ShareThis Page

Flyers ponder what might have been

| Sunday, April 26, 2009

PHILADELPHIA — Opinions differed among the Philadelphia hierarchy as to whether the Flyers' grabbing a 3-0 lead early in Game 6 of their Eastern Conference quarterfinal series with the Penguins should have ensured the necessity for a Game 7.

"Absolutely," said Flyers chairman Ed Snyder. "No question about it. I thought for sure, after the first period, we were going to head back to Pittsburgh."

Flyers general manager Paul Holmgren was less certain, given the caliber of the opponent.

"They're not the Little Sisters of the Poor," Holmgren said of the Penguins.

Not unless the Sisters have developed a reputation for erasing 3-0 deficits, as the Penguins did Saturday afternoon at the Wachovia Center during their 5-3, series-clinching victory in Game 6.

The Flyers had led 2-0 after one period and 3-0 after Daniel Briere's power-play goal at 4:06 of the second.

"It should be over," at that point, Flyers coach John Stevens said.

But sometime thereafter, perhaps as quickly as the 4:21 mark of the second period, when the Penguins' Max Talbot dropped the gloves with Philadelphia tough guy Daniel Carcillo, the Flyers began to come unglued.

"We had a 3-0 lead, there's a fight and they seemed to get more energy out of that than we did," Holmgren said.

The Penguins scored their first goal at 4:35 and their second 1:57 later, and the Flyers never recovered.

"Maybe (we) sat back a little bit, tried to protect the lead too much," Flyers captain Mike Richards said.

Briere cited a loss of "focus," something he said haunted the Flyers periodically throughout the series.

"Too many times we let one goal turn into two and three," Briere said. "They got those two quick goals (on Saturday), and we were just trying to survive after that."

Philadelphia's Jeff Carter concurred.

"For some reason we stopped doing the things we were doing to get us to that point (up 3-0)," he said.

Those things included "playing simple," Carter said. "We were getting a lot of pucks deep, getting on their 'D' and they were turning pucks over."

The Flyers outshot the Penguins, 11-7, in the first period but were outshot, 28-14, thereafter.

They managed just five shots in the third period, which opened with the teams tied at 3-3 but was untied by Sergei Gonchar at 2:19.

Holmgren assessed his team as "better" than it had been last season and the series with the Penguins as "more competitive" than last season's five-game get-together in the Eastern Conference final, not that he found much solace in either development.

"The idea is to win the Stanley Cup," he said. "That's what makes this hard to swallow."

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.