Keefe To The City

Feb 22, 2013

New York Rangers Hockey: ‘Grab Points When We Can’

John Tortorella was the most pissed off he’s been all season after Thursday’s 3-2 shootout loss in Ottawa.

You would think you could tell how pissed off John Tortorella is by how short and snippy his answers are, but that’s only part of the equation. To really tell how pissed off Tortorella is just listen to how many names of reporters he drops in his answers following a loss. On Thursday night in Ottawa, he used “Sam” for Sam Rosen of MSG, “Pat” for Pat Leonard of the Daily News and “Zip” for Steve Zipay of Newsday. It was the most pissed off Tortorella has been all season.

Keeping with tradition, here is the analysis of John Tortorella’s postgame press conference from Thursday night’s 3-2 shootout loss to the Senators.

On what areas he sees improvement.

“Oh, Sam I’m not going to go over areas and all that. I’m glad we got a point. I still don’t think our full lineup is playing, so we just got to keep grinding away until we get people playing and try to grab points when we can.”

Aww, poor John Tortorella and the Rangers. They don’t have their full team! They don’t have all of their best players! They don’t have their complete roster! Paul MacLean’s Senators just lost their Norris Trophy-winning defenseman for the season with a torn Achilles and overcame a late third-period deficit with their backup goalie after their starter sprained his ankle and still beat the Rangers. And Jason Spezza has only played five games (and has five points) due to injury. I didn’t hear Paul MacLean crying about his team’s injuries after Thursday’s game.

No one is going to feel bad for the Rangers and no one should feel bad for them. Yes, it sucks that Rick Nash has missed two straight games and will miss his third on Saturday, but part of being a good team is having depth and the Rangers don’t have much of it even when they are at full strength. Some people want to blame the lack of depth on the Nash deal that saw Brandon Dubinsky and Artem Anismov get shipped to Columbus, but if you want two dimes for a quarter then I can’t help you.

If the Yankees used “Heroes remembered, legends born” last season and are going with “A Timeless Legacy” in 2013, well John Tortorella gave us the 2012-13 Rangers’ slogan: “Grab points when we can.” Because when the lockout ended, coming off an Eastern Conference Finals appearance and with the addition of Rick Nash, “Grab points when we can” was exactly how I thought this season would play out. I was terribly mistaken to think that the number 1 seed a year ago could possibly keep up their level of play. Stupid me. So eff it! “Grab points when we can!” Let’s go Rangers!

On whether or not he sees the power play getting more consistent.

“I thought the past couple of games it’s been OK. We scored a big goal tonight. We still … we don’t have enough guys playing. We don’t. But we get a point, so we just gotta keep trying to grind way and get points until we have our full team playing here.”

Here are the facts aside from the most telling stat the the Rangers are 4-for-31 on the power play in February and last in the league on the power play on the year.

1. Rick Nash didn’t play on Thursday night.

2. Of Rick Nash’s 292 career goals, 83 (28 percent) of them have come on the power play. Of Rick Nash’s 267 career assists, 100 of them have come on the power play (37 percent).

3. Of Rick Nash’s 183 power-play points, one of them has come with the Rangers.

What does all of this tell us? Two things.

1. With Rick Nash in the lineup, the power play still sucks and Tortorella shouldn’t be blaming his absence on the special teams’ struggles.

2. The players Rick Nash plays with on the power play shouldn’t be on the power play.

How do we know this?

Rick Nash was a productive special teams player on the worst team in the league. He’s now supposedly playing with better players on the man advantage, but for some reason the power play isn’t scoring and it certainly isn’t because of him.

The power play needs new personnel. Michael Del Zotto doesn’t belong on the first unit and that needs to be the first change. Pierre McGuire told Mike Francesa that when Tortorella was an assistant coach he was a special teams expert, which only further complicates the situation since this should have been fixed by now.

(Everything else from Tortorella’s answer is the same as the first answer. Poor, Torts! He doesn’t have his best player! But his team has had the lead in their last three losses, but let’s not talk about that.)

On what was working on the line when Halpern jumped up with Callahan and Pyatt in the third.

“They forechecked. They had the puck.”

Can’t argue there.

On why he thought it was necessary to make that line change.

“Because we weren’t developing any offense, Pat.”

Fair enough.

