Jan
17

Rangers smoke Flyers with impressive home win

January 17, 2018, by
rangers flyers

AP Photo/Julie Jacobson

Well it couldn’t get much worse for the Rangers, but the real question was could it actually get better? The Blueshirts answered that emphatically last night, torching the Flyers and completely dominating them from start to finish. The final score of 5-1 was certainly nice, but it’s the consistent effort for 60 minutes that I enjoyed the most.

For the first time in a long time, the Rangers held their opponent to fewer than 30 shots on goal. Henrik Lundqvist finally won a game without having to stand on his head and/or make a deal with the devil. Rick Nash scored twice. Peter Holland got his first point on the Rangers on a shorthanded goal. They scored on the powerplay. All in all, a good feeling and a win.

On to the goals.

Flyers 1, Rangers 0

Jordan Weal was allowed to go to the front by Brendan Smith. Smith covered Wayne Simmonds behind the net instead. In a true zone, Weal would’ve been Kevin Shattenkirk’s man, as Smith would release the front of the net for the boards. However in Alain Vigneault’s system, the defense play man coverage, so Weal is still Smith’s. Confused yet?

Rangers 1, Flyers 1

Great read by Rick Nash to split the D as the puck got to the boards. What a pass by Pavel Buchnevich to hit him in stride.

Rangers 2, Flyers 1

Ryan McDonagh gets the shot through from the point on the powerplay, and JT Miller was left alone in front. Neither Flyer defenseman put a body on him.

Rangers 3, Flyers 1

Peter Holland took advantage when Weal fell along the boards. Paul Carey read it and flew the zone to receive the pass. Bar down with the shot for the shorty.

Rangers 4, Flyers 1

Michael Grabner picks Jakub Voracek’s pocket and beats Elliott five-hole. Elliott wants this one back, since it’s kind of weak. That said, 20 goals for Grabner. Again. What a bargain bin signing.

Rangers 5, Flyers 1

Marc Staal forced the turnover in the defensive zone, then outletted to Nash. Jimmy Vesey cut to the net, drawing attention, as Nash went far post for his second of the game.

Score Adjusted Corsi

This was pretty even throughout, but the Rangers took advantage of the Flyers’ turnovers and relatively poor goaltending. But the big thing was limiting the chances against. A big step in the right direction. I’m willing to ignore the turtle in the third when up four.

Scoring Chances

Another even tilt. The big thing is that the Rangers, again limited the quantity against. The good chances will always be there for this team, it’s limiting those against that matters. Again some turtling in the third, but that’s expected with a four goal lead.

After two humiliating losses, the Rangers pulled it off against a team that could have made life difficult for their playoff aspirations. They have a gimme on Thursday against Buffalo before they head out West. Of course now that I said that, it becomes a trap game.

"Rangers smoke Flyers with impressive home win", 5 out of 5 based on 1 ratings.
Categories : Game Wrap-ups

63 comments

  1. Richter1994 says:

    Memo to the Rangers: That’s what a 60 minute effort looks like. With a little help from the opposing goalie who couldn’t stop any high chance scoring shot.

    Nash and Grabner really upped their trade value.

    Man, effing Henrik is so effing great.

    Holland played a nice all around game. Nice pass to Carey for that goal.

    • reccer626 says:

      A more complete game, but not a full 60 minutes. The 5-1 Victory Masked how bad the 1st period was (again) for the Rangers. Prior to that Nash Goal we were lost as usual, hemmed into our zone non-stop, gaining very little puck possession, and flipping the puck out multiple times to get a line change and allow the Filthy’s to start another Ozone rush.
      In the 1st 15 minutes of the game we had puck control in the offensive zone for a total of 35 seconds THIRTY-FIVE SECONDS!!! Zib’s line 1st shift just over a minutes into the game (that was well sustained) and a brief stint with just over 5 minutes left in the period by Holland’s line. Outside of Nash’s goal, we had a slapped shot far far out that missed the net, we has a mid range shot by Vesey that missed the net, a good chance off a dumo in front to vVesey that also missed the net, and the rush by McD on goal but no trouble for Elliot.
      We were completely outplayed by the Flyers in every facet except the scoreboard in the 1st, a continued trend of this team.

      • Richter1994 says:

        Very true, not disagreeing with that at all.

        But they defended much better and that’s the more important part. They are not going to own the puck so it’s not worth even asking for that. Taking advantage of turnovers and opponents’ gaffes is how they score, which is why they are not successful in the playoffs where those types of goals are few and far between.

