It's hard to say if the Rangers would've beat the Oilers in the Stanley Cup Final, but here's what maybe could've happened.
As Florida hopes to tighten its stranglehold on the Oilers in Game 3 of the Stanley Cup Final tomorrow night in Edmonton, it's fair to ask how the Rangers would have fared against McDavid and Company for The Cup.
Al Greenberg, my guy in South Florida, has studied the Blueshirts all season and is now covering the Stanley Cup Final.
The Maven's thinking is that the Rangers would have taken Edmonton in no more than six games because the Oilers are a soft team, as opposed to the bruising Cats.
The Big Three – led by a non-stale Breadman – would match McDavid-Draisaitl and Shesterkin would take care of the rest.
Greenberg disagrees; as follows:
"The Rangers would do no better against the Oilers than they did against Florida," says Big Al. "McDavid, Draisaitl and Zach Hyman would have skated all over Jacob Trouba, K'Andre Miller and the rest of the New York defense.
"The only advantage the Blueshirts would have would be goaltending. And don't forget that Edmonton has a defenseman like Adam Fox and that's Evan Bouchard,"
Well, a guy can dream, can't I?
I still believe that this Rangers team – despite the loss to Florida – could have taken the Oilers!