The 1970s

[JanErixon20]

I wasn't alive in the 70s, but that 2014 team has a lot of parallels to the 79 team. Mid ranked team that got hot at the right time and was even looking good in the final only to lose. The LA series hurt in more ways than one. I think we could have won it but our D was just out muscled in every game and LA just kept pouring it on. They also had won prior to that just like Montreal.

I thought 2015 the team would step back but boy was I wrong, as mad as I am about that Tampa series it wasn't game 7 where we blew it it was game 3 we had the 2-0 lead and let Tampa get back into it, lots of people blame Hank but our D went to sleep in that game and I still have in my mind that routine shot on hank that Nash picked up, only to have Stamkos swoop in and score to get Tampa back in the game. We win game 3 that series is over in 6, where we meet Chicago who I also don't think we beat and we get a Buffalo Bills moniker attached to us. Had Anaheim beat Chicago, I think we beat them in 4 straight. It sucks because we could have had a dynasty here especially if 2012 went our way( thanks torts).

1 other parallel I see here are 2 years that no one has mentioned, from the highlights I saw that 71 team was the strongest. If they beat the Hawks they win the cup,74 also jumps out in my mind too if they beat the Flyers I really think they get revenge on the Bruins and win another cup in the 70s. It parallels to 12-13 for me, I feel that if there was no lockout in 12-13 and AV is coach that team could have won it all, provided 2 other things change, which was they kept Anisimov (Include Boyle in the Nash trade) and had Zucc for the full year.

Finally whats happening now is almost like a reverse of the 70s it feels like the teams we had recently were like the late 70s teams and the teams were gonna see will be more like the early 70s teams (homegrown talent). I just hope we can get a cup for Hank sooner rather than later. Chicago proved that it doesn't take very long for teams to develop now a days.

When the Kings beat the Hawks that one year, I had a bad feeling. I think the Rangers would have beaten Chicago either years, to be honest. Blackhawks were basically playing 4 dmen the whole game. I don't think they could have handled the Rangers speed and forecheck.

 

[CharlestownChiefsESC]

When the Kings beat the Hawks that one year, I had a bad feeling. I think the Rangers would have beaten Chicago either years, to be honest. Blackhawks were basically playing 4 dmen the whole game. I don't think they could have handled the Rangers speed and forecheck.

In 14 I was just happy to be there, my biggest fear in 15 was the series going 7 and Chicago scoring late in a tight game to win the cup on garden ice. That Chicago team in 15 knew how to get the job done no matter what.

 

[Ratelleitlikeitis]

Our early 70s team benefitted from a strong net tandem. All know Eddie, but Gilles Villemure was one heck of a goalie who could be called on and had the confidence of his teammates when he was between the pipes. I feel he was certainly an unsung hero in our success. His mask kinda gave me the creeps though! It amazes me when I see the old goalie shots that they performed with so little equipment compared to today's gear. Fearless. How the game has evolved.

 

[alkurtz]

I know this has been brought up before and I have heard all manner of explanations, but, should not Jean Ratelle's #19 be retired and hung from the rafters? Easily one of the top ten forwards in Ranger history.

 

[DoobeeDoobeeDoo]

I know this has been brought up before and I have heard all manner of explanations, but, should not Jean Ratelle's #19 be retired and hung from the rafters? Easily one of the top ten forwards in Ranger history.

I certainly think so. He's statistically the 2nd greatest forward to play for the Rangers, after Rod Gilbert. If Andy Bathgate's number is retired, I don't see why Ratelle's number isn't when Ratelle put up better numbers than Bathgate in terms of goals, assists, and points.

 

[DoobeeDoobeeDoo]

I wasn't alive back then either, but I have done some research on the topic. Was the beginning of the Broadway vs Broad Street rivalry between the Rangers & Flyers.

First half of the 1970s was led by the likes of Rod Gilbert, Jean Ratelle, Walt Tkaczuk, Vic Hadfield, Brad Park, & Ed Giacomin.

