John Tortorella – Keefe To The City

May 15, 2015

Rangers-Lightning Is Frightening

One week ago, there was one minute and 41 seconds left in the Rangers’ season. Trailing the Capitals 1-0 with 1:41 left in the third period of Game 5, the realization that the Presidents’ Trophy

One week ago, there was one minute and 41 seconds left in the Rangers’ season. Trailing the Capitals 1-0 with 1:41 left in the third period of Game 5, the realization that the Presidents’ Trophy season was going to end in the second round after just 10 postseason games started to set in. And I thought of Mike McDermott narrating in Rounders.

“I’ve often seen these people, these squares, at the table. Short-stacked and long odds against, all their outs gone, one last card in the deck that can help them. I used to wonder how they could let themselves get into such bad shape … and how the hell they thought they could turn it around.”

The Rangers had one out left. They had to find a way to tie the game and either pull a Blackhawks’ Game 6 of the 2012-13 Stanley Cup Final and score twice in the final minute of the game or win it in overtime. And like Mikey McD, I wondered, “How could this Rangers team, the best Rangers team in 21 years, let themselves get into such bad shape?”

Chris Kreider scored at 18:19 of the third period to save the season and at 9:37 of overtime, Ryan McDonagh extended. Two days later, the Rangers solved Braden Holtby with four goals and then hung on for dear life in the final minutes of a 4-3 win. Three days after that, the Rangers overcame an Alex Ovechkin goal and 1-0 deficit to win in overtime, win a Game 7 on May 13 once again and be the first team in the history of the NHL to overcome a 3-1 series deficit in back-to-back seasons.

Before Game 7, I wrote about how every Stanley Cup-winning team must have a “championship moment” on their way to the Cup and if the Rangers are to win the Cup for the first time in 21 years, it’s going to be nearly impossible to top the odds that overcame in the second-round series against Washington.

The Penguins’ offseason is now 21 days old and the Capitals’ is two days old. For the third time in four years, the Rangers are in the conference finals, and the only thing standing in their way of returning to the Stanley Cup Final is the one team I wanted no part of this postseason: the Tampa Bay Lightning.

The Rangers went 0-3 against the Lightning this year. They lost 5-1 (Nov. 17), 4-3 (Nov. 26) and 6-3 (Dec. 1) and were outscored 15-7 in those three games, but those games did all come in a span of 14 days at a time when the Rangers were banged up and not the Rangers we see today. The Rangers didn’t become the current form of their team until the second week of December.

The main problem with the Lightning is that I was the Trade Ryan Callahan for Martin St. Louis Club President and then I also served as the Don’t Overpay and Re-sign Brian Boyle, Benoit Pouliot and Anton Stralman Club President. (To my credit, I didn’t know Glen Sather was going to sign Tanner Glass or give a ridiculous extension to Marc Staal after having already given one to Dan Girardi.)

A series against the Lightning is challenging enough without the idea of having to watch Callahan, Boyle and Stralman advance to the Final and play for the Cup at the expense of the Rangers. That would be too much to take. A little like watching Marian Gaborik carry the Kings to the Stanley Cup against the Rangers a little over a year after the Rangers traded him to Columbus because John Tortorella didn’t like him. I’m petrified of this series and what a Rangers series loss will mean.

The only thing keeping me from locking myself in my apartment until this series is over (and if ends poorly staying locked in my apartment for the next year) is that Henrik Lundqvist is a Ranger. It’s been 34 days since the regular season ended and there’s still a season for the Rangers because of Henrik Lundqvist the way there has been a postseason for the Rangers every season but one since the 2004-05 lockout because of Henrik Lundqvist. He has once again been the best player on a team picked by many to reach the Final and finish the job they couldn’t last season and he’s been everything and more this postseason. As long as Lundqvist is in net, I will always like the Rangers’ chances.

I picked the Rangers to beat the Penguins in six and they did it in five. I picked the Rangers to beat the Capitals in six and they did it in seven. Both times I was wrong, but the result worked out in the end. So why change something that works?

Rangers in six.

