A Stay of Execution?

I'll admit it. I thought it was over. Admit it. You thought it was over too.

After Curtis Glencross converted his own rebound past Henrik Lundqvist with 9:06 remaining to give the Caps a 1 nothing lead, the Blueshirts were looking like toast.

The Presidents Trophy winners were less than ten minutes away from bowing out in the second round of the playoffs with their skates between their legs.

And then...

With less than two minutes remaining in their season, Derek Stepan, who had his best game of the playoffs - perhaps the whole damn season - gained the Caps zone, pulled up and fed a perfect pass to Chris Kreider who one-timed a shot passed Braden Holtby, who is having the series of his life.

And just like that, tie game. The Garden erupted with joy as the Rangers forced overtime. And in the extra session, it was Stepan to the rescue again, setting up the winning goal by Ryan McDonagh off a feed from Jesper Fast.

Game over. Rangers win. They live to fight another day.

In a game which saw the Blueshirts dictate the pace early and pepper Holtby with 11 of the game's first 13 shots, it was poetic justice that the two goals they managed to score were the result of deflections. Pretty? No. Effective? Yes.

Now the scene shifts back to Washington where the Caps will be under pressure to close out the series or face a game seven at the Garden, where the Rangers are now a perfect 9 and 0 in elimination games. In their history the Capitals have blown 3-1 series leads four times. That burden will be weighing heavily on them Sunday. Talk about a turn of events. The Caps were this close to moving on. Now they've given their opponents something they haven't had since game two of this series: momentum. 

The odds are still against the Rangers prevailing. Despite the emotional win, they are hardly out of the woods. Let's not forget they were 1:41 away from being shutout for the second time in three games. For all their resilience, they're still way too cute with the puck. Several times last night, they found themselves in ideal scoring situations and elected to pass rather than shoot. Kreider, who scored the tying goal, looked like Mother Teresa with the puck. I got it, no you take it. They won game five, but if they plan on winning games six and seven, they're going to have to bury the few opportunities they are afforded.

For now, though, they're alive. There WILL be a game six Sunday night. The season continues. Maybe the hockey gods will smile on them and they will go on to win the Cup, or maybe last night was just a temporary stay of execution. 

We'll know soon enough.

Do or Die for Rangers?

Going into Wednesday's game-four match with the Capitals, the prevailing sentiment among some hockey experts is that while it is important for the Rangers to tie the series, it is not, as of yet, a life or death situation. The Rangers, they argue, are the league's best team and have shown their resilience throughout the season many times. If any team can come back from a 3-1 series deficit, it is certainly them. After all, they came back from a 3-1 deficit against the Penguins last year and Pittsburgh that year was a considerably better team than this year's Washington team.  While such thinking is laudable, it is dangerous and I'll explain why.

Yes, the Rangers came back from a 3-1 deficit last year against the Penguins, but, contrary to the above statement, Pittsburgh was a flawed and vulnerable team that year. After winning the first game, the Blueshirts lost a tough game two in Pittsburgh, then returned home and stunk out the Garden in games three and four. Once they had regained their footing following the death of Marty St. Louis' mother, the Rangers ran off three straight wins en route to an improbable finals appearance.

This year's Capitals team is a much more complete team, both offensively and defensively, than last year's Penguins team. While they don't have the speed of the Rangers, they have done an outstanding job of taking away the middle of the ice, forcing the Blueshirts to the outside. Unlike last year's Rangers team that turned on the jets in game five, this year's team has played only one really poor period of hockey in the entire tournament. Every game has been highly contested and decided by one goal. The Rangers aren't in a 2-1 hole because of the way they've played, so much as the way their opponent has played. Expecting another come from behind miracle is wishful thinking to say the least.

