Another game, another loss. Please don't tell me this is how the home stand is going to unfold.
* For the first 10-or-so minutes of this game, the Rangers were flying. They were go-go-going in the manner we envisioned Torts pushing them to go. They won battles, put pressure on, kept the puck in Washington's zone. As wonderful as it was to see, it was just as evident that it was so rare to see from this team as of late.
* At the Garden tonight they showed a really great clip montage of vintage Rangers clips meshed with current Rangers clips. Whoever thought of that - very good idea. You could tell many fans at the Garden were watching and saying, hmm, this is new, this is cool.
* In the 2nd period, the Rangers normal "nap" period, they actually pressed the puck. I'd guess they had no less than 6 takeaways. Which is something I hadn't noticed before, so I'm going to go with - this is something they don't normally do. Getting to those loose puck battles, standing up and taking the puck away from someone on the Capitals unexpectedly.
* Gaborik has a special something. It should have - and was - evident in every single game so far, it would seem, but yet tonight, with his two goals, it was incredibly obvious. If you are a goalie, you almost can't see his shot. He's that quick. But my favorite thing about Gaborik, a quarter into the season, is the way he is able to pick up a puck. A puck is coming to him, and he has one hand on the stick to pick it up, without any bit of effort, and he slides so easily into his motion of - making a play, a pass, a shot. The way he appears to be barely holding on to the hockey stick, and yet he can make such fluid motions. It's really something. It really is.
* Such a disappointing loss tonight. Really. You have your guy - let's face it, your ONLY guy, score two goals, to keep you in a game that perhaps, you shouldn't have been in, and you manage to lose the tie with less than five minutes to go. Very depressing. They didn't play badly, but they didn't play well enough to win.
The Rangers have three days off before Florida comes to the Garden on Saturday. We'll see how they rebound. I don't even know what to expect to expect.
Showing posts with label Washington Capitals. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Washington Capitals. Show all posts
Wednesday, November 18, 2009
Sunday, April 26, 2009
Where To Go From Here. . .?
I apologize for the lack of posting this weekend. (You can see the comment thread in the last post; I think that sums it up pretty nicely). With that said, here we go...
I picked the Capitals to win the series in six because I did not think the Rangers, minus Hank and a few exceptions, had the determination, skill, where-with-all, or any combination of those three, to get it done when it counted. I said they were a team that spent almost all season struggling to score and struggling on the powerplay and that I didn't believe that would change in the playoffs. I thought Washington was vulnerable, really, on goaltending only, and that they were loaded with too much fire power for the Rangers to contend with.
Fast forward two games into the series. The Rangers have not played spectacular by any means, but they have won - on the road - the first two games and hold a 2-0 lead coming back to New York. Ovechin and the big guns have not scored a ton of goals, in fact, they've scored none. The series had already taken a baffling turn.
I predicted/alluded/pondered how a Game 3 goalie decision from Washington would make or break their playoff season. Not because Theodore could not have come back in and rebounded, not because the Capitals could not have woken up and therefore made their own goalie a non-factor in the series, but because I believe in momentum. Boudreau made the right call, for his team, in my mind, and stuck with Varlamov. The young 20-year old shutout a non-existent Ranger offense.
Game 4 provided the long awaited and anticipated collapse of Sean Avery. And let me get this straight right off the bat. I've defended and stood by Sean Avery, believed he is a legitimate hockey player and can be an effective contibutor to this league. I've said it over, and over, and over again and I still believe it. Game 4 provided a collapse. I have not seen him, until this year, collapse into undiscplined and unacceptable play. (Remember, I was not a fan or an observer of him in LA or Detroit). This was my first foray into the potentially desctructive Sean Avery. And yet - AND YET - Sean Avery, still, to me, is anything but - destructive. Others have alluded to it, so I am saying nothing new, but I feel that Avery was put in a corner here. He came back to the league and immediately - game one - was called for a marginal penalty. It continued. It was allowed to continue. Avery was attacked without punishment, without any thought or consideration for the desire and want for a fair and even playing field. And he finally snapped. I can't agree with what he did. While I feel two of his four penalties in game 3 were of the this-is-crap variety, I know that the two he took in game four were undisciplined and unacceptable. And you cannot have that happen, no matter how many liberties have been taken on you. The fact that those liberties were allowed to be taken, over and over and over - that is a bigger disgrace than anything Sean Avery has ever done. And that disgusts me. And that is one of the growing numbers of reasons why this league, at present, cannot be taken seriously.
In game 5, John Tortorella was faced with a decision - bench Avery or trust that he will stand back and behave? He benched Avery. A decision I do not agree with and I do not think anyone did agree with - well, out of the fans of New York or the Avery supporters that is. I'm sure many were calling for his head and I know many would like nothing better than to see him out of the league forever. I cannot, cannot for the life of me, think of a way to express just how hypocritical and horrible that attitude is, so I will leave it at the fact that I do not agree with them and I do not agree with Tortorella's decision. He left an important game - but not a decisive game - in the hands of a lifeless and withdrawn group of half-players, the same group I've tried hard to wrap my head, let alone my heart, around all season. I saw enough to know I had seen too much. There was no way, no way!, they were winning that game. Think what you want. The message had been sent, and it was the wrong message. Avery's mistakes, his penalties, his errors in judgement were just that, but they did not and have not cost the Rangers a game. The Rangers won on Wednesday by playing together in spite of the rest of it. That was their "big picture." On Friday, without their spirits, spark, enthusiasm, and the guy who you can't argue wants to Be a Ranger!, the team fell, lifeless and undisciplined to the embarrassing end. The decison wasn't really to play him or not to play him. It was whether or not to trust that a team with Avery stood a better chance than a team without Avery.
And Tortorella made the wrong decision.
At that moment, or in the moments following, the series became a circus, if it was not already one. Given a suspension for an altercation with a fan, Tortorella was benched for game 6. I, being at the viewing party, did not hear commentary on this instance, and did not see it for what it was. I found everything out on Saturday. At which point, I shook my head, watched the Flyers/Penguins game, and tried to forget about everything Rangers. Not to be dramatic, but it seemed like just a bad dream I wanted to wake up from, and just one more bad moment in a season of bad moments.
Avery came back for Game 6, and Jim Schoenfeld took the bench. I questioned before the game, during the game, and am still questioning now, hours after the game, whether or not it was too little, too late.
Will Tortorella benching Avery cost the Rangers the series?
Or will the same problems that haunted the Rangers all season cost the Rangers the series?
I don't know. We won't ever know. Heck, the series isn't even over yet, so none of us, any of us, will know anything until Tuesday night.
But did it have to come to this? A game seven? I think of how shocked and in awe I was with the Rangers coming back to the Garden up 2-0. And I watched how the field evened a little, but how the Rangers til held a big enough lead to have not just one, but two, and consequently, three, chances to close out the series. And I said, I'd take it, sure. Who coming into this series would have thought the Rangers would have been up, and would even have a chance. I didn't. Again, I didn't for the reasons I mentioned in the start of this, what I am sure at this moment is a very long, blog entry. But...I started somewhere to believe they could do it. I really did. And that feeling I had was crushed on Friday night.
And those questions I have about what has caused this potential demise - well, they'll never be answered. How can you know what caused the game 5 defeat? How can you know whether or not they would have won had they had Avery in the lineup?
I hate that I'll never know the answer. But I hate even more that it is a question at all.
**Side notes: I am reading the blog entries - Ranger Rants, Blue Notes, Rangers Report and hearing all this stuff. My thoughts are as follows:
If Shaone Morrisonn did in fact bite Brandon Dubinsky, I find that loathsome. I cannot believe that this series, this series I thought the Capitals would dominate on talent and skill alone, has come to this. I can't even believe what I am hearing and reading.
Donald Brashear's non-called penalty on Blair Betts was equally loathsome. He got hit by Callahan and turned and attacked the first guy he saw. My mind screamed Simon/Hollweg. I watched Betts crumple to the ice, and I realized, again , what a big joke this league appears to be at times. At moments like this where guys that run their mouths are punished and guys that legitimately do things so potentially hurtful get nothing but a slap on the wrist and free reign to go do it again and again. I don't like that part of the game that I love.
I hate that this and Tortorella's incident with the fans in game five - that thos are the things I will think of when the series is over - no matter who does indeed win. Not Ovechkin's game one effort sans goal. Not Simeon Varlamov's rookie initiation. Not Hank's dominance to keep this team in the series. Unfortunately it wil be about bottle throwing, name calling, head shots and biting. Seriously, read that last sentence and tell me it doesn't remind you of wrestling for tv entertainment.
Lastly, Jim Schoenfeld, a guy I really do like for his spunk and his honesty, said something I think deserves repeating, whether looking at this series or at this season and a quote I will undoubtably use when the season has come to its final end for New York - either Tuesday night or, hopefully, weeks down the line. He said:
“Big offensive guys have not gotten it going,” said Schoenfeld, without naming names, but the list could include Nik Zherdev, Nik Antropov and Markus Nalsund, with three shots between them. “What happens is part of their job falls on someone else, kid s like Callahan, Dubinsky, Staal and Girardi. There’s so much we have to do defensively because the other guys aren’t doing their job offensively.”
This, from day one, has been the story of this team. It is just interesting, baffling, and amusing, that it took the guy doing the press conference only because he was replacing the head coach (the 2nd head coach) of the season to finally say what we all have been feeling all along. We will never know what this team was capable of, because we have rarely if ever seen the full sum of the parts. We have guys like Hank, Callahan and Staal, to name my favorite three, that have - from the beginning of the season - been tasked with doing more than their fair share, trying to do everything, because not everyone on this team has showed up together on any given night. And that doesn't work. It may work for a while, but it ultimately doesn't ever work.
(courtesy Blue Notes)
I picked the Capitals to win the series in six because I did not think the Rangers, minus Hank and a few exceptions, had the determination, skill, where-with-all, or any combination of those three, to get it done when it counted. I said they were a team that spent almost all season struggling to score and struggling on the powerplay and that I didn't believe that would change in the playoffs. I thought Washington was vulnerable, really, on goaltending only, and that they were loaded with too much fire power for the Rangers to contend with.
Fast forward two games into the series. The Rangers have not played spectacular by any means, but they have won - on the road - the first two games and hold a 2-0 lead coming back to New York. Ovechin and the big guns have not scored a ton of goals, in fact, they've scored none. The series had already taken a baffling turn.
I predicted/alluded/pondered how a Game 3 goalie decision from Washington would make or break their playoff season. Not because Theodore could not have come back in and rebounded, not because the Capitals could not have woken up and therefore made their own goalie a non-factor in the series, but because I believe in momentum. Boudreau made the right call, for his team, in my mind, and stuck with Varlamov. The young 20-year old shutout a non-existent Ranger offense.
Game 4 provided the long awaited and anticipated collapse of Sean Avery. And let me get this straight right off the bat. I've defended and stood by Sean Avery, believed he is a legitimate hockey player and can be an effective contibutor to this league. I've said it over, and over, and over again and I still believe it. Game 4 provided a collapse. I have not seen him, until this year, collapse into undiscplined and unacceptable play. (Remember, I was not a fan or an observer of him in LA or Detroit). This was my first foray into the potentially desctructive Sean Avery. And yet - AND YET - Sean Avery, still, to me, is anything but - destructive. Others have alluded to it, so I am saying nothing new, but I feel that Avery was put in a corner here. He came back to the league and immediately - game one - was called for a marginal penalty. It continued. It was allowed to continue. Avery was attacked without punishment, without any thought or consideration for the desire and want for a fair and even playing field. And he finally snapped. I can't agree with what he did. While I feel two of his four penalties in game 3 were of the this-is-crap variety, I know that the two he took in game four were undisciplined and unacceptable. And you cannot have that happen, no matter how many liberties have been taken on you. The fact that those liberties were allowed to be taken, over and over and over - that is a bigger disgrace than anything Sean Avery has ever done. And that disgusts me. And that is one of the growing numbers of reasons why this league, at present, cannot be taken seriously.
In game 5, John Tortorella was faced with a decision - bench Avery or trust that he will stand back and behave? He benched Avery. A decision I do not agree with and I do not think anyone did agree with - well, out of the fans of New York or the Avery supporters that is. I'm sure many were calling for his head and I know many would like nothing better than to see him out of the league forever. I cannot, cannot for the life of me, think of a way to express just how hypocritical and horrible that attitude is, so I will leave it at the fact that I do not agree with them and I do not agree with Tortorella's decision. He left an important game - but not a decisive game - in the hands of a lifeless and withdrawn group of half-players, the same group I've tried hard to wrap my head, let alone my heart, around all season. I saw enough to know I had seen too much. There was no way, no way!, they were winning that game. Think what you want. The message had been sent, and it was the wrong message. Avery's mistakes, his penalties, his errors in judgement were just that, but they did not and have not cost the Rangers a game. The Rangers won on Wednesday by playing together in spite of the rest of it. That was their "big picture." On Friday, without their spirits, spark, enthusiasm, and the guy who you can't argue wants to Be a Ranger!, the team fell, lifeless and undisciplined to the embarrassing end. The decison wasn't really to play him or not to play him. It was whether or not to trust that a team with Avery stood a better chance than a team without Avery.
And Tortorella made the wrong decision.
At that moment, or in the moments following, the series became a circus, if it was not already one. Given a suspension for an altercation with a fan, Tortorella was benched for game 6. I, being at the viewing party, did not hear commentary on this instance, and did not see it for what it was. I found everything out on Saturday. At which point, I shook my head, watched the Flyers/Penguins game, and tried to forget about everything Rangers. Not to be dramatic, but it seemed like just a bad dream I wanted to wake up from, and just one more bad moment in a season of bad moments.
Avery came back for Game 6, and Jim Schoenfeld took the bench. I questioned before the game, during the game, and am still questioning now, hours after the game, whether or not it was too little, too late.
Will Tortorella benching Avery cost the Rangers the series?
Or will the same problems that haunted the Rangers all season cost the Rangers the series?
I don't know. We won't ever know. Heck, the series isn't even over yet, so none of us, any of us, will know anything until Tuesday night.