Blogs • Rangers • Rangers Playoffs

Jun 26, 2014

Finality from the Final

The 2013-14 Rangers season lasted 107 games and ended in a devastating defeat, but it was one incredible ride over nearly nine months.

I lied. Prior to the start of the Stanley Cup Final I said I wouldn’t care if the Rangers won or lost. I said I was just happy that they were there, that they were playing the last hockey of the 2013-14 season and that they had given me two additional months of hockey that I hadn’t prepared for. But 12 days ago when Ryan McDonagh hit the post, Chris Kreider couldn’t score once again on a breakaway and Rick Nash couldn’t find an open net, I knew that a Stanley Cup loss was inevitable. And when Alec Martinez started a 3-on-2 with Kyle Clifford and Tyler Toffoli that looked like it had jumped off the page of an odd-man rush textbook, finishing with a perfect create-a-rebound-opportunity shot, my fear of the inevitable was realized. Henrik Lundqvist fell to the ice as if his body had finally given out from the burden of carrying the entire Rangers team and organization through the series and the playoffs and the last nine seasons.

Finality had been in Madison Square Garden for Game 7 against the Flyers in the quarterfinals. It was with the Rangers in Pittsburgh in Game 5, traveled with them to New York for Game 6 and back to Pittsburgh again in Game 7. It never presented itself in the Eastern Conference finals, but it was there at the Garden in Game 4 of the Final and would be with them the rest of the way. Up until Martinez carried the puck from the top of the circle in his own zone, through the neutral zone and passed it to Clifford just before the Rangers’ blue line, the Rangers had overcome finality five times in the last six weeks.

In each of those five instances, I went into the game knowing that it could be the last Rangers game of the season, but once the Rangers’ season and NHL season was put on the brink starting in Game 4 of the Final, I started to get nostalgic and look back at the 2013-14 season. The firing of John Tortorella. The hiring of Alain Vigneault. The disastrous West Coast trip to start to the season. The entire embarrassing month of October. The beginning of their climb back. The Henrik Lundqvist extension. The Stadium Series. The debate on what to do with Ryan Callahan. The Ryan Callahan trade. The Martin St. Louis era. The grind to get in the playoffs. The Flyers series. The Penguins series. The Canadiens series. And then the Stanley Cup Final.

I started to think about all the things that needed to happen for the Rangers to reach the Cup for the first time since I was in second grade. I started to think about the post-postseason summer and offseason and training camp and 82-game, seven-month regular-season schedule that would need to happen before the next time playoff hockey would be back. And that’s when I realized I lied.

I realized I had lied because while getting to the Cup is certainly an achievement (especially for a team that finished fifth in the East and didn’t know if they would even be in the playoffs just a couple weeks before the playoffs started and needed to win a first-round Game 7 and overcome a 3-1 series deficit in the second round) getting that far and not winning is crushing. You never know when, or if, your team is ever going to get back to that point (Hello, Toronto) and when you’re there, you need to make the most of it. I’m sure Rangers fans in June of 1994 didn’t think it would take 20 more Junes for the Rangers to reappear in the Final. For the four obstacles I just mentioned that the Rangers had to overcome, for the Kings to reach the Final, they had to overcome a 3-0 first-round series deficit and win three road Game 7s, which included overcoming a two-goal deficit in Game 7 of the Western Conference finals to knock off the defending champions in overtime. The parlay that has to be hit to reach the Stanley Cup Final makes my head hurt to think about and the parlay that has to be hit to win it is difficult to even fathom.

The Final only lasted five games, but it felt more like a seven-game series. It felt more seven-game-ish than the series against the Flyers and Penguins felt, but that’s likely because of what was at stake. And even though history will show that the Kings won the 2013-14 Stanley Cup Final 4-1, for those who watched it and those who were invested in at as either a Rangers or Kings fan will know it was much closer. And if it wasn’t for Dan Girardi, some posts, the Rangers’ inability to score on a breakaway and blown leads in Games 1, 2 and 5, the series could have been different and the Canyon of Heroes could have been used this June for something other than a place for all the suits who work in the area to walk to buy their $12 salads for lunch.

