No more excuses: Flyers fall below .500 with loss in Montreal
by Travis Hughes on Dec 7, 2009 11:44 PM EST
in 09-10 Game Recaps
57 comments
[TSN Recap] - [Boxscore] - [Montreal Reaction]
13-13-1. This Philadelphia Flyers team, once with so many expectations, now sits below the .500 mark, a sad shell of their potential. Out of a playoff spot in the East, behind both New York teams in the division, and unspeakably behind the class of the Eastern Conference, a group they should be a part of.
Two wins in their last ten. 0 for their last 19 on the power play. Two goals or less in their last six games. These are the numbers of a hockey team in free fall. They've fired their coach and still can't seem to get out of this slump. But are there any signs of hope? Any at all?
It's tough to say. If Peter Laviolette can turn this team around, it's not going to happen over night. The Flyers did show more effort tonight, especially considering the work put in on Saturday against Washington. But the same old problems came back -- inconsistency.
In stretches, the Flyers established their fore-check and showed the teachings of their new coach while doing it. They were very aggressive on the puck, and defensemen routinely jumped up into the offensive zone. But they didn't keep the pressure on for the entire game. In the second period, for example, they completely fell on the heels for the latter 10 minutes. You're not going to get anywhere with a less-than-complete effort.
Montreal's second goal was an example of how Laviolette's style could go wrong. The puck was jammed along the side boards in the offensive zone, about five feet from the blueline. Several players fought for it along the wall, including Kimmo Timonen, who jumped into the play. When it bounced free to Maxim Lapierre, Kimmo was caught, leaving Braydon Coburn back to fend for himself on a two-on-one. Coburn played it miserably, allowing a pass to a wide-open Michael Cammalleri, who easily put it by Brian Boucher.
That play is a bit of an anomaly, though, considering there was a puck battle along the wall so close to the blueline. The defenseman is always going to jump up there, regardless of the system the coach has the team running. The key here, is that when defensemen pinch and nobody is there to cover, you can't afford to play the ensuing odd-man rush as haplessly as Coburn did.
You've gotta credit Montreal a bit in this one, too. They took advantage of their chances (3 goals on 13 shots), got solid goaltending, and most of all, they didn't allow the Flyers to get comfortable in the offensive zone. The Habs blocked 27 Philadelphia shots. Twenty-seven! Roman Hamrlik blocked 10 by himself. It's tough to win when more than half your shots don't get through to the net.
Regardless of the reasons, though, this is getting old. We're sick of the excuses. We're sick of trying to justify it. Pretty soon, if not already, we're going to start questioning if this team can really do anything this season.
After the jump, questions, lowlights, and the comment of the night.
Questions With Answers
- Elements of the slump bust: power play. Can they turn it around? 0-for-4, including a goose egg on a key PP in the third period while still only down a goal. Montreal took a dumb too many men penalty and the Flyers couldn't score on the ensuing PP. On the flip side, Montreal gets a PP minutes later and capitalizes. Turning point in the game.
- Element two: goaltending. How does Boucher perform? The stats look bad, but he was pretty solid tonight. The first two goals weren't really his fault, and the third was just a blistering shot nobody would've stopped.
- Element three: lifeless hockey. The Flyers have looked lazy for weeks. Does that stop? In stretches, yes. Need that full effort, though... *sigh*
- Element four: the system. Is it obvious that Laviolette has already put in some tweaks to the offense, and if said tweaks are obvious, do they seem to work? As mentioned above, some of the tweaks were clear. Defensemen pinching, forwards rotating back toward the blueline to cover, aggressive toward the puck carrier in the offensive, defensive, and neutral zones.
Comment Of The Night
Carter couldn’t make the Egyptian team right now.
Lowlights
0 recs |
57 comments
| Add comment
|
Email
Print
Comments
Here's an excuse:
We don’t have any scorers in the lineup.
Carter, Carcillo, Coburn, and Cote to Atlanta.
Kovalchuk, Salmela and a draft pick to Philadelphia.
Done.
Do you see what happens when you find a stranger in the Alps?
Nah.
Get a serviceable d-man in the deal so you’re not rushing Bourdon or Marshall.
Picture if you will:
Kovy-Richards-Giroux
Gagne-Briere-Hartnell
JVR-Pyorala-Powe
Lappy-Betts-Asham
Pronger-Carle
Timonen-Parent
Bartulis-Salmela
OKT
Backlund (why the hell not?)
