fbpx

Rangers

BlogsRangersRangers Playoff ThoughtsRangers Playoffs

Rangers-Capitals Game 4 Thoughts: Four More Goals?

The Rangers tied the series with the Capitals thanks to their second consecutive home win and four-goal game at Madison Square Garden.

Buy more Powerball tickets. That’s what I did after Game 4 after the tickets I already bought after Game 3. Back-to-back four-goal games from the New York Rangers after just one in the last 20 postseason games? What’s next? A hat trick from Brian Boyle in Game 5? A power-play goal from Brad Richards? A positive John Tortorella press conference? Ron Duguay wearing clothing made post-1977? At this point, with this team, expecting the unexpected is how you must prepare for each playoff game. That’s why I have no idea what will happen in Game 5. No one does.

I said before Game 4 that I would walk to Washington D.C. for Game 5 if Pierre McGuire could describe one replay without citing a player’s hometown, college team or junior team, but I forgot to keep track since I was at the bar (Local Cafe next to MSG, which is also why these Thoughts are so short) for the game and the sound wasn’t on for the entire game either, so sorry for anyone hoping to see me making my way down I-95 with a Rangers hat and backpack on.

Read More

BlogsRangersRangers Playoff ThoughtsRangers Playoffs

Rangers-Capitals Game 3 Thoughts: Season Saved For Now

The Rangers took the must-win Game 3 from the Capitals 4-3, but they are faced with the same situation again in Game 4.

The first thing I did when the Rangers won Game 3 was go to the convenient store on the corner and buy $20 worth of Powerball tickets. The Rangers broke their scoring drought of 124:06, which spanned from 16:44 of the period of Game 1 through all of Game 2 and overtime and 12:50 into Game 3. It was the first time the Rangers had scored four goals in a playoff game since their first game of last postseason last year (they played 20 playoff games last year), which means we all basically saw one of those rare comets on Monday night. So why wouldn’t I go out and buy Powerball tickets?

But really those facts might not be the craziest of all. You know what I’m talking about … Brian Boyle scored! Yes, it was indeed my favorite Ranger who ended the Rangers’ goal-scoring drought at 12:50 of the first period. The same Brian Boyle who scored two goals in 38 games this season. I knew that I always liked him. And not only did Boyle score, but Arron Asham scored too. He had two goals in 27 games this year. Who said secondary scoring was a problem?

Don’t count on four goals in Game 4 because like I said, that’s a once-a-year accomplishment and we won’t be seeing it until the 2013-14 postseason. But maybe we can count on Rick Nash (0-1-1) and Brad Richards (0-0-0) and Ryan Callahan (0-1-1) to contribute offensively in Game 4? Would that be too much to ask for the Rangers’ Top 3 paid skaters, totaling $18,741,667 this season? No? OK, I didn’t think so.

– No, no one expects Henrik Lundqvist to give up three goals ever, let alone in a playoff game, but he did and for once the Rangers offense was able to bail him out. It’s weird how no one is suggesting that Lundqvist needs to play better in the playoffs when the offense actually does its job. It’s just so odd how that happens.

I wasn’t sure if Henrik Lundqvist (24-16-3, 2.05, .926) was going to be a Vezina finalist after the shaky start to the shortened season, but he is along with the Blue Jackets’ Sergei Bobrovsky (21-11-6, 2.00, .932) and the Sharks’ Antti Niemi (24-12-6, 2.16, .924). There really isn’t a clear frontrunner the way there was a year ago with Lundqvist and you could make the case for any of them (and Tuukka Rask), but my vote would go to Lundqvist, obviously. What? I’m not bias.

– How much more fun to watch are the Islanders than the Rangers? The Islanders might go down in the first round, as might the Rangers, but at least they are making Pittsburgh work for the second round. The Islanders were the worst possible matchup for the Penguins between the Islanders, Rangers and Senators and there’s no doubt in my mind that the Rangers would have been a red carpet for the Penguins to the conference semis.

– Jim Dolan and Glen Sather don’t want to fire John Tortorella. Had the Rangers missed the playoffs a year after going to the conference finals and after trading for Rick Nash and getting rid of Marian Gaborik instead of the coach, I believe Tortorella would be employed right now. But the Rangers made the playoffs and saved Tortorella his job, even though I think he should need a second consecutive conference finals appearance to save it. That means the only Ranger that needs a Cup to keep their job is Brad Richards, who could be bought out at the end of the season.

