Keefe To The City

Mar 27, 2013

New York Rangers in ‘The Newsroom’

A look the major storylines around the Rangers from the first with help from The Newsroom.

I love Jeff Daniels. I love HBO. I love the media industry. So when HBO aired trailers for a new series starring Jeff Daniels as a TV news anchor at a major media network, I figured it would fill the Sunday night void left by Curb Your Enthusiasm and Game of Thrones. I was wrong.

The first two episodes of The Newsroom were so hard to make it through that I fell asleep during the first episode (I re-watched it later) and actually stopped the second episode before its conclusion.

But after a few days wondering why Aaron Sorkin would write dialogue between characters in a way that no one speaks to each other in real life (if all the 20-somethings at ACN were that smart and that witty they wouldn’t be struggling to earn a living like Maggie suggests they are when she spends “her last $7” in one episode), I decided to go back to the second episode and give The Newsroom another chance. And by the end of that episode, the series picked up and after that it gained steam throughout the summer and left me feeling satisfied that I had stuck it out to make it to the season finale on Aug. 26.

This Rangers’ season has been stuck in the first half of Episode 2 of The Newsroom. But I think, well more like I’m hoping and praying, the 5-2 win over the Flyers on Tuesday night is the end of Episode 2 and the Rangers are about to go on their run and turn their season around the way Will McAvoy turned his series around.

The Rangers have one-third of their season left and the opportunity for “Midseason Awards” is no longer really possible. So instead let’s look at what’s happened over the first 32 games and two-thirds of the season that has the Rangers fighting for a playoff berth with some help from The Newsroom.

MacKenzie: “Where’s a power outage when you really need one?”

I thought the Rangers’ 3-0 loss to the Penguins on Jan. 31 at the Garden was the worst hockey-watching experience of my life. The Rangers trailed after 1:24 and never had a legitimate scoring opportunity in the game. They were shutout, 3-0, at home to one of the two teams (Boston being the other) they were “supposed” to compete with for the East crown this season. The game was an embarrassment on so many different levels that I didn’t think I would ever see such a poor home performance ever again. It only took seven weeks for that loss to be trumped.

Last Thursday was without a doubt the absolute worst hockey-watching experience of my life, and this time I don’t think there is a chance it will be topped. However, knowing this Rangers team, I wouldn’t be surprised if one of the last six home games of the season one-punches last Thursday’s game for the title.

Not only did the Rangers lose to the last-place Panthers 3-1, despite outshooting the Panthers 45-24, but I had a female Rangers fan on my left who started a “BE AGGRESSIVE! B-E AGGRESSIVE!” chant with the Rangers on the power play (to be fair she was drinking the entire game) and a family of four on my right left led by the father who compared the team to the 1962 Mets and the mother who ripped apart Marian Gaborik and was actually upset when he scored with 3:48 left in the game.

If the Rangers blew a 4-0 lead in the final four minutes of Game 7 of the Stanley Cup Final that would be a miserable time, but at least you would see something historic and at least there would be goals and action and excitement and not just boring, painful-to-watch hockey.

Bryan: “Is it important that you treat me like an a–hole?”

This one goes two ways.

First, it goes to Sam Rosen, who has been made into John Tortorella’s whipping boy this season for simply asking Tortorella about the games he coaches and the decisions he makes. I’m disappointed in Rosen for handling the situation gracefully and for talking with and forgiving Tortorella on the team plane for Tortorella’s frequent lashing out. Rosen should have gone over the top with Tortorella and asked real questions that the fans want answers to. If Rosen is going to take a beating for asking hockey-related questions that lack harmful intent, he might as well go all the way and ask sarcastic questions.

The second part of this goes to Brian Boyle and why it is important that I treat him this way, which it is.

Brian Boyle is 6-foot-7. He is two inches shorter than Zdeno Chara, who is the tallest player in NHL history. Have you ever seen anyone who wants to go after Chara on the ice? No, of course you haven’t because he is 6-foot-9 and plays like it. Have you ever seen someone with Brian Boyle? Of course you have because he plays like he’s trapped in Nathan Gerbe’s 5-foot-5 body and completely wastes the main reason he has made it this far in his hockey career (his size).

On Monday, Larry Brooks wrote in the New York Post that Brian Boyle has been on the ice for three Rangers goals this season. But on Tuesday he was on the ice for a Rangers goal, so now that number is four. FOUR! F-O-U-R! How is it possible that Boyle has played in 28 games this season and only has one goal and one assist and has been on the ice for four goals and is still dressing for games. Actually how is it possible that he has those numbers over that timeframe and is still on the team? If Jeff Halpern could get waived for a 0-1-1 line in 30 games and Stu Bickel could get waived for a 0-0-0 line in 16 games, how far away are we from Boyle being waived?

Charlie: “Have you read the New York Post?”
Will: “No. My eyes are connected to my brain.”

Bobby Holik wasn’t wearing number 10 for the Rangers on Thursday night.

Wade Redden wasn’t wearing number 10 for the Rangers on Thursday night.

Scott Gomez wasn’t wearing number 10 for the Rangers on Thursday night.

None of the big-name, free-agent busts of the past were wearing number 10 on Thursday night. Marian Gaborik was wearing number 10.

Marian Gaborik has played 251 games with the Rangers. He has 114 goals and 115 assists in those games. He has two 40-plus goal seasons with the Rangers (2009-10 and 2011-12). So why was everyone at MSG booing him on Thursday night? Why was my friend Jim texting me trade proposals for Gaborik from across the MSG ice? The mainstream media, that’s why.

There is this idea that the Rangers no longer need Gaborik, or that his play has been in a free fall since last spring because he has a 9-10-19 line in 32 games. No one mentions that he’s recovering from offseason shoulder surgery and that he battled his way through the playoffs with a torn labrum. No one mentions that Tortorella has used every possible line combination in just 32 games and the lack of chemistry between the team’s best forwards is clearly evident. No one mentions that Gaborik has played left wing his entire life and that Tortorella moved him to right wing despite Gaborik saying he’s uncomfortable on that side of the ice.

