Brian Elliott’s Game 2 redemption helps Flyers even series

13 Comments

PITTSBURGH — After being dominated in all phases of the game on Wednesday night Philadelphia Flyers coach Dave Hakstol decided he was going to come back on Friday with the exact same lineup. Same players. Same line combinations. Same defense pairings. And, perhaps most notably, the same goalie.

It took a lot of faith and confidence in his team to not make any changes after such an emphatic loss, especially in the playoffs. Most coaches would have changed something between Games 1 and 2 because, well, that’s just what you do when you lose a game, whether it’s actually needed or not.

He was rewarded for that confidence and faith with a 5-1 Flyers win that saw them even their first-round series with the Pittsburgh Penguins at one game apiece.

It is almost never any one particular thing that goes into a win, and on Friday there was a lot that went right for the Flyers that went wrong in the first game.

Sean Couturier played a fantastic game and finished with three points. A lot of their young players had huge games (Ivan Provorov had two points; Nolan Patrick and Travis Konecny both scored goals). But the simple fact starting goalie Brian Elliott was able to bounce back after giving up five goals on only 19 shots in Game 1 (the fifth time in five meetings this season that the Penguins had scored at least five goals against the Flyers) before getting pulled and play the game he did may have been the single biggest factor in the win.

After the game Elliott was asked how much it meant to him to have Hakstol stick with him after such a tough first game, especially while still recovering from an injury that kept him out of the lineup for 25 games.

“Whenever you get that start you want to take advantage of that opportunity,” said Elliott. “It’s special to get a start, it’s special to get starts in the playoffs and carry a team and try to be the block in the wall behind them. The way the guys played tonight in front of me, we blocked I don’t know how many more shots tonight than we did the other night. That is key for me and allows me to stay calm and confident as well.”

To his last point the Flyers were actually credited with two fewer blocked shots on Friday, but that’s really not important — if he thinks it gave him more confidence, so be it.

But early on it still looked like he was off of his game.

He whiffed on two long distance Patric Hornqvist shots that rang off the goal post to his left, and even on bad angle shots he seemed to be fighting the puck a little bit. At that point it seemed like it was only a matter of time until he let one in and the dam would once again burst.

But the real turning point, and the point in the game where it seemed obvious that it was going to be a better night for Elliott and the Flyers, came when he stopped Penguins captain Sidney Crosby, fresh off of a Game 1 hat trick, on a breakaway midway through the second period to preserve what was at the time a two-goal Flyers lead. A goal there could have sent the game in a completely different direction. Instead, Elliott calmly snagged Crosby’s backhand out of the air and kept the Penguins off the board.

“You don’t really have that much time to think,” Elliott said when asked what his mindset was on that play. “You just try to be aggressive and play it just like any other breakaway. He’s got a lot of moves I’m sure, and you just try to stay one step ahead as best you can.”

From that point on Elliott looked like a completely different goalie, and even when he seemed to be beaten things still managed to go his way. Like in the closing seconds of the second period Crosby was standing by himself alongside a wide open net and inexplicably fired it through the other side of the crease, completing missing a chance to get the Penguins on the board.

When the Penguins managed to put the puck on net he stopped 34 of the 35 shots he faced in what was one of the best postseason performances of his career. Given that it came 48 hours after one of his worst playoff performances he faced a lot of questions about personal pride and wanting to make a statement after the game.

[Related: Flyers tie series, Penguins may haved dodged Letang injury]

“I don’t know if it was about pride,” said Elliott. “I think it was just about a response. I think to a man we knew we didn’t play a playoff game last game here in Game 1. I think we needed to just come out and have that intensity that we have had in the past two-to-three weeks of the season just to make it here. It was a little weird last game and I just think tonight everybody came out and played their role really well and we played a great team game.”

But it wasn’t just Game 1 that had to cause some concern for Flyers fans. It is that Elliott had been up-and-down most of the season, while the entire goaltending situation was once again unsettled, a Flyers tradition unlike any other. Then there is the fact that Elliott’s career postseason numbers as a whole — including a forgettable performance in Calgary a year ago — have not been great.

He was also asked about that after the game and whether he was — and still is — out to prove something about himself.

“It’s not about proving anything,” said Elliott. “It’s trying to win a game for your teammates, and your friends, and the guys you spend so much time with together over the year. That is what it’s all about it.”

For all of the things that went for the Flyers on Friday they may need more efforts like this from Elliott if they are going to win this series. They can not give the Penguins four power plays every game or get outshot by a 35-20 margin and expect to win many games by four goals.

If they keep taking penalties and giving up that many shots Elliott is going to have to be the difference in the series.

Does he have that in him the rest of the way? That remains to be seen. But for one night on Friday he certainly did. That performance is a big reason things are even as the series shifts back to Philadelphia on Sunday.

————

Adam Gretz is a writer for Pro Hockey Talk on NBC Sports. Drop him a line at phtblog@nbcsports.com or follow him on Twitter @AGretz.

What’s the right contract for Tom Wilson, Capitals?

Getty
3 Comments

What kind of price to put on grit, agitation, intimidation?

In the NHL, it’s something of a Rorschach Test for GMs. It’s easier to gauge the value of elite players and middle-of-the-pack guys when scoring is their calling card, but when it comes to “intangibles,” prices can vary.

Even with that in mind, Tom Wilson stands as a tricky test case.

You can tie yourself in knots examining the agitating winger, especially if you’re a Washington Capitals fan nervously hoping that the RFA signs a deal soon. Relief won’t come from the latest update, either; the Washington Post’s Isabelle Khurshudyan reports that Wilson’s agent Mark Guy said that the two sides aren’t “done or close.”

Khurshudyan provides some interesting ranges for a possible contract: Guy told her that a new deal could be “north of four years,” while Washington also indicated a preference for a long-term agreement. The salary cap could fall somewhere in the $3.5-$4.5 million range, according to Khurshudyan.

With Wilson (probably wisely) opting against salary arbitration, it’s a lot tougher to guess when something will formulate.

But, hey, that gives hockey people plenty of time to bicker about his value. Back when Wilson was suspended during the 2018 Stanley Cup Playoffs, Puck Daddy’s Ryan Lambert summarized the debate regarding the 24-year-old’s value.

” … He is more accurately described a middle-six forward who has been thrust into a bigger role because Barry Trotz is trying to spread the offense across the first two lines more evenly. A lot is made of the fact that Wilson finished with 32 points at 5-on-5 this season, because that was fourth on the Capitals behind only Ovechkin, Kuznetsov, and Nick Backstrom. But look at the guys who had that many 5-on-5 points this year: Alex DeBrincat, Dustin Brown, Gabe Landeskog, Gus Nyquist, Josh Bailey, Kevin Fiala, and Vince Trocheck. These are guys for whom a pretty reasonable evaluation is “They’re mostly pretty good,” but not much more than that, and with the exception of Landeskog and Brown, none of them played with guys who, like Ovechkin, were legit MVP candidates.

The remarkable thing about Wilson is that various debates can swing both ways.

From an “intangibles” perspective, you could argue that he can be something of a poor man’s Todd Bertuzzi, “opening up space” for forwards such as Alex Ovechkin, and maybe get opponents off their game with a violent hit or a fight. Conversely, someone could argue that his tendency to take penalties could put his team in a bad position, or perhaps that players looking to deliver crushing checks may find themselves out of position.

The pure numbers get more complicated as you burrow deeper.

On one hand, his career-high came this season, with a modest 14 goals and 35 points. While he rode shotgun with Ovechkin for significant chunks of time, he also didn’t get a lot of reps on the Capitals’ deadly power play.

Wilson’s possession stats were pretty good for a player of his style … yet again, that sometimes came with high-end players, and he also enjoyed some cushy offensive zone starts in some cases, too.

Still, a guy who can score a bit, hit a lot, and kill a ton of penalties brings quite a bit of value. As a former first-rounder (16th overall in 2012), few would doubt that the Caps hold Wilson in high regard.

The Capitals also boast a pretty robust $8.26M in cap space, according to Cap Friendly, so even though they’ve been prudent when it comes to bringing back members of their championship squad, they’d struggle to say that they can’t afford to pay Wilson at full value.

*Phew*

Is your head spinning yet? That would be understandable, and maybe that explains why contract negotiations seem stilted. What kind of deal would make sense for Wilson?

James O’Brien is a writer for Pro Hockey Talk on NBC Sports. Drop him a line at phtblog@nbcsports.com or follow him on Twitter @cyclelikesedins.

Sharks should still go bold after failing to land Tavares

Getty
1 Comment

No doubt about it, landing John Tavares was the best-case scenario for the San Jose Sharks this summer. They showed as much with what was reported to be a generous offer, but it was not to be.

The question, then, is what is Plan B?

So far, Sharks GM Doug Wilson has been content to lock up some noteworthy in-house talent, and that’s really soaked up a lot of that would-be Tavares money. After signing Joe Thornton for one year, extending Evander Kane to a big deal, and giving term to Tomas Hertl, the Sharks knocked off one of the final items on their to-do list by avoiding salary arbitration with Chris Tierney via a two-year deal.

