Meltzer: One of his best....

[murraycraven]

 

WHEN WILL GIROUX BREAK OUT OF EARLY SEASON DOLDRUMS?

 

The Philadelphia Flyers would undoubtedly have a better record right now, perhaps even a .500 start through eight games, if they were scoring at even a modestly higher pace. No matter what other flaws there are to dissect, no team is going to win more than a game or two when it scores just 11 times in eight games. 

 

Here the Flyers are eight games into the season, and their leading goal scorer is Tye McGinn (three goals). Something is going very wrong when defensemen Luke Schenn, Braydon Coburn and Erik Gustafsson have accounted for three of the other eight goals the club has tallied. 

 

There is plenty of blame to go around, up and down the lineup. Players are pressing. For instance, Matt Read has zero points to date, because he's repeatedly flubbed open shots and passes. Wayne Simmonds, who finally scored his first goal of the season on Thursday, has otherwise been a hyper-kinetic mess; running around the offensive zone, looking in vain to make positive things happen rather than simplifying things with the most direct route to the net or to the puck. 

 

To reiterate, there is no shortage of culprits in the Flyers offensive woes. Support players like Read, Simmonds, Sean Couturier and blueline offensive triggers such as Kimmo Timonen (zero points) and Mark Streit (two assists) can certainly be doing more to help, especially in the absences of the injured Vincent Lecavalier (one goal, three points in five games) and top line left wing Scott Hartnell (zero points). McGinn has been the only one doing his part in that regard, with Brayden Schenn (two goals, five points) being the only other player in the top eight who is somewhat absolved. Even Schenn can be more consistent, however.

 

Ultimately, the buck has to stop with Claude Giroux and Jakub Voracek -- and the former just a tad more than the latter -- to be the offensive anchors of this club. The team's 1-7-0 record has a lot to do with the lack of production from the top line. It is flat out unacceptable for both players to be without a goal at this point. Likewise, for the team's top two forward playmakers to have just three assists apiece, is very worrisome.

 

At the end of the day, Giroux needs to be the team's best player. He's the captain, and the one who needs to be able to generate or turn momentum. Yes, he's been unlucky on a couple of shots that hit the post but the truth of the matter is that he's not creating enough scoring chances for himself or his linemates.

 

The one and only time this season where Giroux clearly looked to be in charge was on the play in the waning seconds of Thursday's second period that resulted in Simmonds' deflection goal on the power play. Giroux settled things down, checked the clock, and had a clear attack plan in mind. He saw what the defense was giving him and where Simmonds was stationed, made a strong move and put the puck perfectly toward the net for his teammate to deflect past Marc-Andre Fleury. 

 

Suddenly, out of nowhere, the Flyers went from looking dead in the water to being just one goal down at the second intermission. If not for that momentum-changing play, I am not sure if the Flyers would have generated the sort of pressure they did -- albeit, without getting a tying goal -- through much of the third period.

 

Too much gets made sometimes out of things that get said in the locker room. While sometimes a team leader can say something to get teammates in a can-do mindset, what really counts is the leadership by example on the ice. 

 

Giroux's hand injury should be fully healed by now. However, he is still not shooting the puck often enough or with enough confidence. If there is one single player to look to when the New York Rangers come to town next week, it's got to be number 28. 

 

That's the burden that comes with wearing the "C" and signing a long-term megabucks extension. Voracek and Lecavalier may play co-starring roles, but their name appears after Giroux's in the opening credits of this saga. 

 

By the way, I think Giroux does deserve a little bit of recognition for trying to set a more positive defensive example for the team this year, especially at five on five. He was part of that big third-period coverage meltdown against Vancouver that turned the momentum of the game the wrong way. However, generally speaking, I think the captain has paid better attention to defensive detail in the early going of the season, and I have noticed an uptick from the team as a whole. 

 

Unfortunately, when a team is going as badly as the Flyers, it's the big mistakes that stand out. With no margin for error because the team isn't scoring, one or two gaffes can undo 50-plus minutes worth of good work from a team.

 

*******

 

WHEN WILL VORACEK GET UNTRACKED

 

While Flyers coach Craig Berube is understandably unhappy with the lack of production from his top line, I think you can read between the lines right now that Jakub Voracek is one player with him he's rather displeased right now. 

 

This is just my own speculation but call it an educated guess: I would not be surprised if number 93 is one of the players who has heard his name barked out by the Chief in team critiques, either in private or in the locker room. 

