The Art of the Neutral Zone Trap in Hockey

Adeen Rao

Registered User
Mar 23, 2021
5
5
The Neutral Zone Trap has been commonly criticized by hockey’s coaches, players, and fans alike for ruining the scoring aspect of hockey. The simple fact is, no matter how many rules are implemented by the National Hockey League (NHL) to sway teams away from the trap, it will never go away. The trap is the vaccine for closing the talent gap in any level of hockey.
There are many types of traps, the 1-1-3 trap is a type of trap which sees one forward forecheck, another forward behind him forecheck, and the two defenseman and a defensive forward hold the blueline and pressure the puck carriers into the boards. A 1-3-1 trap has only one forechecker, and it has one defenseman and two forwards on the blueline, and another defenseman as a safety in the defensive zone. A 1-2-2 trap has one forechecker, two forwards in the neutral zone pressuring, and two defenders on the blueline.
The goal of all these traps is where they do not differ at all, a trap is implemented to force long passes and turnovers that create odd man rushes. It also forces teams to dump the puck into the zone to try and get offense, which is a very tedious method if a team does not have the necessary speed and conditioning.
At the NHL level, I have done a lot of research on how teams have been affected by certain coaches bringing in the trap system, and all of them positively impacted the teams record and goals against immediately.
My absolute favorite example of the trap working it’s magic is the 2018-19 New York Islanders and the transformation of their franchise by Barry Trotz. Trotz inherited a team that had just lost its franchise center John Tavares and was dead-last in goals against in the league. Trotz implemented his 1-1-3 trap and the Islanders ended up being first in the league in goals against and made it to the second round of the Stanley Cup Playoffs after sweeping a Penguins team with an overwhelming advantage when it came to star-power. This wasn’t a one-season fluke from Trotz either, he followed up the 2018-19 campaign with a 6th-place ranking in the Goals Allowed department in 2019-20 and a Conference Finals appearance that resulted in a loss to the eventual Stanley Cup Champions. In the present, Trotz’s Islanders are at the top of the toughest division in the NHL the East Division and are fourth in the league in goals against.
One may say, Trotz is a future hall of fame coach not any coach can run the trap. The 1994-95 Florida Panthers were 20-22-6 and Doug Maclean -- the same Maclean who coached only two full seasons in the NHL -- implemented a neutral zone trap and saw the virtually identical Panthers roster with the addition of first-overall pick Ed Jovanovski to the Stanley Cup Finals. In his short two-season tenure with the Panthers, Maclean produced two playoff appearances for the Panthers which lasted as their only playoff appearances for almost 15 years.
“With Coach Maclean, we practically knew the trap like a science,” former Panthers player Scott Mellanby said in a documentary about the 1996 Panthers team. “We used to run the trap for about an hour every practice.”
The dead-puck era which was named as such because of the amount of teams that used the trap saw two franchises absolutely run a clinic on the ice. The Detroit Red Wings with Scotty Bowman’s famous Left Wing Lock and the New Jersey Devils with Jacques Lemaire’s 1-2-2. Bowman’s Red Wings finished in the top 10 in the goals against category in every single year of his storied nine-year tenure with the Red Wings. The Wings used Bowman’s strategy to propel them to three Stanley Cups. Lemaire’s Devils were 14th in the league in goals against before he arrived and Lemaire’s system had the Devils 2nd in the same category the following season, kickstarting an incredible run of being in the top five of goals against in every single one of the five seasons Lemaire was in New Jersey. Lemaire would also win a cup in 1995 sweeping Bowman’s young Wings in the final.
The main caution with using the trap is it’s sustainability. Once teams get familiar with the system after a season or two, most talented teams will abuse teams who do not develop their trap scheme. This can be seen with Guy Boucher’s tenures in Tampa Bay and Ottawa. Boucher saw immediate success in both teams when he arrived, as he led the Lightning to Game 7 of the Conference Finals in his first season despite running a trio of 41 year-old Dwayne Roloson, inexperienced Mike Smith and career AHLer Dan Ellis in net. In Ottawa, the Senators went from 28th in goals against to 11th with Boucher’s arrival but more importantly they went from missing the playoffs to being one goal away from the Stanley Cup Finals despite having a roster that consisted of mostly AHLers and players who are currently retired as their depth alongside Erik Karlsson on one leg with Mark Stone and Mike Hoffman.
Boucher is not a good hockey coach but, even he could bring teams immediate success by implementing the trap. The most common factor with most of my examples of the trap’s usage, is that it even brings winning seasons to teams that on paper should not be winning.
Another caution with the trap is that it should only be used at a level of hockey where the players are disciplined enough to play a defensive oriented game. A lot of young players are very offensively focused so it can absolutely ruin a trap if even one player doesn’t play the system properly.
The trap is a system that is often criticized but I’m of the firm belief that those critiques don’t account for the fact that putting your team in the best position to win should always be a top priority. It is a system that exacerbates the team aspect of hockey, as it requires great chemistry and communication as a unit, but when executed properly, the rewards are great and that is shown by its legacy of success at the highest level of hockey.
 