And then there is the nagging question: Is this year's Rangers' team really better than last year's. On paper and certainly in the win/loss column, the answer appears to be yes. But a careful look at how they've played this season reveals something quite interesting. The Rangers won an inordinate amount of their games by one goal. One could make the argument that they've been in playoff mode for most of the season. While that certainly can strengthen a team and force them to be more focused, it can also be quite draining both physically and emotionally. Having to stave off elimination three consecutive times would be a daunting task for any team, especially one as driven and extended as this year's Rangers team.

And finally, while 27 teams have come back from 3-1 deficits to win their series, only six of them went on to win the Stanley Cup. More alarming is the fact that only eight organizations have come from behind more than once, with Vancouver accomplishing the feat three times.  Prior to last season's comeback, the Rangers had never managed it once. It's worth noting they fell to the Kings in the finals that year. If you're a betting man, you can't like the odds of a successful championship run in such a scenario.

If I'm the Rangers, I treat tomorrow's match like it's game seven. I'd pull out all the stops, crash the net and throw all caution to the wind. They must win by hook or crook. They can't head back to the Garden trailing 3-1, not if they plan on hoisting the Cup in June.

Maybe I'm overreacting. Maybe they go down 3-1, come back and go all the way. They did win the Presidents' trophy, after all. And they're playing a team that has made it past the second round of the playoffs only twice in its entire history and has on four occasions blown 3-1 series leads. But if they plan on winning this series and prevailing in the next two, they're going to have to step it up and want it more. This year's playoff teams, as I pointed out in an earlier piece, are considerably better than last year's teams. Several of those teams have a legitimate chance of going all the way.

The Capitals are one of them.

NHL Playoff Predictions

A word of caution here, my track record at predicting championship teams is suspect at best. A couple years ago, I picked the Giants to win the Super Bowl. They ended up having one of their worst seasons in over a decade.

Still, I figure I can't be any worse than some of the predictions of the so-called experts. And, besides, I have a horse in this derby. For the first time since 1994, the Rangers are a favorite to win the Stanley Cup.

First off, I'm going with the teams that have the best goaltending. Why? Because they usually win. The last five Cup winners all had goaltenders who were among the NHL's best. Jonathan Quick (2014 & 2012), Corey Crawford (2013 & 2010) and Tuukka Rask (2011). Without those goalies in net, it is doubtful any of them would've made it passed the second round.

Second, I'm going with teams that have depth. If you don't have more than one scoring line, your odds of advancing to the finals, much less winning the Cup, are slim to none.

I'll go with the Eastern Conference first, followed by the Western and ending with the Cup finals, then let the chips fall where they may.


Eastern Conference Quarterfinals 

Rangers vs. Penguins. The only way the Blueshirts don't win this series is if they take the Penguins too lightly. Rangers have huge edge in both goal and defense. Prediction: Rangers in five.

Islanders vs. Capitals: The smart money is on the Caps. I'm going with the team with better depth. Even with Ovechkin, Caps don't measure up. Prediction: Isles in seven.

Canadiens vs. Senators: Carey Price is lightyears ahead of Andrew Hammond. Montreal was one of the best kept secrets in the NHL this year. Prediction: Canadiens in five.

Lightning vs. Redwings: Tampa has it all: youth, depth and scoring. Things could get ugly fast in Motown. Prediction: Lightning in four.

Eastern Conference Semifinals

Rangers vs. Islanders: This one will be a barn burner. Speed of Blueshirts vs. size of Isles. Lundqvist will prove the difference: Prediction: Rangers in six.

Canadiens vs. Lightning: Last year, the Habs swept Tampa. Not this time. This one will go to the wire. Prediction: Canadiens in seven.

Eastern Conference Finals

Rangers vs. Canadiens: Last year's conference finalists lock skates again. A healthy Price will go toe to toe with Lundqvist. Don't be surprised if the series is decided in overtime. Prediction: Rangers in seven.

______________________________________________________________

Western Conference Quarterfinals

Blues vs. Wild: Early exits were the norm in St. Louis. Not this time. This might be best Blues team we've seen in years. Prediction: Blues in six.

