The Peerless Prognosticator is ON THE AIR!!!
Last year when we wrote the warm-up for the Eastern Conference
Quarterfinal series between the Washington Capitals and the Boston Bruins, we
opened with this paragraph…
“On Thursday the Washington Capitals will embark on their 23rd post-season journey with the aim of winning a Stanley Cup. This year marks the fifth consecutive trip to the playoffs for the Caps and if anything, this one resembles the first one in this five-year run more than the others.”
Well, it worked last year, and but for the fact that this is the 24th
post-season journey for this franchise (the old television series “Lost” comes
to mind) and their sixth consecutive trip to the playoffs, the paragraph still
fits, right down to this year resembling the first one more than any of the
others.
Oh, and there is a different opponent, too. Well…not so different. This will be the fourth time in five seasons
that the Capitals will face off against the New York Rangers in a post-season
series. Some things don’t change…well,
much.
The View from 30,000 feet
Last year, when these teams met in the Eastern Conference
Quarterfinals, they resembled one another as teams that tended to grind out
wins. The Rangers did it with an
aggressive pursuit style, while the Caps did it by minimizing risks. Either way, they were close-to-the-margin
teams for which blowouts were a rare commodity.
This year, things are different.
The Capitals and Rangers are a contrast in styles, or at least a
contrast in production, as their respective numbers would indicate:
Looking at the top-end numbers, the Rangers look a lot like last year’s
team:
- Goals for/game – 2012: 2.71 / 2013: 2.62
- Goals against/game – 2012: 2.22 / 2013: 2.25
- 5-on-5 – 2012: 1.14 / 2013: 1.30
- Power play – 2012: 15.7% / 2013: 15.7%
- Penalty killing – 2012: 86.2% / 2013: 81.1%
- Winning when scoring first (pct) – 2012: .814 / 2013: .857
If anything this year’s Rangers are a weaker road team that scores less
away from Madison Square Garden (2.17 G/G vs. 2.66 last season), is scored upon
more (2.46 / 2.34), has a weaker power play (11.4 percent / 15.7 percent), and has a worse
penalty kill (75.0 percent / 87.3 percent).
The bigger changes are on the Capitals’ side. They averaged almost half a goal more per
game from last year to this (from 2.66 to 3.04), actually had a slight drop in
scoring defense (from 2.76 to 2.71), had a marginally better 5-on-5 ratio (1.01
to 1.07), a much more efficient power play (from 16.7 percent to 26.8 percent),
and had a much better record when falling behind first (.326 winning percentage
to .455). Those differences to the
better hold up in both the Caps’ home and road records, as opposed to the
Rangers, who have been a weak road club this year.
Offense
Even with the addition of Rick Nash this season, this is a team that
was offensively challenged for much of the season, especially on the road. The Blueshirts were held to fewer than two
goals in 11 of 24 road games. The good
news here is that only two of those games took place after March 14th.
The Rangers don’t have top-heavy scoring in their lineup as much as
they do not have top-end scoring. Derek
Stepan led the club in points (44), but was only tied for 21st in
the league in scoring. Rick Nash was
close behind with 42 points (tied for 27th), but after that the
scoring drops off quickly. Only six Rangers
who spent the entire year with the club are in double digits in points. Five
are in double digits in goals, but after that the goal scoring drops off a
cliff to Taylor Pyatt with six and then to defensemen Ryan McDonagh and Anton
Stralman with four apiece. And, just as
the Rangers struggle to score on the road, so is that fact reflected in
individual performance. Only five
Rangers who started the season with the club have more than two goals on the
road.
If there is a silver lining in this for the Rangers, it is that they
have a very strong finishing kick in games.
They were eighth overall in third period goals scored this season (46). But even here that silver lining is not all
that thick. Five of the other seven
playoff teams in the East have scored even more third period goals than the
Rangers.
For the Caps, their offense resembled more the offense of the 2008-2009
season (3.27 goals per game) if not the 2009-2010 juggernaut (3.83 goals per
game). Their 3.04 goals per game tied
Montreal for fourth in the league in scoring offense. And like the Rangers, the Caps’ offense
improved as games went on, only more so and earlier in those contests. Their 56 second period goals led the league (with
Winnipeg), and their 48 third period goals were fourth in the league.
As individuals the Caps resembled that 2009-2010 in the distribution of
goals, certainly. Alex Ovechkin was the
dominant goal scorer (0.71 goals/game in 2009-2010, 0.67 goals/game this year),
but he had good support from another winger (Alexander Semin (0.55) in
2009-2010, and Troy Brouwer (0.40) this season) as well as a center (Nicklas
Backstrom then (0.27) and Mike Ribeiro now (0.27).
And just as with that 2008-2009 team, the Caps had balance. There were 21 players on a pace to score in double
digits in points over an 82-game schedule, while on this team there were 19 (20
if you count Brooks Laich but he played in only nine games this season).
Defense
The Rangers are not an especially gifted team at holding teams without
shots on goal. The finished the season
tied with the Islanders for the tenth lowest average shots on goal (28.2),
although that number is tied for the second lowest among the eight playoff
clubs in the East. What the Rangers do
seem to have a knack for is in avoiding big periods, at least as their overall scoring
defense is concerned. With 34 goals
allowed in the first periods of games, 38 in the second periods, and 34 in the
third periods of games, the Rangers don’t express any clear weaknesses or
tendencies to either slow starts or weak finishes. If there is a concern, it is in falling behind
early. No team in the Eastern Conference
playoffs allowed the first goal of games more often than the Rangers (27 times
in 48 games).
The Caps suffer a similar problem to that of the Rangers allowing first
goals. Only Colorado (23) and Florida (28)
have trailed at the first intermission more often than the Caps (20). Fortunately, the Caps had all those second
period goals scored to negate that disadvantage, but this is not necessarily
something to count on in the post season.
Then there is the continuing issue of shots allowed. Only Edmonton and Buffalo allowed more shots
on goal this season. Here is where that
matters. If Henrik Lundqvist, who had a
.926 save percentage in the regular season, duplicates that in this series,
then Braden Holtby has to have a save percentage of .935 just to stay even in
goals allowed.
Special Teams
The Rangers are a Jekyll and Hyde act on their special teams. Their power play, while not elite, is
competent at home (19.3 percent, 17th in the league), but on the
road it struggles to say the least. No
team scored fewer power play goals on the road than did New York this season
(eight, tied with Winnipeg), and the Rangers have the 28th rated road
power play.
New York’s penalty killing shows similar profiles at home and on the
road. At home the Rangers are a
tenth-best 86.2 percent and had to use it often, finishing with the tenth
highest number of shorthanded situations faced at home (80, tied with
Ottawa). On the road, however, the
Rangers rank 26th with a 75.0 percent penalty kill rate. What saved them was an uncommon discipline
about taking penalties in the first place.
Only Minnesota found themselves in fewer shorthanded situations on the road this
season.
For the Caps, the power play is their signature strength – first at
home among playoff teams (27.2 percent), first on the road (26.5 percent), first
overall (26.8 percent). At first blush
it might look bad that the Caps finished only 14th in total power
play opportunities (164), but if they finished tied with New Jersey for third
most opportunities (176), the difference would amount to three power play
goals. The differences wouldn’t be
significant until the Caps have as many opportunities as Detroit (185) or
Montreal (203). Still, putting more
pressure on teams to defend power plays at the expense of more 5-on-5 time
could not hurt.
Penalty killing for the Caps has been a long slow slog of
improvement. After four games it was
awful (15-for-24, 62.5 percent). But
since then the Caps have kiiled penalties at an 80.6 percent rate. Not elite, perhaps, but it would have ranked
the Caps in the middle third of the league rankings. Overall, the Caps have has issues with games
in which they have three or more shorthanded situations. In those games the Caps are 13-15-3. When they face two or fewer shorthanded
situations they are 14-3-0. The silver
lining here is that they did better late in the season in games facing three or
more shorthanded situations (5-1-1 in April).
