Anyway, I can’t match his British wit, so instead I decided to take questions and hot topics about the Rangers from Twitter, email, and down in the comments section.

What did Marian Gaborik do to get benched for the first half of the second period? Is Torts going overboard?

I don’t think there is a definitive right or wrong answer when it comes to benching players or decreasing their icetime.  The fact of the matter is we’re not on the bench, in the locker room, or at practice. We just don’t have a 360 degree view.

With that said, in my not so humble opinion, I think Gaborik deserved to be benched. He was playing passive and wasn’t sticking to the game plan. His role is to attack the puck and the slot in the OZ. In the defensive zone, he wasn’t sticking with his man or trying to win battles along the wall. He just wasn’t getting it done and others were playing better than he was.

PS – Dave Maloney also brought up similar points during the radio intermission on 1050.

As far as Torts going overboard, I disagree with what others are saying. If Gabby is doing the things I just outlined, how do you not bench him? What kind of message does that send if Torts benches others, but not their star player? Not a very good one. Tortorella has been consistent in this regard all season. You can’t change your philosophy now. Players will tune you out.

What do you make of the moaning coming from the media about Tortorella’s press conferences? Some have suggested a walk out or asking the league to get involved.

Tortorella has the media taking shots at him and not his players, job well done. Nick Monte at Rangers Tribune said it best. “Media complaining about not being able to do their job because of Torts is absurd. I don’t get quotes from the coach, yet still produce better material.”

What do the Rangers have to do to clear the zone better?

This is kind of a multi-part problem. Their defense needs to do a better job of making outlet passes. Stralman and Girardi had some difficulty getting the puck north in Game 2. However, it’s not all on them. You’re behind the 8 ball when you lose key faceoffs in the defensive zone.

The Rangers also need to maintain their two-three man forecheck. We saw spurts in Game 1 and Game 2 where we were on the aggressive and we were pinning the Devils in their zone. They are not that good in their own zone, so we have to counter with similar tactics more consistently.

Would you rather see the Rangers block shots or switch to more of an aggressive strategy and play the points?

Typically speaking, I’d prefer playing the points as a strategy. I think you have a better chance at creating counter rushes if your high forwards are challenging their blueline.

With that said, the Rangers aren’t built in that fashion. They are still young and growing up defensively. My fear for this roster, with a more aggressive strategy, is we’d end up leaving Hank out to dry. I don’t know what you guys all think about this, but I saw enough of that in Hank’s first few years in the league and we never got passed the second round.

Do you think Tim Erixon should replace Bickel in the lineup?

I haven’t followed Erixon much since he was sent to Hartford. If the reports are accurate, he struggled with defensive zone coverage. If he struggled against AHL forecheckers, I can’t imagine him playing well against NHL forechecking, during the playoffs no less. I think Sully’s hands are tied here with the defense. Eminger has basically zero playoff experience and hasn’t played in weeks. John Scott (nice trade Sather!) is supposedly out of shape. It’s Bickel by default.

That’s my take folks. What do you got?

It was two great seasons for me here, in Hartford! I was proud to be one of the part of Wolfpack/Whale team! Thanks everyone for support!

It was a bit curious to see him tweet that, considering he was still a part of the Ranger organization, but now it is clear as to why.

What is also clear is that Valentenko really had no future with the Rangers. He is blocked by a number of current roster players and a few other prospects like Dylan McIlrath and Tim Erixon. In fact, the acquisition of Erixon and the emergence of Stu Bickel might have sealed his fate.

Update: Per Laurie Carr, the deal with Avangard is a two year deal.

Very quietly, the Rangers have had one of the better powerplays in the postseason, ranking in the top 50% of playoff teams. Their conversion rate is at 16.9% in the playoffs, which is a full percentage point above their regular season conversion rate of 15.7%. It may not seem like a big jump, but that 1% can go a long way. After all, three of the Rangers five goals in the Eastern Conference Finals have come with the man advantage.

The Rangers actually have the second best powerplay conversion rate of the teams still in the playoffs. Interestingly enough, the Devils are the leaders at an even 20% conversion rate, while the Coyotes (12.5%) and Kings (10.2%) are sitting well behind the Eastern Conference teams.

