fbpx

Tag: Chris Kreider

Podcasts

Nov 13, 2013

Podcast: Brian Monzo

Brian Monzo of WFAN joins me to talk about why he supposedly didn’t care about the NHL entering this season and where Henrik Lundqvist will play next year.

It took the Rangers nearly a month to get their season on track, but they have done so by winning seven of their last 10 games and climbing out of their early 2-6 hole. I wasn’t sure if Mike’s On: Francesa on the FAN producer Brian Monzo had even watched the first month-plus of the NHL season after he wrote a blog on Opening Night saying how he didn’t care that the NHL was back.

Monzo joined me to talk about the state of the NHL, why he is against the league’s front office and rule changes, whether or not NHL players should play in the Olympics, if the Islanders made the right decision trading Matt Moulson for Thomas Vanek and where Henrik Lundqvist will play next season.

Read More

Blogs • Email Exchanges • Rangers

Oct 3, 2013

The Alain Vigneault Era Begins

Hockey season is back and the Rangers open the year against the Coyotes in Phoenix on Thursday and that means an email exchange with Kevin DeLury of The New York Rangers Blog.

Hockey is backkkkkkkkkkkkkkk! Yes, it’s already been back for two days, but the Rangers open their season on Thursday night, so now it’s really back. It’s been over four months since I chose to walk to a bar in the pouring rain rather than watch the final minutes run on the 2012-13 Rangers season in Game 5 against the Bruins, but the devastating postseason ending can now be erased for a new season.

With the Rangers opening their season against the Coyotes in Phoenix on Thursday, I did an email exchange with Kevin DeLury of The New York Rangers Blog to talk about the difference between Alain Vigneault and John Tortorella, Henrik Lundqvist’s contract situation and whether or not Chris Kreider will ever live up to his first-round draft status.

Keefe: The Rangers are back and just in time with both the Yankees season and Giants season ending last Sunday. After last year’s 48-game schedule was squeezed into 99 days and then the 12 postseason games the Rangers played, it seems like just last week they were being eliminated by the Bruins in Game 5 of the conference semifinals even if it was 131 days ago.

Let’s start with the biggest change for the Rangers over that time, which came at head coach with John Tortorella thankfully being fired and changing places with Vancouver’s Alain Vigneault.

I was never really a Vigneault supporter from what I had seen from afar during his three-plus years with the Canadiens and seven years with the Canucks and wasn’t really sold on him being the No. 1 target for Glen Sather and being given the job so quickly and easily. But I have gotten to learn more about him starting with his introductory press conference and how he has performed through the preseason schedule and with the media. I’m definitely all for his offensive coaching style, which won’t have players like Rick Nash and Brad Richards diving headfirst at bombs from the blue line or being asked to muck it up in the corners and sacrifice their bodies. It’s just too bad Marian Gaborik isn’t here to play under Vigneault and had to be traded during the Tortorella era. (Yes, I’m still bitter.)

DeLury: I’m not sure why any Rangers fan would be thankful that John Tortorella was fired. The guy changed the entire perception of the Rangers organization. Instead of being a country club for veteran players to cash one last huge paycheck before riding off into the sunset, Tortorella held players accountable for their actions and made sure they did things “the right way.”

He was able to convince Glen Sather that trying to buy a Stanley Cup was never going to work and that building from within was a winning strategy. Hard-working and dedicated young players such as Ryan Callahan, Brandon Dubinsky and Marc Staal were given leadership positions and became the core of the Blueshirts under Tortorella. When talented veterans such as Marian Gaborik and Brad Richards were acquired they were seen as part of the equation, not the answer. And the results proved Tortorella correct as the 2011-12 Rangers made it to the Eastern Conference Finals for the first time since 1997. That success was followed up last season with a trip to the conference semifinals in which the shorthanded Rangers (no Staal or Ryan Clowe) were knocked out by a talented Bruins squad.

Now that I’ve painted that rosy picture of Tortorella, I’ll cut him down a bit.

Despite the change in culture and all the success, Tortorella’s constant line changes and reliance on top players to the point in which they were burnt out was beyond maddening. And don’t get me started on the Rangers power play, which was beyond pathetic under a coach who was supposed to be a guru with the man advantage. How can a team with Rick Nash, Marian Gaborik and Brad Richards not have a successful power play?

