2 out of 3. 40 out of 60. 66.667%. That is the effort level the Rangers give us night in and night out. What I am talking about is the fact that for pretty much the entire season, (with the exception of Henrik Lundqvist) this team only shows up for 2 out of every 3 periods, and sometimes less. Really besides 3 games, against the Devils, and the Lightning early in the season, they have played in this infuriating manner. 66% is borderline pass/fail (depending on how your school works) and that is exactly why the Rangers are always in these super close 1 goal games. They are playing borderline win-lose hockey. Sometimes the 66% is a pass (win by 1 goal or so) and sometimes it is a fail (lose in a shootout, or lose 2-1, etc), but either way it all leads to one thing, the Rangers losing more games than they are winning, and a team that can’t find any cohesiveness, or chemistry whatsoever.

Speaking of chemistry, can someone explain something to me? Why is it that Sam Weinman, and Zip and the other beat writers always seem to report 1 set of “new lines” for the team which they practice with, only to have the club put out an entirely different set of lines on game day. Does that make any sense at all to you? Unless we are talking scouting, which during the regular season is stupid, it makes no sense to waste your practice time with combinations you ultimately don’t use.

With regards to todays lineup, I really didn’t like what I saw out there. Particularly from Chris Drury. He seemed woefully out of place with the Dubinsky-Zherdev duo, and the Korpedo line was pretty mediocre as well. With the players we have now, the lineup seen in game 1 still seems like the best fit for this club. Tom Renney should at least give it a try, if for no other reason then to shut me the hell up.

I have not been happy with the play of this club for a while now. At first I was looking at it half full, thinking to myself, imagine how good this team will be if they can put it all together. Now I find myself wishing for the days when I felt that way, because it now appears to me that this team has gone in the wrong direction. Rather than putting it all together, the threads are starting to come apart.

Rangers Review | Comments Off

There is a lot to be angry about with regards to tonights loss. First and foremost the team was badly out muscled, and made to look like sissy little school girls out there for most of the night. Secondly outside of Chris Drury’s penalty shot, the team got next to no high quality scoring chances all night. Even their goal was a flukey deflection play. Thirdly the reffing in this game was absolutely atrocious. A goal that shouldn’t have counted, did count, a goal that was questionable on if it hit the netting or not (I am not convinced it hit the glass) counted. Our goalie was freight trained twice, no calls. We were called for too many men on the ice on a questionable play, but later in the game when the Capitals actually had the puck hit off of a guy going for a change (whose replacement player had already gone onto the ice) we got no call. When the Capitals goalie sent the puck the length of the ice, there was inexcusably no icing called. But all this pales in comparison to a puck that went in that shouldn’t have counted.

The reasoning presented was that the goal was not completely off the peg, but it was at least 6 inches off the goal line, the peg was clearly visible and at an angle, and to me that easily qualifies for a net that is off. What’s the test for it? If the ref noticed it, he would have blown the whistle correct? To me, that is all that matters. Horrendous officiating that out and out cost the Rangers at least 1 point.

Don’t get me wrong, the Rangers had their chances, but this confluence of things that happened really angered me tonight, hence the video rather than the customary game photo.

Another thing that has me so irate is the way we looked like pushovers out there. The Capitals hit us, and hit us, and caused so much havoc in our defensive zone because of it. This is one of this teams achilles heels, we are not built to withstand a true aggressive hard hitting team, especially one that can skate. I liked that Staal and Dubinsky threw a few hits in the 3rd, but it was far too little, far too late. In my opinion, as soon as Henrik was run for the second time, one of our forwards should have annihilated their goaltender. He should have had to leave the ice on a stretcher. Henrik Lundqvist is this team. Period. In this game, if he wasn’t god-like, we lose 6-1, if not worse. When the opposition starts taking runs at your goalie, you need to make a statement. And if it isn’t going to be their goalie who takes the hit, then one of their star forwards needs to leave the ice with a cracked jaw courtesy of a cross check to the teeth.

I’m going to leave it at that, I’m furious right now and don’t want to raise my blood pressure too high by thinking too hard about this game.