    • Rich S says:

      Richter94
      Do you really think that we get equal value back in a trade for Grabner, our best goal scorer and MVP 2 years running?
      You believe its smart to trade a valuable player who shows no signs of slowing down and is only 30 ?
      What are the odds of us getting a mcdavid or eichel in the draft since the worst 2 or 3 teams are NOT giving us their number 1 draft choices.
      You would really give away a ”’game changer”’ who is sets a great example for our younger forwards every game?
      Same thinking gave away rick middleton many years ago and strallman more recently….how did those moves work out???????

      • Richter1994 says:

        Hey pal, Grabner’s value is hot and teams are asking for him, so they might get a decent return for him. He’s a pure rental so a #1 is probably out but a 2nd plus? Sure, I can see that based on what I am hearing.

        I think the Rangers should trade Grabner, Nash, Holden, and DD, to start and if they REALLY want to blow it up, then McD and Zuc. They can always re-sign Grabner in the offseason.

        None, not picking in the middle of the pack. The super elite are usually in the top 3 picks or so.

        Grabner as a game changer you mean? Or Nash? Or both? You can re-sgn them in the offseason if you want and this can be explained to them before they are traded. This team, as is, is not contending.

        • roadrider says:

          You can re-sgn them in the offseason if you want and this can be explained to them before they are traded.

          Yes, this is a key point. If the Rangers’ front office decides they’re out of contention, which is not certain since they will probably hang on the fringes of playoff contention for the remainder of the season and management will not give up the playoff $$$ easily (even for 2 home games), then yeah, trade the UFAs and tell them you want them back next season. There’s no guarantee they will want to come back or will not get better offers, but its possible.

          • Richter1994 says:

            Yep, just like you’re not supposed to “hire” NFL coaches while they’re still coaching their current teams, lol.

        • Fotiu is God says:

          Anthony:
          Nash? Definitely. Along with Holden (if we have any takers).

          San Jose, Dallas, St. Lou, LAK; any Western Conference club poised for a deep run might take on Nash. Albeit only if the asking price for Hoffman, Kane, Pacioretty, et al., closes off those options.

          Highly doubtful we see anything north of a Second or Third round pick for him, by virtue of his $7.8M contract. Perhaps we swap Nash to Dallas for NHL rights to Valeri Nichushkin.

          But no to dumping Grabner. NO.

          Bro: His skill, compete level, smarts are too valuable. Moreover I abhor the message it sends to the youngsters in the room.

          • Richter1994 says:

            Gumba, trade Grabner with the understanding that you are going to re-sign him. It’s been done before. They could probably even have a handshake deal in place. The main problem is that the Rangers are in a playoff spot and have never sold off while contending for the playoffs.

            My opinion as to what they would do is keep the additions in house, meaning Hartford call ups, since they are battling for a playoff spot. The other division stinks so it is very likely that both wild cards come from the Metro.

            What they SHOULD do is sell, but probably not.

          • wwpd says:

            Nash’s contract is not such a big deal at the deadline, this is the final year, cap hit is prorated to the remaining part of the season, rangers could retain some salary if out of contention this year, etc. etc.

          • Rich S says:

            Fotiu is God,

            1,000,000 % correct!!!!!!!!!! EVERY WORD …..great reasons why we must keep him [ message to young players and an example of how to play , act like a pro!
            and IMMEDIATELY sign him to a 4-5 year contract, which I said last year to do and he would have been cheaper!!!!!!

            But no to dumping Grabner. NO.

            Bro: His skill, compete level, smarts are too valuable. Moreover I abhor the message it sends to the youngsters in the room.

        • Rich S says:

          I can see your point ”’resign him”’ in the offseason, after you trade him for a second rounder……but I wouldnt take the chance he likes it better somewhere else for just a 2…….

          Nash , I would trade since his age and deteriorating scoring ability are against him…..[ ? not sure where I read it but some think his once hard shot has lost a few MPH’s ]

          As far as total rebuild, NO…..too many good young players close to reaching their prime….kreider, miller, buch, sjkei, vesey, hayes, fast, letteri, zib and 5 top prospects coming soon- andersson, chytil, day, ronning, Igor…….WAY too much young talent to give up on this soon….give these guys a new coach and talk to me in a couple of years…..when crosby , malkin, ovechkin , stamkos are on the decline!!!!!

      • Stevem says:

        Please don’t remind me of Middleton lol😂

      • Jerry says:

        Great points Rich, but this is different from the Middleton fiasco. Espo wanted Hodge. There wasn’t a rebuild to consider.
        This is different in as much as the Rangers can get a very good return for Grabs in a rebuild on the fly situation. I am not for one minute disagreeing with his value to the Rangers. However, that value is exactly why he will give us a good return.

