It was far too short, and went the wrong way. In the end, the Flyers were two bounces from playing Game 5 Monday night in Carolina tied at two games apiece. However, it wasn’t meant to be. Regardless, some players stood out a bit more than others, either for the right or wrong reasons. Here then is our grades for each Flyer player that dressed for any of the four games. And we’ll start from the net out.
Goaltender
Dan Vladar
After shutting out Pittsburgh twice in the opening round, including the exciting Game 6 overtime victory, Dan Vladar had his hands full against Carolina. Although he kept Philadelphia in most of the contests, there were moments where you felt Carolina took a shot he should’ve stopped. The netminder’s best game was Game 2, where he had a .929 save percentage and kept the Flyers in it until the overtime frame, when Philadelphia dominated the extra session but came up empty. While he allowed 13 goals in four games for a .904 save percentage, Vladar was, for the most part, very good in the second round. Grade: A-
Defensemen
Oliver Bonk
Nobody expected Oliver Bonk to get any playoff action. Most thought he would be happy with being one of the “black aces” during this playoff run, but was a long shot to dress barring a rash of injuries. However, Bonk was there in Game 4, paired with Nick Seeler. And he looked fine. Although beaten by Taylor Hall on the outside for Carolina’s second goal of the game, Bonk had a slightly better Corsi For percentage (26.67) than Cam York and Jamie Drysdale in the contest. He didn’t score like he did in his National Hockey League debut, yet it was a sign of what the future might hold for the Flyers down the road sooner or later. Grade: C
Emil Andrae
Like the first round, Andrae just saw two games of action. He earned one assist in Game 3’s 4-1 loss to Carolina and was a +1 in the tilt, playing 10:59. Andrae generally had between 10 to 11 minutes in the playoffs in the third pairing but had the highest expected goals percentage in Game 3 of any Flyer skater five-on-five (55.22). Andrae didn’t deliver a bevy of hits. What he did do effectively was move the puck quickly and avoid a lot of heavy collisions with his decision-making. Grade: C
Noah Juulsen
Noah Juulsen had one game in the second round. And it was Game 1, the game where the Flyers looked overwhelmed by the swarming Canes forecheck. Juulsen played 10:42 and had no points, He had three hits and one giveaway. Although offering a physical presence, that physicality is only effective if you have the speed to make contact with your opponent. More often than not, Juulsen was on his heels, making the decision for head coach Rick Tocchet a bit easier as Philadelphia tried to right the ship in Game 2. Grade: C-
Rasmus Ristolainen
Playoff Risto was something to behold against Pittsburgh. His decisions more often than not worked out, he was driving play at times, and generally was on the right side of puck battles in the defensive zone. Sadly, the longer the Canes series went on, the slower and more deliberate Ristolainen’s play became. He did have some rushes up ice, but sometimes the gas just wasn’t in the tank.
The defender was -3 overall in the series, playing 28:16 in the Game 2 overtime loss and just over 23 minutes in Games 1 and 4. And after earning five points in the first round, he was invisible on the scoresheet. Grade: C+
Travis Sanheim
The workhorse all season, Sanheim was yet again on call for huge slabs of ice time throughout the Carolina sweep. He played 31:19 in Game 2 and 28:46 in Game 4, but wasn’t able to contribute offensively. Fortunately Sanheim avoided serious injury in Game 3 when he was on the receiving end of a cheap shot by Taylor Hall. Generally, the defenseman was steady and solid. It was just that he was overmatched like most Flyers by a far better, deeper, and talented opponent. Grade: B-
Nick Seeler
Seeler wasn’t all that different than he was all season: he blocked shots, he delivered hits, and provided some toughness in his limited minutes. His underlying metrics were far from good most of the time, but considering how much puck possession Carolina had the entire series, it shouldn’t come as a shock. Nonetheless, Seeler did what was expected of him, being a depth pairing defenseman that gave the first and second pairings a bit of a breather. Grade: C
Cam York
Like Ristolainen and Seeler, York had zero points in round two. He was a plus +2 in game for, and was one of the bright spots in moving the puck despite the speculation York was playing with a broken rib or ribs. He also had five shots on net over the series, averaging 24:25 of ice time in the last pair of games. Generally, York wasn’t any more of a liability than anyone else on the Flyers’ top six. It’s just that he was overmatched at times by a better opponent. Grade: B-
Jamie Drysdale
Jamie Drysdale scored the opening goal in Game 2, a great shot down the middle that gave Philadelphia life and hope. Drysdale had four shots in that game and was on the ice for over 29 minutes of the nearly four-period contest. Although he didn’t score the rest of the series, he was able to move the puck quite well during some stages of the series, including being over 50 per cent in Corsi For percentage in Game 1.
