With the current Collective Bargaining Agreement expiring at the end of the season, the NHL could not secure dates for any NHL team to travel to Europe to open the season. Although no lockout is expected, the NHL couldn’t commit to any dates.

Instead, it looks like the Rangers will simply open the season on an extended road trip to the west coast, and slowly travel back east until the end of October when The Garden opens again.

This isn’t exactly unexpected, as the end of the current CBA has been one of those situations that has been forced to the back of our minds for a while. There are many hot topics to be discussed. And although another lockout is expected, there is no guarantee that the labor situation will be resolved in time to send teams to Europe in September.

Considering how the Rangers played in October, and their hectic travel schedule to open this season, this may be a blessing.

As we roll into the trade deadline, rumors are going to be appearing from every possible angle. Aside from judging the source (note: HFBoards is not a source), there are a few ways to tell if a rumor is legitimate or if it is just someone blowing hot air. This Scouting The Deadline series is going to be a three part series where identify and analyze the three key steps in the trade process. Today is the third and final post, and it will address identifying the ideal trade partner and that perfect deal. All three posts are now permanently pinned in the brand new GM Tactics page.

In the first two posts, we identified where the Rangers have a surplus (defensive prospects), and where they have a need (top six LW), and where other teams need help (Ducks – defensive defensemen, Coyotes – offense). We also identified what exactly the return should be for specific types of players. The key to building a successful trade is identifying where those needs for the Rangers coincide with a surplus for a trading partner; and where those surpluses for the Rangers coincide with a need for a trading partner.

This again brings us back to the Anaheim Ducks. The Ducks, as mentioned above, have a big need for a defensive defenseman. Between Cam Fowler, Francois Beauchemin, and Lubomir Visnovsky, the Ducks are set in terms of blueliners that can contribute offensively. But outside of Toni Lydman, they lack that pure defensive defenseman who is capable of playing top-four minutes. The Rangers have that in abundance, with a few more on the way.

Focusing on Bobby Ryan for a second (again, I know, you must be tired of it), he fills a big need for the Rangers, and the Rangers definitely have the pieces to acquire him. While the rumored asking price is two roster players, a prospect, and a first round pick; the more likely asking price is one young roster player, one prospect, and a pick. The quality of the prospect and the quality of the pick will be determined by the quality of the roster player.

Backing away from the Ducks for a second, let’s look at the Phoenix Coyotes, who we identified have a big need for a scoring prospect. The Rangers have three big names that can fit that bill: Chris Kreider, JT Miller, and Christian Thomas. While Kreider is unlikely to be moved for any of the players on the Coyotes roster, including Shane Doan, someone like Thomas sure is intriguing to a team like Phoenix. That said, when you look at the Coyotes roster, it is tough to really find a player that jumps out at you as a guy you are willing to move Miller or Thomas for. These guys won’t be moved for rentals, as discussed in the second post in this series.

It is due to this lack of intriguing options on the Coyotes that makes any potential deal with them to be less of a blockbuster type and more of a rental for spare parts type. With so many defensemen becoming free agents, a prospect who is not as high on the Rangers depth chart (see: Valentenko, Pavel) could be equally as attractive for the Coyotes. They aren’t a perfect match, but there is a deal to be made there for a rental.

It’s never quite as simple as throwing names up on the board and saying that the deal works, but right now we have identified two teams that seem to be good trading partners, and have the tools to make it work. Now it’s a matter of identifying that perfect deal, which takes us back to knowing what you want for your assets.

“The Deal” here is not going to be top prospects or young roster players for a rental. That doesn’t fit the Rangers M.O. anymore. So you can eliminate any worries of Thomas for Whitney, or Kreider for Whitney, or Kreider for Hemsky, etc. But if the organization feels they can make a run –and every sign points to them looking like they can– then the powers that be might look to deal one of these top prospects to fill a need. After all, hockey is about winning Cups and using assets to build that Cup contender.

As we roll into the trade deadline, rumors are going to be appearing from every possible angle. Aside from judging the source (note: HFBoards is not a source), there are a few ways to tell if a rumor is legitimate or if it is just someone blowing hot air. This Scouting The Deadline series is going to be a three part series where identify and analyze the three key steps in the trade process. Today is the second post, and it will address identifying appropriate returns for assets.