Rangers Review | Comments Off

Rangers Review | Comments Off

You’re kidding yourself, absolutely kidding yourself if you think tonight was a turnaround game. I’m sorry to be the one to be all negative here, but this was yet another poorly played game by the boys in blue. The string continues, and it isn’t a good sign. Yes, the Rangers managed 3 power play goals, and 2 short handed goals, but they were absolutely horrific in the neutral zone and in their own zone. A few days ago I said the Rangers should ramp up their pressure in the offensive zone, and they did a bit of that today, and yes, they skated back hard, and yes they more or less played as 5 men up and down the ice, but what they didn’t do is cover zones very well at all. Often times there were 2 and 3 men going behind the net to pressure one or 2 men, leaving vicious snipers like Lecavalier and St. Louis all alone in front of the net, or there abouts. Luckily most of the time the puck didn’t find it’s way to these open men, but this was a serious problem none the less. That is just one of many instances where the Rangers completely forgot about a player in a prime time scoring location. Think I am being too negative? Re-watch the game and keep your eye away from the puck. See how many times the Rangers absolutely forget about a man right in front of the net, or in the slot, or off to the side, with no person to defend for at least 15 feet.

Henrik Lundqvist didn’t have to be good. He didn’t have to be great. He had to be frigging spectacular tonight…again. You have to be worried about this guys, it’s a very big problem. I know the common thinking is, well, this is what this guy is paid for, to be the rock between the pipes. But that isn’t the point. The U.S.A. has the worlds largest stock piles of nuclear weapons, but it is used as a last resort. Having one of the greatest goalies in the universe right now between the pipes is great, but he should only have to bail you out like 2 or 3 times a night, at most. Right now he is bailing this team out 5 to 10 times a period, which is simply inexcusable. The Rangers are not giving up the simple, Marty Brodeur shots. They are giving up the holy moly, what the hell are the doing type shots. Right in front of the net, breakaways, partial breakaways, two on one’s, three on twos, short handed breakaways, crash the net scrambles, and one timers from the slot. Brodeur has to stop like one or 2 of those every week. Henrik is having to stop 5 to 10 of them a period. That has to stop. Now.

Don’t get me wrong, I absolutely do not want this team to go into so defensive shell. That is ridiculous, and you know how much I hate the super defensive systems. On the contrary, the Rangers need to put MORE pressure on the puck in the neutral zone, and in the offensive zone. They need to cause more turnovers, they need to put more pressure on the men with the puck, and need to cut down the separation between themselves and the opposing players. They are giving the guys too much time, and space to do whatever they want, particularly in the defensive zone.

The amazing thing is, they do EXACTLY what I talk about on the penalty kill. They are super aggressive and get to the men with the puck in half a second and steal the puck and dump it down. Imagine if they played that way in all 3 zones, and then rushed the puck back up the ice.

Do you get what I am talking about now? PRESSURE. PRESSURE. PRESSURE!!!! Just like the Penalty Kill, I want to see more pressure on the puck carrier, I want to see them hold the line much better in the defensive zone, and I want to see the team play as 5 man complete units in all 3 zones. Oh yeah, and they need to be better with their coverage.

Hence the title of this write up. It was a good game, in that they did some of the things I want, but they didn’t execute it near well enough for my liking. A better step in that pressure direction, but one they need to take even further. Ramp up the pressure till you force a cough up, never stop, and force the opposition to make fast plays to beat you. If it happens, then so be it, that is why you have Henrik between the pipes.

Getting back to the game itself, offensively there were some good plays by the Rangers on the rush, particularly Zherdevs beauty of a pass to Ryan Callahan for the one-timer. Similarly Gomez set up Drury for a one timer, both were on the power play. So, is the moral of the story to rush the puck up the ice and take one timers? No, the moral of the story is, you have to hit the frigging net with your shots when you come down the rush like that. Why? Because if you miss the net, on a hard one timer, and you have 3 guys rushing in on the play, odds are your rocket of a shot is going to come out the other side and lead to a rush heading the other way. I love plays like that, but only when the shot goes on net. In a weird way it really is a high risk, high reward kind of play because of the aforementioned scenario.

Finally, I wanted to talk about Mike Smith, and what he tried to pull out there. That was nothing less than bush league garbage. There is nothing wrong with swatting a player when he gets in your crease, or is making contact with you, but Smith was slashing and cross checking Voros no matter where he was, all over the ice. It shouldn’t warrant a suspension, but what it should warrant is the refs keeping an eye on him. They need to circulate a list of goalies who do that, because Smith isn’t the only one.

See you all on Saturday as we get to see AO, and the scary as all hell Caps.

Rangers Review | Comments Off

The NYRangersCast fellas got Kenny Albert on their show. I just finished listening to it, and it was a really great listen.

Rangers Review | Comments Off

Here’s the truth. Before this game, I sorta said a prayer. I’m not a religious person, I actually consider myself agnostic. But I still said a prayer. I asked for Obama to win the presidency, and I said if it meant the Rangers would lose to the Islanders today, then I will take that tradeoff and giggle like a school girl.

I got my wish.

Sorry guys!

That is all I have to say about this game. Yes I saw it, yes the power play disgusts me, yes I still live and die NHL hockey, but some things are just bigger, ya know?