The defenseman showed that he wasn’t out of his element, and provided the Flyers with more proof that Drysdale could be a key piece of the Flyers moving forward. Grade: B-
Jamie Drysdale – Philadelphia Flyers (2)*
— NHL Goal Videos (@NHLGoalVideos) May 5, 2026
Power Play Goal pic.twitter.com/yEhKcH1wA5
Forwards
Travis Konecny
You can’t objectively state Konecny didn’t have his share of great chances. A chance in Game 2’s overtime session should’ve ended it, but Konecny couldn’t score. Then early in Game 3 Konecny again had a prime opportunity but couldn’t finish it off. He did have the primary assist on Alex Bump’s game-tying goal in the third period of Game 4.
But overall, Konecny’s lack of finish was one of many factors that resulted in a Carolina sweep. He had six shots over the four games, and demonstrated other ways to help by throwing his body against far bigger opponents. Overall, it would’ve been interesting to see him finish one or two of those chances. It just wasn’t meant to be. Grade: C-
Alex Bump
He wasn’t as dominant as some other youngsters Philadelphia relied on this playoff campaign, yet Alex Bump had a very good rookie postseason. He scored twice (tying him with Konecny in terms of playoff goals for the Flyers, albeit with a lot fewer games), and was lauded by Tocchet for his resilience in Game 4.
After losing his man in the third to give Carolina a 2-1 lead, Bump got back out and scored on a good feed from Konecny to tie things up 2-2. He also showed his skillset (along with some other young’uns) in the overtime of Game 2, showing his legs were still fresh while the older Carolina team was struggling to keep up. A very solid opening debut for a guy still learning his way around the team and the league. Grade: B-
ALEX BUMP TIES THE GAME AT TWO!!
— NHL (@NHL) May 10, 2026
📺: @NHL_On_TNT, @Sportsnet, & @TVASports pic.twitter.com/hzTrpM4rRT
Carl Grundstrom
Grundstrom was a healthy scratch for Game 1. In Game 2 he hit the ground running, getting a primary assist on Sean Couturier’s goal that made it 2-0 Flyers. His speed and size also resulted in him throwing a team-high six hits in that game, giving Philadelphia another bit of physicality on the fourth line. Overall Grundstrom delivered 15 hits over his three games. It was a decent showing from a depth forward who most likely played his last game in Philadelphia. Grade: C
Garnet Hathaway
Garnet Hathaway dressed for Game 1, but generally wasn’t nearly as effective in round two as he was in round one. It’s difficult to stir the pot or tango when one team generally plays almost completely between the whistles. Hathaway had no points in three games, but was even in plus/minus. Although getting under 11 minutes in Game 3, the forward was given a longer leash in Game 4 where he nearly played over 15 minutes. After a terrible regular season, Hathaway somewhat atoned for it with a better than expected playoff. Grade: C-
Sean Couturier
The Flyers captain has nothing to be ashamed of. After a sensational performance through round one, Couturier was one of Philadelphia’s best and most consistent forwards. He didn’t score much (just the one tally in Game 2), but was a force to be reckoned with in all four games. He was throwing hits, blocking shots, winning faceoffs and generally trying to will Philadelphia into this series. It was a revelation of sorts after a rather mundane regular season. It might not be great having one of the team’s highest paid forwards slotted into the fourth line moving forward. However, seeing Couturier engaged and just playing so well over these 10 games was one of the few highlights from both rounds. Grade: B+
2-0 FLYERS, SEAN COUTURIER LESS THAN A MINUTE AFTER DRSYDALE’S GOAL pic.twitter.com/NJ0ZFU8CqL
— Jimmy King (@Jimmyking35) May 4, 2026
Noah Cates
Noah Cates might not have been the difference maker had he been healthy, but it might have given Philadelphia a slightly better chance of pushing it beyond four games. Cates played the first two games, and was probably playing a good chunk of Game 2 hurt after taking a shot to the foot or ankle area. The center was out the last two games, but wasn’t much of a factor in either game offensively. He was 40 per cent on the faceoff dot in Game 1 and had two hits and three blocks in Game 2 before he was seen after the game with a walking boot near him. Overall he didn’t look completely outclassed. Yet he was doing very well to keep his head barely above water. Grade: C-
Luke Glendening
It might not be until next season when we’ll see just how much of an asset Luke Glendening was in making Sean Couturier look so good down the stretch and in the playoffs. Acquired at the trade deadline as a waiver pickup, Glendening provided much of the same oomph and energy in the first round as he did in the homestretch.
He might have had less gas in the tank against Carolina, but he was doing a lot of the same things in these four games: winning puck battles, hitting, and trying to keep the Canes away from Dan Vladar. With just one shot on goal in the series and no points, he provided little offensive help. As a bottom line winger, he fit the bill quite nicely. Grade: C
Trevor Zegras
When not in an animated discussion with the officials or Tocchet, Trevor Zegras was one of the better forwards against Carolina. That’s not saying a whole lot for a team that only ended up with five goals over four games (and two overtimes), yet Zegras was in on 40 per cent of the team’s tallies with a goal and an assist. After the waters calmed somewhat during Game 1, Zegras was one of Philadelphia’s better skaters with an expected goals for percentage over 85 per cent. He heeded Tocchet’s advice in Game 3 when it came to not taking a dumb penalty, and scored a high-end goal later in the contest.