First things first, let’s define what an asset to the organization is. A player is an asset, and an asset is used to help build a Stanley Cup contending team. Assets can be players in the lineup, assets can be prospects, assets can be picks. Not every draft pick plays for the NHL club, and not every pick is used in the draft. The goal of a general manager in this league is to identify what assets mean to the organization, and what the minimum return for that asset would have to be to be moved.

For trade deadline buyers, the return is almost always a player that will serve as an upgrade for the playoffs. For sellers, the return is almost always picks and/or prospects to help build for the future. Regardless of the position a team is in, these are the generalized returns that GM’s look for.

Going deeper into this for buyers, the return does change depending on which players are to be dealt. Using Brandon Dubinsky as an example here (hypothetical, not an actual rumor), he is an integral part of the Rangers current structure. The Rangers won’t move him for a rental, nor should they. Dubinsky has tremendous value to the club. However, when referring to what was said above, trading Dubinsky isn’t exactly out of the question if the return is another roster player that serves as an upgrade at the position. This goes hand in hand with identifying team needs and surpluses, the first part of this series.

Using the first post, I identified that the Rangers have a need for a top six left wing with proven elite offensive talent. Using the Bobby Ryan example again, Ryan serves as a significant offensive upgrade over Dubinsky. So taking a step back and looping back to the original point of the post: Would Bobby Ryan be an appropriate return for trading Dubinsky? I’d have to think the answer here is yes.

But there’s more to it than just roster players. A prospect that most fans think is untouchable is Chris Kreider. First let’s go with one thing: No player, prospect, or draft pick is untouchable. Period.

Back to Kreider, his potential is widely known, but it is still just potential. He has not done anything at the NHL level, so while he is considered to be a top prospect, he is not a NHL player yet. At his peak, he actually pans out to be another Bobby Ryan: an elite power forward. When you are given the opportunity to trade potential for the proven talent, and that talent has yet to hit his prime, the deal must be made. Ryan is proven at a young age, Kreider is not.

Summing up the last few paragraphs, it makes sense that the Rangers would consider trading Chris Kreider or Brandon Dubinsky for Bobby Ryan. It meets their criteria of what the appropriate return is. That said, appropriate return also addresses overpayment. A deal with both Kreider and Dubinsky for Ryan would be an overpayment. That is not an appropriate return.

Getting away from Bobby Ryan for a moment, let’s address another type of player that is usually available: the rental. The rental is a player that fills a hole for the short term, but is unlikely to return following the playoffs.

Ray Whitney and Shane Doan fall into the rental category. Would a rental be an appropriate return for a core roster player (Dubinsky) or an elite prospect (Kreider)? Absolutely not. But that doesn’t mean a deal is dead. I identified the surplus for the Rangers to be defensive prospects. Is it really unfathomable that the Rangers would view Whitney as a good return for someone like Pavel Valentenko, who has dropped so far on the depth chart he’s collecting dust?

Confused? Think I’m making things too difficult? I might be, but I also might not be. Trades are not made on message boards or in NHL 12. Most trades take weeks of talking and negotiating, and conversations like this one are had on a daily basis. Trading is the science of preparation, negotiation, and sticking to your guns. Preparation includes those surpluses and needs, but it also is about going in knowing what you are willing to give up for a specified return. That is the toughest part of the GM’s job.

If you watch a team long enough, like we have with the Rangers, it’s easy to identify where the team needs and surpluses are. For the Rangers, it’s clear there isn’t much depth on the top six, especially at left wing. Naturally, when the deadline approaches, it is a fair assumption that the Rangers will look to fill that hole. That hole was severely exposed when both Brandon Dubinsky and Ruslan Fedotenko were out of the lineup. On the other side of things, with Mike Sauer returning to the lineup soon, the Rangers are going to have a lot of capable defensemen on their hands.

Identifying other team’s needs and surpluses is a much more difficult task. This requires research (gasp).  Looking at how a team is performing in critical aspects of the game is the best place to start. Taking the Ducks for example, their defense isn’t exactly anything to write home about. When you look at the structure of their blue line, the expiring contracts, and the lack of overall defense being played, it’s clear that if they are to unload a piece of their core, they will require a defensive defenseman in return. It’s why when we analyzed the Bobby Ryan situation, we mentioned that Mike Sauer might have to be an obligatory piece to ship to Anaheim.

But it’s not just about the Rangers and the Ducks. Let’s look at the Phoenix Coyotes, who are quickly falling out of the playoff race. When looking at their roster, it is clear they need some top-six forwards, as their roster is comprised mostly of grinding forwards.  Only three players are on pace for 60 points on their roster. Looking deeper into the roster, you can see a need for a defenseman or two at the NHL level as well. In the ‘Yotes case, their surplus is expiring contracts that don’t have a long term future with the organization (this is true of most sellers).

