Dan Girardi – Page 7 – Keefe To The City

Dec 16, 2013

Searching for Two Points

As of Sunday, it had been 10 days since the Rangers picked up two points and a win, so it felt like the right time to do a Retro Recap of the third period against the Flames.

It’s been 10 days since the Rangers earned two points. In that time they have played four games, earning just one point and allowing four goals in all four games. What makes it even worse is that in the four games, the Rangers scored just seven goals with three of them coming in one game (Dec. 7 vs. New Jersey) and to make it even worse than that, all four games were at home and to make it even worse that that, Henrik Lundqvist started all four games. The Rangers’ high-water mark of the season has been one game over .500. They have achieved that six times this season, but have managed to fall back to .500 following each win to bring them over .500 (with the exception of that Dec. 7 shootout loss to the Devils, which made them 15-14-1).

With 33 games gone (40 percent of the season), the Rangers found themselves in seventh place in the Metropolitan Division and 13th place in the Eastern Conference entering Sunday’s game against the Flames at Madison Square Garden. And then 15 minutes into the game against the Flames, they found themselves trailing 2-0, marking the third straight game they trailed by at least two goals before finding the back of the net. But Derek Stepan would score with 4:35 left in the first (his first goal in 10 games) and Carl Hagelin would tie it at 2 at 7:29 of the the second period, which is the way it would stay through the second. And that’s where we pick things up in this Retro Recap.

THIRD PERIOD

20:00: The Rangers fought back to tie the game at 2 and now they will try to successfully complete a comeback by winning the third period or winning in overtime or a shootout. It’s been 10 days since the Rangers’ last win, but it feels like it’s been a month. That win came over Buffalo on Dec. 5, which probably shouldn’t even count for two points this season, considering Buffalo has an NHL-worst 17 points.

As they always do, Swedish House Mafia takes us to the opening faceoff of the period with “Save The World,” which asks, “Who’s gonna save the world tonight?” It’s probably going to have to be Henrik Lundqvist and it should be since he hasn’t done anything worthy of a king since signing his extension on Dec. 4, going just 1-3-1 since then.

John Giannone is doing the play-by-play with Sam Rosen in Atlanta today calling the Falcons-Redskins game for FOX. When my girlfriend heard Sam’s voice earlier in the day and put two and two together that it was the same voice she hears during Rangers games, her face lit up as if a light went off in her head and she looked like a little kid seeing and hearing Tim Allen in The Santa Claus and realizing that guy who turns into Santa is also the voice of Buzz Lightyear.

17:32: It’s been a slow two and a half minutes to open the period with not much happening for either team. The puck just hit Derick Brassard in the middle of a line change near the Rangers bench, which drew a whistle, but not a too-many-men-on-the-ice penalty, which the ref then had to explain to both benches to delay the game. That’s all the action we have seen so far in the third.

16:42: The Rangers lead 19-14 in shots, which isn’t good for Lundqvist’s save percentage. AV has Carl Hagelin playing with Brian Boyle, which completely cancels out Hagelin’s speed. Why would you want Hagelin and Boyle on the same line? You wouldn’t.

15:16: The Flames score. Anton Stralman and Mats Zuccarello both get beat in the corner (with Zuccarello falling down) and then Derick Brassard gets beat to the net by Sean Monahan as Curtis Glencross finds Monahan and he gets one past Lundqvist. Another odd, bad goal scored against Lundqvist and the Rangers will have to come back again.

14:03: Usually these Retro Recaps work. Actually I think they pretty much always work. Whether it’s the Rangers needing a win, the New York Football Giants needing to win the 2011 NFC Championship Game or Phil Hughes needing to pitch a gem, whenever I do a Retro Recap for a game, it turns out to be for the best. Just thought I would throw this fact out there now, while there’s still 14 minutes for the Rangers to tie it.

13:36: Michael Del Zotto rips a shot from the point into some Calgary shin pads the way that only Michael Del Zotto can and the puck comes out of the zone. Just when it looked like Del Zotto was playing his way out of the lineup for good and possibly out of the organization, he had to go and score that goal against Vancouver in his first game back following two consecutive healthy scratches and five of eight healthy scratches.