On if he sympathizes a team that lost their number 1 goalie.

“Do I sympathize for what’s happened there? No, I … No.”

Then no one is going to sympathize with your injuries, so why keep bringing them up?

On if the play that injured Anderson was an accident.

“He was tripped. It was a goal too.”

OK.

On what happened with the quick whistle on Halpern’s waved-off goal.

“They said they must have lost site of the puck. I didn’t get an explanation. I don’t bother with that anymore.”

You don’t bother with should-have-been goals, but just said that Chris Kreider getting tripped into Craig Anderson should have been a goal. OK then…

On if Gaborik played better for the whole 60 minutes.

“Are you asking me a question or telling me, Zip? Ask me the question.”

“That line played well.”

If Gaborik’s line is the only line that plays well on Saturday night in Montreal, I’ll have a postgame press conference to analyze on Sunday.

Blogs • Email Exchanges • Rangers

Feb 22, 2013

The Canadiens Own the Recent Rangers

The Rangers’ second meeting this week with the first-place Canadiens called for an email exchange with Andrew Berkshire of Eyes on the Prize.

The Rangers lost another game in which they led on Thursday night in Ottawa. Now their two-game road trip north of the border stops in Montreal on Saturday night for their second meeting with the first-place Canadiens this week.

Andrew Berkshire of Eyes on the Prize joined me for an email exchange to talk about why no one is giving the Canadiens the credit they deserve, why they are a bad matchup for the Rangers and what it’s like to have Brandon Prust on the Habs.

Keefe: John Tortorella called the Canadiens a “bad team” (which I ripped him for) after their win over the Rangers on Tuesday night. Henrik Lundqvist called the Canadiens “boring” despite their 3-1 win and now first-place spot in the Eastern Conference. No one seems to want to give the Habs credit for their strong start and five-game winning streak before their shootout loss on Thursday, but we are now one-third of the way through this shortened NHL season and while 17 games might not be a strong enough sample size in other years, it certainly is this year.

Why isn’t anyone giving credit to the Canadiens for their 11-4-2 start? They just won five games in seven days and beat the Hurricanes in Montreal and the Rangers in New York in less than 24 hours. They have outscored their opponents 18-9 over the last six games and outside of their loss to the Senators on Jan. 30 and their loss to the Maple Leads on Feb. 9, they have either won every other game or lost by one goal. The Canadiens might not have the type of stars other teams around the league do or an exciting and flashy style of play and maybe they are “boring,” but the Devils proved that “boring” can lead to championships in the NHL.

I’m buying into the Canadiens, but why isn’t everyone else?

Berkshire: As far as Torts goes, he’s always bitter after a loss it seems. His grumpy demeanor is funny from the outside at times, but it also wears thin. The Canadiens team he saw was playing its third game in four nights, all against teams that are fighting to get into the playoff picture. I don’t think the Canadiens were particularly great that night, but calling them a bad team is just Torts blowing hot air.

As for Henrik, I believe he also called them a smart team, which gives it a little context. The Canadiens played a boring brand of hockey against the Rangers on Tuesday, there is no denying that, but they were dog-tired and it ended up working.

I think the main reason no one wants to believe that the Canadiens are a good team is that, especially among the mainstream press, narratives are hard to shake. Under Jacques Martin the Canadiens were labeled a bad team, even though they were actually a good team. When they fell apart last year, many people felt like they’d been given justification for their former misgivings. And these are Habs fans! There are a lot of people who would rather be right than see their team win, and I think that was largely the case there.

As far as national media goes, the Canadiens were so bad last year for two thirds of the year that it was hard to believe they could possibly recover so quickly. At Eyes on the Prize, we go over a lot of data every day and we figured that a quick turnaround was more than possible, in fact it was highly likely. You can only be so bad when you have Carey Price, P.K. Subban and Andrei Markov heading up your back end. But it’s hard for a lot of people to move away from their opinions. The Habs were bad last year, so surely they would be bad again.

All this said, the Canadiens have still been one of the luckiest teams in the league, with high shooting percentages for several players that aren’t really sustainable. They’re going to lose more often in the next few weeks than they have so far this year, but they’re a playoff team in my opinion, maybe a Top 4 team in the East.

Keefe: I’m a Yankee fan, so I understand people wanting to be right and have their opinions be validated rather than having their team win.

