Keefe To The City

Blogs • Rangers • Rangers Playoff Thoughts • Rangers Playoffs

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.

Blogs • Email Exchanges

May 3, 2013

Kentucky Derby Predictions

The Kentucky Derby is Saturday and the Rangers lost Game 1 of the quarterfinals, so it’s the perfect time for an email exchange with Brian Monzo.

The Kentucky Derby is Saturday and the Rangers lost Game 1 of the quarterfinals to the Capitals 3-1. Those two things make a perfect storm for an email exchange with WFAN producer Brian Monzo as we head into a wild weekend in sports. So I bothered Monzo for his thoughts on who he likes in this year’s Derby and what happened on Thursday night in Washington.

Keefe: I have been waiting for you to pay the invoice I sent you on the money you owe me for telling me to pick Alpha in the 2012 Kentucky Derby without even a mention of I’ll Have Another, but since that money will never arrive, I have decided to bother you about this year’s Derby instead. But just so you know, my little sister told me to pick I’ll Have Another. My little sister. And here you are, the expert who loves TVG more than hockey missing out on a 15-to-1 horse.

You have been feeding me Derby information for a few days now, but when it comes down to it in a race this unpredictable, it’s all about the name. Right now I can tell you Itsmyluckyday (10-to-1 on Sportsbook) and Will Take Charge (25-to-1 on Sportsbook) are two names that stand out to me.

I know you’re all about Revolutionary (5-to-1 on Sportsbook) because you have been telling me so all week, so tell me why Revolutionary isn’t going to be this year’s Alpha.

Monzo: You bring up some great points. Regarding Alpha, it should be noted that he went out to win the Jim Dandy and the Travers at Saratoga last summer, but yes, he didn’t run well in the Kentucky Derby. Yes, you did approach me before the race and asked about I’ll Have Another. Good job by your little sister.

Anyway, this is a really tough race to handicap. This class of horses is good, not great and trying to find the best of “good” horses is pretty tough. When I look at this race, with these horses, the way I handicap the race is by places the horses where they will go in the race and envision how the race will go.

When all is said and done, I’ve decided to go with Revolutionary as my top pick, with many horses very close.

Revolutionary is trained by Todd Pletcher and is coming off an impressive win in the Louisiana Derby. What I liked about that race was that he came off the pace and fought off a late challenge from Mylute, another horse he’ll face in the Derby. That race showed me that this horse doesn’t back down from challenges and isn’t afraid of other horses. He looked like he was going to get beat and he beared down and held for the win. Some horses will buckle and let another horse take it. He didn’t.

He drew the third post for the Derby, which isn’t great, but not awful. It should allow him to get to a position in the race he’s comfortable with. If he runs to the lead, throw your ticket out. If he stays within five to six lengths of the lead, no matter how quick or slow the pace is, he should find himself in a position to run down the leaders down the stretch. My guess is he goes off at 9-1. (He’s currently 5-to-1 on Sportsbook.)

I also love the fact that he has Calvin Borel on him. Like Borel or not, he’s a big race rider and his history in the Kentucky Derby is solid. His win with Street Sense was one of the best rides in Kentucky Derby history.

Orb is another horse I expect to run well. He closed well in the Florida Derby and will likely be the post time favorite on Saturday. Verrazano, another Pletcher horse, will be going to the lead and even though he’s undefeated, this is a tough race to hold with speed.

Since the two horses you mentioned were Itsmyluckyday and Will Take Charge, I’ll give you my thoughts on them.

I didn’t love how Itsmyluckyday ran in the Florida Derby. It was a slow race and Orb blew right by him.

Will Take Charge has been on my radar since February. His wins in the Smarty Jones and the Rebel really caught my eye. He doesn’t have a ton of speed, but if he can stay four lengths from the lead, I can see him tracking down the leaders in the final 100 yards. He is 3-for-7. He likes to win and I think he’ll go off at 30-1. I’m not making him my top choice, but I will play a small amount on him to win and will have him on many trifecta tickets.

Keefe: You mentioned Orb and how well he did at the Florida Derby and Verrazano and how he’s undefeated. Orb along with Verrazano are currently the two favorites on Sportsbook.

Last year everyone was all over Bodemeister and it was pretty much a given that he would win and it looked like he would before I’ll Have Another came out of nowhere to take the Derby. And last year it was Bodemeister and Union Rags getting all the attention before the Derby and now it seems like Orb and Verrazano should be garnering the same attention with the Derby so close on the calendar.

