Just post game thoughts. Im having guests over and I wont be able to watch the game live.

Rangers Review | Comments Off

Rangers Review | Comments Off

That may have been the worst reffing job in a playoff game with the Rangers in it that I have ever seen. There have been worse screw jobs for sure out there, but my goodness, could they get any more blatant out there?

The plays within 45 seconds of each other in particular were just atrocious. First Scotty Gomez gets tripped, blatantly, in front of the ref, no call, then 15 seconds later Sean Avery gets hauled down like they were playing Rugby out there, then 15 seconds later Henrik Lundqvist has stick slashed out of his hands, again directly in front of a ref, no call, then 15 seconds later, the puck is put into the net.

Think you can’t blame refs for games? Baloney, this one had ref screw job written all over it. How on earth was there no call when Jagr slightly bumped Uncle Daddy and you see him fall over like he took a bullet to the chest, then you see him clearly take his helmet off so he gets a whistle. He noticed that the impact didnt get a whistle, so the son of a bitch takes his helmet off so that as a prone player the refs are forced within the scope of the NHL rules to blow the whistle. Uhh, hello, delay of game anyone?! Unsportsman like conduct? 5 minutes for being an epic douchebag would work for me. If that wasn’t bad enough, the ludicrous reffing actually kept going!!! Freddy Sjostrom took a crosscheck to the back that pushed him into a diving Uncle Daddy, granted Uncle Daddy got the proper 2 minutes for being a douchebag, but Sjostrom got a frigging unbelievable even up call for goaltender interference! The guy got cross checked into the goalie! What on earth is he supposed to do? If that wasn’t bad enough, Sjo took a high stick to the face seconds after the play that drew blood. 4 minute double minor on the Devils? Uhh, are you new here? Of course not, no call on the Devil perpetrator, just a slap on the back from the refs for a job well down. I havent even scratched the surface on this game fellas. There was a play with 3 successive crosschecks to the back of Ryan Callahan not 2 feet in front of the ref who was staring right at the play. No call. Scotty Gomez getting boarded not 3 feet from a ref. No call. Jagr and Dubinsky skating in on an odd man rush (it was either 2 on 1, or 2 on 2, I can’t remember at the moment), offsides. I mean, I can go on and on, but really, why bother? The squeaky wheel is getting the oil. Lou Lams cried about the reffing in game 2, Brent Sutter threw a stick onto the ice, and the league got the message, tilt the ice in their favor and hope Lou picks up a handkerchief.

The funny thing about all this bitching of mine about the reffing? We still won the friggin game. Nothing, nothing on this earth, makes you happier than shoving that bull*hit reffing right back in their frigging faces with a big fat W. The Rangers played a superb game folks. This was not a game I will complain about a lack of performance by the good guys. We played our game, and rightfully used our superior play to draw legitimate penalties that never came. The flow of this game changes drastically if the game is called correctly. This wasn’t a 5-3 super close game by the way the 2 teams played. This was a 7-1 drubbing by the Rangers that was far closer than it should have been thanks to a despicable effort by referees who should be fired on the spot.

Now, let’s get back to the actual game at hand. More specifically, the star of this game, and dare I say the series. Marc Staal. Remember a few years ago, and even last year, when everyone was saying this kid was a legitimate #1 defenseman? Folks, the #1 defenseman has arrived.

This was one of those defining games in a kids career, when he goes from just a rookie, to a superstar. Marc Staal dominated this game from start to finish. Even if you take away the fact that he scored the game winner, he was easily the #1 star in a game with 2 separate 2 goal scorers. How good was he? He was so good that if the Devils came down on him with a 5 on 1 rush, I would feel completely confident that he would break it up. Thats how friggin good he was. Odd man rushes, one on one battles, plays below the circles, penalty killing, on the rush…wherever you could think of, he stood out as a man among boys. Watching him make an end to end rush that did not score, only to have him skate all the way back and with little to no effort break up a rush against to set up another rush the other way, just shows you how spectacular this kid can be, will be, and is starting to become. Were talking about a 20 year old SHUT DOWN defenseman, who stood out as the best player on the ice. Think about that folks. He’s 20 freaking years old!!! He’s younger than my younger brother! He’s younger than the youngest friend that I have. Holy Moly, that is all I can say. I’m not impressed with this kid, I’m blown the hell away.