Without Gaborik, John Tortorella isn’t the Rangers head coach today. That’s a fact. Without his scoring and Lundqvist’s goaltending last season, the Rangers wouldn’t have been the top seed in the East and most likely would have missed the playoffs for the second time in three years. But Tortorella treats him like a fourth-line plug by benching him and asking him to play a blue-collar style of hockey by sacrificing his body for blocked shots and going into the corners with a purpose rather than being the elite goal scorer he is and is getting paid to be.

If you think Marian Gaborik is the Rangers’ problem then you’re likely someone who screams, “Shoot! Shoot it! Shoot it!” whenever any Ranger on the power play touches the puck. (I think Michael Del Zotto must hear and listen to these unintelligent fans since he does just that whenever he touches the puck on the power play, usually shooting it into someone’ shin pads or missing the next and shooting it into the corner.) Or you’re someone who treats the MSG T-shirt toss like there are blank checks wrapped up inside the shirts. (It’s scary what people will do for free T-shirts or foul balls.)

When Gaborik records a point, the Rangers are 7-3-2. The problem is that’s only 12 games and the Rangers have played 32 games. Gaborik does need to step up his game, but the treatment by him from the media and unintelligent fans has been unwarranted.

Maggie: “I never knew what the word ‘smug’ meant until I met you.”

Here’s John Tortorella’s resume dating back to his first season as head coach of Tampa Bay.

2001-02, Tampa Bay: Missed playoffs

2002-03, Tampa Bay: Lost in second round

2003-04, Tampa Bay: Won Stanley Cup

2005-06, Tampa Bay: Lost in first round

2006-07, Tampa Bay: Lost in first round

2007-08, Tampa Bay: Missed playoffs

2008-09, Rangers: Lost in first round

2009-10, Rangers: Missed playoffs

2010-11, Rangers: Lost in first round

2011-12, Rangers: Lost in Eastern Conference Finals

That’s one Stanley Cup, one Eastern Conference Finals loss, one second-round loss, four first-round exits and three missed playoffs. If Martin Gelinas’ goal counts in Game 6, I’m not here writing about John Tortorella and you’re not reading about John Tortorella because of the resume surrounding his Cup win with the Lightning. But 2003-04 did happen, so here we are.

If the Rangers miss the playoffs (let’s hope this doesn’t happen), Tortorella has to be fired. He has to be. He has one year remaining on his deal for 2013-14 that the Rangers would have to eat, but this is an organization that has eaten and wasted a lot more money than a one-year salary for a head coach for that one year to scare them away from letting him go.

I said last year that the Rangers had to make the Eastern Conference Finals for Tortorella to keep his job. Given their roster and the idea of winning now while Lundqvist is in his prime and while Nash, Gaborik and Richards are still effective (or should still be effective), I think the same goal holds true even if this season should have been about more than just reaching the conference finals.

It’s one thing to be “smug” if you’re Scotty Bowman and you have won the Cup nine times as a head coach in the NHL. But when you’re hanging your hat on one Cup and a lot of underachieving seasons in 12 years, you might want to lose the attitude because those media members you treat like dip spitters might be your colleagues one day when you’re fired and the only job available is one with a microphone in your hand.

My real problem with Tortorella is that he hasn’t proven himself in this city, but acts like his achievements in Tampa Bay hold weight here. They don’t. No Rangers fan cares what you did nine years ago with a Lightning team that had Vincent Lecavalier, Martin St. Louis and a 24-year-old Brad Richards. Two first-round exits, two missed playoffs and a conference finals loss isn’t enough to act like a winner in New York City. And being on the playoff bubble with Nash, Gaborik, Richards and Lundqvist is unacceptable.

MacKenzie: “Be the moral center of this show, be the integrity!”

The keyword here is “center.” Brad Richards plays center. He has five goals and 13 assists in 30 games. He has four points on the power play (the power play he is supposed to run) and just one of them is a goal. He is making $12 million this season. He made $12 million last season. If he plays out his entire Rangers contract, he will make $60 million over nine years.

When Richards signed with the Rangers I was worried about his concussion-riddled past and what it would mean if he sustained another one. I wasn’t worried about his scoring and playmaking ability. I’m not worried about it now either. I’m petrified.

But Richards did play his best game of the season on Tuesday night in Philadelphia (or maybe it just felt like that since he has played so many bad games). He scored on the power play in the second, added an assist in the third, shot the puck and even mixed it up in some scrums in front of the Flyers’ net after whistles. It was almost like the word “urgency” meant something to him or that he realized he is making $12 million and playing well a couple games a year comes with making $12 million.

Will: “What does winning look like to you?”

If we could go back in time to 13 months ago when I was campaigning for the Rangers to trade for Rick Nash, how many people that didn’t want to give up Chris Kreider back then wish the Rangers had? I think all of them.

Nash been the Rangers’ best player this season with 28 points in 28 games and leads the team in goals (12) and assists (16) despite missing four games. The Rangers are 16-10-2 (34 points) when he plays and 0-3-1 (1 point) when he doesn’t. He has been everything the Rangers could have asked for when they traded for him and everything they thought he could be when they almost traded for him 13 months ago.

The 2011-12 Rangers came within two wins of playing in the Stanley Cup Final without Nash. Would they have been able to beat the Kings if they made it there? Most likely not, but who knows? All we know is that the Rangers didn’t get a chance to find out because they couldn’t score enough goals against the Devils. They couldn’t score enough goals because once the lucky bounces and garbage goals they had been accustomed to producing in the regular season stopped happening, their real, true goal-scoring abilities were shown. And with Marian Gaborik playing with a torn labrum, those true goal-scoring abilities were limited to secondary options.

The 2011-12 season was the Rangers’ best chance at winning the Cup since 1996-97. It was the first time they had seen the Eastern Conference Finals in 15 years and everything, and I mean eve-ry-thing, broke their way during the regular season and the playoffs, prior to Adam Henrique’s overtime goal in Game 6, for the Rangers to even make it that far. The amount of come-from-behind wins and last-minute wins (or sometimes last-second wins) and overtime and shootout wins in the regular season was unbelievable. The Vezina play from Henrik Lundqvist, who took it up to a previously unknown level, was incredible and the bounces that went their way to survive two seven-games series and win both Game 7s were unthinkable.

