fbpx

Tag: Steven Stamkos

PodcastsRangers

Podcast: Brian Monzo

The Rangers’ season came to a devastating end in Game 7 of the Eastern Conference finals and now it’s time to look back at the season and ahead to next season.

New York Rangers vs. Tampa Bay Lightning

It’s been nearly a week since the Rangers’ season ended with a Game 7 loss in the Eastern Conference finals and the finality of the Presidents’ Trophy-winning season is still devastating. Game 1 of the Stanley Cup Final was on Wednesday night and to catch a glimpse of a Rangers-less Final only made the young offseason that much more depressing.

WFAN Mike’s On: Francesa on the FAN producer Brian Monzo joined me to talk about the 2014-15 Rangers, what went wrong in Game 7 against the Lightning, how the Rangers can get over the hump and win the Stanley Cup and what moves the team should make this offseason.

Read More

PodcastsRangers

Podcast: 610 Barstool Sports New York

The Rangers have become familiar with Game 7 and now they will play one for a chance to go back to the Stanley Cup Final for a second straight year.

New York Rangers vs. Tampa Bay Lightning

Another Game 7. Sixteen days after winning a Game 7 against the Capitals, the Rangers are back in the same spot: Game 7 at Madison Square Garden. The difference is this time it’s for a trip to the Stanley Cup Final and a chance to finish the job they started last year.

610 of Barstool Sports New York joined me to talk about what the confidence level should be for Rangers fans for Game 7, how coaching and experience will factor into the game and if anything other than winning the Stanley Cup means the season is a disappointment.

Read More

PodcastsRangers

Podcast: Adam Herman

The Rangers have never lost a Game 7 at Madison Square Garden in the team’s history and that trend will need to continue against the Lightning.

New York Rangers vs. Tampa Bay Lightning

The Rangers are one win away from returning to the Stanley Cup Final for the second straight year and that win will have to come in Game 7 of the Eastern Conference finals against the Lightning. The Rangers have been unpredictable so far in this series and haven’t played their best at home, but they have also never lost a Game 7 at the Garden in the team’s history.

Adam Herman of Blueshirt Banter joined me to talk about Game 7 of the Eastern Conference finals, the unpredictable efforts from the Rangers in the series, the lazy rhetoric about Henrik Lundqvist needing to win the Cup and Rick Nash’s postseason performance.

Read More

BlogsEmail ExchangesRangers

Rangers-Lightning Features Familiar Foes

The Rangers will not only face the Lightning in the Eastern Conference finals, but they will also face a group of former Rangers looking to end their former team’s season.

Ryan Callahan and Martin St. Louis

After the Rangers’ Game 7 win over the Capitals, I was ready for the Eastern Conference finals to start right after the handshake line. I didn’t think I would sleep between Wednesday night’s Game 7 and Saturday afternoon’s Game 1 and wanted the next round to start immediately. Thankfully, there’s just a two-day layoff between series and the Rangers can keep their momentous run alive.

With the Rangers and Lightning meeting in the Eastern Conference finals, John Fontana of Raw Charge joined me to talk about the Ryan Callahan-Martin St. Louis trade, former Rangers Brian Boyle and Anton Stralman playing for the Lightning and what to expect in the series.

Keefe: The Ryan Callahan-Martin St. Louis trade last season was the biggest non-Stanley Cup Final storyline of the 2013-14 Rangers’ season. The Rangers traded their 28-year-old captain for a 38-year-old former MVP because Callahan and his agent overpriced himself out of New York and because St. Louis wanted out of Tampa Bay and wanted to be close to his Greenwich, Conn. home.

So many Rangers fans were devastated that the homegrown Callahan was leaving and it seemed like fans were split 50/50 on liking and not liking the trade. I loved the trade for the Rangers and thought it was necessary.