But did it have to come to this? A game seven? I think of how shocked and in awe I was with the Rangers coming back to the Garden up 2-0. And I watched how the field evened a little, but how the Rangers til held a big enough lead to have not just one, but two, and consequently, three, chances to close out the series. And I said, I'd take it, sure. Who coming into this series would have thought the Rangers would have been up, and would even have a chance. I didn't. Again, I didn't for the reasons I mentioned in the start of this, what I am sure at this moment is a very long, blog entry. But...I started somewhere to believe they could do it. I really did. And that feeling I had was crushed on Friday night.
And those questions I have about what has caused this potential demise - well, they'll never be answered. How can you know what caused the game 5 defeat? How can you know whether or not they would have won had they had Avery in the lineup?
I hate that I'll never know the answer. But I hate even more that it is a question at all.
**Side notes: I am reading the blog entries - Ranger Rants, Blue Notes, Rangers Report and hearing all this stuff. My thoughts are as follows:
If Shaone Morrisonn did in fact bite Brandon Dubinsky, I find that loathsome. I cannot believe that this series, this series I thought the Capitals would dominate on talent and skill alone, has come to this. I can't even believe what I am hearing and reading.
Donald Brashear's non-called penalty on Blair Betts was equally loathsome. He got hit by Callahan and turned and attacked the first guy he saw. My mind screamed Simon/Hollweg. I watched Betts crumple to the ice, and I realized, again , what a big joke this league appears to be at times. At moments like this where guys that run their mouths are punished and guys that legitimately do things so potentially hurtful get nothing but a slap on the wrist and free reign to go do it again and again. I don't like that part of the game that I love.
I hate that this and Tortorella's incident with the fans in game five - that thos are the things I will think of when the series is over - no matter who does indeed win. Not Ovechkin's game one effort sans goal. Not Simeon Varlamov's rookie initiation. Not Hank's dominance to keep this team in the series. Unfortunately it wil be about bottle throwing, name calling, head shots and biting. Seriously, read that last sentence and tell me it doesn't remind you of wrestling for tv entertainment.
Lastly, Jim Schoenfeld, a guy I really do like for his spunk and his honesty, said something I think deserves repeating, whether looking at this series or at this season and a quote I will undoubtably use when the season has come to its final end for New York - either Tuesday night or, hopefully, weeks down the line. He said:
“Big offensive guys have not gotten it going,” said Schoenfeld, without naming names, but the list could include Nik Zherdev, Nik Antropov and Markus Nalsund, with three shots between them. “What happens is part of their job falls on someone else, kid s like Callahan, Dubinsky, Staal and Girardi. There’s so much we have to do defensively because the other guys aren’t doing their job offensively.”
This, from day one, has been the story of this team. It is just interesting, baffling, and amusing, that it took the guy doing the press conference only because he was replacing the head coach (the 2nd head coach) of the season to finally say what we all have been feeling all along. We will never know what this team was capable of, because we have rarely if ever seen the full sum of the parts. We have guys like Hank, Callahan and Staal, to name my favorite three, that have - from the beginning of the season - been tasked with doing more than their fair share, trying to do everything, because not everyone on this team has showed up together on any given night. And that doesn't work. It may work for a while, but it ultimately doesn't ever work.
(courtesy Blue Notes)
Thursday, April 23, 2009
Intense and Vital Win in Game Four for the Rangers and The Final End to a Tumultuous Season in Montreal. . .
Rangers:
Well, that was a rather convincing win. Coming in against a desperate opponent and holding off a steady rush in the game's second game - very impressive showing by the New York Rangers. Vital win in that it puts Washington at the ultimate brink; lose one more and go home.
I don't have to tell you how much I really didn't see this happening, this team coming together, but I must readily admit, they are surprising me and I am enjoying watching it.
Tonight was one of the most intense games I've seen in a long while. Like the heart pumping games I used to watch when I was younger and the Rangers were in the playoffs steadily from 95 through 97. Games that meant something. The Devils series last year was fun, but it didn't have the same threat value that this one has. And last year's Penguins series, unfortunately, never really got to that point. Game four in that series, last year gave chills for a different reason. So, no, I really must say that this series versus Washington feels more like the series against Buffalo from two years ago, where the pressure is on, but people and the team are starting to believe.
And Chris Drury is scoring clutch goals. This time for the good guys.
I'm sure they hesitated whether or not to play him, and I shared such hesitation. He seemed unable to get off a clean shot. However, it didn't seem to matter when he scored the game winner. They all count guys, and that was as beautiful as he could have scored in my opinion.
As for Avery, he was called for less penalties than last game, which was a plus, but he was giving me heart palpitations in the 3rd. I mean I said it last night, a high stick is a high stick, there is not much to debate. And I'm not debating the rough behind the net that drew blood on the Caps player. I'm only saying that if Sean did that on purpose, swung his hand around - what was he trying to accomplish? He knows all eyes are on him. He knows even if, hypothetically speaking, he didn't mean to do that, that no one will believe him anyway. So, why? I'm admittedly a little baffled. He must know that he can't do anything even remotely suspicious at all right now, no?
That aside, credit all around to the Rangers. When the Caps poured it on, they stayed steady. A total team effort and a vital, vital win.
Can't wait for Friday...
Around the League:
Out West:
I left an intense 4-4 tie game in Chicago/Calgary when I turned off the car radio to come inside. I'll look in when I get upstairs. So much for Calgary's 4-1 lead. Damn. Playoff hockey is the greatest, no?
Les Habitants:
I will probably not get a chance to write more on Montreal til the weekend and by then there will be hundreds of thousands of accounts of what went wrong in the 100th season of the most fabled franchise in the "cradle of organized sports" to borrow Ron McLean's words. I listen to enough Montreal radio to know it will be talked about tomorrow, and the next day, and the next day, probably for every day until the next season starts, and even then, it will continue.
So just a few of my immediate reactions.
I wished better for Montreal. I did. As a fan of hockey and a fan of tradition, I did. But I wished for them to be better in general, not for them to win the series with Boston, mind you. The best team won in Boston and they are no doubt a team that can beat you with any combination of threats, offensive and defensive, and they are still, to me, the ultimate powerhouse to be challenged in the East. Credit all around to Boston. They are a great story.
While I wished better for Montreal, I knew it wasn't going to happen. That became clear pretty early. Much of the season north of the border found similarities to the season in New York with our own Rangers. True, there was no off ice concerns, at least none that I knew of, but the on ice turmoils were very parallel. Fast start bread big expectations. A falloff in production. Questioning team character. Missing leadership. General lack of team cohesiveness. One or two brilliant games followed by a run of non-efforts. Superstars drifting in and out of relevancy. A crop of very young kids who came and tried hard, but didn't have anyone to really show them the way. The ultimate firing of a coach when the team stopped listening.
Now New York turned a corner and looked better post-Renney and especially leading into the playoffs. Montreal had a short resurgence and then limped into the second season. They also had a serious goaltending controversy, one that I think was ultimately their demise. I feel for Jaroslav Halak. I don't know why but I always seem to think he's older than he is, perhaps because of his quiet nature and his poise. Young though he is, at this moment, he is a better goaltender and would have been a better option to Montreal than Carey Price. Hard to hear, but true.
Unfortunately, many fans in Montreal and many in management saw Price as their entire future, and held him up with such reverence it was at times scary to listen to. I sincerely hope wherever Halak goes he finds success. And I hope, for the sake of Montreal, that the kid they kept throwing out there, who looked like a deer caught in headlights for too many games, can be salvaged and live up to all they think he can be. I am not the coach in Montreal, but I would not have hung this series on Carey Price. I would have gone with Halak. It might not have made any real difference in the end, but by doing this, it appears the Canadiens may have confused and mistreated both of their goalies at the same time.
Heart is questioned daily in Montreal. I alluded to it before and I'm sure I will again. There are a lot of questions in Montreal, about how things are done and how they need to be done going forward, who wears the jersey and what it means to them. Tomorrow begins the long period of finding those anwers. I don't know where they start, but they have to start somewhere. Their entire team may possibly be dismantled come July 1st, and perhaps that is a good thing. Things will not come easy in Montreal, but they simply have to get the right guys with the right mindset, attitude, and commitment to play there. The only thing is, that's never quite so simple a thing to do.
Well, that was a rather convincing win. Coming in against a desperate opponent and holding off a steady rush in the game's second game - very impressive showing by the New York Rangers. Vital win in that it puts Washington at the ultimate brink; lose one more and go home.
I don't have to tell you how much I really didn't see this happening, this team coming together, but I must readily admit, they are surprising me and I am enjoying watching it.
Tonight was one of the most intense games I've seen in a long while. Like the heart pumping games I used to watch when I was younger and the Rangers were in the playoffs steadily from 95 through 97. Games that meant something. The Devils series last year was fun, but it didn't have the same threat value that this one has. And last year's Penguins series, unfortunately, never really got to that point. Game four in that series, last year gave chills for a different reason. So, no, I really must say that this series versus Washington feels more like the series against Buffalo from two years ago, where the pressure is on, but people and the team are starting to believe.
And Chris Drury is scoring clutch goals. This time for the good guys.
I'm sure they hesitated whether or not to play him, and I shared such hesitation. He seemed unable to get off a clean shot. However, it didn't seem to matter when he scored the game winner. They all count guys, and that was as beautiful as he could have scored in my opinion.
As for Avery, he was called for less penalties than last game, which was a plus, but he was giving me heart palpitations in the 3rd. I mean I said it last night, a high stick is a high stick, there is not much to debate. And I'm not debating the rough behind the net that drew blood on the Caps player. I'm only saying that if Sean did that on purpose, swung his hand around - what was he trying to accomplish? He knows all eyes are on him. He knows even if, hypothetically speaking, he didn't mean to do that, that no one will believe him anyway. So, why? I'm admittedly a little baffled. He must know that he can't do anything even remotely suspicious at all right now, no?
That aside, credit all around to the Rangers. When the Caps poured it on, they stayed steady. A total team effort and a vital, vital win.
Can't wait for Friday...
Around the League:
Out West:
I left an intense 4-4 tie game in Chicago/Calgary when I turned off the car radio to come inside. I'll look in when I get upstairs. So much for Calgary's 4-1 lead. Damn. Playoff hockey is the greatest, no?
Les Habitants:
I will probably not get a chance to write more on Montreal til the weekend and by then there will be hundreds of thousands of accounts of what went wrong in the 100th season of the most fabled franchise in the "cradle of organized sports" to borrow Ron McLean's words. I listen to enough Montreal radio to know it will be talked about tomorrow, and the next day, and the next day, probably for every day until the next season starts, and even then, it will continue.
So just a few of my immediate reactions.
I wished better for Montreal. I did. As a fan of hockey and a fan of tradition, I did. But I wished for them to be better in general, not for them to win the series with Boston, mind you. The best team won in Boston and they are no doubt a team that can beat you with any combination of threats, offensive and defensive, and they are still, to me, the ultimate powerhouse to be challenged in the East. Credit all around to Boston. They are a great story.
While I wished better for Montreal, I knew it wasn't going to happen. That became clear pretty early. Much of the season north of the border found similarities to the season in New York with our own Rangers. True, there was no off ice concerns, at least none that I knew of, but the on ice turmoils were very parallel. Fast start bread big expectations. A falloff in production. Questioning team character. Missing leadership. General lack of team cohesiveness. One or two brilliant games followed by a run of non-efforts. Superstars drifting in and out of relevancy. A crop of very young kids who came and tried hard, but didn't have anyone to really show them the way. The ultimate firing of a coach when the team stopped listening.
Now New York turned a corner and looked better post-Renney and especially leading into the playoffs. Montreal had a short resurgence and then limped into the second season. They also had a serious goaltending controversy, one that I think was ultimately their demise. I feel for Jaroslav Halak. I don't know why but I always seem to think he's older than he is, perhaps because of his quiet nature and his poise. Young though he is, at this moment, he is a better goaltender and would have been a better option to Montreal than Carey Price. Hard to hear, but true.
Unfortunately, many fans in Montreal and many in management saw Price as their entire future, and held him up with such reverence it was at times scary to listen to. I sincerely hope wherever Halak goes he finds success. And I hope, for the sake of Montreal, that the kid they kept throwing out there, who looked like a deer caught in headlights for too many games, can be salvaged and live up to all they think he can be. I am not the coach in Montreal, but I would not have hung this series on Carey Price. I would have gone with Halak. It might not have made any real difference in the end, but by doing this, it appears the Canadiens may have confused and mistreated both of their goalies at the same time.
Heart is questioned daily in Montreal. I alluded to it before and I'm sure I will again. There are a lot of questions in Montreal, about how things are done and how they need to be done going forward, who wears the jersey and what it means to them. Tomorrow begins the long period of finding those anwers. I don't know where they start, but they have to start somewhere. Their entire team may possibly be dismantled come July 1st, and perhaps that is a good thing. Things will not come easy in Montreal, but they simply have to get the right guys with the right mindset, attitude, and commitment to play there. The only thing is, that's never quite so simple a thing to do.
Monday, April 20, 2009
Game 3 Goalie Decisions: 2007 Versus 2009. . .
I will often think back to the Rangers opening round series in the 2007 playoffs versus Atlanta and wonder what, if anything, would have changed if the Thrashers had made a different goalie decision in Game 3 than the one they ended up making. I thought about it a few times leading up to tonight's game 3 at the Garden. Different opponent, somewhat similar circumstances.
If you don't remember, Game 1 in Atlanta was the Sean Avery instigator affair that ended in Ilya Kovalchuk chasing - literally chasing - Sean Avery around the ice and getting ejected. Kari Lehtonen played a less than crisp game in the Atlanta loss.
For Game 2 in Atlanta, Bob Hartley went with veteran Johan Hedberg and it was a very close one goal game, the deciding goal coming off an odd bank play by Avery in fact.
When down 0-2 heading into the Garden, Hartley had a choice to make. He could go back to his regular guy in Lehtonen, or he can stick with his very steady "backup" who played a close, one goal game.
He chose to go back to Lehtonen.
The Rangers won Game 3, 7-0.
They went on to win the series in four.
Jump ahead to 2009. The Rangers and Capitals played a closer game than did the Thrashers and Rangers in 2009. Avery's affects were perhaps more understated. But Jose Theodore was not sharp. He, while not the only one at fault, shouldered much of the blame for yeilding four goals on 21 shots.
Game 2 in Washington saw Bruce Boudreau go to an untested rookie goalie in Simeon Varlamov. (Granted, it was the rookie replacing the "veteran" in this case, but if you continue to follow me...). Varlamov plays very well and lets in only one goal. Another one goal margin. Another solid goalie performance.
When down 0-2 heading into the Garden, Boudreau had a choice to make. He could go back to Jose, his veteran guy whose been in the playoffs before, or he can stick with this young kid that stepped up and played a close, 1-0 game.
He chose to stick with Varlamov.
The Capitals won Game 3, 4-0.
The series - well, the series is still TBD.
Does this goalie decision prove to be THE decision off this playoff series? It is really too early to tell. But it's interesting to me. Interesting because there are so many details that I've forgotten about certain years and certain playoff series. And yet I remember the 2007 opening round like yesterday, thinking how much I really respect and like Bob Hartley, but how I think he got it wrong that day in Game 3. And how I wonder if that one key decision in goal would have made any difference in the outcome.
Other game notes...
Pierre Maguire was on the radio today - either on HTM or Team990; I honestly do not remember - and he spoke about how the Capitals were playing like a bunch of talented individuals and the Rangers were playing like a team. I usually either completely agree with Maguire or completely disagree with him; there is often no in between. Today, I agreed with him.
That struck me if only for the fact that the Rangers, most of this season, were not anything resembling a team, and if they went in the same direction, it was mostly the direction of non-cohesive disillusionment, with a few, well-detailed exceptions.
So, I asked myself, were the Rangers really playing so much more as a team?
Well they were.
Until tonight, that is.
The Capitals and their undisputed leader - Alex Ovechkin - finally seemed to get their heads around the team game. Ovechkin took 13 shots in game one alone and half that in game two, and still couldn't score.
In game three, he realized he didn't need to.
It was enough if he just set up his teammates to score. And he did, to his credit and his team's benefit.
The Capitals looked very much the team tonight. The Rangers did not. Simple as that.
The Rangers were very undisciplined, taking penalty after penalty. And, what's more, they failed to capitalize on the ones the Capitals took. How many of Avery's were deserved, I'd like to take a second look. The punch to the face warranted a rough, and high-sticks are usually high-sticks. I'd like to take another look at the goalie interference - the unofficial Sean Avery penalty - and the hooking before I judge those. Regardless, too much time in the box means that the Rangers lost whatever rhythm they held, for the game's first five minutes.
Game 3 was a very different story, indeed.
As for the goalie decision of 2009, it paid off. Varlamov was not tested a whole lot to start, but he did what he had to do and made 33 saves in earning his first career shutout.
And as for Sean Avery trying to yap at him? Apparently it phased him not at all.
Goalie Decision Game 3, 2009 - score one for Bruce Boudreau.
Looking Ahead:
Hopefully the Rangers loss will let them learn what worked for them, what didn't, and let them move forward with the next goal of winning game four. True, the Capitals will now be even more hungry, and that is a risk you take in letting a team get halfway back in a series. Of course, the best thing would be for them to have won today and really put a reeling Washington on their heals. That didn't happen.
However, one more solid effort at the Garden Wednesday, and they would have the chance to wrap up the series in Washington on Friday.
How they come out and maintain on Wednesday will show us, and them, whether they can compete in this series to win, or whether they will let Washington get in their heads.
I hope, prediction gladly placed aside, it's the former.
If you don't remember, Game 1 in Atlanta was the Sean Avery instigator affair that ended in Ilya Kovalchuk chasing - literally chasing - Sean Avery around the ice and getting ejected. Kari Lehtonen played a less than crisp game in the Atlanta loss.
For Game 2 in Atlanta, Bob Hartley went with veteran Johan Hedberg and it was a very close one goal game, the deciding goal coming off an odd bank play by Avery in fact.
When down 0-2 heading into the Garden, Hartley had a choice to make. He could go back to his regular guy in Lehtonen, or he can stick with his very steady "backup" who played a close, one goal game.
He chose to go back to Lehtonen.
The Rangers won Game 3, 7-0.
They went on to win the series in four.
Jump ahead to 2009. The Rangers and Capitals played a closer game than did the Thrashers and Rangers in 2009. Avery's affects were perhaps more understated. But Jose Theodore was not sharp. He, while not the only one at fault, shouldered much of the blame for yeilding four goals on 21 shots.
Game 2 in Washington saw Bruce Boudreau go to an untested rookie goalie in Simeon Varlamov. (Granted, it was the rookie replacing the "veteran" in this case, but if you continue to follow me...). Varlamov plays very well and lets in only one goal. Another one goal margin. Another solid goalie performance.
When down 0-2 heading into the Garden, Boudreau had a choice to make. He could go back to Jose, his veteran guy whose been in the playoffs before, or he can stick with this young kid that stepped up and played a close, 1-0 game.
He chose to stick with Varlamov.
The Capitals won Game 3, 4-0.
The series - well, the series is still TBD.
Does this goalie decision prove to be THE decision off this playoff series? It is really too early to tell. But it's interesting to me. Interesting because there are so many details that I've forgotten about certain years and certain playoff series. And yet I remember the 2007 opening round like yesterday, thinking how much I really respect and like Bob Hartley, but how I think he got it wrong that day in Game 3. And how I wonder if that one key decision in goal would have made any difference in the outcome.
Other game notes...
Pierre Maguire was on the radio today - either on HTM or Team990; I honestly do not remember - and he spoke about how the Capitals were playing like a bunch of talented individuals and the Rangers were playing like a team. I usually either completely agree with Maguire or completely disagree with him; there is often no in between. Today, I agreed with him.
That struck me if only for the fact that the Rangers, most of this season, were not anything resembling a team, and if they went in the same direction, it was mostly the direction of non-cohesive disillusionment, with a few, well-detailed exceptions.
So, I asked myself, were the Rangers really playing so much more as a team?
Well they were.
Until tonight, that is.
The Capitals and their undisputed leader - Alex Ovechkin - finally seemed to get their heads around the team game. Ovechkin took 13 shots in game one alone and half that in game two, and still couldn't score.
In game three, he realized he didn't need to.
It was enough if he just set up his teammates to score. And he did, to his credit and his team's benefit.
The Capitals looked very much the team tonight. The Rangers did not. Simple as that.
The Rangers were very undisciplined, taking penalty after penalty. And, what's more, they failed to capitalize on the ones the Capitals took. How many of Avery's were deserved, I'd like to take a second look. The punch to the face warranted a rough, and high-sticks are usually high-sticks. I'd like to take another look at the goalie interference - the unofficial Sean Avery penalty - and the hooking before I judge those. Regardless, too much time in the box means that the Rangers lost whatever rhythm they held, for the game's first five minutes.
Game 3 was a very different story, indeed.
As for the goalie decision of 2009, it paid off. Varlamov was not tested a whole lot to start, but he did what he had to do and made 33 saves in earning his first career shutout.
And as for Sean Avery trying to yap at him? Apparently it phased him not at all.
Goalie Decision Game 3, 2009 - score one for Bruce Boudreau.
Looking Ahead:
Hopefully the Rangers loss will let them learn what worked for them, what didn't, and let them move forward with the next goal of winning game four. True, the Capitals will now be even more hungry, and that is a risk you take in letting a team get halfway back in a series. Of course, the best thing would be for them to have won today and really put a reeling Washington on their heals. That didn't happen.
However, one more solid effort at the Garden Wednesday, and they would have the chance to wrap up the series in Washington on Friday.
How they come out and maintain on Wednesday will show us, and them, whether they can compete in this series to win, or whether they will let Washington get in their heads.
I hope, prediction gladly placed aside, it's the former.
Saturday, April 18, 2009
Stunned and Baffled . .
So, today I wasn't able to watch the game live. I had to listen to a period in the car and later, much later, come back home to watch the rest of it. I just finished a few minutes ago.
Wow!
!
!
The Rangers are up two games to zero!
!
!
The Rangers won the game 1-0!?
!
!
!
Look, I'm a Rangers fan so I am completely and utterly thrilled this is the case. But if you told me on Wednesday morning that by Saturday evening the Rangers would be up 2-0 on the Capitals and heading back home for game three Monday night in such a good position, I would not have believed you.
Therefore, I'm stunned.
Very, very stunned.
Stunning me even more than the 2-0 series lead is the final score from today. 1-0. I heard the Callahan goal in the car, fist pumped to myself, and fully expected there to be more goals scored. And yet, apparently, there weren't.
That's kind of why I'm baffled.
That the Rangers were able to hold such an offensive team to such perimiter shots. That the Captials never seemed to look composed. That they really, even though they had 35 shots, didn't seem to put the pressure on.
What's more, I'm baffled because Wade Redden appears to be playing defense - for two games in a row now. Michal Rozsival has a pretty good playoff track record with New York, but even he looks more poised.
Guys like Callahan, with a super sharp game today and the game's only goal, don't surprise me. As the guys in broadcast said, this is been what you have been getting from Callahan since game 1. And I love Callahan for it. Marvelous player and very much deserving of getting a big game winning goal for his team.
Hank does not surprise me either. Well, that'd be a lie. He does surprise me from time to time with just how composed he is. He has an insane sense of focus. I've always admired that of him. His knowledge of the game, the way he analyzes in and out of game, what has happened, what needs to be done, and how he gets the job done. Very deserved shutout by him.
Silently - yes rather silently - Sean Avery has done good things. Antropov too. Betts and Sjostrom. Sjostrom, in fact, showed how he takes after the Callahan mold. Blocking shots, chipping away at pucks, getting injured, but coming right back. More players should be like that.
Thankfully for the Rangers, every player today seemed to have that same sense of focus, determination and sacrifice today. Chipping at loose pucks so that Washington couldn't set up. Blocking others so Hank didn't have to. Hitting a Washington player to take him off his path.
Honestly it was as if they all came together today in cohesion, the type of perfect cohesion that has eluded this team seemingly all year. They fought together, played together, and won the game together.
Even if I didn't fully expect it was possible, it was marvelous to see.
Brilliant game plan by New York. If game one was all about being opportunistic and taking momentum away from the Capitals, I'd say game two was all about the smart little hockey plays adding up and stealing confidence from the league's most dominating player.
Even if the Capitals are not playing up to their strengths or their capabilities - and I'd say they are not - the way the Rangers have stayed composed and accomplished their game plan says this team has come miles from where they were a month ago. That team would have found a way to give the confidence and momentum back to Washington.
So far, they've held themselves in check and have been very, very impressive.
Credit John Tortorella, credit Hank Lundqvist, but credit too, every other guy that has chipped in with a little play, a smart pass, a key contribution, all for the common good of the team. Hockey is a game of sacrifice, sacrificing yourself for the good of the taem. The Rangers certainly did that today.
If they were ever going to come together and play as a team - and all season long we've been waiting for it - I'm thankful we are seeing it when the pressure is greatest and the games count for something real.
Monday night at the Garden should be something to see. I truly can't wait.
Wow!
!
!
The Rangers are up two games to zero!
!
!
The Rangers won the game 1-0!?
!
!
!
Look, I'm a Rangers fan so I am completely and utterly thrilled this is the case. But if you told me on Wednesday morning that by Saturday evening the Rangers would be up 2-0 on the Capitals and heading back home for game three Monday night in such a good position, I would not have believed you.
Therefore, I'm stunned.
Very, very stunned.
Stunning me even more than the 2-0 series lead is the final score from today. 1-0. I heard the Callahan goal in the car, fist pumped to myself, and fully expected there to be more goals scored. And yet, apparently, there weren't.
That's kind of why I'm baffled.
That the Rangers were able to hold such an offensive team to such perimiter shots. That the Captials never seemed to look composed. That they really, even though they had 35 shots, didn't seem to put the pressure on.
What's more, I'm baffled because Wade Redden appears to be playing defense - for two games in a row now. Michal Rozsival has a pretty good playoff track record with New York, but even he looks more poised.
Guys like Callahan, with a super sharp game today and the game's only goal, don't surprise me. As the guys in broadcast said, this is been what you have been getting from Callahan since game 1. And I love Callahan for it. Marvelous player and very much deserving of getting a big game winning goal for his team.
Hank does not surprise me either. Well, that'd be a lie. He does surprise me from time to time with just how composed he is. He has an insane sense of focus. I've always admired that of him. His knowledge of the game, the way he analyzes in and out of game, what has happened, what needs to be done, and how he gets the job done. Very deserved shutout by him.
Silently - yes rather silently - Sean Avery has done good things. Antropov too. Betts and Sjostrom. Sjostrom, in fact, showed how he takes after the Callahan mold. Blocking shots, chipping away at pucks, getting injured, but coming right back. More players should be like that.
Thankfully for the Rangers, every player today seemed to have that same sense of focus, determination and sacrifice today. Chipping at loose pucks so that Washington couldn't set up. Blocking others so Hank didn't have to. Hitting a Washington player to take him off his path.
Honestly it was as if they all came together today in cohesion, the type of perfect cohesion that has eluded this team seemingly all year. They fought together, played together, and won the game together.
Even if I didn't fully expect it was possible, it was marvelous to see.
Brilliant game plan by New York. If game one was all about being opportunistic and taking momentum away from the Capitals, I'd say game two was all about the smart little hockey plays adding up and stealing confidence from the league's most dominating player.
Even if the Capitals are not playing up to their strengths or their capabilities - and I'd say they are not - the way the Rangers have stayed composed and accomplished their game plan says this team has come miles from where they were a month ago. That team would have found a way to give the confidence and momentum back to Washington.
So far, they've held themselves in check and have been very, very impressive.
Credit John Tortorella, credit Hank Lundqvist, but credit too, every other guy that has chipped in with a little play, a smart pass, a key contribution, all for the common good of the team. Hockey is a game of sacrifice, sacrificing yourself for the good of the taem. The Rangers certainly did that today.
If they were ever going to come together and play as a team - and all season long we've been waiting for it - I'm thankful we are seeing it when the pressure is greatest and the games count for something real.
Monday night at the Garden should be something to see. I truly can't wait.
