Flyers 3 Canadiens 0 - Game 4 Scoring Chances
Montreal had played well in the first period in each of the first three games and as the first period started, it certainly looked like that trend would continue. The puck was always in Philadelphia's zone but after five minutes the chances read 0-0. Shots getting blocked, shots from bad areas, zone time but no clear possession. The trend continued unabated through the first half of the period and by the time Marc-Andre Bergeron took a penalty about eleven and a half minutes into the game Montreal led on chances by a paltry 1-0 margin despite a 13-5 advantage in Corsi. At that point, penalty be damned, Montreal looked like they had come to play. But when Bergeron got out of the penalty box, Montreal had lost its groove. Over the rest of the period - all at even strength - I had the Flyers outchancing the Canadiens 4-1 and they led in Corsi 7-4. If you watched the game, you know that things did not improve in the second. Scoring chances and more after the jump.
Scoring Chances
For those who'd like a definition: a scoring chance is defined as a clear play directed toward the opposing net from a dangerous scoring area - loosely defined as the top of the circle in and inside the faceoff dots, though sometimes slightly more generous than that depending on the amount of immediately-preceding puck movement or screens in front of the net. Blocked shots are generally not included but missed shots are. A player is awarded a scoring chance anytime he is on the ice and someone from either team has a chance to score. He is awarded a "chance for" if someone on his team has a chance to score and a "chance against" if the opposing team has a chance to score. And, of course, a big thanks to Vic Ferrari for making the whole damn thing possible with his awesome script.
Olivier didn't have his rendition of the scoring chances up quite yet so I'll update this section with a comparison between how the two of us scored the game when his goes up. It's a long weekend so I guess I can forgive him. Maybe.
I've already discussed the first period in detail but suffice to say the 4-2 Philadelphia total was pretty lucky for the Flyers. But after the first intermission it was all Philadelphia. If you were inclined to spin that period positively you could truthfully say that Montreal generated twice as many chances as they did shots on goal in the period. Not that missing the net on your only scoring chances is all that positive. In the third period, the Flyers were playing to the score and that kind of sort of almost let Montreal back into the game. But not really.
Unlike the first three games, special teams weren't much of a factor in this game. There weren't many penalties and neither team was able to muster all that much offence when they did get a chance. The Canadiens lost decisively, so they won't be mentioned below but the line of Maxim Lapierre and Dominic Moore - this time with Travis Moen - was outstanding for the second straight game both territorially and in terms of the scoring chances. Now if only Montreal could get good play consistently from their best forwards, they'd be in business.
Those Born of God
3. Michael Leighton - The last time I remember a goaltender pitching three shut-outs in one series was J-S Giguere in Anaheim's first run to the finals in franchise history. I certainly don't expect to him to have Giguere's sills in goal but three shut-outs in four games is still awfully impressive.
2. Braydon Coburn - Coburn logged more ice time than any player on either team with the exception of Chris Pronger. Coburn was the only Flyer on the ice for all three goals which is fitting because he was making things happen all night and doing so on both sides of the puck against several of Montreal's best players. Now, Laviolette was pretty lackadaisical when it came to matching defensive pairings in systematic fashion but Coburn did have more ice time against Gionta, Cammalleri and Gomez than any other Montreal forwards. The one play that really stuck out to me came early in the second period with the score tied. Coburn was the only man back on a two-on-one and he calmly broke up the play eliminating any kind of scoring chance. Good to see Coburn bounce back after a poor outing in Game Three.
1. Claude Giroux - He led the team in scoring chance differential (+6) and Fenwick (+5) so it's pretty safe to conclude that the puck was in the right place with Giroux on the ice. But what really caught the eye was the amazing high flick on the breakaway chance that put the Flyers in the lead. Amazing hands.
Those Committing the Sin That Leads to Death
3. Josh Gorges - I think "posterized" is mostly an NBA thing but Gorges got the equivalent of dunked on by Giroux. Other than that I thought Gorges was actually pretty good. Unlike Peter Laviolette, it seems that Jaques Martin was trying to actually match lines. Gorges drew the group of Gagne, Richards and Carter and did a great job of shutting that line down but that one big mistake was rather glaring.
2. P.K. Subban - A second very unnderwhelming performance by Subban. His poorly timed rush - and poorer decision with what to do with the puck when he needed to move it - led directly to the second goal of the night. Aside from that he just wasn't on his game. He seemed to fall over himself once or twice and he wasn't making smart decisions with the puck.
1. Scott Gomez and Brian Gionta - +2 -11. Seriously. These are your best players and that's just really, really bad. This team needs them to be better and has for a while. If they put in another effort like this one, the team really will be on its way to death (but not in quite the same way as the Phoenix Coyotes).
