So many times during that awesome Western Conference Final, I read fans, bloggers and media members write, tweet and posit that that was the true Stanley Cup Final, that both teh Kings and Blackhawks would be heavy favorites and likely win in five, maybe six. That the only way the Rangers can win is if Lundqvist stands on their head and they score on quintuple-deflections enough times to win. I've really had enough of that. Now, the Kings are a better team, they have depth, they've won a Cup recently, but I think way too many people are assuming the Rangers have no chance. Here are my five reasons why I'm picking the Rangers to win the Cup.
1.) They have the better goalie
Jonathan Quick is a very good player. He had an absurd playoff run in 2012, with a .946 save percentage, unheard of for an entire postseason. That's all good, but he is not that guy right now. Quick has been terribly streaky in these playoffs. He started dreadfully, then had a dominant 6-game stretch to end the Sharks series and begin against Anaheim, but ever since the Kings took that 2-0 lead against the Ducks, he has been decidedly average. Quick's played 12 games since and given up at least two goals in 11 of them. The Blackhawks are a very good offense, but Quick had a .885 save percentage against them, which is bad against any team in today's NHL. For the postseason, he has a 2.86 GAA and a .906 save percentage, both below average numbers. Quick was also very good in last year's playoffs, but it is becoming increasingly likely that the 2012 playoffs was an aberration.
On the other side is Lundqvist, who has a 2.03 GAA and a .928 save percentage. His career postseason numbers are basically the same as Quick's. He's been more consistent through his career. He hasn't won a Cup, but he's been dominant in every Game 7 he's played. I'll talk more to this later, but the Rangers are as tested in long series and Lundqvist has done well with the Rangers facing elimination. If he has one black mark in his postseason career, it is faring poorly when facing a non-Game 7 clinching situation, but the Rangers would be lucky to be in that situation. Henrik Lundqvist is an excellent goalie, and can absolutely steal a series.
2.) Tiredness from LA
I'll give the Kings a ton of credit in winning three Game 7's this postseason, all on the road, and coming back three different times against Chicago to win yesterday. That is an incredibly feat, and just getting here is amazing for the Kings. That all said, they looked and seemed tired at the end of the Blackhawks series. They were able to win because they got some odd bounces on three of their goals yesterday (especially the first and OT winners), but they were dominated late in that series in overall shooting numbers. The NHL media is pushing two different 'advanced' stats right now, Corsi and Fenwick Ratings. Now, these aren't really all that advanced, but simply instead of using 'Shots on Goal' they count overall shots, including Shots that miss and shots that are blocked. The Kings are dominant in this, but they lost the ratings in Game 5-7 against Chicago, and lost badly in Game 7. Now, the Blackhawks are a very good team in these ratings, but so are the Rangers, ranking 6th in the NHL this season. For the playoffs, both teams are pretty much the same, with the Rangers trending up. They can claim territorial play better than people believe in this series. The Kings may get the bounces, but they'll also have to work against a better goalie in Lundqvist than any goalie they've faced so far (Niemi, Anderson/Gibson, Crawford). LA playing Game 7 after Game 7 can hurt them, especially given how physical the last series was.
3.) It's Never as Easy as it Seems
The NHL Stanley Cup Finals are known for lopsided seeding matchups, as we've many times had a lower seeded team square off against a higher seeded one from the opposite conference. This isn't even one of those cases, but the way people are viewing these teams let's just say it is. In my mind, this whole matchup is analogous to the Cup Finals in '03, '04 and '06. Three straight times, a high-seed from the East beat another high-seed from the East in a physical, often excellent Eastern Conference Final, took on a lower seeded miracle run team from the West, and though the East team won each time, it took 7 each time. In '03, the 2-seed Devils beat the 1-seed Senators in an excellent Eastern Conference Finals (that oddly featured the same game progression as this one did, with teh Devils blowing a 3-1 lead before winning Game 7 on the road), then needed 7 to dispatch the Ducks. The Lightning did the same in '04, and Carolina in '06. Physicality takes a toll, but also teams in the NHL, a low-scoring sport, are never all that far apart. No team in the NHL wins 70% of its games. Big win-loss disparities are rarer in Hockey. Just look at recent Finals, only one since the Lockout has ended before six games (2007).
