they’ll be a well-oiled machine capable of crushing teams that stand in their way. I don’t think it will be the Pittsburgh Penguins in the hunt alongside the Rangers, but rather the Boston Bruins. Both teams just stand out for me. While I’m sure this would make for an incredible playoff series, I won’t look forward to the Boston vs. New York narrative that both markets will eat up at every possible opportunity, but at least that will mask the four-hour Red Sox-Yankees series that everyone will forget about. But the hockey games, oh, the games will be fun. Late spring, playoff hockey between two of the best teams in the East. Doesn’t get much better, does it? Ahh, hockey!

I guess the Rangers have to win a game first, though, which is good news considering they have the Flyers Thursday night. Ilya Bryzgalov is always good for a pick-me-up.

Read More

Blogs • Email Exchanges • Yankees

Sep 11, 2012

Yankees Bid Farewell to Fenway for Season

The Yankees and Red Sox meet for the final time at Fenway Park in 2012 for what should have been a huge series and that means it’s time for an email exchange with Mike Hurley.

This Yankees-Red Sox series at Fenway Park should have meant something for both teams. It should have been the biggest three games to date on both team’s schedules. Instead, what happens in Boston the next three nights only matters to the Yankees.

It’s weird that the Yankees and Red Sox will play a series in mid-September that should have had the same feeling as the postseason, but will now have the same feeling as the Yankees-Blue Jays series next week. With the Yankees fighting to maintain their AL East lead and the Red Sox fighting to get to the offseason in three weeks, Mike Hurley joined me for the second-to-last Yankees-Red Sox email exchange of 2012.

Keefe: If only this series had been played last week, it would have been a lot better. Not only because the Yankees wouldn’t have been losing to the Rays and Orioles in that case, but because you would have been more miserable to talk to about the Red Sox. Now with football in full swing and the Patriots demolishing the Titans, you’re probably in a good mood, and you probably haven’t watched a full Red Sox game since the Fourth of July weekend series. I will fill you in: the Red Sox suck.

Normally that would be a belligerent and intoxicated Yankee fan trying to win a war of drunken words, but right now they actually do suck. They are 63-78, in last place in the division and have lost 11 of 12. When I was in Atlantic City for Labor Day weekend, the Red Sox lost to the A’s 20-2! 20-2! And somehow I didn’t find out about this until eight days after it happened. I feel like I fell asleep on Dec. 23 and woke up on Dec. 26 and completely missed Christmas Eve and Christmas. When the Yankees got beat by the Indians 22-0 a few years back, there were T-shirt stands outside Fenway Park commemorating the brutal loss, and it wasn’t even at the hands of the Red Sox. I have a feeling there won’t be any 20-2 shirts with the line score written out.

The Yankees are in a weird spot. Their 10-game lead is now a one-game lead, and they split the season series with the Orioles. A month ago I was worried about the postseason rotation, but now I’m worried about winning each day just to get to the postseason.

That was the bad news. The good news is the Yankees have 22 games left and six of them are against Boston. This week was supposed to a meaningful series when the schedule came out and then it looked like it would be meaningless at the beginning of August, but now it’s meaningful again (well, for the Yankees). While the Yankees are playing the Red Sox, the Orioles and Rays will be playing and since someone in that series has to lose, the Yankees have a chance to create separation thanks to the worst team in baseball.

Is there any possible way the Yankees don’t win at least two of three games this week? And should they feel embarrassed if they don’t sweep?

Hurley: I watched the entirety of that 20-2 game, and I reveled in it. It was a glorious evening.

At this point, I enjoy watching the Red Sox finding new ways to fail. Whether it’s serving up grand slams to Josh Reddick, or making Brandon Moss look like Babe Ruth, or having the manager melt down on live radio, the Red Sox are just awesome. I never knew I’d enjoy this level of failure so much. But boy is it hilarious.