Do you see what happens when you find a stranger in the Alps?
They are not playing like a team but a bunch of individuals
That is the problem and it was a mistake to blame the coach and fire him what should have been done was a trade to shake them up. Or send Carter down to the minors for a few and hope he scores a goal and gets his confidence back. Too many of the young players look complacent and not willing to do whatever for a spot on this team.
We miss Powe big time, he by far was the most improved and has great speed, energy and oh yeah he hits people on the ice. A lost art in philly.
I would trade Carter and Coburn for Kovalchuck and cut our losses now. I am a big fan of Carter but he is in a bad funk this year he is not moving his feet but gliding all over and predicably shooing whenever he has the puck. For a big man he should be planted infront of that net deflecting or atleast screening the goalie and i never see it. Carcillo needs to go because we have inforcers and he is too undisciplined to help this team. That was the problem with him in phoenix Discipline. I would not mind giving Gagne away he just gets hurt every year, we need players that can put a full season in so we don’t need to bring up phantoms every year.
by whosyourjockey on Dec 8, 2009 11:00 AM EST up reply actions
That play is a bit of an anomaly, though, considering there was a puck battle along the wall so close to the blueline. The defenseman is always going to jump up there, regardless of the system the coach has the team running
The defenseman is always going to jump up there, regardless of the system the coach has the team running
That is insanity. Anything other than this assinine system, the dman does not jump into a four man scrum at the offensive blue line while the other team’s forwards are in the neutral zone.
I’ve numbered each of the six men involved, and the corresponding man the Flyer is responsible for. Now, Laviolette’s brilliant plan is for Kimmo to ignore his man there and instead try to get the puck.
Guess what happened? The guy marked “3”, the guy Kimmo should’ve been back marking, is the guy who gets the puck, takes it all the way from his zone to the Flyers’ faceoff dot, and creates the goal.
Did Carey Price make a single difficult save? The only goal came on an entirely singular effort by Danny Briere. Otherwise, even with all this pressure, it didn’t turn it anything remotely similar to a quality scoring chance.
They pulled the goaltender for the final 2:00, and had a 6-4 for the final 1:20 and didn’t get a single shot on goal.
Carter literally watched Camalleri charge through the slot and score and the thought never occurred to him to cover the man. Awesome.
The Flyers won 42% of their faceoffs. Carter 35%, Richards 41%.
Has anyone seen James van Riemsdyk? Is he still on this team?
Wait, so now it’s a different system?
In your picture, where are the other two Flyers? Coburn is obviously back covering, but where’s the other forward? I’d think he’s out of position, since the Canadiens have two D-men away from the play, but whoever isn’t in the shot, I’m sure he has absolutely no blame on his shoulders. It’s entirely Laviolette’s fault for installing the same system as Stevens, with minor tweaks that lead to such a completely asinine result.
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
by Geoff Detweiler on Dec 8, 2009 9:02 AM EST up reply actions
Point, Match, Geoff.
He’s right, you can’t claim Stephens and Lav system is the same one day and then the next say one is asinine while the other is better.
It’s not the system that is failing, it’s the team on the ice.
by CoburnsCuddleBuddy on Dec 8, 2009 10:14 AM EST up reply actions
And you can’t say “the system is failing” when the team has had only one full practice day with it.
Certainly there are going to be risks and rewards with Laviolette’s system. But if the team plays to its capability then the rewards will outweigh the risks.
Frustrating as it was to lose yet another game, there were a few instances of strong pressure from the Flyers where I thought “I could get used to this.”
Do you see what happens when you find a stranger in the Alps?
there were a few instances of strong pressure from the Flyers
And they nearly got a shot on net! Great success!
No, you’re right. We had a bad game in part because we’ve been playing porrly and in part because we’ve had one full practice with a new coach. Therefore, Laviolette and his system are complete failures.
Do you see what happens when you find a stranger in the Alps?
Jesus fucking christ you retards.
It’s an attacking system. Just like a passing offense with two wideouts is still a passing offense if you use four wideouts. And, of course, in the latter case, there’s no one to protect the quarterback.
The Flyers still run an “attack” system. Its just more extreme. ITS THE SAME TYPE OF SYSTEM. The Flyers problem is they are not built to be an attack team. Detroit roster, San Jose system.
What if you use 4 wideouts, 1 FB, and 5 lineman? YOU HAVE 5 PEOPLE PROTECTING THE QUARTERBACK.