Theokritos

Global Moderator
Apr 6, 2010
12,655
5,056
The trap is a system that is often criticized but I’m of the firm belief that those critiques don’t account for the fact that putting your team in the best position to win should always be a top priority.

I don't think the latter part is controversial, but one can concede it and at the same time lament the state of hockey it leads to. Criticism of certain developments considered detrimental to the attractiveness of the game and attempts to counter them with rule changes have always been part of the fabric of the game just as those defensive tactics have been.
 

Filthy Dangles

Registered User*
Sponsor
Oct 23, 2014
29,895
42,347
Traditional trapping, just falling into a neutral zone forecheck all the time, doesn't really exist anymore. That Senators team you reference was probably the closest thing to it though.

The Barry Trotz islanders you mentioned are more of a dump and chase team, dogged on the forecheck in the offensive zone. They kind of smother you all up and down the ice. That's just good defense overall.

People often conflate the 2.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Adeen Rao

Adeen Rao

Registered User
Mar 23, 2021
5
5
I don't think the latter part is controversial, but one can concede it and at the same time lament the state of hockey it leads to. Criticism of certain developments considered detrimental to the attractiveness of the game and attempts to counter them with rule changes have always been part of the fabric of the game just as those defensive tactics have been.

I feel like in situations like the 96' Panthers and the 17' Senators or if you are a youth hockey team with a severe disadvantage, full-time trapping shouldn't be criticized because under a normal systems those teams had no shot of winning.
 

Adeen Rao

Registered User
Mar 23, 2021
5
5
Traditional trapping, just falling into a neutral zone forecheck all the time, doesn't really exist anymore. That Senators team you reference was probably the closest thing to it though.

The Barry Trotz islanders you mentioned are more of a dump and chase team, dogged on the forecheck in the offensive zone. They kind of smother you all up and down the ice. That's just good defense overall.

People often conflate the 2.

That's interesting honestly I feel like I remember significantly though that in the playoffs they very frequently run the 1-1-3. I wouldn't say they are a full-time trap team but I would say the heavy use of the trap in Trotz's system is why that franchise did a complete 180. The usage of the trap in the early days of his tenure created a dogged defensive culture if you get my drift
 

Theokritos

Global Moderator
Apr 6, 2010
12,655
5,056
I feel like in situations like the 96' Panthers and the 17' Senators or if you are a youth hockey team with a severe disadvantage, full-time trapping shouldn't be criticized because under a normal systems those teams had no shot of winning.

You can't blame the team for doing it, but as a neutral fan I'm not obliged to be contemplate with the development. One teams does it and next thing you know, half of the league is doing it. No thanks. Certainly I will criticize this development and embrace counter measures.
 

Adamantoise

Registered User
Mar 15, 2021
286
391
I feel like in situations like the 96' Panthers and the 17' Senators or if you are a youth hockey team with a severe disadvantage, full-time trapping shouldn't be criticized because under a normal systems those teams had no shot of winning.
Every team in the top 4 of SC playoffs Last year uses the 1-1-3.

Isles use it against Quick counter attacks, while their 1-2-2 is used against controllwd breakouts.

System Sheets: NYI 2021
 
  • Like
Reactions: ESH

tarheelhockey

Offside Review Specialist
Feb 12, 2010
86,702
144,267
Bojangles Parking Lot
I don't think the latter part is controversial, but one can concede it and at the same time lament the state of hockey it leads to. Criticism of certain developments considered detrimental to the attractiveness of the game and attempts to counter them with rule changes have always been part of the fabric of the game just as those defensive tactics have been.

That's pretty much my feeling. I wouldn't call defensive-minded conservative play "art". As a player (in hockey, basketball... pretty much anything) I will definitely stand a better chance to win the game if I play conservatively and force my opponent to make mistakes which I then convert to points with my limited skill. That's not me being artistic, by a long shot. I wouldn't pay to watch myself play anything. Hell, I'd probably boo myself.
 

Adeen Rao

Registered User
Mar 23, 2021
5
5
That's pretty much my feeling. I wouldn't call defensive-minded conservative play "art". As a player (in hockey, basketball... pretty much anything) I will definitely stand a better chance to win the game if I play conservatively and force my opponent to make mistakes which I then convert to points with my limited skill. That's not me being artistic, by a long shot. I wouldn't pay to watch myself play anything. Hell, I'd probably boo myself.