Goaltending
New York – Henrik Lundqvist (season series): 1-0-1, 1.44, .942
Washington -- Braden Holtby (season series): 1-2-0, 2.71, .923
When you have been nominated for the Vezina Trophy as the league’s top
goaltender four times in the last seven seasons (winning in 2012) while ranking
eighth among active goaltenders in wins, second among active goalies in goals
against average, first in save percentage, and sixth in shutouts, you are an
elite goalie. That, of course, is the
Rangers’ Henrik Lundqvist. This season
Lundqvist had his second best career season in goals against average (2.05,
seventh in the league) and save percentage (.926, tied for fifth in the
league). He has been a bit inconsistent in
the season’s final weeks, though. In his last ten appearances Lundqvist had a
fine win-loss record (7-3-0) and a fine goals against average (1.98). But his save percentage dropped a bit (.920),
and he allowed three or more goals in four of the ten games.
Braden Holtby overcame a start to the season that might have had Caps
fans wondering if last spring’s superb effort in the playoffs was a fluke. In his first seven appearances he was 3-4-0, 4.04,
.874. But in his last 29 appearances he
was 20-8-1, 2.26, .930, with four shutouts.
Only Tuukka Rask of Boston, among playoff goalies in the East, had more
shutouts (five). Among goalies appearing
in at least half of their teams’ games, Holtby finished eighth in even-strength
save percentage and his save percentage against opponents’ power plays was
indistinguishable (.860) from that of his opponent in this series, Henrik
Lundqvist (.861).
Coaching
John Tortorella ended a number of bad personal trends when his Rangers
overcame the Caps last spring. Since
winning a Stanley Cup at Tampa Bay in 2003 he had an 11-19 post-season record
and put together consecutive series wins (beating Ottawa in the first round
before ousting the Caps) for the first time since that Stanley Cup year. This is his fourth trip to the post-season
with the Rangers, but it will be his fourth time facing the Caps, including
once as head coach in Tampa. He is 12-13
overall in wins and losses against the Caps and has split four series against
Washington. This series is seen in many
quarters as critical to his continued employment in New York. One thing to count on, it probably won’t
affect his style. He is the
personification of the Sinatra refrain, he does it “myyyyy way,” even if it
means antagonizing the local media in Manhattan.
Adam Oates is in his first playoff as a head coach, but it is not as if
he is a stranger to being behind the bench in the playoffs, having served as an
assistant to Pete DeBoer in New Jersey when the Devils went to the Stanley Cup
finals last season. He also understands
the pressure of the playoffs as a player, having appeared in 163 playoff games
over a 19-year playing career.
If there is a difference between these coaches it would seem to be on
where they occupy themselves on the motivator-technician spectrum. Tortorella impresses as more of a motivator,
getting his players to expend the maximum effort available to them, more than
he seems to be an X’s and O’s coach. Oates, on the other hand, appears more a
data-driven driven coach that uses technology and adjustments on the fly based
on his accumulation of information than the “rah-rah” type. Each suits their team to a point. New York is not particularly deep in skill and depends on
its whole being more than the sum of its parts, being willing to push
themselves (or be prodded by Tortorella) to give more than 100 percent for 60
minutes of more. The Caps have more
high-end skill, but get contributions from the mid-range of their roster
because Oates can make adjustments to maximize the skills those players have.
The Season Series
The Rangers won the season series. Here are the wrap-ups to bring you up to speed:
- February 17: Rangers 2 - Capitals 1
- March 10: Rangers 4 – Capitals 1
- March 24: Capitals 3 – Rangers 2 (OT/SO)
Stars Who Must be Stars
New York: Rick Nash
This is what the Rangers paid a king’s ransom for (Brandon Dubinsky,
Artem Anisimov, Tim Erixon, a first round draft pick and future considerations)
to employ the services of Rick Nash – the post-season. Nash has appeared in only one playoff series
in nine seasons preceding this one, and it did not end well. His 2009 Columbus Blue Jackets were swept in
four games by the Detroit Red Wings.
Nash was 1-2-3, minus-4 in the four games. And that makes Nash something of an unknown
quantity. At first blush it would seem
that Nash, who has a 7-8-15 scoring line in 12 career games against the Caps,
could dominate. True, he could. But on the other hand he had more shorthanded
responsibility in Columbus than he has in new York (only 31 seconds of penalty
killing time per game this season), and taking that away from his Columbus
production against the Caps he is a more mortal 6-6-12 in those 12 games. Whether he does the “Monster Nash” on the
Caps or is more “Rickey Mouse” could be an important factor on which this
series turns.