Richards has been awful in the series after a disappointing regular season. He has been as much of a power-play specialist as Tortorella has been and if the Capitals eliminate the Rangers a lot of the blame will be placed on the Rangers’ third-highest paid player
– If Pierre McGuire analyzes one replay during Game 4 without citing a player’s hometown or junior or college team, I will walk to Washington D.C. for Game 5.

The saying goes, “It’s not a series until the home team loses,” but around here the saying goes, “It’s not a series until the Rangers win a game.” They finally did that in Game 3. They have to do it again in Game 4.

Read More

BlogsRangersRangers Playoff ThoughtsRangers Playoffs

Rangers-Capitals Game 2 Thoughts: Where Have All the Henrik Lundqvist Critics Gone?

The Rangers lost 1-0 in Game 2 to the Capitals when Henrik Lundqvist stood on his head and the offense was absent yet again.

If the Rangers lose two games to the Capitals before they win four, I want Henrik Lundqvist traded. Not because Henrik Lundqvist isn’t good or because the Rangers’ failures are his fault or because I don’t like him, but because Henrik Lundqvist deserves to be traded because he deserves better.

Lundqvist stood on his head for 68 minutes on Saturday until a stupid Ryan McDonagh delay-of-game penalty and a Mike Green slap shot did him in. The Rangers lost Game 2 on that goal and now trail the Capitals 2-0 in the series and if they don’t win on Monday night at Madison Square Garden they might as well pack up the locker room and we’ll see you in October because only three NHL teams have come back down 3-0 in a series to win and this Rangers team isn’t going to be the fourth one.

One goal. That’s what the Rangers have produced in 128 minutes of playoff hockey. One goal. It’s embarrassing and would seem impossible for a team that boasts Rick Nash, but that is what this team has been about since John Tortorella took over in the middle of the 2008-09 season no matter the personnel. They are a streaky scoring team and when they go into one of these slumps or funks, there’s no telling when they might score again. To Rangers fans, offensive slumps are basically winters in Westeros: everyone fears them and no one knows how long they will last.

Offensively, the Rangers aren’t unlucky, snake-bitten or getting bad bounces. They are a bad offensive team, who not only can’t out the puck in the net, but can’t even put the puck on net. The Rangers managed just 24 shots in Game 2, minimal legitimate scoring chances and Braden Holtby told the media after the game that it was “an easy night” for him.

John Tortorella was short and snippy with the media after Game 2 and bluntly said, “Create more offense” in one of his answers to a question that should have been worded, “How do make your team suck less?” The media deserves to feel the wrath of Tortorella because it’s their fault that his team has scored one goal in 128 minutes, and I’m sure everyone with a Rangers press pass wants to watch Tortorella’s losing system for a living.

Here are the goals through games on Sunday for playoff teams.

Pittsburgh: 13
Anaheim: 11
Ottawa: 11
San Jose: 11
Chicago: 9
New York Islanders 8
Boston: 6
Minnesota: 6
Montreal: 6
Detroit: 5
Toronto: 5
Vancouver: 5
Washington: 5
St. Louis: 4
Los Angeles: 3
New York Rangers: 1

There’s not much else to add about a 1-0 loss for a team that can’t score. Win on Monday and get back in the series or bring cardboard boxes with you to the Garden on Wednesday night.

Read More

BlogsRangersRangers Playoff ThoughtsRangers Playoffs

Rangers-Capitals Game 1 Thoughts: Feels Like 2010-11 Again

The Rangers lost Game 1 of the Eastern Conference quarterfinals to the Capitals after they once again had trouble scoring.

I spent the entire NHL season up until Game 47 of 48 worrying about the Rangers getting into the playoffs in a season in which they were supposed to build off an Eastern Conference finals appearance. If I knew the first game of the playoffs would go the way Game 1 did on Thursday night, I could have saved a lot of time during the regular season by learning how to cook or by finally watching The Wire or by finally reading all of the classic books I used SparkNotes on in high school instead of watching Rangers games.

Is that a little dramatic following one playoff loss? Of course. But I’m not worried about the Rangers being down 1-0 in a seven-game series to a team they were equal to during the regular season. I’m worried about the Rangers because of the effort in Game 1 and the way they played and were outplayed by a Capitals team that looks much different than they did when they last met the Rangers on March 24.