I get what you are saying, but I personally think it's amazing how it can basically level the playing field so easily. That 1995-96 Panthers team had NO BUSINESS making even the playoffs let alone the Cup Final. They beat Mario Lemieux and Jagr with the trap. Ed Jovanovski said the reason he became such a disciplined defenseman was because of Coach Maclean's trap, I think that teams that often find their players caring too much about offensive stats should implement the trap. It's not like the system creates bad hockey, watching the Islanders play is actually very fun they have great stars like Barzal who literally has the goal of the season right now. The Islanders completely neutralized a Penguins team a year removed from the second round and two years removed from Back-To-Back cups. Sidney Crosby, Evgeni Malkin, Phil Kessel, swept by....a team whose Top 3 Players were 21-year old Barzal, Josh Bailey, and Anders Lee.
 

Adeen Rao

Registered User
Mar 23, 2021
5
5
You can't blame the team for doing it, but as a neutral fan I'm not obliged to be contemplate with the development. One teams does it and next thing you know, half of the league is doing it. No thanks. Certainly I will criticize this development and embrace counter measures.
I think other teams won't do it because the Islanders system works so well because they have a player as skilled as Barzal that they can rely on. Not only is Barzal amazing offensively with Lee and Eberle but he's a star that is just as vital on the defensive end. I couldn't see the Sabres succeeding with Trotz as their coach for example, team is too selfish. Same goes for teams that rely on their young talent like New Jersey, Ottawa, etc. A trap doesn't really embrace the creativity or develop the creativity of players like Stutzle, Hughes, Hischier so you risk stunting their growth.
 

tarheelhockey

Offside Review Specialist
Feb 12, 2010
86,702
144,267
Bojangles Parking Lot
I get what you are saying, but I personally think it's amazing how it can basically level the playing field so easily. That 1995-96 Panthers team had NO BUSINESS making even the playoffs let alone the Cup Final. They beat Mario Lemieux and Jagr with the trap. Ed Jovanovski said the reason he became such a disciplined defenseman was because of Coach Maclean's trap, I think that teams that often find their players caring too much about offensive stats should implement the trap. It's not like the system creates bad hockey, watching the Islanders play is actually very fun they have great stars like Barzal who literally has the goal of the season right now. The Islanders completely neutralized a Penguins team a year removed from the second round and two years removed from Back-To-Back cups. Sidney Crosby, Evgeni Malkin, Phil Kessel, swept by....a team whose Top 3 Players were 21-year old Barzal, Josh Bailey, and Anders Lee.

Bear in mind that a very large part of those playoff upsets had to do with deliberate violation of the rules. The entire reason it worked, was an unwillingness of the referees to call every single one of the dozens of interference/holding/hooking penalties that were rightfully earned.

Non-coincidental penalty calls in the 1996 Eastern Conference Finals:

Game 1: Florida 5, Pittsburgh 5
Game 2: Florida 5, Pittsburgh 5
Game 3: Florida 6, Pittsburgh 7
Game 4: Florida 2, Pittsburgh 4
Game 5: Florida 4, Pittsburgh 3
Game 6: Florida 6, Pittsburgh 6
Game 7: Florida 4, Pittsburgh 3
Total: Florida 32, Pittsburgh 33

Amazing, isn't it? Penalty calls almost identical, not just in total but also in every single game of a series between a notoriously tough, grinding, obstruction oriented team and a notoriously soft, skilled, speed-oriented team.

The timing here is interesting because this issue is being litigated on the main board in light of the Tim Peel incident. For the purposes of this thread, I think the question is this:

Even if we recognize that this is coaching brilliance, taking a team which should have no shot and winning by exploiting inherent weaknesses in the rulebook and rule-enforcement, is that actually the highest state of hockey gameplay? Or is this aspect of hockey one in which the game is "broken", perhaps even inferior to other sports? Certainly we would not expect to see ball/strike counts favor the weaker team in a baseball game, or foul counts favor the weaker team in a basketball game. This happens in hockey because the door is (and to be clear -- always has been) wide open for exploitation, especially in the playoffs.
 

Nerowoy nora tolad

Registered User
May 9, 2018
1,444
676
Sunshine Coast, Australia
I don't think the latter part is controversial, but one can concede it and at the same time lament the state of hockey it leads to. Criticism of certain developments considered detrimental to the attractiveness of the game and attempts to counter them with rule changes have always been part of the fabric of the game just as those defensive tactics have been.
Same thing with goalies adopting strategies that increase effectiveness but decrease the importance of actual skill/talent:

20140828.png
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad