Corsi Analysis Game 9: Flyers V. Islanders

Scott Laughton, Philadelphia Flyers (Photo by Elsa/Getty Images)
Scott Laughton, Philadelphia Flyers (Photo by Elsa/Getty Images)

After taking care of the Devils the Flyers defeated the pesky New York Islanders on Saturday night using a strong first period performance that would lead to an overtime victory.  The teams traded stretches of play where one was clearly the more energized and dominant team.

First Period

CF:13 CA:15 CF%:46:4%

The Flyers dominated play throughout the first period, in what may have been the best first period that the team has played all season.  The corsi results were surprising, mainly because the Flyers were obviously the better team. They were able to control pucks, and then make great passes to open players for opportunities.  They were winning pucks and foot races and appeared to be much faster than the opposition.

The Islanders appeared to be asleep. In the event that the Islanders had puck possession in the offensive zone, they were nearly robotic in their approach, taking bad shots from bad angles and distant shots from the point. Elliott, of course, devoured all of the Islanders’ shots

Philadelphia would leave the period with a two goal advantage.

Second Period

CF:8 CA:14 CF%:36.36%

The second period was not a good period for the Flyers, it was a story that was told by the corsi for percentage. Even if CF% was directionally accurate, the magnitude that was reported was misleading.

Philadelphia’s number was dramatically altered by shifts where the Islander scored.  Both featured extended shifts by the Flyers lines, with increasing pressure and scoring chances as fatigue slowed their lines down. It was much in the same way the playoffs.

Their percentage was also suppressed by their own actions. They entered the offensive zone at least four times with out generating a shot attempt. This was not because of the Islanders superior defense, but perhaps by the Flyers’ design.  Rather than shooting the team would attempt  a cross ice pass from the half boards, or pull the puck down into the corner, beckoning the Islander defensemen .

The Flyers’ mistakes would be their undoing and they would leave the period  with the score tied at 2-2

Third Period and Overtime

CF:10 CA:15 CF%: 40.00%

The Islanders’ physical forecheck seemed to take a toll on the Flyers as the game advanced into its latter stages.  Whether it was the physical play or the overwhelming pressure, they had great difficulty controlling the puck in their own end or controlling with the puck past the red line for most of the third period.  Again, the Flyer goaltending would be the difference, allowing them to survive to the overtime period.

Over time was a completely different animal, as the Flyers owned the puck for the majority of the overtime.  Scott Laughton, who was flying for the duration of the extra time, would net the overtime goal on after receiving a nifty pass from Ghost on the counter attack.

Corsi WInner

NYI Oliver Wahlstrom CF: 8 CA:1 CF%: 88.89%

Wahlstrom had a strong game from a corsi perspective but was not really noticeable as a contributor and played the least 5v5 minutes of any of the Islander players.

Corsi Loser

PHI Erik Gustafsson CF:6 CA:14 CF%: 30.00 %

Gustafsson has been a mixed bag for the Flyers this season.  He has plus vision and passing and is valuable moving the up ice.  His defensive coverage and judgement is lacking more often than not.  On this night the Islanders would grind-up Gustafsson on the forecheck, causing him to endure prolonged shifts that were rife with turnovers.  Gustafsson’s predicament was not entirely of his own making, as many of the Flyers wilted under Islander pressure, but Gustafsson was exposed badly on this night.

Conclusion

That pattern that has defined the season continued and the Flyers won a game that statistically, it appears they shouldn’t have.  It may be that the Flyers have been lucky often and will have their luck run out some day.  It could be that they have banked on their stellar play of their goaltenders, and the winning trend will continue  for as long as the excellent goal tending is present.

Perhaps the team has come to the conclusion that wins and losses mean more than shot attempts and the strategy is to take shots that give them the best chance to win, rather than shots just for the sake of shooting.