Rangers Dominate the Flyers 5-2: Why the Win Was Exactly What They Needed
The Rangers had an extremely strong first half and are looking to continue their success to make a powerful playoff run.
Recently, however, the Rangers have been struggling to find their offense, specifically on the power play. After today's game, those problems seem to have worked themselves out, if only for a short while.
The Broadway Blueshirts scored not one, not two, but THREE power play goals in today's game. To go from being 2-for-37 on power play conversion to being 3-for-7 is nothing short of amazing.
Today's game was a major confidence boost for the New York Rangers, to say the least. Besides showing life on the power play, the Rangers extended their win streak over the Flyers to five games this season and seven in total.
Captain Ryan Callahan led the power play escapade, scoring two of the three.
Tomorrow, the Rangers face a formidable opponent in the Washington Capitals, so the momentum from today's game will certainly be beneficial.
Looking further ahead than that, the Rangers face conference or divisional opponents in six of their next eight games. These opponents include the dominant Boston Bruins, the hot Pittsburgh Penguins as well as the Buffalo Sabres and New Jersey Devils, who both have exceptional goaltending.
In these match ups, the Rangers will have the opportunity to earn crucial points in the standings, securing their current first-place spot.
To finally find success on the power play, the Rangers' Achilles heel for the past few years, and to score five goals in total is the energy the Rangers need.
The breakout success of the power play may be a sign of wonderful things to come. It also might be a fluke, a tease, a "lucky day."
Whatever the case may be, the Rangers are firing on all cylinders at this point. Led by Captain Ryan Callahan and the numerous other talents on the team, the next few weeks of Rangers' hockey will certainly be interesting to watch.
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?