Callahan had started negotiations with the Rangers at eight years, $60 million, overvaluing himself and overvaluing the “C” on his jersey as a player who had never scored 30 goals in a season. I didn’t get why Rangers were upset at all once he left because it was his choice to leave. He wasn’t willing to compromise with the Rangers and even as Glen Sather stupidly came closer and closer to Callahan’s demands, it wasn’t enough for the secondary scoring option. Ryan Callahan could still be a Ranger if he wanted to be and no one should feel bad for him.

What are your feelings about Callahan after watching him play 97 regular-season games and 16 postseason games for the Lightning?

Fontana: Before we begin, that’s a painful trade in Lightning history because of what was going on with the face of the franchise. Martin St. Louis didn’t like the changing scene in Tampa.

Let’s be fair here; Slats gave up on negotiations with how many months before free agency started? And the contract Callahan agreed to from the Lightning was something like a few hundred thousand dollars less than Sather’s last offer in New York. While the numbers you presented are certainly too much for Cally, there is the “C” and status with the club that propped him up on a negotiating angle.

At the same time, he’s still getting what comes off as more than he should for his toolsy, responsible game. He’s been playing first line wing with Steven Stamkos centering him and he’s put up a career high in points this season. While I like his game, his locker room presence and what he he’s doing on ice, the contract is still waaaay big. Fans down here in general like him too.

Keefe: On the other end of the trade, the Rangers acquired the captain and face of the Lightning in St. Louis, who was instrumental in helping the Rangers reach the Cup Final for the first time since 1993-94. With Callahan and without St. Louis, the Rangers don’t win the East last year.

For you, I can’t imagine what it was like to have a 13-year-old Lightning, captain and face of the franchise demand to be traded and then be traded to his place of choice at the deadline with the team in the middle of a playoff run.

What was it like to see St. Louis traded? Is is still weird to see him play for another team?

Fontana: There’s a lot to be said here. As a fan alone I reflect on that as the end of an era with this team. As a blogger and a blog manager there’s another degree with what went down with Marty that fans (Rangers or Lightning fans) wouldn’t necessarily think of — having to cover it, talk about it, write about it, try to understand it and more than a year later it still isn’t settled because the reasons keep being twisted for why he wanted out.

I could link to articles I’ve written since February 2014 through Thursday, May 14 that touch on this. It’s a sore spot. Marty’s handling it from start to finish has made it worse to have to reflect on and not just put to rest. This, having to come back to it all, is the downside of the entire series. While I expect New York fans to react warmly to Callahan’s return to Madison Square Garden (or Brian Boyle, or Anton Stralman), Marty is going to see a mixed reaction. We have such good memories of the man and how things transpired to end it all (and some spoken words by him since leaving) defile them a bit; we don’t want to remember St. Louis just because of the trade request and how it played out.

Some fans have moved past him and care more about Cally’s status for Game 1 and the series in general compared to having to deal with Marty again. Others, like me, have feelings renewed: Anger, disappointment, and surprise.

Keefe: Every season there is a target of mine in columns, podcasts and on Twitter and for nearly his entire Rangers tenure, Brian Boyle was that guy. I never understood the fans who liked Boyle as a former first-round pick whose career became as a fourth-line role player and when the Rangers didn’t re-sign him last offseason I was ecstatic. Now had I known that the Rangers were going to waste money on Tanner Glass, I would have gladly had Boyle back, but oh well.

Boyle recorded his second-highest goal total of his career with 15 in a full 82-game season for the Lightning and has chipped in with one this postseason. A lot of Rangers fans have forgotten about his weaknesses as a player now that he is in Tampa Bay and just see him helping out a team that has reached the Eastern Conference finals.

What are your thoughts on Boyle?

Fontana: Boyle’s been able to fit in just about anywhere he’s been asked. He has seen a lot of time on the fourth line but how Tampa Bay approaches fourth-liners isn’t the traditional grind-grind-grind limited, physical aspect. He’s been a standard-bearer on the penalty kill which Ranger fansx should be aware of. But his presence has been elsewhere too — he’s done third-line center time, he’s layed on the wing. He’s played on the power play as the guy near the crease. He’s not an offensive force, but he’s a presence.

