fbpx

Tag: Glen Sather

Blogs • Rangers

Jun 21, 2013

Retro Recap of Alain Vigneault’s Introductory Press Conference

The Rangers introduced Alain Vigneault as the 35th head coach in team history leading to a Retro Recap of the press conference.

Sam Rosen had more enthusiasm than usual while opening the press conference to introduce Alain Vigneault as head coach of the Rangers. It’s been a while since Rosen could talk and act positively around a Rangers head coach with John Tortorella making Rosen the team’s media scapegoat during the 2012-13 season, but on Friday at Radio City, Rosen could be himself with Tortorella long gone.

The press conference didn’t last long and nothing of any real importance was said during it. James Dolan talked and no one listened. Glen Sather talked and told us about the latest personnel decision he had made after firing another failed coach that he had hired. Alain Vigneault talked and gave us a little perspective into who he is and the type of person he will be. The media asked questions. Vigneault answered them. Sather answered a few. Vigneault answered a few more. And then the press conference was over. It went exactly the way a press conference for a new head coach who has coached zero games for his new employer and knows little to no one on the roster personally could go. But that didn’t stop me from taking notes during it for a Retro Recap.

***

James Dolan starts the press conference by saying, “I want to say thanks to John Tortorella, he served us well,” (served us well?) to immediately bring back the bad taste in everyone’s mouth that Tortorella left with the Rangers’ second-round embarrassment. Thanks Jim!

Dolan bumbles around his words and the podium like an entitled rich, spoiled brat who should be doing anything in life other than owning the Rangers (and Knicks). He reads his opening remarks off either notecards or a piece of paper like a fourth grader running for student council without ever promising to extend recess or put candy and soda vending machines in the cafeteria. But Dolan says, “Winning a championship is the Rangers’ first and only goal” (though he could have left the words “first and” if it truly is their “only” goal), so he at least tried to endear himself to Ranger fans like a Steinbrenner.

Dolan continues to ramble on while Train’s “Hey, Soul Sister” plays at a soft, but irritating level like a light drizzle in the background. I have now minimized the press conference seven times searching for the autoplay ad playing the song on my computer only to realize someone effed up streaming the video online and the song here is to stay until they notice.

Hey, soul sister
Ain’t that mister mister
On the radio, stereo

Dolan continues on and mentions Vigneault’s “success” (we’ll get to the usage of that word later) during his time in Vancouver, referring to the Canucks as the “Canooks.” What’s the chance Dolan can name one player on the Canucks whose last name isn’t Sedin? The answer is 0 percent chance. Dolan says Vigneault “knows how to get the best performance out of the entire roster.” The same roster he couldn’t name a non-Sedin on. I feel like he googled “nice cliches to say about a sports coach” and added it to his student council speech this morning.

Hey, soul sister
I don’t wanna miss
A single thing you do
Tonight

Dolan’s time ends without him giving us anything that will become a YouTube sensation and without giving the Daily News or Post anything like his lollipop-eating antics from MSG. So far, a successful morning for Jim.

Next up, Glen Sather.

If you thought this day would be about Vigneault, think again! Sather brings back the bad taste just when you thought the throwup that you swallowed after it came up in your mouth had settled, there it is again.

“I also would like thank John Tortorella for the work he did here,” Sather says. Eff it! Let’s all thank John Tortorella today! Let’s just bring him out on the stage and sit him right next to Vigneault!

Sather rambles on (without notes!) about how impressed he is by Vigneault and what he will do for the Rangers for the next five years (so, I guess it was a five-year deal).

“Alain likes to be called ‘AV,’ so I’m going to call him ‘AV.'” Umm, OK? Sather also makes it clear that everyone can call him “AV.” So I now have permission to call him AV. However, he doesn’t have permission to call me NK.

I’m not going put quotations around AV anymore since that’s his name now. He asked for it.

When speaking about why AV was chosen as the 35th head coach in Rangers history, Sather talks about how he wanted an offensive-minded coach and says, “The game has changed a little bit in the last three to four years.” Wait, what? Sather knew three to four years ago that the game changed? He hired John Tortorella four years ago. Tortorella’s system/approach/style has nothing to do with offense and everything to do with blocking shots, dumping and chasing and forcing skilled scorers to muck it up in the corners. Only Sather could admit to hiring and extending a coach, who is wrong for the team and the time, without actually admitting it. Ladies and gentlemen, Glen Sather!

Here’s the 35th head coach of the New York Rangers for at least the next five years, or possibly longer if he wins, or possibly shorter if he loses.

Vigneault starts by making a promise he might regret later. “I don’t intend to let them (Dolan and Sather) down.” You want might want to slow down there Vigneault. If Dolan said the Rangers’ only goal is to win a championship and he just hired you to win that championship and you just said you won’t let him down, well you basically just guaranteed to win the Stanley Cup in your first sentence as Rangers head coach.

“I’m coming here to win,” Vigneault says, “And there’s no doubt in my mind that this is organization is committed to winning the Stanley Cup.” (For reference: he pronounced it or-gan-eye-za-tion like a good Canadian.)

Vigneault talks about walking around the Rangers practice facility and looking at the pictures from the last time the Rangers won the Cup and I can’t help but think if those pictures are in black and white. Did pictures have color in 1994?

“It’s real clear to me there’s no better place to win the Stanley Cup than here in New York.”

Now that we have the guarantees and reckless predictions out of the way that come with every new hire press conference, it’s time for questions from the media.