 

After Tye McGinn's stellar first games after his recall from the AHL, Voracek praised his teammate to the local beat writers for giving the top line a spark of energy. Berube's response was to question why Voracek felt he needed someone other than himself to feel energized. 

 

In Thursday's postgame press conference, Berube was asked again about Claude Giroux's struggles. The coach did not absolve the captain (nor should he have) but quickly turned it into a general statement about how the entire line needs to be better. Well, Berube certainly wasn't talking about McGinn. Criticism of Scott Hartnell as well as Voracek and Giroux could easily be inferred in that statement, but Hartnell has been injured and out of the lineup for the last four games. 

 

There is no question that Voracek was still affected in the first couple games of the season by the lower back injury he suffered in the preseason. However, by the fourth game of the season, he no longer looked to be laboring physically. 

 

As a matter of fact, in the games against Florida, Phoenix and Detroit, I thought Voracek's explosive stride and creativity with the puck were starting to come back. He seemed on the brink of a breakthrough offensively -- a line rush goal here, a nifty assist there, and suddenly he finds himself with five points in two games or some similar eye-catching total. 

 

In the last two games, however, I think there was a bit of a backslide by Voracek. He seemed to be giving into frustration and hastiness when he had the puck on his stick. I also thought that his offensive play without the puck -- finding the seams in the defense and getting to a good shooting area -- left a lot to be desired.

 

As with Giroux, Voracek needs to a be a driving force in getting the Flyers' offense untracked if they are to have any sort of turnaround to their horrendous start. If not, I don't care what trades the team makes or what line combinations get used. It won't work unless Voracek does his part in sparking the offense and keeping the tempo high.

 

*******

 

MY VIEW ON TRADE POSSIBILITIES

 

One of the most frequently asked questions that I get -- and this is hardly unique to anyone involved in hockey media -- is what trades I think the Flyers will or should make. 

 

My view on the Flyers current roster is that I like most of the individual players on the team, and think they can be effective players in their assigned roles if they had the right players with them. The problem is that the pieces as a whole may not fit together. 

 

As a general rule, there needs to a be a blend of size and speed, grit and finesse, and offensive creativity and defensive responsibility among the forwards. The blueline corps needs the right blend of puck-movers and stay-at-home defensemen (I still think, for instance, that additional mobility and passing acumen is needed on the Flyers defense corps). 

 

To say "this guy needs to go" or "if they could only bring in that guy" is usually oversimplifying a team's lack of success and the ease of solving the problem. The Flyers roster has bonafide NHL players up and down the lineup; I am just not sure the collective team is fast enough where it needs to be fast, and big enough where it needs to be big. Sometimes at least, it's also not gritty enough where it needs to be gritty (for instance, the third piece to a line that has Couturier and Read as two-thirds of its composition). 

 

Also, it takes two sides to make a trade. Another team may be willing to part with a player who could help the Flyers -- and there are dozens of them around the NHL on other teams right now -- but do the Flyers have the right player to trade to help them in return without simultaneously opening a different hole in the Philadelphia lineup? 

 

Is that a non-answer to the question of current trade possibilities? Yes, it is. But it's also a truthful answer. If I knew all the moves the team was going to make or ought to make, I wouldn't be typing this right now. 

 

The one absolute truism I've learned about hockey over the years is that the more you know about the game, the more you realize you don't know. 

 

That does not mean that general manager Paul Holmgren deserves a free ride for putting together a roster that failed to make the playoffs last year and is off to the league's worst start this year. Actually, what it means is that the burden is his -- not ours -- to recognize the areas that need improvement and find solutions to bring in better-fitting pieces that fit under the salary cap and do not require trading asset overpayment in the deal.

 

Right now, no one on the team with the exception of Steve Mason deserves to feel "safe" from a potential trade. Contractual no-trade clauses, contract lengths and/or salary cap hits complicate that for the team, of course, but in strictly hockey-trade terms, there should be a host of possibilities being considered. In my view, those possibilities should include trading off current veterans for draft pick/prospect assets if the team's struggles continue into the mid-season period.

 

I am not much on trade rumors. Never have been, never will be (although I realize the irony of writing for a site that is largely driven by trade/free agent rumors). My view has always been to focus on the team that it actually on the ice and when that composition changes, to worry about it then.

 

Realistically, I think that Holmgren and Craig Berube will get the rest of this season to get this team into the playoffs and win a round or two. If the club falls short of that, I would not be surprised if Ron Hextall is the GM come next season and he gets to pick his own coach. It's not that either man is bad at his job. 