But a trade isn’t made by just looking at the NHL level, so by looking at the prospects in the Coyotes’ system, you can see that four of their top five prospects are defensemen.  In fact, only three of their top ten prospects are forwards. So in a trade, it is safe to assume they are going to look for scoring prospects to help retool their offensive threats. This is why when we laughed at the Shane Doan rumors, we said that Chris Kreider or Christian Thomas would have to be in that deal.

Making a trade is a two way street. Teams are looking to fill holes, be it for the immediate or long term future of their clubs. In the Rangers case, the team need is a top six LW. To fill that need, the Rangers have identified that their surplus is young defensemen, as  Dylan McIlrath and Tim Erixon will also be pushing for roster spots. That’s a lot, even for the most cost-savvy of teams. If the Rangers are to make a move, it will be a move to fill their offensive needs by trading some of their younger defensive prospects.

H/t to Adam Rotter of SNYRB for finding this.

If the NHL is smart they will defuse all of these conspiracy theories around the refereeing of the Winter Classic by revealing on 24/7 what was said between the referees and what went on at the situation room in Toronto. If any of the above is omitted from the episode it will do nothing to fan the flames.

PS – It’s amazing how sensitive the NHL is to words (fining Torts $30K, suspending Avery, etc.), yet hits to the head yield a paltry $2,500 fine and a two game suspension. Unfriggan-believable.

Key Financial Information Leaked

In a bit of underrated news, supposedly some financial information involving ticket sales was leaked to the Toronto Star. To no surprise the bottom feeders were the Phoenix Coyotes and the Florida Panthers.

Bloggers at SBNation Tampa Bay seem to think that the NHL is purposely leaking this information to either prove that Florida teams aren’t in the dire straits the media makes them out to be or perhaps to amp up the pressure for Phoenix’s eventual relocation.

Let me assure you that no professional sports organization leaks financial information on purpose. Trade rumors perhaps, but not financials. There are many reasons why the NHL wouldn’t do this and I could sit here and list them for you, but you would eventually lose interest and close our webpage.

But here’s one reason to take with you. The NHL does not want the NHLPA to have any insider figures, especially this close to negotiation season.

Time Warner & The Situation w/ Local Blackouts

A lot of people are angry at Dolan & Company for pulling MSG off of Time Warner, as they should be, and obviously there are a lot of questions about how fans living in the Time Warner footprint will be able to access MSG telecasts.

Unfortunately, those who have the NHL Network or subscribe to NHL Center Ice still won’t be able to watch upcoming Rangers games as all live telecasts are blacked out in local markets. This is done with all sports leagues and they are intended to protect the rights of the league’s national and regional broadcast partners. There are certain websites that will have the feed for free, but be aware, they are not legal.

Are The Rangers Ready To Contend?

Finally, one last bit about the Rangers since this is after all a Rangers blog. Has the Rangers dominance this season changed your pre-season expectations for this team? If so, will you be disappointed if the Rangers fail to contend, even though most of us said 2013 or 2014 would be the year to do so? Let’s hear it.

*Side note: I want three chants started at MSG tonight. “These refs suck!” Followed by “You can’t fine us!” And finally “Get Well Neal!”

Make it happen Rangers fans.

This morning I read Rick Carpiniello’s always informative Rangers Report blog for his game review and got stuck reading the same bullet point a few times. Credit Rick for highlighting this grim fact:

Who officiated that third period, Ed Snider? No, it was Philadelphia native Ian Walsh, who grew up in the Little Flyers organization. How in Holy Hell does he get an assignment for a Rangers-Flyers game ever, never mind this one?

Seriously, what the hell?  Many people throughout the league, and its fans, already complain at the NHL’s apparent ulterior motives, the at-best questionable refereeing and at the apparent favouritism Gary Bettman seems to show certain players and organisations over the years. Did the league really think in a world of mass media scrutiny and extensive fan involvement that the fact they employed a Philadelphia native, a former Flyer no less (to an extent) to be involved in officiating would get overlooked?

I’m still not a conspiracy theorist but this league needs to be transparent. Every team needs to feel equally treated and at least have confidence in the league that when they step on the ice they have a fair chance at winning a hockey game. Assigning guys like Ian Walsh to this game doesn’t instil confidence.