Rangers Review | Comments Off

Rangers Review | Comments Off

I tend to defy conventional wisdom. That’s why many times you will come on my site after a Rangers win, and feel like you are reading a post mortem from a team that lost. And many times you will come on here after a Rangers loss and think you are reading rave reviews after a win. This is because I subscribe to a pretty simple philosophy. It’s not the results, it’s how you play. If you play well, the results will come, if you play poorly, equally the results will come.

Thus far in this early season, the Rangers have defied conventional wisdom by winning many games in which they have played…poorly (to say the least). Against the Islanders, we played like garbage, but picked up 2 points. Against the Thrashers, we played like garbage, but picked up 2 points. And in each of these instances, I have been very solemn about these wins. Why? Because it’s being done by smoke, mirrors, and a healthy dose of Henrik Lundqvist. Today the smoke and mirrors aspect of our team held up for about 52 minutes, but the lack of Henrik in net couldn’t seal the deal on yet another undeserved win.

Let’s make one thing perfectly clear, we deserved to lose. It shouldn’t have even been close. Our lines once again showed absolutely nothing outside of the Sjostrom, Betts and Orr trio. Once again Dan Fritsche looked simply horrific on the ice, making a blind pass with the score at 2-2 which directly led to a goal against, and once again the Rangers played a lack luster game from the start, and unfortunately, it carried through all the way to the end.

Conventional thinking would be to blame Vally, who was beyond horrific in that final 8 minute blitz we witnessed. But I don’t fault him. He is what he is, our backup goalie. He’s going to have games like this. It is up to the team in front of him to put up a much better effort than that to protect him. No, I blame the person I feel who deserves the blame. Tom Renney.

Yes, I know you guys are sick and tired of hearing this argument of mine, so if you are, you might as well tune out now.

Why Tom Renney? Because it was painfully obvious to me, an outsider to say the least, that the lines, and the style of play has gotten progressively worse as this season has moved along. In our first 2 games of the season, the Rangers played more of a 2-1-2 style of hockey, putting tremendous pressure on the other team in their own zone, and carrying said pressure up through all 3 zones. Since then the Rangers have reverted back to the standard 1-2-2 style that they play (and often times a straight 1-4) which is inevitably going to keep the score down, especially when you have very few pure goal scorers on this team capable of netting pucks consistently. With the Rangers abandoning their more aggressive forecheck style they promised us prior to the season they went back into the old dependable defensive style that they have been playing these past few years. I have a big problem with that. This team is BUILT to play that aggressive up tempo offensive style. We are built to push the puck up the ice, we are built to pressure, pressure, pressure the puck at every instance, and instantly turn defense to offense in the blink of an eye. Instead we play a strict defensive game, a modified trap system, and while it is effective, it doesn’t nearly take advantage of the style of player that Glen Sather has brought to this team.

Let’s take a look at who is on this team. Markus Naslund, fast, shifty, good shot. Nikolai Zherdev, fast, great vision, superb hands. Wade Redden, very adept at making quick outlet passes, has good wheels, and is adept at joining the offensive attack on the rush when given the opportunity. Those are the big 3 players that we brought in this season. 3 guys who desperately want to push the puck up offensively, and who want to pressure the opposition from the second they gain control of the puck, till it comes back into our zone. We did it to a T in the first 2 games. We swarmed all over the puck, we were pressuring, causing turnovers, getting tremendous HIGH QUALITY scoring chances, and if not for some superb goaltending would have won those games by 5-10 goals each. That’s how superb we played.

But no, as usual Tom Renney is scared to try a new style of hockey. We were promised an up tempo offensive team, and instead we got the old trap happy defensive club. I’m not saying playing defensive hockey is without its merits, on the contrary, what I am looking for is more defensive hockey in all 3 zones. Pressure the puck with multiple people all the way up the ice. Remember 5 in the picture? That is what this style of hockey is really about. Don’t all vacate the zone to play defensive hockey, pressure the puck in their zone as a 5 man unit. Pressure the puck in the neutral zone as a 5 man unit, pressure the puck in the defensive zone as a 5 man unit. Instead Renney wants us to play the trap. Great. Unfortunately it means your team is very rarely going to score more than 2 or 3 goals, and it means you will have many more unnecessarily close games than you should, and it means you can’t pick apart weak defensive teams like we were facing tonight because we give them too much time and space to push the puck up in our zone.

Tom, what you did in those first 2 games, with that particular lineup. That is what I want back. This bullshit we have been seeing since then, is not what this team is built for. We are built to be a fast paced locust swarm of a team. Not a trap team. Play to your strengths.

Rangers Review | Comments Off