12:37: Chris Kreider receives a long pass as he streaks down the left side and lets a slap shot go from just inside the blue as the crowd gets up and excited for the first time in the third period. It’s never a good sign when you’re trailing by one goal, not generating any offense and the crowd is creating artificial excitement off a low-percentage shot on a 1-on-1.

10:34: Since I already touched on putting Hagelin and Boyle on the same line, let’s talk about the idea of pairing Del Zotto with Dan Girardi. Is this real life? You’re going to put the worst defenseman on the team with the second-worst defenseman on the team? When I wrote that last sentence/question I meant for Del Zotto to be “the worst defenseman on the team” and for Girardi to be “the second-worst defenseman” on the team, but then I realized they interchangeable and could be classified as either.

We know that Del Zotto serves limited purpose since he isn’t a defensive defenseman and hasn’t evolved in the offensive defenseman we thought he might turn out to be. So he’s now just a defensive liability who doesn’t do enough in his own zone to be worthy of playing time and doesn’t score enough to be worthy of playing time, but he’s still getting playing time and plenty of it. Remember when the supposed strong, young defensive core was the future of the Rangers? (Crickets … crickets … crickets.)

As for Girardi, I hope I don’t hear anyone mention the need to extend him between now and the end of the season. He scored his second goal of the season for the Rangers on Thursday night, but he has a long ways to go to make up for the 15 goals he has scored against Henrik Lundqvist this season.

And the best part about this defensive pair is their inability to hit the net with any shot from the point. They are the opponent’s best breakout strategy.

10:12: Dylan McIlrath gets his stick up on Mike Cammalleri on the way to the corner after Cammalleri initiated contact with McIlrath to position himself in a way that would avoid him getting destroyed along the boards. McIlrath gets called for high-sticking and the Flames have a chance to put this game away.

9:45: A whistle on the power play and we’re reminded that coming up is the “Foxwoods Final Five,” which is when Foxwoods sponsors the final five minutes of the game. In December, the Rangers have played six games and have lost five of them and have been trailing by at least two goals for the final five minutes of the five losses. Is anyone even watching the final five minutes of Rangers games? Wouldn’t Foxwoods be better off sponsoring the first five minutes of the game?

8:12: The Rangers kill off McIlrath’s penalty as the Flames aren’t able to put together or set up anything in the Rangers’ zone. It looked like what I imagine the Rangers’ power play against the Rangers’ penalty kill looks like at practice.

8:02: With just three shots so far in the period, Joe Micheletti says, “The Rangers need shots.” Thank you, Joe. Here I was thinking there would be another way for them to tie this game.

7:53: The Rangers score! Derek Stepan makes a nice move near the bottom of the left circle and gets the puck to the front of the net where Kreider is to put it home. And how exactly did the Rangers score? With a shot on net, of course. Joe Micheletti, you genius you!

4:58: There was a TV timeout with 6:44 left and since then it’s been all Calgary as the Rangers are having a tough time clearing the zone and getting a chance. It feels like a Flames goal is coming any second now and probably will before I finish writing this.

4:33: And the puck is finally out of the zone.

3:56: Cammalleri gets called for roughing, which is some nice payback after he drew the penalty earlier against McIlrath.

3:16: Rick Nash makes a nice move along the goal line and with the puck in the air headed toward Karri Ramo, Ramo paddles it out of the air and it goes over the glass for a delay of game penalty. It’s going to be a 5-on-3 for the Rangers for 1:20. Flames head coach Bob Hartley looks like he just got back to his car in the parking lot of a grocery store only to find a note on it that says, “Sorry, I hit your car. I picked up your bumper and put it on top of your trunk. I was in a hurry and had to go and you weren’t around. Here’s my number.”

2:44: The power play unit is Nash, Stepan, Kreider, Brad Richards and Ryan McDonagh. In other words: only people that should be playing on the power play.

