Dan Girardi – Page 8 – Keefe To The City

Feb 25, 2013

The Same Old Rangers

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

On so many players getting injured.

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

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

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

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

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

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

On severity of injuries to Girardi and McDonagh.

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

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

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

On how to get more from his team.

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

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

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

Blogs • Email Exchanges • Rangers

Feb 13, 2013

Dreaming of a Rangers-Bruins Postseason Series

The Rangers and Bruins met for the last time during the regular season, so an email exchange with Mike Hurley was needed to look back at the three meetings between the teams.

Thanks to some awesome scheduling from the NHL, the Rangers and Bruins won’t meet again this season unless it’s in the postseason. After 12 games, the Rangers and Bruins have played their entire three-game schedule against each other for 2012-13 and it’s going to take a seven-game series this spring if the growing rivalry is going to get a new chapter this season.

With the season series coming to an end, I decided to fill the email inbox of Mike Hurley from CBS Boston with garbage until he finally responded and agreed to an email exchange. OK, so I really didn’t have to beg him since he had nothing else going on (and usually doesn’t), but he wanted me to make it sound like it was really hard to get him to do this exchange since he’s “really busy.”

Keefe: I wanted to be in Boston last night for Rangers-Bruins and I wanted to be at Halftime Pizza before the game eating the best slices in Boston (there are only one or two others place in the entire city worth eating pizza sober at) and pounding their massive draft beers that for some reason taste better than draft beers from anywhere else. But the NHL went and scheduled the second and last meeting between the two teams on a Tuesday night, so I did watch the Rangers-Bruins game and I did eat pizza and drink draft beers, but I did it over 200 miles from TD Garden.

After blowing a two-goal lead to the Bruins in the third game of the season at Madison Square Garden, the Rangers blew a three-goal lead in the last 11:16 on Tuesday night. And while you have to credit the Bruins’ heart (or their “hearts of lions” as Jack Edwards referred to it) for their miraculous late-game comeback, I’m going to also discredit the Rangers’ shot-blocking strategy, which is actually more of a negative than a positive for the team’s defense and the reason for the Bruins’ third-period effort.

Henrik Lundqvist is the best goalie in the world. The best goalie in the world needs to see the puck and he needs to see the shot. He doesn’t need to be playing from behind screens and trying to anticipate whose stick the puck will end up on when Ryan Callahan and Dan Girardi simultaneously sacrifice their bodies and seasons like Secret Service members trying to protect the President. Yes, the Bruins erased a three-goal deficit in the third period and scored twice with an empty net, but none of it would have been possible without some perfect rebounds courteous of too much traffic created in front of the Rangers’ net by the Rangers themselves.

The Rangers did come away with two points and managed to get four of a possible six points against the Bruins this season, but they let the Bruins pick up points in the final minutes of each of the last two games. And while it was good to see the Rangers win their third straight and win on the road in Boston, I get the feeling that no one in Boston views last night’s loss as a loss and that’s not good for the Rangers or me or anyone. These two teams will hopefully meet again this spring and the last thing the Rangers need is the Bruins believing they can always come back against them and that they are never out of a game, and despite losing twice to the Rangers, the Bruins must feel like they have the Rangers’ number. If the Bruins are practicing today, I’m sure the mood in their locker room is of a team that won on last night and not of one that lost.

I guess whenever anything goes wrong like it did in the third period there is someone to blame and someone to praise, but am I am discrediting the Bruins’ comeback too much and placing too much of the blame on the Rangers? And did you get a goody bag with your TD Garden dinner on Tuesday night that looked like everything you would find at a five-year-old’s birthday party?

Hurley: For the record, because of awful traffic due to the blizzard, I got to the Garden late and had no time for dinner, so I ate an oreo brownie, a fudge roll, a big pretzel with mustard, a cup of popcorn and a plate of M&M’s and gummy worms for dinner in the press box. I am 7 years old and everyone knows it, so it’s OK.

I do think you’re right to discredit the Rangers a bit. On 99 out of 100 nights, Anton Stralman’s weak wrister doesn’t beat Tuukka Rask, and on probably 90 out of 100 nights, Derek Stepan’s shot gets stopped easily with the glove. So on a night when they don’t have a somewhat gift-wrapped 3-goal lead, they might not be so fortunate to leave the building with two points.