Keefe: Aside from not wanting Boyle back last offseason, I also didn’t want Benoit Pouliot back and Edmonton signed him and I didn’t want Stralman back because I thought it would take overpaying for him to get him back. That one I wish I could take back.

After looking nothing like an NHL defenseman for long stretches with the Rangers and forcing fans to call for Raphael Diaz to be inserted into the lineup over him frequently last season, Stralman has come into his own with the Lightning and finally reverted back to being more of an offensive defenseman.

How has Stralman fit in with the Lightning?

Fontana: To keep this one short and direct: Norris Trophy candidate worthy to the point I don’t understand one iota why he wasn’t even offered a contract by the Rangers. He’s been in the lineup while hurt and still was the solid guy on the back end. He’s stabilized and improved everyone he’s played with.

No, he’s not a Norris finalist in 2015, but he’s been an unspoken MVP on the Tampa Bay roster.

Keefe: Dan Boyle was a highly-coveted free agent and took less money to be a Ranger. The former star and Lightning defenseman was supposed to provide consistent offense to the Rangers’ defense and captain what has been an embarrassing power play. But in the first year of his two-year deal with the Rangers, Boyle has been a liability in his own zone and hasn’t done much to help the Rangers’ power play. I guess I just need to accept that the Rangers’ power play will never be good.

Like St. Louis, what’s it like to now have to root against Boyle?

Fontana: Dan Boyle’s departure from Tampa Bay isn’t comparable to how things went down with Marty. Of course it’s also been seven seasons ince the one of the worst trades in franchise history went down and Boyle (who had been freshly re-signed  before the 2008 trade deadline) was forced out by one of the egomaniac new owners of the Lightning — a former teammate of Boyle’s, Len Barrie.

Time and distance have literally and figuratively passed (he was in San Jose, so he didn’t haunt us. Long time fans like myself like the guy, respect him and all that. But we’re used to him as an opponent.

Keefe: This series scares me more than those two series because the Lightning are nothing like the Rangers and don’t experience the offensive slumps the Rangers do. The Lightning won all there games against the Rangers in the regular season, but those games came very early in the season before the Rangers are the team they are now and the team they became in the second week of December.

Losing this series will not only be devastating because it will mean the Rangers fell short of getting back to the Final and winning the Cup, but it will mean Callahan, Boyle and Stralman will be playing in the Final with a chance to win the Cup.

Henrik Lundqvist has the ability to be the difference in this series the way he was against the Penguins and the way he was in Games 5, 6 and 7 against the Capitals in the Rangers’ comeback and I will never not believe in the King.

I predicted the Rangers to beat the Penguins in six and the Capitals in six. I was wrong both times, but the actual result worked out both times, so let’s make it a three-peat. Rangers over Lightning in six.

What’s your prediction?

Fontana: I have a belief that I’ve tried to restate when and where I can that I don’t believe the season means a thing at this point. What’s done is done. Way to go Lightning, rah-rah-rah King Henrik, etc.

Over, done with, moot. What Tampa Bay did against the Rangers in November, what they’ve done against Detroit and Montreal have no bearing on the Rangers. What the Rags did against Pittsburgh and against the Capitals are in the past (and the Presidents’ Trophy amounts to a scheduling object).  We know what our teams are capable of when they’re playing their A-game. We know how ugly or painful it can be when they just show up to the gunfight with knives instead.

That being said, youth is on Tampa Bay’s side as is speed. They’re more than capable on the penalty kill but have struggled during the season and playoffs on the power play (though the Montreal penalty kill helped rectify that a bit during the second round).

