2008 Playoffs

Before we address the officiating and its role in the postmortem for Game 5, there are some things we need to address about the Rangers-Penguins series – things which even extended into the Devils series.

First and foremost, the history of this series was written in the 14 seconds it took for the Rangers to implode as a three-goal lead evolved into a precarious 3-2 lead in the second period of the first game. This turning point was not lost on Jaromir Jagr.

“I think we lost the series in the first two games, especially the first game,” the Rangers captain told Larry Brooks of the NY Post. “If we had won the first game it would be totally different, but that didn’t happen.”

There is no telling how the series would have played out if the Rangers would have handed Pittsburgh its first home loss since February 24.

Of course, the Rangers could very easily have pulled out Game 1 – or any of their losses in the playoffs – had their power play not devolved into a way of killing two minutes off the clock. The stark contrast between the Rangers power play and the Penguins power play spoke volumes of how the series developed.

Whereas the Rangers were content to play a stagnant perimeter game, Pittsburgh featured a power play of movement – both of players and the puck. As a result, where Ranger passes and shots found Penguin sticks, skates and bodies, Pittsburgh shots and passes found net.

Following Game 4, Butch Goring made the following prediction for Sunday’s game.

“If the Rangers win the special team battle, they will win the game.” Obviously, the Rangers did not win that battle and it was no mere coincidence that the only time the Rangers did win the special team penalty was in the only game they won in the series.

The Blueshirts were done in by their own shaky hands in the defensive zone. Far too many times there were unforced turnovers, which was matched by the too numerous times they were unable to clear the zone. Pittsburgh capitalized on this exact problem prior to scoring their first goal on Sunday. The Ranger forwards looked to break out of the zone rather than stay back and make sure the puck was cleared.

While the Rangers struggled to get offense, they did have opportunities that never came to fruition because they passed up shots (Marc Staal in overtime), missed the net (Fedor Tyutin with five minutes left in regulation), fanned on shots (Martin Straka on a few occasions), or they were just unable to get a handle on the puck (Nigel Dawes at the end of the first period).

Another disturbing trend was the Rangers inability to find a consistent sense of urgency in the series in the playoffs. It is a sad statement that the Rangers waited 40 minutes before they realized they need to play as if their season was on the line – because it was. The Blueshirts inability to get anything going in overtime (save for Staal’s inexplicable decision to pass rather than shoot) can be attributed to trying to regain their wits after killing off the nearly three minutes of carry over penalty killing.

Now we can address the officiating. First off, the referees made the right call in assessing a four-minute high sticking minor to Chris Drury. It is the right call no matter what point of the game it is. With that said, there is positively no excuse for two non-entities like Marc Joanette and Brad Watson to miss the obvious high sticking on Drury in the second period. How ironic was it that the Penguin involved in both cases was Ryan Malone.

“That was ironic idiocy,” Stan Fischler said of the call on Drury and non-call on Malone.

With four officials on the ice, there is no excuse for Malone not being hit with a four-minute minor of his own – especially when you factor in that the penalty happened in front of the Rangers not. If it had happened behind the play, there might be a slim excuse for missing it. Of course, the non-call was further magnified when Jagr was called for a borderline penalty against Malone. The result was a six minute swing in power play that helped the Penguins dominate the second period.

I will not delve too deeply into the game-winning goal being offside because those things do happen – even though one of the NBC color analysts did mention they thought the play was offside – an opinion echoed by Tom Renney in the post-game remarks. Actually, Renney said a lot about the officiating without saying much.

The following paragraph is from Dubi Silverstein and his Blueshirt Bulletin blog.

“‘Yes’,” said Renney when asked if he thought the winning play was offside. No more, no less. Later, when asked about the high stick Drury took that was not penalized, he said, ‘There’s been on thing consistent. Night after night, different coaches, different teams are wondering about calls or non-calls. Maybe it’s a backhanded testimony to the speed of the game and the talent of the people playing it.’ Maybe that’s a backhanded way of saying that the officials are too visible influencing the outcomes of games.”

In the end, it is easy to blame the officials when your team doesn’t win – and yes the officials do deserve their shame of blame. However, there is also another group that deserves “blame” – the Pittsburgh Penguins.

You must give credit to Michel Therrien and his Penguins. Therrien taught a young Pens team that there is more to hockey than just scoring goals. They maintained their focus and concentrated on tightening up the defense when they had to and putting the puck in the net when they got the chances. The Penguins seem to be able to find their way to the majority of loose pucks. As I mentioned a couple of paragraphs earlier, the Pens did a superb job of getting their sticks on Ranger shots and passes.

Everything the Rangers did right against the Devils they did wrong against the Penguins. Pittsburgh capitalized on almost every big Ranger mistake. In other words, just as the Rangers out-deviled the Devils, the Penguins are out-rangered the Rangers.

In the end, the Rangers did not get big games out of their big players – save for Henrik Lundqvist. In truth, save is the perfect word for the King. Outside of a poor third game, Lundqvist did all he could to keep the Rangers in the series. Had his teammates matched Lundqvist’s desire and focus, the series would have played far differently.

While Sidney Crosby did not score any goals in the series, his presence was enough to open the ice for the likes of Marian Hossa to shine. While lucky to not draw more ire from the NHL for his Game 4 slew-foots, Evgeni Malkin proved that he might be the best player the Penguins have.

Conversely, the Rangers did not get a big effort from the likes of Jagr, Drury, Scott Gomez, Michael Rozsival and Brendan Shanahan in the final game. While it is great to see kids like Dawes and Lauri Korpikoski step up in the big game, it is more of an indictment of your veterans than it is a praise of your youngsters.

Shanahan’s post-game comments, following what could be the last game of a Hall of Fame career, pretty much summed up the feelings of Ranger Nation.

“The organization was filled with hope, and with the things we did in the offseason, our expectations were high,” Shanahan explained to Sam Weinman of the Journal News. “Because of that, it’s a disappointing finish.”

As the Rangers head into an early summer vacation, the Rangers organization faces many decisions in relations to free agents and returning players.

It is a subject that I will save for the coming days because I just don’t have the heart or the energy to delve into the subject. You would think that after some 37 plus years of being a Ranger fan that I would be used to disappointment, but I am not. It is just another year where I am left wondering what might have been as the words of Sam Rosen echo in my mind and heart – and not in a good way.

This one last a lifetime as well.

Add to Yahoo Add to Google Furl this Add to Spurl Save to Del.icio.us Digg IT! Live Bookmarks! Blogmarks

I am sitting at my computer and it about four hours until game time. I have this sneaky feeling that Game 5 will go one of two ways. The Rangers are either going to win in overtime (goal in first five minutes or we head to double overtime) or the Penguins will win 5-2. Unfortunately, the Pittsburgh victory scenario does not come so much at the expense of poor Ranger play, but more from an endless Ranger death march to the penalty box with an empty net goal thrown in at the end.