Predators vs. Blackhawks: With or without Patrick Kane, Chicago was the favorite. With him it won't even be close. Prediction: Blackhawks in five.

Ducks vs. Jets: Boy did the Ducks ever catch a break here. No L.A. Kings and a weak wildcard opponent. They'll prevail, but barely. Prediction: Ducks in seven.

Flames vs. Canucks: This might turn out to be the most competitive series in round one. Flames making their first playoff appearance since 2009. It'll go the distance. Prediction: Flames in seven.

Western Conference Semifinals

Ducks vs. Flames: Here's where midnight strikes for weak Anaheim. This won't even be close. Prediction: Flames in five.

Blues vs. Blackhawks: A shame these two teams had to meet in this round. They deserved better. The winner will go to finals. Prediction: Blackhawks in seven.

Western Conference Finals

Blackhawks vs. Flames: It was quite a run for Calgary, but the run ends here. Blackhawks too deep and Crawford too good. Prediction: Blackhawks in five.

_____________________________________________________________

Stanley Cup Finals

Rangers vs. Blackhawks: Two original six teams meeting for the Cup. Hockey the way it was meant to be. Two great goaltenders go at it.  Superior speed of Blueshirts will prove the difference. Prediction: Rangers in seven with Lundqvist winning Conn Smyth.

Well, there you have it. My two cents worth. As per usual, I wouldn't bet the ranch on it. Just know that if the Rangers don't go all the way, I plan on being one unhappy camper.

Rangers Face Tough Challenges In Pursuit of Cup

53 wins, 113 points, both franchise bests. The New York Rangers go into the 2015 post season as a clear-cut favorite to win the Stanley Cup. They are healthy and they have won 6 of their last 7 games.  What could go wrong?

Well, at the risk of being called a Debbie Downer, there are three legitimate obstacles standing in the way of the Blueshirts' quest to secure their first championship in 21 years. I'll list them in no particular order.

1. A crowded field. As I pointed out in my last posting, while the Rangers have had a helluva regular season and are most definitely the NHL's favorite son, they are by no means an only child. The Montreal Canadiens, Tampa Bay Lightning and Washington Capitals are all genuine contenders to get to the finals. The Canadiens' Carey Price, injured in last year's conference final, is healthy and a legitimate Vezina Trophy candidate. If the Rangers meet them - a strong likelihood should they advance to the third round - Price could go toe to toe with Henrik Lundqvist. If the series goes seven, the Habs are certainly capable of winning at the Garden. Translation? The Rangers are hardly a lock to make it back to the finals.

2. A woeful power play. If there is an Achilles heel to this team, it is their power play, or rather lack of one. The Rangers' power play finished an anemic 16.7 percent, tied for 21st in the NHL. In their last game against New Jersey, the Devils, borrowing a page out of the Broadstreet Bullies' era - handed the Rangers seven power play opportunities. They converted just one. That simply isn't good enough for a team looking to hoist the Cup. The Capitals, by contrast, boast the number one power play in the league. In what promises to be a low-scoring post season, special teams will play a crucial role. If opposing teams know they can take liberties with the Rangers without paying the price, this could be a very short playoff run. The only saving grace here is that the Canadiens' power play is just as woeful.

3. The Presidents' Trophy curse.  Since the trophy was first awarded in 1986, only eight teams that have won it have gone on to win the Cup. Eleven failed to even make it to the conference finals. More ominous was that Alain Vigneault coached two of those failed trophy winners in Vancouver. One of them a first round exit to the L.A. Kings in 2012; the other a thrilling seven game loss to the Boston Bruins in the 2011 finals. Speaking of the Bruins, they were last year's Presidents' Trophy winner, and they lost in the second round to the Canadiens. In fact, of the last six Cup winners, only one, the Chicago Blackhawks, sported the league's best record. And that was during a lockout-shortened season. Being number one isn't all that it's cracked up to be.