1:56: Kreider gets called for high-sticking in front of the net on the power play and it’s going to be a double minor. What a terrible turn of events. From a 5-on-4 to a 5-on-3 to now 4-4 to then being down 5-on-4 for the rest of the third and then 4-on-3 in overtime.

Guns N’ Roses’ “Nighttrain” is now playing at the Garden, so maybe everything will be fine.

0:00: That will do it for the third. We’re headed to overtime. One point for the Rangers, but getting one point once every four games isn’t going to cut it.

OVERTIME

5:00: The Flames start overtime with a 4-on-3 advantage and the Rangers have Boyle, Girardi and McDonagh on the ice. Over/under 45 seconds until this game is over? If you want to use Boyle to kill penalties during regulation, I get it. I don’t agree with it, but I get it. But when you’re using him in overtime to kill penalties and to kill a 4-on-3, well that’s just irresponsible. He is no way the best forward on the team suited for this role

4:23: A huge save by Lundqvist in front on Glencross, which momentarily saves the game for the Rangers. 30 big save on glen

3:26: Dominic Moore is now on the ice as the lone forward in the 4-on-3 and McDonagh is still on the ice, having played all of overtime so far.

2:56: Kreider’s penaty is killed off and I lost that under bet from earlier too.

2:16: Del Zotto sends a nice, long flip pass across the ice to lead Kreider, but it’s too hard to handle for Kreider to turn into a breakaway and he gets stopped. “Sandstorm” now blaring at MSG. With this soundtrack, how can the Rangers lose?

:40: Kreider and Del Zotto have a 2-on-1 chance, but with the puck bouncing on the ice, Kreider can’t handle it and the play is broken up.

0:00: That will do it for overtime. We’re headed for a shootout.

SHOOTOUT

Rangers: Mats Zuccarello starts things off by fooling everyone in the world. Instead of his patented move that has led him to a 50 perecent career success rate in shootouts, he comes down the right side and cuts into the middle moving slowly like usual, but then just snaps a shot off top tit on Ramo. 1-0 Rangers.

Flames: Former Bruin and lanky fourth-liner Joe Colborne comes down and somehow dekes Lundqvist to tie the shootout at 1.

Rangers: Nash makes a nice moves, but at the end when he tries to slide it in just inside the post on his forehand, Ramo’s right pad is there to stop it. If Nash had lifted the puck, it’s an easy goal.

Flames: Jiri Hudler gets stoned by Lundqvist

Rangers: Stepan can’t score.

Flames: Lundqvist stops Monahan.

Rangers: Richards comes flying down and wrists one medium tit or maybe three-quarters tit on Ramo. 2-1 Rangers and with a Lundqvist save, it’s over.

Flames: Lee Stempniak loses the puck and regains it in time to backhand one on the ice through Lundqvist’s legs as he moves right to left. We’re tied again.

Rangers: Brassard gets stopped.

Flames: I thought Cammalleri would end it, but he can’t.

Rangers: Dominic Moore rips one from the slot to the left side to give the Rangers a 3-2 shootout lead and a chance for Lundqvist to close it out again.

Flames: Lundqvist wants to see how long this Retro Recap can be as Paul Byron scores on him to tie it again.

Rangers: Benoit Pouliot goes to Nash’s one-hand move and gets the puck past Ramo with ease. Out of all the times I have seen the move done, never before has it pulled a goalie so far to one side, leaving basically an entire half of the net for Pouliot to slide it in. Come on, Lundqvist.

Flames: Lundqvist closes it out by stopping Mikael Backlund and looks tired and worn out doing so after raising his arms to the Garden rafters in triumph.

It wasn’t easy and it wasn’t pretty and it wasn’t against a good team, but a win’s a win. After 65 minutes of play and seven shootout rounds, the Rangers have their two points. They earned them.

Blogs • Rangers

Oct 11, 2013

The Rangers’ West Coast Embarrassment Tour

The Rangers were embarrassed in San Jose and then again in Anaheim and the Alain Vigneault era looks no different than the John Tortorella era after four games.