You always think your team can contend and win a championship even if you’re being optimistic and know winning the last game of the NHL season is unrealistic. Entering the 2013-14 season I was optimistic about the Rangers’ Cup chances and as the season carried on, the dream became more and more unrealistic and the 2013-14 Rangers looked like six of the eight Rangers team since the lockout: destined for a first- or second-round exit. Down the stretch of the regular season, I kept saying, “Just get in” and once they were in and the playoffs started, I became overly confident and optimistic again, believing that because of Henrik Lundqvist the team could make a run like many other average and above-average teams had done with elite goaltending.

The Rangers’ run was because of Henrik Lundqvist, who proved to the irrational critics of the world that he could carry a team to the Final, even if once he got there, it was his own team that eventually beat him. And it will be Henrik Lundqvist who is remembered for April, May and June 2014 and for bringing the Rangers back to a place they hadn’t been in so long and close to a place they now know they can get to.

I can’t wait to try to do it all again next season.

Blogs • Rangers • Rangers Playoffs

May 30, 2014

The Rangers’ Cup Run Doesn’t Feel Real

A year ago the Rangers were lost after an embarrassing postseason exit. Now they’re going to play for the Stanley Cup. What a difference a year makes.

When your team is facing finality and losing, the clock seems to tick away faster than normal as if the Hockey Gods set the periods to “5 minutes” EA Sports-style. And when your team has a chance at a fourth win in a series and a chance to advance, and in this case advance to the Stanley Cup Finals (I can’t say Final without hating myself) for the first time in 20 years, the clock seems to drag on as if time is standing still. On Thursday night, in the third period of Game 6 of the Eastern Conference finals, time stood still.

Twenty-two days ago, the Rangers faced a 3-1 series deficit to the Metropolitan Division-winning Penguins after losing three consecutive games, including two at home and two by way of shutout. The 2013-14 Rangers’ season was on the brink of destruction, (The Hockey News’ Ken Campbell said it was actually over), and the Rangers were headed to Pittsburgh for Game 5 where everyone expected a postgame handshake to take place. But the handshake didn’t take place. Well, it did eventually, just not that night. It took place six nights later following Game 7 in Pittsburgh where the Rangers held on to a one-goal lead for 32 minutes and four seconds just like they did on Thursday night in Game 6 against the Canadiens for 21 minutes and 53 seconds.

After earning the 1-seed in the Eastern Conference in 2011-12, the Rangers made it to the Eastern Conference finals for the first time since 1996-97, but they did so with a Freddy Garcia-esque smoke-and-mirrors act. The Rangers only won the regular season because of Henrik Lundqvist’s historical Vezina year and because of their amazing ability to come back and win games in the final minutes or minute or even second as well as in overtime and shootouts. They needed Games 7s in the first and second rounds to get past the 8-seeded Senators and 7-seeded Capitals to make it to the conference finals and once the the bounces stopped going their way, the Devils ended their season. The 2011-12 Rangers were never as good as their record suggested and they were never as deep as they were trick people into believing. That Rangers team was missing one player to move them over the top and that player was Rick Nash.

At the 2011-12 trade deadline I was willing to give up anything and everything to pry Nash from the Blue Jackets and that included Chris Kreider. I told WFAN’s Steve Somers my feelings about Nash and he disagreed, thinking that keeping an NCAA standout was better than making a move in a special season for a proven elite scorer. I told WFAN’s Brian Monzo my feelings about Nash and he disagreed too, but eventually came around to see that seasons like the Rangers’ 2011-12 one don’t happen to often and when they do, you need to be prepared to go all in. The Rangers weren’t. They waited and eventually landed Nash five months later in July, long after the Devils had eliminated them because they didn’t have another elite scoring option to turn to with Marian Gaborik playing through the playoffs with a torn labrum.

The Rangers needed all but one game to clinch a playoff berth in 2013-14 and then when they did make it, they needed to overcome a 2-0 series deficit to the Capitals and win another Game 7 against them to advance. They entered their conference semis series with the Bruins as the favorites and five games later they left as embarrassed losers wondering where the direction of the franchise was headed and if they would ever be anything more than a first- or second-round playoff team with Glen Sather at the helm. But it took that five-game loss to the Bruins for Sather to make the first of his two most significant moves in his 14 years with the Rangers.