Thursday night’s Game 1 was the 20th playoff game between the Rangers and Capitals since the 2008-09 quarterfinals. It was the ninth time in the 20 games that the Rangers scored one goal or less and their inability to score goals has become an annual problem that not even Rick Nash being the scoring machine he is could fix thanks to minimal secondary scoring help.

So despite it being a new Rangers team, the franchise still has the same scoring problem. How much of a problem is it? Let’s take a look. Here are the scores of all the Rangers-Capitals playoff games since the 2008-09 quarterfinals.

2012-13 Quarterfinals
Game 1: WSH 3, NYR 1

2011-12 Semifinals
Game 1: NYR 3, WSH 1
Game 2: WSH 3, NYR 2
Game 3: NYR 2, WSH 1 (OT)
Game 4: WSH 3, NYR 2
Game 5: NYR 3, WSH 2 (OT)
Game 6: WSH 2, NYR 1
Game 7: NYR 2, WSH 1

2010-11 Quarterfinals
Game 1: WSH 2, NYR 1 (OT)
Game 2: WSH 2, NYR 0
Game 3: NYR 3, WSH 2
Game 4: WSH 4, NYR 3 (OT)
Game 5: WSH 3, NYR 1

2008-09 Quarterfinals
Game 1: NYR 4, WSH 3
Game 2: NYR 1, WSH 0
Game 3: WSH 4, NYR 0
Game 4: NYR 2, WSH 1
Game 5: WSH 4, NYR 0
Game 6: WSH 5, NYR 3
Game 7: WSH 2, NYR 1

The Rangers are 8-12 in the 20 games.

The Rangers have scored 35 goals in the 20 games (1.75 goals per game).

The Rangers have been shutout three times (15 percent).

The Rangers have scored one goal or less nine times (45 percent).

The Rangers have scored two goals or less 14 times (70 percent).

Do you see this as a problem? I do. Do you see this as the reason why they have only won one of the three previous series and needed two overtime wins to win that series? I do. Do you see this as a goaltending problem? I don’t. Because how could you?

It took one playoff game and one loss for the Henrik Lundqvist critics to come out of their holes like Punxsutawney Phil to recite Lundqvist’s playoff record and the Rangers’ lack of success in the playoffs during his tenure. These are claims made by unintelligent fans who aren’t aware that Lundqvist can’t score goals for the Rangers and that the team missed out on the playoffs for seven consecutive seasons before he became a Ranger after the lockout, and that the Rangers have been in the playoffs seven of the eight years since the lockout.

Game 1 was just another Rangers loss that had nothing to do with the way Lundqvist played and everything to do with the offense and the power play. If you’re someone who placed any blame for the 3-1 loss on Lundqvist then that means you’re someone who felt the Rangers should have won a playoff game 1-0 against the hottest team in the NHL with one of the best power plays in league history because the Rangers scored one goal.

– I’m really not sure what Ryan McDonagh and Dan Girardi were thinking or doing when they let Steven Oleksy complete a pass from the top of the Capitals circle to the Rangers blue line to Marcus Johansson, who inexplicably got behind them, to create a breakaway and give the Capitals a 2-1 lead. That’s supposed to be the Rangers’ best defensive pair. No big deal!

– What’s the percentage of Dan Girardi shot attempts that actually find the net and count as a shot on goal and don’t hit shin pads, chests, sticks, the boards or glass? I’m thinking it’s somewhere around 7 percent. As for Michael Del Zotto, I’m thinking his percentage is around 4 or 5.

– Physics and common sense dictate that John Moore scored at 15:57 of the third period of Game 1 to cut the Rangers’ deficit to one. Camera placement by the NHL and TV networks and the idea of “conclusive evidence” created by the NFL dictate that Braden Holtby kept John Moore’s shot out of the net at 15:57 of the third period to hold the Capitals’ lead at 3-1. And while it sucked and would have been a nice momentum shift and would have made the last 4:04 of the game dramatic, I understand why the officials made the call they did since given the rules it was the correct call. But the Rangers shouldn’t put themselves in a position where they would need the help of the officials and the off-ice officials in Toronto to determine whether or not a goal should or shouldn’t count.