Sportsnet’s Elliotte Friedman reports that the cap hit comes in at $2.9375 million per season.

As it stands, the Sharks aren’t actually all that flush with money. According to Cap Friendly, they’re only about $4.4M under the ceiling with all 23 roster spots covered.

Does that mean that Wilson can go tan on a beach for the rest of the summer? Maybe that’s the call now that Tavares is off the table, but allow some advice: the Sharks should instead go for it … in 2018-19.

There are a slew of interesting trade options for players with expiring contracts right now, and for many teams, that’s the stumbling block. Why give up assets just for a guy who can walk in free agency next summer? Such a thought process might explain the lack of an Erik Karlsson trade, in particular, right now.

The funny thing is, the Sharks might get protected from themselves by such a barrier.

Simply put, the Sharks’ core is aging, a point we’ve made plenty of times at PHT. Even beyond the obvious (Joe Thornton at 39), Brent Burns is already 33, Joe Pavelski is 34 and entering a contract year, Marc-Edouard Vlasic is 31, and even recently extended Logan Couture is 29. Adding another risky long-term contract could make for a scary situation in San Jose, especially when you consider that Max Pacioretty – one of the optimal targets – is 29 himself.

(Jeff Skinner would theoretically be a more palatable risk since he’s 26, yet just about any long-term contract carries risks for an aging team such as the Sharks.)

Let’s list off the reasons why the Sharks should make big commitments, but mainly for 2018-19, since this is theoretically a great time to poach someone on an expiring contract.

  • Again, this team’s window could close soon. The Sharks might as well swing for the fences while they still can.
  • The free agent market is too shallow for a shark to swim.
  • Beyond the worrisome miles on key players (and the possibility that they might have to let Pavelski walk after this coming campaign), the Sharks are simply formatted for this. They’re already heading into 2019 without their first and fourth-round picks, while their two second-rounders could help them put together the sort of trade package that might be acceptable for a Skinner or Pacioretty.
  • Pacioretty would work under the cap, as his $4.5M cap hit essentially matches the room San Jose currently possesses. They’d either demote someone to the AHL or include some salary in a hypothetical trade to make it actually fit. Skinner’s a little pricier at $5.725M, but moving around deals or some salary retention would alleviate those concerns.
  • Both Skinner and Pacioretty could really give the Sharks that extra boost as scoring wingers. Pacioretty would play with the best center of his career – whether he’d land with Couture or Thornton – while Skinner would be shooting for his first-ever postseason bid. Naturally, both would carry contract motivations, which never hurts one’s ambition.
  • And, hey, maybe a player like Skinner or Pacioretty would earn such rave reviews during an audition that the Sharks decide to re-sign them anyway? The cap could always rise for 2019-20, and such a player could serve as a Pavelski replacement.

That’s a pretty decent list, right?

Now, naturally, the Canadiens and Hurricanes might just want to keep those players for themselves, or perhaps their asking prices will be too steep for San Jose. From here, it sure seems like the right strategy for the Sharks.

Of course, it doesn’t hurt that it would just be flat-out fun to watch Thornton set up Pacioretty for goal after goal …

James O’Brien is a writer for Pro Hockey Talk on NBC Sports. Drop him a line at phtblog@nbcsports.com or follow him on Twitter @cyclelikesedins.

Trouba, Jets millions apart as arbitration date nears

Getty Images
1 Comment

With less than 48 hours to go before his arbitration date, Jacob Trouba and the Winnipeg Jets are reportedly millions apart in valuation for the top-pairing defenseman.

Sportsnet’s Elliotte Friedman reported Wednesday that Trouba is looking for $7 million per season while the Jets, at the moment, are sitting at the $4-million mark instead.

This isn’t unusual for a team to be low-balling ahead of an arbitration case while a player shoots for the moon — it’s an oft-used strategy.

Trouba’s underlying numbers suggest he’s among the league’s best rearguards, but when it comes to goals and assists, he doesn’t show as well. And with Trouba, there’s always the question about his durability, having completed 81 games just once in his career and never playing more than 65 in a season in his four other seasons in the NHL.

Arbitration is no fun for either side, where the dirty laundry is aired and teams tell players why they don’t deserve the money they think they do. But it appears increasingly likely that Trouba’s July 20 date will come to fruition in what would be a first for the Winnipeg Jets and general manager Kevin Cheveldayoff since the team relocated to Winnipeg in 2011.

The Jets also have forward Adam Lowry (July 22), Brandon Tanev (July 25) and Marko Dano (July 30) with scheduled arbitration hearings. Last week, the Jets handed Vezina runner-up Connor Hellebuyck a six-year, $37 million contract, avoiding a potential arbitration hearing with him as well.