The first question goes to Stan Fischler because who else would get to ask the new Rangers head coach a question other than Fischler, who predicted the Rangers over the Bruins in 5 and tweeted “If Boston wins series, I will eat beans for a week.” (How were those beans, Stan?)

Fischler doesn’t ask his usual nonsensical questioning, but instead tries to be a real reporter (or whatever he is) and asks, “Can you define your philosophy of the game? How is it going to be different from John Tortorella? What is AV’s coaching like?”

It took Fischler four seconds to use AV for the first time since being given permission from Sather to do so. But instead of having Vigneault talk down to Fischler in a tone that makes everyone other than Fischler aware at how unnecessary his question is like Tortorella would do, Vigneault actually gives him a reasonable and respectful answer.

“I like my teams to play the right way,” Vigneault says before going on to talk about how he wants his offensive players to be creative. “If you have space and time to carry the puck, carry the puck.”

Let me get this right. There are coaches who actually encourage their talented offensive players to create things on the ice? There are coaches who don’t want players like Rick Nash and Marian Gaborik to bang bodies in the corners? Is this real life?

“Offensive players have to be given the latitude to make something out of nothing.”

I’m starting to feel the way I did on that July morning in 2010 when I woke up to Cliff Lee being traded to the Yankees. Is David Adams going to ruin this for me too?

AV is saying all the right things and making me believe in him to the point that I don’t care that Sather passed over Messier and probably ruined the relationship between Messier and the Rangers. If AV says he can fix the power play, I will be buying a Brian Boyle jersey at the conclusion of this press conference.

Sather is asked if the job came down to AV (I think I’m only going to refer to him as that from now … I think I have to) and Mark Messier?

“We had a list of 13 candidates and I narrowed it down to nine,” Sather says. “I interviewed two in person and four over the phone. But no, it wasn’t just between AV and Mark.”

OK, we know that AV and Messier were candidates. I’m pretty sure Lindy Ruff was in there too. So that’s three. So who were the 10 other candidates? Let’s figure it out.

1. Wayne Gretzky – “The Great One” had to be one of the 13 after being rumored to be interested in the job and being such close friends with Sather even if Sather didn’t stop Peter Pocklington from trading Gretzky to Los Angeles. There’s no doubt in my mind that Sather could have prevented that trade if he wanted to and his supposed threatening to resign was likely fake.

2. Guy Boucher – He did a good job in Tampa Bay when you consider his goalies were Anders Lindback and Mathieu Garon. He deserves another chance somewhere when you think about some of the coaches in the league who have been given numerous opportunities with less ability.

3. Mike Sullivan – Vigneault mentioned how he talked with Sullivan at the practice facility. Was Sullivan driving the Zamboni or working at the snackbar? Wait, he’s still with the organization? I actually like Sullivan and think he would make a good head coach at some point again, but can you really keep on Tortorella’s right-hand man from the past few seasons? I don’t think you can.

4. John Tortorella – Would anyone be surprised if Sather fired Tortorella only to rehire him and sign him to an even longer-term deal? This is the GM who has one conference finals appearance as his “success” in New York over 12 seasons we’re talking about here. Since I started writing this, John Tortorella was hired by the Vancouver Canucks. If they rioted for losing the Stanley Cup, what are they going to do for this? Just burn the city to the ground?

5. Tom Renney – Renney is an assistant with the Red Wings now, but maybe Sather realized he messed up when he got rid of Renney in the first place for Tortorella because of Tortorella’s misleading 2003-04 Cup in Tampa Bay?

6. Mike Keenan – Keenan was a lot like Tortorella and there’s a good chance the 1993-94 Rangers would have won the Cup without him and probably would have won it in easier fashion. But Keenan has been able to hang around the organization and MSG Network for quite some time. Good luck in the KHL.

7. Pierre McGuire – McGuire hasn’t been a head coach since 1993-94 with the Whalers, his only stint as a head coach in the league. But you know that McGuire thinks he is capable of returning to lead a team because he can rattle off any player’s hometown, local youth hockey program, junior team, home phone number and Social Security number at will. What? You wouldn’t want McGuire getting the Rangers fired up by telling them to “Enjoy themselves!” and to “Go have some fun!” minutes before a game?

8. Pat Leonard – John Tortorella told the Daily News beat writer to “stop coaching” when he asked Tortorella a reasonable question last season, which technically meant that Leonard was coaching. So maybe Sather took notice and thought about going a different route with his decision.

9. Bryan Trottier – Brian Cashman didn’t think Javier Vazquez’s miserable second half in 2004 and a certain Game 7 disaster were enough to not bring him back for a second time. So why would Sather not bring back the man he gave his first coaching job to and who went 21-26-6-1 (remember when the NHL decided to have four categories in the standings thinking it would be a good idea?) before being fired and replaced by the next man on this list…

10. Glen Sather – The man himself. Why would Sather make himself head coach of the Rangers … again? (He coached 90 games combined over the 2002-03 season and 2003-04 season.) Better question: Why wouldn’t he? Nothing Sather has done during his time as GM when it comes to selecting a head coach has made a whole lot of sense, so why would this?

But Sather chose Vigneault despite these 12 candidates and chose him while every free-agent coach had the Rangers at the top of their list. Sather could have had any coach in the world and he chose Vigneault. That tells us that either Vigneault was the best possible candidate or that Sather still doesn’t know how to correctly pick a head coach. I’m hoping it’s the former, but history tells us that the latter is the more likely option according to statistics.