2nd half was led by the likes of Phil Esposito, Ulf Nilsson, Ron Duguay, Carol Vadnais, & John Davidson.

It was a great bounce back decade for the Rangers, who were somewhat irrelevant during the 1960s (and much of the Original 6 Era).

Kind of interesting to talk about 1970s era other than the Canadiens, Bruins, & Flyers sometimes. Although those were no doubt the best teams of the 1970s, teams like the Rangers, Maple Leafs, and Black Hawks were also doing some good things back then.

 

[HFBS]

I certainly think so. He's statistically the 2nd greatest forward to play for the Rangers, after Rod Gilbert. If Andy Bathgate's number is retired, I don't see why Ratelle's number isn't when Ratelle put up better numbers than Bathgate in terms of goals, assists, and points.

Ratelle never played well in the playoffs. I don't think he ever scored more than one or two playoff goals in a season. The Rangers early 1970's teams were the best modern Ranger teams, maybe better all around than 1994. But there were fewer teams and the competition was better too. Plus, as has been said a million times, those teams weren't winners. They didn't have heart.

 

[cwede]

... Plus, as has been said a million times, those teams weren't winners. They didn't have heart.

I must disagree, i think this is rewriting history with one of today's urban legends, that its always the teams fault if they dont win.
As you wrote, competion at the top was really fierce then.
The Bruins were the most powerful team in the league (and only won twice during their ~6-7 year dominant run, Tony 0 was the most dominant goalie of his time ( no Cups) and the Canadiens were still way deeper in talent due to various league advantages that were finally phasing out.

I guess if you believe loss to Kings in '14 was less 'heart', then you can label the great Emile teams that way too

 

[Captain Lindy]

Ratelle never played well in the playoffs. I don't think he ever scored more than one or two playoff goals in a season. The Rangers early 1970's teams were the best modern Ranger teams, maybe better all around than 1994. But there were fewer teams and the competition was better too. Plus, as has been said a million times, those teams weren't winners. They didn't have heart.

My dad said Stemkowski picked up the slack for Ratelle. That was before my time, I wasn't interested in hockey back then but I remember hearing the games on the radio.

 

[HFBS]

I must disagree, i think this is rewriting history with one of today's urban legends, that its always the teams fault if they dont win.
As you wrote, competion at the top was really fierce then.
The Bruins were the most powerful team in the league (and only won twice during their ~6-7 year dominant run, Tony 0 was the most dominant goalie of his time ( no Cups) and the Canadiens were still way deeper in talent due to various league advantages that were finally phasing out.

I guess if you believe loss to Kings in '14 was less 'heart', then you can label the great Emile teams that way too

The best team they had was in 1972-73 when Vickers was a rookie. They lost to a Blackhawk team in 5 games they should have beaten. I was already a diehard Ranger fan by then and I'm not going by others.

 

[cwede]

Just dont agree that means those NYR teams were "losers" with "no heart".
Hawks were a strong veteran team, in the Semis 4 years running, twice to the Finals. In '73 they met NYR 3d year in a row, splitiing previous 2 series. They split games 1,2 then Hawks and Tony 0 held them to 1 goal 3 straight games to move on.
NYR didnt make it happen any of those great years.
Obviously, thats the facts.
They didnt win when thay had the chance with a deep and succesful roster. That happens in sports all the time.
Its a hard league to win in.
i wont slam their character because they didnt win the Cup

 

[DoobeeDoobeeDoo]

Ratelle never played well in the playoffs. I don't think he ever scored more than one or two playoff goals in a season. The Rangers early 1970's teams were the best modern Ranger teams, maybe better all around than 1994. But there were fewer teams and the competition was better too. Plus, as has been said a million times, those teams weren't winners. They didn't have heart.

But was Andy Bathgate a winner? How come he gets his # retired & Ratalle doesn't? I understand that the star players of the 1994 team get preferential treatment (and rightfully so), but let's not discount the great players of the 1970s just because they didn't win the Cup. As of now, the Rangers have retired the numbers of 4 players that haven't won the Cup: Ed Giacomin, Harry Howell, Rod Gilbert, & Andy Bathgate. If those guys get their numbers retired, then it makes sense to retire Jean Ratalle's number as well.