I do feel Torts got a bad rap for the shot-blocking mentality the team had. Right away, he recognized the team didn’t have a wealth of goal scorers, so he felt the only way the Rangers could win was to pack the defense in, rely on his all-world goaltender to steal games and hope the forwards generated enough of a forecheck to produce timely offense. And it worked.

That was until Rick Nash was brought in last season. Tortorella’s stubbornness got the best of him. Yes, his shot-blocking ways led to a conference finals appearance, but when you bring in a Rick Nash, you have to open up the offense and his refusal to modify his game plan to fit a team that didn’t need to grind their way to victory ultimately led to his demise.

I was initially against the firing, but after hearing the reports about what a nightmare it was for the players last season, I don’t think Sather had much of a choice.

As far as Vigneault, I wasn’t a big fan at first. For all the talent and regular-season success he had in Vancouver he was only able to guide the Canucks out of the second round ONCE in his seven years as head coach, including first-round upset losses in each of the last two seasons. Sure, he got the Canucks to within one game of the Stanley Cup, but he lost a Game 7 in his own building with everything on the line.

Having said all that, he’s been a breath of fresh air for the Rangers so far as the positive energy surrounding the team in training camp is palpable. Unfortunately, the results on the ice didn’t reflect it during the preseason. The Rangers scored just nine goals in six games, while giving up 22. So not only are the Blueshirts still not scoring, now they can’t play defense.

Vigneault used most of the preseason to evaluate the talent on the Rangers instead of prepping for the season, which likely led to the uneven play. While I understand that mindset, I just have to question whether the evaluation process went on a little too long and the team is behind the eight ball as they’ve yet to play a game with the opening night line-up.

Yes, it was preseason, but Rick Nash and Brad Richards combining for zero points along with prized prospect Chris Kreider being re-assigned to the AHL after a very unimpressive showing is cause for concern.

So, going into the season, I’m a little uneasy.

Keefe: You mentioned the power play under Tortorella and how it’s unfathomable that a team with Nash, Gaborik and Richards could have a bad power play. But going back even farther than just last season, I don’t remember the last time the Rangers had even a mediocre power play. Actually it was the 2006-07 season when they finished with eighth-best power play in the league. But in the six seasons since then?

2012-13: 23rd
2011-12: 23
2010-11: 18th
2009-10: 13th
2008-09: 29th
2007-08: 23rd

It’s not the like the Rangers have had offensively-challenged players over the last six seasons and it’s not like they have lacked skill players or true scorers. And this year they certainly don’t aren’t lacking those either with Nash and Richards as the should-be focal points of the power play and Derek Stepan finally signing to guarantee a boost to the team’s offense and the man advantage.

On Tuesday, Vigneault told Mike Francesa that the team has been working on the power play of late and there were reports of Nash being put in front of the net to put a pure scorer with a big body in the slot to create traffic and pick up rebounds. I’m torn on this since theoretically it makes sense, but I would rather see him at the top of the dots ripping one-timers.

The power play has been the Rangers’ downfall and was again last year, especially in the postseason when they went 2-for-28 against the Capitals and 2-for-16 against the Bruins. With Ryan Callahan returning from offseason surgery and Carl Hagelin also due back in a couple of weeks from offseason surgery, the Rangers are currently constructed like a high school team with a dangerous first line, an above average second line and then a third and fourth line that aren’t exactly the definition of “depth.” The Rangers are going to have to rely on their scoring to come from the Richards-Stepan-Nash line and the power play with two of their better scoring options unlikely to be in the lineup soon.

Are you worried about the Rangers’ early-season depth?

DeLury: I’m beyond concerned about the scoring depth on this team. While I don’t think Nash has a 40-goal season in him this year, 35 is absolutely doable for him. After that, I’m not sure who else the Rangers can truly count on to supply consistent goal scoring.

Rangers fans have been fawning over Derick Brassard this offseason, but the fact remains that he’s never eclipsed 20 goals in any season during his career. And while it’s great that the Rangers got Stepan re-signed, he’s never been known as a goal scorer as he’s failed to score more than 21 goals in a season. Callahan and Hagelin’s absence from the lineup as they continue to recover from shoulder surgeries will obviously keep their goal totals down and even when they’re back in the line-up there’s no guarantee they’ll immediately return to form. See Gaborik’s return from shoulder surgery last season. Many predicted a breakout season for Kreider, but he’s down in the AHL, and even if he was on the Rangers he has a grand total of TWO career regular-season goals.

How’s this for a stat: After Nash, only two players on the current roster (Callahan and Richards) have reached 25 goals in a season. And as I mentioned above, it is very doubtful Callahan will reach that total this season. Ditto for Richards if he continues his downward spiral.

Sure, Vigneault is going to open up the offense this season, but if he doesn’t have the players who can execute his new schemes, does it really matter? As far as Vigneault’s power-play strategy, I did like what I saw in the preseason. There was a lot more puck and player movement. I also loved that there was always someone in front causing havoc. I definitely anticipate a more successful power play this season. Hell, it can’t get worse.

The biggest reason for the Rangers power-play failings under Tortorella has been the lack of a true power-play quarterback. The guy who has all the talent to do it is Michael Del Zotto, but I have lots of questions about what goes on between the ears with him.

Keefe: The idea of Henrik Lundqvist leaving via free agency is scarier than the idea of Robinson Cano doing the same. Lundqvist is the reason the Rangers have been relevant in the post-lockout era and the only reason they have gone as far as they have in the playoffs during that time.

Lundqvist and the Rangers have still been talking about an extension, which he says he will ask the talks to cease during the regular season, so they don’t become a distraction and he can focus 100 percent on playing. That means the Rangers have just hours left to get a deal done with No. 30 or it will be a long, long season of the unknown. (Editor’s note: Since the end of the email exchange it was reported that Henrik Lundqvist backed out of contract extension talks.)

And with the Francesa-Vigneault interview mentioned earlier, Vigneault told Francesa that he plans on playing Lundqvist for 60 games this season and then giving 22 to Martin Biron due to research done in the past about Stanley Cup winners and how many games their goalies played. The fewest number of games Lundqvist has played since entering the league was in his rookie season in 2005-06 when he played 53. Since then he has played 70, 72, 70, 73, 68, 62 and 43, but the 43 came in the shortened season and was 89.6 percent of the season, which is the equivalent of 73 games in a regular 82-game season.

What do you think will happen with Lundqvist’s extension? Please don’t tell me we will be looking at a revolving goalie door for a decade starting in 2014-15.

DeLury: Now that the regular season is virtually upon us and Lundqvist has declared that he’s not going to be a part of negotiations during the summer, it looks like if a deal is going to get done it won’t be until next summer. Which makes this season, probably one of the most important in franchise history.

I’ve never seen an athlete so driven by winning as Lundqvist. He has made no bones about it, he wants to win a Stanley Cup. Would winning it in New York be his ideal scenario? Of course, but if he isn’t enamored with the direction of the team under Vigneault and doesn’t feel the Rangers give him the best chance to achieve his goal, I wouldn’t at all be surprised to see him bolt for a team like the Penguins.

And while most so-called experts expect the Rangers to break the bank to keep “The King” on his throne in New York, I’m not so sure. It would be beyond the height of stupidity for the Rangers to offer a 31-year old goaltender an eight-year, $80 million contract in the salary cap era, epecially when the team still needs to re-sign Callahan and Dan Girardi next offseason as well.

I love the idea of limiting Lundqvist’s workload in an attempt to keep him fresh for the postseason. One of the knocks over the years of Hank has been his inability to carry the team on his shoulders to the promise land in the postseason. Hopefully this strategy will allow him to do that. Although, that workload could increase significantly if the Rangers fall behind in the standings early and Vigneault needs to lean on the All-Star goaltender down the stretch.

Keefe: In February 2012, I would have traded anything for Rick Nash and that anything included Chris Kreider. At the time Kreider was a 20-year-old college hockey player and 2009 first-round pick of the Rangers. The debate favored keeping Kreider over trading him for a player, who if Kreider lived up to his potential would still never match in talent, ability or skill. Ultimately the Rangers decided not to trade for Nash and ended up needing seven games to get by the Senators and Capitals before falling to the Devils in six games in the conference finals.

I argued that the Rangers can’t keep wasting years of Henrik Lundqvist’s prime by not balancing the team with offense. How many more documentaries and shows can be squeezed out of the 1993-94 season? Isn’t it time the Rangers start to make new memories and stop reliving ones from two decades ago?

Kreider was called up for the postseason and scored five goals in 18 games. But last year he became a frequent traveler between Hartford and New York, playing only 23 games for the Rangers and scoring just two goals and adding one assist. He played in eight of the Rangers’ 12 playoff games and had a goal and an assist.