It was a year ago Thursday, the day of Game 6, that Sather fired John Tortorella after he lost the team and inexplicably benched his supposed “good friend” for the final two games of the season. (I still believe Lundqvist told Sather he wouldn’t sign an extension with the team if Tortorella stayed.) On Thursday night while the Rangers were holding off the Canadiens and winning the Prince of Wales Trophy, I like to think that John Tortorella spent his night watching Game 6 at an Applebee’s in Massachusetts, where he was of course given a shot of Wild Turkey on the house after Dominic Moore’s goal and then given a few more when time ran out on the Canadiens’ season. And I would also like to think that Tortorella stumbled out of that Applebee’s with a stain from a disgusting low-grade meat rack of ribs on his shirt and into some minor league level strip club where he drowned his sorrows using money from the five-year deal Mike Gillis gave him in Vancouver.

From Tortorella’s firing, Sather hired Alain Vigneault, who was given what seemed like all the tools to win with the Canucks, but couldn’t, blowing a 2-0 series lead in the only Cup he reached in Vancouver. I was skeptical of the Vigneault hiring, wondering why the Rangers would want to immediately give a chance, and a five-year deal chance, to someone with Vigneault’s lackluster resume. And when the Rangers started the season 3-7-0 and were 20-20-2 on Jan. 3, I began to envy Vigneault knowing he would eventually be collecting checks from the Rangers while fishing or playing golf every day, laughing that he could get a five-year deal so quickly following the failures with the Canucks. But Vigneault stayed the course and stuck with his system as the Rangers slowly but surely adapted it and understood it and eventually the wins started to come the way they did for him in Vancouver. However it wasn’t until the most significant decision of Sather’s tenure as Rangers general manager when the season completely changed and that’s because the Rangers completely changed.

Ryan Callahan was never the face of the Rangers. He was a fan favorite in the way that any blue-collar player on any NHL team is beloved (kind of like the way Brandon Prust was in New York), but he was never the face of the team or the organization despite having the “C” on his jersey. If anything, he was the heart of the team, while Number 30 in net was (and has been and still is) the brain of the team.

When Callahan opened his negotiations with the Rangers last offseason by starting at eight years, $60 million, he traded himself. The Rangers were never going to pay a third-liner, first-line star money, even if they could afford it, but with Nash and Richards’ contracts and Lundqvist’s extension they couldn’t. Callahan wouldn’t compromise even as Sather’s offer stupidly rose and he came dangerously close to destroying the Rangers’ cap for the rest of Lundqvist’s career, so Sather traded him for Martin St. Louis. And with that trade, Sather transformed a team with a strictly blue-collar image into a team that could play a finesse style as well as play the defense-first, shot-blocking style the Rangers played since the Jaromir Jagr era ended six years ago.

Since the end of that era, while the team changed, the roster turned over, the coaches changed and changed again and changed again and Sather continued to pour money into aging veterans who couldn’t score and kept trying to build a young defensive core that couldn’t defend, Henrik Lunqvist remained the same. He showed up every game and stood on his head for most, single-handedly carried the team to the playoffs and gave the Rangers hope and promise that maybe someday he would be given the right team around him to play for the Cup, so he wouldn’t have a career that reminiscent of Don Mattingly’s.

I always worried that the Rangers would waste Lundqvist’s prime by making the wrong personnel decisions and believed it would happen after they didn’t trade for Nash at the 2011-12 deadline and let that season and the conference finals get away from them. I thought Lundqvist would be an old man and a shell of himself by the time the Rangers had the depth and secondary scoring and legitimate defense to win games without needing him to give up one goal or less.

I thought this team could be the team that could accompany Lundqvist to the promised land, but I didn’t believe it. And 22 days ago I started to wonder what Lundqvist must think knowing that Marc-Andre Fleury has won the Cup and played for it twice or that Corey Crawford’s name is etched into it. I envisioned Lundqvist one day giving a speech on “Henrik Lundqvist Night” at the Garden and his achievements and accolades being announced by Sam Rosen with his Number 30 being raised and the rafters to sit alongside Mike Richter’s Number 35 forever without ever having had the chance to play for the Cup.