It seems like there’s something different about the Rangers when they play the Canadiens. Actually I know there is. No matter how well the Rangers have played leading into the game or for how long they have been playing well, they always seem to either give an awful effort against or look like a completely different team when they face the Habs.

The Canadiens have won 11 of the last 17 meetings with the Rangers dating back to the beginning of the 2008-09 season. (I started counting with the 2008-09 season because the 2007-08 season featured the Rangers’ epic embarrassment on Feb. 19, 2008 when they blew a 5-0 lead in Montreal with 34:57 left in the game. I’m sure you remember that game well.) After Saturday’s game, the Rangers and Canadiens will only meet one other time this season (unless they meet in the playoffs) on March 30.

Why do you think the Rangers seem to never have their best game or anything that closely resembles their normal game when they play the Canadiens even though the names on the rosters change?

Berkshire: It’s an interesting question. I believe heading into that 5-0 comeback game the Rangers had dominated the Habs for a couple straight years, but I could be wrong.

I think part of it could be psychological. That game between the Rangers and Habs in 2008 was a turning point in that season for Montreal, and they blitzed through the rest of the season to finish first in the conference. One guy who always seems to be ordinary against the Habs is Lundqvist and we all know that he’s anything but ordinary. It’s possible that he’s still annoyed with that game a few years later. Something I’ve noticed with Lundqvist is that if you put a few past him, he stops fighting to make saves, and gets visibly frustrated.

Other than perhaps some latent mental frustration lasting from that game, I don’t really think there’s a logical explanation. The Rangers are a strong team, especially defensively that they shouldn’t be too far below .500 against the Habs.

It reminds me a little of the Habs and Leafs. The Leafs have been a terrible team by pretty much any measure for the last five or so years, while the Canadiens have been OK to strong over that time, yet they split the games down the middle. Something about the way the two teams match up that isn’t readily apparent causes results that shouldn’t happen.

Keefe: Brian Gionta has been one of my favorite players in the league since he debuted during the 2001-02 season even though his career has been spent with New Jersey and Montreal. I had the chance to watch him in college at Boston College and admired his scoring ability and his style of play despite being 5-foot-7, which he’s listed at, but appears way, way smaller.

Scott Gomez was also a personal favorite of mine after his Calder Trophy campaign in 1999-2000 despite playing for New Jersey and I was ecstatic when the Rangers signed him before the 2007-08 season. I was even more ecstatic when they were able to trade him to the Canadiens before the 2009-10 season.

The two of them formed the EGG line in New Jersey with Patrik Elias before teaming up in Montreal, but now their careers have gone separate ways with Gionta being the captain of the Canadiens and Gomez being told to go home for the year before ending up with the Sharks.

How much do you enjoy getting to watch Gionta play for your Canadiens and how did you feel about Gomez’s time and unusual departure?

Berkshire: I’m one of the few Canadiens fans who doesn’t harbor any ill will against Scott Gomez. It’s not his fault that Glen Sather signed him to an insane contract and it’s not his fault that Bob Gainey gave up Ryan McDonagh and Chris Higgins for him (two players that are younger and better than he is).

Gomez had the misfortune of being in Montreal when his career plateaued and he began to decline into old age and he was eviscerated for it. That said, he did have one very good year in 2009-10, and probably could have had a second one in 2010-11 if the Pacioretty-Gomez-Gionta line was a thing from the start of the season to the end.

I enjoyed watching Gomez’s transition game and neutral-zone play, which is still a strong skill set of his, but the rest got to be pretty mind-numbing by last year. I was glad to see him go, although it was still surprising. I think in the end, the buyout is good for both the Canadiens and Scott Gomez, who no longer has to worry about being labeled overpaid.

Gionta on the other hand, has been excellent for the Habs. He’s also at the age where his scoring has taken a slight dip every year, from a near 40-goal pace in his first year, to near 30, to an injury plagued year and now he’s likely a 25-goals-per-82-games kind of player.

He’s still solid defensively and plays a strong possession game against top competition though, and he rarely takes a shift off. Watching Gionta go in on the forecheck against Zdeno Chara and winning the puck battle tells you all you need to know about the Habs captain.