The stars aligned for the Rangers to get to the Eastern Conference Finals in 2011-12 and when you look at the path that was put out for them with a first-round matchup against Ottawa and with Boston and Pittsburgh both eliminated in the first round and Philadelphia eliminated in the second round, it was a New York Giants-esque road to a championship.

I don’t want to look back on the 2011-12 season in a decade when the MSG Network is still creating new documentaries about the 1993-94 season because that was the last time the Rangers made meaningful memories in the spring and summer and think about what could have been if the Rangers traded for Nash five months earlier than they did.

P.S. Chris Kreider has two goals and one assist in 14 games and has been sent down to the AHL twice.

MacKenzie: “When should I start to worry?”
Maggie: “I’d have started already.”

The idea of watching the Stanley Cup playoffs without a real interest has crossed my mind, but I haven’t given it much thought since I also push it away with the notion of “They’ll be fine.” But will they be?

If losing to Florida at home or needing to rally to steal a point from the Capitals is the way this season is going to go and end over the next month then maybe the season won’t ever get out of Episode 2.

So, yes, MacKenzie, I’d have started already too.

Blogs • Yankees

Mar 25, 2013

Welcome Back, Chien-Ming Wang

Once upon a time Chien-Ming Wang saved the Yankees and now he’s back with the organization.

Since I was seven years old, the Yankees have missed the playoffs once: 2008. I refer to that year as the Year Without October the way I refer to the 2004 baseball season as the Season That Never Happened. (There was a strike that season and no games were played. Don’t you remember?)

I remember the 2008 Yankees for being miserable and making my summer miserable. And because I relate specific years to how that Yankees season went, when I hear “2008,” I think, “That’s the year I graduated from college and the year the Yankees ruined my summer” and sometimes I think of those two things in reverse order. (OK, I always think of them in reverse order, but I didn’t think it would be a good look to put the Yankees ahead of college graduation.) The truth is that the 2008 Yankees didn’t suck and weren’t even bad. And given their circumstances they were actually pretty good.

That Yankees team went 89-73, which would have been enough to play in a one-game playoff if they were in the AL Central and would have been enough to win the NL West by five games. Their 89 wins were the fourth most in the AL and more than the 2000 Yankees had (87-75) and that team won the AL East by 2 ½ games and won the World Series. But the 2008 Yankees ended the run of 13 straight playoff appearances and because of that I remember them as a failure even if they really weren’t.

That season the rotation featured Darrell Rasner and Sidney Ponson for 35 combined starts. Andy Pettitte posted career worsts in losses (14) and ERA (4.54) pitching through injuries the entire year in the only .500 season of his 17-year career. Jorge Posada didn’t play in one game in May and played in his last game of the year on July 19. Jose Molina had 297 plate appearances, Chad Moeller had 103 and Ivan Rodriguez had 101. Pettitte, Posada, Jonathan Albaladejo, Wilson Betemit, Chris Britton, Brian Bruney, Joba Chamberlain, Johnny Damon, Dan Giese, Phil Hughes, Jeff Karstens, Ian Kennedy, Hideki Matsui and Alex Rodriguez all landed on the disabled list at least once. LaTroy Hawkins was in the bullpen and so were Billy Traber, Jose Veras and Edwar Ramirez. Richie Sexson got to put on pinstripes. So like I said, “Given their circumstances, they were actually pretty good.”

Even during the Murphy’s Law season with all of those things happening during the same year in which the Yankees cared more about Jobamania and his transformation from the best setup man since 1996 Mariano Rivera to starter (which became a circus), the season really ended on June 15 in the sixth inning at Minute Maid Park.

The season ended when Chien-Ming Wang and his .000 career on-base percentage reached base on a fielder’s choice after a failed sacrifice bunt attempt and suffered a lisfranc injury running home on his way to scoring his first career run. The Yankees won that game 13-0 and Wang earned his second-to-last win as a Yankee to this day (the other coming on June 28, 2009 against the Mets), improving to 8-2 on the year with a 4.07 ERA.

To that point in the season, Wang had averaged 6 1/3 innings per start in 15 starts and the Yankees were 12-3 in games he started. He had won 19 games in both 2006 and 2007 and looked to be a lock for that number again in 2008. With the win over the Astros he improved to 54-20 in five seasons with the Yankees and had become the “ace” of their staff even if Chris Russo strongly believed otherwise.

(To me, Wang was an “ace” during the regular season where his heavy sinker worked the majority of the time over 33 starts. But come postseason time when you didn’t know if Wang’s sinker would sink or not, he was a disaster when it didn’t. He didn’t have strong enough secondary pitches to get outs and would be stubborn on the mound trying to find the sinker because he had to be stubborn about it. He couldn’t really grind his way through starts without his pitch and because of it I consider him a “regular-season ace.” His playoff numbers would consider him that too: 4 GS, 1-3, 7.58 ERA, 19 IP, 28 H, 19 R, 16 ER, 5 HR, 5 BB, 7 K, 1.737 WHIP. The same pitcher who allowed nine home runs in 116 1/3 innings in 2005, 12 home runs in 218 innings in 2006 and nine home runs in 199 1/3 innings in 2007 somehow allowed five in just 19 postseason innings. “Regular-season ace.”)

The Yankees missed the playoffs by six games in 2008 with Rasner and Ponson starting 22 percent of the season and with Dan Giese, Brian Bruney, Carl Pavano and Kei Igawa also getting starts. Six games ended up separating the Yankees from the Red Sox for the wild card (and eight games separated the Yankees from the Rays for the division). You can’t tell me Chien-Ming Wang wouldn’t have made up that difference if he hadn’t been injured. He would have.

Wang saved the 2005 season (along with Robinson Cano’s emergence, Tino Martinez emptying the tank and Jason Giambi turning back the clock or possibly reverting to undetectable performance-enhancing drugs). Wang picked up the only win in the 2006 ALDS against the Tigers (Game 1) and from April 30, 2005 until June 15, 2008 (minus the two months he missed in 2005), he was the closest thing the Yankees had to a guaranteed win every five days before CC Sabathia came to town.