This kind of stupidity (let’s leave it at that for now) in their decision making is terrible. The league needs to be challenged as to why they allowed a Philadelphia native, one with ties to the organisation, to referee the game. Some people will always question a league’s integrity whether it be their handling of discipline or otherwise. This kind of faux-pa really does them no favours. Its bad enough I had to listen to the Roots.

The Rangers were the second best team over the first two periods. They couldn’t impose their game, got little-to-no sustained pressure on the Flyers and seemed to be a step behind the play. They didn’t give up however, had the world’s best goalie in net and once again, found a way to win a tight game. The Flyers couldn’t match the Rangers intensity in the third and their desire to win the one on one battles, so it’s not surprising the Rangers won an oh-so-tight 3-2 affair. What a game, what an ending, what a (Rangers) goaltender.

Let’s start the quick hits backwards, with the ending:

You want the definition of clutch play? 19.6 seconds left on the clock when Lundqvist out waits Danny Briere on the incorrectly called penalty shot to preserve the Rangers one goal lead. Lundqvist was spectacular throughout and that was a fitting climax for the league’s best goaltender on the league’s biggest stage.

The Rangers actually started the game well with Callahan having a great chance to begin the first. They were hard in to the corners and had some good early pressure but they couldn’t keep it up and as stated, struggled to do so until the third period.

You want more examples of the brilliance of Henrik Lundqvist? His early saves on Jagr and Giroux. The one (on Jagr) was patience, standing up to the Czech legend and taking the space away from Jagr. On the Giroux chance he was surprisingly aggressive and made a great poke check which likely caught Giroux off guard. There were other, multiple spectacular stops throughout the game by Lundqvist. Great goaltending. Again.

They weren’t at their best in this game but Anisimov and Gaborik did create some chances. However Stepan had a relatively poor game, his worst in some time. Defensively he was off while he was less visible offensively than his line mates. Anisimov was good on the puck while Gaborik showed off some nice awareness and his usual speed.

Throughout the first two periods the Rangers defensive coverage wasn’t great. One occasion early on, Voracek was wide open on the right hand side but luckily fanned on his shot – no one was near him.

The Rangers also caused several turnovers giving the Flyers some good offensive zone opportunities. There were simply too many neutral zone breakdowns by the Blueshirts (not Blueshits, Mike Milbury).

Before the Mike Rupp show began I had made a note on how Bobrovsky was pretty solid. Then the clock struck twelve and he turned into a pumpkin. Not just because of Rupp’s second goal either. He gave up several juicy rebounds and made a few routine saves look harder than they should have been.

It’s worth noting how carefully the Rangers were managing Marc Staal’s comeback as he had just  3:40 of ice time after one (compared to Girardi’s 10:46) and 9:35 after two. Very un-Staal like minutes but it was the right way to handle him.

• Thought on Brian Boyle: he had a great hit by Boyle to open the second period –why doesn’t he do that more often? That aside, good in the face-off circle which was much needed.
• Another defensive concern: despite nothing materializing from it I didn’t like one instance when the puck broke for the Flyers in the Rangers zone and the trailing Ranger (Mitchell) left his man in the middle and migrated toward the puck to help out his beaten team-mate. Had a Flyer got control of the puck he’d have had a team-mate standing in front of Lundqvist completely alone.

The first two periods the Rangers lost a ton of puck battles all over the ice. Credit to the way the team rebounded in the third. The Rangers won much more battles in the last period. A coincidence that they won the period? I think not.

More physicality: Brandon Dubinsky had a nice hit on Bourdon – he’s more effective when he plays a physical game. He was involved in the game winner though and generally played an intelligent game, especially how he handled the puck at times.

• Schenn’s goal 7:34 left in the second? After Matt Carle threw it on net, there was a big bounce right in front of Lundqvist that created a juicy rebound which a streaking Schenn chipped into the net. It’s hard to criticise Lundqvist given the bounce but Schenn did the right thing by going toward the net. More concern should be how Schenn was left unattended going to the net.
• My issue on the second Flyers goal? While Del Zotto was caught up the ice pinching (leaving an odd man rush) the winger needed to recognise the pinch by Del Zotto and cover him: it was another breakdown in the Rangers play.

Mike Rupp; by far his best game as a Ranger and not just because of the two goals – but obviously they were huge. Loved the Jagr salute by the way. Following a great pass from Prust, Rupp used Meszaros as a screen to beat Bobrovsky with a neat wrister for his first. That was a terrible defensive play from Meszaros by the way and Bobrovsky was helpless on the goal.

