Despite picking up five of a possible six points in three games against the Canadiens, Sabres and Penguins this past week, the Rangers have looked out of sync offensively.

Head coach Gerard Gallant has rightly begun tinkering with the lines to try to find combinations that work.

Starting in the third period of the Sabres game on Saturday and continuing into the matchup in Pittsburgh on Sunday, Gallant tried the following groupings:

Lafreniere-Chytil-Kane
Panarin-Zibanejad-Tarasenko
Kreider-Trocheck-Kakko
Kreider-Trocheck-Kane
Chytil-Lafreniere-Kakko
Vesey-Goodrow-Motte

There clearly are a lot of possible line combinations to tinker with since Vladimir Tarasenko and Patrick Kane joined the team.

If their disjointed play of late continues, I would expect Gallant to continue experimenting.

Whether it be mid-game or in practice, there should be an alignment that sticks.

Gallant often talks about knowing his perfect lines, which we all know includes Chris Kreider-Mika Zibanejad and Artemi Panarin-Vincent Trocheck paired together, so maybe there’s a time where we see Kane and Tarasenko swap spots in the right-wing spots of the top six. That’s something I’d be curious to see. The good thing is, the fourth line looks great.

Though the Panarin-Kane connection has disappointed thus far, I don’t know if I’m willing to quit on it just yet.

They are forcing passing right now, but that’s probably a byproduct of getting reacquainted on the ice.

It’s not just them, however.

The entire team is playing too much east-west hockey.

I’m still thinking they need a few more games to mesh as a new lineup. Let’s not forget, it’s only been three games with a full lineup that includes Kane. Tyler Motte wasn’t in one of those, and Ryan Lindgren hasn’t played in any.

I can understand the inclination to press the panic button, especially because the Rangers haven’t really been on their game since before the All-Star break. Still,  there are plenty of games left to figure things out.

Despite all of that, they’re still winning and sitting pretty comfortably in third place in the Metropolitan Division. That says something about this team. Good luck to everyone else when they do put it together.

But they’re certainly not in an untouchable top-three position, and there isn’t a lot of season left. The Rangers need to start ramping up their game for the playoffs sooner rather than later.

It’s Mollie’s Mailbag time! I haven’t had the chance to do one of these in a while, but it seemed like the perfect time for questions from our Texts from the Blue Seats followers. 

There’s a lot going on with the team right now after the addition of Kane and their recent three-game road trip. Let’s get into it!

How is Ryan Lindgren doing? What’s his prognosis? When do you project he’ll return?
— Stephen Palcic, Michael Borodinsky

When we spoke to Lindgren after practice in Buffalo, he sounded as if he was on the upswing. He pointed out he experienced a similar injury, which appears to be to his left shoulder, earlier in the season, and it’s just taken longer to heal this time around. 

I’m just speculating here, but after suffering a separated shoulder the first time, it stands to reason you might be more prone to having it happen again and more severely. All that said, he could be a possibility for Tuesday against the Capitals.

Artemi Panarin, Patrick Kane and Vladimir Tarasenko are not three-zone hockey players. How do you balance defense?
—  Ken Duane

I’ve had an overarching theory this entire season that from the start the team has had blinders on looking toward the playoffs. 

Kane and Tarasenko know that they were brought in to help this team in the playoffs, so it wouldn’t surprise me if they’re also subconsciously focused on the meaningful games ahead. So we should see an uptick in all three of those players’ games come the postseason. 

Right now, however, they’re not putting as much effort into backchecking/defense as they should. 

That will need to change in the playoffs, and it should, because those three know how much the game changes then.

For now, in terms of balancing the push for offense while also remaining defensively sound, it has to be a team effort. The Rangers’ defensive structure has just been full of holes lately. 

Jimmy Vesey said the team came into Saturday’s game in Buffalo with “good intentions,” which tells me that they’re discussing it as a group and know what needs to be tightened up.

