Rangers Report Blog

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.

It sure looked to me like Henrik Lundqvist had decided to come out on his own after allowing that fifth goal tonight, but the involved parties said it was Tom Renney who signaled the goalie to the bench.

“I looked at Tom and he gave me the sign,” Lundqvist said.

Renney confirmed as much, saying he was waiting for Lundqvist to make eye contact with him before he summoned him.

More surprising is that the goalie made it that far. I asked Renney if he had considered pulling Lundqvist after the fourth Vancouver goal.

The coach nodded.

“I thought about it after the third goal, too,” he said.

So why didn’t he?

“Let him battle,” Renney said. “Let the team battle in front of him.”
———
Meanwhile, either the decision is out of Tom Renney’s hands or he hasn’t given it much thought, but when I asked the coach about calling up a player from Hartford so that he could occasionally sit down a struggling defenseman—pick one of several—the coach said he didn’t have the latitude right now to do so.

“The bottom line is we have to look at where we are with our roster in general,” Renney said. “I still have some forward decisions to make. You’d sure like the depth to get guys attention, but we don’t have that luxury.”

It was a complicated answer, and not altogether clear. On one hand, Renney said the idea was worth considering. On the other, he said the real issue was the structure of the Rangers’ practices, in which too much time is spent on conditioning and flow and not on teaching and systems.

“That’s not an excuse. That’s a coaching decision,” he said. “That’s my job.”

So in other words, the Rangers need more time to practice.

Fine—except tomorrow they’re off.

Raise your hand if you’re confused.

There now appears to be at least a light at the end of the tunnel when it comes to Scott Gomez’s troublesome ankle.

Although the Rangers center didn’t skate again today and will not play for the fourth straight game, Tom Renney said Gomez did show marked signs of improvement thanks to—no lie—an acupuncture treatment yesterday.

“Today was as good as he’s felt all along,” Renney said of Gomez.

That still puts Saturday in Ottawa as highly doubtful, but Gomez is expected to skate again on his own tomorrow.

Update, 6:21 p.m.: Larry Brooks reports that Gomez “had a stress fracture in his ankle, then pulled his groin trying to play through it.”:http://www.nypost.com/seven/11192008/sports/rangers/rangers_gomez_has_stress_fracture_139573.htm The prognosis remains the same, with the center doubtful for Saturday and more likely for Monday.
———
Meanwhile, amidst all the talk of Markus Naslund facing his old team and Roberto Luongo facing Henrik Lundqvist, let’s not forget that Renney will be facing his old team as well for just the third time in his career.

Renney’s season-plus stint with the Canucks was hardly a triumphant one. He went a combined 39-52-9 and was canned at the beginning of the 1997-98 season—thank you, Mark Messier?—but he did say he benefited from the experience regardless.

“I was given the chance to coach in the NHL there. And I very much appreciate that. I grew up from the experience to say the least,” Renney said. “So whether they want it that way or not, the Vancouver Canucks have some ownership in whatever I am. But I’ll appreciate beating them. I’ll be good with that.”
———
On the shameless plug front, don’t forget “live video chat tomorrow at 1:15”:http://www.lohud.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/99999999/MOGULUS0103/399990019. I demand a good turnout since the Rangers are supposed to be off tomorrow and I normally would sneak in a lunchtime skate at WSA.

I’m told there will be some special guests from Sweden live in studio, which should only add to the experience. And no, I’m not talking about Henrik Lundqvist and Markus Naslund.

But if you can’t wait until then—and something tells me you can—I’ll be on with Kenny Albert after the second period tonight. That’s Kenny Albert: Capital “K”, capital “A” (if you must know, he said he wanted me to mention him in the blog, so there you have it).

For the conspiracy theorists out there, let the record show that there will be a staggering 17 scouts in attendance for tonight’s tilt against the Canucks, including two each from L.A., the Islanders, and Florida (GM Jacques Martin among them).

Open market on Petr Prucha? Maybe.

More likely is the simple fact that the Canucks rarely come east, so area scouts will want to jump at the chance to see them up close. Don’t forget, the Sedin twins will be free agents July 1. Actually, 13 players in all on the Vancouver roster will be either UFA’s or RFA’s at season’s end.

So in other words, those scouts will be busy.

