Which Defense works best in the NHL?
- Thread starter Jeffrey Pedler
- Start date
norrisnick
The best...
- Apr 14, 2005
- 28,797
- 17,926
While true, at some point the opposition will have the puck and you need a system of sorts to mitigate and get the puck back.
Gjman2019
Registered User
- Dec 6, 2017
- 2,001
- 2,801
Good post....
I like the idea of a zone defense that always protects the high percentage area.....The opponent can shoot from the perimeter all night if they want......Goalie equipment seems pretty big now a days and with good positioning they can just play the geometry game in terms not giving shooters from the outside any daylight to shoot at......
But there is no shot clock to save you like there is in Basketball so you do have to have some sort of wrinkle or scheme to get the puck back.
Gjman2019
Registered User
- Dec 6, 2017
- 2,001
- 2,801
norrisnick
The best...
- Apr 14, 2005
- 28,797
- 17,926
Yeah, it's a trip how many times you run into people saying "just play offense, dummy" when discussing defensive systems. Defense is what allows you to play offense. Not the other way round.
Ianturnedbull
Registered User
- Jun 11, 2022
- 5,170
- 6,486
Wow you sound like a great coach. Don't worry about Dzone coverage, just make sure they don't get the puck
lomiller1
Registered User
- Jan 13, 2015
- 6,409
- 2,968
Which one? If you pressure the offense to try to get the puck back chances are you'll give up good shot opportunists. If you sit back and protect the high danger area's then you probably are not getting the puck back any time soon.
It's my intuition that if you have a big goalie, box works well. If you have a smaller goalies, overload is what I prefer. With box it's possible to deny most of the high danger shots that slow big goalies struggle with. Obviously this is bit counter intuitive, since Bruins had one of the fastest goalies of modern times in Rask (6'3" 176lbs!).
I'm no Bruins expert, but Bergeron's defensive value I know to have come from faceoffs, aggressive forecheck (AND backcheck!), great personal positioning, great stick stick positioning and of course the IQ to make high percentage non-risky plays.
Outside the defensive zone systems, the aggressive forechecking is something that many young and fast teams have used VERY effectively! Few teams that come to mind are 2017/18 VGK, 2020/21 MTL, 2022/23 NJD and team Finland who has done this almost every year with good success the past 20 years. All these have ended up with results way above their pay grade. You don't need much skill to do it, just fresh legs, so it is something all younger teams try to do, but it takes lot of short shifting and disciplined team to do it properly. A lone slow forechecker usually achieves nothing no matter how aggressive he is, but few faster guys doing the same usually leads to havoc sooner than later.
Machinehead
The Olli react should add points!
The best method of defense is being aggressive in the neutral zone and not letting them in the zone to begin with. If they do get in, overload to get the puck back with a heavy focus on breakouts.
More passive forms of defense are just fake "structure" which relies on your goaltender.
More passive forms of defense are just fake "structure" which relies on your goaltender.
- Nov 15, 2020
- 18,336
- 38,502
Man on man is easiest but most exploitable. When Keefe took over for Babcock hours before the game against Arizona, he asked the players to play man on man and it was jarring to see that in the NHL. Just guys following guys around there was no structure. A good team would move the puck quickly and cause confusion and exploit someone getting lost in the shuffle.
Otherwise I am a fan of whichever system fits the team best. The Leafs play box plus one and achieved great defensive results for it. It's amazing what just having guys in predictable spots and having multiple people open for help when under pressure does instead of having everyone blow the zone and have the D launch the puck down the ice and hope it lands on a stick for odd man rushes.
Otherwise I am a fan of whichever system fits the team best. The Leafs play box plus one and achieved great defensive results for it. It's amazing what just having guys in predictable spots and having multiple people open for help when under pressure does instead of having everyone blow the zone and have the D launch the puck down the ice and hope it lands on a stick for odd man rushes.
- May 4, 2009
- 9,416
- 9,306
HighLifeMan
#SnowyStrong
- Feb 26, 2009
- 7,299
- 3,046
I agree.
Look no further than Calgary last season. Yes, they were elite at shot suppression, but when the breakdowns did in fact occur, the puck was in the back of the net more often than not. Markstrom and Vladar's SV% reflected that. It worked wonders the prior season, but Edmonton (McDavid) exploited the system in the playoffs and Darryl was unwilling to adapt or recognize the issue. It's not a scheme I would recommend/run against the elite teams/players in the NHL, because as you said, it's highly exploitable.
PlayMakers
Registered User
It’s a copy cat league, and teams tend to copy Cup winners. The Bruins haven’t won in awhile so maybe that’s why teams haven’t copied them, but I could see more teams doing it after the season Boston had, and the post season Vegas had.
PlayMakers
Registered User
Aggressive systems are en vogue now in college and the pros but I‘m not a fan. In my experience, aggressive/overload systems give up fewer shots but more grade A scoring chances. When you beat an overload you’re at worst 2on1 in front of the goalie, and at best 1on0 or 3on1. When you beat a box+1 you’re still just shooting from the perimeter or through defenders. It’s very hard to get to the net 1v1 because there is a second layer, and its hard to get ‘inside’ because they always have two guys in the slot (who also help prevent rebounds).
Raccoon Jesus
Jim Hiller is point shaving games
Pretty much explains everything as to why you thought Brendan Smith was a good player.
When a measure becomes a target, it ceases to become a good measure.
Discipline Daddy
Brentcent Van Burns
Canes play essentially a man-to-man defense when it gets into the zone. Sometimes this can cause coverage problems when a player slips away behind the net or two defenders run into each other. But generally it's very successful.
What also helps Carolina is their bread and butter is forechecking. They make the opponent's breakout difficult from the beginning with the forecheck. While that happens, the other players try to take passing lanes rather than set up in the defensive zone. The plan is 100% trying to prevent the other team from entering the zone. When they do though, it tends to be more man-to-man.
The best way to score on the Canes lately has been on the powerplay with elite passing, or if you can catch the team with super quick passes and get an odd-man rush.
What also helps Carolina is their bread and butter is forechecking. They make the opponent's breakout difficult from the beginning with the forecheck. While that happens, the other players try to take passing lanes rather than set up in the defensive zone. The plan is 100% trying to prevent the other team from entering the zone. When they do though, it tends to be more man-to-man.
The best way to score on the Canes lately has been on the powerplay with elite passing, or if you can catch the team with super quick passes and get an odd-man rush.
Machinehead
The Olli react should add points!
I understand the quality argument but quality tends to go away in the playoffs where garbage goals reign supreme. If you can't prevent shots then you can't guarantee preventing goals.
- Jul 25, 2006
- 32,111
- 31,062
McVespa99
Registered User
- May 13, 2007
- 5,909
- 2,799
Thallis
Progression is not linear
Preventing quality makes life easy on your goalies. Volume has taken a back seat to quality in recent years, Vegas just won the cup with box+1 while basically just letting teams take shots from the outside. