Did I really see the powerplay actually work at last night’s game or was my attention misdirected? Magicians use misdirection to focus the audience’s attention away from the mechanics of the trick. I did not see Perry Pearn wearing a pointed hat and waving a wand.
Last night’s game was by no means a litmus test for Perry Pearn’s powerplay. The Rangers were able to score on three of their six 5 on 4 opportunities. The fourth powerplay goal was on a 5 on 3.  The first three powerplay goals came off the rush. When the Rangers did try to set up in the Bolts zone, they were not successful. Â
What I did see were fewer mental errors last night. I saw everyone engaged, finishing their checks and paying attention to the little things that win games. Petr Prucha may not have lit the lamp but his tenacity on the puck drew two penalties. Gomez has had better games. For the most part, the play was moving in the right direction and heads were facing the right way.  Henrik Lundqvist was his sensational self.
I’m not looking a gift horse in the mouth here. I am glad the Rangers won and tried to amend the misdeeds of their last two games. However, I will not be convinced by last night’s performance that the Rangers powerplay is now either honky or dory.
Posted under New York Rangers
This post was written by m hurley on November 7, 2008
You made mention before the game that they need to shoot faster.
How may of those went in off of one timers?
Callahan – One Timer
Drury’s 2nd and 3rd – One Timers
Stall – One Timer
Pattern?
Whether it’s a psttern or not, the element of surprise (less predictabilty)works much better then the half hearted set up and overpassing that goes no where.