Back to the press conference…

I just realized “Hey, Soul Sister” stopped playing.

“It’s an Original 6,” Vigneault says about the Rangers. “It’s got a chance to win. It’s one of the elite teams in my opinion in the NHL.”

“It’s?” Are the Rangers a horse? An elite team? Sure, they made the conference semifinals and were essentially a Top 8 team this season and reached the conference finals a year ago and were essentially a Top 4 team then, but elite? Hmm, I’m not sure after the way the Bruins series went if we can call the Rangers elite right now. Let’s call them a “good” team for now.

Vigneault makes a joke about getting hired by saying, “I did find out it’s a lot easier to negotiate a contract when you got two teams after you instead of just one.” Sather doesn’t like this and tries to joke back. Dolan really doesn’t like this and throws his lollipop in the trash.

Why does AV think he was fired by the Canucks?

“Well that’s a question you should ask them,” Vigneault says. “I do want to say though that I enjoyed my time in Vancouver.”

Here’s the real answer why he was fired, which could save you time if you were planning on asking the Canucks like AV instructed: AV was fired because he didn’t win the Cup. He won five division titles, two Presidents Trophies and lost in the 2010-11 Final, but he never won it all and that’s why he was fired (this is the “success” part I said we would talk about later and there’s a reason “success” has quotations around). Pretty straightforward.

Someone asks Glen Sather whether he expects either Mark Messier or Brad Richards to be part of the organization next season.

“I don’t think this is an appropriate place to talk about player decisions,” Sather says. “It’s a day for AV and I think we’ll stick to the coaching.”

I didn’t expect Sather to actually give a real answer to that question and the person who asked it should have realized they wouldn’t get a real answer either and they should have saved everyone time by not asking it. (Beat writers! Reporters!) I don’t think Richards will be back even though I think he should be back, but that decision has most likely already been made.

As for Messier, it’s a weird spot. How is he supposed to continue to serve as a special assistant to Sather when Sather didn’t hire him and he would have to work with AV and make decisions about AV’s team when AV was picked over him? I would have been happy with Messier as the head coach and wanted him to be the head coach, but it looks like his time with the team might end (for now) the way Don Mattingly’s did.

The press conference went about as well as it could for a coach who won’t coach his first game for a little over three months. Vigneault said all the right things and answered every question the way you would have wanted him to and maybe New York (his third head coaching job) will turn out to be what Chicago has been for Joel Quenneville (his third head coaching job) and what Boston has been for Claude Julien (his third head coaching job).

If it works out, Vigneault will lead the Rangers to their first Cup since 1994. If it doesn’t work out, well at least he’s not John Tortorella.

Read More

Blogs • Rangers

Jun 12, 2013

I Won’t Miss John Tortorella

John Tortorella is no longer head coach of the Rangers and if other teams are smart, he won’t be the head coach anywhere.

I have waited to write this column for a long time. I have dreamed about what I would write. I have rehearsed what I would write. And then when Tortorella was actually fired I didn’t want to write anything. I felt like my personal mission to have him fired had been completed (which is the way I felt when A.J. Burnett was traded) and after picking him apart for four-plus seasons in New York, including in postgame press conferences following losses this season, I didn’t have anything left to write or say about the man who helped steal four-plus seasons of Henrik Lundqvist’s prime. But when I heard a rumor that the Dallas Stars were looking at Tortorella as a possible replacement for the recently-fired Glen Gulutzan, I just couldn’t keep quiet anymore.

***

The year after college (2009) I was still living in Boston and listening to Mike Francesa when Tom Renney was fired. The Rangers were 31-23-7 with 21 games remaining in the season when they made their change and Glen Sather gave the following reason for firing Renney, who had brought the Rangers back to the postseason for the first time since 1996-97 and the first time during Sather’s Rangers tenure.

“We had lost our zip at some point. We were a fast, puck-possessive hockey club that was determined and worked very hard and moved the puck well. We’ve gotten away from that and that’s why we made the change.”

(Side note: Does that seem familiar?)

When the speculation started that John Tortorella could be Renney’s replacement, people glowingly talked about Tortorella for the job in a way that Scotty Bowman must have been thinking, “How the eff will they talk about me if I want to get back into coaching?” You would have thought that Tortorella brought the Lightning to Tampa Bay before creating an Oilers/Islanders-esque dynasty and winning four Cups in five years. But Tortorella’s time in Tampa Bay actually wasn’t as successful as many people seemingly misremembered it to be, the way an artist or actor is praised posthumously for a spectacular career despite only making one huge song or album or movie. Here’s how Tortorella’s Tampa Bay tenure actually went.

2000-01: Took over team halfway through year and missed playoffs
2001-02: Missed playoffs
2002-03: Lost in second round
2003-04: Won Stanley Cup
2005-05: Lost in first round
2006-07: Lost in first round
2007-08: Missed playoffs

Tortorella came to New York with a Cup, a second-round exit, two first-round exits and three missed playoffs on his resume and acted in a manner that he thought he had won the Conn Smythe during the 2003-04 playoffs rather than Brad Richards. He felt entitled from the minute he was named Rangers head coach and in his mind I think he felt the following thought process was justified: “I won the Stanley Cup with Tampa Bay in 2003-04. The Rangers haven’t won the Stanley Cup since 1993-94. I’m more successful than the New York Rangers.” Without ever being able to go inside his head or without giving him truth serum or a polygraph test, I know that’s what he was thinking.

Tortorella has the type of cockiness about him, which exuded the idea that he couldn’t believe he was fired by the Lightning following the 2007-08 season, even though his team went 31-42-9, finished in last place in the Southeast and missed the playoffs. “I’m John Tortorella! I won this franchise a Cup five years ago! How could they fire ME? But they did and unfortunately Sather and the Rangers were there to get Tortorella back behind a bench, and back behind the Rangers bench for the second time after his four-game stint coaching the team to an 0-3-1 record in 1999-00.

The Rangers finished the season 12-7-2 after firing Renney and hiring Tortorella, earned the eighth spot in the Eastern Conference, held a 3-1 series lead over the top-seeded Capitals in the first round and blew it. That’s how the John Tortorella era began.

The following year, the Rangers missed the playoffs despite having a chance to clinch the 8-seed if they could beat the Flyers in a shootout in Game 82, but they couldn’t and the Flyers clinched the 8-seed. How did the Rangers lose? The way the John Tortorella Rangers always lost: scored the first goal and couldn’t make it stand despite 46 saves from Henrik Lundqvist before losing 2-1 in a shootout.

The year after that, the season came down to Game 82 and playing for the 8-seed again with the Rangers needing to beat the Devils on the final day of the season and have the nothing-to-play-for Lightning beat the Hurricanes, who were also playing for the 8-seed. The Rangers did their part and the Lightning helped them out to complete the two-team parlay and get the Rangers into the playoffs at the 8-seed to face the 1-seed Capitals for the second time in three years. Five games later the Rangers’ season was over.

So after three seasons, two first-round exits and one missed postseason, John Tortorella would coach the Rangers again in 2011-12. And then came the problematic 2011-12 season. And the 2011-12 season was problematic because the Rangers weren’t nearly as good as their 51-24-7 record and 1-seed in the Eastern Conference would have you think they were, but because it was the most success the organization had experienced in 15 years, Tortorella appeared to be a coaching hero.

The 2011-12 Rangers were an offensively-challenged and defensively-flawed team that relied on the best goalie in the world to win the East by one point over the Penguins, who were without Sidney Crosby for 60 games. If the season was 83 games, the Rangers would have lost the conference and the division to the Penguins and been the 4-seed in the East. But the season is only 82 games and therefore John Tortorella looked like the man who had gotten the Rangers to the Eastern Conference finals through system development and progress. But really John Tortorella’s wasn’t about progress, the 2011-12 season just happened to be an aberration. John Tortorella’s Rangers tenure wasn’t following natural progression the way that Claude Julien’s had in Boston. Instead, John Tortorella’s Rangers tenure mirrored Daisuke Matsuzaka’s Major League career. How? Here are Matsuzaka’s record and ERA for his six seasons in the majors.

2007: 15-12, 4.40
2008: 18-3, 2.90
2009: 4-6, 5.76
2010: 9-6, 4.69
2011: 3-3, 5.30
2012: 1-7, 8.28

In 2008, everyone thought Matsuzaka had adjusted to the majors after a so-so rookie season. But in the four years to follow, everyone realized this wasn’t the case. Matsuzaka had won 18 of his 29 starts in 2008 despite averaging under six innings per start. This was made possible by the Red Sox offense, which scored five or more runs in 19 of the 29 starts. Matsuzaka had a 2.90 ERA despite having a 1.324 WHIP and leading the league in walks (94) and hits per nine innings (6.9). This was made possible by his ability to somehow get out of a bases-loaded jam seemingly every inning.

The 2011-12 Rangers and their 51-24-7 record defied logic, math, science, the law of odds and the laws of everything. This was made possible by Henrik Lundqvist’s Vezina-winning 39-18-5, 1.97 GAA, .929 SV% season. The 2011-12 Rangers played in 33 one-goal games and won 21 of them (64 percent). They went a combined 12-7 in overtime and shootouts came from behind in seemingly ever game and tied and won games in the actual final seconds (or in the actual final second as was the case in Phoenix). In the playoffs, they needed seven games to survive the 8-seed Senators and seven more games to survive the 7-seed Capitals and won both Game 7s 2-1. Their luck finally ran out in the Eastern Conference finals against the Devils, losing in six games. The only two games they won? Two shutouts from Henrik Lundqvist.

The 2008-09 through present day Rangers have been built on getting a lead and sitting on it. They aren’t built like the Blackhawks or the Bruins or the Penguins. They can’t sustain Lundqvist giving up two or three goals in a game because they have no way of scoring two or three goals in a game. (The 2011-12 Rangers gave up three or more goals 33 times. They lost 24 of those games.)

If you believe in progression, which Tortorella made clear doesn’t exist from year to year in the NHL in several interviews this season with Mike Francesa, then the 2012-13 season was supposed to be about building off the Eastern Conference finals loss to something bigger. And when Sather fleeced Scott Howson and the Blue Jackets in the overdue trade for Rick Nash, progression made sense.

The Rangers caught a break with the lockout after playing 102 games the year before and having their season last until May 25. Gaborik would need surgery to repair a torn labrum and would be out until after the New Year anyway, so no hockey until the middle of January and a condensed 48-game schedule made sense for a team with scoring troubles.

But the 2012-13 didn’t have anything to do with “progress.” The Rangers started out slow, got hot, got cold, got ice cold, nearly missed the playoffs (again), clinched a playoff berth in the final days of the season and got lucky to get the 6-seed when things broke right. The team that come within two wins of a Stanley Cup Final appearance the season before was now relying on outside help to reach the postseason the way they had two years ago and it all finally fell apart for John Tortorella. It wasn’t just the team’s record, their 6-seed or their second-round embarrassing exit. It was the three majors things that caused those things that led to John Tortorella being currently unemployed.

1. Mistreatment of Media
I don’t care how John Tortorella treated the media or the beat writers since I’m loosely part of the first and I’m not the second. Stupid questions deserve stupid answers in every aspect in life, including NHL press conferences, so I don’t feel bad for media members belittled by unnecessary and poor lines of questioning. But not every question is stupid and not every question deserves a stupid answer or in Tortorella’s case an a-hole answer, which is how MSG Rangers play-by-play man Sam Rosen was treated for no reason. But even though I don’t care if Tortorella wanted beat writers to go home feeling humiliated, it clearly played a part in his firing. It’s one thing to act like that if you’re winning since someone like Bill Belichick isn’t exactly media-friendly, but how many times has Belichick’s job status been in question? Zero.

No one in New York cared about what Tortorella did in Tampa Bay and he never figured this out. New Yorkers want the Rangers to win and don’t care when the Lighting won. They don’t care about championships, accomplishments and accolades achieved in another city with another franchise. Tortorella spoke down to everyone to he was forced to speak to and acted in a manner in which no coach in the major sports should act, but if someone is going to, it should be someone with a much more impressive resume than Tortorella’s, which finished in New York like this:

2008-09: Lost in first round
2009-10: Missed playoffs
2010-11: Lost in first round
2011-12: Lost in conference finals
2012-13: Lost in second round

2. Misuse of Stars
Somewhere, I’m not sure where, Marian Gaborik was smiling when it was announced that John Tortorella had been fired. Well, maybe Gaborik wasn’t exactly smiling since he will spend at least one more season in Columbus with the Blue Jackets, but he had to be happy knowing that the man responsible for him being sent to Columbus would now be viewed as a loser and not a savior in New York.

If there hadn’t been a lockout this season, Gaborik would have missed close to the half the season recovering from the torn labrum he suffered during the 2011-12 season when he scored 41 goals and played through the playoffs with the injury. A lot of people seem to forget this and these people certainly forgot it when they booed Gaborik at the Garden and called for him to be traded, which he eventually was.

No one wanted to talk about how he was unfairly treated in comparison to players of lesser talent on the team or that he was moved from the position he has played his entire life or that he was asked to change his game away from being one of the league’s elite and pure goal scorers to someone willing to bang bodies and muck it up in the corner and block shots. All anyone knew was that Gaborik wasn’t scoring at the rate he used to and that he was being benched and having his playing time reduced by Tortorella. Everyone gave the benefit of the doubt to the coach who had won nothing in New York and not to the two-time 40-plus goal scorer for the Rangers who, along with Lundqvist, was the sole reason for the team’s marginal success since 2009. So Gaborik was shipped to Columbus to create depth (but not depth with people who could score goals) and the team who couldn’t score goals lost their second-biggest scoring threat.

The Rangers started the season with Rick Nash, Marian Gaborik and Brad Richards. Entering their final game of the year (Game 5 in Boston), only Rick Nash was in the lineup. Gaborik was gone and Richards had become a healthy scratch in consecutive games, nine years after he won the Conn Smythe, giving Tortorella his lone Cup and the one thing on his resume keeping him employed behind a bench in 2013.

What happened to Richards? He certainly didn’t forget how to play hockey or “lose it” overnight. Maybe the 48-game shortened season had something to do with the 33-year-old center not looking like himself? It’s more likely that Richards was out of shape, which would absolutely be his fault, in January prior to the start of the season and never caught up over the five months that the Rangers season lasted.

Even for as bad as Richards looked at times and how lost he was running the power play, he still finished with 34 points in 46 regular-season games. If he deserved to be benched or scratched, he deserved to benched or scratched long before the final two games of the season with the Rangers’ backs against the wall, trailing 3-0 in the conference semifinals. Tortorella tried to back Richards when he told everyone to “Kiss his ass,” but by then it was too late. Richards started his own potential amnesty process with his play and Tortorella put the potential finishing touches on it with his lineup.

3. No Accountability
John Tortorella always made sure to ask the media if they had asked his players the same questions following losses when he would get testy usually right before or after he would take out his frustration of not being a good coach on Sam Rosen. Tortorella wanted to make sure his players were owning up for their sloppy play or poor effort, but he never once took the blame for a loss. For someone who felt so entitled for his one truly successful season in the NHL, he never once thought he could be the reason for a loss. It was always someone else’s fault in Tortorella’s mind and it most likely was his players’ since he rarely would credit the opponent for their performance either.

Tortorella’s players turned on him following the Game 5 loss to the Bruins and after looking immune to being fired before the 2013-14 season, he was gone the day after reports came out that Henrik Lundqvist wasn’t sold on signing a long-term deal with the Rangers. Lundqvist’s play had been responsible for Tortorella keeping his job as long as he did and Lundqvist’s play had been responsible for any of the team’s post-lockout success, so it was fitting that it was Lundqvist who ended up being the one to end Tortorella’s time as Rangers head coach.

I’m not sure why the Dallas Stars or any other team looking for a head coach would want Tortorella behind their bench. But I get it. Like a campaign manager with at least one election win on their resume, Tortorella has the 2003-04 Cup on his and he will always be mentioned in potential jobs until he has another one.