Earlier this preseason, Kreider was playing with Nash and Richards and looking like he might be part of the Rangers’ top line and given a chance to finally prove his first-round worth. Instead he had a poor camp and was sent to Hartford on Sunday to start the season.

Kreider isn’t that young anymore when it comes to a former first-round pick (though he’s not old by any stretch). He’s 22 now and it’s been over four years since he was drafted and he has 23 regular-season games under his belt. To put that in perspective, out of the 29 others players taken in the first round with Kreider in 2009, 25 of them have played more NHL games than him.

What are we to make of Kreider?

DeLury: Last season, Tortorella caught a huge amount of flak for his handling of Chris Kreider. His constant bouncing from the Rangers and Hartford was said to be ruining the kid’s confidence. But I think this preseason’s underwhelming performance from the Rangers No. 1 prospect leading to his assignment to the Wolf Pack almost vindicates Tortorella’s hesitancy to use Kreider in a bigger role.

Kreider has first-line talent, which is why you saw Vigneault put him on a line with Nash and Richards in the preseason, but what the new Rangers head coach found out very quickly is that Kreider might not have the NHL IQ to go along with that talent.

A ton of minutes in every situation in the AHL will be much better for his development than 15 minutes of even strength action in the NHL. I have all the confidence in the world that he will be recalled at some point this season and will succeed at the NHL level. He’s just too talented not to.

Keefe: So here we go with 82 games between now and April 12. It will be a tough stretch out of the gate for the Rangers with nine games on the road to start the season because of the third and final year of MSG renovations.

I’m not as concerned with the early-season schedule as I am with the scoring depth and apparent lack of secondary scoring options, which has pretty much been my biggest concern with the team over the last six years. I’m also obviously concerned about Lundqvist’s contract situation even if that might not get taken care of until the end of the year and by then Lundqvist might decide he wants to play for a team that can score a goal in a playoff game.

What are you most excited about this Rangers team other than the season starting and what worries you about this team?

DeLury: I’m most excited about a fresh start for the Rangers. Despite all the doom and gloom I’ve been spewing, there is a sense of camaraderie that is very similar to the 2011-12 club that was one of the closest Rangers teams I’ve rooted for.

While most might see the nine-game road trip to start the season as a negative, I think it’ll be a huge bonding experience that fosters a ton of chemistry with the team. It also doesn’t hurt to have one of the league’s best goal scorers in Nash and when everything breaks down it’s always nice to turn to the greatest goaltender on the planet.

I’m most worried about the lack of team toughness. I watched the Rangers get pushed around all last season with zero push back. Both Ryan McDonagh and Rick Nash got run last season without a response which is absolutely unacceptable. When the Rangers were successful under Tortorella they displayed toughness and grit. When an opposing team faced the Blueshirts they were prepared to fight for every inch of the ice. Torts’ crew wasn’t the most talented team, but would outwork their opponent and were always there for each other. For some reason the “jam” as Torts liked to call it disappeared last season.

When the Rangers parted ways with heart and soul guys like Brandon Dubinsky, Artem Anisimov, Brandon Prust, Ruslan Fedotenko and John Mitchell after the 2011-12 season, I think management miscalculated how integral those guys were to the success of the team. And up until this point, those players have yet to be replaced.

Read More

Blogs • Rangers • Rangers Playoff Thoughts • Rangers Playoffs

May 24, 2013

Rangers-Bruins Game 4 Thoughts: Extend the Season

The Rangers staved off elimination with a win in Game 4 to send the series back to Boston and extend the season for at least one more game.

I had already gotten over the 2012-13 season after leaving MSG following Game 3, so I was prepared for whatever happened in Game 4. If the Rangers lost it wasn’t going to be a surprise and if they won, it would mean I would get to watch at least one game over the weekend in Nantucket for Figawi.

I watched Game 4 the way I would watch an exhibition with no real emotional investment knowing that it would take an actual miracle for the Rangers’ season to continue past this series and it would take an epic collapse from the Bruins not seen since the 2009-10 Bruins.

When the Rangers trailed recorded four shots in the first period, I didn’t have a good feeling. When the Rangers went down 1-0 at 4:39 of the second period, I thought it was over. When the Rangers went down 2-0 at 7:41 of the second period, I knew it was over. But 58 seconds later, Tuukka Rask let in the strangest goal I have ever seen in my life and the “Two-Goal Lead” theory that I said doesn’t pertain to the Rangers was suddenly in play.