I eventually got used to Wang’s painfully slow windup and let the way he curved his hat go because when you win those things become trademarks and cool and mimicked by others. There isn’t any young baseball player trying to mirror A.J. Burnett’s herky-jerky, inconsistent windup. At least I hope there isn’t. (If A.J. Burnett used Wang’s windup or curved his hat the way Wang did, I would have had enough material for at least three or four more columns from 2009-2011. That’s the difference between winning and losing.)

But if I’m going to mention his 55 wins with the Yankees and his calm and collected demeanor and his victory in Game 1 of the 2006 ALDS then I’m afraid I’m going to have to mention how he single-handedly lost the 2007 ALDS with this majestic pitching line for two games: 5.2 IP, 14 H, 12 R, 12 ER, 4 BB, 2 K, 3 HR, 3.174 WHIP. With that WHIP, Wang essentially loaded the bases every inning he was on the mound in Games 1 and 4 on his way to a 19.06 ERA for the series, which I thought would never be touched, but Phil Hughes made a run at those numbers with his 2010 ALCS performance against the Rangers. (I won’t put his numbers here for fear of having a nervous breakdown remembering that series, knowing it could have ended differently if Hughes had just been atrocious and not disastrous.) And also 2009 when Wang was supposed to be the Yankees’ No. 2 start, but instead was the worst statistical pitcher in Yankees history.

During the last half of the aughts, when Brian Cashman was trading for a 41-year-old Randy Johnson, giving $39.95 million contract to Carl Pavano and $21 million to Jaret Wright, begging a 45-year-old Roger Clemens to unretire and make 17 starts for the Yankees for $28 million and paying $26 million for the rights to give $20 million to Kei Igawa, Chien-Ming Wang was busy winning 68 percent of his starts for the Yankees while being grossly underpaid.

Wang is back where it all began on a minor-league deal with the Yankees that will have him start the season in Triple-A, a place that five years ago you never thought he would never have to pitch again unless it was a rehab start. When asked about Wang’s return to the team, Joe Girardi said, “He was a very good pitcher for the New York Yankees.” But he’s wrong. For four seasons, he was the best pitcher for the New York Yankees.

So welcome back, Chien-Ming Wang. You were never thanked for what you did. Here’s to hoping you get the chance to do some more.

Blogs

Mar 19, 2013

2013 NCAA Tournament Bracket Predictions

March Madness is here and trying to predict the eventual champion is as hard as ever.

The first time I remember seeing a bracket I was 12 years old. (This means that the first documented time I also gambled was when I was 12 years old.) I was in math class and noticed my friend had ripped the bracket out from Sports Illustrated and made a bunch of photocopies of it because in 1999 the Internet was just a place to talk to your friends on AIM at night and to form an AIM alliance and gang up on someone and “warn” them to the point that they would get kicked off. There wasn’t a place online to print a bracket (there actually might have been, but no one was doing it that way), so using Sports Illustrated or a newspaper (yes, a newspaper!) was the only way to do it.

So I filled out that bracket and likely picked Duke or Kansas to win it all because I have picked Duke or Kansas to win it all every year since I started filling out a bracket. Every year. That doesn’t mean I didn’t think Florida would win back-to-back titles in 2006 and 2007 or that Kentucky would run the table last year. It’s that I didn’t want those teams to win and since seventh grade, Duke and Kansas have always been normal, safe picks to rely on. But there has been nothing really normal or safe about them when you consider that I have predicted the champion once in the 14 years (Kansas in 2008) since I saw that bracket under my friend’s desk. I correctly picked Kansas’ title in 2008, which was the only time since 1999 they have won, but for the two times Duke won (2001 and 2010), I unfortunately picked Kansas both years.

Two years ago I made a set of 12 rules I follow when filling out my bracket. My rules led me to picking Kansas as the champion and it didn’t work out. Last year I had Kansas again, but John Calipari’s juggernaut and the Kentucky payroll was too much for the Jayhawks.

This year I decided to go a different route and go through every game of the first round, which is what the Tournament is really about. 24-for-32 is the goal every year and it’s the goal again this year.

MIDWEST

1 Louisville vs. 16 It Doesn’t Matter
One year a 16-seed is going to do it. They have to. And when they do, I won’t be the person that picks it correctly because I’m not trying to be a hero here, I’m trying to make correct picks because like I said in the first rule when it comes to the 1s and 2s: “Don’t try to be a hero.”

The pick: Louisville

8 Colorado St. vs. 9 Missouri
I don’t think I will ever forgive Missouri for last March. I think it goes Cliff Lee and then Missouri in the order I won’t give forgive people, places or things for devastating my sports life. I will always remember refreshing my phone to see that Missouri had lost to Norfolk St. 86-84 (despite being a 2-seed and 21.5-point favorite) and destroying my bracket before the tournament had even gotten out of the first round. (Yes, the round of 64 is the first round and anyone who says it’s the second round needs to reevaluate their life.) But on the other hand, my girlfriend went to Colorado and loves the Buffaloes so much that she saved a buffalo she found in a box of Animal Crackers the other day for the tournament thinking it’s a sign and good luck. Maybe it is. Or maybe that buffalo Animal Cracker is a bison and I’m too scared to tell her.

The pick: Missouri

5 Oklahoma St. vs. 12 Oregon
Oregon has to feel snubbed after winning the Pac-12 Tournament and being slotted as a 12-seed. And when you finish the season ranked 25^th in the country, but you’re given a 12-seed, well, that’s just wrong.

The pick: Oregon

4 Saint Louis vs. 13 New Mexico St.
I trust Shaka Smart and VCU in a way that no one should trust a school from the Atlantic 10 not named Butler or Xavier. Saint Louis beat VCU this year twice, including in the conference championship, and also beat Butler twice and beat New Mexico. Saint Louis is for real.

The pick: Saint Louis

6 Memphis vs. 11 Middle Tennessee/Saint Mary’s
I will never like Memphis for their John Calipari days. And Rule 9 says, “When In Doubt, Find A Reason Or Make One Up” and Memphis being formerly coached by John Calipari would make sense for me picking the winner of the play-in game. But Calipari and Kentucky didn’t make the Tournament and it would be great to see Memphis make a run while Calipari coaches in the NIT.

