In hockey, most teams relish the chance to go on the man-advantage, particularly during the playoffs. If you're a Rangers fan however, you should be rooting for even strength, even in the wake of a pair of pp-goals for the ages.
All right, let me come right out and admit it: the Rangers' power play very likely saved their season Monday night.
A mere 7.6 seconds (officially amended from 6.6) separated the Blue Shirts from a demoralizing and back-braking 3-2 loss. Demoralizing because it was a game where they outshot their opponent more than 2:1 (when's the last time they did that?). Back-braking because it would have meant going down in the series 3-2 with the task of winning a do-or-die Game 6 on the road and another Game 7 for the second straight round.
Could they have done it again? Possibly, but it would have been a lot harder to do against the Capitals, a stingy, battle-tested squad that's giving them a much tougher fight than the Senators...albeit more so in the competitive sense and less so in the literal.
Fortunately for Rangers fans, it's a moot point. The miraculous last-second score by Brad Richards and subsequent OT-winner from Marc Staal have vaulted New York into commanding position. Instead it is Washington down 3-2 and feeling the effects a dizzying, deflating Game 5 stunner.
And I will say it again because it's worth reiterating: the Rangers scored both of those goals on the power play.
Before you go on prematurely celebrating Ranger Nation, why don't you all ease the collective foot on the Zamboni brake pedal for me? Yes, the power play clicked in a dramatic spot, and there have been a couple instances this postseason where it has shown sparks of life (namely Games 3 and 6 against Ottawa).
But these flashes are just that, fugacious flickers that quickly give way to the pp-status quo: a man-advantage muddled with indecisiveness, poor shot selection, sluggish puck movement, and a chronic inability to get pucks to the net. The power play is so dreadful that it has actually become a burden and a momentum squasher for the Rangers.
You think I'm over-estimating the extent and importance of their power play anemia? Allow me to point to a couple recent instances where their inept man-advantage prevented them from taking over the series.
Recall Game 4. The Rangers came out looking as flat as they have all postseason, chasing the puck all over the Verizon Center with an exasperation that might convince the uniformed viewer they were the side that had lost Game 3 in triple-OT three nights prior (hint: they weren't).
Somehow down just a goal after twenty minutes, the Rangers skated onto the ice in the second period with an energy and a determination the likes of which I had not witnessed in the entire 2012 playoffs. It was the legs of the Rangers from November and December, the fore-checking vigor that nabbed them the top conference seed, the kind of smothering defense for which the Capitals had no retort.
'This is it,' chirped the fan in me, bubbling inwardly with excitement. 'This is the moment when they finally take it to that next level, when they finally put their boot on the jugular and take over this series.' A game-tying goal seemed to confirm my suspicions. 'Here comes the onslaught.'
Then, the worst possible thing that could have happened, happened. Power. Play. Rangers.
In the ensuing two minutes, New York's power play incompetency was on full display. All that energy, all that momentum they had built up from the opening twelve minutes of the period completely evaporated, and what's more it allowed the Capitals to swing the pendulum in their favor. Shortly after Washington killed the penalty, Nicklas Backstrom gave the Capitals the lead. They went on to win 3-2.
Questioned as to what gave the Caps the edge in the game, Rangers' head coach John Tortorella riposted with a typically laconic Tortorellaism: "their power play." No Mr. Tortorella, it was in fact your power play, or lack there of, that allowed them to tilt the action.
A similar scenario played out in Game 5. The Rangers were blasting shots from all sorts of angles at Braden Holtby in the first period, tallying 15 shots and a goal as a result. Right on cue, the Capitals take a penalty and suddenly, the Rangers couldn't buy a shot on goal. The post-power play dropoff wasn't as pronounced as in Game 4, but it was a hindrance none the less, and they weren't able to regain the control until the final frantic seconds of regulation.
Some of these struggles have to do with Washington's penalty killing strategy, which has served to deeply exacerbate and expose the Rangers' power play weaknesses. Their approach is to put as much pressure on the Rangers' point men as possible while maintaining blockers in the shooting lanes.
Because New York likes to hold the puck at the point and search for the ideal shooting/passing opportunity, this high-zone defensive attack forces them to make decisions quickly, usually resulting in the point man blasting the puck around the boards. This is not a good recipe for puck control as it gives the opponent a strong chance to stop the puck and clear it.
There are three ways the Rangers can counteract this penalty killing schematic:
1) Point men can fake shots in an attempt to get the pressuring defender to go down for the block. Then he can step around them into space and either look for the shot or a pass to an open teammate. This is how Anton Stralman scored the first Rangers goal in Game 5.
2) Bring the point men further into the zone and collapse all five skaters on the net. The idea then is to keep the puck below the circles and hope you find a rebound in the scrum of bodies. This is how they scored the miraculous game-tying goal in Game 5.
3) Move the puck quickly around the perimeter and look for a one-timer. This forces the defense to shift quickly and drift out of position. Chances are that eventually a shooting lane will open up. Of all the options, this is the one the Rangers are least likely to put into play, essentially because they do not have guys with the puck skills to pull it off.
In all likelihood, the Rangers will not employ any of these techniques, and they will continue to rely on their even strength forechecking, their board play, and their world-class goaltending to dictate the pace and steal victories.
To wrap up, I'd like to cite ESPN analyst Barry Melrose. Barry claims that 5-on-5 hockey has been the Rangers "Achillies heel" this season. I could not disagree with him more. I don't know what team he's been watching, but there's no way New York would be where they were at if it weren't for their ability to skate well when skating 5-aside.
It's the power play that has been their true bug-a-boo. It is going to keep on haunting them, and it will be the main reason they do not win the Cup, unless they make some severe adjustments to their 5-on-4 strategy.