Now, you’re asking me about the Yankees, I guess, which makes sense because they’re a real, major league-caliber baseball team. I was confused at first why you were emailing me about the Yankees until I remembered that they’re actually coming to Boston this week. I honestly forgot. Like you said, it’s football season, so much so that what should be the best home series of the year has become a complete afterthought in Boston.

To answer your question, yes, the Yankees should not only feel embarrassed if they don’t sweep, but they should probably just quit and excuse themselves from the playoff race. The Red Sox just got swept by the Blue Jays. They were outscored 20-12 in the series. They were swept in back-to-back series by the Angels and A’s, getting outscored (wait for it … ) 58-16 in those six games (average score: 10-3). They have the same number of wins in September as the New England Patriots, despite having seven more chances. They let Omar Vizquel drive in two runs – including the game-winner – on Sunday. He’s old enough to be Derek Jeter’s dad. They are 32-41 at Fenway Park. They bat Scott Podsednik and Pedro Ciriaco and Ryan Kalish at the top of the lineup, and when asked to explain his lineup choices, the manager utters some curse word and a flippant remark, literally telling the world, “I really couldn’t care less about my lineup.”

So you tell me, will it be embarrassing to not sweep this team?

Keefe: Yes, it will be embarrassing. But while other teams have an easy time with the Red Sox, it seems like they could let you start a game and the Yankees would have trouble winning. That’s just the way Yankees-Red Sox series seem to go.

The other day I read the Tom Verducci cover story in Sports Illustrated about the Red Sox, hoping for some new info or some great behind-the-scenes story that would cause even more problems and more turmoil for the Red Sox entering the offseason. But there was no new information in the story. I guess since I have spent the last five months reading every Boston media outlet religiously to make sure I don’t miss out on anything there was really nothing new for me to learn. Unless we find out that Bobby V has been doing drugs during the seventh-inning stretch or that the bullpen has been running a prostitution ring out of the clubhouse, there is really nothing left to be discovered about the Red Sox.

The only thing that really stood out to me in that story was how out of touch with the city of Boston and reality Larry Lucchino is. He had several quotes in the story telling Red Sox fans how to act and how to accept the team’s fate and the idea of rebuilding period. But if I’m correct, your city has been calling for a rebuilding period since last year and it wasn’t until a few weeks ago when they undid everything Theo Epstein had done that the ownership group finally realized. I haven’t seen a positive thing written or heard one said about Lucchino in at least five years unless it was because he forced a Globe writer to portray him in a positive light.

Boston sports fans hate A-Rod and Peyton Manning and LeBron James and the Canadiens and Canucks organizations, but has there ever been anyone involved with a Boston team that has been hated as much as Larry Lucchino is?

Hurley: Jose Offerman, for one. He was just the worst. In terms of non-players, Bruins owner Jeremy Jacobs was pretty much hated for decades before they won the Cup in 2011. Even then, he was booed at the banner-raising celebration by some fans who will never forgive him for his tight wallet in the pre-lockout days.

But yeah, Larry Lucchino has always been pretty transparently phony. Only a truly blind Sox lover would look at Lucchino with googly eyes and say, “Gee, whiz, Larry, you’re really the cat’s pajamas.” Nothing is really new here. I remember reading “Feeding The Monster” by Seth Mnookin and noticing that it put a pretty solid smear job on Kevin Millar, for no real reason. I wasn’t in the media or anything at that point, just a college kid reading a book, and it was obvious that that was how Lucchino operates.

So yes, to try to tell fans how they will respond to front office decisions is hilarious, considering Theo Epstein uttered the words “bridge year” a few years ago and the front office went into DEFCON 1 to diffuse the situation. And what do we have to show for it? John Lackey! Way to solve that one.

Lucchino is correct in saying fans will be more open to a rebuilding-type year, because we’ve seen this team fall flat on its face for a while now. It was a bad mix of big-money guys, and there’s plenty of blame to go around, from Theo to Larry to John Henry to Ben Cherington to whoever else was involved in any decision for the past four years, things got ugly, and it’s going to take some time for them to crawl out of it. Knowing Larry said it’s OK to feel that way makes me feel even better though!

