Are the Rangers For Real?

They're the hottest team in the NHL. They've won 12 of 13 for the first time since the 1972-73 campaign. But the operative question around New York is this. Are the Rangers for real? Can the team that shocked everybody last season, including their head coach, by going to the Stanley Cup Finals, get back the championship round?

Conventional wisdom says no. Teams that lose in the final round seldom get back there the next season. But, over the last month, the Blue shirts have made a compelling case for being the exception to the rule. They haven't just won, they've beaten a lot of good teams. On this current west-coast road trip, they beat the Anaheim Ducks and the defending Cup champion L.A. Kings on back to back nights.

But while die-hard Rangers fans have reason to believe, I wouldn't reserve my final-round playoff tickets just yet. Why? Because a careful look at the roster reveals a potential roadblock to a long and sustained playoff run.

Last year, if you'll recall, head coach Alain Vigneault was able to rotate four solid lines. That gave him an advantage over opposing coaches who may have had more upfront talent, but couldn't keep up with the Rangers' depth. Eventually they wore down both the Penguins and Canadiens. It wasn't until the finals that they met their match in the Kings.

This year, most of the scoring has come from the top two lines with a rejuvenated Rick Nash carrying most of the load. Derick Brassard, last year's third line pivot, is centering the number two line. Brad Richards, last year's number two center, had his contract bought out and is now playing in Chicago. This year's number three center, Dominic Moore, was last year's number four center. Gone from last year are Benoit Pouliot and Brian Boyle who were vital cogs during last year's run. It is doubtful the team would've advanced as far as it did without both players. Role players like Lee Stempniak and J.T. Miller have some big skates to fill. If they're up to the challenge, the Rangers will go far - maybe even all the way. If they're not, an early exit is in the offing.

With that in mind, GM Glen Sather has a big decision ahead of him. Does he make a deal at the trading deadline and risk upsetting the team chemistry? If so, for whom? He has roughly $3 million in cap room to play with, more than enough to rent a scoring forward for three months. If the Devils decide to dump Jaromir Jagr, I'd grab him. Jagr still has speed and is a proven clutch player. He could play on either the number 2 or number 3 lines as well as the power play. He's also a solid citizen in the locker room, something Vigneault demands of his players.

And the best thing about it is that the cost of obtaining Jagr wouldn't be that much: a low-round draft pick probably and Sather has no commitment to Jagr beyond this season. Indeed, with both Marty St. Louis and Jagr's contracts expiring at the end of the year, Sather could potentially have $9 million in cap money to go shopping for some new blood if the team doesn't win the Cup. That should allow him to lock up both Mats Zuccarello and Carl Hagelin to long-term contracts. With a developing Chris Kreider and phenom Anthony Duclair on the horizon, the Rangers could have one of the youngest and fastest teams in the league for years to come.

Bottom line: the Rangers are a solid playoff team. How far they go this postseason will depend on how big their role players play and whether their GM is willing to role the dice the way he did last year when he traded Ryan Callahan for St. Louis. That move helped propel them to the finals.

Only time will tell if lightning can strike twice.

A Mugging in Dallas

I won't mince words. I hate the Cowboys. I've hated them for years, decades in fact. I hate how smug their fans are and I especially resent that they call themselves America's team. Even the Yankees - who it should be noted have considerably more championships - don't have the nerve to refer to themselves as America's team.

That being said, what happened last night was atrocious and an embarrassment. The Detroit Lions got mugged, period. Please spare me all the "it wasn't a clear-cut penalty" and "the Lions still had time to recover and win the game" drivel. Try telling that to the city of Detroit. They have every right to feel like they got screwed. Because they did.

I don't know which I find more offensive, the incompetence of the officiating crew or the litany of irrelevant explanations from apologists who are more concerned with protecting the integrity of the NFL than calling a spade a spade. One such example of this was from Frank Schwab of Yahoo Sports who managed to come up with a whopping five reasons for why the Lions lost, none of which, surprise, had to do with the call. In the interest of common sense, allow me to dispense with all five.

1. The Lions should have gone for it on 4th down. Really, no REALLY! That's your strategy? Eight minutes to go, up by three, at midfield. You want to risk giving the ball back to the opponent with a short field? I'm glad you're not a coach; you'd be fired. Head coach Jim Caldwell made the right call - the ONLY call he could've made. He decided to punt the ball and force Dallas to go the length of the football field. Given that the Cowboys had only scored 17 points up until that call, he had every reason to believe his defense was capable of making a stop. Had he gone for it, he would've been saying he had no faith in his defense. Worse, if he went for it and didn't make it, his head would rightly be on the chomping block. You don't take that kind of gamble that late in a playoff game.

2. The kicker shanked the punt. What can I say, shit happens. Tell me you knew he was going to do that and I'll buy you a house. 99 times out of a hundred, the punt goes off without a hitch. At the very least, the Cowboys would've gotten the ball at the 20 yard line; at most, the ball would've been downed near the goal line. You count on players to make plays. When they don't, it can prove costly. Shank or no shank, the call reversal is still unacceptable.

3. No one play wins or loses a game. This one's a beaut. First of all that statement depends on when the play occurs. For instance, three years ago the Giants were playing the Packers in the playoffs. Aaron Rogers threw a pass to a receiver who caught the ball and then was stripped of it as he was being tackled. Everyone who saw the play knew it was a fumble, but the call on the field was down by contact. The call even withstood a challenge by Giants' head coach Tom Coughlin. On the very next play Rogers threw a touchdown pass. It was still very early in the game and the Giants had plenty of time to recover from the blown call, which they did. They ended up routing the Packers. Had that call happened later in the game, there's no telling what might've happened. The point is you can't simply make a blanket statement like the above without knowing all the details. If the call is upheld, the Lions have the ball first and 10 at the Cowboy 26 yard line with just over eight minutes to go. They could've scored another touchdown, making it a two-score game for the Cowboys; they could've potentially run out the clock; or, at the very least, taken a good chunk of time off it before giving up the football deep in Cowboys' territory. They were denied that opportunity. End of story.

4. If the Lions had simply beaten the Packers the week before, they would've had a bye and hosted a home game next week. So, I guess it's okay then if the Packers had been the ones robbed. I just don't understand this reasoning. What difference does it make whether the Lions were home or on the road or whether the Packers would've been the team on the road? None of this is relevant. A bad call is a bad call, no matter where you are or which teams are involved.

5. It wasn't a clear-cut penalty. I don't know which universe you're in but that was about as clear a penalty as you're likely to see in the NFL. In fact, Hitchens, the Cowboys' linebacker who committed the foul, actually was holding Lions' tight end Pettigrew's jersey before the actual pass interference was committed. So he could've been called for either foul or maybe even both. It happens all the time. In fact, holding penalties are so common place in the league, a defender can be called for one for just breathing on the receiver. Furthermore, when Cowboys' receiver Dez Bryant ran onto the field with his helmet off, a penalty should've been called just for that. So that's three pretty cut and dried penalties. Don't take my word for it; take the word of Dean Blandino, the NFL head of officiating, who said all three fouls were committed and should've been called.

So there you have it. A horrific call which badly tainted what was up to that point a pretty good game. One team goes home empty handed; the other lives to play another game. And, once more, the NFL is embroiled in an embarrassing controversy that was avoidable. They say the worst errors are the unforced ones. This was one helluva unforced error.


Go Packers!