I give Tom Renney a lot of crap, but I am man enough to admit that he has some positives. The guy is a genius at bringing kids along so that they can stand the test of time at the NHL level (granted that is why, in my previous rants, I have said he would be better as a player personnel director or developmental director, or assistant coach).

Up 3-1, I am a lot more confident today than I was even after we went up 2-0. Why? Because for the first time all series, I can say that the Rangers played better than the Devils, and deserved the win. There you have it. Good night everyone, see you on Friday.

EDIT: One last thing. If you hate the Devils as much as I do, you need to check out this link.

Rangers Review | Comments Off

-Here we go…

-My prediction in this one prior to the game is that the Rangers will FINALLY play a good game, 2 minutes in, they look strong.

-You see how a good offense doesn’t necessarily lead to poor defense? Rangers playing SUPERB hockey right now.

-I need to see that replay, looked like the Devils player grabbed the stick right out of his hands, and not a hook.

-GOMEZ!!! Now THAT was a good goal. Not on Uncle Daddy, just a good play. Rangers playing GREAT hockey.

-Great save by Henrik, but see, this is the difference between what I wanted to see, and what we have seen in the past. Henrik isnt having to face pressure for large amounts of time, the pressure is coming few and far between, NOT because of our defensive play alone, but because we are maintaining control of the puck for long stretches in their zone. This is the kind of hockey that wins long term. Wear them down, keep their defensive core constantly on the move and defending, and you will win, I guarantee it.

-Thats baloney, Clarkson clearly interferes with him, and Dubi gets an even up call as well. Baloney.

-Now that ladies and gentlemen, was the kind of hockey I expected, and demanded from the Rangers. They were clearly the better team, clearly had the better chances, and kept the puck in their zone, not ours. AWESOME period.

-Terrible start, Rangers stopped skating through the neutral zone.

-DUBI TO STRAKA!!! WHAT A PASS!!!! Rangers take back the lead!

-Make no mistake about it, Marc Staal is the best defenseman on this team…At the age of 20.

-Ugh, too many men, thats inexcusable in a playoff game.

-Jesus, was that deflected? If it wasn’t thats a helluva soft goal by Henrik.

-4 min power play, gotta capitalize on that.

-Disjointed PP right now.

-DRURY!!!! OH YEAH BABY!!!

-Only the Rangers can get a penalty for goaltender interference when they are clearly crosschecked into Uncle Daddy.

-No call on a clear trip on Gomez…what a surprise.

-Terrible turnover by Backman, Elias almost gets the hat trick.

-Even Eddie-O knows that was too many men. NO call. Thanks refs.

-BALONEY, Brodeur should get a penalty for that.

-Christian Backman might be the worst under pressure defenseman in the NHL today. Hes a solid defenseman in almost every other aspect, but put the puck on his stick, and if you are even close to hitting him, he will cough it up and turn it over with the best of them. I would definitely target him if I were Sutter. All in all an acceptable period. I don’t think Henrik was to fault on the first goal, that was all on Jagr, Straka, and Dubinsky for lazily skating through the neutral zone and not coming back to defend on the play, the second goal was all on Henrik, you can’t let in soft goals like that in the playoffs. Uncle Daddy has been very good, but flopping like usual all over the ice. He gets hit by Jagr, his helmet comes a little loose, and he purposely rips it off to draw a whistle. What a surprise, no call.

-Of course, THAT they call, none of our stuff though. Thats not a trip at all folks, he just dove, plain and simple.

-Heh, interesting, even the linesmen are screwing us. That was offsides? Puhlease.

-Hah, Eddie O killing the refs, terrible non call yet again.

-Devils score, Rangers getting screwed so bad by these refs its just unbelieveable.

-Rangers 3, Devils 1, Refs 2.

-ROFLMAO this reffing is just comical, who needs Chris Rock when you can watch this comedy!

-STAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

-AAAAAAAHAHAHAHAH OWN GOAL ON THE FACEOFF!!!!

-End of live blog, this was an amazing game to watch. Rangers overcoming a crap load of adversity and horrendous officiating.