Tuesday, April 14, 2009
2009 First Round Playoff Predictions Without All the Fuss. . .
Okay, so after finding out the final matchups were set, I took out a post-it (my favorite writing tool) and wrote my predictions down. What you are getting here are my first thoughts, and I haven't changed anything based on what I may have heard or read in the last couple days, although truth be told, I've had little time for much and haven't read any "experts" picks. This is me trying to not overthink anything. Thus, no fanfare, no fuss, well, except for a little fanfare and fuss on the Rangers/Captals Matchup, of course.
Western Conference:
San Jose over Anaheim - 5
I still think this is San Jose's year to prove themselves.
Columbus over Detroit - 6
I think Columbus has as much a chance as any to knock of Detroit, especially if Steve Mason can stay hot.
Calgary over Chicago - 7
I think this is somewhat of a coin toss series, but I am going with Calgary based on their having been there before.
Vancouver over St. Louis - 5
I think St. Louis may lack the experience to do battle with a rejuvenated Canucks team and a goalie like Luongo.
Eastern Conference:
Carolina over New Jersey - 6
I think Carolina is playing as good as they have since they won the Cup and if Cam Ward can out-duel Brodeur, they have a good shot.
Boston over Montreal - 5
I think Montreal might steal a game in there, but Boston has too much going for them this year.
Philadelphia over Pittsburgh - 7
I think it'll be a close series, but I believe the longer the series goes the better the chances that Philadelphia can overcome their cross-state rivals.
Washington over Rangers - 6
I think Ovechkin and Co. will be too much for this year's Rangers to handle.
Okay, so I'll give you more than a sentence on this matchup. (But aren't you all very impressed that I kept the above predictions to just ONE sentence each? To tell you the truth, I kinda am myself!)
Rangers/Capitals:
My heart wants me to pick the Rangers to win. It really does. And if, by chance, the Rangers do win, I'll be as happy as anyone. BUT....
This team has lacked a few things from the beginning of the season.They do not score very much, although it's been better under Tortorella. Their powerplay has been horrendous from day one. They lack a group cohesiveness and a strong sense of leadership. All three things are vital to a team's playoff chances. Great teams, perhaps, can overcome their shortcomings. I'm not sure the Rangers are a great enough team to do so. If I am being honest with myself, which I am trying to be.
The Rangers win this series if they can shutdown Washington's superpower offense, plain and simple. We all know how good Ovechkin and Co are. That is not a surprise. It is not up for debate. They are just that good.
The Rangers would need a true game changer to make a difference in this series. As discussed here at NHTP about a week ago, they have a potential one in Henrik Lundqvist. If he can shut the other team down, then, yes, the Rangers can win.
But, while I'm not questioning Lundqvist's talent or determination, I am just not sure he can do this on his own.
Now he'll have Marc Staal, who automatically becomes the Rangers second most important player in this series for his previous one on one battles with the Great Ovechkin. Marc Staal, although one of the youngest on the team, may just be the most composed person on the entire Rangers roster. I do have great faith that he will do all in his power to try to slow Ovechkin. Because, again folks, you slow the league's great players, you can't stop them.
However, it is really more than just Ovechkin. I'm not sure what Staal is expected to do if he slows Ovechkin and everyone else on the Capitals runs circles around the rest of the Rangers team.
Staal and Lundqvist aside, I turn my attention to this team's leadership. And I do not want to make this an attack on the big money makers on this team. I won't. That's a regular season and an off=season debate. BUT...
While I believe Tortorella is not the type of coach to let his team roll over and play dead, he cannot play along side them. Whatever happens on ice is truly, at this point, left up to the 20 players on the game day roster. And I'm not sure they - collectively - have it in them.
Yes, Drury and Gomez have been there before. And Gomez was a good force for New York last year against New Jersey. But what if that isn't enough? There is no one player on this team that can single handedly win these games for the Rangers. (Remember, Hank can only stop the puck. He cannot help this team score). Unless someone, or preferably a few somebodies, step up and play beyond what they have in the regular season, I do not know how they can do it. Motivation is great, but they need to have something to back it up.
A team that wasn't perfect last year in New York, still had a guy like Jaromir Jagr, who in game four said, screw this, we are NOT going to lose this game today. And he came through, like legendary players do.
Washington has Ovechkin, a guy who we've seen do the same thing against our very team. The old, "climb on, guys, I'm leading us there" type mantra he lives by.
Who, really, do the Rangers have?
Callahan? Antropov? Avery? Zherdev?
Do any of these players really strike fear in the heart of Washington that they will score enough to compete with Ovechkin, Semin, Backstrom, Green, etc?
Now Avery is a wild card. If he can effectively take Washington off their game, he can make a difference. But I just don't see it working like it did in the past. Avery versus Kovalchuk. Avery versus Brodeur. Avery versus Ovechkin? I just don't see how Ovechkin gets riled up by Avery like Ilya and Marty did. And even if one of their goal scorers does bite on Avery's advances, there are a half dozen more in his place.
Now that doesn't mean that Sean can't be effective and help the cause - because he most certainly can. I'm just not sure it's enough. I'm not sure any of it is enough.
The one major thing to the Rangers advantage is that Jose Theodore is not the best goalie in the playoffs. He might, in fact, be the worst. Does that make a difference in a series? - you bet it does. But it would mean more to me if the Rangers were a high-powered scoring team. Based on the fact that at many times they don't even shoot the puck, I am somewhat afraid it won't make much of a difference who the Caps have in net.
Wayne Gretzky said something about not having a chance to score any goals if you don't take the shots, or something. You know where I'm going with this. And you also know he's right.
But be sure, if the Rangers were to win, they'd have to get scoring from unlikely sources (or anyone!), and score on the powerplay. Washington is not going to give them a free path to their goalie. They are going to have to work hard for their chances. And take advantage of the ones that they get.
For the reasons above, and perhaps a few more, I just believe - in my head - that the Rangers just do not have enough to beat the Washington Capitals, who got a taste of the second season last year and want it even more this year.
If it means anything though, folks, I do hope I am wrong. I really, really hope I am wrong.
**Author's note. I think all these Eastern series are fantastic matchups and we, as fans, really lucked out. The West's I'm a little less sure about but I think there's a chance for a few doozies as well. But regardless of my predictions - and rib all you want because it's all in fun - enjoy the playoffs. One of the best times of the year!**
Western Conference:
San Jose over Anaheim - 5
I still think this is San Jose's year to prove themselves.
Columbus over Detroit - 6
I think Columbus has as much a chance as any to knock of Detroit, especially if Steve Mason can stay hot.
Calgary over Chicago - 7
I think this is somewhat of a coin toss series, but I am going with Calgary based on their having been there before.
Vancouver over St. Louis - 5
I think St. Louis may lack the experience to do battle with a rejuvenated Canucks team and a goalie like Luongo.
Eastern Conference:
Carolina over New Jersey - 6
I think Carolina is playing as good as they have since they won the Cup and if Cam Ward can out-duel Brodeur, they have a good shot.
Boston over Montreal - 5
I think Montreal might steal a game in there, but Boston has too much going for them this year.
Philadelphia over Pittsburgh - 7
I think it'll be a close series, but I believe the longer the series goes the better the chances that Philadelphia can overcome their cross-state rivals.
Washington over Rangers - 6
I think Ovechkin and Co. will be too much for this year's Rangers to handle.
Okay, so I'll give you more than a sentence on this matchup. (But aren't you all very impressed that I kept the above predictions to just ONE sentence each? To tell you the truth, I kinda am myself!)
Rangers/Capitals:
My heart wants me to pick the Rangers to win. It really does. And if, by chance, the Rangers do win, I'll be as happy as anyone. BUT....
This team has lacked a few things from the beginning of the season.They do not score very much, although it's been better under Tortorella. Their powerplay has been horrendous from day one. They lack a group cohesiveness and a strong sense of leadership. All three things are vital to a team's playoff chances. Great teams, perhaps, can overcome their shortcomings. I'm not sure the Rangers are a great enough team to do so. If I am being honest with myself, which I am trying to be.
The Rangers win this series if they can shutdown Washington's superpower offense, plain and simple. We all know how good Ovechkin and Co are. That is not a surprise. It is not up for debate. They are just that good.
The Rangers would need a true game changer to make a difference in this series. As discussed here at NHTP about a week ago, they have a potential one in Henrik Lundqvist. If he can shut the other team down, then, yes, the Rangers can win.
But, while I'm not questioning Lundqvist's talent or determination, I am just not sure he can do this on his own.
Now he'll have Marc Staal, who automatically becomes the Rangers second most important player in this series for his previous one on one battles with the Great Ovechkin. Marc Staal, although one of the youngest on the team, may just be the most composed person on the entire Rangers roster. I do have great faith that he will do all in his power to try to slow Ovechkin. Because, again folks, you slow the league's great players, you can't stop them.
However, it is really more than just Ovechkin. I'm not sure what Staal is expected to do if he slows Ovechkin and everyone else on the Capitals runs circles around the rest of the Rangers team.
Staal and Lundqvist aside, I turn my attention to this team's leadership. And I do not want to make this an attack on the big money makers on this team. I won't. That's a regular season and an off=season debate. BUT...
While I believe Tortorella is not the type of coach to let his team roll over and play dead, he cannot play along side them. Whatever happens on ice is truly, at this point, left up to the 20 players on the game day roster. And I'm not sure they - collectively - have it in them.
Yes, Drury and Gomez have been there before. And Gomez was a good force for New York last year against New Jersey. But what if that isn't enough? There is no one player on this team that can single handedly win these games for the Rangers. (Remember, Hank can only stop the puck. He cannot help this team score). Unless someone, or preferably a few somebodies, step up and play beyond what they have in the regular season, I do not know how they can do it. Motivation is great, but they need to have something to back it up.
A team that wasn't perfect last year in New York, still had a guy like Jaromir Jagr, who in game four said, screw this, we are NOT going to lose this game today. And he came through, like legendary players do.
Washington has Ovechkin, a guy who we've seen do the same thing against our very team. The old, "climb on, guys, I'm leading us there" type mantra he lives by.
Who, really, do the Rangers have?
Callahan? Antropov? Avery? Zherdev?
Do any of these players really strike fear in the heart of Washington that they will score enough to compete with Ovechkin, Semin, Backstrom, Green, etc?
Now Avery is a wild card. If he can effectively take Washington off their game, he can make a difference. But I just don't see it working like it did in the past. Avery versus Kovalchuk. Avery versus Brodeur. Avery versus Ovechkin? I just don't see how Ovechkin gets riled up by Avery like Ilya and Marty did. And even if one of their goal scorers does bite on Avery's advances, there are a half dozen more in his place.
Now that doesn't mean that Sean can't be effective and help the cause - because he most certainly can. I'm just not sure it's enough. I'm not sure any of it is enough.
The one major thing to the Rangers advantage is that Jose Theodore is not the best goalie in the playoffs. He might, in fact, be the worst. Does that make a difference in a series? - you bet it does. But it would mean more to me if the Rangers were a high-powered scoring team. Based on the fact that at many times they don't even shoot the puck, I am somewhat afraid it won't make much of a difference who the Caps have in net.
Wayne Gretzky said something about not having a chance to score any goals if you don't take the shots, or something. You know where I'm going with this. And you also know he's right.
But be sure, if the Rangers were to win, they'd have to get scoring from unlikely sources (or anyone!), and score on the powerplay. Washington is not going to give them a free path to their goalie. They are going to have to work hard for their chances. And take advantage of the ones that they get.
For the reasons above, and perhaps a few more, I just believe - in my head - that the Rangers just do not have enough to beat the Washington Capitals, who got a taste of the second season last year and want it even more this year.
If it means anything though, folks, I do hope I am wrong. I really, really hope I am wrong.
**Author's note. I think all these Eastern series are fantastic matchups and we, as fans, really lucked out. The West's I'm a little less sure about but I think there's a chance for a few doozies as well. But regardless of my predictions - and rib all you want because it's all in fun - enjoy the playoffs. One of the best times of the year!**
Thursday, February 12, 2009
In The Wake of The Rangers Scoring Four Goals. . .
I'll try to give them a little bit of a break today.
Look I have not apologized (too much) this season, and I am not going to start this late in the year. I'd rather tell the truth, as I see it, day in, day out. Whether it's harsh or happy, I'll at least try my hardest to be honest in my feelings and my opinions. Of that you can be assured.
That being established, a few thoughts came to mind as I watched the game last night and reflected on it into this morning.
The question has been raised over and over recently - has Tom Renney lost this team? Many thought yes. Others thought no. The players keep saying we want to play, we are behind him, blechety blah, bleckety blah.
Yet why, last night, when they essentially stopped playing Renney-style hockey, skated to win, skated with energy, did they finally find a way to score, and inevitably come away with a win? More importantly, I ask myself, was this decision made by the players? Was tonight's different energy and momentum just a result of their going against the coach's wishes? Because please don't tell me the coach of garbaly-gook disguised as highly intelligent analysis actually said to them, go out there, go play wide open hockey, and go play to win?
Am I the only one that has trouble believing that?
Is it not more likely that this, like the last 10 minutes against San Jose and like the last 10 minutes against Boston more recently, was just the players realizing that they had to abandon the system in order to score and consciously knowing, in the wake of their late embarrassing games, they had no choice but to score. In San Jose and in Boston it was to push the tie. Players essentially said, when they were down, they had no choice but to do anything to try to score. Including putting unrelenting pressure on. Including letting up on defense.
Is it not so hard to believe that last night was simply a larger magnification of the same thing. After going 0-4-1 in their last five games and scoring a total of five goals during that span, was it not just an utter need to score, and score at all costs, that made the Rangers, umm, score.
I truly think so.
I'm still baffled and amazed that this team was capable of scoring four goals. I am.
But maybe I shouldn't be. Maybe I really shouldn't be. Maybe, if they were to fully skate, fully let go of the defense-first, win 2-1 or bust mentality, maybe they would have won more games. Maybe they would have scored more goals.
Look I am not for a second saying that this team's one game has made me reconsider any of the disgustingly inexcusable and horrificly embarrassing play of late - or definitely not the lack of defensive responsibility, lack of energy and heart, lack of urgency, lack of offensive prowess, lack of consistency, lack of powerplay production, and lack of accountability that plagued this team all year.