The pick: Memphis

3 Michigan St. vs. 14 Valparaiso
Michigan St. hasn’t won since 2000, but it feels like they are right there every year with a chance to do so. It’s always hard to pick against Tom Izzo and I won’t have to for a few rounds.

The pick: Michigan St.

7 Creighton vs. 10 Cincinnati
Creighton has been my team since their 2002 upset of Florida and it feels weird to pick them here as a favorite against a Big East school. I would feel more confident and comfortable if Creighton was 10-seed in this game, but I always feel confident picking the Bluejays even if they have only gotten out of the first round once (58-57 win over Alabama in 2012) once since that win over Florida 11 years ago.

The pick: Creighton

2 Duke vs. 15 Albany
With the ACC expanding even more next season, I couldn’t help, but think about how the Big East teams moving to the ACC will prevent Duke and North Carolina from continuing their easy dominance of what has been an overrated conference aside from the two rivals. I’m not trying to be a hero and pick Albany here because I don’t think Duke can lose to a 15-seed in back-to-back years.

The pick: Duke

WEST

1 Gonzaga vs. 16 Southern
“Don’t try to be a hero.”

The pick: Gonzaga

8 Pittsburgh vs. 9 Wichita St.
Rule 2: Trust The Big East But Don’t Trust Them Too Much.

The pick: Pittsburgh

5 Wisconsin vs. 12 Ole Miss
Wisconsin is my team this year and even though Ole Miss surprised everyone with their win over Florida in the SEC Championship at +500, it’s going to really hard to convince me to pick against Bo Ryan and the Badgers in this tournament. (Even if they are a Big 10 school without their last names on their jerseys.)

The pick: Wisconsin

4 Kansas St. vs. 13 Boise St./La Salle
The Tournament is going to miss Frank Martin looking like someone touched his wife at a bar every second of his life now that he is the head coach of South Carolina. And the Tournament is going to miss Jacob Pullen’s talent and late-game heroics (this clip from the 2010 Tournament is one of my favorite Tournament moments thanks to Pullen, Tu Holloway and Gus Johnson). But I think nine years at Kansas St. was enough for Pullen. I know he was only there for four, but it seemed like nine, the way it seemed like Scottie Reynolds played for about 16 years at Villanova.

The pick: Kansas St.

6 Arizona vs. 11 Belmont
Someday I will get over Duke barely beating Belmont in the 2007 Tournament, and failing to cover. And really I should be mad at Duke for the score of that game and not Belmont, and I am, but I can’t read, write or hear the name “Belmont” without thinking about that game.

The pick: Arizona

3 New Mexico vs. 14 Harvard
I love picking the Ivy League schools because I trust their decision-making skills and clock management if the game is close near the end since they aren’t going to rush the 35-second shot clock or make a bad decision. However, they usually lack the talent to make the game close near the end.

The pick: New Mexico

7 Notre Dame vs. 10 Iowa St.
Notre Dame has screwed me over in the past unlike any other team. And even though they are a Big East team and I’m “supposed to trust” Big East teams, I can’t trust Notre Dame for how they have treated me in the past.

The pick: Iowa St.

2 Ohio St. vs. 15 Iona
Ohio St. has treated me well in previous brackets, so I plan on treating them well in this bracket.

The pick: Ohio St.

SOUTH

1 Kansas vs. 16 Western Kentucky
“Don’t try to be a hero.” I wish Western Kentucky had been given a higher seed because I will always have a soft spot in my heart for them after this 2008 upset at the buzzer over Drake.

The pick: Kansas

8 North Carolina vs. Villanova
OK, maybe Notre Dame isn’t the team that has screwed me the most in the past because I momentarily forgot about Villanova. Picking North Carolina here goes against my rule about picking Big East teams and my general feelings about the ACC and North Carolina, but I’m done with Jay Wright and Villanova, and even if I wasn’t, Roy Williams is a Yankee fan, and that’s enough for me.

The pick: North Carolina

5 VCU vs. 12 Akron
It’s a good thing VCU passed Jay Bilas’ “Laugh Test” this year. It’s also a good thing they passed it back in 2011 because their win overtime win over Florida St. helped my bank account.

The pick: VCU

4 Michigan vs. 13 South Dakota St.
A lot of people are high on South Dakota St. and using Michigan’s loss to Ohio in 2012 as reasoning, but I just don’t see it.

The pick: Michigan

6 UCLA vs. 11 Minnesota
This is my favorite upset of the first round and really it shouldn’t even count as an upset. But because Minnesota is the 11^th seed it has to and just to make sure I wasn’t getting ahead of myself by being so sure about this pick, it got the blessing of my friend Forman, who has been picking March Madness upsets correctly since we were all “warning” him on AIM. His Manhattan pick over Florida in 2004 was glorious, but not even close to as good as his pick of Creighton over Florida in 2002, which has made me a Creighton fan to this day. I referenced Forman in the 2011 column about my NCAA rules and asked him for some of his other first-round upsets this year and the Cornell run in 2010.

11 Minnesota over 6 UCLA
12 California over 5 UNLV
12 Oregon over 5 Oklahoma St.

The pick: Minnesota

3 Florida vs. 14 Northwestern St.
I don’t think this game really needs a reason. At least I hope it doesn’t.

The pick: Florida

7 San Diego St. vs. 10 Oklahoma
San Diego St. didn’t help me in 2011 when I picked them to beat UConn, but it’s hard for me to pick against Steve Fisher, especially in the first round.

The pick: San Diego St.

2 Georgetown vs. 15 Florida Gulf Coast
Knowing that Florida Gulf Coast beat Miami 63-61 back on Nov. 13 scares the eff out of me. And I don’t trust Georgetown by any means (and I have never have), but I just can’t pick the Hoyas to lose here. Once again: “Don’t try to be a hero.”

The pick: Georgetown

EAST

1 Indiana vs. 16 LIU Brooklyn/James Madison
“Don’t try to be a hero.”

The pick: Indiana

8 NC State vs. 9 Temple
The 8-9 games are always a coin flip and nothing says coin flip more than two teams I usually pick in the first round playing against each other in the first round.