Why do I feel that way? The Rangers have been waiting since Friday for clarification from the NHL in reference to the Evgeni Malkin penalty shot. Guess what – I still haven’t seen hide nor hair of an explanation from the league.

Also, Malkin managed to get away with not one, but two slew-foots on Paul Mara without anything being called. Do you know why? If the referees assessed a penalty to Malkin, it would have been a match penalty and all match penalties instantly go the league for review and possibly disciplinary action. Do you think the NHL w3ants to suspend Malkin? I don’t think so.

For those of you who are shaking your heads in disbelief because referees don’t think way have never seen a college hockey game. As you know, fighting is illegal in college hockey and suspensions are doled for those who receive fighting majors. Many times collegiate officials will dole out double minors instead of fighting majors because they don’t want players to face automatic suspensions.

I just hope that the Rangers do not put themselves in any positions where the referee has to make a decision about a borderline call because the benefit of the doubt will go Pittsburgh’s way. The Rangers need to get out in front early so they can neutralize the crowd at the Igloo and put some doubt into the Penguins collective psyche as early in the game as possible.

Add to Yahoo Add to Google Furl this Add to Spurl Save to Del.icio.us Digg IT! Live Bookmarks! Blogmarks

If Thursday proves to be Jaromir Jagr’s last home game as a member of the New York Rangers then he gave Rangers fans quite a show with his two goals and one assist as the Blueshirts staved of elimination. In fact, it was probably poetic justice that Jagr ended the scoring with his empty net goal in the waning seconds.

Jagr was not alone in his heroics. Henrik Lundqvist rebounded from a shaky performance in Game 3 to post his second career shutout – including his second penalty shot save of the playoffs.

The captain and the King had help from an undermanned squad that faces the long haul without the services of Sean Avery and Blair Betts. While the entire team raised their level of play and displayed a confident urgency, one player stands out. Chris Drury shook off the pain from an upper body injury to play a solid two-way game. Amazingly, he won 15 of 24 faceoffs after not being able to take faceoffs during the third period of Game 3.

Stan Fischler summed up the Rangers effort, simply and succinctly.

“It was all about heart – and the Rangers showed heart.”

Despite the team’s accomplishments, the night belonged to Jagr. The veteran showed that there is still gas left in the tank as fans filled the Garden with chants of “Ja-gr, Ja-gr!” and “Comeback Jagr”. Time will tell if he is going to return to the Rangers, but his NHL playoff leading 15 points speak volumes for his ability to step up in the big games. In his career, Jagr has played in 27 elimination game and he has tallied 32 points.

Of course, it wouldn’t be a Rangers playoff game without a couple of controversies involving the officials. First and foremost was the penalty shot awarded to Evgeni Malkin. I am still trying to figure out the reasoning behind Kevin Pollock’s call. While Malkin was in the clear on a breakaway, what exactly did Daniel Girardi that was wrong?

Obviously, Girardi did not hook, hold or interfere with Malkin. At best, he gave the Penguins center a slight shove from behind. Interestingly enough, had that occurred anywhere else on the ice, it would not be a penalty.

I doubt Pollock was whistling Girardi for hitting from behind because, as Dubi Silverstein (editor of Blueshirt Bulletin pointed out on the magazine’s blog) pointed out, such a penalty would be a major.

Actually, I expected the Penguins to be awarded a goal because replays appeared to show the puck crossing the line before the net was dislodged. Ira Podell of the AP explained the NHL’s ruling in his game story.

“A penalty shot was awarded, but a lengthy video review ensued first to see if the initial play was a goal,” Podell wrote. “It was waved off because Rule 78.5 states when a goalkeeper has been pushed into the net with the puck after making a save the goal will not be allowed.”

As bizarre as the whole penalty shot call was, Malkin’s attempt was even more bizarre. Rather than come in at full speed, as he had on the breakaway, Malkin opted for a leisurely stroll in on Lundqvist and shot the puck into the netminder’s glove. Malkin looked more like a reluctant regular season shootout participant as opposed to a superstar trying to tie a playoff game.

The stop on Malkin was the second time in the second period where Lundqvist stepped and bailed out Girardi. Prior to the penalty shot, Lundqvist stoned Ryan Malone on a breakaway after a Girardi turnover at the Penguins blue line.

One has to wonder what would have happened if Sidney Crosby had been blindsided by Jason Strudwick the way Jagr was blindsides by Brooks Orpik. First off, the Rangers would have been shorthanded for anywhere from two to five minutes and secondly Marek Malik would have been in the lineup replacing the suspended Strudwick.

I know many commentators said it was a clean hit, but then again these are the same people who said that Scott Stevens’ shoulder hits to the heads of opponents was legal as well.

Speaking of suspensions, does anyone doubt that Paul Mara would be suspended if he slew-footed Crosby twice on the same shift the way Malkin did to Mara? Give Mara credit, he didn’t pull any punches following the game.

“It’s a classless act by a superstar and there is no need for that in the game,” Podell wrote. “It’s not like it was just a little slew foot, it’s actually a full kick. We’ll put that in the back of our minds.

Looking back at the third period, the Penguins seemed to have lost their composure as they sense Game 4 slipping away. Both Crosby and Malkin took retaliatory penalties with 6:28 left after Girardi delivered a hard, but legal, check on Marian Hossa in the neutral zone. Toss in the Malkin slew-foots and the scrum following Jagr’s empty net goal and the seemingly unflappable Penguins seemed to have lost their cool.

It will be interesting to see what happens in Game 5 if the Rangers can get ahead early in the game. Will the Rangers have learned their lesson from Game 1 and will the Penguins repeat their Game 4 meltdown?

Looking ahead to Game 5, the Rangers must play with the same heart they did Thursday night. They will need to tighten up on the defensive mistakes – especially in the first period. The Penguins had eight shots in the first twenty minutes and all of them were good scoring opportunities.

Lundqvist must carry over his play from Game 4. The King was much steadier is goal and seemed more willing to step up and play with more aggressive style as he was more willing to challenge shooters rather than stay deep in the crease.

The veteran leadership must find a way to come to the forefront. Jagr and Drury already accomplished that on Thursday night. The Blueshirts need Scott Gomez and Brendan Shanahan to start finding their scoring touches and Martin Straka needs to get a new shipment of sticks because he had a couple of golden opportunities (including one on the first shift of the game where he fanned from the slot) that went for naught.

With all of these things considered, the Rangers must focus on two areas that are absolutely crucial to winning Game 5.

The first thing they must continue with the idea that they are not going to win this series all at once. It is a shift-by-shift, period-by-period, game-by-game struggle from here on out – a point echoed by Tom Renney in his post-game comments.