The way Game 6 ended felt right. The 1-0 win has become the textbook example of postseason success for the Rangers in the Henrik Lundqvist era where the team has asked him to stand on his head and protect one goal, so it was fitting that it was a 1-0 win that puts them in the Stanley Cup Finals. Lundqvist didn’t necessarily have to stand on his head the way he has in every other 1-0 win for this team, but he made the big save when he had to in the 18-shot shutout and he was given a lead entering the third period, asked to close it out and he did.

Over the last 22 days, Lundqvist has been himself. He’s been the same goalie he’s been his entire career even though people want to make this nine-game run out to be something more than it has been from the King. These are the same people who believe he has to win it all to prove himself in a sport with a 20-player roster in which he can’t provide offense or play defense as if he’s somehow playing golf or tennis. Now Lundqvist has a chance to end this ridiculous reasoning and end the unfair criticism forever. He has a chance to play for the Cup.

The Rangers are going to play for the Stanley Cup for the first time since I was in second grade. Right now it doesn’t feel real, but on Wednesday it will.

Podcasts • Rangers • Rangers Playoffs

May 2, 2014

Podcast: Kevin DeLury

Kevin DeLury of The New York Rangers Blog joins me to talk about the Rangers’ matchup with the Penguins and what will happen to Rick Nash if he continues to go scoreless in the playoffs.

It’s never easy when it comes to the Rangers and once again they needed seven games to get by their first-round opponent, but at least they got by the Flyers. Now things get a little harder with the Rangers going to Pittsburgh to start their conference semifinals series with the Penguins after just one day off with the two teams set to play three games over the next four days.

Kevin DeLury of The New York Rangers Blog joined me to talk about the Rangers’ matchup with the Penguins, what will happen to Rick Nash if he continues to go scoreless in the playoffs and how Daniel Carcillo should be in the lineup for the entire postseason.

Podcasts • Rangers Playoffs

Apr 18, 2014

Podcast: Brian Monzo

Brian Monzo of WFAN joins me to talk about the Rangers’ Game 1 win over the Flyers and how the Rangers’ postseason nerves have disappeared without John Tortorella.

The hype and anticipation of the playoffs was erased 7:28 into Game 1 when the Flyers took 1-0 lead and the sense of impending doom came over me. Playoff deficits have never been easy for the Rangers to overcome, let alone early deficits, but this Rangers team under Alain Vigneault proved that these aren’t the Rangers of old.

WFAN Mike’s On: Francesa on the FAN producer Brian Monzo joined me to talk about the Rangers’ Game 1 win over the Flyers, the chemistry of the Rick Nash-Derek Stepan-Martin St. Louis line and the power play and how the team’s postseason nerves have disappeared without John Tortorella.

Podcasts • Rangers

Apr 3, 2014

Podcast: Brian Monzo

Brian Monzo of WFAN joins me to talk about how Martin St. Louis has impacted the Rangers in a way Ryan Callahan never could and whether Alex Burrows’ hit on Ryan McDonagh was dirty and deserving of a suspension.

Since the 2004-05 lockout, it’s taken an average of 92.3 points to make the playoffs in the Eastern Conference. I looked that up and did some math to come up with that number back on March 17 when the Rangers were 36-29-4 and coming off a devastating 1-0 home loss to the Sharks. The Rangers had 13 games left in the season and were going to need to win at least eight of them to have a chance at the playoffs. I was skeptical and wasn’t sure if I would get to watch playoff hockey this year or have to hate-watch playoff hockey this year. But since March 17, the Rangers have gone 7-1-0 and have 90 points, and if the math holds true, they need to win just one of their last five games to make the playoffs. So in honor of the Rangers’ recent run, I decided to do a podcast with person who told me with 13 games left that an 11-2-0 run wasn’t out of the question.