Meanwhile, I just walked into the Garden, wher Zipay reminded me the game doesn’t start until 7:30. Doh! That’s an extra half hour I could have spent at home ignoring the leaves piled up on the front lawn. Instead it will be an extra half hour speculating why there are so many scouts here.

I’m just confirming this now, but word is that the team the Rangers are playing tonight, the Vancouver Canucks, are in fact members of the National Hockey League.

Go figure. I never got the memo.

Like it or not, the impact of the new NHL schedule is already being felt, and will be felt even more next month when the Rangers set out on their three-game swing through California.

Is the new schedule better? Worse? I haven’t yet decided. The question may be best answered on a night like tonight. On one hand, the visit by the Canucks is rife with storylines: Markus Naslund facing his old team, a match-up of the two best goalies in the NHL, a rare chance to see “the singular chemistry between the Sedin twins”:http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/19/sports/hockey/19sedin.html?_r=1.

But will the Garden tonight have a greater buzz tonight than if it was another game against the Islanders or Devils (or even Flyers or Penguins)? Probably not. And while the metropolitan teams are in a unique position because of their proximity to one another, familiarity will always breed greater contempt. In a hockey context, that’s usually a good thing.

Of course, I personally like seeing more of these Western Conference teams for the simple reason that when it’s time to vote on the end-of-the-season awards, I’m not completely talking out of my backside.

As much as you try to avoid a regional bias, there is still a tendency to favor the players you see often as opposed to the ones you see maybe once a year, or sometimes just by way of the TV (a couple of years ago, after consulting with a number of people I trusted, I was proud of myself for voting for Samuel Pahlsson for the Selke Trophy. Which was great, except at the time I wouldn’t have recognized Pahlsson if he hit me over the head with a Koho).

Now at least the new schedule makes the league smaller.
———
My story in today’s paper deals with none of these above issues, but instead “looks at the relationship between Chris Drury and Travis Roy”:http://www.lohud.com/article/20081119/SPORTS01/811190381/-1/SPORTS, his former BU teammate who was paralyzed 11 seconds into his college career.

It has become such a cliche to say stories like Roy’s help put sports in their proper perspective. But it’s a cliche because it’s true. Here’s a guy who had the same aspirations as Drury when he showed up at BU, and yet he never made it past his first shift.

In our conversation yesterday, Roy acknowledged that watching hockey these days is always a bittersweet experience, and how could it not be? But he still made clear how much enjoys following Drury, a teammate whose determination on the ice is exceeded only his grace off of it.

“Chris has a pretty good perspective on things,” Roy said. “If you can get him to talk, he can give you a depth other people can’t. He’s incredibly caring, and that was the thing with Chris: He asked questions right after my accident about how things were and what was hard. People were so afraid to ask those questions. But he wants to hear what you have to say.”

I wrote the story for today because Roy is in town  to speak at Rye High School (my alma mater). For those of you who want to DVR the Rangers game, the session tonight is free of charge and open to the public.

Update, 11:12 a.m.: Great story in the comments section from reader Irawine:

The Travis Roy Foundation is one of very few organizations in this country that provide grants for people who have suffered spinal cord injuries and who need special equipment to assist them in their lives. I recently attended the 39th reunion of my high school soccer team, which included a guy who has been a quadriplegic for the last 11 years. When we found out about the Travis Roy Foundation we helped our friend submit a grant request for a special lift that would make his daily life more bearable. He received the lift and it was installed in his house several months ago. It has made a tremendous difference to him and his family. That Chris Drury has maintained his support for Travis Roy over the years speaks volumes to his character.

———
Optional skate today for the Rangers. The one important question is whether Scott Gomez will attempt to skate at all. Unless he does, I would say his chances of returning in time for Saturday’s game against Ottawa are doubtful.

Update, 10:42 a.m.: Gomez will not skate again today, so it’s looking more and more likely that he can return no sooner than Monday against Phoenix, if even then.

So why didn’t Nikolai Zherdev come out when he was named the game’s second star last night?

It was not a communication issue, as some have speculated. Instead, it was a case of the young wing deciding he didn’t deserve the recognition after a game in which he was benched, and so he decided not to come out.

Maybe that was fairly short-sighted, but it does underscore the many problems with the three star voting, which I’ve lamented in this space  before.

The basic gist: as writers, we are given the three star ballots early in the third period, and are usually asked for them back with around seven minutes to play. That’s sometimes OK, but when the score is tied at 1-1 and it’s obvious that the real star of the game has yet to present himself, many of us, myself included, simply write “GWG” for game-winning goal.

Again, most nights that’s not a problem, but it is when there is no real game-winning goal scorer and instead only a guy who scored the only goal in the shootout. And it gets even more complicated when the guy who scored that goal is a guy who had an otherwise uninspired game and was benched for several minutes in the third period.

Long story short: given the time to really think about it, most voters wouldn’t have voted for Zherdev. The player sensed that, and decided not to come out.

Again, maybe that’s short-sighted. But at least he had a reason.
——-

No skating at all today for Scott Gomez. He is definitely out for tomorrow’s game against the Canucks, and unless he can get back on the ice in the next day or two, Saturday in Ottawa is unlikely as well.

“He’d have to get a couple of skates in now, there’s no question,” Tom Renney said.
———
As for the Canucks, the spotlight now turns to Markus Naslund, who spent the previous 12 seasons in Vancouver.

“I envisioned myself retiring as a Canuck, but things happen,” Naslund said. “More and more as I was uncertain about the future at the end of last year, it was more likely that I was not going to be there. But this situation presented itself and it was an easy choice.”

As with Redden, the transition to New York for Naslund is jarring when considering just how much less attention he receives. There are demands from media and fans just as there was in Vancouver. But it’s still different from being the captain of the only hockey team in a hockey-mad city.

“It’s a big difference, there’s no doubt about it,” he said. “It’s been relaxing in many ways. Coming to the rink is the same. You’ve got a full house that’s going to be loud and excited. That’s no different. But outside of hockey you don’t get recognized as much, which is kind of nice.”

The Rangers are now 4-1 in shootouts, including wins in each of the last two games. If there were no such tiebreaker, would they still be in first place?

What if they had to keep playing until someone scored an actual goal? Is it possible they’d still be on the ice, with a ragged and delirious Henrik Lundqvist stopping odd-man rushes at one end, and a tireless Blair Betts missing the net with wrist shots at the other?

The point is, the shootout, of which I am not a big fan, has helped gloss over some untidy efforts this season. But by the same measure, it also colored an otherwise encouraging showing against Edmonton last week in a negative light.

There is no real sense to it. Were the Rangers a better team last night because Craig Hartsburg, in a moment of temporary insanity, tapped Jarkko Ruutu? Does Nikolai Zherdev’s shootout goal mean he’s no longer in Tom Renney’s doghouse?

The answer is probably no on both. And yet the shootout, which conveniently disappears in the playoffs, takes on an oversized importance in the regular season. Sure, it’s fan friendly. But to steal a line from a friend, girls in bikinis would be fan friendly, too, but that doesn’t mean they should be deciding who’s in first place.
——-

Don’t forget, live video chat on Thursday beginning at 1:15 p.m. There will be no girls in bikinis in that, either, but there will be me. I understand if you’re disappointed.

This is “the page you’ll need to go to”:http://www.lohud.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/99999999/MOGULUS0103/399990019
——-

Speaking of Zherdev, I wasn’t aware until this morning that the wing didn’t come out when he was named the game’s second star last night. One would assume it had to do with Renney’s benching of him in the third period, but it merits a follow-up.
——-

The latest on the Brendan Shanahan front: it sounds like the wing is at odds with the Flyers over compensation. They’ve reportedly offered a year at $1 million. He’s looking for closer to $1.5 million. Read more about it toward “the bottom of this story.”:http://www.courierpostonline.com/article/20081117/SPORTS04/811170361/1002

So if you had to guess..

Which coach tonight said he was proud of each and every one of his players for a “heck of a game”?

And which coach talked about the need to be more consistent, the need to attack more, and who was asked to defend everything from his personnel decisions to his team’s practice habits?

If you guessed Craig Hartsburg as the ecstatic coach after his 14th place Senators lost their fifth straight and Tom Renney grimly assessing the state of his first-place Rangers, you were right.

Truth is, the Rangers were a few subway stops shy of stellar tonight. And if it wasn’t for Henrik Lundqvist, this was yet another game that could have easily gone in the other direction.