        If you are comfortable with this team, by all means keep Grabs. If you think this team has a chance at the only prize that matters, you for sure keep Grabs. But if those of us who are not happy with this team and its mediocre effort, and results, feel it’s time for a change.

        I love Grabs Nash, McD and Zucc. If JG trades them for some combo of picks, good young prospects, a good young player, we can set us up for a bright future

        This is a unique situation and very different from the Middleton/Hodge fleecing we took.

        • Rich S says:

          Jerry, I wrote this above but here are the reasons why I give this team a couple more years to grow……too many good young players close to reaching their prime….kreider, miller, buch, sjkei, vesey, hayes, fast, letteri, zib and 5 top prospects coming soon- andersson, chytil, day, ronning, Igor…….WAY too much young talent to give up on this soon….give these guys a new coach and talk to me in a couple of years…..when crosby , malkin, ovechkin , stamkos are on the decline!!!!!

      • Peter says:

        I am a huge fan of Grabner, but they would be nuts not to at least see what his market value might be.

      • gene4240 says:

        Let’s say the Winnipeg Jets come calling for Grabner, Gorton can get a nice prospect in return and a pick. The jets have one of the best farm systems in the NHL and they are separating themselves in the west a little bit. Grabner would give them more fire power along with that solid D.

        • James1090 says:

          I think Winnipeg is a team to look at when it comes to a trade partner. If the Rangers want to trade Nash I think the Kings and the Blues are teams to look at.

        • Fotiu is God says:

          Gene:
          If Nash gets us either nasty Brendan Lemieux, or highly skilled Joel Armia: absolutely.

          As for Grabner: unless Kyle Connor, plus one of the abovementioned comes our way, no way.

          I’m hard pressed to i.d. any LAK or Blues prospect, save for D-men Jordan Schmaltz or Vince Dunn.

          But if we add another puck-moving D-man, DeAngelo becomes that much more irrelevant.

    • Fotiu is God says:

      Memo to Anthony:

      Back when Flyers-Rangers Meant Something: Boxcar pops the Flyers trainer. F++k yeah! LGR!

      • Richter1994 says:

        LOL, man there was some blood baths that occurred on the ice weren’t there?

        I was at the latest Flyer game and needless to say it was nothing like that, lol. What they record as “hits” these days would not have even registered back then.

        Imagine players putting their hands on officials these days? Forget it.

  2. Walt says:

    A big shout out to Hank, the man is the only goalie to win 20, or more games, in his first 13 NHL seasons. Now that is a big deal!

    As for the game last night, well we put it to Filathadelphia, what else needs to be said. That alone is worth the price of the pain we have experienced so far this year. Keep it up, our trade value gets better everytime we win like that!!!!!!!!!!

  3. amy says:

    i just want to say thank you guys for winning last night for Joel’s birthday especially you Rick I will see you tomorrow and Henrik you rock

  4. Blue Seat says:

    94 agree good to see Nash helping trade value, but not interested in trading Grabner. Black Hawks need goalie help, Palavec is available. According to Sportsnet.ca defenseman are being made available. So, no point putting Holding on market, but still want to see what McD might bring to Rangers.

  5. Mancunian Candidate says:

    Playing 1 good game every 8-10 games: it’s the ‘17-‘18 Ranger Way.

  6. Al Dugan says:

    Can you imagine the Flyers sites this morning?

    That was a huge game for them. A win and they leapfrog the NYR and move into a playoff spot. Outside of Scott Darling’s two appearances for Carolina, last night was the worst goaltending of the year. Elliot seemed to be off his angles all night, and he wasnt seeing the puck well at all.

    Huge road trip coming. Need at least 4 points after Buffalo.

    Pittsburgh on the coast starting tonight. It’s a big trip for them too.

    • reccer626 says:

      The Rangers put the puck in spots that no goalie could save them given the distance from the net. Nash high blocker, Carey post and in high glove, Nash2.0 far post and in from the face off dot. Miller deflection from a few feet out.
      This had nothing to do with Elliot being bad, but the rangers putting the puck where it needs to be,

      • King Sieveqvist ! King Sieveqvist ! says:

        Nash first goal he gave him the whole blocker side , Nash second goal he was leaning , Carey goal he dropped the glove … Nuevirth and it’s a different game … Happy Elliott gave up a ton

  7. Walt says:

    Adam Herman wrote a great article on the Blueshirt Banter site talking about how to build a team thru the draft, very good read. He basically says what I’ve been saying all along, draft in the first round, multiple times, to get the quality necessary to develop a strong team for the long haul. Let’s hope JG has enough sense to keep our #1’s from here on out.