Keefe: Brandon Prust became an important part of the Rangers after being traded to New York in the Olli Jokinen deal three years ago. His grinder style of play and his willingness to fight anyone at anytime made him a blue-collar player and fan favorite in the city. My friend Dave went so far as to buy a Prust jersey last season, which I strongly advised him not to do.

So far this season Prust has already has two goals and five points after having just five goals and 17 points in all 82 games last year. He has a plus-7 rating, leads the league in penalty minutes with 76 (on pace to break his career high even in a shortened season) and is second in the league with six fighting majors. At four years and $10 million it seemed like the Habs overpaid for Prust in the summer, but he is giving them everything he gave the Rangers in two-plus seasons and more. Right now the Rangers could use Prust, but instead he’s helping your team try to achieve the 1-seed this season.

Berkshire: I really like Brandon Prust. I think his contract is a little too much money for a little bit too long, but that’s what happens with unrestricted free agents who have a unique skill set.

He’s already a fan favorite here, which has led to fans and media completely overblowing his value to the point where our local sports radio station asserted that he’s been the second most important player on the team this year. That’s pretty crazy and I wrote about what his real value is to the team on Wednesday.

I think he’s an above average fourth liner who can play on the third line if necessary, something the Canadiens have four of now along with Travis Moen, Colby Armstrong and Ryan White. He’s also been lights-out on the penalty kill, which is a welcome surprise since he was only middling by the numbers on the Rangers.

Is he going to be worth his contract by the last year of it? I don’t know, but for now I really like what he brings to the team.

Keefe: When the two teams met on Tuesday night, it was ugly. It was the second-worst game of the year for the Rangers after their 3-0 home loss to the Penguins on Jan. 31.

On Thursday night the Rangers blew a third-period lead to the Senators, and lost in a shootout, to drop their second straight game in which they led and it was their third loss in a row in which they scored the first goal. The Canadiens also lost on Thursday, but it was the first in six games as they blew a two-goal lead to the Islanders and lost in a shootout.

Saturday night will be the second-to-last meeting of the season between the Rangers and Canadiens (the last one is March 30) and hopefully we see a better all-around game than we saw on Tuesday. But in the bigger picture, what do you see for the Rangers and Canadiens over the remaining two-thirds of the season?

Berkshire: I think what we’ll see on Saturday is a much more entertaining game than what we saw on Tuesday. The Canadiens were extremely disappointed with how the game ended against the Islanders with Max Pacioretty being particularly fired up. The Canadiens are also a much stronger home team than they are on the road and won’t be coming off of three games in four nights.

Similarly, I think the Rangers are going to be a lot better as well. It’s possible that Rick Nash will be back in the lineup and that’s a big boost on its own, but I also think they have something to prove after the last game. I think we’ll see a high tempo game.

As for how the season will go, I think the Habs will be taking a step down sooner or later, because they’re not as good as their record. They should challenge the Bruins for the division title, but I’m not sure that they’re there yet. They’re a playoff team though, and a pretty good one.

The Rangers don’t seem to be the team they were last year. They’re still fantastic defensively, but they lost quite a bit of depth when the traded for Rick Nash, and they seem to miss Brandon Prust on the fourth line. They’re still a playoff team in my mind. I don’t think they’re as good as the Penguins over an 82-game season, but over this 48-game one, they could begin a hot streak that propels them up the standings to a division title.

Blogs • Email Exchanges • Yankees

Feb 21, 2013

The State of the Yankees: Spring Training Edition

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Do you recognize this Neil Keefe yet?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Blogs • Rangers

Feb 20, 2013

John Tortorella Thinks the First-Place Canadiens Are a Bad Team

John Tortorella didn’t have much to say after the Rangers’ 3-1 loss to the Canadiens, but he said enough.

There isn’t much to say about a 3-1 home loss to the best team in the Eastern Conference and John Tortorella proved that after Tuesday night’s embarrassment.

Tortorella provided no insight into what the eff happened to the Rangers between Sunday night and Tuesday night, with or without Rick Nash (who he also didn’t provide any information on) because why would Tortorella need to tell anyone why his team can’t seem to consistently hold or increase a lead?

