71-72 Rangers

[kruezer]

I was reading through a list of top ppg seasons today while (like everyone) gawking at McDavid stats and came across Ratelle’s 71-72 season and realized I know very little about this Ranger team. I see this seems to have been Park’s breakout season but a few players seem to have peaked a lot this season for the Rangers. What was going on with the team this year? Anybody have more context? Was this just an all time elite defenseman juicing the stats of his whole team or was their anything else?

 

[The Panther]

I don't know, but I've always been curious about this Rangers' era, too. It seems that from autumn 1967 to spring 1973 they had a very strong club, peaking in 1970-71 and 1972-72. The problem was that the Bruins were so dominant in 1970-71, with Montreal winning the Cup, and then the Bruins beating the Rangers in the 1972 Finals, that this Rangers' squad is easy to kind of overlook when thinking of the great teams of the sixties and seventies.

And, really, it the NYR's only truly impressive stretch from 1942 to 1991.

 

[CharlestownChiefsESC]

I don't know, but I've always been curious about this Rangers' era, too. It seems that from autumn 1967 to spring 1973 they had a very strong club, peaking in 1970-71 and 1972-72. The problem was that the Bruins were so dominant in 1970-71, with Montreal winning the Cup, and then the Bruins beating the Rangers in the 1972 Finals, that this Rangers' squad is easy to kind of overlook when thinking of the great teams of the sixties and seventies.

And, really, it the NYR's only truly impressive stretch from 1942 to 1991.

That team believe or not was cooked goose, with an angry Bruins team in the finals who had blown it the year before, and on top of that Ratelle had broken his ankle that year basically rendeng him ineffective. He did play in the finals vs Boston but didnt have a good series as he was still hurt.

The 70-71 and 71-72 teams finished with identical point totals but the 71 team had 1 more win. If there was a team from that era that should have gotten it done it was them. That was the team who beat Chicago in triple ot on the Stemkowski goal in Game 6, but then lost in Game 7. In Game 7 they had a 2-1 lead halfway through but blew it. I'm still convinced if they didn't lose that game they would have won the cup. Say what what you will about the Habs, those Emile Francis gag line Ranger teams had the early 70s Habs number in the playoffs. Im convinced if they get there in 71 they win and the curse dies at 31 years. I've always said had they won a cup with that group they maybe never trade Ratelle and Park who were huge parts of the lunch pail ac Bruins and maybe its the Rangers challenging the Habs in the late 70s instead of those Bruins.

Unfortunately those teams faced quite a few issues. 1 of which they seemed to beat the teams they needed to beat in the following year. For example as I mentioned above in 71 they lost to Chicago but then beat them the following year, in 72 they lost to Boston but then beat them the following year. Outside of 72 Chicago always seemed to be their kryptonite, but what was unfair about it is the rule they had in the playoffs at the time where you did a crossover with the other division in the semi finals. in 71 and 73 despite Chicago winning the west and the Rangers finishing in 2nd then 3rd in the east the still finished with more pts than the Hawks but had to open on the road.

I also think the 74 team maybe could have won it they beat Philly but im still iffy on that too. If they had a cup previously maybe, but those same Bruins had lost the previous year to the Rangers so idk if revenge was on their minds too.

 

[Tawnos]

Ratelle being hurt is the main reason they didn't win the Cup that year. Not saying they 100% would have beat Boston, but with a healthy Ratelle in those games there's a much better chance. My dad was at the game where he got hit with the shot that broke his ankle and claims he can still hear the sound.

 

[Mandar]

Ratelle being hurt is the main reason they didn't win the Cup that year. Not saying they 100% would have beat Boston, but with a healthy Ratelle in those games there's a much better chance. My dad was at the game where he got hit with the shot that broke his ankle and claims he can still hear the sound.

Dale Rolfe took the shot that ended Ratelle's season, and our shot to win it all. I hated Rolfe from then on....even when Schultz was pounding on him.

The biggest difference between the Bruins & Rangers was the goaltending...Cheevers was great for the Bruins in the clutch, while Giacomin was never a good playoff goalie for the Rangers.

 

[Crosby2010]

That 1972 Rangers team had it all. A dominant line, a Hall of Fame defenseman, a Hall of Fame goalie and a pretty good back up, a Hall of Fame coach, and also some good secondary scoring like Walt Tkaczuk and Bobby Rousseau. A healthy Ratelle and who knows if they beat Boston. But they still took the Bruins to 6 games regardless.

 

[Staniowski]

I've seen the Rangers of that era play very few times, but they were a top team.

Park and Tkaczuk were at their bests....and Park was a top player in the world. And their top line was very strong.

 

[pbgoalie]

Neilson got injured too. Can’t remember if it was ankle
Or knee. Buts he defense was missed