Keefe To The City

Blogs • Rangers • Rangers Playoff Thoughts • Rangers Playoffs

May 11, 2013

Rangers-Capitals Game 5 Thoughts: Happy to Have Other Plans

Henrik Lundqvist stood on his head again, but the Rangers lost Game 5 in Washington because of their inability to extend a lead or score more than one goal on the road.

I missed most of Game 5 of the series to host and attend a surprise birthday party for my girlfriend, so it’s hard for me to comment on the game other than to say it’s no surprise the Rangers once again scored just one goal in Washington and Henrik Lundqvist allowed just one goal and the team lost. And it’s absolutely awful that the Rangers scored 53 seconds into the game (Ladies and gentlemen, Brian Boyle!) and couldn’t add on and that Mike Ribeiro scored the game-winner in overtime. I’m happy I wasn’t able to watch this game in full.

May 9, 2013

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.

May 8, 2013

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.

May 6, 2013

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.

May 3, 2013

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 20^th 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 23^rd 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.