The pick: NC State

5 UNLV vs. 12 California
The committee went against the rule of having a first round game between two teams that played each other during the regular season and then they went and gave California a home game in San Jose against UNLV. According to Google Maps, Berekely is an hour away from HP Pavilion in San Jose.

The pick: California

4 Syracuse vs. 13 Montana
I don’t think I have ever picked Syracuse to lose in the first round. I’m not sure if I have ever picked them to lose in the second round. I’m not about to start now.

The pick: Syracuse

6 Butler vs. 11 Bucknell
I gave Butler their own rule in the 12 rules. How can I possibly pick against them when they have their own rule?

The pick: Butler

3 Marquette vs. 14 Davidson
I have always liked Marquette for no reason at all since I have no ties to the school. Part of me wants to go against my Big East rule and pick Davidson here, but I can’t let memories of Steph Curry making a name for himself in the Tournament sway my decision.

The pick: Marquette

7 Illinois vs. 10 Colorado
You read what I wrote about the Animal Cracker, right? I could pick Illinois here and then I could not have a girlfriend tomorrow. I have no choice, but to pick the Buffaloes here. I’m just glad I have another day to figure out how to tell her that I’m picking Miami to beat her Buffaloes in the second round. Wish me luck.

The pick: Colorado

2 Miami vs. 15 Pacific
It would be a great story if Bob Thomason, who is retiring at the end of the season after 22 years at Pacific could pull of an historical upset over 2-seed Miami, but the U is headed going on a long run in this Tournament and a Disney-esque storyline isn’t going to stop them.

The pick: Miami

Blogs • Fake Mailbag

Mar 15, 2013

Fake Mailbag: March 15, 2013

It’s the debut of the Fake Mailbag with questions from Sam Rosen, Derrek Lee, Brian Cashman and Mark Teixeira.

I wanted a way to tie in multiple sports to one column without writing things in bullet points and trying to keep some sort of flow to it all and I didn’t really know how to make it all work. So I finally came up with the idea of a Fake Mailbag, which would allow me to create questions that I want to answer (it’s not as weird as it sounds … OK, maybe it’s a little weird) from real sports figures since they would never actually ask me these questions or ask anyone these questions. (Except for Brian Cashman. He actually did ask the question I wrote for him.)

We’ll take it slow with just a few questions this week and try to build it in the coming weeks, but I thought for this week it was important to address the Rangers’ and Yankees’ situations.

Why does John Tortorella always yell at me after his team loses?
– Sam R., New York, N.Y.

After Tuesday’s loss to Buffalo, Sam Rosen started John Tortorella’s postgame press conference by asking, “Do you think the Sabres were the hungrier team in this game?” Here’s how Tortorella responded.

“Oh, no … they were … no, no I don’t think the Sabres were the hungrier team. I thought we stunk and I’m not going to give Buffalo any credit. Well, I will give their third line credit. They outplay our top players and that can’t happen. I couldn’t be more disgusted and disappointed with the way our top guys played, the way we handled ourselves through it. That team was ripe to be beaten and we simply did not play the way we’re supposed to play. I don’t know what to tell you. Did you ask them? Did you ask them any questions? I don’t know why I always have to answer these questions. You should ask them occasionally about what happened. Did they answer your questions? Were they in the room? What did they say? Tell me. Let me ask some questions here.”

When Vince Vaughn’s character, Jamie O’Hare flips out on Rudy in Rudy at practice for his effort and Coach Parseghian asks him, “What’s the problem, O’Hare?” O’Hare responds, “Last practice and this asshole thinks it’s the Super Bowl.” Coach Parseghian answers, “You just summed up your entire sorry career here in one sentence!”

That’s what John Tortorella did with his Tier I meltdown. In 53 seconds, Tortorella summed up his time as head coach of the New York Rangers and discredited the Sabres’ win along the way (even though they were playing without Ryan Miller). It’s always everyone else’s fault. The players, the opponent, the media. It’s never John Tortorella’s fault.

But it didn’t end there.

After Tortorella asks the media if they asked his players any questions, which they obviously did since that’s their job, Rosen asks Tortorella to “talk about hunger around the net too,” and Tortorella looks at Rosen and then looks away and asks, “Does anybody else have a question?” Rosen goes to put the microphone to his face and Tortorella responds, “I’m sure you do, Sam.” So Rosen asks, “Well, the inconsistency, it’s got to be a little frustrating when you think that you’re starting to get inconsistent…” Tortorella cuts him off and says, “I just, I just told you what I thought. I told you what I thought.”

The Rangers aren’t good. They’re not bad. They’re average. That’s what you are when you win half of your games. And at 13-11-2 that’s what the Rangers have done in what has been a disastrous 62 percent of the season. And through that 62 percent, Tortorella hasn’t even hinted at the idea that any of the 13 losses could be any bit his fault.

I fully understand why Tortorella yells at and belittles Rosen in the postgame press conferences. Rosen broadcasts the Rangers games from high above ice level and has appeared in zero games for the Rangers this season or any season and he doesn’t create the line combinations or fill out the lineup, so it makes complete sense as to why the head coach of the team would take out his frustration on the MSG Network’s play-by-play man. Rosen clearly had a negative impact on Tuesday’s loss and it’s not like Tortorella has the power to decide who plays and when and who plays with who, and it’s not like it’s up to him to get the best out of the Rangers players. So while you might think I would feel sympathetic for Rosen, I don’t. It’s your fault the Rangers are in ninth place and can’t find any offensive consistency, Sam Rosen. Leave John Tortorella alone. He has nothing to do with this.

I’m 37 years old. I haven’t played in a baseball game since Sept. 28, 2011. I hit .267/.325/.446 in 2011. Why do Brian Cashman and the New York Yankees want me to play first base for them?
– Derrek Lee, Sacramento, Calif.

I’m not sure if Cashman suffered a concussion along with his broken ankle during his skydiving accident, but The Golden Knight is looking at his second-worst offseason as Yankees general manager. (The first obviously being when he decided that he would go into 2007 with Carl Pavano and Kei Igawa making up 40 percent of his rotation.)