So now it’s not “The same system”; it’s “the same TYPE of system”? Which is it? Everyone disagrees with you, even your anointed Captain.
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
by Geoff Detweiler on Dec 8, 2009 11:13 AM EST up reply actions
It’s still an attacking system. And the Flyers built a roster that is designed to play a defensive system.
This isn’t complicated. The comparison is made to the Penguins, who fired their coach mid-season last year and switched from a defensive to attacking system. The Flyers, on the other hand, fired their coach and didn’t change systems.
Well, since Ray Emery is still a butterfly goalie, they didn’t change goalies in the offseason
Since Chris Pronger and Andrew Alberts are both big, physical defenseman, they didn’t change defenseman.
Why would I argue with you over whether or not they changed systems. You are the ONLY person who says they didn’t. The ENTIRE team says they did.
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
by Geoff Detweiler on Dec 8, 2009 12:02 PM EST up reply actions
Please watch your mouth.
I can’t imagine you carry yourself like this in everyday life, because it’s not acceptable behavior. So why is it acceptable here?
You’re allowed to state and defend your opinions. Just because no one agrees with you doesn’t make us all “retards.” Come on now.
Do you see what happens when you find a stranger in the Alps?
I’m not bothered by foul language. My avatar reads “asshole” for God’s sake. (Granted, I didn’t design it, but that’s beside the point.)
To use foul language is one thing. To direct it at a person or group of people is another.
I’ve only been reading / contributing to this site for a few months more than you have, so I cannot speak to the history of Broad Street Hockey. But as far as I can see, you brought most of the name-calling and put-downs here with you. That’s why every time someone has a conversation with you on here, it turns into a shouting match. It’s not because of your opinions – we’ve all got them, and we don’t all agree. It’s because you stomp and hiss and cuss and call people “fucking retards” and “jokes” and “dense” when they disagree with you.
We all want to have intelligent discussion about our favorite team. In the course of discussion, there will always be disagreements. But just because one person is right and another wrong doesn’t make the wrong person stupid or his comments irrelevant.
That’s why I asked you to watch your language. It’s not the cuss words themselves – it’s how you use them.
Do you see what happens when you find a stranger in the Alps?
by mikefive on Dec 8, 2009 1:14 PM EST up reply actions 5 recs
Rec'd
Completely Agree, Mike.
We have already talked about this issue numerous times. Please Mario, keep it civil. I know you have strong opinions about everything and that is great. You do a good job of supporting your arguments with evidence and research, so there is no need to name call or insult to get your point across more.
I think everyone (including Travis, Geoff and Ben) wants BSH to be a welcoming place for intelligent Flyers conversation. Lets try and keep it focused on the Flyers and not on tearing each other down. We are all frustrated here but lets keep the personal attacks to a minimum (or not at all, for that matter).
Mario, I would’ve deleted this comment if it wouldn’t delete the entire conversation that follows after it.
Please, watch your language, and stop the personal attacks. It’s a clear violation of the community guidelines and you’ve been warned before.
Broad Street Hockey - SB Nation's Philadelphia Flyers Blog. Makin' it look mean since 1967.
by Travis Hughes on Dec 8, 2009 4:25 PM EST up reply actions
Has anyone seen James van Riemsdyk? Is he still on this team?
If the team were winning we wouldn’t be asking that. He’s still learning the game at this level and we’ve all got to be patient. The problem is that, since no one else is scoring, it becomes glaringly obvious when he does not.
Do you see what happens when you find a stranger in the Alps?
Also, if noone has seen him, that means he’s not contributing offensively, nor harming the team defensively. If Mario hasn’t even seen JVR, he must not be a defensive liability. So… call it even?
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
by Geoff Detweiler on Dec 8, 2009 10:44 AM EST up reply actions
No, he’s a -1 last night skating around lost when the first goal was scored.. He was just as responsible as Carter for the first goal by Washington Saturday night and was a -1 that game, too.
lol, skating around lost? HE WAS COVERING HIS MAN AT THE POINT.
By the way, totally called that you would criticise JVR for that goal. Seriously, give it up. JVR had absolutely no blame for that goal as he was doing exactly what he should have been.
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
by Geoff Detweiler on Dec 8, 2009 11:11 AM EST up reply actions
Carter is POINTING AND TELLING JVR WHAT TO DO while the goal scorer flies by. And JVR is looking all around him trying to find people.
But you’re right, he wasn’t lost at all…
I take that back, Carter was pointing at someone else.