 

That's just how it goes in hockey, especially in a win-now market like Philly. When you lose too often, players get traded and decision-makers eventually get changed as well.

 

http://www.hockeybuz...Trades/45/54992 

Edited October 21, 2013 by Digityman
cleaned it up

[murraycraven]

http://www.hockeybuzz.com/blog/Bill-Meltzer/Meltzers-Musings-Giroux-Voracek-Trades/45/54992

Man... That came across ugly so here is the link... Stupid mobile version... We need an app!

[radoran]

"That does not mean that general manager Paul Holmgren deserves a free ride for putting together a roster that failed to make the playoffs last year and is off to the league's worst start this year. Actually, what it means is that the burden is his -- not ours -- to recognize the areas that need improvement and find solutions to bring in better-fitting pieces that fit under the salary cap and do not require trading asset overpayment in the deal."

 

Yeah, why do we waste our time reading and writing about the team? The only guy who can fix it is the guy who created the problem in the first place. 

 

WADR to Meltzer, in this same bit of the piece he's decrying trade rumors on a site built upon trade rumors and stating that there is no reason to be speculating about what the team might do on a trade front following two features speculating about what the team might do in improving play. Speculation is part an parcel of columns, blogs, comments, forums, etc.

 

Of course it is Holmgren's responsibility to "fix it." He's the GM. You'd be better off saying that there is no way to predict what Holmgren might do, because Holmgren has shown he's been capable of anything.

 

And if he's not stopped, he'll do it again.

 

"Realistically, I think that Holmgren and Craig Berube will get the rest of this season to get this team into the playoffs and win a round or two."

 

I'm not at all sanguine about the possibility of things going the way he sees them at this point. Glad he still sees a path to a second round exit for this squad. I can, too, but my Infinite Improbability Drive needs a new cup of tea.

 

Happy to be wrong.

[murraycraven]

I don't think he was predicting anything rad. The point was that if Homer and team do not turn it around Homer and Berube are gone at the end of the season. Nowhere does he predict they go past the first round or even make the playoffs in this article... Also... I think he is saying speculation is nothing more than, well., speculation and the Flyers might not or might do something... Nothing provocative but he is right. I have read several trade rumours but until the Flyers find a dance partner it is rumour.

Yeah, he is on Eks site and Ek is the source of everything and anything ridiculous - I agree completely. However Meltzer, IMO, is one of the best Flyers writers out there... Haters gonna hate I guess....

Edited October 20, 2013 by murraycraven

[aziz]

I don't think he was predicting anything rad. The point was that if Homer and team do not turn it around Homer and Berube are gone at the end of the season.

 

that's how i read it, too, that a 2nd or 3rd round exit were the threshold that would save holmgren's job, and if the team falls short of that, next in line steps in.

[murraycraven]

That is how I took it too aziz...

[radoran]

that's how i read it, too, that a 2nd or 3rd round exit were the threshold that would save holmgren's job, and if the team falls short of that, next in line steps in.

Sounds eerily like a prediction.

For me, that's scary from the perspective that Homer is thus encouraged to make short term gain moves over those which might be more beneficial for the team. That's when you exchange young talent for "playoff experience."

My point is, however, that Speculation is what this is all aout.

Like the rest of the column. He's one of the better Flyers writers out there.

[aziz]

Sounds eerily like a prediction.

Well, no. It's a preformance benchmark. Like saying forsby must sell 150 cars this year if he wants to keep his job. No prediction, a condition of continuing employment. 'course, it is a purely speculative condition, so if that's what you're saying, then.... Yeah.

It Is scary, though, for exactly the reasons you stated. For me, holmgren has already stepped in it bad enough that there should be no saving his job.

[canoli]

For me, holmgren has already stepped in it bad enough that there should be no saving his job.

 

yeah, as much as I'm a "it's on the players" kind of fan, obviously it falls to the guy who hired them to put a roster together that can compete. I don't know what you gain by waiting till April unless the team is well over .500. If they're are under .500 when the new year rolls around they should make the switch and let Hextall take over. I'd rather he was in charge at the TD if the Flyers are still stuck in neutral.

[brelic]

For me, that's scary from the perspective that Homer is thus encouraged to make short term gain moves over those which might be more beneficial for the team. That's when you exchange young talent for "playoff experience."

 

Agreed. To me, that's why Homer made the moves to get Vinny and Streit. He was told in no uncertain terms that missing the playoffs again is not an option. So, IMO, he made unnecessary moves because he wants to keep his job.