But it’s not just the numbers that are playing in the Rangers favor, it’s the overall look of the powerplay that has had most people relatively impressed. They seem to be moving the puck better, finding open space, and really attacking the opposition. More shots from the point are leading to more deflections and goals as well.

Sure, it’s not a perfect powerplay, but it is definitely improvement. Remember the powerplays from the beginning of the year that yielded 48 pass attempts and no shot attempts? Those appear to be a thing of the past. Well, at least when they are given the opportunity to set up and move the puck around.

The Rangers are converting at opportunistic times as well, which is another reason why the powerplay has looked so good. I can remember numerous times when a powerplay goal would have tied or won the game in the final minutes of the game, but the Rangers failed to convert. Not this year. That Joel Ward double minor penalty, which led to two separate powerplay goals is a prime example of how the Rangers are starting to convert at opportunistic times.

It’s very odd to say that the Rangers powerplay is no longer a weakness in their game this postseason. But it appears that the Rangers have found a way to at least have a serviceable powerplay. Does it need improvement? Absolutely, but it’s no longer going to cost them games. Progress is a good thing.

1-0   Devils take the lead on the powerplay

This goal was a matter of missed positioning on the penalty kill. There were three Rangers in the corner, including Ryan Callahan. Cally got caught on the boards, forcing Derek Stepan to cover two point men. Ilya Kovalchuk was wide open for the pass from Marek Zidlicky, who Stepan bit on a bit too much. Kovi was able to walk the puck in, tee up, and shoot. Yes, this went high glove, but this was not a stoppable shot.  When Kovi has time to tee it up from that distance, he scores 99 times out of 100.

1-1 Rangers tie it up on the powerplay

This goal begins with Travis Zajac breaking his stick. Marc Staal, Brad Richards, and Dan Girardi worked the puck along to attack the 5 on 3 up high masterfully. This, in essence, isolates Zajac on a three-on-one. Richards wound up feeding Staal at the top of the circle for a one timer that was blocked by Salvador. Unfortunately for the Devils, this one took a wild bounce off the boards, and banked in off an out of position Martin Brodeur. Brodeur was out of position because he didn’t see the puck ricochet off Salvador. Stepan was the man in front to cause that.

2-1 Rangers take the lead on the third powerplay goal of the game

This was essentially a broken play. Anton Stralman tried to pass to Artem Anismov along the near boards, but he passed it right back to Stralman. Dainius Zubrus winds up being the man to blame, as he abandons Stralman and allows him to walk the puck in to the top of the circle.  With Chris Kreider in front screening Brodeur, Stralman wristed the puck. A good deflection over Brodeur by Kreider and the Rangers took the lead.

2-2 Devils fourth line ties it up

This goal is why Marian Gaborik was benched in the third period (in addition to just an all around bad game by Marian). Gabby couldn’t clear the puck, and it wound up on Steve Bernier’s stick. His shot got blocked  by Michael Del Zotto, but goes right to Bryce Salvador. Salvador has a bit of time and rips a low, hard shot that Ryan Carter deflects. Hank has no chance.

3-2 Devils take the lead (updated)

Stu Bickel –with a rare third period shift– whipped the puck too far behind the net and out of MDZ’s reach.  Zidlicky read the play perfectly and pinched, keeping the puck low. The puck got to Adam Henrique at the point, covering for Zidlicky after he pinched. His wrist shot is perfectly deflected by Clarkson. Clarkson was completely undefended in the slot because Cally released him. No chance for Hank again.

In the end, it’s a 1-1 series tie headed to New Jersey. It wouldn’t be the Rangers without the series being tied headed to Game Three. It’s now a best of five, as per usual.

NYR Leading Scorer: Brad Richards (6-5-11)
NJD Leading Scorer: Ilya Kovalchuk (5-7-12)

NYR Goaltender: Henrik Lundqvist (15 GS, 1.57 GAA, .940 SV%)
NJD Goaltender: Martin Brodeur (13 GS, 2.05 GAA, .920 SV%)

Rangers Lines:

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

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

Henrik Lundqvist gets the start.

Probable Scratches/Injuries: Mike Sauer (concussion), Mats Zuccarello (wrist), Brandon Dubinsky (lower body), Jeff Woywitka (healthy), John Scott (healthy), Steve Eminger (healthy)

Preview: Everything you need to know about this series can be found in our preview. Looking for info on Brodeur? Check Justin’s review of his style. As for this game, the Rangers are attempting to go to Newark up 2-0, which would be their first two game lead of the playoffs. In each of the previous series, the Rangers looked dominant in Game One only to falter in Game Two. Let’s hope they avoid that this time around.

Crazy Thought: Bickel gets a point.

A side plot of his offseason may be how Anisimov has pushed his teammate Brandon Dubinsky further toward the exit door. Earlier this season we discussed the potential ‘play off’ between Anisimov and Dubinsky in regard to a future with the Rangers. Both are blessed with skill and ability and both have been productive Rangers yet both have often left you hoping, expecting more.

With the Rick Nash rumours and the apparent inclusion of Dubinsky in the Nash package every man and his dog is aware that inside Madison Square Garden the lust is starting to wear off of Dubi. He’s likely in play and his future is clearly tenuous. He’s not earning his Benjamin’s.

To an extent one could have argued the same about Anisimov. However, the Russian has stepped up (somewhat) this post season while Dubinsky has first been mired in an awful campaign and secondly has now had to sit and watch his teammates work towards a Cup. Dubinsky was poor in last year’s playoffs and one point in seven this time around doesn’t inspire confidence he can do it better any time soon.

Anisimov on the other hand has produced 8 points in 13 games despite being shifted all over the line up and has come up with big plays such as the assist for Chris Kreider’s goal against the Devils. Basically, Anisimov is stepping up while his teammate Dubinsky cannot. Unfortunate for Dubinsky.

There’s every chance that this summer the Rangers revisit a Rick Nash acquisition or chase Zach Parise with a Staten Island Ferry load of Jim Dolan’s cash. Failing on both counts and there’s a strong likelihood Chris Kreider’s presence in the line up next year will become even more prominent than it already might be. In short, there appears to be less room for one of the Rangers scoring forwards next summer and right now it’s Anisimov and not Dubinsky who is doing himself a favour in regard to locking up a future in NY.

The deeper the Rangers go the more likely it is that Dubinsky can get back on the ice and impact his own future, however he’s having to watch several teammates (aka the competition) increase their chances of being prominent roster parts going forward. Dubinsky will return rusty yet he’ll need to make an immediate impact, possibly on the grandest stage of them all. Thinks are looking up for the Rangers, things look promising for Anisimov. Things ain’t looking so hot for the local Alaskan.

Every couple of weeks it’s something else that is supposedly destroying the game. First it was keeping a hockey team in Nashville, a market that was never supposed to succeed. Whoops.

Then it was the Lightning’s 1-3-1 trap, which was supposed to lift them from mediocrity while simultaneously sink the NHL and its ratings. Shhh…don’t tell anyone they missed the playoffs and the ratings are breaking all kinds of records.

Finally, in the most recent piece of garbage written by Ken Campbell of The Hockey News, the Rangers strategy of blocking shots will kill the league because as Kenny said, everyone “found it frustrating to watch and devoid of excitement.” Further, he says, “The Rangers are bad for the NHL, that’s why. If you found the Rangers seven-game second round series against the Washington Capitals to be compelling hockey, then good on you.” Interesting stuff.

I swear a zombie apocalypse could be destroying mankind and Ken Campbell would still be finding some irrelevant hockey nugget and acting like it’ll cause hockey and humanity’s impending doom. But hey, what else do you expect from a writer who is anti-salary cap because of rookie initiation dinners?

I digress.

The real issue is the media has picked up this idea that the Rangers are in fact ruining the game and predictably all fingers are pointing to the man behind the bench. John Tortorella. Some have even gone as far to say that the NHL should develop rules to prohibit teams from blocking shots.

Well, as Samuel L. Jackson once famously said in Pulp Fiction, and I continue to say on this site…“well allow me to retort.”

The Rangers don’t play a “boring style of hockey.” Evidence by the Garden crowd this postseason. They don’t even play a defensive system by traditional logic. They actually play an aggressive 2-1-2 offensive zone forecheck. They allow their offensive defensemen free reign to pinch, jump into the play, or join the rush. You could even argue they are the antithesis of “dead puck” era hockey, whatever that means. But Ken simply writes the Rangers off as a neutral zone trapping team, even though that is completely false.