Overall it wasn’t an excellent second round for Zegras. Yet it showed that he should be another piece of the Flyers’ fortunes moving forward. Grade: B
Philadelphia goal!
— NHL Goals (@nhl_goal_bot) May 8, 2026
Scored by Trevor Zegras with 17:29 remaining in the 2nd period.
Assisted by Emil Andrae and Porter Martone.
Philadelphia: 1
Carolina: 1#CARvsPHI #IgniteTheOrange #SoundTheSiren pic.twitter.com/iJ6iAv7pGs
Jett Luchanko
Much like Oliver Bonk, Jett Luchanko’s fifth game of the season with Philadelphia was an elimination game. No pressure, right? Well, with Luchanko not lighting the lamp much in the Ontario Hockey League, the Flyers called him up primarily to be with the club and experience some playoff atmosphere. What nobody predicted was Tocchet pulling the trigger and replacing Matvei Michkov with Luchanko in Game 4. He didn’t score, had two hits and blocked a shot in 12:31. He did provide some speed, which is what Tocchet desired for that final game. However, with such a small sample size, it would be ridiculous to criticize Luchanko for his playoff cup of coffee. Grade: C-
Denver Barkey
Barkey, like a lot of other Flyers, didn’t register a point against Carolina. However, he was relied on a bit more in the last two games on the faceoff dot due to the absence of Cates due to injury. He played 13:51 in Game 4 and was 38.5 per cent on faceoffs. And in Game 3 he registered three hits. On the whole, Barkey didn’t look quite as sharp as he did against Pittsburgh. When you play a team contending for the Cup this year, however, it might be a case of playing a team far superior than the Penguins. A good first impression, even if there were a few hiccups in places, namely some stick infractions. Grade: C+
Matvei Michkov
Oh boy. Michkov assisted on Cam York’s overtime winner in Game 6 against the Penguins. In round two, he was a non-factor. Without piling on too much on the Russian sophomore, Michkov had a 1.45 expected goals for percentage in Game 1. And was on the ice for all three goals Carolina scored in the opener. The forward wasn’t able to reach that gear he had during the stretch run where he was piling up some very good numbers. Only in the overtime of Game 2 did he appear to come to life alongside other young Flyers who were trying to tie the series.
Game 3 was one he and most would like to forget about, resulting in the Game 4 scratch for Jett Luchanko. After losing Cates, Michkov was in a more vulnerable position not having his go-to center with him. However, in the end, there wasn’t a whole lot of positives to take from Michkov in round two. Grade: D
Christian Dvorak
This week should see some of the bumps, bruises, and injuries some Flyers had come to light during exit interviews. In the meantime, center Christian Dvorak was reportedly dealing with a shoulder issue, namely it was separated to some extend. The forward saw his ice time curtailed somewhat in Game 3 (14:30) after over 22 minutes in Game 2. He recorded one assist in Game 4, a secondary on Alex Bump’s third-period goal. Dvorak was hampered by the injury obviously, and with some lines juggled a bit thanks to Cates and Owen Tippett being out, saw some of his linemates change from time to time. Grade: C
Porter Martone
For some reason, it appeared that the longer this series went on, Martone was getting stronger and more confident in his play. The numbers (two assists) didn’t match the two game-winners against Pittsburgh in the first two games. Yet Martone was far more visible than most Flyer forwards not named Couturier. He had five shots in Game 4, a game where Philadelphia only scrounged up 17 to begin with. And he had a number of great scoring chances that weren’t finished. To be this young, and be this talented in the second round of the playoffs is a huge asset for the team heading into the summer.
Martone might not have scored against Carolina. What he did do was separate himself from a lot of his teammates with his style of play, driving to the net, and not afraid to go to the dirty areas to generate goals. Grade: B+
Tyson Foerster
After going nine games without a point, winger Tyson Foerster opened the scoring in Game 4. The relief on his face was good to see, finally putting one in after a trying playoffs. Try he did, but it appeared that Foerster was hitting a wall more times than not. He did look good on the fourth line with Sean Couturier earlier in the playoffs. Yet he was often trying to find something to latch on to while he was mired in this goal draught.
Most likely, having Foerster return after missing roughly 50 games, and then be expected to hit a fourth or fifth gear in the playoffs, was too much to expect. At least he was strong defensively, and able to look capable of making clears when required. It wasn’t a dazzling playoff debut. Returning to play after such a devastating injury might have been a victory of its own. Grade: C
FINALLY!!! TYSON FOERSTER LIGHTS THE LAMP!!!
— Flyers Nation (@FlyersNation) May 9, 2026
1-0 #FLYERS!!! pic.twitter.com/tiW0Xiejvc