It was another night where the power play put up a zero and the Rangers’ power play now has three goals in 27 opportunities in February and the man advantage is dead last in the NHL at 10.9 percent for the season. It was another night where the Rangers outshot their opponent and didn’t win and another night where they failed to convert high-quality scoring chances. And it was another night where Brian Boyle failed to score a point, extending his scoreless streak to seven straight as the Tortorella favorite now has one assist in 12 games this season. But he did lead the team with six hits! Hits!

But for everything I say about Boyle (all of which is true), it was a full team loss against the Canadiens. Henrik Lundqvist said, “They play it extremely boring” and I’m not sure if he was praising or trying to mock the Habs, but maybe it’s time the Rangers played “it” boring. Because if playing it boring gets you two points every game and first place in the conference, well that’s way more fun than losing.

After the Rangers lost to the Devils two weeks ago, I said I would start a tradition on Keefe To The City and analyze John Tortorella’s postgame press conference after every Rangers loss. I missed the 4-3 shootout loss to the Islanders on Valentine’s Day because it was Valentine’s Day and if I was watching hockey instead of celebrating it then I would certainly be watching hockey on Valentine’s Day next year. So here’s John Tortorella after Tuesday’s 3-1 loss to the Canadiens.

On the game as a whole.

“I thought it was probably one of the worst hockey games I’ve been involved in. Both teams. But they were better than we were.”

There’s no doubt it might have been one of the worst games Tortorella has ever been involved in, but that would mean that he doesn’t remember the Rangers’ 3-0 loss to the Penguins at the Garden on Jan. 31.

I’m not really sure how Tortorella can stand there after losing a home game to the top team in the Eastern Conference and say that both teams played poorly. Not only did the Canadiens beat the Rangers on the road, but the Canadiens played the Hurricanes at 7:30 p.m. on Monday night in Montreal and won 3-0. 23 hours and 30 minutes after the Canadiens-Hurricanes game started, the Canadiens and Rangers began play at Madison Square Garden. In less than 24 hours the Canadiens beat the current 3 seed in the Eastern Conference (thanks to Gary Bettman’s division winner system) and then flew to New York City and depending on what time they arrived at their hotel in New York (I’m guessing early Tuesday morning) they either beat the Rangers the following night or that same night.

The Canadiens deserve a pass for poor and sloppy play and 15 shots on goal. The Rangers, however, last played on Sunday at home against the Capitals. They slept at their own homes in their own beds on Sunday and Monday night and the only travel they had to endure was to the team’s practice facility and to Madison Square Garden. Maybe just maybe Tortorella shouldn’t be grouping the Rangers’ effort with the Canadiens’ effort?

On the icing that was waved off and led to the Canadiens’ first goal.

“They told me that they were yelling to Michael, “No icing” because they said he was shielding the player when he was going back for the puck. They said they didn’t think he was skating completely going to the puck. Doesn’t matter. That doesn’t cost us the game. No excuse there. Two bad teams playing and we were worse than they were.”

Even though Tortorella believes this play didn’t cost the Rangers the game, and yes they deserved to lose anyway, the play did have an impact on the outcome of the game since every play does whether or not he will admit it. After praising his team’s effort in a loss to the Devils just two weeks ago, Tortorella did say, “No excuse there,” so I have to give him credit for not talking about how well the team played despite what the scoreboard said. But let’s look at the last sentence of his quote, which sounds very similar to how he opened his postgame press conference.

The Canadiens are the hottest team in the Eastern Conference and have won five straight games, outscoring opponents 15-5. Three of those wins have come on the road and all five of them came in a one-week period. They are in first place.

The Rangers have lost two of their last three games, all at home, and their only win in the three games came against the last-place Capitals. Last Tuesday they blew a three-goal lead with 11:16 left to play in Boston, but won in a shootout. Last Thursday they blew a two-goal lead after the first to the Islanders and lost in a shootout. In seven of their 15 games they have been held to two goals or less and have scored just three goals in the last seven periods. They are in ninth place.

How is the team in first place just as “bad” as the team in ninth place that they just beat? How is the team in first place “bad” at all?

Tortorella kept it short with the media after the loss and finished with this gem before walking away.

“That pretty much sums it up, huh?”

A poor effort in a home loss following a day of rest with nothing to show for on the power play? Yeah, that pretty much sums it up.

Blogs • NHL

Feb 19, 2013

The 2012-13 NHL All-Animosity Team

It’s the first ever NHL All-Animosity Team.

Last week during the third and last (well the last for now) Rangers-Bruins game, Milan Lucic took exception to the way the Ryan McDonagh plays hockey and decided he was going to try to prove that he’s tough. This wasn’t the first time the two had had sort of mixed it up since last March, Lucic didn’t like that McDonagh didn’t like that Lucic hit from behind. So Lucic, the owner of 30 penalty minutes in 2013 and 555 career penalty minutes (in 371 games) decided that McDonagh and his 66 career penalty minutes (in 136 games) was someone worth bullying.

But this is who Milan Lucic is. He’ll try to intimidate the guys that are in the league because they can play and every once in a while he will prove to those that are in the league even though they can’t play that he is in the league because he can. And it was this latest example of Lucic’s “toughness” that led me to create the first edition of the NHL All-Animosity Team the way I had for MLB.

Five years ago this list would have been a lot easier to make. Ten years ago, this list would have written itself. But in 2013, things are a little trickier. It actually took time to complete a defensive pair (and it’s not even a real defensive pair) for the team when in 2002-03 I would have had to make three separate weeks of cuts just to get it down to six or eight.

But to go along with the MLB All-Animosity Team, which will celebrate its fourth season this spring, here’s the first edition of the NHL All-Animosity Team. (Note: Brian Boyle wasn’t ineligible to make the team.)

FORWARDS

Milan Lucic
I’m not sure there’s anything left to be said about Lucic that wasn’t captured in the opening of this column. But if I could add anything to justify his placement on this team it would be his unnecessary running of Ryan Miller and that Boston fans so badly want him to be Cam Neely 2.0 and some are even crazy enough to think that he is. (FYI: He’s not and it’s not even close.) And there’s nothing worse than a Boston sports fan overrating their player’s talent and ability. (Hey, it’s Trot Nixon!) Also, according to Jack Edwards, Lucic still hasn’t lost a fight.

Matt Cooke
Show me someone outside of Pittsburgh that likes Matt Cooke and doesn’t have the last name Cooke and I will show you a liar. Cooke has become the unanimous number 1 choice as the most hated player in the league (though Raffi Torres really wants that spot), and had I not cared about this column flowing, I would have listed him first instead of Lucic.

Cooke has supposedly changed his dangerous ways and knack for hits and cheap shots that make you wonder what goes through someone’s mind right before they decide to go through with a hit like this.

But it’s not the hit from behind on Fedor Tyutin that I will always think of when I think of Matt Cooke. When I hear Cooke’s name I will always think of him starting the end of Marc Savard’s career with an elbow to the head, which he wasn’t suspended for. And while Cooke continues to play, Savard is left tweeting things like this one from Nov. 8 or this one from Dec. 17. No big deal.

Cooke has been suspended five times and four of those have come while with the Penguins. (If Colin Campbell had never been the league disciplinarian, that number could be doubled.) After being suspended for the remainder of the 2010-11 regular season and the first round of playoffs the year for elbowing Ryan McDonagh in the head, Cooke said, “I don’t want to hurt anybody. That’s not my intention. I know that I can be better.” At the time, no one believed him. I’m not sure if anyone does yet.

Alexander Ovechkin
You probably didn’t expect to see this name here. He’s the cleanest player of the group and a Top 3 talent in the world. But for me Ovechkin has been a problem as I have had to argue against him in what seemed like a never-ending Crosby vs. Ovechkin debate that has now ended with Crosby at the clearly better player.

Ovechkin has 15 goals and 14 assists in 29 regular season games against the Rangers and has been a key player in two first-round exits for the Rangers (2008-09 and 2010-11). On top of that, it seems like every time I get to see him in person he doesn’t do anything (which is both good and bad), including on Sunday night at the Garden and the first time I ever saw him play on Jan. 26, 2006 in Boston, he missed a shorthanded breakaway and then also failed to score on a penalty shot. Give me Crosby every day of the week.

DEFENSEMEN

Zdeno Chara
Jack Edwards will likely tell you that Chara is the best defenseman in the league, but he’s the same guy who thinks fights are decided by whichever plays ends up on top of the other player on the ice. Is there anything worse than when broadcasters talk about Chara’s 108-mph slap shot in the Skills Competition in a real game? No, there’s not. Because there are a lot of times in real games when you get to sprint untouched from the blue into a still puck in the slot and rip a bomb into an open net. But that’s just the tip of the iceberg that is the lovefest for the 6-foot-9, one-time Norris Trophy winner.

It’s tough to say that Chara won’t fight or fight frequently since there aren’t many willing opponents to go against his reach, but unlike Lucic, when Chara picks his spots, he picks them correctly, except when he intentionally tries to injure someone like Max Pacioretty (listen to Jack Edwards blame it on the geometry of the rink), which I wrote about after it happened. But it’s not tough to say that outside of being a massive body on the ice with the longest stick in the league, Chara’s game is overrated by everyone and anyone willing to form an opinion based on his name alone (except for maybe Mike Milbury who thought that Chara, Bill Muckalt and the pick that turned into Jason Spezza was worth Alexei Yashin). But Chara has always been good at standing in front of the net on the power play, which has always been good for a good laugh when rebounds appear at his feet.

Maxim Lapierre
I know Maxim Lapierre isn’t a defenseman, but here’s the thing: there are a lot more forwards in the league to hate than defensemen (probably because there are a lot more forwards in the league than defensemen), so for the sole purpose of not trying to fake hate someone for the sake of this team, I’m going to make a forward play defense for the sake of this team. And when you’re talking about Maxim Lapierre, it’s easy to bend the rules and make exceptions and change things to make sure he’s part of something that includes “Animosity” in the title.

It was hard to pick a Western Conference player since the Rangers play the Canucks once a year and won’t play them at all this year, but Lapierre’s antics go back to his time when he was in the Eastern Conference with the Canadiens. And any Bruins fan taking exception for Lucic and Chara making the team should forgive me for including the 2010-11 Final agitator.

I’m not sure which of the dozens of Lapierre cheap shot moments or examples to break down here, but I think this attempt to draw a penalty against fellow Animosity teammate Zdeno Chara proves his worth to this team. And on top of me breaking the rules and putting a forward on defense just to get him in the lineup, Lapierre is part of the first tier of the “Athletes I Hate To Look At” List, which is led by Josh Beckett. And I’m not the only one who thinks so since someone made a video of his many punchable faces from one game.

The problem with Lapierre is that even though he plays the game in a way that no one should play the game, he does it within the rules because the rules allow for players like him to run around without the fear of paying the price for their actions. But in order to fix that, the NHL would have to care about the game, its integrity and the fans, and there’s a better chance of me giving Nick Swisher a welcome applause when the Indians arrive in the Bronx this season than there is of the NHL caring about any of those things ever.

GOALIE

Martin Brodeur
Was there any other choice?

It’s simple: If you’re a Rangers fan, you don’t like Martin Brodeur. If you’re any other fan, you (most likely) like Martin Brodeur. (Unless you’re a fan of the Ten Commandments.)

Brodeur has been a part of the Rangers-Devils rivalry for 20 years now. Twenty! And when I watch highlights from the ’94 season (since those are all the memorable moments the Rangers have provided in the last 19 years) I can’t believe that he’s still the Devils goalie.

I have friends that try to discredit most of (and sometimes all of) Brodeur’s career by citing the depth and system Lou Lamoriello built around him, and I will agree that there is some truth to the situation he was put in in 1993-94 and the one he has played in since. But that’s sports and there’s no way of knowing if Brodeur would be the NHL’s all-time winningest goalie as part of another franchise or if the Devils would have three Cups if someone other than Brodeur had been their goalie.

In 2008-09 this theory looked real when career backup Scott Clemmensen went 25-13-1 for the Devils with a 2.39 goals against average and .917 save percentage. The theory looked even more real in 2010-11 when injuries to the core of the Devils forced Brodeur to be outstanding and he posted a career-low .903 save percentage and posted a sub-.500 record for the first time in his career (though age could obviously be cited as a factor). But then Brodeur had to go and record 31 wins in 59 games in 2011-12 and beat the Rangers along the way to his fifth Stanley Cup Final appearance at the age of 40 even if he didn’t look like the three-time Cup winner in the process.

Brodeur isn’t the same goalie in 2012-13 at 40 that he was in 2002-03 at 30 when he won his first of four Vezinas. But my animosity for him remains the same.