But honestly, if you didn’t know the score when you walked into the locker room, you’d have thought they were blown out of their building.

“We have to use this as our wake-up call,” Brandon Dubinsky said.

Right. Heaven forbid this winning should continue.

(I know what he meant, don’t worry).
———
As for Tom Renney’s benching of Aaron Voros and Nikolai Zherdev in the third period—no, you weren’t in a psychedelic haze, that really was Colton Orr starting out on the power play—the coach said he was trying to send both a message.

“I thought they could have offered us up more than what they had at that point in time,” Renney said.
———
Continuing a recent run of beefs with officials, Renney took issue with what he thought were two non-called interferences on Daniel Alfredsson’s second period goal and Jarkko Ruutu’s second shot on Henrik Lundqvist in the shootout.

“What happens if that hits Henrik in the side of the head?” Renney said of Ruutu’s shot. “He’s looking at our bench instead of straight ahead. We lose our goalie.”

Naturally there was the obligatory media scrum around Wade Redden downstairs just now, when we asked the former Ottawa defenseman about playing his old team. The plan is to re-enact the same scene Wednesday when Markus Naslund faces Vancouver.

Come to think of it, maybe we can just dust off the same quotes from Redden and use them for Naslund.

“It’ll be good to see (insert former teammates). I really enjoyed my time in (whatever city),” (whatever player) said. “I’ll always remember the time we (insert team highlight here). But it was time to turn the page. Now I’m a Ranger, but I want to thank (insert former coach, general manager, trainer, pilates instructor) for giving me a chance in (whatever city).”

OK, so Redden didn’t exactly say that, and it wouldn’t be completely ethical to replicate quotes like that. But it sure would be a good way to save time.
———
Jokes aside, here is what Redden said about facing the Senators tonight. He said he met up with Daniel Alfredsson and Chris Phillips, and only then did the significance of tonight start to hit home.

“I just think it’s the final recognition, going up against the old guys,” Redden said. “I think it’s a good thing. It really hit home just seeing the guys yesterday. It was different. I’m excited about playing them. It’s been a big change this year. I don’t know. I’m just looking forward to getting out there against them and knowing that I am against them. It’s good to finally play them.”

So there you have it. Nice guy, Wade Redden. But he’s not exactly Richard Pryor in front of a tape recorder.
——-
Meanwhile, apropos of nothing in particular (other than of course that the Rangers power play is still struggling) I asked Tom Renney if there were any forwards he would consider using at the point.

“Maybe, but I’m just not even there yet in my own mind,” Renney said. “I’m just thinking about this group of guys, this group of defensemen finding the answer.”

I’m not surprised by Renney’s answer. Truth is, unlike with Matt Cullen two years ago or even Martin Straka last year, there is no obvious forward worth trying at the point.

Chris Drury was tried there for a spell last season, but he wasn’t entirely comfortable (plus the thinking is Drury is too valuable in front of the net). Scott Gomez obviously has the puck-carrying ability but doesn’t have the shot, while Ryan Callahan might have the shot but probably doesn’t have the defensive sense needed to defend a rush.

Actually, if the coach ever wanted to be bold he could experiment with Nikolai Zherdev since a player at the point is actually afforded the room to carry the puck and make a play. But don’t count on it. For all of his obvious gifts, Zherdev is enough of a defensive liability at forward. Put him at the point and Renney would be in a cold sweat the entire time.

I just noticed that the indefatigable Peter Abraham has set up a “Facebook fan page”:http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=34715657699 for “his Yankees blog”:http://yankees.lhblogs.com/

With that in mind, I should mention “we have one set up, too”:http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=56996970648, which could be a cool way for some of you get to know one another outside of your shared disdain for overpaid defensemen; and of course, to attract more readers.

So anyway, have at it. I just became a fan of my own blog, too, which I realize is terribly narcissistic. Maybe to balance things out, I’ll comment on one of my posts and call myself an idiot.

One other other thing about Facebook, which has even expanded its reach to thirtysomething drips like me: Some of you have tried to friend me, which is very cool and very flattering. But my basic rule, on advice from others, has been to reserve that for people I know or at least have met.

It’s a necessary precaution when you have kids, so I hope everyone understands.