Why aren’t these two horses getting as much attention despite being the favorites? Why is the class of horses only “good” and not “great?” And what’s the difference between this year’s Derby and last year?

Monzo: That’s the thing though and the beauty of the Derby. A horse at 9-to-2 or 5-to-1 could be the favorite. There are now 19 horses in the race with Black Onyx scratching out on Friday morning. I’d say 14 of the 19 have a shot to win. It’s mostly about having the best trip and not being the best horse to win. Last year Bodemeister was the best horse to run, as was Went The Day Well. I’ll Have Another had a perfect trip and was able to catch Bodemeister late.

Orb is a good horse and has won 4-of 7, but I worry that his last race was too slow. He has a good closing kick and should be there when the dust settles, but I will put on my exotics tickets, not as a winner.

Verrazano is a speed horse who has run really well. He is undefeated, going 4-for-4, but running a 1 1/4 miles is a tough thing to do, especially running to the lead. Bodemeister ran as good as anyone on the lead, but couldn’t hold it. I don’t think Verrazano will win, but has a good shot of holding onto a top four spot, which is why I’m leaving him on my superfecta tickets.

There isn’t one horse that is that much better then the rest of the field. Also, not of these horses has run an epic eye opening race. Some very good races (Revolutionary in the Withers, Orb in the Florida Derby, Verrazano in the Wood), but none were extraordinary.

I’m not sure there’s much of a difference from last year. One thing that’s different if Bob Baffert, who trained Bodemeister and is a legendary trainer has no horses in the race. Todd Pletcher has five horses in the race, which is pretty crazy.

Will Take Charge is my value horse. Trained by D. Wayne Lukas with veteran jockey Jon Court on the mount, Will Take Charge has the winning instinct to pull off an upset here. He won the Rebel in March and Smarty Jones in January, as well as his maiden race in October at Keeneland. To me, the win in the Rebel showed this horse’s ability to have enough left in the tank late to chase down leaders. I don’t think he has the talent to come back from 16 lengths to win, but if he can stay four to five lengths wide throughout the race and can find a way to be two lengths off with 200 yards to go, he’ll have a fighting chance. He should carry a huge price tag too, maybe close to 30-to-1, which is a huge value play.

Revolutionary is my top pick, however. I just think the race will open up for him late. Book it.

Keefe: OK, I’m booking it. Let’s hope this goes better than it did a year ago. Now let’s talk about what happened on Thursday night in Washington.

Some people stupidly want to blame Henrik Lundqvist for the Rangers’ Game 1 loss, which to me is as ridiculous as it has been to blame any loss on him during his tenure with the Rangers. I blame the Rangers’ inability to score and their lack of discipline.

The Rangers entered the series with two goals: 1. Contain Alexander Ovechkin and 2. Limit the Capitals power-play opportunities. In Game 1, Ovechkin tied the game at 1 and the Rangers took six penalties against the Capitals, including a too-many-men-on-the-ice penalty just 34 seconds into the game. So much for accomplishing those two goals. And on top of those problems, I’m not sure what Ryan McDonagh and Dan Girardi were doing on the Capitals’ second goal when they let a full-ice pass split them for a Marcus Johansson breakaway goal.

I picked the Rangers in 5 and that pick is as good as done because after what we saw in Game 1 this Capitals team is much different than the team the Rangers narrowly beat in seven games a year ago and it’s barely the same Capitals team we saw last against the Rangers on March 24. The Rangers aren’t going to win four games in a row, so I’m OK with my pick being wrong. Let’s just hope they can win four games at all.

Monzo: Blaming Lundqvist is stupid. Like I said on Twitter, if he was the Penguins goalie they would go 82-0 and sweep every playoff series. He gets little goal support in the playoffs.

I took the Rangers in 5 as well and I’m content with that not happening now. I actually took some good things from the game. Carl Hagelin looked good and Chris Kreider looked good and Steve Eminger actually played physical.

I also think Ryane Clowe was missed because of the space he creates in the offensive zone. I think even the great Brian Boyle could be an asset here with his big body. And I noticed the Rangers often pass way too much, but when they shoot, they miss the net. (Brad Richards!) The Rangers need to fire more shots on Braden Holtby. He gives up a ton of rebounds and if they crash the net, they should be able to bang a few pucks in.

They need to improve on hitting the net and crashing the net. They also need to stay disciplined and not take penalties. They PK is good enough to hold off the Caps, but they can’t be giving the Caps six power players a game.

Rangers in 6.