That said, the Bruins do deserve some credit. They realized against that mess of bodies and No. 30 in net, the only way they were scoring was going to be on a rebound. Andrew Ference’s point shot was intentionally low, and Nathan Horton banged home the rebound. Dennis Seidenberg intentionally shot at Milan Lucic in the slot, and the redirect on Lundqvist led to an open net for David Krejci. And though Brad Marchand just got a lucky break for his goal, that was a pretty good snipe. So it’s not as if the Rangers blew the lead to the Flames or anything.

But it was a blocked shot that led to that opportunity for Marchand to score the game-tying goal, which allowed the B’s to walk away from the season series with four out of six points in the season series as well. So you’re not crazy for thinking the shot-blocking strategy can work against them. You are crazy for a lot of reasons, but not that one, I suppose.

Keefe: For the record, you told me about four hours before the game that you were going to eat healthy and detox after your brother’s wedding weekend. But really, I don’t think you had any plans other than to eat those things for dinner whether there was traffic or not.

When I see Rick Nash do the things he did to the Bruins defense and then to Tuukka Rask, I can’t help but think how they would have gotten past the Devils last May if they had traded for Nash last February. (Yes, I would still trade Chris Kreider for Nash if it was still an option.) And when I see the things that Marian Gaborik does like Nash, I can’t help, but think about how the Bruins have no one like Nash or Gaborik though Tyler Seguin will one day be Boston’s version of those two. And when I realize that the Bruins don’t have a true superstar (even though Pierre McGuire thinks Patrice Bergeron’s is one of the best players in the league), I wonder how they are so good even without Tim Thomas. But then you watch them play and you realize why they are so good.

The Bruins, for some unknown reason, find a way to score despite true scoring ability and a power play that makes even the Rangers not feel so bad about their man advantage and more importantly they find a way to win and win all types of games. I can’t explain it and I’m not sure if it’s even explainable because a team with that roster shouldn’t be this good without their best player (the Conn Smythe winner turned social media guru).

I know you’re probably going to say depth and defense and you might even talk about Claude Julien (I said “might”), but help me out here: Why are the Bruins so good? And why are they so good even without a single player whose jersey you would want to buy and wear?

Hurley: Well for one, Rask is a great goalie in his own right. He led the league in goals-against and save percentage in 2009-10, so it’s not like he’s some stiff off the street. Then you have Julien’s system, which above all else requires responsibility in your own end. That’s why Seguin barely played as a rookie — he wasn’t going to be put onto the ice until he could learn to play in the defensive system. Something tells me that as a kid, back-checking and getting sticks in passing lanes wasn’t drilled into the head of a kid as talented as Seguin.

So with that system, they’re rarely out of games. The 3-0 deficit against the Rangers was odd in that regard. And while they may not have a Steve Stamkos, they’re not short on talent up front. Nathan Horton is a big-time player. All the guy does is score big goals. The Bruins wouldn’t have made it out of the first round in 2011 if not for Horton, and his absence last spring was the reason the Bruins were wiped away in the first round.

Patrice Bergeron lacks flash, but if you were to assign grades to parts of his game, he’d get A-minuses across the board. He’s also won 63.6 percent of his faceoffs, which quietly goes a long way toward earning victories. Brad Marchand has a bad reputation for just being an agitator, but he’s a talented player who has a knack for scoring and has never been afraid of any moment or situation. David Krejci can be a wizard with the puck on his stick (still not a Marc Savard, but a decent knockoff) and Seguin is always a scoring threat every time he’s on the ice.

Add in third-liner Rich Peverley, who’d likely be a top-six forward in a lot of cities, and a fourth line that contributes while rarely making mistakes, and you just have a solid hockey team.

(I said hockey in case you were confused if I was talking about a football team or something.)

Oh, I should’ve mentioned, they’re also big on saying things like “compete level.” Julien hasn’t done an interview in the past five years without assessing his team’s compete level, and it’s spread to Peter Chiarelli and Cam Neely and now everyone who talks about the team.

It means “trying hard.” Yes, the millionaire hockey players need to be rated on whether they’re trying hard or not.

Regardless of its apparent stupidity, it really seems to work. It’s very rare you see the Bruins just lay a complete stinker, and teams know when they’re playing the Bruins that they’re in for a long battle. A lot of teams can’t handle it.