4.) The Rangers are Faster
Speed doesn't tire as easily as Size. Case in point was last year's Cup Final, when the speedier Blackhawks kept their speed the entire series while the bigger, stronger Bruins seemed to tire, most notably in Zdeno Chara. The Rangers have ridiculous team speed. They might have the three fastest skaters in this series. They can roll lines and skate at the Kings in all of them. The Kings size will neutralize some of this, and the Kings should win most battles in the corners, but the Rangers can skate past the Kings often enough to win the series. The Rangers can roll lines at the depth of the Kings, something no team has been able to do so far against them. Admittedly, this isn't a strong point because size does matter as well, but it is nice for the Rangers to have one clear area with an edge as the way people are speaking it doesn't seem like the Rangers should have nay.
5.) The Kings really aren't That Much Better
In the regular season, the Kings got 100 points while the Rangers got 96. You can claim the Rangers were in teh easier conference, but oddly the Rangers did very well against the Western Conference this season. There's also an interesting quirk behind those 96 points in that the Rangers started the season with 9-straight road games, in which they went 3-6. They went 42-25-6 in the other games, which is a better representation of what they are. They've also done far better in the playoffs. The Kings have been clutch in getting to the finals, but winning three Game 7's obscures the fact that they had to play three Game 7's. Now, the Rangers have played just one fewer game so far, needing 7 games in each of the first two rounds, but that also brings up another point,. For the first time, the Kings sterling record in Game 7's have met their match. Henrik Lundqvist's stats in Game 7's are better than Quick's. They've only lost 1 game 7 since Lundqvist arrived, and won a bunch in that time, including 5 in the last three seasons. They have enough ability and enough experience to match the Kings, apart from the Kings once-in-a-lifetime roll in 2012.
The Kings are probably better, but nowhere near the amount they are made out to be. I think the Rangers have a very real chance to win this series, and I think they will.
Rangers in 6
1.) They have the better goalie
Jonathan Quick is a very good player. He had an absurd playoff run in 2012, with a .946 save percentage, unheard of for an entire postseason. That's all good, but he is not that guy right now. Quick has been terribly streaky in these playoffs. He started dreadfully, then had a dominant 6-game stretch to end the Sharks series and begin against Anaheim, but ever since the Kings took that 2-0 lead against the Ducks, he has been decidedly average. Quick's played 12 games since and given up at least two goals in 11 of them. The Blackhawks are a very good offense, but Quick had a .885 save percentage against them, which is bad against any team in today's NHL. For the postseason, he has a 2.86 GAA and a .906 save percentage, both below average numbers. Quick was also very good in last year's playoffs, but it is becoming increasingly likely that the 2012 playoffs was an aberration.
On the other side is Lundqvist, who has a 2.03 GAA and a .928 save percentage. His career postseason numbers are basically the same as Quick's. He's been more consistent through his career. He hasn't won a Cup, but he's been dominant in every Game 7 he's played. I'll talk more to this later, but the Rangers are as tested in long series and Lundqvist has done well with the Rangers facing elimination. If he has one black mark in his postseason career, it is faring poorly when facing a non-Game 7 clinching situation, but the Rangers would be lucky to be in that situation. Henrik Lundqvist is an excellent goalie, and can absolutely steal a series.
2.) Tiredness from LA
I'll give the Kings a ton of credit in winning three Game 7's this postseason, all on the road, and coming back three different times against Chicago to win yesterday. That is an incredibly feat, and just getting here is amazing for the Kings. That all said, they looked and seemed tired at the end of the Blackhawks series. They were able to win because they got some odd bounces on three of their goals yesterday (especially the first and OT winners), but they were dominated late in that series in overall shooting numbers. The NHL media is pushing two different 'advanced' stats right now, Corsi and Fenwick Ratings. Now, these aren't really all that advanced, but simply instead of using 'Shots on Goal' they count overall shots, including Shots that miss and shots that are blocked. The Kings are dominant in this, but they lost the ratings in Game 5-7 against Chicago, and lost badly in Game 7. Now, the Blackhawks are a very good team in these ratings, but so are the Rangers, ranking 6th in the NHL this season. For the playoffs, both teams are pretty much the same, with the Rangers trending up. They can claim territorial play better than people believe in this series. The Kings may get the bounces, but they'll also have to work against a better goalie in Lundqvist than any goalie they've faced so far (Niemi, Anderson/Gibson, Crawford). LA playing Game 7 after Game 7 can hurt them, especially given how physical the last series was.
3.) It's Never as Easy as it Seems
The NHL Stanley Cup Finals are known for lopsided seeding matchups, as we've many times had a lower seeded team square off against a higher seeded one from the opposite conference. This isn't even one of those cases, but the way people are viewing these teams let's just say it is. In my mind, this whole matchup is analogous to the Cup Finals in '03, '04 and '06. Three straight times, a high-seed from the East beat another high-seed from the East in a physical, often excellent Eastern Conference Final, took on a lower seeded miracle run team from the West, and though the East team won each time, it took 7 each time. In '03, the 2-seed Devils beat the 1-seed Senators in an excellent Eastern Conference Finals (that oddly featured the same game progression as this one did, with teh Devils blowing a 3-1 lead before winning Game 7 on the road), then needed 7 to dispatch the Ducks. The Lightning did the same in '04, and Carolina in '06. Physicality takes a toll, but also teams in the NHL, a low-scoring sport, are never all that far apart. No team in the NHL wins 70% of its games. Big win-loss disparities are rarer in Hockey. Just look at recent Finals, only one since the Lockout has ended before six games (2007).
4.) The Rangers are Faster
Speed doesn't tire as easily as Size. Case in point was last year's Cup Final, when the speedier Blackhawks kept their speed the entire series while the bigger, stronger Bruins seemed to tire, most notably in Zdeno Chara. The Rangers have ridiculous team speed. They might have the three fastest skaters in this series. They can roll lines and skate at the Kings in all of them. The Kings size will neutralize some of this, and the Kings should win most battles in the corners, but the Rangers can skate past the Kings often enough to win the series. The Rangers can roll lines at the depth of the Kings, something no team has been able to do so far against them. Admittedly, this isn't a strong point because size does matter as well, but it is nice for the Rangers to have one clear area with an edge as the way people are speaking it doesn't seem like the Rangers should have nay.
5.) The Kings really aren't That Much Better
In the regular season, the Kings got 100 points while the Rangers got 96. You can claim the Rangers were in teh easier conference, but oddly the Rangers did very well against the Western Conference this season. There's also an interesting quirk behind those 96 points in that the Rangers started the season with 9-straight road games, in which they went 3-6. They went 42-25-6 in the other games, which is a better representation of what they are. They've also done far better in the playoffs. The Kings have been clutch in getting to the finals, but winning three Game 7's obscures the fact that they had to play three Game 7's. Now, the Rangers have played just one fewer game so far, needing 7 games in each of the first two rounds, but that also brings up another point,. For the first time, the Kings sterling record in Game 7's have met their match. Henrik Lundqvist's stats in Game 7's are better than Quick's. They've only lost 1 game 7 since Lundqvist arrived, and won a bunch in that time, including 5 in the last three seasons. They have enough ability and enough experience to match the Kings, apart from the Kings once-in-a-lifetime roll in 2012.
The Kings are probably better, but nowhere near the amount they are made out to be. I think the Rangers have a very real chance to win this series, and I think they will.
Rangers in 6