 

How are you supposed to follow a methodical build plan that way?

 

Remember when the Leafs sucked and the league laughed at them? Well, it seems like Burke's patience is finally paying off... too bad he's not around to enjoy it.

[aziz]

Remember when the Leafs sucked and the league laughed at them? Well, it seems like Burke's patience is finally paying off... too bad he's not around to enjoy it.

 

well, there is the opposite example, i think.  two extreme reasons to focus on the fact that october by itself does not a season make.  the flyers are 1-7 and the leafs are 6-3.  and colorado is 7-1 and the rangers are 2-5.  carolina is 4-2 while the debbies are 1-4.  a 10 game sample is not a particularly accurate measure of a team, especially the first 10 games of the season.  the leafs are still, imo, a bad team, whereas the flyers are not nearly as bad as their record indicates.  long term lessons taken from the first month of the season are wrong as often as not.

[brelic]

well, there is the opposite example, i think.  two extreme reasons to focus on the fact that october by itself does not a season make.  the flyers are 1-7 and the leafs are 6-3.  and colorado is 7-1 and the rangers are 2-5.  carolina is 4-2 while the debbies are 1-4.  a 10 game sample is not a particularly accurate measure of a team, especially the first 10 games of the season.  the leafs are still, imo, a bad team, whereas the flyers are not nearly as bad as their record indicates.  long term lessons taken from the first month of the season are wrong as often as not.

 

Yes, I know it's still October... just saying that the Leafs are looking like a team. It takes time and stability to develop a team.

[doom88]

It takes time and stability to develop a team.

Huge understatement

[radoran]

Yes, I know it's still October... just saying that the Leafs are looking like a team. It takes time and stability to develop a team.

 

Huge understatement

 

Agreed on the time and stability.

 

The team has essentially the same roster as last year - with the caveat that they added VLC and Streit to the existing core and got rid of Bryzgalov.

 

How much time do they need? What's been "unstable"?

 

The main problem seems to be that they just weren't very good last year, either.

[brelic]

Agreed on the time and stability.

 

The team has essentially the same roster as last year - with the caveat that they added VLC and Streit to the existing core and got rid of Bryzgalov.

 

How much time do they need? What's been "unstable"?

 

The main problem seems to be that they just weren't very good last year, either.

Which is why I said before the season started that, on paper, they are not a better team than last year.

To your point, I would not have signed VLC or Streit. If the plan was to give our young guys a chance to grow and develop together, let it be. Why did they need to do anything? We didn't need a center. We didn't need another defenseman. You can argue that Streit brings a puck moving element that we lacked since ignoring Carle, but we already had 8 NHL defensemen under contract. Did we really need Gill and Streit?

Time and stability. Gus, Lauridsen, Akeson, Straka, McGinn, Raffl, Laughton, Manning. Let's see what we have. And if it isn't great, so be it. We'll have the benefit of picks in the meantime. Ride that for a few seasons and reassess where you are in your long-term plan.

[radoran]

Which is why I said before the season started that, on paper, they are not a better team than last year.

To your point, I would not have signed VLC or Streit. If the plan was to give our young guys a chance to grow and develop together, let it be. Why did they need to do anything? We didn't need a center. We didn't need another defenseman. You can argue that Streit brings a puck moving element that we lacked since ignoring Carle, but we already had 8 NHL defensemen under contract. Did we really need Gill and Streit?

Time and stability. Gus, Lauridsen, Akeson, Straka, McGinn, Raffl, Laughton, Manning. Let's see what we have. And if it isn't great, so be it. We'll have the benefit of picks in the meantime. Ride that for a few seasons and reassess where you are in your long-term plan.

 

Obviously, I agree with the general thrust of the statement. And, obviously, the Flyers are never going to take the "long road rebuild" option. My point was that this team has been relatively stable for the past season and coming into this one. How much more time to they need?

 

Snider's query about whether they have overvalued their players has been pretty much answered - they have.

 

Famously, this team doesn't "rebuild" (or even "build" for that matter) - they "reload." And that's certainly not going to change with an 80-year-old owner desperate for a swan song Cup.

 

I didn't mind the VLC signing, aside from the length of the deal - but it did effectively "fix" a problem (center) that didn't really exist on the roster. Streit, I thought was a mistake from the jump and he hasn't done much to change that impression.

 

And, apparently, the only guy that can fix it is the guy who created the problem in the first place...?

 

Lather. Rinse. Repeat.

[aziz]

Which is why I said before the season started that, on paper, they are not a better team than last year.

 

i can't say i agree there.  on paper.  they are minus bryzgalov, plus a halfway decent goalie.  all else, in the most cynical view, were sideways moves.  certainly not backwards, in the short term, at least.  to me, that has to be a net plus, if only slightly, and from a low position.

 

on paper.

[radoran]

i can't say i agree there.  on paper.  they are minus bryzgalov, plus a halfway decent goalie.  all else, in the most cynical view, were sideways moves.  certainly not backwards, in the short term, at least.  to me, that has to be a net plus, if only slightly, and from a low position.

 

on paper.

 

OK, but all last season I was pointing out time and again where they had problems above and beyond Bryzgalov - not that Bryz wasn't a problem, but that there were deeper issues that people were ignoring in the annual quest to blame the coach and/or goalie for the team's overall failure.

 

Many insisted that once they rid themselves of Bryz and got a goalie they could have confidence in, then everything would magically improve and the team would reach its potential.

 

And so they got rid of Bryz. And they have a goalie everyone is now excited about. And they have the same problems they did last year.

 

Maybe it wasn't just the goalie and the coach?

[aziz]

And so they got rid of Bryz. And they have a goalie everyone is now excited about. And they have the same problems they did last year

 

define the problems they had last year.  this year, they can't score.  end of story, end of big list o' debilitating issues.  they are giving up relatively few shots, getting solid goaltending, defensive breakdowns -while still there- aren't nearly the plague they were last season.  the issue this season is 1.38 goals per game, 2nd worst in the league.  last season, they averaged 2.73 g/g, 9th best in the league.  the issue last season was hemorrhaging goals against, to the point that even their top-third-of-the-league goal scoring couldn't overcome.  

 

that doesn't smell like the "same problems" as this year at all.

 

perspective guy in me wants to point out that this team did have the same offensive problems at the start of last season.  i grant you.  16 goals in their first 8 games, including a 7 goal outburst against florida.  drop the high and low (the 7 against florida and a shutout against NJD) from those first 8, and you end up with....a 1.33 g/g over that early stretch.  so, now we're back to similarities.  last season, the flyers found their offensive game in game 9 and never really had chronic offensive problems after.  they did have chronic defensive problems, though.  i, for one, believe those to be largely mitigated (in no small part due to stable goaltending).  should the team actually follow the pattern they established last season, i believe things should trend upwards from here.  if they follow the pattern.

[brelic]

i can't say i agree there.  on paper.  they are minus bryzgalov, plus a halfway decent goalie.  all else, in the most cynical view, were sideways moves.  certainly not backwards, in the short term, at least.  to me, that has to be a net plus, if only slightly, and from a low position.

 

on paper.

Well, that was annoying... I had a long post done up and accidentally closed my browser. User error.

Anyway, to me the moves they made did not make them better on paper. "Sideways" would fit too because it's not better.

Bryzgalov, on paper, is better than Mason. And while Mason was impressive in his 7 starts at the end of the year in utterly meaningless games, it's hardly enough to erase 4 years of consistently bad goaltending statistics. Good thing paper means nothing because Mason has been excellent so far.

Streit and Lecavalier are defensive liabilities, and we already had a problem with that. Things could be different here, but it's hard to completely ignore Lecavalier's career -116 regardless of what you think of that statistic. Everything about him is in decline - his shots per game, goals per game, assists per game, goals created per game. His point shares are in decline (huge decline offensively, which is why got him in the first place, isn't it?). His TOI is in decline. So naturally we signed him for 5 years.

Streit is probably a little more durable because he started his NHL career later and his role is less punishing than, say, Grossman's or Schenn's. That being said, I still felt at the time that it was an unnecessary move. Another signal that we don't trust the guys we have and that they won't even entertain the idea of waiting to see how they develop in more important roles.

So, yeah, I didn't think this team, on paper, was better than last year's. And regardless of where we put the blame, so far the on ice product confirms that they are not better. In fact they are worse, which I didn't think could happen.

It's only 8 games in, so lots of time to turn things around. But with Homer on the hot seat, I would put my money on a desperation move that might give us short term improvement at the expense of longer term planning and stability.

[brelic]

define the problems they had last year.  this year, they can't score.  end of story, end of big list o' debilitating issues.  

[...]

last season, the flyers found their offensive game in game 9 and never really had chronic offensive problems after.