 

[Crease]

Bathgate was the second best forward in the league behind Howe for many years. It wasn't that he wasn't a winner. The team around him was awful.

Re Ratelle (and for that matter Park), isn't there a bitterness stemming from the trade that makes a number retirement not possible at this point?

 

[DoobeeDoobeeDoo]

Bathgate was the second best forward in the league behind Howe for many years. It wasn't that he wasn't a winner. The team around him was awful.

Re Ratelle (and for that matter Park), isn't there a bitterness stemming from the trade that makes a number retirement not possible at this point?

I wasn't aware that there was bad blood between the Rangers & Ratalle. If true, that actually would explain why his number hasn't been retired. Doesn't make it right, but that is a reasonable explanation.

 

[NickyFotiu]

For years the Rangers did not really retire numbers. It was basically Eddie Giacomin and Rod Gilbert hanging in the rafters alone. I think under Dolan the retired jerseys have been from the 1994 team. Bathgate was not going to have his number retired. Graves was getting the number 9 retired then many fans and the media protested asking what about Bathgate who wore #9 and was a great player. Then they brought in Harry Howell along with Andy Bathgate. I kind of like only having a half dozen retired jerseys or so. It makes it special.

 

[DoobeeDoobeeDoo]

Really like this thread. As a Pens fan, I consider the 1970s to be the dark ages of Penguin history. They had some great players during that time, but we rarely talk about them, with the exception of Rick Kehoe & Jean Pronovost. Also don't talk about how the 1974-75 Pens set the Pens record for most wins in a season until the 1988-89 Pens broke the record, we just talk about how they blew a 3-0 series lead to the Islanders in the playoffs.

I might actually know more about the Rangers of the 1970s than I do about the Pens of the 1970s.

Great thread by you guys, really inspires me to put up a thread about the Pens prior to Mario.

 

[alkurtz]

It's been 40 years since THE TRADE! Somebody needs to take the lead (I can't image that Rod Gilbert, Ratelle's childhood friend and line mate hasn't advocated for this) and say enough it enough! 40 YEARS!!!!!! Even Yogi made up with Steinbrenner.

As for Ratelle disappointing in the playoffs.....well, it was a given that the entire Ranger team always disappointed in the playoffs during the Francis era. Giacomin, our HOF goalie had some good games and good series across the decade of the Francis era, but never got hot enough to carry us through. But his number was retired (and he deserved it). If Lundqvist never wins a Cup, there is no doubt whatsoever that his number will, and should, be retired.

Can't blame Ratelle in the 72 finals: he limped back from a broken ankle and was not effective.

There were other elite teams in the NHL during the time when the Rangers were at their peak: the Orr-Esposito Bruins, the always dangerous Canadians, the Hull-Mikita Blackhawks, and as the Rangers were beginning to decline, the hated Flyers.

Jean Ratelle was an important as anyone: just look at his stats season-by-season and over the course of his Ranger career. An all time great Ranger anyway you cut it. Yes, he had some more great years after the trade (did I mention that that was 40 years ago?) with the Bruins, but so what? Brad Park wasn't here as long as Ratelle was. Nobody is more deserving of the honor, even if you say that number retirements should be a rare honor. By any standard, Ratelle deserves it.

 

[Crease]

I agree that the organization should reach out to Ratelle if they haven't already.

Same with Park. Among other things, Park was upset--and rightfully so--that the trade uprooted his son, who had cerebral palsy. Back then it was tough finding schools that were designed to engage and educate kids with special needs. He had just found a facility here in New York he was happy with, then the trade happened.

The cherry on top of the turd sundae was that whenever he came back to Madison Square Garden the fans boo'd him every time he touched the puck. Even Espo got a standing ovation by Bruins fans the first time he went back to Boston.