“What we need to do is understand what we need to do to win,” Renney stated. “The big thing for us is not to look beyond the next game.”

In looking at that next game, the Rangers have to make their special teams priority number one. As Lundqvist said in reference to special team play, “It’s been the difference in every game.”

As far as special teams go, the Rangers must continue to strive to eliminate the careless penalties. There was no need for Scott Gomez to take a high sticking penalty late in the third period. The Blueshirts can’t afford to take penalties other than those that prevent a scoring chance.

As for the power play, they need to continue to get traffic in front Marc-Andre Fleury. If the Penguins are going to be aggressive in checking the Rangers pointmen, then they need to work the puck down low along the goal or behind the net – much like they did on Brandon Dubinsky’s goal and much the same way they did against Martin Brodeur.

Here a couple of Game 5 statistics courtesy of the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review:

• The Penguins are 2-0 in Game 5s against the Rangers and 10-4 all-time in Game 5s played in Pittsburgh.
• The Penguins have gone two months without losing consecutive games. They were defeated March 1 in Ottawa after falling Feb. 28 in Boston.

Add to Yahoo Add to Google Furl this Add to Spurl Save to Del.icio.us Digg IT! Live Bookmarks! Blogmarks

In 1994 the New York Rangers had to climb one more hill to win the Stanley Cup and that hill was Mount Vancouver. For the Rangers to survive in the 2008 Stanley Cup Playoffs, that hill might as well be Mount Everest – never mind Mount Pittsburgh.

To say that the Rangers face a daunting task would be an understatement. Only three times in the history of sports has a team come from three games to none down to win a playoff series. The last time it occurred was in 2004 when the Boston Red Sox exorcised the “Curse of the Bambino” and eliminated the New York Yankees. Rangers fans looking from solace can take hope in the fact that two of three times it was a hockey team pulling off this feat. In 1942, the Toronto Maple Leafs rallied to defeat the Detroit Red Wings and in 1975 the New York Islanders survived and eliminated the Pittsburgh Penguins. A real diehard fan will point to the 33 year difference as a glimmer of hope – faint as it may be.

On the other hand, the last time a team won its first seven playoff games they went on to win the Stanley Cup. That team was the 1994 New York Rangers.

As if the Rangers road ahead were not tough enough, it may get even tougher with the potential losses of Chris Drury, Blair Betts, and the loss of Sean Avery. It was obvious that Drury suffered some type of “upper body injury” as he labored through the third period. It is uncertain if Betts will recover from taking a puck to the face.

The Avery injury was not revealed until this morning when John Dellapina and Larry McShane of the Daily News broke a report that Avery lacerated his spleen during the first period last night and remained in the game. Dellapina reports that Avery went to the hospital at 3:00am this morning and that a St. Vincent’s Medical Center source said the feisty winger remains in the intensive care unit.

According to the Rangers, Avery was admitted following a CT scan. He will miss the remainder of the season and he is expected to make a full recovery during the summer.

As bad as the Rangers Game 3 loss is, believe it or not, it could have been worse if past Rangers history held true. April 29 is remembered as the date of two of the longest playoff games in Blueshirts history. In 1971, Pete Stemkowski scored in triple overtime as the Rangers defeated the Chicago Blackhawks. Last year, Michael Rozsival’s double overtime winner against the Buffalo Sabres briefly turned the tide in the Rangers favor.

Unfortunately, the only heroics last night belonged to Pittsburgh’s Evgeni Malkin who celebrated his being named as a Hart Trophy nominee with his playoff coming out party. While Sidney Crosby may get all of the headlines, Malkin has been the leader of the Penguins this season.

During the first two games, special teams and bad penalties spelled doom for the Broadway Blues and Game 3 was no exception. The Penguins two power play goals and the Rangers inability to muster any offense with the man advantage spelled defeat. The Blueshirts had a chance to sink a dagger in the Penguins with their two five-on-three advantages, but they could not solve the Pens penalty killers. People argue that the Ranger can’t find the shooting lanes. Funny, but other teams manage to find those shooting lanes.

The two power play goals the Penguins scored were the direct result of two careless and stupid penalties. Ryan Callahan’s four-minute high sticking penalty at the end of the first period and Ryan Hollweg’s boarding penalty at the end of the second period buried any hope the Rangers had of getting back into the series. While Callahan’s penalty was bad, Hollweg’s could not have come at a worse time given the fact the Rangers had erased a two-goal deficit and had Pittsburgh back on their heels. Actually, the Rangers did a pretty good job of killing off the Hollweg penalty. The problem is the penalty killers were exhausted because they could not get off for a change. The Rangers had one good chance to clear the puck, but once again, went up the middle with the clearance rather than bang it off the boards/glass.

While the Rangers did show a willingness to return to the style of attack that helped beat the New Jersey Devils, they still made the same defensive mistakes – the difference being Pittsburgh’s ability to finish off their chances.

Oh there was one other difference. Pittsburgh’s Marc-Andre Fleury outplayed Henrik Lundqvist. While some will say The King played badly because of the five goals allowed on the 17 shots, more often than not Lundqvist was hung out to dry. His sin was not being able to make up for his teammates mistakes – something he did on a regular basis against the Devils. Turnovers, players falling down, players out of position and wingers having to take defensive zone draws all contributed to the loss.

To their credit, the Rangers are not ready to throw in the white towel yet. Despite being down three games, hope still exists in the Rangers locker room.

“I have a very funny feeling about this series. It’s not over,” Jaromir Jagr said. “It’s just my feeling. I don’t know how many believe me, but we’ll see.”

Whether Jagr truly believes what he is saying is a matter that time will tell. It could be that he believes it, or it could just be the captain saying what he is supposed to say. One thing is for certain, if this turns out to be the captain’s last time in a Rangers uniform he is going out doing all that he can do to will his team to victory.

Does Tom Renney insert Petr Prucha and/or Colton Orr into the lineup of does he pull a page out of Phil Esposito’s playbook? During the 1989 playoffs, Esposito gave Mike Richter his taste of NHL action against the Penguins with the Rangers trailing three games to none. Will Renney give Artem Anisimov and/or Greg Moore their first taste of playoff action if any combination of the injured forwards can’t go and does he replace an ineffective Christian Backman with Bobby Sanguinetti or Corey Potter?

According to Sam Weinman of the Journal News, Moore and P.A. Parenteau were on the ice at practice today.

In the end, it really doesn’t matter who is in the lineup and who isn’t. The bottom line is the Rangers have to revisit their play against the Devils if they want to extend the season at least one more game. We saw flashes of it last night as the Rangers managed to get more traffic in front of Fleury and relied on some forechecking to create scoring chances from behind the net. The Rangers need to translate that sense of urgency to their moribund power play. It is amazing that a team that has so much success when they move their feet and commit to forechecking can be so passive when it comes to their power play.