The Rangers tied the game at 2 and I felt like I have so many times before with the New York Football Giants pulling me back into a game or a season only to eventually pull out the rug from underneath me. I thought Tyler Seguin’s goal with 11:54 left in the game was that rug, but “Ladies and gentlemen, Brian Boyle!” saved the game and the season 1:54 later and Chris “I Should Have Been Traded for Rick Nash” Kreider scored in overtime on a pass from Rick Nash to give me at least one more hockey game this season.

Game 4 felt as weird as Game 4 of the ALCS felt. Winning means most likely prolonging the inevitable and losing means the end of the season. The difference is the Rangers won Game 4 and the Yankees didn’t. And for at least one game, “Why not us?” has some meaning.

(These Thoughts have clearly grown shorter as the season has started to take a turn for the worse.)

Read More

Blogs • Rangers • Rangers Playoff Thoughts • Rangers Playoffs

May 20, 2013

Rangers-Bruins Game 2 Thoughts: Two-Goal Lead Isn’t Worst Lead in Hockey

The Rangers were embarrassed by the Bruins in Game 2 and face another must-win situation at home on Tuesday night.

My whole life I have been told “the two-goal lead is the worst lead in hockey” and all my life I have believed this theory because I have seen it erased what seems like the majority of the time. But the time has to come for me to alter the phrase to “the two-goal lead is the worst lead in hockey unless that two-goal lead is against the Rangers.”

When the Bruins went up 4-2 just 26 seconds into the third period, I thought that maybe the Rangers would catch the Bruins taking their foot off the gas, pop in a third goal and cut the lead to one and then use the momentum change to tie the game. Maybe it was the Coors Light bringing out the optimist in me, but for me to think that scenario was even remotely possible even for a second, I’m surprised I don’t still leave milk and cookies out for Santa on Christmas Eve.

Who the eff was I kidding? The Rangers weren’t going to score a third goal, let alone a third and fourth goal and then a fifth goal, which would have been needed to win the game at the time when little did we know it was going to take six goals to beat the Bruins in Game 2. The 2012-13 Rangers have scored six goals three times in 57 games this season and they weren’t about to make it a fourth in a playoff game, on the road, against the Bruins.

The Bruins got five goals from five different players and when you’re getting goals from Torey Krug (four previous career NHL games) and Johnny Boychuk (22 previous goals in 299 regular season and playoff games combined) and Greg Campbell (one previous goal in 40 playoff games), maybe you’re not going to be beaten this spring or summer and maybe the overused and overplayed “saying” will hold true in this series.

That saying is “it’s not a series until the home team loses.” It’s a saying I have never understood, but it’s been used since the Bruins won Game 2 on Sunday and it’s a saying we will hear until the start of Game 3. And if the Rangers win Game 3, it’s a saying we will hear until Game 4 and we will keep hearing until the home team does in fact lose a game in this series. But even if the Rangers were to win Games 3 and 4 at home, according to the saying they are only going to lose Game 5 before winning Game 6 and then losing Game 7. So if the Rangers are going to lose this series next Wednesday in Game 7 in Boston, why am I even watching? I’m watching because right now the chances are slim this thing lasts until Game 7. There’s a chance this thing might not even get back to Boston for Game 5.

The Rangers were embarrassed on Sunday afternoon in Boston in a way they haven’t been embarrassed since losing to Florida 3-1 at home on March 21 in what was the worst hockey game I have ever attended. So let’s start the Thoughts off with the man responsible for the embarrassing play on the ice.

– I gave John Tortorella credit for his preparation and game plan for Game 7 against Washington, but now it’s time to take that credit back. I’m not sure how the Rangers weren’t up for Game 2 from their first shift, but they were absolutely dominated in the opening minutes and it led to a Bruins goal at just 5:28 of the game. I don’t expect the Rangers to come out that flat-footed in Game 3 at home in a must-win game, but it wouldn’t surprise me if they did. Nothing should surprise anyone with this team whether it’s positive or negative because “surprise” is the one word I would use to describe Tortorella’s tenure as Rangers coach. (Did I just accidentally give him the name of his book about his Rangers years once he is eventually fired? Surprise: John Tortorella’s Unexpected Reign as Rangers Coach.)

