That general uneasiness over the Rangers’ play of late has given way to outright frustration after last night’s slopfest against the Canucks (here’s my “story here”:http://www.lohud.com/article/20081120/SPORTS01/811200503/-1/SPORTS).
I should point out that it is just a rocky stretch in November for a team that is still in first place,, not exactly time to rip it up and start anew. On the other hand, is a stretch that may be underscoring the weaknesses that could cripple this team later.
Regardless, it does give us plenty to talk about during today’s live video chat at 1:15 p.m., which you can access by “clicking here”:http://www.lohud.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/99999999/MOGULUS0103/399990019.
To prepare myself, I’m going to shut it down for an hour or so since I’m working on about four hours of sleep. Otherwise I’ll be even more incoherent than I usually am.
If you think Henrik Lundqvist had a tough night, so did my friend Lynn Zinser of the Times, who went into the evening having already prepared most of her story about the two elite goalies in hockey. Eight goals against later, let’s just say there was some mass re-writing.
As always, though, Zinser “salvaged the effort.”:http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/20/sports/hockey/20rangers.html?_r=1
One bright spot of the night? The play of Stephen Valiquette, who shut out the Canucks for the better part of two periods in his first outing since that meltdown in Toronto.
Unintentional as it may have been, it was still an ideal way for the goalie to wade back into the waters, especially now since it looks like the Rangers need him: If anything, the Lundqvist clunker last night might have been a byproduct of overexposure.