But while the Rangers do have some challenges, it's only fair to say that, all things being equal, I would much rather be in their skates than anybody else's. There's a reason why they won the Presidents' Trophy. They were clearly the best team this season. Despite losing their number one goalie, and arguably the NHL's best net minder, the Rangers not only didn't miss a beat, they went into fifth gear. They are the league's fastest and deepest team and they have the three best defense pairings of any playoff team. Since mid December, they have been in a league of their own. After enduring the likes of John Tortorella for five seasons, this team has a quiet confidence that Tortorella's never had. Alain Vigneault has gotten these players to buy into his system and the results speak for themselves.

So round one begins Thursday against the Pittsburgh Penguins. The Blueshirts should have little trouble getting past them. The Pens have been dreadful down the stretch and are missing half their defense due to injuries. And Marc Andre Fleury will be no match for Henrik Lundqvist in goal. It will be crucial for the Rangers to not get extended deep in this round. Five games should suffice.

After that, the Caps or the hated Islanders await. That series should go at least six games. Buckle your seat belts, kids. We're in for quite a ride.

Rangers Can Learn From Kentucky Loss

Seconds after watching the Rangers take apart the Jersey Devils 6-1, I switched over to see the final seconds of the Kentucky - Wisconsin semifinal. Duke had won a few hours earlier and I was checking to see if the Wildcats would be meeting them in the NCAA finals.

Needless to say I was shocked when I learned that Kentucky had lost 71-64. Not only had they lost, but they went the final 90 seconds without scoring a single point. They had been undefeated up to that point and it was looking very much like their year.  It just goes to show you that that old Tony D'Amato line "on any given Sunday you're gonna win or you're gonna lose" is true. Except of course this was Saturday. But you get the point. Anybody can win and anybody can lose. Or, more importantly, anybody can beat you if you're not careful.

And that got me thinking about the Blueshirts. For the last three months the hockey world has been touting them as the team to beat; the prohibitive favorites to make it back to the Cup finals and win it all. And who could blame them. On December 6th, their record stood at 11-10-4 and they looked lost. Since then, they have gone 39-11-3 and are currently number one in the Eastern conference. They are only four points away from capturing their first President's trophy since the 1993-94 season - the last time they won the Cup.

The comparisons to Kentucky are unmistakable and unavoidable. Best record? Invincible? Inevitable? I'm sure at the University of Kentucky, they are still in a state of shock. How could the vaunted Wildcats have lost? Actually, if you take a step back and look at their season, they were lucky to advance as far as they did. Several times throughout the tournament they almost lost. In the game before, they survived a last second three point attempt to hold off Notre Dame.

Throughout this season the Rangers have managed to win a lot of close games by margins of 1-0, 2-1 and 3-2. All exciting games to be sure and all games that could easily have gone the other way. One of those wins came against a Buffalo Sabres team that is currently battling for the worst record in the NHL. Of the 50 wins they have amassed this season, only 18 have been decided by more than 2 goals. An argument could certainly be made that the Rangers have been as lucky as they've been good.

Now I'm not poo-pooing luck. Most head coaches will tell you they'd rather be lucky than good. A lot of good teams end up losing. But the problem with being lucky is that sooner or later your luck runs out. The Rangers may be an elite team this year but they've got company. Of the eight teams that will qualify for the playoffs in the Eastern conference, six are good enough to make it to finals. In the Western conference five teams can make that claim; six if the Kings manage to get in as a wild card. That's a pretty crowded field if you ask me.

Bottom line, yes the Rangers are good enough to win the Cup. Then again we all thought Kentucky was good enough to win the NCAA tournament before they got beaten in the final four. As a result, tomorrow Duke will be playing Wisconsin for the championship. If I were Alain Vigneault, I'd get a copy of that final four game and make sure his players watch it before they start their playoff run.

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!