Washington: Alex Ovechkin
It is getting late in the day for Alex Ovechkin to be more than a
numbers freak in the post season. He is
30-29-59, plus-56 in 51 career playoff games, but his Caps are just 24-27 in
eight playoff series in which Washington has only three series wins. He is 9-8-17, plus-2, in 19 career playoff
games against New York having scored three goals in each of the three series in
which he faced the Rangers. This season
started poorly for Ovechkin, but he closed with a rush. After going 2-1-3, minus-3 in his first eight
games he finished 30-23-53, plus-5, in his last 40 games, a 62-47-109, plus-10
pace over 82 games. His 16 power play
goals works out to a 27 power play goal scoring rate per 82 games. Only 12 times in the history of the league
did anyone score more power play goals in a season. And, if anything he comes into the
post-season even hotter – 23 goals in his last 23 games.
Guys Who Might Be Heroes
New York: Derick Brassard
Derick Brassard is another one of those players who is a big question
mark. This is his first taste of
post-season action, having missed his first chance as a member of the Columbus
Blue Jackets in 2009 when he had a shoulder injury. Since arriving in New York with Derek Dorsett
and John Moore from Columbus at the trading deadline (with a draft pick for
Marian Gaborik and two prospects) Brassard went 5-6-11, plus-3, in 13 games,
four of those goals coming in his last six games of the regular season. On a team lacking offensive depth, and not
getting all that they might have thought possible from Gaborik, Brassard has
been a plus. If he carries that into
this series, it spells trouble for the Caps.
Washington: Martin Erat
We had it right in Round 1 of last year’s playoffs when we picked Joel
Ward in this category (he with the series clinching goal against Boston). This year we go with the new guy. The addition of Martin Erat has not led to a
flood of scoring off his stick (1-2-3 in nine games), but his presence shores
up a weakness on this team, filling the left wing side on the second line. He provides balance to that line, his
intelligence and scoring potential opening things up for Troy Brouwer and
giving center Mike Ribeiro more options.
Erat has a body of work in the post season – 8-15-23 in 46 playoff games
with Nashville – so this will not be new to him. His is the sort of secondary scoring the Caps
could use as another threat against Henrik Lundqvist.
In the end…
This is seen by many folks as a series that will be close, although the
Rangers appear to be the consensus pick.
We wonder if this isn’t “muscle memory” taking over. The Rangers were on a short list of Stanley
Cup favorites when the year started, but they struggled to get much traction
for long stretches over the course of the abbreviated season. This is not a team that has performed to that
anticipated level.
To that, add the fact that this Ranger team is not a lot different than
that which defeated the Caps in seven games last spring. But in that series the Caps were within a
triple overtime goal in one games and a late penalty in another of ending the
Rangers’ season in less than seven games.
And the Caps did it with a team that didn’t have a consistent number two
center, had a defenseman with a lot of rust, had a first-line center that lost
half a season to a concussion, and was led by a coach who made-do with what he
had, but took few (if any) chances. The
Caps do not suffer those same problems on the eve of this series.
The Rangers have improved as an internal matter, young players
(particularly Derek Stepan) getting another full year of experience under their
belts. And on balance, Rick Nash is an
upgrade over Marian Gaborik. They will,
however, miss defenseman Marc Staal for any additional time he might miss
recovering from an eye injury. For the
most part, the Rangers will be relying on being a better version of the team
that faced the Caps last spring, and that team has not yet emerged this season,
at least not consistently and not for long stretches.
On the other hand, the Caps are a better version of the 2009 team that
beat that Ranger team, mostly for the experience that their core group – Alex Ovechkin,
Nicklas Backstrom, and Mike Green – have obtained. They are also a more balanced team than that
one, which was the warm-up act for the Greatest Show on Ice that would torment defenses
the following year.
This will be a hard-fought series, as have the three been that preceded
it. But while this will be no five-game
romp for the Caps as it was in 2011, neither will it be the seven-game series
that sandwiched that 2011 series.
Capitals in six