– The Rangers tied the game at 1 when Ryan Callahan beat Dougie Hamilton (just typing his name makes me think of Pierre McGuire blushing and trying to hide his pants tent between the benches) to a loose puck that led to a breakaway. The sequence that led to Callahan skating free almost looked like Hamilton’s skates were breaking down like Forrest Gump’s leg braces. First the blades, then the TUUKs, then the rivets then the boots then the laces. The only difference is Hamilton didn’t become faster. I didn’t think there was any way any 19-year-old defenseman in the NHL could be that slow, but apparently there is. Can we get a Hamilton vs. Brian Boyle goal line-to-goal line race during warmups before Game 3?

– Rick Nash came out from wherever he had been hiding for the first eight playoff games and tied the game at 2 by going top tit. Aside from a hot goalie, the scariest thing to face in the playoffs is a confident goal scorer, which is why I didn’t feel good about the Washington series with Alexander Ovechkin entering the playoffs on such a streak and scoring in Game 1 before he started to hang and play the role of four-line bruiser rather than world-class sniper. And if Nash has his confidence back after ending his goal-less postseason then maybe we won’t watch the Rangers season end at the Garden this week.

– Henrik Lundqvist wasn’t Henrik Lundqvist on Sunday. Hell, he wasn’t even Mike Dunham. But I’m not going to get on Lundqvist because that’s just not something I’m going to do. He knows he played poorly and I know he will bounce back in Game 3 because that’s what Henrik Lundqvist does. Lundqvist never gave up five goals in 43 games during the regular season, but he gave up four goals four times and in the four games following a game in which he gave up four goals, he went 4-0 with a 1.71 GAA and .934 save percentage. So no, I’m not worried about Lundqvist.

– “I have tried to be your friend, but you will not listen to me, so you have invited this monster…” That’s what Stevie Janowski tells Kenny Powers’ gym class when they’re not supposed to watch him pitch. And that’s what I’m telling John Tortorella (power-play specialist according to Pierre McGuire) and the Rangers power play.

How can a power play go 2-for-36? That’s not a rhetorical question. That’s a real question. I want an answer. How can the power play go 2-for-36? Maybe if the writers and reporters who attend Tortorella postgame press conferences would stop having thumb parties and ask a real question rather than the nonsensical questions they actually do ask we could get an answer to this because it deserves an answer. But according to Tortorella, the power play actually wasn’t bad despite going 0-for-5 in Game 2 since he said, “Our power play was better. Our power play was better today. We didn’t score, but it was better.” I guess we’re judging special teams on how they look rather than results now. I also guess most Rangers fans judge coaching that way too.

– The Rangers could have really used Dan Girardi in the lineup on Sunday. I hope he’s able to play on Tuesday because the guy who filled in for him in Game 2, who finished the game with a minus-4 rating, can’t possibly play in Game 3.

– Michael Del Zotto isn’t an offensive defenseman. Michael Del Zotto isn’t a defensive defenseman. Michael Del Zotto is just some guy that makes terrible decisions, shoots pucks into shin pads, misses the net and is a liability in his own zone. I don’t think there’s a position for that.

– No one should be surprised when the Rangers’ fourth line gives up a goal. The line consists of an overpaid, underachieving 33-year-old former star in Brad Richards, an overrated, should-have-been-traded-last-year 22-year-old first-round pick in Chris Kreider and an actual 35-year-old fourth-line checking forward and fighter in Arron Asham. That combination certainly makes me think Textbook Playoff Fourth Line!

– Torey Krug wouldn’t be playing in this series if Dennis Seidenberg or Andrew Ference or Wade Redden were healthy. It took three defenseman to be injured at the same time for him to get into the Bruins lineup and he has two goals and an assist in two games. It’s Claude Julien getting as lucky as he did in the 2010-11 playoffs when he had to insert Tyler Seguin into the lineup against Tampa Bay and the rookie single-handedly beat the Lightning. That Claude is one great coach!

– It was nice to see Derek Dorsett show some heart and fight Shawn Thornton in the third period, but why fight when trailing 5-2 with 6:51 left? Why not start something at the beginning of the period when it’s 4-2 with 19:36 left and the game is still within reach? Rangers hockey!

It’s been eight days since the Rangers played their last game at Madison Square Garden. All three of their games at home this postseason have been must-win games and they’re 3-0 in those games. If they’re not 4-0 when I write the Game 3 Thoughts there won’t be a point to writing the Game 4 Thoughts.

Read More

Blogs • Rangers

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.

Read More