It’s Day 12 of the Yankees’ offseason. The Giants’ season was officially (yes, finally) ended last night in Chicago. That means between now and April 1 the only thing I have left is the Rangers’ season, but with the way that’s going there’s a good chance I will have to turn my interests to the NBA or college basketball or curling or maybe start reading more or finally learn how to cook more than just-add-water pancakes and pasta.

Game 1 in Phoenix was a letdown after 131 days without Rangers hockey and it being Opening Night and the opponent being the Coyotes, whose big offseason signing was Mike Ribeiro.

Game 2 was what I expected from the 2013-14 Rangers with an impressive 3-1 win over the Kings (even if the third goal was in the Tuukka Rask tier of gift goals).

Game 3 in San Jose was a disaster, not only because the final score was 9-2, but because the Rangers led 3:27 into the game on a power-play goal (yes, those exist) and under five minutes later were trailing 2-1 as part of a six-unanswered-goal barrage. Even in this defeat you could chalk it up as an early-season loss on the West Coast as part of this season-opening road trip that is more like a rock band’s tour than a professional sports team’s road trip with the length of it. You could make the case that the Rangers were tired after playing in Los Angeles the night before and then having to travel from Southern California to Northern California. But the excuses, if any are even valid or reasonable, end there.

Then there’s Thursday night in Anaheim. What the eff was that? Seriously, what the eff was that? I could just go the route Ryan Callahan did in explaining what happened, starting with the first period, when he said, “I don’t have an explanation for you,” but let’s try to explain it and let’s try to explain what has gone wrong during the first four games of the season. And let’s use Alain Vigneault’s postgame to try to explain it.

On if there are any signs of improvement.

“It’s tough to say there were signs of improvement in a 6-0 loss, that being said though, I thought tonight we tried until the end. Obviously we’re not playing very well right now and there are probably a lot of theories out there as to why we’re not playing the way we should be playing, but our reality is really quite simple. We’re going to get up tomorrow morning and we’re going to go back to work. We’re going to work ourselves into the team that I believe we can be, which is a smart-working, hard-working hockey team that can make plays and right now we’re having tough times making plays with puck.”

Vigneault started this answered by stumbling around for the right words to begin his answer before using “that being said” which will always make me think of Larry David and Jerry Seinfeld’s “having said that” exchange in Curb Your Enthusiasm.

“Trying until the end” isn’t going to cut it for this team (and shouldn’t cut it for any team). There’s no need to always try to find some positive out of an embarrassing effort. Not everything needs to have some silver lining and a 6-0 loss two nights after a 9-2 loss certainly doesn’t.

On whether the team has no confidence.

“That’s always the word that’s thrown out there. We’re being tested as a team, as a group. We’re being challenged and it’s up to me as the head coach to get this team to play well.”

This is actually a bit of fresh air. In the John Tortorella postgame days, Tortorella would tell the media to go ask his players why they sucked or he would ask the media if they had asked his players the same questions since they were the only ones that had to answer for losses. Tortorella never took blame for the team’s struggles and was always quick to point the fingers at his players, including his star goal scorers, who he sacrificed as shot blockers.

Tortorella’s ability to pretend like nothing is his fault traveled with him to Vancouver where he recently said he isn’t sure what happened to his relationship with Brad Richards. Other than demoting him to the fourth line and then scratching him in the playoffs and citing his style of play not being that of a fourth-liner (real life?), I’m not sure why their relationship would be fractured. If I were Richards, I would be saving every puck from every goal scored this season and then writing the goal number on the puck using whiteout and then mailing them to Tortorella. After some quick research, it appears this would be the mailing address for Tortorella in Vancouver:

Vancouver Canucks
Attn: John Tortorella
800 Griffiths Way
Vancouver, BC V6B 6G1
Canada

On if it’s difficult to believe the team is actually the team that won in Los Angeles.

“I would say San Jose, you guys all saw it. The effort wash very good. I thought tonight our guys tried, but we’re not playing very well right now. We’re not making plays. Same outcome, but two different levels of competing in my opinion.”