Keefe: We started talking about Bobby Valentine the day he was hired when no one other than Larry Lucchino thought it was a good idea. Well, I thought it was a good idea from a Yankee fan perspective hoping that it would be a disaster, but never did I think it would have been this much of a disaster. I figured the Red Sox would bounce back from September 2011 and just be good again and it wouldn’t matter if Terry Francona or Bobby Valentine or the delivery guy from Big Daddy’s in Boston that looks like Steve Buscemi’s character in Airheads and only wears Bruins apparel were the manager.

I’m scared that the Red Sox are going to fire Valentine. That would mean someone competent would take over the team and that would mean that the Red Sox would be in a better position than they are currently in. Though I do think the Red Sox aren’t going to get their first postseason win since 2008 for several more years now that after Game 162 this year they won’t have a left fielder, right fielder, shortstop or first baseman, and their rotation consists of two guys that have pitched a full season in the majors and one of those guys gets hurt every years.

What happens to your favorite sports figure of the last decade in Bobby V at the end of this year? I can’t imagine he will be back, but then again I never could have imagined that a team would trade all of their players instead of changing their manager and the Red Sox did that, so nothing would surprise me at this point. Please bring back Bobby V!

Hurley: Wow. It’s pretty disrespectful for you to mention the delivery guy from Big Daddy’s in Boston that looks like Steve Buscemi’s character in Airheads and only wears Bruins apparel, because you are pretty much single-handedly responsible for him losing his job when you moved to New York and stopped ordering from Big Daddy’s every day. That guy was a legend.

But yeah, he could manage the Red Sox better than Bob V. Nobody is crazy enough to pin all the blame on Valentine; he inherited a team with problems. But he definitely made things worse. There’s no reason for the Boston Red Sox to be this bad.On whether he’ll be back, it’s weird. On the one hand, you have to fire him, because he says things like “Who cares?” and “What does it matter?” at press conferences, and he acts like a lunatic on the radio, and he forces Alfredo Aceves to fly commercial across the country, then forces him to pitch in four out of five games for 125 pitches, and so on and so forth. It’s a bad joke that he’s still employed, and it’s an even worse joke that he’s due $2.5 million next year. Two-and-a-half million!! Cue the “I feel like I’m taking crazy pills!” clip.

All that being said, a part of me thinks, why wouldn’t he be back? Valentine is exactly the nut I expected him to be. If they hired him in the first place, are they really going to fire him simply for coming as advertised?

I’d hope they’re smart enough to recognize they made an awful error in judgment last winter by firing him this October, but if I told you I was 100 percent confident in that happening, I’d be lying.

Keefe: I keep hearing Red Sox fans and media members debate about Jason Varitek becoming the next Red Sox manager and I think the only thing better than Bobby V would be Varitek. He’s one year removed from being the captain of a team that experienced the worst September collapse in baseball history and played with most of the guys on the team. The age separation and difference isn’t that of someone like Joe Girardi, who only played with Derek Jeter, Mariano Rivera and Andy Pettitte, and no one is going to tell them what to do regardless of age.

If Bobby V is out, I can only hope they bring in an inexperienced friend and pal of guys on the team responsible for Terry Francona being fired, Theo Epstein leaving town and the trade of their No. 2 starter, left fielder and first baseman. Unless you think those first two things happened because of those three guys.

If Bobby V is out, who do you want in? Does it even matter?

Hurley: I can’t even follow the things you say, that’s how crazy you are with giddiness.

They should let David Ortiz be MLB’s first player-manager-general manager. His first move as a triple threat would be to sign himself to the four-year contract he feels he deserves. That’d be a good start.

