newjerseynewsroom.com

BY SAM HITCHCOCK

NEWJERSEYNEWSROOM.COM

COMMENTARY

How exactly did we get here? The Penguins and Canucks being dangled off the proverbial postseason cliff have taken away some of the attention from what is unfolding in the Rangers-Senators series but, seriously, how did we get here?

The heavily favored Rangers have scored first in every game this series. They have never once trailed during regulation. They have so much depth that they can yawn and bring up the most highly anticipated college prospect (Chris Kreider) and place him between Brad Richards and Marian Gaborik, and he is so skilled that he does not look overwhelmed or overmatched.

But the Senators deserve a lot of kudos for matching the Rangers with physicality and grit (the Senators’ shot-blocking has been superb so far). They have battled along the walls, fought in the corners, jockeyed around the blue paint, and won pucks in the neutral zone.

In my Rangers first-round preview, I provided five points on how the Senators could beat the Rangers. My fourth point outlined a blueprint for beating New York. Since my other two playoff preview columns have seen mixed success with predictions and forecasts, I’d like to revisit what I wrote on April 11. Hopefully, this will make me feel better about prognosticating the Penguins in six games.

The blueprint, or recipe for success, that I described had the Senators defensemen getting pucks out of their defensive zone as quickly as possible before the Rangers forecheck bore down on them. Also, their forwards would need to take advantage of the limited scoring opportunities the Rangers allow. The Senators would have to match the Rangers physicality, but stay out of the penalty box (the Rangers power play has been clicking since Derek Stepan was moved to the point to quarterback it).

Ottawa would need to use screens and deflections in front of Lundqvist to make every shot difficult for him. The Senators also would have to withstand the offensive attack that is bolstered by pinching defensemen (Michael Del Zotto, Ryan McDonagh, Marc Staal) and reverse the transition to get good odd-man rush opportunities. They must limit turnovers in their defensive zone and neutral zone, and try to apply pressure to some of the weaker Rangers defensemen.

Well, a lot of this has come true. The Senators defense has done admirably in limiting mistakes in their own zone and handled the Rangers pinching, attacking defensemen well. Astonishingly, they have matched New York’s physicality, but they have had their share of penalties (a third of the Rangers’ nine goals have come on the power play). Offensive chances like in Game 4, when Michalek got the final pass on an odd-man rush, was a great example of reversing the transition thanks to a beautiful breakout pass by Spezza to Matt Carkner who led the rush after leaving the penalty box.

Turris’s game-winner in overtime was the model for how to convert on limited scoring opportunities. In my preview, I also stressed the importance of Spezza and Karlsson playing Hall of Fame caliber hockey. While Spezza has been contained, Karlsson, after ridding his playoff jitters in Game 1, has been an absolute force. So much so that, if the Senators win this series, he alone will be the biggest reason. His speed, the tempo that he sets for the rest of the team, and the constant attack that he propels allow the Senators to get a lot of rubber at Lundqvist, which is a must. The Senators are beating the Rangers to loose pucks and controlling the possession. For a New York team that relies so heavily on puck possession this is a very concerning omen.

GOING FORWARD:

The Rangers have seen Brian Boyle raise his game to new heights as he has been the Rangers player who has raised his game above his talents the most in this series, doing so on both sides of the rink. Callahan, whose game is made for playoff hockey, has been fantastic, and Gaborik and Richards have contributed on the score sheet.

But after those four, the Rangers remaining forwards have not stepped up and made the big, forceful play. Hagelin’s questionable three-game suspension has had an enormous ripple effect (although Senators fans shout their case about the impact of not having Daniel Alfredsson), and players like Artem Anisimov, Derek Stepan, and Brandon Dubinsky need to be better.

Lastly, the most puzzling dimension of this series so far is that Lundqvist has not totally dominated the goaltending matchup. Anderson has been really, really good, and so has Lundqvist -- but neither has been so spectacular that they have dramatically outplayed the other.

Anderson had shown in the 2010 playoffs that he can grab the big moment if it presents itself. Game 5 means going back to New York, which for both teams is a must-win. If the Senators want to win this series they will need to win one of the next two in Madison Square Garden, and the Rangers do not want to fall to 3-2 heading to Ottawa. The pressure is mounting on both sides, with David swinging his slingshot at Goliath. I believe the Rangers will take Game 5 and ultimately win the series, but stay tuned.

In the words of Red Wings coach Mike Babcock, “I’ve been shocked before.”