The problem wasn't scoring, overall, but at 5 on 5. They were 25th last year (0.86 gpg @ 5 on 5) and are at the bottom again this year. That puts a lot of pressure on the special teams to score and prevent scoring because they won't score at 5 on 5.

[aziz]

The problem wasn't scoring, overall, but at 5 on 5. They were 25th last year (0.86 gpg @ 5 on 5) and are at the bottom again this year. That puts a lot of pressure on the special teams to score and prevent scoring because they won't score at 5 on 5.

 

where are you getting those numbers?  nhl.com says they were 19th in the league 5-on-5, with 1.72 5-5 g/g.  83 5-5 goals in 48 games.  that isn't great, but it isn't 25th in the league, and is way more than .86g/g.

[radoran]

define the problems they had last year.  this year, they can't score.  end of story, end of big list o' debilitating issues.  they are giving up relatively few shots, getting solid goaltending, defensive breakdowns -while still there- aren't nearly the plague they were last season.  the issue this season is 1.38 goals per game, 2nd worst in the league.  last season, they averaged 2.73 g/g, 9th best in the league.  the issue last season was hemorrhaging goals against, to the point that even their top-third-of-the-league goal scoring couldn't overcome.  

 

that doesn't smell like the "same problems" as this year at all.

 

perspective guy in me wants to point out that this team did have the same offensive problems at the start of last season.  i grant you.  16 goals in their first 8 games, including a 7 goal outburst against florida.  drop the high and low (the 7 against florida and a shutout against NJD) from those first 8, and you end up with....a 1.33 g/g over that early stretch.  so, now we're back to similarities.  last season, the flyers found their offensive game in game 9 and never really had chronic offensive problems after.  they did have chronic defensive problems, though.  i, for one, believe those to be largely mitigated (in no small part due to stable goaltending).  should the team actually follow the pattern they established last season, i believe things should trend upwards from here.  if they follow the pattern.

 

you seem to define them quite well. They are in almost exactly the same situation they were in - are we expecting different results?

 

No, actually, from your comment we're expecting the same results.

 

Those results? Six points out, looking in.

 

Same problem.

 

And "after nine games" was no great shakes. In half of the next ten they scored two or less. 7 against the Isles and 6 against Pit skews the number up.

 

Not surprisingly, they were 5-5 in those games.

 

Then ten after that? Scored two or less in six of them.

 

Ten after that? Scored two or less in five of them.

 

Same problem. They can go out and whoop up with 7-0 and 7-1 wins, but the test is consistent scoring and they don't have that, haven't had that and aren't looking like they will have that. If you score less than 2 goals in 50% of your games, it doesn't matter what your overall  "goals per game" is.

 

It's gonna be tough to win.

[brelic]

where are you getting those numbers?  nhl.com says they were 19th in the league 5-on-5, with 1.72 5-5 g/g.  83 5-5 goals in 48 games.  that isn't great, but it isn't 25th in the league, and is way more than .86g/g.

You're right. I was looking at the wrong stat (5 on 5 goals for/against ratio). So the Flyers were 25th with a 0.86 ratio.

[aziz]

you seem to define them quite well. They are in almost exactly the same situation they were in - are we expecting different results?
 
No, actually, from your comment we're expecting the same results.

 

no, i'm expecting different results.  i'm increasingly confident the flyers now have a goalie unlikely to allow two floaters from the blueline per game.  tamp down on the goals against and maintain the goals for and:  different results.  likely drastically different results.

 

in fact, this might be a good season for the flyers if they do, in fact, follow the offensive pattern they set last season.  a ton of one goal losses turn into multi-goal wins with a decent goaltender.  my only real concern with this season is whether or not the offense can return to last season's form.

 

And "after nine games" was no great shakes. In half of the next ten they scored two or less. 7 against the Isles and 6 against Pit skews the number up.

 

Not surprisingly, they were 5-5 in those games.

 

Then ten after that? Scored two or less in six of them.

 

Ten after that? Scored two or less in five of them.

 

hey, guess what?  that's normal.  that's why the average goals for in the league is around 2.6.  because teams score 2-ish goals in half their games, and more-ish in the other half.  2 to 3 goals per game is normal.  last season, the president's cup winning blackhawks scored 2 or less in 17 games.  pittsburgh, goalscoring leader, 16 games.  and those are the goalscoring elite.  the kings had 22 games last season with 2 or less.  

 

that isn't to say that the flyers didn't have spikey goalscoring, they absolutely did.  but so does everyone.