The jaded me, the part of me that usually wins out, still thinks that perhaps last night was just a drop in the bucket. To borrow a line from a Angels in the Outfield, that it was "merely a blip on the screen of a terminally ill patient."
Don't forget, this team still cannot and did not - in its four goals - score on the powerplay last night. That including a string of four consecutive Washington penalties in the third, one being a four minute double minor. Also not to be forgotten in the excitement over the team scoring four goals was the fact that they gave up four goals as well. Ovechkin, although hitting everything in site - twice - had a relatively quiet night on the scoresheet. Beggars can't be choosers, but I'm just stating facts here.
I don't know. The game in Florida on Friday and the game against Philadelphia on Sunday will both be very telling to that question of whether this was a corner turned or a moment of sanity in an otherwise insane run. The Rangers have been a team of good and bad this year, mostly bad it would seem, so whether they build on scoring four goals and beating a very good Washington team or quickly resort back to the futile past efforts will tell you what this team can and is willing to do going forward.
At the very least - and this is what I will take away from last night - it was more entertaining on the part of the Rangers than any game I've seen them play in a month, perhaps longer. Starting with the Orr/Brashear fight that was quite remarkable really, filling in with a beautiful goal by Callahan off a feed by Korpikoski (did those two have a nice night. Just imagine them getting - or giving themselves - the green light to go free more often) , and topped off with a shootout victory that didn't feel as forced or undeserved as some of the others this year have.
I said if they were going to win, let them win by trying. They most certainly did that.
Around The League:
Capitals defensemen Mike Green scored two more goals last night - his 20th and 21st on the year - to tie an all time record for defensive scoring in consecutive games (7). I don't get people that don't like good players from other teams doing something cool, something that hasn't been done in a long time. As it turns out, Green's goals really had nothing to do with the outcome of the game either way. They were not game winners. They did not eliminate our team from playoff contention. Let the guy be congratulated. He's been a marvelous player to watch.
As I drove home late last night and put on the Calgary/Anaheim game, the announcer told the score of the OTHER late game - Montreal/Edmonton. Me guessing the bowling idea didn't work out quite as planned, huh Guy?
Rut Roh.
But seriously, let's not kid ourselves. The only true difference between Montreal and the Rangers right now - cause trust me the comparisons between the NYR fans complaining on the blogs and the Montreal fans complaining on the Team990 are so eerily similar - is that the Rangers won last night and Montreal's losing streak continued.
Look I have not apologized (too much) this season, and I am not going to start this late in the year. I'd rather tell the truth, as I see it, day in, day out. Whether it's harsh or happy, I'll at least try my hardest to be honest in my feelings and my opinions. Of that you can be assured.
That being established, a few thoughts came to mind as I watched the game last night and reflected on it into this morning.
The question has been raised over and over recently - has Tom Renney lost this team? Many thought yes. Others thought no. The players keep saying we want to play, we are behind him, blechety blah, bleckety blah.
Yet why, last night, when they essentially stopped playing Renney-style hockey, skated to win, skated with energy, did they finally find a way to score, and inevitably come away with a win? More importantly, I ask myself, was this decision made by the players? Was tonight's different energy and momentum just a result of their going against the coach's wishes? Because please don't tell me the coach of garbaly-gook disguised as highly intelligent analysis actually said to them, go out there, go play wide open hockey, and go play to win?
Am I the only one that has trouble believing that?
Is it not more likely that this, like the last 10 minutes against San Jose and like the last 10 minutes against Boston more recently, was just the players realizing that they had to abandon the system in order to score and consciously knowing, in the wake of their late embarrassing games, they had no choice but to score. In San Jose and in Boston it was to push the tie. Players essentially said, when they were down, they had no choice but to do anything to try to score. Including putting unrelenting pressure on. Including letting up on defense.
Is it not so hard to believe that last night was simply a larger magnification of the same thing. After going 0-4-1 in their last five games and scoring a total of five goals during that span, was it not just an utter need to score, and score at all costs, that made the Rangers, umm, score.
I truly think so.
I'm still baffled and amazed that this team was capable of scoring four goals. I am.
But maybe I shouldn't be. Maybe I really shouldn't be. Maybe, if they were to fully skate, fully let go of the defense-first, win 2-1 or bust mentality, maybe they would have won more games. Maybe they would have scored more goals.
Look I am not for a second saying that this team's one game has made me reconsider any of the disgustingly inexcusable and horrificly embarrassing play of late - or definitely not the lack of defensive responsibility, lack of energy and heart, lack of urgency, lack of offensive prowess, lack of consistency, lack of powerplay production, and lack of accountability that plagued this team all year.
The jaded me, the part of me that usually wins out, still thinks that perhaps last night was just a drop in the bucket. To borrow a line from a Angels in the Outfield, that it was "merely a blip on the screen of a terminally ill patient."
Don't forget, this team still cannot and did not - in its four goals - score on the powerplay last night. That including a string of four consecutive Washington penalties in the third, one being a four minute double minor. Also not to be forgotten in the excitement over the team scoring four goals was the fact that they gave up four goals as well. Ovechkin, although hitting everything in site - twice - had a relatively quiet night on the scoresheet. Beggars can't be choosers, but I'm just stating facts here.
I don't know. The game in Florida on Friday and the game against Philadelphia on Sunday will both be very telling to that question of whether this was a corner turned or a moment of sanity in an otherwise insane run. The Rangers have been a team of good and bad this year, mostly bad it would seem, so whether they build on scoring four goals and beating a very good Washington team or quickly resort back to the futile past efforts will tell you what this team can and is willing to do going forward.
At the very least - and this is what I will take away from last night - it was more entertaining on the part of the Rangers than any game I've seen them play in a month, perhaps longer. Starting with the Orr/Brashear fight that was quite remarkable really, filling in with a beautiful goal by Callahan off a feed by Korpikoski (did those two have a nice night. Just imagine them getting - or giving themselves - the green light to go free more often) , and topped off with a shootout victory that didn't feel as forced or undeserved as some of the others this year have.
I said if they were going to win, let them win by trying. They most certainly did that.
Around The League:
Capitals defensemen Mike Green scored two more goals last night - his 20th and 21st on the year - to tie an all time record for defensive scoring in consecutive games (7). I don't get people that don't like good players from other teams doing something cool, something that hasn't been done in a long time. As it turns out, Green's goals really had nothing to do with the outcome of the game either way. They were not game winners. They did not eliminate our team from playoff contention. Let the guy be congratulated. He's been a marvelous player to watch.
As I drove home late last night and put on the Calgary/Anaheim game, the announcer told the score of the OTHER late game - Montreal/Edmonton. Me guessing the bowling idea didn't work out quite as planned, huh Guy?
Rut Roh.
But seriously, let's not kid ourselves. The only true difference between Montreal and the Rangers right now - cause trust me the comparisons between the NYR fans complaining on the blogs and the Montreal fans complaining on the Team990 are so eerily similar - is that the Rangers won last night and Montreal's losing streak continued.
Sunday, February 8, 2009
Around The League: Schenn's 1st, Montreal Boos, Another Win @ Verizon. . .
Just because I was out of state didn't mean I didn't do as much as I could possibly do to catch some hockey games.
First I went to a bar that promised support of the Washington Capitals. Heck, I didn't need support, I just wanted the game to be on. So I was happy, on Saturday night in football/basketball country, to find the hockey game on three screens.
The game was nothing overly spectacular. Another home win for the Caps at Verizon, where they are just outright dominating this year.
I had a few other random thoughts. Washington might not just contend for the division, as I previously predicted, they might take the East too. I still like Boston - who wouldn't - but if Boston slows down and hits a bad stretch, the Caps have something outragous like 14 out of 16 of their final games in division. So that's 2-3 games against the likes of Carolina, Tampa Bay, and Atlanta. They have to like those odds.
The game, which ended in a 3-1 final (empty net included) was closer than appeared. In fact, again, I'm holding on to the thought that Florida, if a few things fall into place, are looking pretty good right now. Again, another team I predicted to make the playoffs back in October.
Zednick avoided the check of Tom Poti (do I hear faint boos in here)behind the net, to make a nice pass to Ballard for the team's only goal.
And Mike Green scored two goals, which brought his goal scoring streak to 6 games, a Capitals record. It's also something, folks, that hasn't been done by a defenseman since Ray Bourque in the early 80s.
Talk about company.
The Caps are special. Yeah it's Ovechkin, but it's really so much more than just him. Though you can understand why we sometimes forget.
Also on Saturday night, in Leaf Land, the boos reigned down on the hometown Habs as they fell 5-2 to their rivals from Toronto.
But not before one Luke Schenn got his long overdue and very well deserved first NHL goal:
Congrats Luke!! :)
However, as the Leafs, despite a few bright spots this year, still struggle overall, the GM has said all players except for Schenn, Grabovski, and John Mitchell, are up for grabs.
If you haven't yet had the chance, read the rest of Brooks today. I think it's hilarious that Bettman and the league really thought they had any power at all regarding the Olympics. It's really comical.
I, for the record, am a huge fan of NHL players in Olympics. The entire 2002 display was some of the best I have ever seen, and something I will always remember.
And while I'm not doing any sort of agreeing with Scott Gomez lately, I do agree with what he said above. If the Olympics are being played, with or without NHL players, I'm still going to watch the Olympics over that two week period. No doubt.
First I went to a bar that promised support of the Washington Capitals. Heck, I didn't need support, I just wanted the game to be on. So I was happy, on Saturday night in football/basketball country, to find the hockey game on three screens.
The game was nothing overly spectacular. Another home win for the Caps at Verizon, where they are just outright dominating this year.
I had a few other random thoughts. Washington might not just contend for the division, as I previously predicted, they might take the East too. I still like Boston - who wouldn't - but if Boston slows down and hits a bad stretch, the Caps have something outragous like 14 out of 16 of their final games in division. So that's 2-3 games against the likes of Carolina, Tampa Bay, and Atlanta. They have to like those odds.
The game, which ended in a 3-1 final (empty net included) was closer than appeared. In fact, again, I'm holding on to the thought that Florida, if a few things fall into place, are looking pretty good right now. Again, another team I predicted to make the playoffs back in October.
Zednick avoided the check of Tom Poti (do I hear faint boos in here)behind the net, to make a nice pass to Ballard for the team's only goal.
And Mike Green scored two goals, which brought his goal scoring streak to 6 games, a Capitals record. It's also something, folks, that hasn't been done by a defenseman since Ray Bourque in the early 80s.
Talk about company.
The Caps are special. Yeah it's Ovechkin, but it's really so much more than just him. Though you can understand why we sometimes forget.
Also on Saturday night, in Leaf Land, the boos reigned down on the hometown Habs as they fell 5-2 to their rivals from Toronto.
But not before one Luke Schenn got his long overdue and very well deserved first NHL goal:
Congrats Luke!! :)
However, as the Leafs, despite a few bright spots this year, still struggle overall, the GM has said all players except for Schenn, Grabovski, and John Mitchell, are up for grabs.
If you haven't yet had the chance, read the rest of Brooks today. I think it's hilarious that Bettman and the league really thought they had any power at all regarding the Olympics. It's really comical.
I, for the record, am a huge fan of NHL players in Olympics. The entire 2002 display was some of the best I have ever seen, and something I will always remember.
And while I'm not doing any sort of agreeing with Scott Gomez lately, I do agree with what he said above. If the Olympics are being played, with or without NHL players, I'm still going to watch the Olympics over that two week period. No doubt.
Saturday, January 3, 2009
The Great AO, Halfway to a Record, and The Funniest Fight I May Have Ever Seen. . .
Well - that game had almost everything.
Almost.
I must say though, I was highly entertained. Annoyed at points, but highly entertained.
The Most Entertaining Moments:
Marc Staal is the man. While I have never been a fan of knock-em down defenseman, Staal has found a way to do it in a way I enjoy. Perhaps because it appears effortless. While he's a tall guy, he's not overly big (196 lbs?) but he hits like he is. And his battles with Ovechkin make me wish these teams played more than four times. Great stuff.
AO. I've been saying it and it's nice to hear the even-if-we-are-getting-more-and-more-nauseating-with-every-game tandem of Joe and Sam say so. He is amazing. That character and that ability. Forget it. There really aren't words for how exciting he can be. A rare thing. I'm envious of Capitals fans getting to see that night in and night out. No wonder they pack the building. The team is great - (with only one loss and one overtime loss at home all year and their best start in 40 years!) but that is the man they are coming to see. No question.
Wade Redden actually stepping up and, well stepping up period. I almost thought I'd fallen asleep and woken up in dreamland. That's the most energy I've seen from him yet. I hope that won't be the last. Show you have a pulse, Wade, damn it. They are paying you enough! Too bad none of that seemed to help their defense.
Petr Prucha getting another chance and another goal. Hmmm. Wonders do never cease to amaze me. It wasn't even Dubinsky and Zherdev, in my opinion, that were having great games. Prucha was just skating with a power all his own, a man possessed. It was great to see and it paid off for him. Now, he scored. Again. He was one of the best players. Again. What else can you ask for from the kid?
Fight of the Year:
No, no, not Orr/Cote, not Orr/Boulton, but Staal and Semin. I have not laughed that hard in a long, long time. And it's just laughter. I mean Semin will never live that down, but he's a great enough player people will probably forgive him for it. But what was going through his head?? haha. I love Staal just ripping the jersey off with no effort. And what can Semin do but slap him like a child who had a toy taken away. I love Semin. I do. But that was the funniest fight I think I have ever seen. Ever.
The Not-So-Entertaining:
Gomez, while speedy, had another one of those games were the speed appears to generate nothing, in the end.
Was it me, or did Drury spend a lot of this game on his butt? It seemed so.
And yet, those are the guys that are out there with the game on the line. The same stagnant group of players that have made the Rangers powerplay. . . a disgrace.
Why not next time the game is on the line, stick Staal back along the line by the defensive zone to block the empty net. Stick Callahan and Dubinsky and Mara in the offensive zone to hit and tie up every other player, much like the PK that seems to work so well. Put Z out there to put the puck on net. And stick Prucha in front of the net.
Tell me even my lay-man's idea doesn't make more sense than what Renney did?
More Than Halfway to a Record:I'd really love to hear the post-game comments on this one. If it hadn't happened 11 times already this year, you might be able to say, bad bounce, and it's Alex freakin' Ovechkin. But, guess what, it's not the first time. And credit AO all you want - you know I will! But the Rangers powerplay is so bad. It's so bad, there are no words. It's so bad they should have been denying it for years now. In fact, it's so bad, they should literally skate the puck back to their OWN zone on the PP, give the puck intentionally to the other team, and play it like a penalty kill.
Because any other way, they are just asking to be scored upon.
12 goals with just over half a season to go. They can hit 22 easy to tie and make 23 goals to set the all-time record for shorties allowed. I am confident they can.
And yet, do they really seem to care? After THREE years of a bad powerplay? And this third year where it has somehow, beyond anyone's comprehension, gotten WORSE?
That's It and That's All:
Really, despite a few decisions I'd correct - like pp personnel and the coaching staff in general - I thought the game was entertaining. I really did. Credit guys like Staal, Prucha, Callahan, Dawes, and even Redden for that tonight. (For the record, even though Joe/Sam overdo it a lot, Dawes has looked remarkably better in the last five. No doubt). And big props to Valliquette. He played very well on the fly and was not in any way the reason this team could not pull out a win.
And AO is AO, so that's entertainment right there.
I just wonder what happens next?
Does this team's big name, big priced players actually, well, learn to play?
When do they stop referring to whatever line Gomez is on as the #1/Top Line?
When do they take my ideas for the PP or give up entirely?
And lastly, if Prucha scores a goal - the only Rangers goal -, and they still lose, does he play again?
Tough ones, folks. Tough ones.
I'm upstairs to watch some World Juniors before the late evening Oilers/Stars tilt. Should be good. Enjoy all.
Almost.
I must say though, I was highly entertained. Annoyed at points, but highly entertained.
The Most Entertaining Moments:
Marc Staal is the man. While I have never been a fan of knock-em down defenseman, Staal has found a way to do it in a way I enjoy. Perhaps because it appears effortless. While he's a tall guy, he's not overly big (196 lbs?) but he hits like he is. And his battles with Ovechkin make me wish these teams played more than four times. Great stuff.
AO. I've been saying it and it's nice to hear the even-if-we-are-getting-more-and-more-nauseating-with-every-game tandem of Joe and Sam say so. He is amazing. That character and that ability. Forget it. There really aren't words for how exciting he can be. A rare thing. I'm envious of Capitals fans getting to see that night in and night out. No wonder they pack the building. The team is great - (with only one loss and one overtime loss at home all year and their best start in 40 years!) but that is the man they are coming to see. No question.
Wade Redden actually stepping up and, well stepping up period. I almost thought I'd fallen asleep and woken up in dreamland. That's the most energy I've seen from him yet. I hope that won't be the last. Show you have a pulse, Wade, damn it. They are paying you enough! Too bad none of that seemed to help their defense.
Petr Prucha getting another chance and another goal. Hmmm. Wonders do never cease to amaze me. It wasn't even Dubinsky and Zherdev, in my opinion, that were having great games. Prucha was just skating with a power all his own, a man possessed. It was great to see and it paid off for him. Now, he scored. Again. He was one of the best players. Again. What else can you ask for from the kid?
Fight of the Year:
No, no, not Orr/Cote, not Orr/Boulton, but Staal and Semin. I have not laughed that hard in a long, long time. And it's just laughter. I mean Semin will never live that down, but he's a great enough player people will probably forgive him for it. But what was going through his head?? haha. I love Staal just ripping the jersey off with no effort. And what can Semin do but slap him like a child who had a toy taken away. I love Semin. I do. But that was the funniest fight I think I have ever seen. Ever.
The Not-So-Entertaining:
Gomez, while speedy, had another one of those games were the speed appears to generate nothing, in the end.
Was it me, or did Drury spend a lot of this game on his butt? It seemed so.
And yet, those are the guys that are out there with the game on the line. The same stagnant group of players that have made the Rangers powerplay. . . a disgrace.
Why not next time the game is on the line, stick Staal back along the line by the defensive zone to block the empty net. Stick Callahan and Dubinsky and Mara in the offensive zone to hit and tie up every other player, much like the PK that seems to work so well. Put Z out there to put the puck on net. And stick Prucha in front of the net.
Tell me even my lay-man's idea doesn't make more sense than what Renney did?
More Than Halfway to a Record:I'd really love to hear the post-game comments on this one. If it hadn't happened 11 times already this year, you might be able to say, bad bounce, and it's Alex freakin' Ovechkin. But, guess what, it's not the first time. And credit AO all you want - you know I will! But the Rangers powerplay is so bad. It's so bad, there are no words. It's so bad they should have been denying it for years now. In fact, it's so bad, they should literally skate the puck back to their OWN zone on the PP, give the puck intentionally to the other team, and play it like a penalty kill.
Because any other way, they are just asking to be scored upon.
12 goals with just over half a season to go. They can hit 22 easy to tie and make 23 goals to set the all-time record for shorties allowed. I am confident they can.
And yet, do they really seem to care? After THREE years of a bad powerplay? And this third year where it has somehow, beyond anyone's comprehension, gotten WORSE?
That's It and That's All:
Really, despite a few decisions I'd correct - like pp personnel and the coaching staff in general - I thought the game was entertaining. I really did. Credit guys like Staal, Prucha, Callahan, Dawes, and even Redden for that tonight. (For the record, even though Joe/Sam overdo it a lot, Dawes has looked remarkably better in the last five. No doubt). And big props to Valliquette. He played very well on the fly and was not in any way the reason this team could not pull out a win.
And AO is AO, so that's entertainment right there.
I just wonder what happens next?
Does this team's big name, big priced players actually, well, learn to play?
When do they stop referring to whatever line Gomez is on as the #1/Top Line?
When do they take my ideas for the PP or give up entirely?
And lastly, if Prucha scores a goal - the only Rangers goal -, and they still lose, does he play again?
Tough ones, folks. Tough ones.
I'm upstairs to watch some World Juniors before the late evening Oilers/Stars tilt. Should be good. Enjoy all.
Wednesday, December 24, 2008
Let Me Share My Coping Mechanism. . .
So I finally have my answer.
It is not outright hatred for my own team. It's not indifference. It's merely something someone could have picked up in Psych 101. (Note, again, I did not pay attention in Psych 101, but my friend was kind enough to share this theory with me on my way home from the game last night).
A coping mechanism.
My laughing when the Capitals team came back and beat the Rangers last night after being down 4-0 at MSG (for the first time in 30 years), wasn't a fluke. It was nothing more than a coping mechanism. I'm laughing because I wish I could be crying, but it's easier to laugh than to allow myself to be as angry, upset, and frustrated as I honestly truly expect to be as a fan that loves and supports her team. So I laugh, because really, sometimes, what else can you do.
So glad that's been cleared up.
Now, do not get me wrong. When the Rangers went up 4-0, I shook my head. Every goal that was scored, I kept saying, who are these guys? I mean good for Ryan Callahan, who looked remarkably better. And Chris Drury had 3 points on the night? Everyone, for the first 10-20 minutes, looked fast, they looked together. In fact, they looked very much like the team that played the final glorious 10 minutes in San Jose Saturday night.
Then the rug was pulled out from under them. Washington, interestingly enough, although it worked, put back in Jose Theodore after having pulled him in the first. The Capitals gained speed, momentum, and scored goals one and two so fast, it really did seem probable they could come back. And of course, they did. The whole way.
I think of Washington as one of those teams. That can never be counted out. Some may think of the Rangers that way. I think the Rangers have proven they are capable of the step by step, small goal comebacks, like 2-0, tie the game, win in a shootout. I just don't know if I can imagine the Rangers coming back from four goals down to win.
Is that a coping mechanism, or is that reality, I don't know.
Coping mechanism to blame, or not, I felt horrible for Hank. Irregardless of whether the goals were his fault or not, I hate for the one guy who has really been there for his team to be embarassed by this utter team collapse. Again.
But for the rest, it should have served as a lesson. That if you play that amazingly to start, and you sit back, you are going to get your butts handed to you by a team like Washington. Did the Rangers lose all their energy? Are they truly physically incapable of playing for 60 minutes one way? Or did they not even play that well in the first place?
Back to Washington though. It never should have been allowed to happen if the team was being responsible. Even without Federov, Semin, and Green, they are a dangerous, dangerous team. And exciting.
And very exciting.
I obviously like Alex Ovechkin a great deal. So seeing him score some goals was fun, I'm not going to apologize for saying that.
And do you know why?
I started thinking. Ovechkin is the greatest example of it right now in hockey. A foreign, a specifically European player, with moves that can dazzle. That can surprise. Be it finesse, be it grace, or in his case, be it pure strength and a King-Midas-Touch - - those type of players enthrall me.
Bure did that. Jagr did that. Malkin does that.
The Rangers own Zherdev certainly at times does that.
I'm not including Americans or Canadians in this comparision, so you can automatically cross off 95% of the Rangers team. And goalies, because they dazzle in a different way than skaters. And defensemen because, well our defensemen at least, cannot dazzle in the way I'm talking about.
So the Rangers have on a regular basis, of European blood, Korpikoski, Sjostrom, Naslund, Zherdev on their team.
Shootouts not-with-standing, I've only seen Zherdev be that type of player. And I don't think he'll be given (or take) the opportunity with this team to be that kind of player I truly enjoy.
He's had sparks. He's had moments. But, because of the way this team is constructed, and the type of game they play, it probably won't happen. And that's a shame.
My point is, Alex Ovechkin is worth the price of admission. The Capitals were down 4-0! He scores a flukey goal, no denying it, but a goal that he got, frankly, because he is that great. The great players are lucky sometimes. And the Rangers game went down like a house of cards.
We'll never have Ovechkin. I'm going to continue to admire him from afar.
My regret is not that, though. It's that we had those type of dynamic, take control, dazzle-me type European skaters before. Where did they all go?
With that, Merry Christmas, Happy Hannukah, Happy Holidays to all.
P.S. Another thought struck me. When the Capitals scored to tie it and when they scored to win it in overtime, the team showed such life. Such life and exhuberance. I was happy to see them be happy, frankly. Happy to see players being happy, showing they are alive, happy, and playing a game they love.
I've seen the Rangers look that happy, that exhuberant, exactly twice this year. When Zherdev scored with 8 seconds left to tie the game versus Pittsburgh. And then Prucha scored with 6 minutes left to tie the game versus Pittsburgh.
Everyone keeps saying this team is "on one page" and "together" and "supportive" and they "get along perfectly." That all might be true. But they apparently are on one page, together, and supportive in their attempt to be complacent, get by with half efforts, and bore those fans that adore them.
If the team thinks they need to take a long look at themselves this holiday break, fine. I think they need to take a long look at San Jose, at Chicago, at Washington. Those are the dynamic teams in the league that look like they are truly having fun. Those are the dynamic teams in the leagues that their fans must really enjoy watching.
It is not outright hatred for my own team. It's not indifference. It's merely something someone could have picked up in Psych 101. (Note, again, I did not pay attention in Psych 101, but my friend was kind enough to share this theory with me on my way home from the game last night).
A coping mechanism.
My laughing when the Capitals team came back and beat the Rangers last night after being down 4-0 at MSG (for the first time in 30 years), wasn't a fluke. It was nothing more than a coping mechanism. I'm laughing because I wish I could be crying, but it's easier to laugh than to allow myself to be as angry, upset, and frustrated as I honestly truly expect to be as a fan that loves and supports her team. So I laugh, because really, sometimes, what else can you do.
So glad that's been cleared up.
Now, do not get me wrong. When the Rangers went up 4-0, I shook my head. Every goal that was scored, I kept saying, who are these guys? I mean good for Ryan Callahan, who looked remarkably better. And Chris Drury had 3 points on the night? Everyone, for the first 10-20 minutes, looked fast, they looked together. In fact, they looked very much like the team that played the final glorious 10 minutes in San Jose Saturday night.
Then the rug was pulled out from under them. Washington, interestingly enough, although it worked, put back in Jose Theodore after having pulled him in the first. The Capitals gained speed, momentum, and scored goals one and two so fast, it really did seem probable they could come back. And of course, they did. The whole way.
I think of Washington as one of those teams. That can never be counted out. Some may think of the Rangers that way. I think the Rangers have proven they are capable of the step by step, small goal comebacks, like 2-0, tie the game, win in a shootout. I just don't know if I can imagine the Rangers coming back from four goals down to win.
Is that a coping mechanism, or is that reality, I don't know.
Coping mechanism to blame, or not, I felt horrible for Hank. Irregardless of whether the goals were his fault or not, I hate for the one guy who has really been there for his team to be embarassed by this utter team collapse. Again.
But for the rest, it should have served as a lesson. That if you play that amazingly to start, and you sit back, you are going to get your butts handed to you by a team like Washington. Did the Rangers lose all their energy? Are they truly physically incapable of playing for 60 minutes one way? Or did they not even play that well in the first place?
Back to Washington though. It never should have been allowed to happen if the team was being responsible. Even without Federov, Semin, and Green, they are a dangerous, dangerous team. And exciting.
And very exciting.
I obviously like Alex Ovechkin a great deal. So seeing him score some goals was fun, I'm not going to apologize for saying that.
And do you know why?
I started thinking. Ovechkin is the greatest example of it right now in hockey. A foreign, a specifically European player, with moves that can dazzle. That can surprise. Be it finesse, be it grace, or in his case, be it pure strength and a King-Midas-Touch - - those type of players enthrall me.
Bure did that. Jagr did that. Malkin does that.
The Rangers own Zherdev certainly at times does that.
I'm not including Americans or Canadians in this comparision, so you can automatically cross off 95% of the Rangers team. And goalies, because they dazzle in a different way than skaters. And defensemen because, well our defensemen at least, cannot dazzle in the way I'm talking about.
So the Rangers have on a regular basis, of European blood, Korpikoski, Sjostrom, Naslund, Zherdev on their team.
Shootouts not-with-standing, I've only seen Zherdev be that type of player. And I don't think he'll be given (or take) the opportunity with this team to be that kind of player I truly enjoy.