If Cashman were to sign Lee, that would give the Yankees an Opening Day infield of Lee, Robinson Cano, Derek Jeter and Kevin Youkilis. The outfield would be Brett Garden, Ichiro Suzuki and we’re not sure of the third outfielder yet. The catcher will probably be Chris Stewart to catch CC Sabathia since personal catchers are always a good idea. That lineup would be good for the mid-2000s Orioles, but the 2013 Yankees?

Lee last played in a Major League game on Sept. 28, 2011. He hit .267/.325/.446 in 113 games for the Orioles and Pirates. It would be one thing if Lee was looking to rebound off a bad 2012 and could come on the cheap after a solid 2011 to show that he isn’t that far removed from being productive. But Lee isn’t looking to rebound off a bad 2012 because he didn’t play in 2012 and he isn’t coming on the cheap after a solid 2011 because he wasn’t good in 2011.

But none of this really even matters since Lee turned down the Yankees’ offer. That’s right. Derrek Lee, at 37, turned down FREE MONEY to put on the pinstripes and serve as a role player with no pressure for the most prestigious and popular team in baseball. He didn’t want guaranteed money and to be a major leaguer again for the MakeShift Yankees. And I thought things hit rock bottom when Cliff Lee left money on the table to go to Philadelphia. But I think Derrek Lee not taking an offer from the Yankees when he has no other offers and isn’t playing baseball anymore is rock bottom.

I can’t find Chipper Jones’ agent’s number anywhere. Do you have it?
– Brian C., Darien, Conn.

If you thought things were bad or miserable to embarrassing when there were rumors that Cashman wanted Lee, how did you feel when you found out that the general manager of the New York Yankees didn’t have the phone number of one of the game’s best players over the last 20 years?

I didn’t think for one second that Jones would come to the Yankees (and I didn’t want him to either just like I didn’t want Lee to take Cashman up on his offer) since he had played all 2,499 games in the majors with the Braves and had already taken less money during his career to stay a Brave forever. So why would he throw that all away and join the Makeshift Yankees? He wouldn’t and he was never going to.

Everyone can make fun of me and say that I’m the new Jason Giambi and that I’m getting paid $22.5 million a year to only play defense and that my career is in decline and that I’m overpaid and that I got a free pass to criticism because A-Rod won us the World Series in 2009, but everyone is going to miss me for the first two months of the season. You’ll see. They’re going to miss me. I know it. Theyre’ going to miss me, right? Right?!?!
– Mark T., Greenwich, Conn.

I felt like a Vegas sportsbook pulling the Steelers game off the board with Ben Roethlisberger’s playing status uncertain when it was announced Mark Teixeira would be out for up to 10 weeks because the news completely altered the “2013 Ladies and gentlemen…” race and I had to quickly change the odds. With Teixeira out for two months I had to adjust the odds for this season’s overall winner and here are the current odds:

Joe Girardi: -600

Eduardo Nunez: -450

Francisco Cervelli: -320

Mark Teixeira: -250

Boone Logan -180

Field: EVEN

Teixeira is out with a strained wrist. A strained wrist. Not a broken wrist. Not something that requires surgery or a cast or a pin or a screw or reconstruction or a titanium rod. A strained wrist.

On Feb. 7, I broke down Mark Teixeira’s interview with the Wall Street Journal. And in that interview he hinted at the idea that he might break down.

“To think that I’m going to get remarkably better, as I get older and breaking down a little bit more, it’s not going to happen.”

It only took 27 days for that little bit of foreshadowing from the $22.5 million-per-year first baseman to come to fruition.

But to answer your question, Mark T. from Greenwich, Conn., I won’t miss Mark Teixeira’s April at the plate, but I will miss his defensive skills and the amount of errors and runs he saves at first base. If Teixeira would suck up his pride and try to hit to the left side of the field from the left side of the plate or just drop two or three bunts down the third-base line to end the Michael Kay “Martini Glass” Shift then I would really miss Mark Teixeira because he might be the .292/.383/.565 guy he was in 2009 and not the .251/.332/.475 he has become and was in 2012.

Blogs • Rangers

Feb 25, 2013

The Same Old Rangers

It was another game and another loss for the Rangers, so that means another John Tortorella postgame press conference analysis.

When I started the tradition and made the promise to analyze every John Tortorella postgame press conference following a loss, I didn’t think the Rangers would lose every game, but that’s basically what’s happened. Since the first of these after losing to the Devils, the Rangers have lost to the Canadiens and lost to the Senators and lost to the Canadiens again. (They also lost to the Islanders, but that was on Valentine’s Day and I have already given my excuse for missing that game and the postgame press conference.) Starting with that loss to the Devils, the Rangers are 4-3-2, which isn’t even that bad since I was starting to think that maybe the start of these was the problem with the team. And then I remembered that when Rick Nash doesn’t play and Marian Gaborik gets benched, it’s hard for a team without secondary scoring to score and when you don’t score it’s hard to win.

The Rangers aren’t scoring or winning right now and John Tortorella is getting testier with each loss. With three straight losses in five days, Tortorella started his postgame press conference in Montreal by asking the media a question rather than the traditional way a press conference is held.

“How high did Pacioretty jump on his hit? Anybody give me an answer? I’m asking you guys. Over/under? No one can give me an answer? Figures, Zip, you’re wrong. No, I’m just asking.”

Tortorella has a point here that Max Pacioretty did leave his feet on the hit on Ryan McDonagh. The refs thought he left his feet on the hit and gave him two minutes for boarding, which was the correct call. Neither the MSG broadcast nor the Canadian broadcast of the game really took exception to the hit (OK, obviously the Canadian broadcast wasn’t going to) and the NHL Department of Player Safety determined that the hit wasn’t worthy of a suspension. So maybe it wasn’t that bad?

The Rangers got their two-minute power play for the hit, which was viewed by both broadcasts as payback for McDonagh hitting Pacioretty earlier in the game, but the Rangers failed to score a power-play goal (surprise, surprise) and wasted the opportunity and also lost McDonagh for the rest of the game.

On what happened in the second period when the game got away.

“We don’t generate enough consistently and they score a goal. Again we’re just not consistently having the puck … offensively. They score a power-play goal, ours doesn’t work. I think our game just fell off. I thought we had a really good first period, but it fell off from there.”