14 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Well, don’t hold your breath. I was at a friend’s place, my recording borked up, the CBC feed is an abomination and it’s a marvelous day outside. So here is to the first game I won’t score this year.
Gomez’s performance doesn’t surprise me; he and Gionta aren’t bad defensively, but they often overcommit on the offensive zone and. Pouliot forgot about forechecking and being the man up in the offensive zone somewhere during his injury and ever since, when these 3 are together they usually end up with a pretty nasty differential.
Gorges had a nice wardrobe malfunction on Giroux’s goal.
I’ll allow it. I hope you really enjoy the outdoors! If the Canadiens keep playing like this, you’ll have plenty of time for that soon enough.
by Scott Reynolds on May 23, 2010 10:46 AM MDT up reply actions
the second period was absolutely bad for the canadiens. Soo many turnovers. No sustained pressure. Botchin passes. It really showed how Canadiens have over-achieved by reaching the conf finals.
Also the hall gill on the ground in the 1st period was hilarious
That Hal Gill play was hilarious. I mean, they ruled that he didn’t intentionally cover the puck. That seems kind of odd to me since at some point he obviously decided freezing it was a hell of a lot better than getting up. Maybe the real rule is covering it with the hand and the broadcasters didn’t communicate it that well. I can’t seem to remember what the rule actually says in that case.
by Scott Reynolds on May 23, 2010 10:48 AM MDT up reply actions
Well, the rule is 63.5 apparently if you are interested in looking it up.
Pension Plan Puppets: A Toronto Maple Leafs blog and a group therapy session.
Like reading thoughts confined to 140 characters? I'm on Twitter too.
63.5 Penalty Shot – (…) No defending player, except the goalkeeper, will be permitted to fall on the puck, hold the puck, pick up the puck, or gather the puck into the body or hands when the puck is within the goal crease. (…)
So there’s the rule. It looks to me like because the puck was pushed into him, as opposed to Gill gathering it into himself, he gets away with it. And that jives well with what the CBC said about intent. Still a pretty darn close call. Thanks PPP!
by Scott Reynolds on May 23, 2010 10:55 AM MDT up reply actions
Except he didn’t fall on the puck, he went down first and the puck was shot under him. Perhaps that’s the distinction that resulted in the non-call.
Writer for The Copper & Blue and primary shareholder of Zorg Industries
"Never be ashamed of who you are" -- Jean-Baptiste Emanuel Zorg
by Bruce McCurdy on May 24, 2010 2:38 PM MDT up reply actions
I didn’t bother to go find the replay, but I seem to remember Carter shooting it and Gill basically batted it with his glove back into Halak. I thought it was the right call. If he would have closed his glove on it, that would have been one thing, but he didn’t.
Managing Editor - HockeyOutsiders.com
by HockeyOutsiders on May 24, 2010 2:40 PM MDT up reply actions
Eddie Belfour did it in 2004 against the Senators. The only gave the Leafs were able to win without a shutout was game seven when Patrick Lalime had his meltdown.
Pension Plan Puppets: A Toronto Maple Leafs blog and a group therapy session.
Like reading thoughts confined to 140 characters? I'm on Twitter too.
Wow! That’s interesting. It’s obviously more common than I had thought.
by Scott Reynolds on May 23, 2010 10:50 AM MDT up reply actions
I’m also pretty sure Turco did it in a losing cause for Dallas against Vancouver in ‘07. After Game 1 was 4-4 going into OT, it became a goaltending clinic on both ends. That first game went into 3 or 4OT, and the rest were some variety of 2-0, 1-0, and 2-1, with all three of Dallas’s wins being shutouts.
SNN Sports - A theoretical Oilers blog (i.e. theoretically, I write stuff there). Link now 100% less broken.
Lalime himself had 3 straight shutouts against Philly in 2002, after losing Game One 1-0 in overtime. He then won Game Five 2-1 in OT, then got a shutout in the first game of the next series.
Brent Johnson did the same thing that same spring – three consecutive shutouts in one series.
Marty Brodeur had three shutouts in the 2003 SCF, and also lost a 1-0 decision in OT. There are a few other examples of three shutouts in a series (e.g. Frank “Ulcers” McCool in the 1945 SCF). I am pretty sure that no goalie has ever posted four shutouts in one series, something which Leighton still has a chance to do.
Note that other than Brodeur, these guys aren’t exactly household names. Seems like almost anybody (or team) can go on a roll (or into a funk as the case may be).
Writer for The Copper & Blue and primary shareholder of Zorg Industries
"Never be ashamed of who you are" -- Jean-Baptiste Emanuel Zorg
by Bruce McCurdy on May 24, 2010 2:49 PM MDT up reply actions

by 




