Rangers Review | Comments Off

Well, I have kept completely quiet on the whole Sean Avery incident. Mostly because its all been said. From the message boards, to the blogs, and from the newspapers to the podcasts everyone has given their 2 cents. But very few seem to think about it the way I think about it so I might as well share what my thoughts are on the matter.

I loved it, but I am glad the stopped it.

I absolutely cracked up when I saw it, it was a fall off the chair stomach hurting because youre laughing so hard at what you are seeing moment. I noticed it as it was happening, on the 5 on 3, so it was tough for me to even pay attention to the play while Sean was doing his thing. It was one of the greatest things I have ever witnessed on television, and I totally agree with the NYRangerscast’s Steve. It was utter genius by Avery to do it.

But, I think the NHL was right in making it a penalty. Not because it was Avery doing it to Uncle Daddy, not because I feel it is unsportsmanlike or “butch league” or any of the other things people are throwing out there. No, I just happen to think that if you allow the opposing players to out and out blind the goalies the way Avery did, power play percentage will go through the roof. Players will simply wear more padding on the back of their bodies, and youll line up 2 players in front of the goalie whose one job is to block what he can see. You’ll see teams going from 14-18% on the PP to 35-40%. And while it is nice to see more scoring in the game, I think it bastardizes one of the greatest things we have in our sport, the way we handle our penalties to give the other team an advantage for a short period of time, but not making it a given they will score on it. Allowing the Avery rule to go unwritten would be tantamount to throwing all the old records out of the window and making even smart penalties, bad ones. It would probably also impact the physicality you would see in the game because teams would be hesitant to do anything to get themselves into the box, even throwing a huge hit, or having a scrum after the play, and that is something I want no part of.

While I made myself clear that I hate dirty plays, like the hit from behind, or hits to the head, I love the physicality in our game, and doing anything that may effect it would be wrong, and allowing the Avery play to become the norm should, and probably would effect the game on many levels, particularly the power play effectiveness, and will have a trickle down effect on other aspects of the game because of it.

So there ya have it.

Rangers Review | Comments Off

Just listened to Steve and Eric slam the hell out of me, and while Steve definitely got a little forceful with his points, they really aren’t about what I was talking about.

So let me say it clear and simple.

You need to play in ALL 3 FACETS to be successful in the playoffs. By all 3 facets I mean, Goaltending, Defense, and yes, Offense as well. This is in regards to the new NHL by the way, not the previous iteration of it which Steven brings his stats into play. Sorry Steven, but prior to the lockout, clutch and grab were a huge part of the playoffs. If you played the trap, and clutched and grabbed like nobodys business, you could win a cup. Thats just not the case anymore. I never said that defense doesn’t win championships, I said that it is possible to win a championship with your offense.

This paragraph my seem out of flow because it is an edit job, but I did want to point something else out about the stat that Steven threw out there. He pointed out how the Canes, Sens, and Lightning averaged (Im sorry I dont remember the exact number off hand and i already deleted the mp3 and dont want to spent another 20 minutes redownloading it to find out the exact numbers) something like 3 or fewer goals scored, but only 2 or fewer goals against and how it was their defense that won them games not their offense, and I say to that, not so fast. First, regarding the Senators, they played our style of game with a lockdown defense but had the offense to backstop that defense as well, so they aren’t really who I am talking about. Regarding the Canes and Lightning, let me ask you, if you are the opposition to the Canes and Lightning, and you see 294 goals scored by the Canes off the rush, and you see 245 goals by the Lightning (in the clutch and grab era) do you go toe to toe with those kinds of offenses? NO, you do exactly what anyone does, you play the conservative defensive game that everyone expects you to play. When you play conservative defensive games, you don’t generate many chances yourself, you hedge your bets that you will beat them 1-0, 2-1, etc, and don’t give them the chance to score. It takes 2 to tango guys, and when one team stifles the other, the goals total obviously goes down for both teams, but in the end the superior offensive (one-dimensional. with no defense to back it up) teams have as good a chance as the superior defensive (also one-dimensional) teams so long as their goaltending can stand up. The point is, you can win with offense, and you can win with defense. I don’t think it is as simple as saying, defense wins championships, in the NHL as it used to be. I think offense can be an effective way to win a championship as well, as long as you have the goalie to backstop you, and you play 5 in the picture in your own end and siphon pucks away from the high quality scoring areas. Remember, in the end you need to score more goals than the other team does, and while it may sound funny to make me look like an idiot by saying all teams everywhere in all sports know that defense wins championships, the evolving game today may not necessarily play that out 100% of the time…hell, even 50% of the time. I think it comes down to, Defense, Offense, and Goaltending wins championships nowadays, and if you don’t have at least 2 of the 3, you won’t have a chance in hell.

Think about it? The Rangers earlier this year had a stretch where they went something like 12 games in a row without a loss, and they were winning many of the games in the 2-1 variety. But they weren’t doing it by simply playing a defensive lock down type of game. NO, what they were doing was holding the puck in the offensive zone, applying tremendous amounts of pressure, and forcing the other team to dump and change, and set up our next offensive attack. They were ALSO extremely responsible in coming back when the play came back the other way, and were simply superb in not getting caught in odd man rush situations. Oh, and it didnt hurt to have Henrik playing like Henrik.

The point on the Senators team having more team speed, I feel, is kind of moot. You don’t need superior team speed to play their type of game. These aren’t the Canes, Habs, Pens, or Lightning we are talking about. This is a team that used crisp passing, and an attack style offense focused on generating high quality shots with men in front. It was a set up offense, exactly what we do, except I would argue our team has more talent on the 2nd and 3rd lines than they do, and while the Sens team undoubtedly had a better first line, they still managed to play that offensive game with all of their players. If the setup failed, and they didnt cash on a scramble at the goalmouth, or a laser of a one timer by Heatley, they would come back, 5 in the picture, and defend just like we do. They played a near carbon copy game as we do, except they did what we refuse to do with any consistency. Use their skill to find lanes, and put pucks at the net with men in front, or in position to grab rebounds.

My point is, if the Rangers played consistently like they did during that 12 game stretch, their superior talent would enable them to be an offensive team AND a defensive team just like the Senators.

Steven, Eric, I think this is where the disconnect is coming. I LOVE that this team plays defense first. Hell, in my own league, I am a checking forward, I am highly responsible in my own end, and have only been on the ice for 3 goals against all year in a wide open league where teams average 5-10 goals a game. Trust me, I love it when a team plays well in their own zone. What the Rangers don’t do with any consistency is exploit their offensive talent to generate pressure, and CHANCES.

Is this solely on Tom Renney? No, but here is where my biggest problem comes with the guy. What he says, and what he enforces, seems to be 2 entirely different thing. I never said Tom Renney has no plan, in fact I made a point of mentioning how quite often, what he says is exactly what I want the team to do. However what the team actually executes out there, is not what he says. And that my friends, is my problem. If you can praise Tom Renney for getting offensive players to play his defensive system, then it is pretty hypocritical to not lambaste him for not getting his offensive players to play his offensive system. THAT, my friends, is my point.

Watch the Devils play this series, what do they do? Forecheck, get pucks to the net, crash the net. I bet you if the Rangers played exactly the same way the Devils have been playing this series (under Brent Sutter, who by the way I think is 10 times the coach that Renney is) they would be up 3-0 with a seriously humiliated Devils team which would have lost games 5-0, 6-1, 5-1. Rangers have the talent to score a whole lot of goals, the fact that they arent even getting close to generating the kind of chances that they should be really concerns me. Oh, they are scoring goals all right, thankfully Uncle Daddy has been putrid, but they are generating no kind of consistent offensive attack.

Tom Renney seems to walk on water with many fans because of the decade of despair. Those lean years though had way more to do with a terrible management system, and a terrible farm team, than they did with the coaching. I could be wrong, and if Steven wants to spend a few hours researching this, feel free to go ahead and let me know what you find, but those teams always used to start of well. Be playoff caliber teams through much of the season. Then, a Lindros would get a concussion, or a Fleury would get injured, or a LaFontaine would get a concussion himself, or a Messier (like Shanahan) would hit a wall and stop producing. Those teams failed because the replacement players they would call up, were borderline ECHLers, much like Strudwick. There is nothing a coach can do when you replace a player like Eric Lindros with some no name scrub who wouldnt even be playing for the Checkers. Blame the GM’s in Smith and Sather for not having viable alternatives when injuries happened. Then they would compound this problems by trading whatever little quality they had for even more over priced, injury prone old players. As the injuries occurred, and the older players starting wearing down, there were no Callahans and Girardis to help lead the charge and keep the team winning. Then the teams would simply fall into a abyss, and be awful from the all star break onwards.