Keefe: Is Andy Brickley saying “compete level” yet or is he too busy talking about “points being at a premium” the way Edzo drops “active sticks” on everyone?

Everyone is talking about the Rangers and Bruins meeting again in the postseason for the first time since the 70s, you are one of these people, but a lot of these people are saying it’s going to happen. A lot of people said this last year too, but they forgot that eight teams make the playoffs in the Eastern Conference and just because people want a series to take place doesn’t it mean it will. And if it doesn’t take place in the quarterfinals then a lot has to go right for it to happen at all.

It’s been so long since these two teams have met in the playoffs and the New York-Boston rivalry has taken so many twists in the last 10 years that I don’t know what to expect if this series ever takes place and I don’t know if I even want it to. When the Yankees play the Red Sox, the Yankees are supposed to win. When the Knicks play the Celtics, the Celtics are supposed to win. When the Giants play the Patriots, the Giants always win. But what happens if these two teams meet again this year in the postseason? Who would have the upper hand? I can’t imagine this series would be good for my blood pressure especially coming in the beginning of baseball season. Maybe I will just pull for Rangers-Devils again.

Hurley: I’d like to see it happen because unofficially, without looking it up, I can state with complete confidence that every single Bruins-Rangers game in the past four years has been on a Saturday or Sunday afternoon and has been a one-goal game, almost always 1-0 one way or the other. That’s all factual. Don’t look it up though.

What happens if they meet? That’s why we want them to meet — it’s impossible to predict. The Rangers have the edge in offensive firepower, but so did the Canucks in 2011. It would be captivating hockey, and honestly whichever team emerged from that series would probably be too beaten, bruised and exhausted to go on a Cup run. But I wouldn’t mind watching it. Maybe even while enjoying some Halftime.

Keefe: OK, I looked it up. Here are the last 15 Rangers-Bruins games going back to 2009-10, which are the four years you told me to not look up.

NYR 4, BOS 3 (SO)
NYR 4, BOS 3 (OT)
BOS 3, NYR 1
BOS 2, NYR 1
NYR 4, BOS 3
NYR 3, BOS 0
NYR 3, BOS 2 (OT)
NYR 5, BOS 3
NYR 1, BOS 0
BOS 3, NYR 2
NYR 3, BOS 2
BOS 2. NYR 1
NYR 3, BOS 1
NYR 3, BOS 2
NYR 1, BOS 0

That’s 11 of 15 games that were decided by one goal. You were close.

It does feel like all of their games have been on Saturday or Sunday afternoons and they were all started by Tuukka Rask, which is weird considering over that time period Tim Thomas was the best goalie in the NHL. (Well, he was according to voters, but anyone who watched Henrik Lundqvist play behind awful teams know that it was King Henrik who has been the best goalie in the league for several years now.)

Only three of those games weren’t decided after three periods and one of them was on Tuesday night. While shootouts are fun when your teams wins, they are usually a letdown unless Rick Nash gives you a YouTube-worthy goal or unless Pavel Datsyuk is participating in the shootout. You have been a strong advocate of getting rid of the shootout and I’m on board with the idea. But what’s the solution? Is it 10 minutes of 4-on-4? Is it five minutes of 4-on-4 and then five minutes of 3-on-3? How can we make it so that the action that we saw in the five minutes of overtime on Tuesday night doesn’t end abruptly to have a breakaways decide a great game?

Hurley: 1. Rask started most of those games because Timmy T couldn’t handle the lighting at MSG! Remember? The lights were different for Tim!

2. You’re such an awful person for throwing my 10-minute, 4-on-4 period in there like you thought of it. Let the record show that’s my solution.

Actually, for years I (mostly jokingly) argued that the NHL should have five minutes of 4-on-4, and if it’s still tied, then five minutes of 3-on-3, and if it’s still tied then 2-on-2, and if it’s still tied then GOALIE DEATHMATCH AT CENTER ICE.

Because that’s a little extreme, and because we’d run out of goalies pretty quickly, I propose a simple 10-minute period of 4-on-4 hockey. I freaking love 4-on-4 hockey. I’ve been to three games at the TD Garden this season that have featured full five-minute periods of overtime, and they’ve all been thrilling. It’s like taking the best players on the planet and throwing them into an arcade game for five minutes. D-men get forced out of their comfort zones to be a part of odd-man rushes, then they get stuck out of position and lead to another odd-man advantage going the other way. Goalies are forced into hyper-mode, and the game is an all-out frenzy for 300 seconds.

Then they stop it abruptly and start a breakaway contest.

It makes no sense.

If you were showing an alien around earth and wanted to introduce it to the sport of hockey, you could show it five minutes of 4-on-4 overtime and the little freak would be in love with hockey forever. Five more minutes of that, and how many ties would we really end up with? You’d have to think that with 10 minutes of all that open ice, one team is going to be able to bury one goal.

And why do we hate ties so much to begin with? Is it really because fans don’t like the feeling of going home after a tie? For one, since when does the NHL give a crap about how fans feel? But even more so, when has that ever been a consideration in a league deciding the rules which govern its standings?? That’s insane. And thirdly (I could go until 12thly but I’ll stop), don’t fans feel worse when they leave a game which their team lost in a shootout than they would if their team had just tied? This isn’t rocket science here. Why are we having shootouts?

Oh, and if you take away the automatic point of making it to overtime, with a tie resulting in one point apiece and an OT win giving two points to the victor and bupkis to the loser. That would only make that 10 minutes of 4-on-4 overtime even better.

And I’m not even someone who out and out hates the shootout. I just prefer watching hockey.

Keefe: You told me today you were going to give short, concise answers because no one wants to really hear what you have to say. So much for that like your diet.

I don’t really miss ties because I had seen my fair share of ties in real life as a child, but you’re right the NHL doesn’t care about the fan at all, so why start by eliminating ties and changing the record books and point system and goalie’s records? It doesn’t make sense. If Gary Bettman is going to be the worst commissioner to ever run a major sports league in North America, he might as well go all the way with it.

Bring back ties! Bring back the red line! Add “obstruction” to penalties again since penalties aren’t already the result of “obstructing” something! Have North America vs. the World for the All-Star Game and bring back the Goalie Goals competition to the Skills Competition! Sign a deal with FOX! Let them make the puck glow again!

The NHL.com video player is currently the worst piece of technology available and it works like something from 1999, so why not just change everything in the league back to a time when Jaromir Jagr led the league in scoring with the Penguins, Ron Tugnutt posted a 1.79 GAA and Byron Dafoe was playing goal for the Bruins? There’s a good question: What happened to Byron Dafoe? That might be an entire email exchange itself. “Bruins Goalies Between Andy Moog and Tim Thomas.” I think I know what our next email exchange will be about. And if it isn’t about that I’m sure we’ll talk again between now and Opening Day in the Bronx.

Hurley: I’m not sure what happened, but I’m nearly positive your brain just completely stopped working for a few paragraphs there. I’m not sure how it all came out in English. I don’t even know what to say. I don’t know when we’ll talk again, but how about this — don’t email me. I’ll email you.

Blogs • Email Exchanges • Rangers

Dec 2, 2011

Rangers Building Elite Status

With the Rangers on top of their game and with the 24/7 series with the Flyers set to premiere in less than two weeks, now seemed like a good time to have an epic email discussion with WFAN producer and hockey writer Brian Monzo.

This column was originally published on WFAN.com on Dec. 2, 2011.

It’s right around this time every year when the Rangers begin their decline to the lower half of the Eastern Conference and spend the rest of the season jockeying for position between the sixth and 10^th spots. The final two months of the season wind up being the Rangers’ postseason to reach the postseason, and settling for the No. 7 or No. 8 seed in the postseason feels like an accomplishment. Well, not anymore.

The Rangers have made the jump from being a middle-of-the-pack team to being an elite team in the first quarter of the season. They have the best winning percentage in the NHL and have lost just two games since Oct. 29 (it’s now Dec. 2 if you weren’t aware).

With the Rangers on top of their game and with the 24/7 series with the Flyers set to premiere in less than two weeks, now seemed like a good time to have an epic email discussion with WFAN producer and hockey writer Brian Monzo.

Keefe: The Rangers are fun to watch. I’m being serious. It’s not that it wasn’t “fun” to watch the Rangers or hockey in recent years; it’s just that this season feels different. This season isn’t like the last few years when they were only “fun” to watch at the end of the season because every game was a must-win to reach the postseason (right up until Game 82 the last two years) since they blew so many games earlier in the year. This year has a different feel to it. Earlier in the year it seemed like we might just be going down the same old road with the Rangers, but I think that can now be attributed to the insane schedule for the first few weeks of the season and travel overseas and north of the border to open the schedule with MSG being renovated. But it feels like all of this waiting and all of this building is finally adding up to something.