    • roadrider says:

      But the money quote from this article is:

      They need to find away to add some young players with the realistic potential to be superstars down the line. Unfortunately, the most realistic way of doing so requires multiple years of losing. If Rangers’ brass can’t find it within themselves to stomach that, then they’re going to have to get very creative and find other ways to do.

      Well, I’m not sure how to get “creative” enough to find “other ways” to get lottery picks with superstar potential (not all of which will pan out) but I’d love to hear suggestions.

      • Walt says:

        let’s start with never trading away #1’s for retreads, which is our history in spades!!!!!!!

        • roadrider says:

          Well, there are #1s and #1s. If you’re trading away lottery picks for overpriced vets then, yeah, bad idea.

          The Rangers probably gave up too much for St. Louis but if they didn’t make that deal they would have been criticized for not “going for it” when they had a real shot at the Cup (they were also going to be either stuck with an albatross contract for Callahan or risk losing him for nothing). And the picks they gave to TB were not going to be lottery picks.

          The thing is, its really only the first 10 picks or so in the first round that are the real premium prospects. And even some of those might be misfires. After that its roulette.

          • Walt says:

            You just gave an excellent example of what not to do, in the MSL trade. Tampa flessed us big time. We gave them 2-#1 picks, for a rental who proved to be over the hill, and never was a shadow of the player he was a few years before. The only reason we got to the finals was his mother passed away, and the team rallied around the man, pure luck there.

            Marty also said that he wanted to come here, and nowhere else, so why the hell did we give up 2 picks. In doing that deal, we didn’t have a #1 for some four drafts in a row, and our cupboard got depleted, and our draftees were second rate. There is an argument to be made for both sides, and I feel strongly on my side!!!!!!!

      • Walt says:

        Also, I’m tired of being in the middle of the pack, which gave us a grand total of “1” cup in 77 years. How is that working for us?????????

        Just think about this, Pittsburgh has more cups than we do, and we are an original six team!!!!!

        • roadrider says:

          So am I. But its hard to sell overpriced season ticket plans and charge mega fees to cable providers to carry your network when you’re tanking for 3-4 years, And finishing low and getting lottery picks is not guaranteed path to a Cup. Just ask the Oilers, Fish Sticks and others. For every McDavid or Crosby there’s a Nugent-Hopkins and a Yakupov.

          • Walt says:

            As I stated above, there are arguments to be made on both sides. I grew up following this team when there were six teams, and we were door mats for years. I just hate to lose, and want another cup before I see St Pete, or is that saten??????????

    • Richter1994 says:

      It starts with the scouts recognizing talent.

      • Walt says:

        how about getting a shot to sit at the table in the first place?

        we seem to do well in later rounds, but can’t seem to get quality if they draft early!!!!!!

        • Richter1994 says:

          They draft in the early rounds based on need as opposed to talent, which is moronic.

          But hopefully Andersson (pick not based on talent at #7, lol) and Chytil (a potential steal at #21) will change our drafting results.

  8. Andy says:

    It’s a shame they can’t play that way every night. it was nice to watch them take it to Philly. Glad to see Nash improve his trade value. Nothing has changed. They finally played a good game. The team still needs a rebuild and should be sellers at the deadline. Hank finally saw less than 30 shots, but he sure did make some big saves early to keep them in it.

  9. Blaine says:

    Can I ask a question? Grabner is not a top 6 forward on this team and is scoring against lesser competition. I understand that he is our top scorer but what makes him so valuable to a to a contending team as a bottom 6 forward? And what is a reasonable return.

  10. lv says:

    I agree too…Trade Nash while we can. Re-sign Grabner. In addition, package up Miller, Desharnais and Smith for a stud 2nd line center or D. Waive Staal after the season and rebuild. Fire the coaches. In fact, trade anyone on the team that does not give 100% every game. There needs to be some changes. Why do we give up so many shots on goal?

    • Richter1994 says:

      I would like to know who McD was alluding to in saying that not everyone is on board.

      • King Sieveqvist ! King Sieveqvist ! says:

        Everyone … Lol … Everyone watched in the Isles game , Pitts game was a little better , Philly game had no goalie

        • Richter1994 says:

          Yeah as good as we like to feel about the Flyer game Elliott couldn’t stop a beach ball that game.