I really don’t care who manages the team next year. A lot of people are excited about John Farrell, but I don’t understand that one. Cherington’s choice last year was apparently Dale Sveum, who is exciting as a bag of old rocks and had the Cubs out of the playoff picture by June. I’ve heard the Mike Scioscia rumors, and I’ll just say that if Mike Scioscia manages the Red Sox, I’m moving to Toronto and I’ll stop following baseball. But BOY, OH BOY the Red Sox would get from first to third more often!

Keefe: Not only would they be the best team at going first to third, but they would also be the best fundamentally sound team in the majors. That’s not an opinion. That’s a fact. Mike Scioscia’s teams don’t make errors or baserunning blunders. They also haven’t been in the playoffs since 2009 and they have played in a four-team division and have played 36 games combined against the A’s and Mariners the last few years. But who cares about that? Mike Scioscia is the best manager in baseball and a genius!

It kind of sucks that the Red Sox suck. Don’t get me wrong, I loved every second of them being in last place and seeing entire sections of Fenway Park without people in the seats while the organization chases a sellout streak that isn’t real. But this series should have been important for both teams and not just the Yankees. (I can’t actually believe I’m saying any of this.) I just miss the idea of waiting all day for a meaningful Yankees-Red Sox game or traveling up to Boston for a regular season game that has a postseason feel. I have a feeling I won’t be seeing one of those for at least five more years given the Red Sox’ current state.

Now that the Patriots have started your attention is on a quest for the Patriots’ first Super Bowl since 2004 and since Gary Bettman is a horrible person it doesn’t look like we will get to talk hockey this season unless you recently became a labor lawyer and want to talk about collective bargaining agreements. It’s sad that you have to turn to other sports right now and don’t care about baseball right now as much as you should because you can’t. What is going to take for the Red Sox to win you back in 2013?

Hurley: It is sad, but it’s not like it’s entirely new. I mean, the Yankees crapped the bed in their final year at the REAL Stadium, and even I was kind of bummed about that. And the era of the Red Sox being equal with the Yankees really only began nine years ago, so it’s not like we haven’t been here before. It does feel strange though.

For me to care about the Red Sox again, they’re going to have to make smart baseball decisions. Dumping Beckett and Crawford was a good start, even if it meant giving up a steady bat and glove in Gonzalez. In free agency, they need to go more the Cody Ross route than the Crawford/Lackey route. They need a manager who hates the media and the spotlight and can keep his frigging mouth shut. They need honesty from ownership (which has only happened once, when John Henry invaded Felger & Mazz, but will never happen again). They probably need lower ticket prices too. It costs $75 to sit way up in left field foul territory higher than the Monster seats and farther from the field. That BS just isn’t going to fly for a last place team.

I don’t think the last two things will happen, but the reality is, if they can just get back to baseball and stop inundating us all with the over-the-top marketing garbage, everyone here will be much happier. Oh. They also need to stop playing Sweet Caroline. I’ve been at Fenway this year when they were losing something like 18-3 to the Rangers. So many dopes were happily singing that awful song that I nearly started ninja kicking everyone in my section. It is the greatest embarrassment in sports.

Keefe: I take it you didn’t buy a Fenway brick or that CD that included Kevin Millar and David Ortiz sing-alongs?

So with the Giants and Patriots not playing each other unless they reach the Super Bowl, which is a situation I know you’re petrified of, and the NHL looking like they are ready to say “Eff You!” to the fans for the second time in eight years, this might be the second-to-last-time we talk via an email exchange in 2012, and maybe it’s better that way. I don’t know how much one person can take of Mike Hurley, but I think I have reached my limit.

The Yankees and Red Sox meet one more time to close out the season in Games 160, 161 and 162 of the regular season. When the schedule came out I didn’t sleep for two weeks thinking about the implications those three games might have. Now they have different implications since the Orioles and Rays will be playing each other those three days and it will likely mean the division, one-game playoff or nothing for the Yankees. I’ll talk to you on Oct. 1.

Hurley: Talk to you later, but if the Giants and Patriots make the Super Bowl, delete this email address.

Read More