Rather than carry over that idea of player (and puck) movement, the Rangers become five statues content on passing the puck on the perimeter in a fruitless search for the perfect shot on goal. If the Rangers were as committed to moving the puck and themselves on the power play, they would find that the clogged shooting lanes would open up.

Obviously, the Rangers also need to stay out of the penalty box. While it is impossible for the Rangers not take penalties, they are in no position to take the lazy and careless penalties they took in Game 3 (see Callahan and Hollweg).

No one knows for sure how much longer the Rangers season will last. However, Rick Carpiniello of the Journal News relayed an excellent story that pretty much sums up the Rangers situation.

“It’s been said often in this situation. The first time I heard it, it came from Rangers coach Ted Sator, whose team was down 3-0. ‘One way or another,’ he said, ‘we’ll be history.'”

Add to Yahoo Add to Google Furl this Add to Spurl Save to Del.icio.us Digg IT! Live Bookmarks! Blogmarks

The Rangers-Penguins series is far from over. However, the Rangers need to raise their level of play. They seem to have returned to their mid-winter malaise where the team either scored goals/didn’t play solid defense, or the team played well defensively/ couldn’t find any offensive consistency.

Make no mistake about it, the Rangers do face a daunting task. The Rangers have faced a two games to none deficit 18 times in their history and have only one series win to show for it – 1996 against Montreal when the Rangers came back to sweep the Canadiens. Conversely, the Penguins have won seven of nine series when they had a two games to none lead. Then again, who would have thought the Rangers would have blown a five goal lead against Montreal this season?

The Rangers cannot concern themselves with returning to Mellon Arena tied at two games apiece. Right now there focus needs to be on Game 3 because Game 4 will take care of itself. With that said, here are some areas the Broadway Blues need to address heading into Game 3 on Tuesday night.

1. URGENCY – The Rangers backs may not be against the wall, but they are getting closer and closer. The team has to find a way to play with “desperate control” that Mike Milbury mentioned prior to Game 2. I am not a fan of Milbury, but even a blind squirrel finds an acorn every now and them.

2. The Rangers need to put the “special” back in special teams. The Penguins two game winning goals have been power play tallies. The Rangers need to take a page out of the Pens playbook and put two men in front to screen/harass/annoy Marc-Andre Fleury. In addition, the Rangers have to move the puck and themselves in order to create scoring chances. Pittsburgh is doing a fine job of clogging the shooting lanes and movement (puck and players) is the way to open up those lanes.

3. Better puck control and ice balance are two keys to success at both ends of the ice. Once again the Rangers failure to clear the puck cost them a goal. Marc Staal was unable to clear the puck and Michael Rozsival left the slot to help Staal with Evgeni Malkin – thus leaving Jordan Staal open in front. Puck control includes getting pucks out of the zone when the opportunity presents itself. It also includes eliminating the bad clearances up the middle of the ice. The boards are there for a reason – use them. Ice balance includes the forwards not clumping up to one side of the ice and it includes the defense corps’ bad habit of playing too wide – which is how Marian Hossa walked in on a first period breakaway.

4. In order to strike a balance between the Game 1 offense and the Game 2 defense, the Rangers must increase their forechecking and physical play in combination with getting the puck deep. The Penguins are doing a solid job of standing the Rangers up at the blue line. As a result, the Rangers must get the puck deep and work the Penguins defensemen. The Pens blueliners are good, but they are beatable if the Blueshirts can get serious pressure on them.

5. The Rangers must work Fleury the same way they did Martin Brodeur – with Sean Avery toning down his Marty antics a bit. The Rangers forced Brodeur into mistakes by being a presence in front of him – something they are not doing to Fleury.

6. The veteran leadership has to step up. It is now the time for the likes of Chris Drury, Scott Gomez and Brendan Shanahan to show their leadership and live up to their big-game personas.

7. Tom Renney might want to consider a couple of lineup changes. He needs to move Petr Prucha up with Avery and Gomez and drop Shanahan to the fourth line. It will add much needed speed to the Gomez line and keep Shanahan fresher for special teams work. It also gives the Rangers a solid defensive fourth line. The other change might be to roll the dice and insert Andrew Hutchinson into the lineup. Since he was one of 10 players recalled from Hartford, I have to presume that there are no issued with him having to clear waivers. He is a risk defensively, but he might be the power play spark the Rangers need. Renney could conceivably sit a forward and dress seven defensemen and use Hutchinson as a power play specialist. That would open up the opportunity for Renney to double shift Jagr in hopes the captain will shake free from his shadows. Would Renney consider reuniting his HBO Line? Ryan Hollweg, Blair Betts and Colton Orr were an effective line when matched against Sidney Crosby’s line.

Add to Yahoo Add to Google Furl this Add to Spurl Save to Del.icio.us Digg IT! Live Bookmarks! Blogmarks

The naysayers are out in droves as the Rangers find themselves in the exact same position they were in one year ago – down two games to none in the Eastern Conference Semifinals. You can excuse Ranger fans for feeling down and Penguins fans for feeling giddy, but the media – that is another question.

Shelly Anderson of the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette offered the following analysis.

“By failing to at least split the first two games of their second-round series against the Penguins, the Rangers put themselves in a position of having to win at least one game at Mellon Arena if they are to advance to the Eastern Conference final.”

I don’t want to hurt Anderson’s feelings, but the Rangers were going to have win at least one game in Pittsburgh no matter what. While it would have been nicer to win the first game at the Igloo, if they win the last one at the Mellon that works just fine. The bottom line is that the Rangers are not in trouble until they lose a game at home.

It was only one year ago, that the Rangers were seconds away from bring a three games to two lead back to the Garden against the Buffalo Sabres.

The Rangers have to hope that this season’s streaks continue. The Penguins have now won their last 12 home games and the Rangers have to hope that their four game home winning streak this year against the Penguins gets extended by three.

Of course, the Rangers need to start finding way to win in this series – and in a hurry. The Blueshirts played with a curious lack of intensity and desperation during Game 2, especially in the third period. I am not sure if they were a tired team, a beaten team, or an overconfident team. Whatever the case, they need to play with what NBC’s Mike Milbury called a “desperate control”.

A perfect example of the Rangers lack or urgency stems from their “one and down” style of attack. They seemed content to get one shot on Marc-Andre Fleury and not work as hard against him as they did Martin Brodeur to get to rebounds and cause traffic in front of the Pens net.

While his players may or may not realize this problem, Tom Renney is well aware of what the Blueshirts need to do on offense.

“We need to make sure he has some screens to have to find the puck through,” Renney offered to Dave Molinari of the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette. “I’m not going to suggest that it was easy for him, but it certainly could have been tougher.”