Whaaaaaaaaaaatttttt?!?!?!?! I’m going to have to disagree with AV on this one. Did AV watch the same Rangers-Sharks game that I did or did MSG show a different game on Tuesday night? In the Rangers-Sharks that MSG aired for me, I saw a Rangers team that was outshot 47-20, looked to be shorthand the entire game, gave up odd-man rushes without a care and were eventually run out of the building with Tomas Hertl’s goal on Martin Biron (who I hope drank at least 12 beers during the game).

Henrik Lundqvist is 1-3-0 with a 4.31 GAA and .879 SV% and has been pulled once already. Those aren’t exactly Lundqvist-esque numbers, but the defense has failed him and the offense (or the lack of offense) might once again be a problem this season. Isn’t it great that eight days ago Lundqvist ended talks with the Rangers on an extension sine they couldn’t come to terms before the season? How many Stanley Cups are the Penguins going to win starting in 2014-15 with Lundqvist as their goalie? I would say at least five in a row starting next season.

On his theory for the struggles.

“My theory is reality. Our reality is we got to get up tomorrow morning, put our work boots on, come to the rink, have a good practice, watch some video, look at the areas that we need to improve and that’s what the coaching staff is going to do tomorrow. And the players are going to get up, put their skates on and work hard.”

If your theory is reality then you should have said, “My theory is reality. Our reality is we suck.” Because right now the Rangers suck. They have been outscored 20-6 in the first four games, the scoring production is the same it was last season and throughout the Tortorella era, but now there’s no longer a defense to balance out the lack of scoring.

I keep hearing about how great and solid a defenseman Dan Girardi is and how the Rangers need to extend Lundqvist while keeping enough space available to re-sign him. (This is the same Girardi who was basically a pylon against the Bruins in the conference semifinals.) I’m not even sure the Rangers should re-sign Girardi this offseason and it blows my mind that the Rangers would extend Lundqvist with Girardi in mind and that Girardi could somehow affect whether Lundqvist stays or not because of finances. (Hey there, don’t include Eduardo Nunez in a deal for Cliff Lee!) And how about Girardi suggesting that the Rangers go back to the way they played the last few years? You know, the way they played under the coach that they got fired?

I could easily pick apart the entire defense like Mitch in Waiting… going around the room and trashing every restaurant employee, but I won’t. Instead I’ll just go with Michael Del Zotto the way Mitch takes down Floyd (Dane Cook’s character).

This is Michael Del Zotto’s fifth season in the NHL. In his first season as a 19-year-old, who put up 9-28-37 in 80 games (despite a minus-20) it had many thinking he could be the future face of the franchise, a premier offensive defenseman and a staple on the blue line for possibly two decades. But the following season he fell out of Tortorella’s graces and spent time in the AHL before returning with 10-31-41 and a plus-20 rating in 2011-12. Last season Del Zotto was back to his 2010-11 ways, which is most likely who he is and who he is going to be. He isn’t going to be the captain of the power play that some people have envisioned him as when he thinks that he deserves to shoot the puck in any any situation with Rick Nash, Brad Richards and Derek Stepan also on the ice (Dan Girardi has this problem when he’s out there on the power play) and when he does choose to shoot, he usually misses the net and is the best breakout strategy for any opponent (Dan Girardi also has this problem). Del Zotto is careless with the puck, makes incredibly poor choices in his own zone and unbelievable mistakes in the transition game in the neutral zone. He doesn’t score enough to not care about his defense the way Sergi Gonchar has for his entire career and because of this doesn’t deserve the ice time he receives. But like Brian Boyle, I have to accept that Michael Del Zotto isn’t going anywhere ever.

On if he can simplify the game while the team learns his system.

“The execution making a tape-to-tape pass has nothing to do with systems. Coming through the neutral zone and reading the other teams pressure and gap and reading the play with the puck has nothing to do with the system. Those are all things that these players have done their whole lives and I’m confident they can still do.”

Well, if the Rangers can’t even perform the basics of hockey, let alone learn and get down an offensive system then what’s the point?

You know what I would think the Rangers have done their who lives other than the absolute basics? I would think they would have understood the need to stick up for teammates on the ice, especially if your teammate happens to be your team’s best player.