– Tortorella’s postgame press conference didn’t last long, but he had one telling line when he said, “Hopefully we discipline ourselves in the next game.” If the way to beat the Capitals is to contain Alexander Ovechkin (which the Rangers didn’t do in Game 1) and to limit their power-play opportunities (which the Rangers didn’t do in Game 1) then why wouldn’t the Rangers have come into the series already disciplined? They have been an undisciplined team all season with untimely penalties at inopportune times and their two-many-men-on-the-ice penalty just 34 seconds into the game showed that they aren’t prepared to change their ways for the postseason. Discipline falls on the coaching staff and the penalty to open the game, while it didn’t come back to hurt them, was absolutely ridiculous.

– I’m tired of listening to Pierre McGuire talk about John Tortorella as a power-play specialist (which he has done several times this year to Mike Francesa on WFAN), who has run successful power plays in the past for other organizations. No Rangers fan cares about Tortorella’s prior power-play success to coming to New York the way no one cares about him winning the Cup nine years ago in Tampa Bay.

The Rangers power play is a disgrace. They finished the regular season 23rd in the league at 15.7 percent, which is actually sort of impressive when you think about where they were midseason. But in Game 1 they went an expected 0-for-4 on the power play and failed to score on a 5-on-3.

The Rangers power play isn’t good enough (it actually isn’t good at all) to be the difference in the series and the Capitals power play is too good to give any chances to (let alone five in one game). The Rangers need to use their supposed depth, defense and goaltending to win the series at even strength because if it comes down to special teams, this series is going to go the same way the 2010-11 quarterfinals went. After one game, it already feels like that series.

Read More

BlogsEmail ExchangesRangers

Rangers-Capitals Now a Playoff Tradition

It’s the fourth Rangers-Capitals playoff series in five years and that calls for an email exchange with Kevin Klein of Japers’ Rink.

It’s the third day of the NHL playoffs and the Rangers have yet to play a game. At this point it feels like the fourth Rangers-Capitals series in five years might never start, but then again maybe it’s a good thing that they waited until Thursday since there won’t be two days off between games at any point in the series.

Kevin Klein of Japers’ Rink joined me for an email exchange to talk about the Rangers-Capitals series and how Adam Oates brought the Capitals back to prominence and how the new head coach was able to get Alex Ovechkin back into the conversation of “Best Player in the World.” We also give our predictions for the series.

Keefe: Four years ago, I was petrified of the idea of a Rangers-Capitals series, and my worrying was proved right when the Rangers blew a 3-1 series lead.

Two years ago, I didn’t expect anything good to come from a Rangers-Capitals series with a Rangers team that couldn’t score and found their way into the playoffs on the last day of the season thanks to some outside help. Again, the Capitals had their way with the Rangers in five games and embarrassed the MSG crowd by erasing a three-goal, third-period deficit while silencing the Bruce Boudreau chants.

Last year, I wanted no part of the Capitals in the first round and no part of them in the playoffs at all. It wasn’t the same Capitals team from 2008-09, but even with a new look and style of play they forced the No. 1-seeded Rangers to a seventh game and if it weren’t for some late-game heroics from the Rangers in the series they would have eliminated the Rangers once again.

This year I feel lucky the Rangers are playing the Capitals. I’m not sure if it’s because the other two options would have been the Penguins and Canadiens, who have both dominated the Rangers in recent years, or if it’s because the Rangers were finally able to eliminate the Capitals last year. Then again, it’s never good to get a good feeling about the Rangers, especially when it comes to the postseason and who their first-round opponent might be. So before we pick this series apart piece by piece prior to Game 1, maybe you can help bring me back to reality and why I shouldn’t feel so confident about the Rangers getting the Capitals in the quarterfinals and feeling like everything magically fell into place for the Rangers over the weekend.

Klein: It’s funny you should feel lucky to face this year’s Capitals, when you feared last year’s.

This year’s Capitals boast the most lethal power play in the NHL (by more than two full percentage points) and Alex Ovechkin is back to his old self, racking up 32 goals in 48 games. Two years ago, when the Capitals ousted the Rangers in the first round, Ovechkin had 32 goals in 79 games. It’s certainly worth noting that Ovechkin’s resurgence would not have been possible without his running mate, Nicklas Backstrom, who returned to form in time with Ovi, to the tune of 40 assists in 48 games (good enough for third in the league and only three helpers off the league lead). I’ll also add that Troy Brouwer and Mike Ribeiro are having career years on the second line, so once Ovi and Backstrom hop back onto the bench, the Rangers still have their work cut out for them.

