There are more advanced player evaluation metrics and models that showed Hayes to be one of the most valuable players to this team last year and this year. Even by the eye test it was apparent that he was excelling in the shut down role and still driving play with poor linemates- it's why it was so laughable when some people on these boards (not you) were saying that Hayes was stat padding at the end of last year. No, ya dope, he got better minutes, actual linemates, and powerplay time. What a shocker that a skilled offensive player started scoring more when used that way.
The other thing I've been meaning to ask you is your thoughts on my posts about Quinn collapsing these guys down low too far in the d-zone. I saw you liked a post from a GDT last week or so, but never got to ask you further about the topic.
I don't really have any insight in this area other than the very basic stuff. In the modern game you have overloaded more and more and moved away from the man-man approach we used to see. These pictures kind of illustrates, to the left, how everyone played 20 years ago, and to the right, how most play today (Y=winger, B=D):
Like the idea behind this development is not hard to get. The defending Y's job is to remove the passing lane from yellow C to B. By moving down this deep you do that and you also really take away the ice and passing lanes in more dangerous positions. Often the phrase "we left a player wide open in front of our net" is used, but its not true that often. Stuff happens and players reacts and have to react to it. If you play like the picture to the left and yellow C dekes the pants off his guy the other D have to leave his guy and try to handle both. Any of the defending Ys will not have time to drop down and take away the Y that now is wide open.
This is what you mean when you talk about
layers in hockey. In the picture to the right the blue Ys can easily drop down and take out the yellow Ys if required.
But nothing comes without a price. Attacking forwards are really good at getting the puck to unmarked Ds. You often see forwards send the puck around the entire attacking zone along the boards to the D at the far end, that can be done in the picture to the right but not left. Zucc uses this often, and its interesting how he doesn't look if we have a D open there or not, its hard to get time and see that, but he just sees how far down the defending winger is, if he is deep Zucc throws a no look pass around the boards to the D at the far point. And of course, every once in a while that D is changing and the puck goes out of the zone...
Under AV we played much more like the picture to the left and didn't quite get those layers. We didn't just opt to leave guys open, but when situations occurred we got exposed. You undoubtedly must play like more to the right in todays game, forwards are so skilled that the Ds need back-up and you must take away the ice. OTOH you of course both want to eat the cookie and keep it, and in all these instances in hockey you get into the magical word used -- "
decision making". Making the small decisions. Like there is no reason for the defending wingers to drop down when the Ds have the guy with the puck under control? Right? So you leave it up to the winger to decide, when its needed you collapse deep, when its not you stay up. Then you just try to educate your personell, and that certainly is a work in progress. The term decision making is used by coaches in relation to a situation where its best from one perspective to play one way but from another perspective its better to play another way, instead of picking your poison you try to play both ways and have the players making individual decisions on the ice as to when to play each respective way.
Just like you I think we over committed on the back check when you made that post. Like we really had the forward under control but the wingers went down real deep and that forward could more or less fire the puck hard along the boards -- of course unstoppable for our defenders, and the puck was picked up by un-marked Ds on the points.