Rick Nash wasn’t part of the debacles in San Jose (other than for two minutes and 32 seconds ) or in Anaheim and won’t play in St. Louis. While the team is touring the Western Conference, Nash is in New York because Brad Stuart doesn’t know how to properly check someone. Nash’s head injury is his second in under a year with the Rangers and maybe Nash returns after the Blues game or after next week or maybe after October or November or maybe never? Who knows with head injuries when any player is going to return, if at all, and if they do, will they even be the same player once they do?

Maybe the Rangers missed Nash fighting Martin Hanzel in Phoenix last Thursday to stand up for Derek Stepan the way I must have missed the Rangers-Sharks game that AV watched. But I know they didn’t miss it since after the game, Ryan McDonagh and Dominic Moore both spoke out about how it’s good to see Nash mix it up and how the team trusts each other and sticks up for each other. But where was the “team” when Stuart was earning a three-game suspension for an elbow to Nash’s head? Nowhere.

On if the road trip and travel is a reason for the losses.

“Not at all. This is normal travel. I have done this all my life. Travel’s been fine.”

That’s nice that the travel has been fine since that’s the only thing that has been.

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.

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.

Blogs • Rangers • Rangers Playoff Thoughts • Rangers Playoffs

May 3, 2013

Rangers-Capitals Game 1 Thoughts: Feels Like 2010-11 Again

The Rangers lost Game 1 of the Eastern Conference quarterfinals to the Capitals after they once again had trouble scoring.

I spent the entire NHL season up until Game 47 of 48 worrying about the Rangers getting into the playoffs in a season in which they were supposed to build off an Eastern Conference finals appearance. If I knew the first game of the playoffs would go the way Game 1 did on Thursday night, I could have saved a lot of time during the regular season by learning how to cook or by finally watching The Wire or by finally reading all of the classic books I used SparkNotes on in high school instead of watching Rangers games.

Is that a little dramatic following one playoff loss? Of course. But I’m not worried about the Rangers being down 1-0 in a seven-game series to a team they were equal to during the regular season. I’m worried about the Rangers because of the effort in Game 1 and the way they played and were outplayed by a Capitals team that looks much different than they did when they last met the Rangers on March 24.

Thursday night’s Game 1 was the 20^th playoff game between the Rangers and Capitals since the 2008-09 quarterfinals. It was the ninth time in the 20 games that the Rangers scored one goal or less and their inability to score goals has become an annual problem that not even Rick Nash being the scoring machine he is could fix thanks to minimal secondary scoring help.

So despite it being a new Rangers team, the franchise still has the same scoring problem. How much of a problem is it? Let’s take a look. Here are the scores of all the Rangers-Capitals playoff games since the 2008-09 quarterfinals.

2012-13 Quarterfinals
Game 1: WSH 3, NYR 1

2011-12 Semifinals
Game 1: NYR 3, WSH 1
Game 2: WSH 3, NYR 2
Game 3: NYR 2, WSH 1 (OT)
Game 4: WSH 3, NYR 2
Game 5: NYR 3, WSH 2 (OT)
Game 6: WSH 2, NYR 1
Game 7: NYR 2, WSH 1

2010-11 Quarterfinals
Game 1: WSH 2, NYR 1 (OT)
Game 2: WSH 2, NYR 0
Game 3: NYR 3, WSH 2
Game 4: WSH 4, NYR 3 (OT)
Game 5: WSH 3, NYR 1

2008-09 Quarterfinals
Game 1: NYR 4, WSH 3
Game 2: NYR 1, WSH 0
Game 3: WSH 4, NYR 0
Game 4: NYR 2, WSH 1
Game 5: WSH 4, NYR 0
Game 6: WSH 5, NYR 3
Game 7: WSH 2, NYR 1

The Rangers are 8-12 in the 20 games.

The Rangers have scored 35 goals in the 20 games (1.75 goals per game).

The Rangers have been shutout three times (15 percent).

The Rangers have scored one goal or less nine times (45 percent).

The Rangers have scored two goals or less 14 times (70 percent).