Dropping back to the blue line, last season the Rangers had the luxury of facing off against Roman Hamrlik and Jeff Schultz, two defensemen who – as you well know by now in the case of Hamrlik – aren’t exactly known for their mobility these days. It’s my presumption that Schultz and Hamrlik will be watching the games together from the Verizon Center and Madison Square Garden press boxes, a fact that most singularly improves this Capitals team over last year’s squad.

But the Capitals’ improvements never would have occurred if not for the mind of the man behind the bench. Indeed, it was Adam Oates who redesigned the power play, taking it from the middle of the pack to the pinnacle of the league. Indeed, it was Adam Oates who envisioned Ovechkin on the right wing, where he has since re-established himself as the league’s premier goal scorer. And indeed, it was Adam Oates who was standing behind the New Jersey bench last year when the Devils ushered the top-seeded Rangers unceremoniously into the offseason.

These are the reasons why you should perhaps not feel so confident. This isn’t to say that I feel confident about the Capitals’ chances against a Rangers team that played very well down the stretch, but rather to illuminate that this Capitals team should be a more fearsome opponent than last season’s.

Keefe: OK, well I just went from overly confident to terrified. Thanks?

When it comes to Roman Hamrlik, I can understand what you mean since I’m not sure how the Rangers thought the Capitals’ trash would become their reward when it comes to a 39-year-old defenseman with as many miles (1,395 regular-season games and 111 playoff games) as Hamrlik has. The man played in his first NHL game in 1992! 1992! Sure, Jaromir Jagr is still playing and he played in his first game in 1990, but he’s Jaromir Jagr and he’s playing an elite level for a 41-year-old (35 points in 45 regular-season games).

You’re right, I should be worried about Ovechkin wanting to once again be in the “Best Player in the World” conversation again and the way he has responded to Adam Oates’ coaching. With Bruce Boudreau it seemed like Ovechkin was allowed to do whatever he wanted (and rightfully so I would say), but it got to the point where Boudreau’s style became stale, not only with Ovechkin, but the entire team. With Dale Hunter, the way Ovechkin had played his entire life was changed and it took away from what makes him who he is and why he’s great. But with Oates it seems like Ovechkin finally has a coach with the right balance. And Oates’ success behind the Capitals’ bench is intriguing especially since it seems so easy for fans to respect and appreciate someone like him. Here in New York it’s not as easy to respect and appreciate John Tortorella.

How refreshing has it been to have Oates as the head coach of the Capitals?

Klein: I think that just about everyone inside of, around and in the peripherals of the Washington Capitals organization has come to the realization that Adam Oates is the best thing that’s happened to this franchise in quite awhile. Not to beat a dead horse here, but it absolutely starts with Alex Ovechkin.

In hindsight, Alex probably had a decent relationship with Bruce Boudreau that slowly degraded as the team began to struggle. We know that he didn’t have the best of relationships with Dale Hunter, and that’s because Hunter stymied Ovechkin in his insistence that Ovechkin take on the same roles and responsibilities of, say, a guy like Hunter did during his playing days.

When Oates came aboard, he embraced the idea of Ovechkin as the chassis for the Capitals vehicle. From the get-go he saw the potential for success under such a model, so long as Ovechkin was open to some considerable tweaks in his game. Oates immediately established a communicative, two-way relationship with his captain and Ovechkin has responded brilliantly. Now Oates has a happy captain, a happy locker room and inside that locker room there is a sense of trust and harmony that has been absent for a couple of years now.

It was by no means a caustic environment before, but it certainly was not as cohesive as it is now, and I attribute that coming together to Adam Oates.

Keefe: Well you’re lucky. Here we have a coach who feels entitled because of what he did in Tampa Bay nine years ago and doesn’t care that in four years here he has made it out of the first round once, made it to the playoffs twice and missed them completely the other time … despite having the best goalie in the world in his prime. No big deal.