He's had sparks. He's had moments. But, because of the way this team is constructed, and the type of game they play, it probably won't happen. And that's a shame.
My point is, Alex Ovechkin is worth the price of admission. The Capitals were down 4-0! He scores a flukey goal, no denying it, but a goal that he got, frankly, because he is that great. The great players are lucky sometimes. And the Rangers game went down like a house of cards.
We'll never have Ovechkin. I'm going to continue to admire him from afar.
My regret is not that, though. It's that we had those type of dynamic, take control, dazzle-me type European skaters before. Where did they all go?
With that, Merry Christmas, Happy Hannukah, Happy Holidays to all.
P.S. Another thought struck me. When the Capitals scored to tie it and when they scored to win it in overtime, the team showed such life. Such life and exhuberance. I was happy to see them be happy, frankly. Happy to see players being happy, showing they are alive, happy, and playing a game they love.
I've seen the Rangers look that happy, that exhuberant, exactly twice this year. When Zherdev scored with 8 seconds left to tie the game versus Pittsburgh. And then Prucha scored with 6 minutes left to tie the game versus Pittsburgh.
Everyone keeps saying this team is "on one page" and "together" and "supportive" and they "get along perfectly." That all might be true. But they apparently are on one page, together, and supportive in their attempt to be complacent, get by with half efforts, and bore those fans that adore them.
If the team thinks they need to take a long look at themselves this holiday break, fine. I think they need to take a long look at San Jose, at Chicago, at Washington. Those are the dynamic teams in the league that look like they are truly having fun. Those are the dynamic teams in the leagues that their fans must really enjoy watching.
Monday, November 24, 2008
Jersey Retirement Ceremonies and Saturday Wrapup. . .
In the years I've had Centre Ice, I've not had the chance to see all the retirement ceremonies that I've wanted to. Sometimes the coverage I get doesn't begin until after the ceremonies are over.
That being said, Saturday was especially nice. The chance to see not one, but two, retirement ceremonies. Patrick Roy's #33 in Montreal and Wendel Clark's #17 in Toronto. Two different people. Two different ceremonies. But one great Saturday night for all of us that had the pleasure.
I'll start with saying how different the ceremonies were, for two of hockey's greatest cities. I've seen Montreal Canadiens retirement ceremonies before. Most recently the ceremony for Boom Boom Geoffrion before the Rangers and Habs game in March of 2006. Montreal does hockey. Montreal is hockey. There is no denying they can put on some great ceremonies. Historic class.
Add Patrck Roy to the list of French Canadians that I love to hear speak. I greatly enjoy the opportunity to hear the French language spoken, especially in regards to hockey, and this was no different. Patrick's departure from Montreal might not have been under the best of circumstances. But, his return, undoubtedly, was done well.
Wendel Clark's ceremony was different from any I have seen. And I will note, I do not think I've seen a Maple Leafs one before. But from all indications, Clark would have wanted no different than a simple ceremony. Both teams lined up - the Maple Leafs each wearing a "C" and #17 jersey - which to me, gives a sense of passing the torch to new generations. They showed a video montage. Clark spoke. It was just he, his wife, two daughter and son on the ice. He dropped the ceremonial faceoff puck between Jonathan Toews and Tomas Kaberle, which I thought was pretty cool. My favorite part, without fail, was the banner raising itself. Toronto has always had the perfect music for great moments. And this was no different. Clark's ceremony was simplistic class. And I'm sorry, but there may not be prettier banners than those raised for the honored Maple Leafs.
To me retirement ceremonies are nice. Sometimes long and overdone. But it's a special night for the player, his family, and his teammates. And you have to respect that. I've had the incredibly fortunate opportunity to see three such ceremonies in person so far, Mike Richter, Mark Messier, and Brian Leetch. Regardless of whose number is getting retired, my favorite moment is not the speeches or the tribute videos, or the tears, although all those are all special. It's the moment the arena goes dark, and the banner makes its ascent. That always gives me chills. It's a true sense of permanency in the world of sports where sometimes it appears so little stays the same.
Congratulations to #33 and #17.
HNIC recap:
*Watching PJ Stock with his Wendel Clark moustache on Scoreboard Saturday was worth the price of admission. You cannot fake his facial reaction as the moustache began to slip. And the laughing. You try not cracking up when watching that. It's just classic.
*Enjoyed the interview with Mike Cammalleri on After Hours. He told a great story of how Tommy Kostopolos "got" former coach Marc Crawford with shampoo. And how he got traded on Draft Day this year and found out by watching TV. Also, how he is a true fan of Joe Sakic. There are few better than Joe. Good stuff.
*On that note, I am not sure I love Marc Crawford. I don't love his voice. Perhaps at this point it's his hesitancy to ask good questions or questions at all. He seems unsure. And maybe that's natural for a guy who isn't accustomed to doing this. But Scott Oake is carrying the After Hours team. And poor Kelly Hrudey is stuck with coach Millbury. *sigh*
*I couldn't include this above but I had to mention it. Patrick Roy's son is hot. (Actually all of his children are incredibly good looking). But even though his son has his father's temper, Jonathan is pretty to look at. Apparently he's a rap artist now too. His music is on myspace under J.O.E. Daking. Seriously folks, you can't make this stuff up. I'll add a link when I can.
Random Around the League:
*Watched the end of the Habs/Bruins game and the shootout. Amazing announcing team. A true pleasure. And Boston is legit. No question about it.
*Watched the late game - Sharks/Capitals. Didn't quite live up to all the hype (in my head that is), as the Caps were less than stellar. But still a heck of a game. Nice little fight between Brashear and Jody Shelley. Just how fast is Milan Michalek? Jeeze. And just how fast is that whole San Jose team? [Makes me almost shed a tear to think about how slow the Rangers looked against, well, against anyone so far this year.] Rob Blake, Christian Ehrhoff among the league leaders in defensive scoring. A nice feature on how Devon Setogucci stays in shape in the off-season. Badminton. You heard it here first. Badminton. Although I must say it was one of my favorite gym class activities, although nothing beat floor hockey - am I right? And lastly, Joe Thornton got called for an unsportsmanlike conduct penalty, for icing. Not that icing. But for icing Brent Johnson, the Caps goalie. I heard the announcers say it was in the rule book, but I have never seen that called in my memory. [also, did you know there was comcast out west? I turned from the caps feed to the sharks feed and BOTH were comcast which really threw me off. Good deal though when you get the choice of announcing teams, although no complaints of either on Saturday night.]
Rangers:
Rangers play the Coyotes tonight as Wayne Gretzky returns to the Garden for the 2nd time in two seasons. Last I heard Scott Gomez might be more than 50% to play, and if so Nigel Dawes will take a seat to make room for him. But will anybody skate, shoot, or score? That plays for the Rangers? Yeah, I'm not sure what to think about tonight. I'm not trying to get down on them. I'm really trying to be realistic. And the realistic honesty about this is the Rangers stole a lot of points when they were not playing complete games. They are now losing points because they can't seem to stop the bleeding. Big game tonight. Big game.
That being said, Saturday was especially nice. The chance to see not one, but two, retirement ceremonies. Patrick Roy's #33 in Montreal and Wendel Clark's #17 in Toronto. Two different people. Two different ceremonies. But one great Saturday night for all of us that had the pleasure.
I'll start with saying how different the ceremonies were, for two of hockey's greatest cities. I've seen Montreal Canadiens retirement ceremonies before. Most recently the ceremony for Boom Boom Geoffrion before the Rangers and Habs game in March of 2006. Montreal does hockey. Montreal is hockey. There is no denying they can put on some great ceremonies. Historic class.
Add Patrck Roy to the list of French Canadians that I love to hear speak. I greatly enjoy the opportunity to hear the French language spoken, especially in regards to hockey, and this was no different. Patrick's departure from Montreal might not have been under the best of circumstances. But, his return, undoubtedly, was done well.
Wendel Clark's ceremony was different from any I have seen. And I will note, I do not think I've seen a Maple Leafs one before. But from all indications, Clark would have wanted no different than a simple ceremony. Both teams lined up - the Maple Leafs each wearing a "C" and #17 jersey - which to me, gives a sense of passing the torch to new generations. They showed a video montage. Clark spoke. It was just he, his wife, two daughter and son on the ice. He dropped the ceremonial faceoff puck between Jonathan Toews and Tomas Kaberle, which I thought was pretty cool. My favorite part, without fail, was the banner raising itself. Toronto has always had the perfect music for great moments. And this was no different. Clark's ceremony was simplistic class. And I'm sorry, but there may not be prettier banners than those raised for the honored Maple Leafs.
To me retirement ceremonies are nice. Sometimes long and overdone. But it's a special night for the player, his family, and his teammates. And you have to respect that. I've had the incredibly fortunate opportunity to see three such ceremonies in person so far, Mike Richter, Mark Messier, and Brian Leetch. Regardless of whose number is getting retired, my favorite moment is not the speeches or the tribute videos, or the tears, although all those are all special. It's the moment the arena goes dark, and the banner makes its ascent. That always gives me chills. It's a true sense of permanency in the world of sports where sometimes it appears so little stays the same.
Congratulations to #33 and #17.
HNIC recap:
*Watching PJ Stock with his Wendel Clark moustache on Scoreboard Saturday was worth the price of admission. You cannot fake his facial reaction as the moustache began to slip. And the laughing. You try not cracking up when watching that. It's just classic.
*Enjoyed the interview with Mike Cammalleri on After Hours. He told a great story of how Tommy Kostopolos "got" former coach Marc Crawford with shampoo. And how he got traded on Draft Day this year and found out by watching TV. Also, how he is a true fan of Joe Sakic. There are few better than Joe. Good stuff.
*On that note, I am not sure I love Marc Crawford. I don't love his voice. Perhaps at this point it's his hesitancy to ask good questions or questions at all. He seems unsure. And maybe that's natural for a guy who isn't accustomed to doing this. But Scott Oake is carrying the After Hours team. And poor Kelly Hrudey is stuck with coach Millbury. *sigh*
*I couldn't include this above but I had to mention it. Patrick Roy's son is hot. (Actually all of his children are incredibly good looking). But even though his son has his father's temper, Jonathan is pretty to look at. Apparently he's a rap artist now too. His music is on myspace under J.O.E. Daking. Seriously folks, you can't make this stuff up. I'll add a link when I can.
Random Around the League:
*Watched the end of the Habs/Bruins game and the shootout. Amazing announcing team. A true pleasure. And Boston is legit. No question about it.
*Watched the late game - Sharks/Capitals. Didn't quite live up to all the hype (in my head that is), as the Caps were less than stellar. But still a heck of a game. Nice little fight between Brashear and Jody Shelley. Just how fast is Milan Michalek? Jeeze. And just how fast is that whole San Jose team? [Makes me almost shed a tear to think about how slow the Rangers looked against, well, against anyone so far this year.] Rob Blake, Christian Ehrhoff among the league leaders in defensive scoring. A nice feature on how Devon Setogucci stays in shape in the off-season. Badminton. You heard it here first. Badminton. Although I must say it was one of my favorite gym class activities, although nothing beat floor hockey - am I right? And lastly, Joe Thornton got called for an unsportsmanlike conduct penalty, for icing. Not that icing. But for icing Brent Johnson, the Caps goalie. I heard the announcers say it was in the rule book, but I have never seen that called in my memory. [also, did you know there was comcast out west? I turned from the caps feed to the sharks feed and BOTH were comcast which really threw me off. Good deal though when you get the choice of announcing teams, although no complaints of either on Saturday night.]
Rangers:
Rangers play the Coyotes tonight as Wayne Gretzky returns to the Garden for the 2nd time in two seasons. Last I heard Scott Gomez might be more than 50% to play, and if so Nigel Dawes will take a seat to make room for him. But will anybody skate, shoot, or score? That plays for the Rangers? Yeah, I'm not sure what to think about tonight. I'm not trying to get down on them. I'm really trying to be realistic. And the realistic honesty about this is the Rangers stole a lot of points when they were not playing complete games. They are now losing points because they can't seem to stop the bleeding. Big game tonight. Big game.
Monday, November 10, 2008
Saturday's Cap Wrap and Oil Pre-game Thoughts. . . [updated]
So I actually saw Saturdays Rangers/Capitals game live from DC on Saturday. I'd never been to Verizon Center before and have to report, it's very nice. Very easy to drive to, parking right across the street, and in a good, safe area. And a really beautiful arena at only about 10 or so years old. The people I ran into were nice, both fans and employees. No complaints and I would happiliy go again and tell others to do the same.
The game on the other hand left something to be desired.
The Capitals most definitely came ready to play. Undefeated at home so far this season, they used it to their advantage. The Rangers, on the other hand, looked hungover from Thursday's wild victory over Tampa Bay. They were not awake, pretty flat, and it was kinda hard to watch at times. Thankfully the speed of the game was at least a little improved over the Rangers other lackluster games.
I don't know what I thought about the two goals the Capitals scored. I still have yet to see a replay of the net off the mooring goal. Perhaps that can be argued. As for the second goal, where Hank was nudged in the crease, I don't know how much an argument there is there either.
So while I don't have complaints on the goals scored, I do have to complain that the Rangers, again, weren't willing to stick up for themselves or for Henrik. If there was even a bit of traffic in front of him, which there most definitely was, and he got bumped a few times, there should be some reprocussions. On this team, however, they don't seem to have that rough and tumble mindset. And that's a shame. A little tussle would have done something to make the game more exciting, perhaps.
Overall, I have the following to say. I don't think one person, with maybe the exception of Hank, has been consistent this year. Usually, in my experience, you often have at least one player clicking constantly. They might go dry for a short while, but then they come back. Who has been that player? I mean with the exception of Mara and perhaps Callahan, not many of these guys seem to be "in the game" night in and night out. Correct me if I'm wrong.
