Rangers can’t solve a backup, shutout by Kings

November 18, 2013, by
AP Photo/Kathy Willens

AP Photo/Kathy Willens

On Saturday the Rangers blanked the Habs 1-0 behind their backup goalie. Last night, they themselves were blanked 1-0 by their opponent’s backup goalie. It’s kind of funny how that works out. The Kings did to the Rangers what they did to the Canadiens, completely outworking, out possessing, and outplaying them in every facet of the game. If not for stellar play from Henrik Lundqvist, this game would have been a lot worse than the 1-0 final score.

Now don’t get me wrong, the Rangers didn’t play poorly last night. Their powerplay didn’t convert on five chances, and two separate 5-on-3s, but it wasn’t for lack of creativity, shots, or puck movement. Their defense and goaltending was good. They just couldn’t solve Ben Scrivens (37 saves), subbing in for the injured Jonathan Quick. The Kings goal was a fluke goal too. These games happen sometimes. Puck luck just doesn’t go your way.

On to the goal (and the disallowed goal):

Kings 1, Rangers 0

I couldn’t really get a picture here, they all came out blurry. Sorry.

After a defensive zone face off win, Ryan Callahan made an attempt to clear the zone with a pass, but it was picked off by Robyn Regehr in the neutral zone and fired back into the Rangers zone. The Kings generated some decent chances off the turnover, and New York was just unable to clear the zone. Eventually, the puck winds up on Tyler Toffoli’s stick at the point. He let a slapshot go that hit off Anton Stralman’s skate and through Hank’s wickets. It’s a bad luck goal, but the Cally turnover there really cost them.

It’s worth noting that the Kings were constantly pressuring the Rangers, and were forcing them into a lot of turnovers. Cally wasn’t the only one to give the puck away, and he didn’t even give the puck away in front of the net (a few Rangers were guilty of that).

Disallowed goal

Sorry folks, but Dominic Moore kicked this one in. Not much else to analyze, it’s a clear kick.

Fenwick Chart:

Per ExtraSkater

Per ExtraSkater

The chart above is very misleading. The graph shows the total Fenwick numbers, including powerplay shot attempts. However, it is best to analyze Fenwick at 5v5, since powerplay chances really skew numbers. This game is a perfect example, The Rangers were dominated pretty badly at 5v5 (43.5% FF%), but because of five powerplays, they had more shot attempts throughout the course of the game. When the game was played at even strength, the Kings were the better team. Considering how the game went, that shouldn’t surprise anyone.

These types of losses happen. It seemed the puck couldn’t bounce the Rangers way. That’s what happens when you run into a very hot goalie, even if he is a backup. The Rangers are now 1-1 in their three game stretch against playoff teams. I’ve been saying a 2-1 record would be considered a win for this stretch, and the Rangers can still do that against Boston on Tuesday night.

Categories : Game Wrap-ups


  1. neal says:

    We all know Moore kicked it. The question is did Scrivens or anyone else touch it before it went in? if Yes, then it is a goal.

    • Dave says:

      Has to hit a player’s stick. It didn’t.

      • neal says:

        I was wrong, see the rule below
        49.2 Goals – Kicking the puck shall be permitted in all zones. A goal cannot be scored by an attacking player who uses a distinct kicking motion to propel the puck into the net. A goal cannot be scored by an attacking player who kicks a puck that deflects into the net off any player, goalkeeper or official.

        A puck that deflects into the net off an attacking player’s skate who does not use a distinct kicking motion is a legitimate goal. A puck that is directed into the net by an attacking player’s skate shall be a legitimate goal as long as no distinct kicking motion is evident. The following should clarify deflections following a kicked puck that enters the goal:

        (i) A kicked puck that deflects off the body of any player of either team (including the goalkeeper) shall be ruled no goal.

        (ii) A kicked puck that deflects off the stick of any player (excluding the goalkeeper’s stick) shall be ruled a good goal.

        (iii) A goal will be allowed when an attacking player kicks the puck and the puck deflects off his own stick and then into the net.

        A goal cannot be scored by an attacking player who kicks any equipment (stick, glove, helmet, etc.) at the puck, including kicking the blade of his own stick, causing the puck to cross the goal line.

        • Centerman21 says:

          The goal last night was the right call. Moore kicked it in. It doesn’t change the fact the Rangers are getting screwed on the goal reviews. I still can’t get the Miller (no goal) review that was called kicked in. Meanwhile the game before on the same play it was ruled a goal. Real ticked about that. Last night the original call was a goal. Then changed?

    • Centerman21 says:

      No the rule states that you can’t kick it to a players skate and in. It has to touch a stick if you kick it before it goes in or it’s no goal. The call was right.

  2. Mikeyyy says:

    The lesson kids is to kick the puck at your stick.

  3. Chris F says:

    Scrivens is no ordinary backup; the guy has 3 shutouts in 5 games.

    • Justin says:

      Doesn’t mean he’s not an ordinary backup, just an ordinary backup on a hot streak 🙂

      • Centerman21 says:

        Hey Justin. Look at that picture of Hank as the puck slid past him. Now look at that black area above the top of his pads but just below his pants. That area is what’s not protected and what’s causing all the goalie injuries this year. At least some of them. I don’t remember a year in which this many goalkeepers went down in recent memory. A good topic for discussion maybe but a problem nontheless. The NHL wants more goals for the casual fan but at the expense of the health of a top goalie? The net size has done enough. Give them their pads back!

        • The Suit says:

          The black area are his thigh guards. You couldn’t put a knife through those things. Goalies are fine. Glad the NHL rid us of goalies wearing pads suited for someone 7 feet tall.

          • Centerman21 says:

            You can put a knife right through a bullet proof vest but it doesn’t mean you don’t feel anything when you get shot in the vest. Still might break a rib tho it’ll save your life. Those thigh pads help I know but when taking a slapper from the point there the puck weighs as much as a kiddie bowling ball. I thought there was plenty of goal scoring last year and years prior. You beat a goalie and the puck goes in regardless of pad size. The net change has done more for Goal scoring. Pads protect goalies from injury. Look how many GK have GAA of 2 and less with those pads and how many goalies have gone down with injury. Is it making them play differently?

          • Centerman21 says:

            Aside from that. With Nash in the lineup. True or False. The Rangers are a good hard shot from the blue line away from being an elite team and cup contender. It seems like the best teams in the NHL have it. The Rangers don’t. A Mike Green or someone that teams have to account for on the point. Seems like teams don’t worry about the NYR from the Blue line. Makes it harder to get shots through.

            • Chris F says:


              The injuries we’ve seen to goaltenders this year are overwhelmingly:

              1) Due to being run over by opposing players;
              2) Groin issues, completely unrelated to the ‘black area’ above the pads being susceptible to puck-related injuries.

              Just because pads were changed and now we’re seeing an increase of injuries doesn’t suggest the two are linked. You have to look at the specific injuries and none have anything to do with a reduction in protection around the thigh area.

              • The Suit says:

                Agree with Chris F here. Haven’t heard of many guys getting injured because a puck got through someone’s thigh guard. Would defeat the purpose of those pads if they didn’t work.

  4. Bloomer says:

    Moore couldn’t kick it to his stick as it was tied up. The Ranger club was 0 for 5 on the Power Play, that is not good enough and cost them the game. They still need a dman with a cannon from the point. If they don’t want to use Michael Del Zotto there, then move him for someone that they can use.

    • Centerman21 says:

      There was a few insances where they elected to pass rather than shoot on prime scoring chances. I’d say they were all real tired. They played hard but the mind needs rest. They weren’t focused and one mistake cost them a goal against. Maybe a couple for as well.

  5. Bloomer says:

    One more point on clearing the zone. When a player has the puck deep in their end and their teammates are circling center ice waiting for the long stretch pass, chances are you will have a turnover. Not even Wayne Gretzky can make that pass through 3 opposition players.
    You have to have puck support when breaking out of your own end and at times it was not there last night. It looked like peewee hockey at the Gardens.
    Lundquist played very well last night, it could of been 3 or 4 to zero. The Rangers need to pick up their game if they want any chance of beating Boston. Lastly, on a 2 on 1 rush on a penalty kill, shoot the damn puck and hit the net. Cause you know if you don’t, you and you line mate will be caught up ice creating a odd man rush the other way.

  6. Walt says:

    Let’s give credit where it is due, the goalie for the Kings was on, the team in front of him was on, and we couldn’t score. Results, the Kings win, and Hank’s effert was in vain!!

    Now we have to reflect on the game, regroup, and put out the best we can against Boston. LGR!

    • Centerman21 says:

      The Kings played a good game. They out played us. No doubt. They’re a big team from top to bottom. When you have a scoring chance, you have to get a SOG. Zuc & Dorsett blew 2 of the better scoring chances. You aren’t going to get many against that team. Need to capitalize on chances. The Kings PK is just very good. Didn’t give much.

  7. HARLEMBLUES says:

    This team still can’t get the puck out of the Ozone.This has got to be address.GTFPO.

    • Frank says:

      Agreed. This is one area AV hasn’t been able to fix either. More and more it looks like a personnel issue and not a coaching issue. Time to make some moves.

    • Dave says:

      Cherry picking on early season woes and this one game. They’ve been dominating puck possession in their 7-2 run, and against Montreal. Last night was a dud against a solid team. It happens.

      • The Suit says:

        Agree that getting out of our zone is still not a strength. Corsi (ie puck possession) is an output. Unfortunately we can’t itemize the components that lead to this output. In other words, we can’t break down how good we’ve been in each zone.

        We don’t know if our corsi is good because we’re pinning the opposition in their zone, if we’re doing a better job managing gaps in the neutral zone, or if we’re breaking out of our own zone more efficiently. We know ‘what’ happened, we don’t know ‘how’ it happened or why.

  8. SalMerc says:

    37 shots but how many were legitimate scoring chances, maybe 9. Still need quicker puck movement on the PP. Nash can’t hurt either.