JVR was in the middle of nowhere, spinning in a circle watching Camalleri skate by.
You’re right. The goal scorer, going right by Jeff Carter, is not Carter’s man. JVR is completely to blame for that. Notice how there’s only two Canadiens in the shot? Yeah, Assist and Goal. Totally not Carter’s fault. At all.
I wonder where the other 3 Canadiens are?
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
by Geoff Detweiler on Dec 8, 2009 12:11 PM EST up reply actions
Here’s where everyone is on the ice as the puck goes in.
Two Canadiens came down the slot. Carter missed the first one and was late picking up the second one. Briere tried to pick up the second one.
JVR was no less than five feet away from everyone on the ice.
And look! There’s someone at the far point, exactly who his man is. If the pass went back there, he’s in position.
You want to blame Boucher for not letting anybody know the goal scorer was alone out front? Fine. You want to blame Kimmo for covering nobody? Fine. You want to blame Coburn for not blocking the pass? Fine. you want to blame Carter for not picking up his man? (Of course not) Fine. You want to blame Briere for not picking up his man? (Even though he did) Fine.
But of course, you pick the only guy on the ice who is where he should be. No, clearly that goal is JVR’s fault.
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
by Geoff Detweiler on Dec 8, 2009 12:43 PM EST up reply actions
And look! He’s TEN FEET AWAY FROM THAT MAN. He’s not in position. If the dude behind the net came out the left side, he had a clear passing lane straight to the point. He also had a clear lane around the boards to get the puck to the point. JVR wasn’t in the general vicinity of the point even, and wasn’t cutting off the passing lane to that guy.
JVR was doing absolutely nothing. Did it affect the goal? Doesn’t matter. Had he been in a passing lane the same thing would’ve happened. But the point is that he was just lost out there.
How is he not in position? Do you want him available for a blocked shot to come to the slot? Do you want him available for a breakout play? Do you want him in position to be able to take a pass off the boards from Coburn? Do you want him in a position to cover his man if a pass gets there AND be able to pick up a loose puck anywhere above the faceoff dots AT THE SAME TIME? If so, he’s in position. If, in your hypothetical, the puck is fired around the boards, JVR has about 2 or 3 seconds to cover “ten feet”. I think he can do that. He’s covering his man, in position.
“Did it affect the goal? Doesn’t matter.”
So you’re criticizing a guy, who you admit had no fault in a goal allowed because… you hate him and just want to take this opportunity to slam the ONE player not responsible? No, that makes perfect sense. I’m sure that goal was also Laviolette’s fault because the D were too busy “pinching” below the goal-line; Homer’s fault for not getting a face-off specialist who could have won that draw; Powe’s fault for being a defensive liability; and Emery’s fault for being a downgrade in net.
Did I miss any?
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
by Geoff Detweiler on Dec 8, 2009 2:10 PM EST up reply actions
If, in your hypothetical, the puck is fired around the boards, JVR has about 2 or 3 seconds to cover "ten feet"
Really? Two to three seconds for the puck to go around the boards? Are they playing on grass?
So you’re criticizing a guy, who you admit had no fault in a goal allowed because… you hate him and just want to take this opportunity to slam the ONE player not responsible?
No, I’m criticizing him because he CONSTANTLY drifts around the defensive zone just like this. He’s now providing nothing on offense and is a liability on defense.
How is he not in position?
He’s three steps from doing any of the things you listed. Jeff Carter was one step away from covering the slot man and couldn’t recover. JVR is three steps from covering the man at the point, three steps from the slot, three steps from the passing lanes, and he literally spins around in a circle. Theoretically, he could pick up a long rebound (he’s at the top of the faceoff circle, not a likely place for a rebound to go) but the puck was behind the net at the time so a rebound of any sort was at least one step removed from the scenario.
Forgot to mention, keep in perspective the fact that the Flyers just got beat handily by a bad team.
My thoughts: What a terrible, terrible game. That looked like two really bad teams.
Coburn played especially awful along with a number of other guys.
The injuries on the lower lines surprisingly hurt them a lot as that last line is rotten.
Jeff Carter is either not physical enough or flat out weak. He only excels in the open ice right now and we need more from him.