WFAN Mike’s On: Francesa on the FAN producer Brian Monzo joined me to talk about how Martin St. Louis has impacted the Rangers in a way Ryan Callahan never could, whether Alex Burrows’ hit on Ryan McDonagh was dirty and deserving of a suspension and if the Rangers can compete with the Bruins and Penguins in the playoffs.

Podcasts • Rangers

Mar 11, 2014

Podcast: 610 Barstool Sports New York

610 of Barstool Sports New York joins me to talk about if the Rangers are better now than they were before the trade deadline and how Ryan Callahan didn’t think the Rangers would call his bluff and actually trade him.

A week ago, Ryan Callahan was the captain of the Rangers and trying to work out a deal to make him a career Ranger. Now the Rangers are without a captain, Callahan is playing for the Tampa Bay Lightning and we are four games into the Martin St. Louis era in New York.

610 of Barstool Sports New York joined me to talk about if the Rangers are better now than they were before the trade deadline, how Ryan Callahan didn’t think the Rangers would call his bluff and actually trade him and if Brad Richards can avoid a buyout now that his old teammate is his new linemate.

Blogs • Rangers

Dec 4, 2013

The Henrik Lundqvist Extension

Glen Sather made the one move he’s absolutely had to make as Rangers general manager: extend Henrik Lundqvist.

Here were my reactions in order after hearing Alain Vigneault was going to bench Henrik Lundqvist in favor of Cam Talbot.

1. (Laughter)

2. What?

3. Is this real life?

4. Are you effing nuts, AV?

Henrik Lundqvist has been the sole reason for any Rangers success in the post-lockout era with maybe the exception of his rookie season in 2005-06. Then again, the Rangers’ success that season was going to be defined by just making the playoffs for the first time in forever (or nine years) and that’s why their five-game, first-round loss to the Devils wasn’t viewed as much of a disappointment. The face of the franchise, the backbone of the organization and the one man responsible for the Rangers’ postseason drought not running into its 17th year was going to be benched for a 26-year-old rookie with seven career starts? Oh …

Benching Lundqvist wasn’t going to go over well with Lundqvist (even if he pretended like he was fine with the decision) and it wasn’t going to go over well with a fan base wondering why a first-year Rangers head coach would decide to shake things up like Coach Orion taking over for Gordon Bombay. The only way for the controversy to end would be if the Rangers were to lose when Talbot started in place of Lundqvist. So in order for everything to be righted, the Rangers would need to give up two valuable points. And that’s what happened.

But let’s live in an “if” world for a minute. What if the Rangers had won against the Jets on Monday night? Talbot would have to start in Buffalo on Thursday after winning back-to-back games as the now No. 1 goalie, which would then turn a seemingly harmless one-game break for Lundqvist in an Olympic-condensed season into a full-blown controversy. A win over the Jets would have forced the Vigneault-created crisis to take on a life of its own. What would be made of AV’s inability to manage goalies after the Roberto Luongo-Cory Schneider disaster in Vancouver? What would become of Lundqvist if Talbot were to win again in Buffalo on Thursday and consistently win? What would happen with the relationship of the new head coach and the face of the franchise? What would this do for Lundqvist’s impending free agency? Most importantly, what would become of Lundqvist’s contract negotiations and extension?

Luckily, none of that matters now and not because the Rangers lost to the Jets in their quest to never separate themselves more than one game over the .500 mark. It doesn’t matter now because Glen Sather did the one general managerial he absolutely had to do since becoming Rangers general manager in 2000: extend Henrik Lundqvist.

Lundqvist will be a Ranger next year. After signing a seven-year extension, he will be a Ranger for the next seven years. He will be a Ranger for his entire career (well, unless he is looking for some money when he’s 38 and the Rangers aren’t willing to give it to him, but that’s something we can worry about for the 2020-21 season).

A lot of people are unhappy with the years and dollars committed to the 31-year-old and the belief of paying him for what he has done over the last seven years and not what he will do over the next seven years. But it was going to take the Rangers giving Lundqvist a seventh year and it was going to take at least $8 million per season to keep him in New York with the free-agent market waiting and teams with better futures and more realistic Cup-winning chances ready to break the bank. So if you wanted Lundqvist to retire as a Ranger and one day watch him raise his Number 30 in MSG then that means you were fine with what it wound up costing. And if you wanted Lundqvist to stay, but at a lesser price, then you never really wanted him to stay or at least were fine with him leaving.