Last season, and even the season before, Ovechkin wasn’t the same Ovechkin we had grown accustomed to. It seemed like years since a real debate could be had between who was between Ovechkin and Sidney Crosby and his postseason play wasn’t the same either. Now he’s back to pre-2010-11 Ovechkin and alone could be enough to eliminate the Rangers with the way they go into scoring slumps for extended periods of time and take untimely and undisciplined penalties.

Earlier in the season there was speculation that maybe Ovechkin needed a change of scenery and a new team, which had me wondering if the Rangers would be able to figure out a way to pay Rick Nash, Marian Gaborik and possibly Ovechkin if they had anything left to trade for him. Now with the regular season he just had and the success he experienced under Oates that dream of mine, sadly, will never come to fruition. But maybe it’s for the better since I’m a Crosby guy anyway.

When things were going poorly in Washington, did you ever think that Ovechkin might not possibly find his old scoring ability again and d did you ever think that maybe a change of scenery was needed for him?

Klein: Well, I hate to tell you, but your dream of a Nash-Gaborik-Ovechkin tandem would have been foiled by Brad Richards’ nauseating contract. As for Ovechkin needing a change of scenery, I don’t buy it. Any of that talk was more than likely born of a bored, starved, media market or sensationalist hockey pundits.

Did I ever worry that Ovechkin wouldn’t return to form? Sure, but I’ve been preaching for some time that Ovechkin’s decline in production was a result of the changeover and resultant inconsistency in on-ice philosophy from the end of the Boudreau era to the start of the Oates era. I thought that last year, despite the sour aroma that came with discussions of his play, Ovechkin demonstrated tremendous capability in scoring 38 goals while playing most of the season under the not exactly offensively-minded Dale Hunter.

Besides, the guy has the “C” on his jersey and has only worn it for a few years now. If an organization slaps that letter on a jersey then ships the player away, it probably speaks more to the organization than it does to the individual.

Keefe: So you’re saying the Flyers aren’t exactly run by the most intelligent people for trading their captain, Mike Richards, and then watching him win the Cup that same season with the Kings? Hey, if you’re anti-Philadelphia, you’re talking to the right person.

This Rangers-Capitals series is being regarded as the best first-round series in the playoffs and I think rightfully so. You saw what the Penguins did to the Islanders and what the Bruins did to the Maple Leafs on Wednesday night, and outside of Canada, the Canadiens-Senators series just isn’t that intriguing.

My confidence prior to the start of this email exchange has cooled off with thoughts of Ovechkin becoming Ovechkin again, the feared Washington power play and the idea that Oates, a rookie head coach, could outcoach Tortorella in the series.

The Capitals have the scoring depth and secondary scoring depth with three point-per-game guys leading the way, but to me, the Rangers are the all-around deeper team (not necessarily when it comes to putting the puck in the net) and with Henrik Lundqvist as the backbone I believe they are the better team. However, I live in New York, so of course I’m going to believe this.

The Rangers enter the series after a 10-3-1 April and the Capitals come in even better after an 11-1-1 April. Outside of Pittsburgh, who no one might stop, we have the league’s two hottest teams meeting in the postseason for the fourth time in five years. I’d like to think this Rangers team is better than the team that won the series in seven games a year ago and much better than the teams that lost in five games and blew a 3-1 series lead three and four years ago. But the Rangers are a lot like the New York Football Giants in that the second you start to feel confident about them they let you down in the most devastating way possible.

I’m going with the Rangers in five games, which I’m sure will get a sarcastic laugh out of you, and really given the information I have, might be a ridiculous pick. But eff it! Rangers in five.

Klein: Picking the Rangers in five is certainly … optimistic. I don’t doubt that the Rangers have a very solid lineup from top to bottom, especially through the forward ranks (but if you’re not going to measure depth by production, I’m not certain what the best way is), but I think the injury to Marc Staal leaves them exploitable outside the top pairing of Dan Girardi and Ryan McDonough.

I personally have the Caps in six, but in order for that to come true they’re going to need to be the more disciplined team on the ice. This season was the first time in 16 years that the Capitals drew more penalties than they took and that’s only because Boston went to the box three times in the third period of the final game of the schedule. I should also point out that as great as Henrik Lundqvist is, as has been for a long time, Braden Holtby’s early measurables in career save percentage and goals against average are eerily similar.

If both goalies show up in the same way they did last year, I wouldn’t be surprised to be chewing my nails down to nubs during another Game 7.

Read More