One point the Rangers had a 2-on-0 and Stepan should never have passed and instead taken the shot. One too many passes ruined a great chance which was created from a nice turnover by Gaborik. The botched play was symptomatic of Stepan’s day.

Kudos to Prust for two nice assist’s today by the way. Clearly he can play the game, it’s just been to rare this season from the gritty forward.

Despite having an average game, Brad Richards scored the eventual GWG off a rebound following great work from Callahan and Dubinsky. Richards roofed a rolling puck into the net. Nice finish.

After the Richards goal the Rangers began to finally establish their cycling game down low. For the first time in the game they were able to play their own game. Exhibit A: they had great pressure with about five minutes left of the third controlling the puck, getting lots of shots off and creating  traffic, eating up a ton of clock.

The closing minutes of this game were simply spectacular. The incredibly inconsistent referees attempted to hand the Flyers a tying goal but they couldn’t get it. How? First of all the power play was questionable. Then, as Callahan goes down the ice and gets pulled down, how the referees see a penalty on both the Flyer and Callahan is beyond. Finally, with little evidence to prove McDonagh closed his hand on the puck in a goal mouth scramble they award a penalty shot. Incredible decision making.

Side note: If you hear in the coming days or weeks that Henrik Lundqvist has a new love in his life it’s me. Today’s game hooked me in. I love you Henrik. God knows how I’d react if that was a Cup Final game seven. Henrik; Call me…..

So hey, the biggest stage so far and the Rangers find a way to win again. Tell me you don’t feel good right now, I dare you. This team is for real, far from perfect, but they don’t give in. Let’s enjoy this ride shall we? Oh and big up to the man with a cigar for walking into Philadelphia and guaranteeing a victory. I’m smoking my Cuban right now for you Glenny boy. 

Leading Scorer: Claude Giroux (17-28-45)

Goaltender: Sergei Bobrovsky (14 GP, 2.52 GAA, .910 SV%)

Rangers Lines (probable)

Artem Anisimov-Derek Stepan-Marian Gaborik
Carl Hagelin-Brad Richards-Ryan Callahan
Brandon Dubinsky-Brian Boyle-John Mitchell
Ruslan Fedotenko-Mike Rupp-Brandon Prust

Ryan McDonagh-Dan Girardi
Michael Del Zotto-Anton Stralman
Marc Staal-Stu Bickel

Henrik Lundqvist gets the start.

Scratches/Injuries: Wojtek Wolski (groin), Mike Sauer (concussion), Steve Eminger (shoulder), Erik Christensen (healthy), Jeff Woywitka (healthy)

Preview:  Another day, another game against the Flyers, of whom the Rangers have defeated twice this season.

But this isn’t just another day. This isn’t just another game against the Flyers. It’s the Winter Classic.

We’ve seen this matchup twice this season, so it’s tough to not know what the Flyers will bring: a balanced scoring attack, good defense despite injuries, decent goaltending (since it’s Bobrovsky and not Mr. OMG-The-Universe-Is-So-Big), and a tremendously physical onslaught. The Rangers have beaten the Flyers twice by playing solid defense, capitalizing on chances, and maintaining puck possession.

The biggest thing for the Rangers is getting that powerplay to function again, as it has been worse than terrible the past 10 or so games. The Flyers are a dangerous team, and the Rangers will need to put home some powerplay goals to beat them for a third time this season.

Crazy Thought: Brad Richards gets a powerplay goal.

Opponent’s Blog: Flyers Fan Central

Game time tonight is 3:00pm on NBC, AM1050 and XM214.

Staal’s return shouldn’t have come because Ryan McDonagh is down with the flu. He should come back when he is ready to come back. Whenever Staal returns, there’s likely to be rust. Not many players can have his kind of lay off and return without missing a beat. The Winter Classic, already played in exceptional circumstances, is not a good choice to return even where there’s health permitting, absolutely not.

The Rangers should allow Staal to return later in the week, give him a few more days of hard skating. Another aspect to consider with the game today; don’t underestimate the likelihood of a dirty, physical game against the Flyers (as is the norm); another reason to tread carefully with the Rangers best blue-liner.

If you can insert a quality player in to the line up who is ready to do so then it’s a no-brainer, but clearly Staal isn’t ready – yet. Let’s just hope all the reasons for Staal’s return – whenever that may be – are the right ones.