The easiest way to sum up the Rangers playoff experience so far is to take the tact that they played just good enough to beat the Devils and are playing just bad enough to be trailing the Penguins. The Blueshirts just seemed to beat a step off during the entire game. To use a baseball analogy, it just seemed like their curveball was hanging all game long.

Game 2 is the perfect illustration. Despite Fleury’s shutout, Henrik Lundqvist outplayed his Pittsburgh counterpart. The King was called on to make the bigger game saving stops. Even Fleury’s best stop was more a case of the Rangers not being willing, or able, to take that final shot.

A few minutes before Jordan Staal capitalized on poor Ranger defense, Jaromir Jagr cruised down the slot. Rather than take the shot in the slot, the Rangers captain tried to skate it down low and get Fleury to commit. In the old days, Jagr would have rifled the puck from the slot rather than try to deke the goaltender.

Of course, the Rangers again found themselves one break away from heading into overtime. In Game 1, it was Jagr’s shot that clanged off the post. Yesterday, it was Dan O’Halloran’s quick whistle that nullified martin Straka’s tying goal.

Rather than resort to the gamesmanship that Penguins coach Michel Therrien accused Renney of in respect to Sidney Crosby and his diving fetish, the Rangers bench boss agreed with the call.

“I thought it was an accurate call,” Renney told Larry Brooks of the NY Post. “Either the whistle had blown or the intent was there. It was a good call.”

I have to agree with Renney’s assessment with this one caveat – O’Halloran needed to put himself in better position to follow the puck. The referee was to side of the net rather than getting behind the net to follow the puck. The referees did not lose site of the puck on a Rangers second period power play despite a maze of Rangers and Penguins surrounding Fleury.

The Rangers process of fighting their way back into this series has to start with forgetting about Crosby and his Greg Louganis-like dives because it is doing the team no good. Everyone knows that Crosby dives. That is why all of the media, both print and television have harped on this subject. You don’t see anyone saying that Evgeni Malkin dives because he doesn’t.

If what Brooks wrote in Sunday’s Post is true, then the league knows it as well. Brooks said that the NHL called Sidney the Swan in on the carpet because of his propensity to dive.

This situation is very similar to the one the New York Mets face in the 1986 National League Championship Series against the Houston Astros. Everyone knew that Mike Scott was scuffing the baseballs. Much like the NHL turns a blind eye to Crosby, National League President Chub Fenney looked the other way when the Mets presented him a with a bucket full of Scott baseballs that were scuffed in the exact same place with the exact same pattern.

The Mets went out and beat the other Astros pitchers and won that series in six games and did not have face Scott in a seventh and deciding game.

The Rangers need to go out and play their game and not worry about what Crosby may or may not do. If the Rangers end up putting themselves in a position where Crosby can draw a penalty for diving, then the blame is on the Rangers. If the Rangers are going to take a penalty against Crosby, make sure it is as earned penalty because they put a body on Crosby and not a careless hook or debatable hand on the shoulder.

Add to Yahoo Add to Google Furl this Add to Spurl Save to Del.icio.us Digg IT! Live Bookmarks! Blogmarks

“I haven’t changed. I never dove. I don’t,” Sidney Crosby offered during Thursdays meeting with the media. “That’s just part of the playoffs, part of the gamesmanship,” he said. “If I go down it’s because I’ve been forced down. If not, I’ll find a way to stay up. I think he should be the one worried about guys diving.”

Apparently, Crosby forgot about that statement as he felt a breeze and found a way to go down on the thinnest of calls against Martin Straka late in the third period. Of course, both Don Koharski and Kelly Sutherland somehow managed to miss Straka being crosschecked moments earlier in front of the Pens net, but were on top of the Crosby call. Interesting, indeed.

As bad as that call on Straka was, it did not cost the Rangers the game. There is no excuse for any team to blow a three goal lead – especially one that is built on defensive responsibility first. It was that lack of defensive responsibility that let Pittsburgh get back into the game.

John Dellapina of the Daily News had a telling quote from Brendan Shanahan in reference to the Straka penalty.

“I think it was certainly a big play in the game,” Shanahan explained. “But it wasn’t the game. I think the moment of the game was really when they get their first goal. They’re pretty dead, trying desperate things. And kind of out of nowhere, their fourth line gets the goal that gives them momentum.”

Michael Rozsival presented the Penguins with their first goal by committing a turnover at the Rangers blue line and them compounded that problem by getting caught standing in the crease when Jarkko Ruutu pinballed one in off Rozsival’s skate.

The Rangers need to heed Butch Goring’s post-game warning to “stay out of the crease”. I have counted at least three goals that have bounced off Rangers defensemen who have been standing in the crease (last night’s goal, the Devils’ Game 3 winner that deflected in off Marc Staal and the Devils’ Game 5 goal that bounced off Fedor Tyutin).

Heck, even the Rangers caught a break when Straka’s power play goal deflected in off Sergei Gonchar, who was standing in the crease.

Defensive breakdowns played a huge part on goals two and four. On the second goal, four Rangers left Pascal Dupuis all alone in the slot and on the fourth goal Tyutin poorly misplayed a two-on-one on Petr Sykora’s goal.

Of course, it would be another pinball-type goal that would prove to be the game-winner – this time off the leg of Evgeni Malkin rather than a Ranger.

One disturbing trend from last night’s game was just how fragile the Rangers psyche was. The Penguins scored their first two goals in the space of 14 seconds and their third and fourth goals in the space of 20 seconds. While the Blueshirts do rely on young players in key spots, this team still has enough veteran leadership that should prevent the team from losing its poise so easily.

The Game 1 loss reflected the same problems the Rangers encountered in Montreal when they blew their five goal lead. The Broadway Blues had the game in control, but then took their skate off the pedal. They stopped fore checking and they stopped hitting. They let the crowd get back into the game and affect their performance.

As a result, for only the second time in their playoff history (covering 94 games), the Rangers lost a game where they had a three goal lead. On the other hand, Pittsburgh rallied from a three goal deficit in the playoffs for the first time since May 1992 when they came back to defeat the Chicago Blackhawks in Game 1 of the Stanley Cup Finals.

I had a bad feeling when Versus announcer Joe Beninati started to say that the Penguins had not rallied from a three-goal deficit all year. Unfortunately proved to be true as the “dreaded three goal lead” came back to bite the Rangers.

“(Ahead) 3-0 in the playoffs, you’d like to think it’s over, but what are you going to do?” Scott Gomez told the AP. “We can’t get in a track meet with those guys. It’s over, there’s nothing you can do about it.”

Actually, there is something the Rangers can do. They can, once and for all, learn from their mistakes. They got away with mistakes against the Devils because New Jersey does not have the offensive firepower to capitalize – the Penguins do have that kind of firepower.