The Rangers are successful fellas, because of their depth, not because of anything miraculous that Renney has done. Yes, absolutely, Tom Renney has a system that works. Yes, you need to play that kind of a defensively responsible game to be able to win in the playoffs. But guess what, you can score playing his system as well. You CAN get more out of this talented a roster, with this much youth, than they currently are, and it is OK to expect a lot more. It is OK to see a coach to go freaking nuts, like Sutter did, when you get a crap call. It is OK to see a Rangers team that performed so terribly offensively that only 4 teams did worse in the entire NHL and say, you know what…this team should be a whole lot better scoring wise without sacrificing any more goals against. It is OK to say, Tom Renney, I don’t think you are getting as much out of your players as many other coaches could. It is OK to say, Tom Renney, why in god’s name is Jason Strudwick playing for the 52nd time (that’s how many games hes played fellas…52). In short, it is OK to expect more. And I think this team could be a whole lot better than they are.

Eric, regarding me complaining about a team that is winning, I think that is kind of a low blow. I am complaining that a team is underachieving, and could be a whole lot better than they are now. Even in this series I think we are winning because of smoke and mirrors, and not because of our play. IMHO we have played a terrible playoff series, and no way in hell should we be up 2-1. This series should be 3-0 New Jersey if they didn’t have a goalie who was imploding back there. Hell, you, me, everyone seems to think that putting back the lines to the way they were before the Gomez injury makes sense. Has Renney even entertained it for a period of hockey? Does that not upset you? Don’t you think that is stupid of him? Don’t you think it is stupid for him to play the 4th line in games we are trailing by 1 in the final few minutes of the 3rd period as he did earlier this year? Clearly we all agree he does some questionable things, so why is it not ok for me to want a coach who DOESNT do retarded things like that? I don’t think Tom Renney is an awful coach guys, I think he is an average coach.

In short, I guess we will have to agree to disagree. I don’t think Renney is the messiah that some people think he is, but I certainly don’t think he is the Devil incarnate either. All I think is, we can do better. Sutter, Nolan, Ruff, these are the kinds of coaches I like. Guys who can be in your face, outspoken, and still get their players to play great D, and get a lot out of their teams offensively as well. (Sadly all 3 of these fine coaches have some of the worst organizations in sports behind them as far as getting them talented players to deploy)

Anyway, I consider this argument done with, so I will let you guys get the last word in. It’s time to focus on the playoffs now. Renney can always be scrutinized in the offseason.

Rangers Review | Comments Off

Rangers Review | Comments Off

Im glad the Rangers lost this game. If they won that would have been 3 consecutive games where we didnt play well at all only to come away with a win. We needed some humble pie, and got a big dose of it here. I expect game 4 to be a helluva lot better by the Rangers, because if they keep playing like this, we will lose right here in the first round.

Give credit to the kids, they played a pretty strong game, and although I am sure Marc Staal is kicking himself (and not the puck) for scoring an own goal like that, it happens. You move on, and forget about it. These are valuable minutes for these kids. They are going to look back at this playoff series and remember how important it was to lose a game like this for their future well being.

But the fact remains. 3 games in this playoffs, and not a one that we well played by us. Sloppy turnovers, sloppy defense, sloppier offense, sloppy everything. Even our penalty killing was sloppy today. Our goaltending was average at best, and even despite Uncle Daddy having another crap game, we weren’t good enough to overcome all these deficits.

This one lies squarely on the coaching staff. All week long they have been giving the credit to the Devils, they have been saying “We can improve our play” while totally glossing over the fact that not only do we have to improve our play…our play has been absolutely terrible. Any sane fan will look at this series and say, without Henrik playing god-like in games 1 and 2, we would be down 0-3 against the swamp rats right now. Shift after shift they seemed to elevate their play, and shift after shift there has been no consistency, let alone elevation to our play.