The Canadiens fans have the most annoying of any team. I know there’s history behind this stuff but that Ole song and the cheering and then booing when they think it’s a penalty have to be two of the dumbest things in sports. It looks/sounds like something a European soccer fanbase would do i.e. stupid and annoying.
you mean stupid and annoying like the Crosby sucks chant he uses to shit on us?
we all boo the refs for any penalty against us, only some of us cheer when a ref gets blasted in the grape though
Bill Clement’s article on CSNPhilly.com:
“The new system isn’t just about the closest guy to the puck chasing like crazy. It’s about five-men moving as a unit, with or without the puck, so that large seams don’t open up through the unit. Should these fissures appear, a team is vulnerable defensively and less threatening offensively. […] There is much work to be done for the new head coach, but this was a step in the right direction. The first period was Laviolette hockey. The last two weren’t.”
Broad Street Hockey - Makin' it look mean since 1967.
by Geoff Detweiler on Dec 8, 2009 10:57 AM EST reply actions
attack system vs. what we're doing now
the flyers system is either crash the net or cycle behind the net. which doesnt work if you have to count on lucky bounces and one-on-one battles on the boards where they just chuck the puck from side to side chasing… until their defender nabs it…
the attack system is built mainly on transition, that is the real problem here… we use to punish teams for giving it away on the top of the blueline… where has that game gone?. We’re not taking shots, over-skating the slot and not being in shooting position. making plays way too fancy… not simplifying… for instance the two on two with richy and harts last night… Rich never took the shot and harts flies 100 mph into the net…
You’re talking about counter-attack system. Thats more like what the Red Wings play. Its genesis is in the neutral zone trap.
That’s not what the Flyers are trying to play. They want two men in the O zone with atleast one more guy across center ice.
im not liking the 2-1-2 or the triangle system or whatever you call it… forces things we’re not strong at – on the boards and slot presence…
the neutral zone trap is an old devils system that doesnt really work with the new rules and open ice
I think we need to take a few steps back, break out the acoustic guitar, and sing sing some kumbaya. There is a lot of tension in this post as well as the whole atmosphere dealing with the Flyers. We all want them to win because we know they are capable of it, and it gets very disheartening after each time they lose. With each loss comes more frustration and a step closer to alcoholism. The whole team’s confidence is shot, and on the ice it seems that they aren’t even enjoying themselves. Will time heal this team wounds? or will they be unsuccessful for the season? Time will tell, but i believe they can do it.
Something to say? Choose one of these options to log in.
On Facebook? Use Connect to join SB Nation. Share insights with fans and friends.- » Create a new SB Nation account
- » Already registered with SB Nation? Log in!
Secondary Sidebar
Related FanPosts on Broad Street Hockey
Related FanShots on Broad Street Hockey
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recent FanPosts
Atlantic Standings
| GP | W | L | OTL | PT | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
New Jersey
|
82 | 48 | 27 | 7 | 103 |
|
Pittsburgh
|
82 | 47 | 28 | 7 | 101 |
|
Philadelphia
|
82 | 41 | 35 | 6 | 88 |
|
New York Rangers
|
82 | 38 | 33 | 11 | 87 |
|
New York Islanders
|
82 | 34 | 37 | 11 | 79 |
(updated 4.12.2010 at 9:21 AM EDT)
Flyers Schedule
Next 5 Games
|
New Jersey
|
Tue 09/21 | 7:00 PM EDT |
|
@
Toronto
|
Thu 09/23 | 7:00 PM EDT |
|
@
Toronto
|
Fri 09/24 | 7:00 PM EDT |
|
@
Minnesota
|
Sat 09/25 | 8:00 PM EDT |
|
@
New Jersey
|
Tue 09/28 | 7:00 PM EDT |
Last 5 Games
|
Chicago
|
Wed 06/09 | OT - L 3 - 4 |
|
@
Chicago
|
Sun 06/06 | L 4 - 7 |
|
Chicago
|
Fri 06/04 | W 5 - 3 |
|
Chicago
|
Wed 06/02 | OT - W 4 - 3 |
|
@
Chicago
|
Mon 05/31 | L 1 - 2 |
SBNation.com Recent Stories
In Association With
Latest Puck Daddy - NHL from Yahoo! Sports
- Donald Fehr aware of Kovalchuk drama, mum on everything else
- Puck Headlines: Savard's agent rants on Bettman; Halak in Montreal
- Boudreau, Crawford placed on the coaching hot seat
- NHL 2010-11 Season Preview: Wrestling with Atlanta Thrashers
- Chris Pronger's contract accepted; why NHLPA could have advantage
Certain photos copyright © 2010 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