Tortorella almost made the right point here except he said “enough consistently.” What he should have said was, “We don’t generate anything.” “Consistently” would indicate that the Rangers score goals at times and at other times they don’t score any goals. But in reality, they don’t ever score goals.

Marian Gaborik has the most goals on the team. Marian Gaborik was benched for the entire third period on Saturday with the Rangers needing to score goals because of a penalty he took in the second period. Brian Boyle doesn’t score goals. Brian Boyle took a penalty that cost the Rangers a win and a second point in Ottawa on Thursday late in the third period. Nothing happened to Brian Boyle. You should always bench your leading goal scorer when trailing in a game in a shortened season. It’s just common sense.

Last week the Rangers played four games. They scored four goals in those four games and came away with just three of a possible eight points. And in the “really good” first period, the Rangers had six shots and no goals. (The Canadiens only had three shots in that period, but they would at least go on to score three goals in the second and third period.) The Rangers finished with 17 shots.

To say the power play doesn’t work is an understatement. The Rangers went 0-for-2 in the game and are 8-for-71 on the year. That’s 11.3 percent. That’s good enough for the 29th-best power play in the league. (Thankfully they aren’t 30th like the Sabres at 11.3 percent. Losers!) The personnel on the power play has to change. It has to. Brad Richards might have a Conn Smythe and a worthy reputation as a “playmaker,” but he has done nothing on the first unit this season. Whether it’s his constant overthinking, making one too many passes or shooting pucks into shin pads, Richards has been detrimental to the power play when he’s supposed to be the leader of it. I think making wholesale changes to a power play that is second worst in the entire league and sitting some of the expensive cap hits for less experienced players is necessary at this point. If the younger and supposedly less offensive guys don’t get the job done, what will have changed? The worst that can happen is the Rangers will regain their spot at the bottom from the Sabres, which they are one more unsuccessful power play from taking back anyway. The best that could happen is that they actually score with a man advantage.

On so many players getting injured.

“Yeah, it’s part of the game though. You have injuries. You gotta keep on playing. I mean what can you do, Sam? Some kids got a chance to play tonight, but again we’re not playing enough minutes, so we gotta figure it out and just try to find ourselves, keep our wits about ourselves and keep on playing here.”

Wait a minute. Just wait a minute. Who was that guy standing in front of the Rangers/Chase backdrop in a suit with a goatee talking about not having the full lineup and complaining about injuries after blowing a late lead in Ottawa on Thursday night? Whoever that guy was, he looks strikingly similar to the guy who stood in front of the Rangers/Chase backdrop after the Montreal loss on Saturday night and gave us that quote about injuries not being an excuse. Very, very strange.

If the team isn’t playing “enough minutes,” who’s fault is that? No, John Tortorella doesn’t play in the games, but it’s his job to decide who does and when and it’s his job to get the most out of his players. If his players aren’t “playing” for the entire 60 minutes of the game that falls directly under his job description as head coach.

On Michael Del Zotto not being able to play in the game.

“Well, it hurts. He’s a very good player for us. It hurts. He takes some big minutes.”

Michael Del Zotto missing time does hurt because Del Zotto is basically a somewhat fifth starting pitcher. He’s going to eat minutes and have his good games with his bad games and you just hope he doesn’t screw up too badly and cost your team a game, which he tends to do. The problem is that while Del Zotto hasn’t had a good season, the options below him on the depth chart aren’t as good, which is very scary. So when you’re worried about Del Zotto not being able to play despite him thinking he is Bobby Orr and Ray Bourque and thinking the power play runs through him, it’s never a good thing. Hurry back, Michael Del Zotto? (Yes, a question mark is the correct punctuation there.)

On severity of injuries to Girardi and McDonagh.

“No, I don’t know, and I’m not going to talk about it anyway.”

John Tortorella has the right to not talk about injuries, but choosing not to seems to be making his job harder. I’m not sure what talking about injuries will really do since if Player X has a concussion and Team Y finds out about it, I don’t think Team Y is going to purposely target Player X’s head in the 2012-13 NHL where contact to the head is finally being taken seriously. And I don’t think players are going to willingly put their own jobs and other players’ careers in jeopardy or forfeit their source of income to hit someone in the head.

Tortorella has started to get agitated and angry when asked about injuries and it really upsets him that media members want to find out why players are missing time and games so they can report it. As a fan, it would be nice to know why Rick Nash hasn’t played in the last three games since the team has scored three goals combined in the games he has missed. It would help to know if there’s a chance he might play on Tuesday against Winnipeg or on Thursday against Tampa Bay or if he will play again in March or April or at all again this season. (Sure, it’s extreme to wonder if he will be out for months, but how am I supposed to know if I don’t even know why he is out in the first place?) Fans deserve to know why their team’s most important offensive player isn’t playing and when he might play again. You know fans, the people who happen to be the reason that someone like John Tortorella is able to coach professional hockey for a job and afford to be fined $30,000 like he was after the Winter Classic or $20,000 like he was after ripping the Penguins last April.

On how to get more from his team.

“We’ve gotta try to gain some confidence. We’ve gotta try to just stabilize ourselves when we lose a couple. Coming into these last three games here we were playing pretty well. We find a way to get a point in Ottawa. We can’t get into a panic mode. We just need to get more minutes consistently out of our players and I mean it’s a hard question to answer, Sam. It’s just a matter of trying to find yourself and hope some good things happen and you gain some confidence.”

Before the season, Tortorella told Mike Francesa that in a shortened season you can’t afford to get into a jam because you might not be able to get out of it. The Rangers are in a jam sitting in 10th place in the East with the season 35 percent over and injuries mounting. They haven’t looked like a playoff team since their win in Boston seven games and 13 days ago and no one is talking about what the Rangers can do this spring, they’re talking about whether or not they will be playing after Game 48 and if Brad Richards will be amnestied by the team.

The 2012-13 Rangers were a team that was looking to build off a season in which they finished first in the conference and reached the Eastern Conference Finals. Instead they look like the pre-2011-12, post-lockout Rangers, who played by the strategy of “score the first goal and hope Henrik Lundqvist makes it stand.” Those Rangers team either didn’t make the playoffs or lost in the first round and never once made it out of the second round. This team is becoming those teams.