One of my wishes was that the Rangers got a veteran stay-at-home defenseman who has been there, done that. Niko Mikkola wasn’t what I was hoping for. Having said that, is our defense, when healthy, strong enough to be able to win low-scoring, one-goal games? Seemingly we are built to score lots but at a defensive cost. Thoughts?
— Brian Bobd

In a perfect world, the Rangers would’ve had enough salary cap space to bring in a veteran blueliner. In the NHL’s flat-cap world, however, that wasn’t an option after the Tarasenko and Kane deals. 

I’ve actually liked Mikkola’s game. He is a physical player with an aggressive reach and strong play along the boards. Isn’t that what everyone is saying the Rangers need more of?

There’s no question, Brian, that the Rangers are built to outscore opponents, which, as you note, comes at a defensive cost. But that’s how they’ve been structured for a while now. 

Instead of trying to be something they’re not, the Rangers need to figure out how to highlight their strengths while masking their shortcomings as much as possible. 

This team shouldn’t be in low-scoring, one-goal games because they have the firepower to run up the score.

The best news in the past few weeks wasn’t the Kane trade, but Igor Shesterkin’s reemergence from strong goaltending to exceptional. What has changed or what has he changed?
— Randall Bingham

I agree with the first statement. The Rangers will only go as far as Shesterkin takes them, as has been the team’s genetic makeup since the Henrik Lundqvist era. And Shesterkin has looked as if he’s starting to find his groove again. I’d love to ask Shesterkin himself, but I haven’t had much of an opportunity recently. I plan to soon! 

Is it me, or does Patrick Kane seem unhappy? I thought he wanted this trade, and now that it’s happened, he seems less than pleased.
— Anthony LaBella

I mean this in the most respectful way, but it’s just you. 

Kane has been on a media tour since the trade. Every single city has seen an absolute mob of reporters at his locker every single day. He’s been cooperative with it and available every game/practice so far. That will certainly take a toll on anybody, fielding the same questions day after day. 

Maybe that’s what you’re seeing? 

From my point of view and the conversations I’ve had with him, he’s psyched to be in Manhattan and pumped to be playing for the Rangers.

Alex Lafreniere’s hot streak coincided with two things: 1) stable linemates on the Kid Line, and 2) increased [power-play] time starting immediately after the All-Star break. I think the Rangers are lucky this kid has managed to right himself and that he is developing despite poor handling by Gallant, and not because of him. What are your thoughts?
— Jeff Corfsello

I agree with both those points. 

It seems as if every time we talk to Lafreniere about what’s working for him, he almost always mentions Kaapo Kakko and Filip Chytil. And the power play, in particular, has been huge for Lafreniere and his confidence.

I don’t know if I’d jump to say it’s poor handling by Gallant, who is obviously working with what he has. 

When you look at how loaded the Rangers’ top six is, even before Kane and Tarasenko, it’s impractical to expect Gallant to take ice time away from one of the more established players. 

There certainly have been opportunities for Gallant to give Lafreniere a look, which he actually did when Chris Kreider was hurt earlier this season. 

But Gallant is not here to develop players, he’s here to win games. Whether or not that’s been the best thing for Lafreniere is yet to be seen, but I think both of them are trying to make the best of their circumstances.

Should Gallant put the original PP1 back together with Vincent Trocheck in the bumper and Zibanejad in Alex Ovechkin’s office?
— Michael Shalett

First of all, that’s also Zibanejad’s office! 

I’ve actually really liked the new power-play units. I think they’re balanced, giving teams a different look, and more importantly, easing some of the workloads of their most-used players (Zibanejad, Kreider, Adam Fox). 

That original PP1 was getting way too predictable and way too easy for teams to game-plan against. Now Gallant is alternating between the two, and teams 1) don’t know which one is coming out, and 2) have to game-plan for two units that haven’t had a lot of ice time together to be predictable.

Is there any possibility absolutely whatsoever that Chris Drury can figure out a way to keep both Kane and Tarasenko?
—  Jake Wooten

There is zero possibility the Rangers can keep both players.

I’m not too sure there’s a chance even one can be retained. 

Unless one of them is willing to take a significant pay cut, I don’t see the Rangers having the cap space to make that happen. 

They have Lafreniere, Chytil and K’Andre Miller to pay this summer, too. 

Unless Drury prioritizes Kane or Tarasenko over one or two of those three, which I doubt will happen, there really is no room for them.