Do you see this as a problem? I do. Do you see this as the reason why they have only won one of the three previous series and needed two overtime wins to win that series? I do. Do you see this as a goaltending problem? I don’t. Because how could you?

It took one playoff game and one loss for the Henrik Lundqvist critics to come out of their holes like Punxsutawney Phil to recite Lundqvist’s playoff record and the Rangers’ lack of success in the playoffs during his tenure. These are claims made by unintelligent fans who aren’t aware that Lundqvist can’t score goals for the Rangers and that the team missed out on the playoffs for seven consecutive seasons before he became a Ranger after the lockout, and that the Rangers have been in the playoffs seven of the eight years since the lockout.

Game 1 was just another Rangers loss that had nothing to do with the way Lundqvist played and everything to do with the offense and the power play. If you’re someone who placed any blame for the 3-1 loss on Lundqvist then that means you’re someone who felt the Rangers should have won a playoff game 1-0 against the hottest team in the NHL with one of the best power plays in league history because the Rangers scored one goal.

– I’m really not sure what Ryan McDonagh and Dan Girardi were thinking or doing when they let Steven Oleksy complete a pass from the top of the Capitals circle to the Rangers blue line to Marcus Johansson, who inexplicably got behind them, to create a breakaway and give the Capitals a 2-1 lead. That’s supposed to be the Rangers’ best defensive pair. No big deal!

– What’s the percentage of Dan Girardi shot attempts that actually find the net and count as a shot on goal and don’t hit shin pads, chests, sticks, the boards or glass? I’m thinking it’s somewhere around 7 percent. As for Michael Del Zotto, I’m thinking his percentage is around 4 or 5.

– Physics and common sense dictate that John Moore scored at 15:57 of the third period of Game 1 to cut the Rangers’ deficit to one. Camera placement by the NHL and TV networks and the idea of “conclusive evidence” created by the NFL dictate that Braden Holtby kept John Moore’s shot out of the net at 15:57 of the third period to hold the Capitals’ lead at 3-1. And while it sucked and would have been a nice momentum shift and would have made the last 4:04 of the game dramatic, I understand why the officials made the call they did since given the rules it was the correct call. But the Rangers shouldn’t put themselves in a position where they would need the help of the officials and the off-ice officials in Toronto to determine whether or not a goal should or shouldn’t count.

– Tortorella’s postgame press conference didn’t last long, but he had one telling line when he said, “Hopefully we discipline ourselves in the next game.” If the way to beat the Capitals is to contain Alexander Ovechkin (which the Rangers didn’t do in Game 1) and to limit their power-play opportunities (which the Rangers didn’t do in Game 1) then why wouldn’t the Rangers have come into the series already disciplined? They have been an undisciplined team all season with untimely penalties at inopportune times and their two-many-men-on-the-ice penalty just 34 seconds into the game showed that they aren’t prepared to change their ways for the postseason. Discipline falls on the coaching staff and the penalty to open the game, while it didn’t come back to hurt them, was absolutely ridiculous.

– I’m tired of listening to Pierre McGuire talk about John Tortorella as a power-play specialist (which he has done several times this year to Mike Francesa on WFAN), who has run successful power plays in the past for other organizations. No Rangers fan cares about Tortorella’s prior power-play success to coming to New York the way no one cares about him winning the Cup nine years ago in Tampa Bay.

The Rangers power play is a disgrace. They finished the regular season 23^rd in the league at 15.7 percent, which is actually sort of impressive when you think about where they were midseason. But in Game 1 they went an expected 0-for-4 on the power play and failed to score on a 5-on-3.

The Rangers power play isn’t good enough (it actually isn’t good at all) to be the difference in the series and the Capitals power play is too good to give any chances to (let alone five in one game). The Rangers need to use their supposed depth, defense and goaltending to win the series at even strength because if it comes down to special teams, this series is going to go the same way the 2010-11 quarterfinals went. After one game, it already feels like that series.

Tag: Dan Girardi

Searching for Two Points

The Rangers’ West Coast Embarrassment Tour

The Alain Vigneault Era Begins

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

Rangers-Capitals Game 1 Thoughts: Feels Like 2010-11 Again