Sure, there’s a very good chance and pretty much a certainty that the 37- and 38-year-old Lundqvist won’t be posting the 1.97 GAA that the 29-year-old Lundqvist did or the 11 shutouts that the 28-year-old Lundqvist did. But right now this Rangers team (and by “this Rangers team” I mean the 2014-15, 2016-17, and so on teams because he is already on and under contract with the current Rangers team) needs Lundqvist. They can’t worry about what his level of play will be like in 2019-20 and 2020-21. This June it will be 20 years since the Rangers won the Stanley Cup and without Lundqvist the chances of that drought ending in the near future weren’t going to improve. In the spirit of Christmas, let’s borrow the Ghost of Rangers past to show how every post-Cup Rangers season has ended.

1994-95: Lost second round
1995-96: Lost second round
1996-97: Lost conference finals
1997-98: Missed playoffs
1998-99: Missed playoffs
1999-00: Missed playoffs
2000-01: Missed playoffs
2001-02: Missed playoffs
2002-03: Missed playoffs
2003-04: Missed playoffs
2005-06: Lost first round
2006-07: Lost second round
2007-08: Lost second round
2008-09: Lost first round
2009-10: Missed playoffs
2010-11: Lost first round
2011-12: Lost conference finals
2012-13: Lost second round

Still worried about and want to complain about having a 36-, 37- and 38-year-old Lundqvist? Does anyone really want to complain about having the best goalie in the world in 2014-15 because of what he might be in five-plus years?

The biggest knock on Lundqvist during his career has been his “inability” to lead the Rangers to the Cup or even the Stanley Cup Final, which is a comical knock since one person isn’t going to lead any team to the Cup by single-handedly winning four seven-game series against only the best teams in the league. Once the 83rd game of the season starts everyone seems to forget that Lundqvist is actually the one mostly responsible for getting the Rangers to that 83rd game and the “What have you done for me lately?” crowd takes over. The same crowd that booed Marian Gaborik because he didn’t want to use 40-goal scoring body as a shot-blocking pylon for John Tortorella and muck it up in the corners like a fourth-line grinder. The same crowd that jumps on their seat and causes chaos in the aisles over free T-shirts during TV timeouts. But here’s something that crowd probably doesn’t know or doesn’t care enough to know.

The Rangers have reached the postseason in four of the last five years. In that time, they are 19-25 in the playoffs, which means Lundqvist is 19-25 in the playoffs over that time. In those 25 playoff losses, the Rangers have scored 36 goals or 1.44 goals per game. Here is the breakdown by goals scored in the losses and how many times they scored each amount of goals:

0 goals: 5
1 goal: 9
2 goals: 8
3 goals: 3
4 or more goals: 0

That’s 14 playoff losses when the Rangers couldn’t score more than one goal and 22 when they couldn’t score more than two.

No, Lundqvist’s career will never be complete without winning it all. He knows that. That’s why the thought of going to the open market and a better place caused these negotiations to drag on through the first two-plus months of the season. He knows that when it comes time to raise his Number 30 that if it he must do so without his name on the Cup, it will as empty as buying a brand new house, but being unable to furnish it.

The Rangers and their fans need new memories. The 1993-94 season was two decades ago and the team, the Garden and the MSG Network have exhausted every possible perspective to recapture and remember the Cup run. The first step in trying to create those memories has always been locking up Henrik Lundqvist.

Blogs • Rangers

Oct 11, 2013

The Rangers’ West Coast Embarrassment Tour

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

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

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

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

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

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

On if there are any signs of improvement.

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

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

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

On whether the team has no confidence.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

On his theory for the struggles.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Blogs • Email Exchanges • Rangers

Oct 3, 2013

The Alain Vigneault Era Begins

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

What are we to make of Kreider?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Tag: John Tortorella