The Rangers veterans need to find a way to make sure the team does not fold at the first signs of adversity. Far too many times it seemed like the Rangers had that deer-caught-in-the-headlights look.

The Blueshirts have to remember that their team is built on taking care of defensive responsibilities first. The Rangers cannot go toe-to-toe with the Penguins offensively. As a result, the Rangers have to bring the tempo down top their level. That means playing a smarter game in their own zone by keeping ice balance and making sure each player has their man marked while keeping a body between the puck and the net.

That means being more careful with the puck in the defensive zone. The Rangers dodged a couple of bullets on some poor clearing attempts. The Blueshirts have a bad habit of trying to break out of the zone with ill-conceived passes up the middle rather than chipping the puck off the boards.

That means establishing a forecheck and taking advantage of the Penguins blue liners who do not handle the puck that well (e.g. Hal Gill and Brooks Orpik).

For the most part, the Rangers stayed silent about the officiating during the Devils. The same was not true following the Koharski-Sutherland Show.

“I think it’s a weak call at that time in the game,” Shanahan stated. “Sidney embellished and you could make the call that he was interfering with Martin Straka. It’s too bad it had to happen to a guy like Martin Straka. He’s such an honest, hard-working player… I think it was a tough call for the referee to make at that time in the game.”

Jaromir Jag had an even more telling quote. While he explained, half-heartedly, that he didn’t see the play, the Rangers captain said, “I was kind of expecting something like that.”

While we are at it, can we expect another “rule clarification” from Colin Campbell in reference to Ruutu taunting Rozsival before a faceoff. The Pens uber-pest stole a page out of Sean Avery’s playbook as he put his stick in front of Rozsival’s face. Before anyone starts screaming about a double standard, I did not say that should be a penalty. All I am asking is if the NHL will overreact and issue a Ruutu Rule like they did with the Avery Rule.

Add to Yahoo Add to Google Furl this Add to Spurl Save to Del.icio.us Digg IT! Live Bookmarks! Blogmarks

The New York Rangers will be battling history and the National Hockey League when they face the Pittsburgh Penguins in the Eastern Conference Semifinals. The Rangers lost their three previous playoff matchups against the Penguins and if you thought the officiating was inconsistent against the New Jersey Devils just wait until “He Who Must Be Babied” (aka Sidney Crosby) starts flopping to the ice and whining to the officials.

The Blueshirts will need to elevate their intensity and execution in the next round. They were able to get away with some of their mistakes and turnovers because the Devils do not posses a potent offense. The same cannot be said of the Pens.

Crosby is just one of the headaches the Rangers will face against Pittsburgh. The Penguins have two strong offensive lines in the Crosby-Marian Hossa-Pascal Dupuis line and the Evgeni Malkin-Petr Sykora-Ryan Malone line. In addition they have Sergei Gonchar, the NHL’s second highest scoring blueliner, patrolling the point.

Even if the Rangers do eliminate those mistakes and turnovers, they will not be able to get away with playing the way they did in the third period in Game 5 against the Devils. The Rangers retreated into a passive 1-2-2 defensive mode and practically shut down the forecheck that got them where they were. As a result, the Devils were able to dictate the tempo of the play.

The Rangers also must remember to stay out of the penalty box in the next round. The last thing they want to do is give the Penguins any more power play chances than necessary. This will be a problem in this series, not so much because of the Rangers, but because of the NHL’s need to sell the game on the back of Sidney Crosby.

While I wrote that the Devils series was about the Rangers being able to score goals, the Penguin series reverts back to the old adage of defense winning playoff games. The main part of that strategy will be in keeping the Pens off the power play, something Tom Renney knows all too well.

“They’ve got some terrific young players … their goaltending certainly seems to have nailed it throughout the course of the season,” the Blueshirts coach told Steve Zipay of Newsday. They’re one of those teams who will force you into mistakes by the pressure they apply offensively, so we have to be alert to those issues and try to keep a pretty good offensive team off the ice in terms of the power play.”

Renney has good reason to be concerned with the Pittsburgh power play. The Penguins power play which connected at a 20.4% clip (fourth in the NHL) has stepped up their play in the playoffs as they are now at 26.1% (third in the playoffs). While that increase does not seem to be much of a surprise, the Penguins penalty killing numbers are a different story.

Pittsburgh was ranked 23rd in penalty killing (81.0%) during the regular season. However, they have done a complete turnaround in the playoffs as they have the best penalty killing percentage (92.3%).

Of course, some of these playoff numbers have be taken with a grain of salt given Pittsburgh’s opponent in the Eastern Conference Quarterfinals – something many in the media are not doing when it comes to analyzing the Rangers-Penguins series.

Many in the media are pointing to Pittsburgh’s four game sweep over Ottawa as the coronation of King Crosby and the Penguins. However, the Senators were pretty much dead team skating as they hung on the make the playoffs. Injuries and inconsistent goaltending doomed any chance Ottawa had in the playoffs.

While the Penguins get the edge when it comes to offense, the Rangers have to get the edge in terms of defense. Yes, the Rangers do not have a stud defenseman on the blue line, but when discussing their defensive corps the sum is better than the parts. This is not to slight the Penguins because Michael Therrien’s team finished third among the Eastern Conference teams in goals allowed with 216. The Rangers finished second with 199.

As you might expect, the series will come down to goaltending. Henrik Lundqvist’s play against the Devils provided a perfect example as to why The King earned his third consecutive Vezina Trophy nomination. However, Pittsburgh’s Marc-Andre Fleury has been displaying the skills that made him the first overall selection in 2003.

Fleury is 14-3 in his last 17 decisions, including the sweep of Ottawa in the first round of the playoffs. During that streak, he has allowed more than two goals just twice.

Against the Rangers Fleury was 2-3, but two of those losses came in overtime – and he posted a 2.19 GAA against the Blueshirts. For comparison, Lundqvist was 5-3 with a 1.87 GAA.

During the regular season series, the Rangers outscored the Penguins 21-16. The more telling stat is how the Rangers special teams outplayed Pittsburgh. The Penguins scored five power play goals on 35 chances (14.3%) while the Rangers scored nine power play goals on 42 chances (21.4%). Each team scored a shorthanded goal.

While the 2007-2008 regular season went the Rangers way, history has not been so kind for the Blueshirts in playoff matchups with the Penguins. The Rangers were swept in the two team first ever matchup in the 1989 Division Semifinals as the Pens outscored the Rangers 19-11. In 1996, Pittsburgh scored a five game victory in the Conference Semifinals outscoring the Blueshirts 21-15. In that series, Mario Lemieux and Jaromir Jagr skated roughshod over the Rangers as they combined for 19 points.