Looking at the comparables likely doesn’t favor Trouba and his current valuation of himself.

Take for instance Seth Jones of the Columbus Blue Jackets. He’s in the third year of a six-year deal that sees him pocketing $5.4 million per season.

Jones had 57 points last year, including a career-high 16 goals.

Trouba finished the season with three goals and 24 points and has eclipsed 30 just once (33) in his five-year career.

Colton Parayko also comes to mind.

The St. Louis Blues d-man signed a five-year, $27.5 million deal last summer after a 35-point season and put up the same total in 2017-18.

Another deal that can be used as a comparison is Roman Josi of the Nashville Predators. Josi signed a seven-year, $28 million deal prior to the 2013-14 season.

In the two years before signing the deal, Josi’s numbers were comparable to Trouba’s and Josi is now likely going to get a significant pay raise after hovering around the 50-point mark for the past four seasons.

The end game, at least this season, likely results in a one-year deal in the neighborhood of $5 to $5.5 million for Trouba. The Jets have the option to give Trouba two years, but he would become an unrestricted free agent following the 2019-20 season, so a one-year deal makes sense for the Jets and will put both sides in the same scenario next season if a long-term deal isn’t hashed out before then.

Both sides have said they’d like to commit to one another long-term. The Jets would like to see Trouba’s production go up, and if he can hit the 45-50-point window this season, there’s a good chance there wouldn’t be a second arbitration case but rather a long-term deal to stick in Winnipeg.

Trouba has been given everything he wanted after initially wanting out of Winnipeg two years ago. He’s on a contender playing on one of the league’s best shutdown tandems and commanding big minutes every night.

If he wants to get paid like an elite defenseman, he needs to score like one and will have every opportunity to earn the raise next summer, assuming the Jets hand him a one-year deal after their arbitration hearing on Friday.


Scott Billeck is a writer for Pro Hockey Talk on NBC Sports. Drop him a line at phtblog@nbcsports.com or follow him on Twitter @scottbilleck

PHT Morning Skate: How much, how long for Wilson?; What if Panarin pulls a Tavares?

Getty Images
3 Comments

Welcome to the PHT Morning Skate, a collection of links from around the hockey world. Have a link you want to submit? Email us at phtblog@nbcsports.com.

Tom Wilson needs a new contract. Said contract is likely to be signed with the Washington Capitals. The question is: how much and for how long? (The Washington Post)

• Assessing the cost if Artemi Panarin pulls a John Tavares and leaves in free agency next summer. (The Dark Blue Jacket)

• The Liquor Control Board of Ontario is investigating after one of its workers made a homemade sign calling for the ousting of Eugene Melnyk. (Ottawa Citizen)

• The New York Rangers coaching a staff is going to have a distinct Boston University feel to it next season. (College Hockey News)

• Should the Boston Bruins make any more moves this offseason? (WEEI)

• The New York Islanders should leave the Barclays Center and Brooklyn behind after next season. (IslandersPointBlank)

• After signing Connor Hellebuyck, is it possible for the Winnipeg Jets to afford the rest of their core? (The Score)

• The Nashville Predators have managed to widen the window they have to win the Stanley Cup. (Pred Lines)

• The Florida Panthers have one prospect, Henrik Borgstrom, who stands as their best and brightest, and maybe their key to pulling the trigger on a trade to bring in a big name. (The Puck Under the Sun)

• A quick check on the rebuild happening in Detroit shows that while it’s not without its flaws, it appears to be moving in the right direction. (The Sporting News)

• Is Pittsburgh Penguins general manager Jim Rutherford done dealing this summer? (Penguin Poop)

• Marred by the gong show that is Ottawa Senators owner Eugene Melnyk, here’s a look at the least evil owners in the NHL. (Welcome to your Karlsson Years)

• A new NHL team in Seattle means a new AHL team to keep all the kids on the farm. Where will that farm be? (NHL To Seattle)

• With James Neal and Elias Lindholm added to the mix in Cow Town, will the Calgary Flames breakup the 3M line? (Puck Daddy)

• Flames GM Brad Treliving has finally filled a hole that has existed in Calgary’s lineup for seven years. (Flames from 80 feet)

• A look at if NHL contracts should include an opt-out option. (Devils Army Blog)

• With Kyle Dubas now steering the ship, is there a way back into the good graces of Mike Babcock for some out in the doghouse? (Editor in Leaf)

• Should the NHL start up a summer league? (Gotham Sports Network)


Scott Billeck is a writer for Pro Hockey Talk on NBC Sports. Drop him a line at phtblog@nbcsports.com or follow him on Twitter @scottbilleck