Be afraid folks. Even though I proclaimed this series to be over, it was with the understanding that the good guys would actually play a good game. They have done nothing to make me feel like they DESERVE to win this series.

Tom Renney better be putting these guys through the ringer…oh…wait, what am I talking about, this is Tom Renney. We will just have to be content with the same talk about being patient, putting pucks to the nets, playing 5 in the picture, blah blah blah, without any emphasis on what this team is doing wrong, and giving them a tongue lashing for playing like this.

I am scared, I will admit it.

EDIT:

I want to add one more thing. If Tom Renney does not even attempt to go back to the lines that work..
Avery Dubinsky Jagr
Dawes Gomez Shanny
Straka Drury Callahan

Then I better not hear crap from all you Renney lovers. This guy is simply not giving our team the best chance to win with his line combinations. IMHO he is being badly outcoached by Sutter, as I predicted.

Rangers Review | Comments Off

-Come out strong, come out tough, and weather the storm. You know the Devils are gonna be flying, and the Rangers are going to be pumped. Need to not let the crowd get us too pumped up.

-Dang, my MSG feed died, I gotta watch the Versus feed. That is not a good sign…Am I being a little ridiculous with the superstitions? Meh.

-Rangers look to have a ton of jump. Good sign to start.

-Looked like a distinct kicking motion to me.

-Ugh.

-4th line generates some chances. How? Get pucks to the net, and crash the net.

-No surprise. Moronic play by Shanny,

-I LOVE Sean Avery. Keep hitting Uncle Daddy Aves, keep it going.

-DOOBZILLA!!!!! Yet again another soft goal allowed by Uncle Daddy.

-MARRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRTY!

-How was that not a penalty. Betts about 20 feet from the puck, gets leveled right in front of the ref, no call.

-Pfft Hepatitis E-Lias (thanks for the nickname Kovy!) needs to sit his ass down.

-Just an awful, awful call on Avery there. The flopper draws one.

-Good, makeup call, it was definitely due. They missed the boat on Avery and they made it right.

-Rangers played ok in the period. I think it may have been their best first period in the 3 games, but they were sloppy at times, and superb at others. The second will be huge, long change, but last change for Tom. Good way to get matchups you like, and tire out crappier lines. Expect the 4th line for NJ to be planted on the bench this period.

-Penalty parade continues for the Rangers. This is ridiculous.

-fumbly bumbly stumbly. Terrible play there by the Rangers, were very lucky they didnt score.

-That should be a penalty. And it is, 5 on 3 coming.

-AVERY!@@@!!! OH YEAH BABY!!!

-ROFLMAO @ Avery in front of the net.

-Devils have elevated their game. Rangers need to settle down.

-HOW IS THAT NOT GOALIE INTERFERENCE?!!?!?

-Haha, VS with too much on ice audio.

-These refs are just ridiculous.

-Not surprising, refs giving the Devils the game.

-Another penalty on the Rangers. Where was the penalty? There was none.

-Terrible reffing costing the Rangers here today.

-BULL!! Another horrible call.

-Horrendous. NONE of the last 3 penalties have been actual penalties, refs doing what you expect, appeasing Lou Lams, and Rangers paying the price for their terrible play this series.

-Heh, how about closing the hands on the puck there for the Devils? No call, not surprising.

-Jagr has missed most of the second, and probably all of the 3rd with a groin/thigh injury. Not good.

-Rangers PP. Have to generate offense here, if not flat out score.

-DUBI!!!! GAME TIED BABY!!!!

-BTW Jagr back, thank god.

-Nice save by Uncle Daddy.

-Our defense is just having a nightmare of a game today.

-Gionta robbed twice in 5 minutes by Lundqvist.

-Another penalty, looked like a good call though.

-Thats not on Cally, the Devils better get a penalty out of this. He wasnt in the crease, Marty got outside of it, and Callahan skated back into him. Thats not on us. If we end up down a man, its just disgusting.

-Here comes Overtime. Ugh, I hate overtimes. Especially when we lose

-Time for Drury to earn is paycheck.

-Ugh, im nervous.

-Oh boy, off the post.

-Devils want this a lot more than we do.

-Awful goal. I expected it.

Rangers Review | Comments Off

Well, I just got finished listening to the latest NYRangerscast podcast and halfway through it I fired up the blog ready to retort. But I figured, I probably should wait till the whole thing is done before responding.

