NHL

Time for the Rangers to step up and live another day

Mike Keenan, who coached the Rangers to the 1994 Stanley Cup title, will give Post readers his insights and opinions periodically during these finals. The coach also is appearing on MSG Network as an analyst. As told to Steve Serby.

I think the Rangers can avoid a sweep if they play with more of an emotional and intellectual investment than we saw from them in Game 3.

You’ve got to find a way to take your game to another level. If you’re a skill player, you better have some drive and determination, some grit to you. If you’re a gritty player, you better run and get the puck to the net and with authority. Small aspects. Small ingredients. If you’re a faceoff guy, you better win some faceoffs. You better win the one-on-one battles. And defensively, your team has made too many mistakes. You just can’t be having those defensive lapses. Sometimes they’re forced, but sometimes they’re careless and a lack of concentration.

The Rangers’ best forward in Game 3 was Mats Zuccarello, and if that’s the case, the other forwards better step up.

You need strong leadership within the group itself, and somebody has done a good job to get them to this point. It’s now, can they grasp the idea of each of them taking their play to a different level? Martin St. Louis and Brad Richards have won the Cup, and Dan Carcillo is coming back for Game 4, so that might be a thrust of energy into the team.

But your best players have to step up and be your best players. Rick Nash has to be the best forward. Ryan McDonagh’s made some blunders, he’s got to be the best defenseman. … Dan Girardi, there’s no room for error.

In 1985, we (Flyers) played the Oilers, maybe the best hockey club in the history of the sport, and we won the President’s Trophy even though we weren’t expected to do well that year. There was a sense of satisfaction, to a certain extent, once we arrived there that we had done something more than anyone expected. We were given a few lessons by a championship team that also had to learn their lessons from the Islanders, and what it took to elevate your play to the next level.

Like the Rangers, we had some bad calls go against us, particularly in Game 1 when we had the lead and they came back to beat us. That rookie team in Philadelphia that went the distance with the Oilers in 1987 learned their lessons well.

Another reminder for me of a team that wasn’t quite ready to win was with Chicago, when we lost to Edmonton in the 1990 Campbell Conference final. Dirk Graham, who was our captain in Chicago at the time although Chris Chelios had arrived, he came in to me after the Cup finals against Pittsburgh in 1992 — and this is something I hope the Rangers can learn sooner rather than later, and I hope they can learn it in this series. It’s a difficult task to try to grasp at this point, but Dirk said: “Mike, I didn’t understand what was going on, we were too deep into the series when I understood what it would take.”

We responded pretty well, we got beat in the final game 1-0 in Chicago.

This has been a rude awakening for the Rangers. The Kings understand the Stanley Cup finals ingredients. They won the Cup two years ago … they lost the Cup … now they’re back for an opportunity to win it again. They were a team that had the passion ignited somewhere along the line in their first series when they overcame the 3-0 deficit against the Sharks.

The Rangers can’t be talking about bad bounces or missed opportunities. They have to learn to execute under pressure, and be poised under pressure. You can’t give up in playoff hockey. Maybe they were disarmed a little by the late goal in the first period Monday night. Well, the late goal came about because they gave L.A. a chance. The errors you were able to get away with in the first three rounds of the playoffs you won’t get away with in the finals.

Jonathan Quick had the edge over Henrik Lundqvist on Monday night, but overall, it’s been pretty even. Quick reminds me of Eddie Belfour — he battles and fights. Doesn’t necessarily have great technique all the time, but he battles to stop pucks.

I watched the pregame skates Monday and I thought Los Angeles seemed a lot more focused and more intense in terms of executing and getting prepared for the game. This is just an observation, but it looked to me that the Rangers were a little bit more casual — whether they felt more comfortable in the Garden … whether there was a sense of confidence that they were coming home, I’m not sure. And if they felt they were just unlucky in Games 1 and 2, the fact of the matter is they gave the games back. You just can’t do that and expect to win a Stanley Cup.

I know coach Alain Vigneault said Game 3 was a must-win. Well, there’s no question about it now, or they’ll go home without the Cup.

In 1992 in Chicago, we were in an 3-0 hole in the finals against Mario Lemieux and Tom Barrasso and the Penguins and we got beat in Game 4 on a fluke goal. You always have to make sure they have an element of hope.

Only one team in history (1942 Maple Leafs) has come back from 3-0 in the finals. It’s up to the Rangers if they plan on being the second team. If they play at the same level they played at in L.A. and clean up their game defensively, they’ve got a shot.