As for the Rangers, I’m not sure who will coach the team next season, but it won’t be John Tortorella. And that’s all that matters.

Read More

Blogs • Email Exchanges • Rangers

Feb 22, 2013

The Canadiens Own the Recent Rangers

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Read More

Blogs • Yankees

Aug 2, 2012

Rick Nash Really a Ranger and Other Thoughts

Thoughts on the reality of Rick Nash becoming a Ranger, something Ivan Nova and Carl Pavano have in common and the false hype and hope of the MLB Trade Deadline.

Last February I wanted Rick Nash on the Rangers in the worst way. I thought the Rangers had to give up whatever it took to get Nash, even if that meant Chris Kreider, and I campaigned hard for Glen Sather to get it done.

Sather tried to get it done by supposedly offering Brandon Dubinsky, Tim Erixon, J.T. Miller, Christian Thomas and a first-round pick for Nash. It was a deal the hockey world collectively agreed was a great return for the Blue Jackets, but Scott Howson turned it down and then denied it was ever offered. Howson missed the trade deadline and it looked like he would have leverage in the offseason with more teams in the mix, and could possibly get even more from the Rangers for Nash if they didn’t win or reach the Cup. But then Howson outed Nash by saying he asked to be traded, compromising his leverage and forcing him to have to move his franchise player in the offseason no matter what. So Howson accepted the Rangers’ offseason offer on July 23 of Brandon Dubinsky, Artem Anisimov, Tim Erixon and a first-round pick, which was significantly lower than the original reported offer. The Blue Jackets never intended on keeping Rick Nash because they couldn’t keep Rick Nash. They had “tried” to build their team around him, but never gave him adequate pieces to play with. (Question: How does Scott Howson still have a job?)

I thought the Rangers had to have Rick Nash at the trade deadline because they lacked premium and consistent scoring for the postseason and with a young defense, it was going to come down to Henrik Lundqvist every game again … and it did. Once the crazy bounces stopped going the Rangers’ way, and the shots from the corner stopped deflecting off defenseman’s skates and going in, and they stopped scoring in the final seconds … the Devils beat them.

A lot of people opposed trading for Nash at the deadline because of his contract, the years on his contract, his salary and the cap hit. Others cited the Rangers being “two games away from the Cup” with the team they have as a reason to not trade for Nash. But when you think about them being down 3-2 to the eighth-seeded Senators and needing to win back-to-back elimination games, being forced to a Game 7 against the seventh-seeded Capitals (and they needed to win in triple overtime in Game 3 and a goal with 6.6 seconds left in Game 5 before another overtime win) and then losing to the rival Devils, a 6 seed, in six games, it didn’t feel like they were just two games from the Cup. The only time the Rangers won back-to-back games in the postseason was in Games 6 and 7 of the first round. Technically they were two games away from the Cup, but really they weren’t that close.

I hadn’t written about the Nash trade yet, partly because of the Yankees and partly because it still hadn’t really set in that Rick Nash is a Ranger. When was the last time I had really, really wanted a New York team to get Player X and it worked out? It certainly didn’t work out with Cliff Lee and still hasn’t. But last week the Nash trade became a reality when I walked by the NHL store on 6th Avenue and saw his No. 61 jersey displayed in the front window. Then this week at Yankee Stadium I saw several people wearing Nash shirts for Yankees-Orioles and it really started to set in.

With Nash officially a Ranger I wanted to look at the three main reasons I kept hearing as cons to trading for him aside from his contract.

1. Don’t Give Up Chris Kreider
I was ready to give up Kreider in February when no one else was (except for WFAN’s Brian Monzo). Kreider played well for three years at Boston College, but he also didn’t put up better numbers than a lot of other BC and Hockey East players that ended up becoming average NHL players. The jump Kreider made from the NCAA ranks to the NHL playoffs was impressive, scoring five goals and two assists in 18 games in three tight series, and he showed a glimpse of what Rangers fans can expect in the future. But Kreider was also picked 19th overall in the 2009 first round and was the 28th of 30 players from that first round to appear in an NHL game, so it made me skeptical as to why the rest of his class had already been in the league and he kept returning to BC.

Would I have traded Kreider this offseason for Nash after having seen him in the playoffs? Probably not. But it’s not because I think he’s a guarantee to become the type of player or offensive presence that Rick Nash is, but it’s because I didn’t think the Rangers would have to give him up to get Nash. When Howson didn’t trade for Nash at the deadline and then said Nash wanted out, you knew Howson wasn’t going to get what he wanted anymore. I thought the Blue Jackets would get more than they ended up getting (I thought it would take Derek Stepan or Carl Hagelin), but I didn’t think they would get Kreider and they didn’t, so all Rangers fans got what they wanted.

2. Nash Can’t Win Because He Hasn’t Won
A lot of uninformed or unintelligent fans cited Nash’s four playoff games in nine seasons as a reason to not trade for him. Because it’s his fault the Blue Jackets reached the postseason once, and not the poor supporting cast or defense and goaltending situations. And let’s forget that he’s a first-liner on Team Canada with Sidney Crosby. Yeah…

3. His Offensive Numbers Aren’t That Good
Nash’s worst goal-scoring season came in his rookie season in 2002-03 when he scored 17 as an 18-year old. The sad thing is that was his worst offensive season and those 17 goals would have tied him for fourth on the Ranges last season with Stepan for goals on the team. Stepan was 21 to start last season. Since his rookie year, Nash has put up 41, 31, 27, 38, 40, 33, 32 and 30 goals. In that time, the wing’s best centers have been R.J. Umberger, Antoine Vermette and a 36-year-old Sergei Fedorov. That’s real life.