Anyway, now that I am finished, I have to get my 2 cents in. It appeared to me that Eric and Steven may have been directing some of their thoughts in the middle of the podcast towards me, or at the very least, towards people who think the way I do. That is to say, people who aren’t fans of Renney and what he has done. In fact I believe Steven mentioned something about Renney getting so little out of his lineup, and I know that has been a mantra of mine for a while now so I do have to assume the comments are directed at me.

Let me preface all this by saying I absolutely love the fact that we can have this kind of cross-platform discussion, albeit it take me a helluva lot longer to respond, damn Carpal Tunnel Syndrome. Wait, where was I? Oh yeah, I want it to be known that I did not take any offense, or any negativity about how their argument was phrased. I think they simply addressed an issue I have been outspoken about in a professional, well thought out manner, that just happens to be completely wrong. Hehehe. So, what was their argument? Well, I figure the best way is for you guys to simply listen to the podcast first before going on… Click here for their latest podcast.

Ok, have you listened to it? Good. So here are the few basic points that they make which I will refute.

1) That offensive teams don’t win in the playoffs.
2) That my statement that Tom Renney has gotten so little out of such a talented roster is a fallacy.

Since the second point is much more of a broader question, I will obviously save that for last (plus it doesn’t hurt that the number 2 comes after the number 1).

So, I dont really remember who said it, I think it was Steven, but either he or Eric mentioned that offensive teams don’t win in the playoffs, and that only defense first teams win in the playoffs, and that Tom Renney has them playing a style that will win in the playoffs. I simply do not agree with the thought process here. Not only because it is factually incorrect, but because the spirit of the argument simply glosses over the teams failures while it accentuates their positives.

The very fact that offensive teams have won 2 of the past 3 Stanley Cups is proof enough that this statement is incorrect, but also the last 3 Eastern Conference champions have all been offensive juggernauts.

Who won the Stanley Cup 3 seasons ago? Tampa Bay. How did they do it? With a kickass offense, and stellar goaltending. They had the 3rd highest goals allowed for a playoff team that year coming into the playoffs, but had the second best offense. What did they do? Win the cup.

Who won the Stanley Cup 2 seasons ago? Carolina. How did they do it? With a kickass offense, and stellar goaltending. They had the worst goals allowed for a playoff team that year coming into the playoffs, but had the second best offense. What did they do? Win the cup.

Who won the Eastern Conference title last year? Ottawa Senators. How did they do it? With a kickass offense, a kickass defense, and decent goaltending. They had the third best goals allowed total for a playoff team that year coming into the playoffs, and also had the second best offense. What did they do? Made the cup finals.

Notice a trend here? Granted the Anaheim Ducks won it all with an average offense, and a stellar defense, but it is simply a fallacy that defense is the only way to win. You need balance. You need to be able to score goals, because the days of winning Stanley Cup championships by simply having the best defense are more or less over. You need offense, and you need a lot of it, because if you don’t teams like Pittsburgh and Montreal will run you into the ground. Luckily we have the talent to do this, but we do not have the production on a consistent basis to make anyone feel confident heading into a potential second round matchup with either of those teams.

Now, the second point was that my statement that Renney has gotten so little out of such a talented roster was a fallacy because Renney has superstars buying into a defense first style of play, and that they are sacrificing their offense to play defense. That is just not true, at least, I don’t feel that is true. The easiest way to answer this is that we have a superb penalty kill, and an absolutely horrific power play. That in and of itself says that our coach is not getting the most out of this super-talented roster. Getting Blair Betts, Brendan Shannahan, and Chris Drury to play Defense is all fine and great, but as the coach, it is your responsibility to get these guys to play well on both sides of the ice. Why is it such a taboo to expect the team to play well in both areas? I call shenanigans on the fact that you can’t play a good offensive game without sacrificing defense. That is baloney. The Ottawa Senators of last year are proof positive of that. They play a strikingly similar style to ours, except all their offense is put on one line, and their goaltending was suspect compared to ours. They shut teams down in their defensive zone all season long, and then transitioned it into an absolutely lethal offense. If their goaltending wasnt absolute trash in the finals, I think they could have won it all.