The Rangers just had their best week of the year. They played their hardest three-game stretch of the young season and came away with six points. That’s right, all six points. Philadelphia: defeated. Washington: defeated. Pittsburgh: defeated. And on top of that, the trailer for this year’s 24/7 was released and their Winter Classic jerseys were unveiled. So, I ask you, the “erstwhile” Brian Monzo, how good are the 2011-12 New York Rangers, and how excited are you about the possibilities and potential for this team?

Monzo: Well, the best week of the season got even better on Thursday night with the Rangers’ win in Carolina in a “TCB” game (Take Care of Business game). The Rangers are a better team than the Hurricanes and they needed to win against an inferior opponent even after beating the Capitals, Flyers and Penguins in their previous three games. The Rangers didn’t play a perfect game, but they got the two points they needed.

So far this season, what I like about this team is the fact that the best players, for once, are playing like the best players. Marian Gaborik has been a beast; Brad Richards has had zero issues adjusting to New York; Ryan Callahan is on pace for 30 goals; King Henrik is playing as good as ever.

Another asset has been the ability for the young players to really step it up. Derek Stepan has been better in his second season, and Ryan McDonagh picked up where he left off. After his recent call-up, Carl Hagelin has added speed and offense with four points in his first four NHL games. You also nailed something with what you said in that the Ranges are fun to watch. They are quick, score big goals when needed and fight when they have to.

One issue I’m having with the team is Brandon Dubinsky. It’s OK to struggle, but one goal in 22 games is unacceptable. Fortunately, they have been winning, despite Dubinsky’s lack offense, but he’s one of their main guys, and if they are going to do anything he will need to start burying the puck. In reality this is likely just a slump, but at 14-5-3, imagine what it could be if Dubinsky can get it going?

Keefe: The guy you have a problem with was rumored to be a player of interest to the Ducks in a trade for Bobby Ryan. The rumors were that the Ducks wanted Dubinsky, Michael Del Zotto and a draft pick for Ryan, and I gladly offered to pack their bags and buy their plane tickets for this type of deal. You said you wouldn’t go as far as packing their bags, so all I asked of you was to drive them to the airport to complete a potential deal.

Now the rumor is that Bobby Ryan is off the trade market, and no longer desires to be traded. Is this real life? Was this the shortest amount of time a player has been on the trade market? Not even a complete 24 hours of trade rumors and he’s already off the market? And he doesn’t want to be traded now? His mind changed that quickly? Doesn’t this all seem sketchy?

Let’s break this down into two parts with the first part being the idea of Ryan on the Rangers, which is a phenomenal idea, if you ask me. He’s 24 years old and has posted 31-plus goal seasons in the last three years entering this season. He’s a legitimate scoring threat to compliment Marian Gaborik, Brad Richards and Ryan Callahan. Del Zotto has been better in his third year after a rough sophomore season, but he’s certainly replaceable. And like you said, Dubinsky hasn’t been good. He has just one goal in 21 games, his career high in goals for a season is 24 and he’s two years older than Ryan.

The other part of this Bobby Ryan rumor is the situation in Anaheim. The Ducks are awful, and they fired Randy Carlyle (in his seventh season as head coach). Obviously the losing and the direction of the team played a role in Ryan being put on the block, and the reports of his unhappiness and willingness to want a trade helped fuel the rumors. But are the departure of Carlyle and the hiring of Bruce Boudreau enough to change his mind?

Monzo: You need to look at what the Rangers would be getting, and not just them, but any team that would have the opportunity to land a player like Bobby Ryan. Let’s not forget, Ryan was the guy drafted second to Sidney Crosby in the 2005 draft. There’s a ton of scoring talent with Ryan, and he’s put up 31, 35 and 34 goals in his first three seasons. So, would I make that trade? Yes. Would the Ducks? I don’t think so since now that they have a new coach, Ryan will be part of the solution.

