I was wrong.

There. Glad I can get that out of the way first.

No, the Flyers didn’t win Game 5 Wednesday night as I boldly stated they would in this very space 24 hours prior.

Instead, they lost 5-3 to the Montreal Canadiens and now lead the Habs 3-2 in the Best-of-seven Eastern Conference Quarterfinals.

Game 6 is Friday at 7 p.m.

But here’s an unexpected angle for you – this loss was good for the Flyers.

Now, I know what your thinking, I’m just trying to save some face after a bad prediction, and you wish I wouldn’t.

That’s not the case at all. I will break down the game for you and identify where things went sideways for the Flyers. There’s a lot to consider from this game which, despite the loss, was wildly entertaining.

But, what’s good for the Flyers is this – they are now really in the playoffs.

By that I mean, Game 5 was a traditional playoff hockey slugfest filled with energy, emotion, dislike for the opposition, nasty, physical play, a boarding major, two high sticking double minors that drew blood, hits, slashes and more blood drawn that the referees somehow missed. Things got chippy and chirpy at the end. There were calling cards left for Game 6.

Welcome to playoff hockey.

This is what is good for the Flyers. They showed spirit and spunk for the first time this month. In the seven previous games they’ve played – the three round robin games and the first four games against the Canadiens – they played like automatons, executing their system flawlessly with the exception of Game 2 against Montreal in which they were clearly not present and getting a reboot.

The Flyers had been operating on autopilot before Game 5. They were a machine just repeating the same steps over and over again resulting in (mostly) the same outcomes.

Game 5 brought about the human element. The guts. The drive. The competitive juices overflowed.

The Flyers are going to need more of this if they expect to play into September and even October. They should thank Montreal for bringing it out of them. It will bode well for a deep playoff run.

Could the Flyers have won Game 5? Yes. Absolutely. There were enough chances to do so, and that certainly would have been a better outcome.

But, if the alternative was losing, then this was the kind of game that you wanted to lose – because it only makes you want to get right back out there and settle the score.

The Flyers are now ready. Bring on Game 6.

But first… here’s what we learned:

1. The power play lives

Claude Giroux, Sean Couturier, and Jake Voracek may not have played together at 5-on-5, but boy did they turn back the clock on the power play.

Much maligned for its ineffectiveness to this point in the season, the Flyers reverted to some old tricks to jump start the top unit.

There was Voracek back on the half wall on the right wing. There was Couturier serving as a big body in front of the net. There was young Joel Farabee buzzing in the high slot. And there was Giroux, masterfully quarterbacking the whole thing from his spot on the left wing.

The end result? Not one, not two, but three power play goals for the Flyers – two by Voracek and one by Farabee.

The Flyers were 1-29 before they finally scored again, and from there it seemed the confidence level grew.

Voracek finished with two goals and an assist. Giroux and Couturier each had two apples. They finally found weaknesses in Montreal’s penalty kill and exploited them:

This one was just like old times. Giroux got the penalty killers to be flat-footed by faking a couple of passes, creating the seam he needed to set up Voracek for the one-timer. As for the other Voracek goal:

(note: I’m using Russ’ tweets of the goals because he seemed a little butt-hurt that I haven’t used his tweets in the first four games. These are the things I deal with away from the actual hockey coverage.)

The best part of this goal was Giroux drawing the attention of all four penalty killers and making a no-look pass to Voracek. When the power play shows patience in its setup it can be very dangerous. Sometimes  they try to do too much or can’t get set up, and that leads to the bad streaks like the one they had before Game 5.

Hopefully the Flyers can build on this moving forward.

It also should be noted that both of these goals came on a 5-minute major penalty on Jesperi Kotkaniemi for boarding Travis Sanheim:

I don’t think this will result in any supplemental discipline, but one never knows with the NHL. We’ll see if anything comes out later today.

As for the third power play goal:

Farabee’s offensive instincts are incredible for such a young player. Just having his stick on the ice is something a lot of young players don’t do, but there are more subtleties to his game that make a difference on this play:

The Flyers don’t need the power play to be clicking on all cylinders to be a winning team. But if it’s going well, like in Game 5, it will be a huge boost to an already good team.

2. Doubting the coach

There are days when the analytics people go too far. Wednesday was one of those days.

Listen, coaches don’t give a shit what your Corsi percentage is, or what your expected goals are, or any other fancy stat – especially here in the playoffs.

Those things do. not. matter.

So, trying to make an argument that Alain Vigneault and his assistants Michel Therrien and Mike Yeo should not be using Nate Thompson’s line as much as they do, especially after scoring power play goals because the numbers say they are getting “throttled” when they are on the ice is showing ignorance.

Do you really think the line of Michael Raffl, Thompson, and Tyler Pitlick (Raffl replaced Connor Bunnaman on this line for much of the second half of the game) are being deployed to create offense? Or do you think these coaches, who have created a system that is rooted deeply in a defense-first mentality, are asking them to go out there and give the team a good defensive shift while the top players rest for an extra minute?

The fact that people are screaming about this and blaming the coach for having a “blind spot” for a player like Thompson because analytics tel you that he’s on the ice for far more shots against than he is for shots for is incredibly annoying and disappointing showing a true lack of understanding of the game.

The Flyers are where they are because of the way this team has been coached this season and the way the coach has deployed his players this season. They likely would have won the Metropolitan Division had the season not ended abruptly in March. They earned the No. 1 seed by toppling the three other teams in the East who were at the top of the standings when the shutdown happened. They built a 3-1 series lead in the playoffs – and they had all of this success because Vigneault successfully rolled four lines and often put whoever his fourth line was on the ice after a big goal.

The idea is keep the momentum going with good energy. Good defense and a strong forecheck.

If there’s anything to blame the fourth line about on the two goals against when they were on the ice, it would be that they didn’t establish that forecheck in the play previously to the goal being scored. That said, establishing that forecheck is often a 50-50 proposition on a given play. As such, you have to be able to backcheck well and do it hard and fast.

This line did that both times.

It wasn’t the fault of the fourth line being on the ice when both those goals were scored.

The first one was all on Carter Hart for letting up a softie:

Every player was marked. The defense did their job correctly. The forwards were back-checking. Hart needs to make this save, plain and simple.

And don’t think I’m ignoring the Nick Suzuki head tap. Russ has more on this in another post, so I’ll let him scream from the rooftops.

Then, the one that had the Twitterverse imploding on itself with all the math geeks spasming over who is on the ice was the game winner:

Yes, Thompson gets the tunover in his column here, but he’s expecting Robert Hagg to be there when he makes the pass. He’s not. Notice Hagg’s reaction after the goal. He knows he was out of position and it cost the team.

And if you think I’m wrong, here’s a guy that played the position validating it.

So, where exactly is having Thompson’s line on the ice costing the Flyers? Their shifts have been solid. Strong. Thompson and Pitlick especially have been good defensively. That’s why they’re on the ice. They’re not out there to score goals or generate offense. If they do, it’s a bonus.

Them scoring a goal is like a defensive tackle recovering a fumble and running it back for a touchdown. You don’t expect it, but you’ll be happy to take it.

Instead, their job is to give you good defensive shifts, play a physical game and wear down the other team. They’re only getting 10-12 minutes in a game. Actually, at 5-on-5 it’s more like 7-8 minutes. Is that the coach having a blind spot? A weakness?

Or is that just the way this team has won all season?

You go with what got you there. You don’t deviate from that. And Vigneault won’t, even after them being on the ice in Game 5. No matter what you abacus tells you.

3. Weird night for Hart

This was not a good game for the Flyers’ young goalie. Hey, those nights happen. There were two goals (one that counted, one that didn’t) that he’d like to have back – the second Armia goal above and a goal scored by Suzuki that was waived off after Vigneault correctly challenged the call for for the Canadiens being offside.

It was the second one that made the night strange. After Suzuki scored to seemingly make it 4-2, Vigneault told Brian Elliott to sub in for Hart. Hart left the net and was ready to come off when the Flyers decided to challenge the goal.

While the officials were reviewing it, Hart and Vigneault could be seen having a conversation at the bench. Vigneault looked like he was asking Hart how he felt and then offered up some encouragement and Hart went back in goal, not being pulled.

It was a strange event – something I’ve never seen before. And ultimately, it will be a footnote in the history of this series, but what it did, was show Hart that Vigneault still has confidence in him, even after a shaky outing.

He could have pulled him, but didn’t. He chose to ride the young netminder. As one of the commentors on the Press Row Show said after the game, Vigneault was just making a mound visit.

That has to make Hart feel a lot better about himself as he gets ready to start Game 6 on Friday.

4. Missing in Action

Another narrative that has been perturbing me has been the notion that the Flyers top players are not producing, and everyone is pointing at Giroux, Voracek, Couturier and Hayes.

So, let’s start with this:

As for Hayes, he was the best player on the ice for either team in Game 4 (he even earned the No. 1 star) and he was pretty strong in Game 5 too, even without registering a point.

He and Couturier have not cashed in on some chances, but it’s not for lack of effort or playing poorly. Both are playing at a very high level.

The guys who are disappointing to me at the moment are:

  • Travis Konecny
  • Scott Laughton
  • Derek Grant

The Flyers aren’t getting anything from these guys in the way of secondary scoring, impactful play, or the minimization of mistakes.

Laughton was demoted from the second line. Konency was taken off the top power play line. Grant might be the 3C but he’s getting fourth line minutes.

The Flyers need more of these guys in Game 6 – assuming they’re all in the lineup.

The Flyers did struggle at 5v5 against Montreal in Game 5, mostly because the second and third lines weren’t giving you much of anything.

I wouldn’t be surprised if we saw the return of JVR in Game 6 in place of someone like Grant.

And then you might see a line juggle. How about something like this:

  • Farabee-Couturier-Voracek
  • Raffl-Hayes-Laughton
  • JVR-Giroux-Konecny
  • Bunnaman-Thompson-Pitlick

Moving Giroux back to center is just the kind of short-term move that might benefit the team even though it’s not a long-term solution.

Additionally, both JVR and Konecny have had offensive success playing with Giroux before. It’s not the most defensively responsible line, but if deployed properly, especially with offensive zone draws and Giroux’s propensity to win faceoffs, it might be able to generate some secondary offense against the bottom six lines Montreal is trotting out.

Just some food for thought. Not saying it’ll definitely happen… but I can see it happening.

Either way, it’s good that the playoffs have ramped up to a new level for the Flyers. I think they’ll thrive at this pace and intensity.

[the_ad id=”103880″]