That is where we have the advantage here folks. Between the pipes, we can match up with the best of the best, and we should be able to play both ends well, but we don’t. We play defense great, but we just can’t generate a consistent offensive attack.

Do we get consistent point shots and crash the net? No. Do we get consistent traffic in front of the net to deflect shots? No. Do we dump and chase when the other teams stands up at the blueline? No. There is no consistency to our offensive attack. At times we do some things right, at other we do other things right, but seemingly never at the same time, and that is on the coach.

Want more proof that it is a fallacy that in order to play our system you have to sacrifice goals? Look at the Hartford Wolfpack this year. They have a tremendous amount of offensive skill on their team. Bourret, Hutchinson, Korpikoski, PA Parrenteau, Byers, Moore, Pock, etc. They also have had good to excellent goaltending in Montoya and now LeNeveau. What’s more, they play nearly the exact same system as we do, except they have a clear cut plan on offense. Get pucks to the net, and crash, crash, crash. They also are proportionately skilled to their league as we are (actually they are probably less skilled than we are offensively in terms of talent when you consider they lost their 2 best players, Dawes and Callahan, to the big club this year). So, how did they do? They have the 3rd best defense in the entire Eastern Conference, with just 1 more goal allowed than Albany. But do they sacrifice offense by playing so well defensively? NO!!!! They have the second best offense in the East behind Providence.

Now I don’t want to say that just because it happens in Hartford it immediately happens here. What I am saying is, it is baloney that Tom Renneys style automatically equals zero offense. In Hartford using the offensive plan that Jim Schoenfeld has put in place (by the way, Jim has always been my preferred choice to coach the Rangers) the Pack attack the net, and use their skill to funnel pucks there, and use their size to bang in pucks. We. Don’t. Do. That. Here. Why? I don’t know, you constantly hear Renney saying that is what they need to do. Clearly he has a plan in place that could, and should work, but the team does not execute that plan at all. They do it once in a while, but otherwise they overpass and play far too “hybridized” for my liking.

If he has the plan in place, but can’t get his supremely talented forwards to execute that plan, to me that means that he isn’t getting the most out of his players.

Yes, they are winning. But if Henrik has to be this damn good every night, I can guarantee you here and now, we won’t win the cup. No goalie can stand on his head for a full playoff series the way Henrik is having to play now. He has saved our asses in 2 consecutive games. Any other goalie in the league not named Nabakov or Luongo, and we are down 0-2 right now. We have generated zero offense, and have benefited from, lets face it, a putrid performance by a guy who has been overrated his entire career in Uncle Daddy. With the exception of the empty net goal, I truly believe Uncle Daddy should have had each and every goal we have scored on him. Every play was either a savable shot, or a misplay by him that led to the goal. Also our run down the end of the season, while miraculous, had a lot to do with shootouts and our ability to score goals in them.

When we were at our best, during that 12 or 13 game streak without a regulation loss, we were scoring goals. Yes, Henrik was fantastic during that stretch as well, but the point is, he didn’t have to steal us every single game. He only had to steal one out of 5 games. Now he has to steal 5 out of 5 games.

Now ask yourself, is Tom Renney really getting all that he can out of his team? Is he doing everything he can to put this team in a position to win by the choices he makes, and the way he has coached his team? Is he putting the configuration of players on the ice that downright dominated AS A TEAM for almost a month:

Avery Dubinsky Jagr
Dawes Gomez Shanahan
Straka Drury Callahan
Whoever you like on the 4th line (imho Prucha Betts Sjostrom)

Or is he putting a lineup out there that has been offensively anemic ever since they were put together with the exception of Jaromir Jagr who has consistently put up goals during this time.

Renney is putting out the latter roster, and that, along with all the other examples I have presented, is why I insist that this guy has gotten so little out of such a talented roster. We shouldnt be winning games 2-1 with a late game scramble and a couple of flukey goals. We should be winning games 5-1 or 6-2 where the 3rd period is an afterthought.

It is OK to expect more from the team. Accepting 100% from the defense, and 100% from the goaltending while tolerating 7% from the offense is not how I am wired. I want 100% from all facets. Tom Renney, as of now, is not getting it done well enough for me to sing his praises.

Rangers Review | Comments Off