I haven’t been this excited about a New York trade in a long time. I’m excited for the Rick Nash era in New York because he’s Rick Nash and because he’s been one of my favorite players in the league since his rookie season. I’m more excited for the people that only know his name and not his level of play to find out just how good he is.

***

The worst Yankees start I have seen in person at Yankee Stadium came on May 28, 2005 when Carl Pavano and the Yankees lost to the Red Sox 17-1. Here’s Pavano’s line from that day: 3.2 IP, 11 H, 5 R, 5 ER, 1 BB, 2 K. (Tony Womack hit second, John Flaherty hit eighth and Robinson Cano hit ninth so it was a weird day.) It was actually the last time I would see Pavano pitch in person until Opening Day 2007 (since he would soon be out for the rest of 2005 and then all of 2006) when he got the start by default and injuries (ironic). That was a bad day in the Bronx, but Tuesday night against the Orioles might have been worse.

When the Yankees went up 5-0 in the first, I was laughing with my friend and his brother about how we might be able to go to the Yankee Tavern in the third inning if the Yankees kept it up. We didn’t know the Orioles were going to answer with seven two-out runs in the top of the second, including a Chris Davis grand slam.

When the Orioles made it 5-3 with the bases loaded and Davis coming up, we joked that he was going to his a grand slam. I jokingly predicted it was going to go where the Yankees’ bullpen meets the auxiliary scoreboard. Then when he crushed an 0-1 pitch that just kept carrying and carrying and eventually hit the top of the wall in left-center and bounced over, we weren’t joking anymore.

I’m not sure if Nova is going to get a postseason start with CC Sabathia and Andy Pettitte at the front of the rotation, Hiroki Kuroda having a great year and Phil Hughes pitching well. If Nova wants to be in the conversation and avoid being the Javier Vazquez of 2010 and the A.J. Burnett of 2011 when it comes to the rotation, he needs to start pitching the way he did in June (5 GS, 3-0, 1.26 ERA).

***

I spent an unnecessary amount of time over the last month going to MLB Trade Rumors, reading what Buster Olney and Jon Heyman wrote and clicking any headline or link that teased some sort of rumor. I even forced myself into following Ken Rosenthal for the last few hours of the deadline (don’t worry I unfollowed him at 4:01 p.m.). That’s how enticing and addicting the MLB Trade Deadline can be.

I don’t remember every deadline or every move at every deadline, but this had to be in the Top 3 worst trade deadlines ever. The hype of Cole Hamels, Cliff Lee, Justin Upton, Matt Garza, James Shields, Josh Beckett, Jon Lester and Jacoby Ellsbury led to nothing happening. I blame Bud Selig because he’s the one to blame. With the one-game playoff, there are currently eight teams with a chance at a wild card in the AL and there are five with a chance in the NL. Teams in the AL didn’t know if they should be buyers or sellers or if it was worth giving up pieces of the future for a chance to play one game and then face the Yankees or Rangers in the ALDS.

During the final hour of the deadline the Yankees made a push for Ryan Dempster because the Cubs were running out of time and it was going to cost the Yankees nothing. I didn’t want Ryan Dempster unless it cost them nothing and even then I didn’t want Ryan Dempster because I didn’t think his success would translate in the AL East or in the AL playoffs. However, by the end of the 3:00 hour I wanted the Yankees to get him just because it had dragged on and it felt like they had to do something at that point even if they didn’t need to and even if it didn’t make sense to.

I thought the Yankees needed to add a starting pitcher and I still do, but it shouldn’t have been Ryan Dempster and I’m glad it wasn’t. The guy I wanted the Yankees to get is the guy I wanted them to get in December 2010 and now he might be available again and Texas better not get him.

Read More

Blogs • Yankees

Jul 24, 2012

Number 31, Ichiro Suzuki, Number 31

The Yankees added the perfect piece to their 2012 puzzle when they traded for Ichiro.

It’s rare that I really like non-Yankees. I always had a soft spot for some Tampa Bay players (before they became the Rays and actual competition) like Carl Crawford (before he became a Red Sox) and Scott Kazmir (before he became an Angel because the Mets — I found out on Tuesday morning that he is now pitching for the Sugar Land Skeeters of the Atlantic League). For some strange reason I liked Rey Ordonez because of his fielding even if he was a .246 career hitter, and I also liked Carlos Baerga (again I don’t know why). But my favorite non-Yankee of all time is now playing right field for them.

Maybe I never would have liked Ichiro if the Yankees hadn’t steamrolled his 116-win Mariners in the 2001 ALCS, and he had burned them the way that Juan Pierre would two years later in the World Series. But the Yankees did destroy them, and Ichiro and the Mariners haven’t played October baseball since their 12-3 loss to the Yankees in Game 5 of that ALCS on Oct. 22, 2001.

That game, which happened almost 11 years ago, is the reason Ichiro changed clubhouses, numbers, positions (when Nick Swisher gets back) and roles on Monday. That game is why Ichiro went to Mariners ownership and asked to be traded in the final months of his $90-million deal for a chance to play in the postseason for the first time since his rookie season.