The Lightning are capable of winning the one-goal games, they’re also capable of offensive showings. Do the Rangers have the endurance to keep up with the speed? We’ve also (both teams) known Carey Price was a beast this season and the Lightning put him into a different kind of place — the L column. Henrik Lundqvist is looked upon league-wide as a force and a great character, but will he (and the team around him) solve the Lightning where Price, or Petr Mzarek (and the Detroit Red Wings) couldn’t?

I don’t think this series goes seven games, that much I’m certain of. The winner is something I’m waiting to see for myself.

Read More

BlogsTeam USA

Team USA-Canada Thoughts: Goodbye, Gold Medal

Team USA was dominated by Canada in the semifinals and the chance to end the goal-medal drought will have to wait another four years.

Friday could have been memorable. Team USA could have beaten Canada. They could have played for the gold medal for the second time in as many Olympics and the third time in the last four. They could have forced Canada to play for the bronze medal on Saturday morning. They could have proven that USA Hockey is on the same level as Hockey Canada. They could have been one win closer to winning gold for the first time since 1980.

But Friday wasn’t memorable. At least not in a good way. Jonathan Quick was the only member of Team USA to show up and we’re lucky he did. Or maybe we’re not since all Quick’s performance did was prevent Americans from changing the channel as they watched the clock slowly tick away on their gold medal dreams. Without Quick, every American could have gone back to work earlier or saved their bank account from an excessive early-afternoon or bar tab or flipped over to watch King of Queens or Everybody Loves Raymond reruns rather than monitor the clock in the final minutes and seconds of the semifinal game, hoping Team USA had another last-minute Zach Parise goal from 2010 in their back pocket.

The Team USA we saw on Thursday wasn’t the team we saw the previous four games and that’s Dan Bylsma’s fault. Throughout the game, the team made no adjustments to create offense as the clock slowly wound down on their goal-medal campaign. Aside from Patrick Kane giving us a few “Ohhhh!” and “Ahhhh!” moments (and those were mostly exaggerated “Ohhhh!” and “Ahhhh!” moments since we were looking for something, anything to be excited about) Team USA never really came close to putting the puck in the net. The worst kind of hockey fans are those that get overly excited and get out of their seat for any 3-on-2 or for their team simply carrying the puck over the opposing blue since it’s unlikely either of those things will result in a goal, but I found myself getting worked up whenever Team USA was able to just gain possession on the other side of the red.

It’s hard to win when you don’t score and despite recording 31 shots (though I’m still unsure of where about 20 of those came from), you can count the true Team USA scoring chances on one hand and you could still count them if that one hand had only three fingers. Team USA never challenged Carey Price and never made a goalie who wouldn’t cross my mind in picking to start for me in a game for everything work for his eventual shutout. Canada dominated the entire game and again, if it weren’t for Quick, what was a 1-0 game would have easily been 5-0 or 6-0 or worse. Quick played like the former Conn Smythe he is and the Olympic MVP he could have been had Team USA won the game.

Despite the result, it’s hard to think that this Team USA was only one goal worse than this Team Canada. Canada was missing it’s second- and third- best players (Steven Stamkos and Jonathan Tavares) and they still won and they are still playing for the goal medal. It’s hard to think about what the result of the game would have been if Canada had Stamkos and Tavares in the lineup or if Quick had only been amazing and not unbelievable. If Patrick Kane is Team USA’s best player, where would this team be without Phil Kessel and Zach Parise (or whoever you think are Team USA’s best two players after Kane)? But this game doesn’t mean that USA Hockey has lost a step in its pursuit of Hockey Canada over the last four years. It’s just that this Team USA wasn’t as good as this Team Canada.

After waiting four years thinking that this would be the time to end the drought, it’s all over. Sure, Team USA plays again on Saturday morning against Finland for the bronze medal, but who cares? Anything other than gold was going to be a disappointment after the way the 2010 Games ended in overtime in Vancouver. Making the gold-medal game wasn’t going to be enough. Only winning gold was.

Read More