On that note, these have been my observations of the Drury/Prucha/Dawes line the last 3 games. (Note, Prucha played 10/25 and 10/27, DNP 10/30 and 11/1, and has played the last three games). They are not a good line. I think whoever thought they would be to start the season was sadly mistaken (I am willing to admit that BEFORE the season, I thought they'd be a good, solid, and permanent line. Oh how little I knew back then!). But whoever thought they would be a good combo at this juncture of the season , I certainly think that's an even worse prediction. They are simply not effective. They are, in all honesty and to a lay-man observer, quite the same players. All of them. They shuffle around and try to get in good position to - - get the puck. Not to pass it, but to receive it. I am not calling them selfish players because they appear to be trying to play as a unit. I am just saying they are all in similar mold. They are not working. I often see all three in the same exact position on the ice. Whether digging in the corners, or standing in front of thet net for a deflection. They are all doing the same exact thing. Dawes, presumably and if he didn't appear slower and still unready to start the season, and Prucha, again, based on when he was most successful, need to have people dishing them the puck in prime locations. That isn't happening. And this isn't even a knock on Drury. It's just that he too, seems to have no clue what is going on this season, for the most part. Was his game against Tampa Bay on last Thursday a good one? Definitely. But over 90% of this season, he has looked lost and been ineffective on anything except the PK. If he has a good night on faceoffs, it's still not really helping the situation. Drury was 60% on the night on faceoffs Saturday. The team was a dreadful 38%. And win or lose, the Rangers faceoffs do not seem to end up generating goals. Quite obviously not good.
I guess what I am saying is this. Drury is Drury and the Rangers are stuck with him, good, bad,or indifferent, and I, personally, hope there are more games like Thusday versus Tampa in him. Dawes, in my mind and I don't think I'm alone, has probably been one of the least effective on the team, but yet somehow seems immune to benching. Prucha, who I have defended, has looked more flat in his last two, than he did in the 3 previous games he played. (Note, it was he and not Dawes that got the bench in favor of Sjostrom for the last few shifts Saturday). I am not sure of much, but if Prucha's going to be successful at all, I am sure it cannot be with Drury. It has to be with Gomez or Dubinsky. And I don't think that will happen because . . .
This team, and myself included at this point, seem to have hung the world on Scott Gomez's shoulders. He's been yielded as being a great passer. And that may be. And he might just be this team's only true set up guy. Because apparently our defense are not at all good at the breakout passes they were so touted for. (Wade *cough* Redden). The Rangers are a team of guys that are a) too small to make things happen themselves (except draw penalties, and well, you know how well getting the man advantage has worked for them so far) or b) not capable of playing give and go. Just looking to do the 'go' part. And that doesn't add up. To take a quick look at some numbers, I went to hockeydb.com (necessary and awesome site, btw) and took a look at the Rangers team to get a look at how many goals versus assists they have.
It breaks down as:
more G > A
Prucha (59G/45A)
Betts (24G/17A)
More A > G
Gomez (135G/397A)
Naslund (376G 459A)
Zherdev (81G/114A)
Drury (223G/307A)
Sjostrom (35G/42A)
Dubinsky (18G/35A)
G =/~ A (essentially equal)
Callahan(17G/18A)
Dawes (16G/16A)
Voros (13G/12A)
Orr (3G/4A)
For the record, Korpikoski, has one playoff goal in the NHL. His AHL numbers slightly favor scoring over setting up, but it's rather soon to tell.
And, honestly, can you really look at guys like Betts and Orr given their roles on the team? No. (Note Betts, in 05-06 and 06-07, had 8-9 goals each year. That dropped to 2 in 07-08 as his role changed). Can you say that Sjostrom, Dubinsky, Dawes, Prucha, Voros, or Callahan have had long enough careers to make any true speculation? No.
But what it comes down to is that Naslund, Drury, and even Zherdev have very similar rations of goals to assists. And Gomez is the only one that has a clear and distinct advantage of Assists to Goals - about a 3 assists for every 1 goal ratio. That's a set up guy. (Side note: currently, just a year and change into his careers, Dubinsky is operating at 2-1 for assists to goals).
But the numbers don't lie.
And that's a shame, because with seemingly untradable salaries like Gomez, Drury, Redden, and Rozsival, how do you go and get a guy that can be another set up guy? You probably don't. And until then, whatever line Gomez is on is going to be expected to shoulder the brunt of the scoring. And the lines with Drury and Betts will be around for defensive roles only, and as a result, the guys like Sjostrom, Orr, Prucha, Dawes, or who-ever are with them, will not be put in prime position to score. And consequently, the Rangers will lose game 2-1 like they did on Saturday because while they will be able to hold the opposition to 2 goals, they will not able to find the net at least 2 times to pull the game to overtime.
I said it the other day; I'm glad I'm not the coach. Because what can you possibly do? Continue switching lines to try and gain chemistry. And run the risk of switching too soon, too much, and too often. Or leave lines that like Drury/Dawes/Prucha out there that really will have little chance of succeeding as is.
The only thing I can say is that one Lauri Korpikoski, fresh off a Hartford hat trick, has been recalled and will, persumably, skate with the big club tonight. Who comes out - don't know. (I'd vote Dawes, but again, I don't get a vote and I certainly think it will be Prucha taking a seat). What will that do to the lines - no idea. Will any of this affect the dismal powerplay or general lackluster attitude? I can't imagine so.
But, as a fan, I'll hope. Considering they have the Oilers coming in fresh off a win in NJ last night, riding a new goaltender: Jeff Drouin-Deslauriers (Dru-enn-DeLaurien / think the car from Back to the Future!) and have been known to score more than two goals when given the chance, the Rangers have to be smart tonight.
Lastly, congratulations to Glenn Anderson, Igor Larionov, Ray Scapinello, and Ed Chymoweth who will be inducted into the Hockey Hall of Fame this evening.
P.S. In doing some looking at all time assist leaders and the like, I had some wow moments. Doug Weight - has 2.6% more assists than goals per his career (268G/714A). Chelios, a guy who I never liked and, yes, it is noted his is a defenseman, has a ridiculous amount of career assists (185G/763A). And out of the active leaders and assist leaders for their career, Mike Modano, Mats Sundin and Joe Sakic are worth every penny. As if that were in question.
**Authors Edit: 11/10/08 - 1:05pm
According to the blogs, Nigel Dawes will sit so Korpikoski can play. Prucha will also sit, to make room for Dan Fritsche, who yes, is due a turn in at this point in the roulette/carousel/musical chairs game. I'm fine with this. Ideally would have liked to see Drury with Korpikoski and Prucha. But Fristche is due and I think it's more than time for Dawes to sit in favor of fresh blood. Game on! 6 hrs and counting til the opening faceoff. **
The game on the other hand left something to be desired.
The Capitals most definitely came ready to play. Undefeated at home so far this season, they used it to their advantage. The Rangers, on the other hand, looked hungover from Thursday's wild victory over Tampa Bay. They were not awake, pretty flat, and it was kinda hard to watch at times. Thankfully the speed of the game was at least a little improved over the Rangers other lackluster games.
I don't know what I thought about the two goals the Capitals scored. I still have yet to see a replay of the net off the mooring goal. Perhaps that can be argued. As for the second goal, where Hank was nudged in the crease, I don't know how much an argument there is there either.
So while I don't have complaints on the goals scored, I do have to complain that the Rangers, again, weren't willing to stick up for themselves or for Henrik. If there was even a bit of traffic in front of him, which there most definitely was, and he got bumped a few times, there should be some reprocussions. On this team, however, they don't seem to have that rough and tumble mindset. And that's a shame. A little tussle would have done something to make the game more exciting, perhaps.
Overall, I have the following to say. I don't think one person, with maybe the exception of Hank, has been consistent this year. Usually, in my experience, you often have at least one player clicking constantly. They might go dry for a short while, but then they come back. Who has been that player? I mean with the exception of Mara and perhaps Callahan, not many of these guys seem to be "in the game" night in and night out. Correct me if I'm wrong.
On that note, these have been my observations of the Drury/Prucha/Dawes line the last 3 games. (Note, Prucha played 10/25 and 10/27, DNP 10/30 and 11/1, and has played the last three games). They are not a good line. I think whoever thought they would be to start the season was sadly mistaken (I am willing to admit that BEFORE the season, I thought they'd be a good, solid, and permanent line. Oh how little I knew back then!). But whoever thought they would be a good combo at this juncture of the season , I certainly think that's an even worse prediction. They are simply not effective. They are, in all honesty and to a lay-man observer, quite the same players. All of them. They shuffle around and try to get in good position to - - get the puck. Not to pass it, but to receive it. I am not calling them selfish players because they appear to be trying to play as a unit. I am just saying they are all in similar mold. They are not working. I often see all three in the same exact position on the ice. Whether digging in the corners, or standing in front of thet net for a deflection. They are all doing the same exact thing. Dawes, presumably and if he didn't appear slower and still unready to start the season, and Prucha, again, based on when he was most successful, need to have people dishing them the puck in prime locations. That isn't happening. And this isn't even a knock on Drury. It's just that he too, seems to have no clue what is going on this season, for the most part. Was his game against Tampa Bay on last Thursday a good one? Definitely. But over 90% of this season, he has looked lost and been ineffective on anything except the PK. If he has a good night on faceoffs, it's still not really helping the situation. Drury was 60% on the night on faceoffs Saturday. The team was a dreadful 38%. And win or lose, the Rangers faceoffs do not seem to end up generating goals. Quite obviously not good.
I guess what I am saying is this. Drury is Drury and the Rangers are stuck with him, good, bad,or indifferent, and I, personally, hope there are more games like Thusday versus Tampa in him. Dawes, in my mind and I don't think I'm alone, has probably been one of the least effective on the team, but yet somehow seems immune to benching. Prucha, who I have defended, has looked more flat in his last two, than he did in the 3 previous games he played. (Note, it was he and not Dawes that got the bench in favor of Sjostrom for the last few shifts Saturday). I am not sure of much, but if Prucha's going to be successful at all, I am sure it cannot be with Drury. It has to be with Gomez or Dubinsky. And I don't think that will happen because . . .
This team, and myself included at this point, seem to have hung the world on Scott Gomez's shoulders. He's been yielded as being a great passer. And that may be. And he might just be this team's only true set up guy. Because apparently our defense are not at all good at the breakout passes they were so touted for. (Wade *cough* Redden). The Rangers are a team of guys that are a) too small to make things happen themselves (except draw penalties, and well, you know how well getting the man advantage has worked for them so far) or b) not capable of playing give and go. Just looking to do the 'go' part. And that doesn't add up. To take a quick look at some numbers, I went to hockeydb.com (necessary and awesome site, btw) and took a look at the Rangers team to get a look at how many goals versus assists they have.
It breaks down as:
more G > A
Prucha (59G/45A)
Betts (24G/17A)
More A > G
Gomez (135G/397A)
Naslund (376G 459A)
Zherdev (81G/114A)
Drury (223G/307A)
Sjostrom (35G/42A)
Dubinsky (18G/35A)
G =/~ A (essentially equal)
Callahan(17G/18A)
Dawes (16G/16A)
Voros (13G/12A)
Orr (3G/4A)
For the record, Korpikoski, has one playoff goal in the NHL. His AHL numbers slightly favor scoring over setting up, but it's rather soon to tell.
And, honestly, can you really look at guys like Betts and Orr given their roles on the team? No. (Note Betts, in 05-06 and 06-07, had 8-9 goals each year. That dropped to 2 in 07-08 as his role changed). Can you say that Sjostrom, Dubinsky, Dawes, Prucha, Voros, or Callahan have had long enough careers to make any true speculation? No.
But what it comes down to is that Naslund, Drury, and even Zherdev have very similar rations of goals to assists. And Gomez is the only one that has a clear and distinct advantage of Assists to Goals - about a 3 assists for every 1 goal ratio. That's a set up guy. (Side note: currently, just a year and change into his careers, Dubinsky is operating at 2-1 for assists to goals).
But the numbers don't lie.
And that's a shame, because with seemingly untradable salaries like Gomez, Drury, Redden, and Rozsival, how do you go and get a guy that can be another set up guy? You probably don't. And until then, whatever line Gomez is on is going to be expected to shoulder the brunt of the scoring. And the lines with Drury and Betts will be around for defensive roles only, and as a result, the guys like Sjostrom, Orr, Prucha, Dawes, or who-ever are with them, will not be put in prime position to score. And consequently, the Rangers will lose game 2-1 like they did on Saturday because while they will be able to hold the opposition to 2 goals, they will not able to find the net at least 2 times to pull the game to overtime.
I said it the other day; I'm glad I'm not the coach. Because what can you possibly do? Continue switching lines to try and gain chemistry. And run the risk of switching too soon, too much, and too often. Or leave lines that like Drury/Dawes/Prucha out there that really will have little chance of succeeding as is.
The only thing I can say is that one Lauri Korpikoski, fresh off a Hartford hat trick, has been recalled and will, persumably, skate with the big club tonight. Who comes out - don't know. (I'd vote Dawes, but again, I don't get a vote and I certainly think it will be Prucha taking a seat). What will that do to the lines - no idea. Will any of this affect the dismal powerplay or general lackluster attitude? I can't imagine so.
But, as a fan, I'll hope. Considering they have the Oilers coming in fresh off a win in NJ last night, riding a new goaltender: Jeff Drouin-Deslauriers (Dru-enn-DeLaurien / think the car from Back to the Future!) and have been known to score more than two goals when given the chance, the Rangers have to be smart tonight.
Lastly, congratulations to Glenn Anderson, Igor Larionov, Ray Scapinello, and Ed Chymoweth who will be inducted into the Hockey Hall of Fame this evening.
P.S. In doing some looking at all time assist leaders and the like, I had some wow moments. Doug Weight - has 2.6% more assists than goals per his career (268G/714A). Chelios, a guy who I never liked and, yes, it is noted his is a defenseman, has a ridiculous amount of career assists (185G/763A). And out of the active leaders and assist leaders for their career, Mike Modano, Mats Sundin and Joe Sakic are worth every penny. As if that were in question.
**Authors Edit: 11/10/08 - 1:05pm
According to the blogs, Nigel Dawes will sit so Korpikoski can play. Prucha will also sit, to make room for Dan Fritsche, who yes, is due a turn in at this point in the roulette/carousel/musical chairs game. I'm fine with this. Ideally would have liked to see Drury with Korpikoski and Prucha. But Fristche is due and I think it's more than time for Dawes to sit in favor of fresh blood. Game on! 6 hrs and counting til the opening faceoff. **
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