I grew to love Ichiro because he was and is cool. Everything about him from putting his first name on the back of his jersey (which I didn’t like at first) to his jersey pull to the way he swings (in the summer of 2002 I mirrored my left-handed Wiffle ball swing after his); the way he leaves the box; the way he fields; the way he throws; the way he runs; the way he talks to the media like this gem with Bob Costas, and even the way he could hit a walk-off home run off of Mariano Rivera.

I was eating dinner on Monday night and trying to make sense of the surreal feeling that Rick Nash is actually a Ranger (after months of campaigning on Twitter with WFAN’s Brian Monzo) when my friend texted me to say that he saw “Ichiro was switching clubhouses.” I had texted him earlier in the day about the Nash trade and then the Tigers-Marlins trade, so I thought he was just mocking my excessive trade texts. I went on Twitter and there was Jack Curry’s tweet followed by dozens of responses to the deal, which took longer to scroll through than the Pearl Jam section of my iTunes.

How awkward must Monday have been for Ichiro? You’re the face of the only franchise you have known in the majors and you’re traded to a team you’re supposed to be playing against in just a few hours. So before you walk to the other clubhouse and put on a new uniform for the first time in your 12 years in the league, you have to sit beside your owner and GM, who you asked for a trade, and watch your owner read a prepared speech about your career straight from paper like a nervous third grader giving a student council election speech. Then you give your own statement in Japanese. Then you have to sit through your translator give the same exact statement in English. Then your new manager comes out to tell the media how you will be used on your new team. Then you take questions from the media about leaving the only team you have ever known only to play against them that night in their stadium. Whether it was when he was getting ready in the Yankees clubhouse or putting on his No. 31 jersey or when he took the field at Safeco in the bottom of the first instead of the top, at some point Ichiro had to have asked himself: Is this real life?

(What happens with Ichiro’s translator? Does he get traded too? Does he join the Yankees’ payroll and uproot his Seattle life, or is he unemployed?)

And talking about awkward, how about the Mariners fans who aren’t Internet savvy or aren’t Twitter users or just weren’t aware of the trade when they showed up to Safeco on Monday night? “Honey, why is Ichiro playing right field with a Yankees uniform on?”

A lot of critics have been quick to joke that this trade is about seven or more years late, but no one is mentioning that Jayson Nix and DeWayne Wise were getting regular playing time with Brett Gardner out, or that Raul Ibanez was playing a little too much left field. Was anyone really going to feel comfortable with Wise facing Justin Verlander or Jered Weaver in October? I know I wasn’t. Did anyone want Andruw Jones going into left field as a “defensive replacement” with a one-run lead in the ninth inning of a playoff game?

Two-plus months and October of Ichiro for D.J. Mitchell and Danny Farquhar? If Glen Sather hadn’t fixed the Rangers’ scoring problem by getting one of the only true pure scorers in the game for just Brandon Dubinsky, Artem Anisimov, Tim Erixon and a first-round pick earlier on Monday, Brian Cashman might be on a float up the Canyon of Heroes this morning. I guess he could still take a cab up it if he really wants to.

This isn’t the Lance Berkman deal of 2010 (at least I hope it’s not) even if has a few similarities like going from a last-place team to a playoff team or the pending free agency. So, if Ichiro becomes overweight and looks a slob for the final two months and then signs with the Cardinals, gets into shape and rededicates himself to the game and saves his team’s season in Game 6 of the World Series in an eventual championship then I will really move to Europe and become a soccer fan.

This deal isn’t the Ivan Rodriguez deal of 2008 either. This isn’t the Lance or Pudge deal because I don’t think Ichiro lost it overnight between 2010 and 2011, and I don’t think he’s mailed it in for the last year and a half the way Berkman did with the Astros and Yankees. I think Ichiro is a superstar who has deserved a better supporting cast in Seattle since Oct. 22, 2001, and hasn’t gotten it. He’s been stuck in a lineup with Brendan Ryan and Chone Figgins. Casper Wells leads the Mariners in average, on-base and slugging with a .261/.331.447 line, and Justin Smoak, the team’s home run leader with 13 was sent down to Triple-A after Monday’s game. If Kevin Youkilis’ situation in Boston screamed “Trade Me!” then Ichiro’s situation was in need of a 20-story billboard in Times Square, a Super Bowl commercial and maybe even the rights to a stadium name reading “Trade Me Right Effing Now!” the way Denis Lemieux asked to be in Slap Shot. Over the last few years, Ichiro became the poster boy for “change of scenery” and he went about getting it the right way.

Today’s Ichiro might boast a poor .261/.288/.353 line, which is far from where he was just two years ago (.315/.359/.394), but at this time yesterday Ichiro was probably counting down the days to the offseason. He was going to go to Safeco to likely hit second behind Casper Wells and his 123 career hits with the 100 hits and 13 career home runs of the 22-year-old Jesus Montero as his protection. At this time yesterday Ichiro and his Hall of Fame resume was going to play the first game of the Yankees series in the same lineup with possibly four players hitting under .200 in Miguel Olivo, Justin Smoak, Chone Figgins and Brendan Ryan. (The Mariners only ended up playing two guys hitting under .200 with Smoak and Ryan.) Instead Ichiro hit eighth for the Yankees, lost in a lineup where he isn’t being asked to be the offense, but rather just part of the offense.

The Yankees don’t need Ichiro to be the 28-year-old Ichiro for 162 games, which is what the Mariners needed. The Yankees just need Ichiro to be a piece to the puzzle for the second season. And this piece fits perfectly.

***

My book The Next Yankees Era: My Transition from the Core Four to the Baby Bombers is now available as an ebook!

Read More