It’s always tough when a good coach like Carlyle loses his job, but that’s part of the game. Boudreau can go back to playing his offensive style of hockey, like he did early in his tenure with the Capitals. He has a ton of talent to work with in Ryan, Corey Perry, Ryan Getzlaf and some guy named Teemu Selanne. Once he gets to know his new team, they should be headed in the right direction. Boudreau didn’t win a Jack Adams Award for his looks. The guy can coach.

Keefe: Some people are opposed to the idea of the Rangers making a blockbuster move like the one that would have possibly landed them Ryan, and that’s because the team has 31 points in 22 games (the best points percentage in the league) and the fewest amount of losses in the league with five. I understand the idea of not wanting to break up what Glen Sather and John Tortorella have built here over the last few years, but a guy like Ryan takes the Rangers to another level.

The reason people spoke out against the rumors is because of the chemistry of this team and because every fan base (no matter what the sport is) always finds it hard to part ways with homegrown talent like a parent watching their kid go to school for the first time. And this group of homegrown talent is the best the Rangers have had in nearly two decades. You don’t hear about draft busts and overhyped talent anymore like we did in the early 2000s with names like Jamie Lundmark and Garth Murray and Hugh Jessiman. And we don’t have to worry about the Rangers signing terrible free-agent contracts like they did with Bobby Holik, Scott Gomez, Darius Kasparitis and Wade Redden. This Rangers team is one that fans can enjoy to watch and be proud of, and the way the team is being run is the way it should have been run for the last 10-plus years.

Monzo: It’s amazing how the organization has been able to develop players like Ryan Callahan, Brandon Dubinsky, Derek Stepan, Ryan McDonagh, Michael Sauer, Dan Girardi and Artem Anisimov and have them immediately pay dividends. And the latest example of this is Carl Hagelin.

I think Carl Hagelin is a name that is going to get more and more attention around the league throughout the season. How can anyone not like what they have seen out of the rookie early on? His style of play and the combination of offense and speed adds another element and weapon, to the Rangers’ game.

He’s flown under the radar behind Gaborik and Richards, but Callahan is soaring with the “C” on his jersey. He has 10 goals, and is always in the right spot on the ice. He throws his body around, and has been tremendous in front of the net on the power play.

Keefe: As we head into the second quarter of the season, the Rangers have a lot on their plate with maintaining their level of play and position near the top of the conference, as well as dealing with the media and production crews surrounding them for the next month leading up to the Winter Classic. The Rangers have had their share of convincing wins over the other elite teams in the Eastern Conference, and the only team they haven’t seen from that tier is the Bruins, who they won’t see until January. But without a 1-0 or 2-1 Rangers-Bruins game (since they always end in those scores) so far, would you be willing to put the Rangers in the conversation for the best team in the league?

And now that we are under two weeks away from series premiere of this year’s 24/7 featuring the Rangers and the Flyers. HBO showed a preview of the series last week, and the trailer did an unbelievable job of teasing the rivalry between the two Atlantic teams. Last year I analyzed and reviewed the show for WFAN.com, and it will be even better this year with the Rangers being part of the process and the buildup to the Winter Classic on Jan. 2.

Maxime Talbot stole the show last season (along with Bruce Boudreau) with his antics at the team holiday party and on road trips. Fans got to see into the locker room of the Penguins during a lengthy winning streak and into the Capitals’ during an extended losing streak. How pumped are you for this year’s 24/7 and who is going to be this season’s Max Talbot?

Monzo: It’s going to be exciting. Last year HBO did an outstanding job with the Penguins-Capitals 24/7, and I don’t expect anything less this year. It will once again give fans the chance to get inside the locker room before, during and after games.

Brian Boyle has a pretty good personality, and I would not be shocked if he is someone that fans see a really cool side of. I also wouldn’t be shocked if John Tortorella does the same thing, but for different reasons that the media is far too familiar with.

It’s tough to say the Rangers are the best team in the league, but I think it’s safe to say they are one of the best teams in the league. The problem is they haven’t done this long enough, and we have seen teams have hot starts and taper off. However, I think the feeling around the league is the Rangers are finally doing all the right things to continue this level of consistency. Now, can they continue this stretch of long winning streaks? It will be tough, but they certainly have the right pieces. If everyone stays healthy (and they are due to get Mike Rupp and Marc Staal back at some point) everything could fall in the right place.

Tag: Dan Girardi

The Same Old Rangers

Dreaming of a Rangers-Bruins Postseason Series

Rangers Building Elite Status