Then there is 1992. The Rangers won the President’s Trophy in Mark Messier’s first year in New York. Expectations were running high in the hopes that 1940 would be erased. A not-so-funny thing happened on the way to winning the Stanley Cup as the Penguins eliminated the Rangers in the Division Finals in six games with Pittsburgh again holding the goal advantage (24-19).

Taking everything into consideration, players, coaches, statistics, past trends, this series might just come down to which team is bet able to shake off the rust from their long playoff break. The Penguins will have had eight days off and the Rangers six days off. Last year the Rangers spotted Buffalo the first two games before tying the series up at the Garden. If the Rangers can gain a split in Pittsburgh, they return to the Garden where they won all four games against the Penguins.

However, gaining a split will not be easy because Pittsburgh has a 10 game home winning streak on the line. Then again, the Rangers are 3-0 on the road in the playoffs.

One interesting thing to note is how each team responds to falling behind in a game. Pittsburgh trailed Ottawa for a grand total of 4:28 in their series while the Rangers only trailed for 15:10 against New Jersey.


There will be many subtexts in this series:

1. Penguins GM Ray Shero is no stranger to Madison Square Garden given his father Fred Shero’s days as GM/Coach of the Blueshirts.

2. Another Penguin who will be having a homecoming of sorts is Syosset, NY native Rob Scuderi. Prior to going to Boston College, the blueliner played for the NY Apple Core program.

3. It is the first, of what should be many, playoff matchups between Marc and Jordan Staal. In addition, Marc Staal will be “reunited” with fellow Team Canada teammate Kris Letang. The two defensemen were part of the 2006 and 2007 teams that won gold at the World Junior Championship.

4. Jagr may very well be making his final NHL appearances in Pittsburgh. If you thought he has been booed in the past, just wait until Friday night.

5. The Rangers captain is not the only player in this series who has ties to their opponent. Dupuis, Sykora and Adam Hall were all Rangers and Michal Rozsival and Martin Straka were members of the Penguins. Even Glen Sather has ties back to his playing days as a member of the Penguins.

6. Of course, there is what should be the most entertaining matchup of all. Sean Avery and Jarkko Ruuutu will be battling for the title of uber-pest. Toss in Georges Laraque and Gary Roberts will be on hand to stir the pot as well. It will be interesting to see if Renney dresses Colton Orr. During the regular season, Renney often used the HBO Line against Sidney Crosby. The coach must decide if Orr is fit enough to face the extended ice time he might see. Does Renney look to keep Ryan Hollweg in the lineup as well to counter the aforementioned Pens?

7. Renney also has to find a way to keep Jagr away from Hal Gill and Brooks Orpik because Therrien will be looking for that matchup. Does Renney look to move Jagr from line to line or does he give him extra shifts or does he just stay the course and run his four lines as usual?

8. Faceoffs will be a key to a potential Rangers victory. Crosby (48.0%), Malkin (34.1%) and Maxime Talbot (44.1%) have not been strong on faceoffs. Pittsburgh’s best has been Jordan Staal (52.9%) and Tyler Kennedy (50.0%). Conversely, three Rangers centers are over 50% – Scott Gomez (53.1%), Brandon Dubinsky (51.0%) and Blair Betts (50.0%). Surprisingly, Chris Drury (39.4%) has been poor on faceoffs – even though he had as solid Game 1.

9. According to John Dellapina of the Daily News, Games 1 and 4 will be broadcast on Versus only in the New York area. Games 2 and 5 will only be broadcast by NBC. Games 3, 6 and 7 will be on MSG.

Add to Yahoo Add to Google Furl this Add to Spurl Save to Del.icio.us Digg IT! Live Bookmarks! Blogmarks

Survive and advance. Jim Valvano first spoke those words 25 years ago as his North Carolina State team went on its Cinderella run to the NCAA basketball championship. Those words still rung true last night as the New York Rangers eliminated the New Jersey Devils. While the series lasted only five games, each one was a war that seemed to come down to the last shift.

Interestingly enough, surviving and advancing wasn’t the only look back into the past. The Rangers revisited four significant moments in their playoff history.

With the Blueshirts seemingly in command with a 4-1 lead, Bryce Salvador channeled the spirit of Ron Francis and 1992 when the Devil defenseman’s shot from outside the blue line hit Brandon Dubinsky, banged off the post, hit Henrik Lundqvist and bounced into the net.

In addition to the Francis goal, Salvador’s masse shot brought back visions of Kevin Hatcher’s goal from the neutral zone against Mike Richter in Game 5 against the Washington Capitals.

The second look back into the past came when the Devils scored their five-on-three goal as Patrik Elias innocent shot bounced in off Fedor Tyutin as visions of Marc Staal and Game 3 flashed into focus.

The final stroll down memory lane came in the third period when John madden looked to tie the goal with his penalty shot attempt. Ranger fans flashed back to Vancouver in 1994 when Richter atoned for the Francis goal as he stoned Pavel Bure’s penalty shot attempt. Much like Richter’s save, Lundqvist’s save on Madden seemed to stem the tide and turn it in favor of the Blueshirts.

The Rangers opponent in the Eastern Conference semifinals could be decided as soon as Saturday. While four teams still remain in play, odds are the Rangers will face either the Montreal Canadiens or the Pittsburgh Penguins. Both teams present a daunting task – especially if the Rangers play like they did against the Devils.

The Blueshirts will need to elevate their intensity and execution in the next round. They were able to get away with some of their mistakes and turnovers because the Devils do not posses a potent offense. The same cannot be said of the Habs or the Pens. Montreal’s speed has the potential to magnify those mistakes and turnovers while Pittsburgh’s Sidney Crosby and Evgeni Malkin are certain to cause problems.

Even if the Rangers do eliminate those mistakes and turnovers, they will not be able to get away with playing the way they did in the third period in Game 5 against the Devils. The Rangers retreated into a passive 1-2-2 defensive mode and practically shut down the forecheck that got them where they were. As a result, the Devils were able to dictate the tempo of the play.

The Rangers also must remember to stay out of the penalty box in the next round. The last thing they want to do is give the Canadiens or Penguins any more power play chances than necessary. This will be a problem in the next series, not so much because of the Rangers, but because of their opponent – on a couple of levels.

Obviously, with the Rangers potentially facing a more offensive team than the Devils there will be more chances to take penalties. However, the offensive abilities of Montreal and Pittsburgh is not the only thing the Rangers have to worry about.

If there were concerns with the officiating against the Devils just wait until they face the Canadiens or the Penguins. The NHL has not seen a team from Canada win a Stanley Cup since the Habs did it in 1993. With the NHL looking to base its mainstream appeal on Sidney Crosby, playing the Penguins will be no walk in the par either. Conspiracy theorists start your engines.

The Rangers-Devils series is not the only one where questionable officiating has reared its ugly head. Yet despite all of the grumblings, the NHL remains blissfully unaware of the miserable jobs its on-ice officials are perpetrating.

Dave Gross of Canwest News Service offered what might be the most incredible misstatement ever uttered by a league official. The main behind the insanity was Stephen Walkom, the league’s Senior Vice President & Director of Officiating.

“We’ve had our bumps, but this is the first year where I believe our team has truly been consistent,” Walkom opined on Gary Bettman’s XM satellite radio program on Thursday.

The only consistent thing about the NHL’s officiating has been its inconsistency!

I would be remiss without visiting the Sean Avery-Martin Brodeur saga one final time. Brodeur proved himself to be classless and a hypocrite by ignoring Avery and not shaking his hand while shaking every other Rangers’ hand. At least when Billy Smith refused to shake hands he didn’t shake anyone’s hand.

Despite all of the lamentations about how Avery is bad for the game, he comes out of this series with more class than Brodeur.

“Everyone talks about how much class I don’t have, well it’s the end of the series and men go to war against each other,” the feisty winger offered. “I guess he forgot to shake my hand. I don’t know if anyone saw that. Of course I was going to shake his hand.”

Add to Yahoo Add to Google Furl this Add to Spurl Save to Del.icio.us Digg IT! Live Bookmarks! Blogmarks

Most times the hockey gods (actually all of the sports gods) can be fickle and cruel. But every now and then they do provide an opportunity for redemption. Marc Staal took every advantage of that opportunity with his game-winning goal late in the third period of Game 4. While he was in the wrong place at the wrong time on Sunday night, the rookie blue liner was in the right place at the right time on Wednesday night.

Truth be told, Game 4 should served as Marc Staal’s final coming out party. Not too many people would fault him if he had a below par Game 4 given what happened in Game 3. As it turns out, the exact opposite occurred. Not only did Staal elevate his play from the opening face-off, but he deserved every accolade he received – despite finishing the game on a tender ankle after blocking a hot. And he didn’t hurt that he picked a pretty opportune time to score his first goal at Madison Square Garden.

Think back to the beginning of the season. How many Ranger fans would have bet that Staal would be on the ice looking at Brandon Dubinsky taking a face-off with 70 seconds remaining in a game where the Rangers led by a goal? It just goes to show how far the Ranger rookies have advanced during the season.

Ranger fans should not get too giddy about being up three games to one over the Devils. While the numbers are strongly in their favor, the Blueshirts cannot and must not look ahead to the next round. Yes, teams with a three games to one lead have gone on to win 91% of those playoff series. However, the Devils are one of those teams within the 9% after rallying to defeat Philadelphia in the 2000 Eastern Conference Finals.

As if that pressure wasn’t enough, the Rangers have never blown a three games to one lead. Then again, they had never lost a game where they had a five goal lead and we know what happened in the Rangers final trip into Montreal.

They Rangers must elevate their level of play as they return to the Prudential Center. The Rangers lack of intensity, at times, during the two games at the Garden was problematic. One would expect the devils to play with a level of desperation, but the Rangers are not that good of team that they can by on talent alone – and if they were – that only works during the regular season, not the playoffs.

Fortunately, the Rangers still seem focused on surviving and advancing. The same can’t be said about the Devils. New Jersey continues to bemoan about the treatment Martin Brodeur is receiving from the “big, bad Rangers”.

“They are getting away with it, we should be able to get away with it, too,” Jay Pandolfo told Tom Canavan of the AP. “That’s the only thing you can do. It’s out of your hands after that. Sure enough, they are going to hit Marty and if we retaliate, we’ll probably get a penalty. It’s tough, but it’s been going on all series. We have to do the same to their goalie.”

Yes, Brent Sutter was quick to point out that his team failed to clear the puck on the first four goals, but the Devil coach continued his amazement at the “mugging” his star netminder was receiving.

“There was definitely contact on the goaltender and if it’s allowed, that’s fine,” Sutter lamented. “I want to know it and then we’ll do the same. I didn’t think there was contact allowed on goaltenders.”

Funny, I guess Sutter must have missed it when Zach Parise slashed the stick out of Henrik Lundqvist’s hands prior to Mike Mottau’s tying goal. I wonder if Colin Campbell will issue an “on the fly” rule interpretation in reference to that.

While Campbell is looking for new rule interpretations, he might want to reaffirm the NHL’s intolerance for diving because Brodeur is at his Greg Louganis best. Martin Brodeur is a world class Hall of Fame goaltender so it is not necessary for him to assume the pike position every time a Ranger brushes up against him. He is earning the nicknames that blog fans are giving him – Brodiva or Brodiver.

I know that Brodeur did receive one diving penalty, but the official also penalized Fredrik Sjostrom – even though Vitaly Vishnevski pushed him into the Devil goalie. The official also missed the fact that Sjostrom was cut.

Look, I really do hate to pile on the officials, but last night’s duo of Kevin Pollock and Denis LaRue were beyond brutal. In addition to the aforementioned Parise slash, the two referees missed Bryce Salvador’s take down of Sean Avery prior to the Devils rush. Then again, it was Avery so it doesn’t count. However, that doesn’t explain their inability to whistle Salvador for a penalty while he delivered multiple cross checks to the back of Ryan Hollweg in the first period.

Just to show I am not a completely jaded Ranger fan; the refs blew the four-minute high sticking call on Travis Zajac. Replays showed that Zajac’s stick was lifted by Jaromir Jagr prior to making contact with Michal Rozsival.

The bottom line is that while the Rangers have handled the poor officiating by taking the high road and showing class, the Devils have been at the opposite extreme as they are in full Sidney Crosby Whine Mode.

If Ranger fans learned anything from winning the Stanley Cup back in 1994, the hardest thing to do is win that fourth game to close out a series. The Blueshirts can make their job so much easier if they could get their power play working on three cylinders, never mind working on all four cylinders.

Their four-minute power play was the golden opportunity to put away the Devils in Game 4. The problem is that the Rangers reverted to their bad habits. Their strategy was to sit and wait for that one perfect chance to reveal itself. If we have learned anything at all from this series is that offense has been generated by getting the puck at the net.

The best way to get the puck at the net, especially when you are on the power play, is through movement – both of the puck and the player. When the Rangers set up and seem content to pass the puck around the perimeter, it makes killing penalties easy. Opponents can sit in their box and cut off shooting and passing lanes. However, if the Rangers work the puck while keeping themselves in motion, their opponents’ ability to shut off shooting and passing lanes diminishes.

There was no better example of this idea than Scott Gomez’s power play goal that opened the scoring.

Add to Yahoo Add to Google Furl this Add to Spurl Save to Del.icio.us Digg IT! Live Bookmarks! Blogmarks

Next Page »