So because they are collapsing in front of their net and blocking shots, which most of the league is doing now anyway, everyone seems to want to take shots (pun intended) at their style of play and associate it with the trap? It’s ridiculous. These labels have become vague and meaningless. The fact of the matter is the Rangers team concept is the perfect fit for this roster and it should be praised by experts, journalists, and fans alike.

Instead of bashing the coach and the system, Tortorella should really be receiving praise. They should be praising him for the intricate decisions he makes on a nightly basis that helps the Rangers win hockey games. But is anyone talking about it?

For example, there was a point during Game 1 against the Devils where the Rangers had spent a ridiculous amount of time in our own zone and took an unfortunate icing. Following this icing, the faceoff back in our end zone happened to be a false start.

Tortorella, in a brilliant move, sent out a line change after the false start. When the ref came over to disallow the line change, Torts played dumb. He acted like he thought the false start was an offside, since the puck did end up at the point on the mis-draw. These 10-15 seconds of discussion with the referee were CRITICAL for the players who were stuck out on the ice.

But where’s the coverage? Is anyone talking about it? Or was my last paragraph the first time you have actually read about this?

This is the hockey media unfortunately, and as the Rangers continue to climb the mountain towards Lord Stanley, we will continue to have misinformed and biased writers try to undermine the team’s success. But don’t be fooled. You know what the real story is and you know where to get it.

Discuss whatever your hearts desire, just keep it civil.

• 2004: New York Rangers draft Al Montoya with the sixth overall pick.
• 2/26/2008: Rangers trade Montoya and Marcel Hossa to the Phoenix Coyotes for Frederick Sjostrom, John Gratton, David LeNeveu, and a conditional fifth round pick. The conditions of the pick were that LeNeveu did not re-sign with the Rangers (he did not) and that Montoya played at least 15 games with the Coyotes (he did).
• As a result of these conditions being met, the Rangers were award the fifth round pick in 2009, which they used on Roman Horak.
• 6/1/11: Rangers deal Roman Horak, and two second round picks to the Calgary Flames for Tim Erixon and a fifth round pick (Shane McColgan).

Your mind has been blown. Stop hating on drafting Montoya already.

With Boyle back, and Kreider showing he deserves his top six minutes, the question about the Rangers missing Dubinsky hasn’t been brought up too often. After all, why question something if the Rangers are winning? John Mitchell is doing just fine on the fourth line, and won a key face off that led to Marc Staal’s overtime winner in Game Five of the Washington series. Mike Rupp is playing very well. Ruslan Fedotenko is too.

So the question becomes: If Dubinsky comes back, who would sit? Does the team even miss him?

Dubinsky may not have been producing offensively, but he has definitely been a great asset to the club defensively and on the penalty kill. Let’s remember that the penalty kill really struggled in the Washington series, although the Caps have some tremendous talent. Was it just coincidence that the kill looked bad when Dubinsky was out? I’m inclined to think no, it was not a coincidence. The club definitely misses him on the kill.

While the Rangers as a whole may miss him in that particular scenario, is it enough to say that they miss him in every scenario? He certainly wasn’t scoring, so there’s no loss on offense. Defensively, the Rangers have done a magnificent job of shutting down the opposition’s best scorers. But the depth appears to be lacking, as it’s the secondary and tertiary scorers that have been breaking through against them (see: Chimera, Jason).

In the hypothetical situation that Dubinsky is to return, and let it be known that John Tortorella will play Dubi if he can go, it’s tough to see who he would really replace. Earlier in the postseason the target was on Fedotenko’s back, but he’s been great this postseason. Then it moved to Mitchell, who hasn’t exactly been playing poorly, but hasn’t been turning heads enough to keep Dubi out of the lineup.

At even strength, there really wouldn’t be too much of a difference between Dubi and Mitchell. Maybe Dubi can turn one of those fourth line grind shifts into a goal, but that’s a big maybe. It’s the added depth on the kill that would really help the Rangers. In the end, the team likely misses Dubi, but not as much as we might think.