As for me, I'll be rooting for the other team not to take a penalty. Let's go opposing team discipline!
All right, let me come right out and admit it: the Rangers' power play very likely saved their season Monday night.
A mere 7.6 seconds (officially amended from 6.6) separated the Blue Shirts from a demoralizing and back-braking 3-2 loss. Demoralizing because it was a game where they outshot their opponent more than 2:1 (when's the last time they did that?). Back-braking because it would have meant going down in the series 3-2 with the task of winning a do-or-die Game 6 on the road and another Game 7 for the second straight round.
Could they have done it again? Possibly, but it would have been a lot harder to do against the Capitals, a stingy, battle-tested squad that's giving them a much tougher fight than the Senators...albeit more so in the competitive sense and less so in the literal.
 |
| The Rangers celebrate a pair of miraculous power play goals that may have saved their season. So power play ails cured right? Not quite. |
And I will say it again because it's worth reiterating: the Rangers scored both of those goals on the power play.
Before you go on prematurely celebrating Ranger Nation, why don't you all ease the collective foot on the Zamboni brake pedal for me? Yes, the power play clicked in a dramatic spot, and there have been a couple instances this postseason where it has shown sparks of life (namely Games 3 and 6 against Ottawa).
But these flashes are just that, fugacious flickers that quickly give way to the pp-status quo: a man-advantage muddled with indecisiveness, poor shot selection, sluggish puck movement, and a chronic inability to get pucks to the net. The power play is so dreadful that it has actually become a burden and a momentum squasher for the Rangers.
You think I'm over-estimating the extent and importance of their power play anemia? Allow me to point to a couple recent instances where their inept man-advantage prevented them from taking over the series.
Recall Game 4. The Rangers came out looking as flat as they have all postseason, chasing the puck all over the Verizon Center with an exasperation that might convince the uniformed viewer they were the side that had lost Game 3 in triple-OT three nights prior (hint: they weren't).
Somehow down just a goal after twenty minutes, the Rangers skated onto the ice in the second period with an energy and a determination the likes of which I had not witnessed in the entire 2012 playoffs. It was the legs of the Rangers from November and December, the fore-checking vigor that nabbed them the top conference seed, the kind of smothering defense for which the Capitals had no retort.
 |
| Rangers coach John Tortorella reported that it was the Capitals power play that gave them the edge in Game 4. In fact it was the Rangers' man-advantage (or lack thereof) that swung the game in Washington's favor. |
Then, the worst possible thing that could have happened, happened. Power. Play. Rangers.
In the ensuing two minutes, New York's power play incompetency was on full display. All that energy, all that momentum they had built up from the opening twelve minutes of the period completely evaporated, and what's more it allowed the Capitals to swing the pendulum in their favor. Shortly after Washington killed the penalty, Nicklas Backstrom gave the Capitals the lead. They went on to win 3-2.
Questioned as to what gave the Caps the edge in the game, Rangers' head coach John Tortorella riposted with a typically laconic Tortorellaism: "their power play." No Mr. Tortorella, it was in fact your power play, or lack there of, that allowed them to tilt the action.
A similar scenario played out in Game 5. The Rangers were blasting shots from all sorts of angles at Braden Holtby in the first period, tallying 15 shots and a goal as a result. Right on cue, the Capitals take a penalty and suddenly, the Rangers couldn't buy a shot on goal. The post-power play dropoff wasn't as pronounced as in Game 4, but it was a hindrance none the less, and they weren't able to regain the control until the final frantic seconds of regulation.
Some of these struggles have to do with Washington's penalty killing strategy, which has served to deeply exacerbate and expose the Rangers' power play weaknesses. Their approach is to put as much pressure on the Rangers' point men as possible while maintaining blockers in the shooting lanes.
Because New York likes to hold the puck at the point and search for the ideal shooting/passing opportunity, this high-zone defensive attack forces them to make decisions quickly, usually resulting in the point man blasting the puck around the boards. This is not a good recipe for puck control as it gives the opponent a strong chance to stop the puck and clear it.
 |
| The Capitals' penalty kill has been doing a superb job of putting pressure on the Rangers point men and getting in the shooting lanes, exacerbating the weaknesses of an already clumsy Rangers power play. |
1) Point men can fake shots in an attempt to get the pressuring defender to go down for the block. Then he can step around them into space and either look for the shot or a pass to an open teammate. This is how Anton Stralman scored the first Rangers goal in Game 5.
2) Bring the point men further into the zone and collapse all five skaters on the net. The idea then is to keep the puck below the circles and hope you find a rebound in the scrum of bodies. This is how they scored the miraculous game-tying goal in Game 5.
3) Move the puck quickly around the perimeter and look for a one-timer. This forces the defense to shift quickly and drift out of position. Chances are that eventually a shooting lane will open up. Of all the options, this is the one the Rangers are least likely to put into play, essentially because they do not have guys with the puck skills to pull it off.
In all likelihood, the Rangers will not employ any of these techniques, and they will continue to rely on their even strength forechecking, their board play, and their world-class goaltending to dictate the pace and steal victories.
To wrap up, I'd like to cite ESPN analyst Barry Melrose. Barry claims that 5-on-5 hockey has been the Rangers "Achillies heel" this season. I could not disagree with him more. I don't know what team he's been watching, but there's no way New York would be where they were at if it weren't for their ability to skate well when skating 5-aside.
It's the power play that has been their true bug-a-boo. It is going to keep on haunting them, and it will be the main reason they do not win the Cup, unless they make some severe adjustments to their 5-on-4 strategy.
As for me, I'll be rooting for the other team not to take a penalty. Let's go opposing team discipline!
