Advice to Flyers: don't change aggressive style
Winning in a shot-blocking era.
Advice to Flyers: don't change aggressive style
Rich Hofmann, Daily News Sports Columnist
It has been more than a week now since the Flyers were eliminated by the New Jersey Devils. Somewhere, coach Peter Laviolette and his staff, along with general manager Paul Holmgren, are going about the annual ritual of assessment and reassessment after you lose -- what went right, what went wrong, what needs to be fixed, what needs to be tweaked. It happens every spring -- and in the Flyers’ case, 37 springs and counting.
Their analysis does not take place in a vacuum. Teams are still playing. There is a game every night on television, and there is a narrative that is being sold and told and re-told. It is about blocked shots. The New York Rangers are the leading practitioner of the art, and they are in the conference final -- tied at one game apiece with the Devils.
Compared to 5 years ago, playoff shot-blocking is up about 10 percent. That is a real number. The Rangers already have blocked 309 shots in 16 playoff games. The Washington Capitals blocked 308 shots in 14 games. The leader in the 2006-07 playoffs was Ottawa, which blocked 310 shots in 20 games. So, yes, this is happening.
Some of it is better equipment, which makes players more fearless. More of it is tactical. The NHL, like all pro sports, is full of copycats -- and if the Rangers were to win the Stanley Cup, the notion of shot-blocking-as-secret-formula would be debated in every one of the league’s outposts.
The short answer, for Holmgren and Laviolette, is to resist the conversation.
The formula, for the Flyers, is to giddy-up and go.
That is not to say that shot-blocking is meaningless. There are times when it matters a lot, such as the night of Game 6 in the first round when the Flyers did, in fact, build a wall in front of goaltender Ilya Bryzgalov and eliminate the Pittsburgh Penguins. In general, though, it is not the metric that matters the most for a team that is best when it is skating aggressively and asking questions later.
True Fact I: The Flyers blocked more shots than the Penguins did in the first round (116-81) and won the series in six games.
True Fact II: The Flyers blocked more shots than the Devils did in the second round (77-65) and lost the series in five games.
Against the Devils, the Flyers were out-blocked -- is that even a term? -- in Game 1 and won anyway. Then they out-blocked the Devils in Games 2, 3 and 4 and lost each time.
Shot-blocking is not the reason the Flyers are currently spectating instead of playing. They had plenty of blocked shots. What they didn’t have enough of against the Devils was shots.
It wasn’t shot-blocking. It wasn’t the goaltender. It was the Flyers’ inability to sustain a forecheck and to prevent the Devils from sustaining theirs. It was about an imbalance in time of possession in the offensive zone. It was about not getting enough shots against a 40-year-old goaltender who looked gettable at many points during the series.
If you want to argue that the young-and-overconfident Flyers took a big punch from the Devils in Game 2 of the series and never recovered, there is plenty of evidence to support that theory. If you want to say that the obviously-injured defensemen, Kimmo Timonen and Nicklas Grossman, were not at the top of their games, it is a fair comment.
None of that is about shot-blocking, though. None of that is about style of play. The truth is that the Flyers won games when they skated and possessed the puck and they lost games when they didn’t. In the five games against the Devils, when you compare total shot attempts -- shots, blocked shots and missed shots -- and use that as a proxy for effective possession of the puck, this is what you come up with:
The team with the most shot attempts won every game. The Flyers’ advantage in Game 1 was 71-47 and they looked great after a slow first period. Their deficit in Game 2 was 70-37 and they looked godawful. In Game 3, the Devils won in overtime and had the 59-46 advantage. Game 4, it was 64-33 and more lopsided. In Game 5, a much more competitive game, the Devils led by 60-55.
The Flyers do not need to re-make themselves. They need to learn to sustain their effort, and to hope for (or acquire) healthier defensemen. And for the sake of everyone who likes the game, and who likes speed, and who likes offense, they need to remain the kind of team that values skating most of all.
Nobody ever fell in love with a blocked shot, after all.
You decide: Flyers Stay or Go
Ryan Suter.— chriscollins
Comment removed.- I agree. Please, no more neutral zone trap.— Philly Born
- Rich:
good article, but I don't completely agree. The series was won by the team willing to pinch in with their defensive players and the team that was willing to fore check, which just happened to me the Devil's. At times it seemed like the ice was tilted and it was not in the Flyer's favor. They also seemed burned out after their great series with the Penguins and were unable to ever get their mojo back. I think it's dimply a case of being mentally toasted.— DandyFarAndy - Comment removed.
- Gagne better hope he can play a game in the finals because he didn't play enough games in the regular season to qualify to have his name on the Cup... — beagle29
- Williams already has his name on the cup, get with the program troll. — 420Phillie
- Toyota Dealer i right on.. the Richards, Gagne, Carter combo will be sweet. I hope they take the cup to Ed Snider's front lawn!! How come the Inqy isn't following the story? you guys are all afraid of "MISTER Snider ...."— boomartin
- Never win with Bryz, so I figure we have another shot in maybe 2020 or so.— jimmymack
- I agree that the Flyers should stay aggressive, but does that imply taking the most risks? Much of the time they aggressively turn the puck over or aggressively dump the puck and aggressively chase it while the other team builds a rush. Clearly, a degree of control and puck support must temper the risk-taking. Rather than adopting a block-the-most-shots strategy, I'd like to see the Flyers emphasize more puck possession as opposed to simply dumping and chasing. It's a harder style to play - it requires more stick-work and more vigilant puck support, but it gives up fewer odd-man rushes, leaves the defense overmatched less frequently, and it's an inherently more defensive approach. They can still be more aggressive than their opponents, but they also need to play with more patience and discipline than they displayed against the Devils.— gnarlyscuzz
- Here is the bottom line:
1) the Flyers rarely played 60 minutes and rarely showed the committment to win games other then offensive open ice games
2) the Flyers consistently were unprepared for the start of games routinely falling behind
3) the Flyers have a slow reacting and slow skating defense( and please dont use the Pronger injury he was not the difference)
4) the Flyers have a goaltender who is inconsistent at best...has poor technique and weak concentration and committment levels plus doesnt want to be here
The 1st two are on Lavvy...the last 2 are on Holmgren...They have not put together a team that can win and they do not compete regularly.
BOTTOM LINE: we are in for a few soft years and many years looking up at the Rangers who have an all world goalie and 4 all star young defenders with an equal amouont of young talented forwards...Its not going to be fun around here!— flyers1000 - Couldn't agree more with ToyotaDealer! Ed Snider is the George Steinbrenner of the NHL, convinced that he's a player personnel expert, which the last 30-some years should have shown him conclusively that he isn't. Don't get me wrong - I'm glad Carter and Richards are gone. They're doing great in LA, sure, but that's only because Snider gave them the wake up call they sorely needed by trading them. They weren't doing for us what they're doing for the Kings, so whaddya gonna do? They were overly-focused on hanging out in Center City and Sea Isle City watering holes instead of upping their game for the Flyers the way they have for the Kings. The Bryzgalov deal? It has Snider's fingerprints all over it. I can picture the exchange: "Go get me a f****** goalie, Homer! Bob isn't good enough!" "But Mr. Snider, the only decent one out there is Bryzgalov. His price is outrageous and his own teammates say that they'll be glad when he's gone!" "I don't give a s***! Get him signed!" That's how I read it. I really enjoyed the Flyers' season, but I realize, as Holmgren said early on, they took a big risk trading "Cartsie" and "Richie" because they had no choice but to use their rookies and they lucked out, 'cause it worked. They sorely need a top line defenseman who can skate and move the puck through traffic.— RightSaidJeff
- Great article Rich, but one thing you are leaving out is this. A team cannot do the things that are needed to generate a sustained offense, e.g. a defenseman pinching along the boards, a forward stepping in front of a pass at their own blue, etc., if the team is not comfortable or confident in their goalie. The Flyers have been visibly shaken by the absolutely bad goaltending they have had these past few years and I think it weighs on this team like a very dark cloud, more so than anyone will care to speak about. Look at what a mediocre LA is doing with Quick, and what a mediocre Ranger team is doing with Lundquist, and look what a average Boston did with Thomas last year, how much more evidence do we need?— jdeang
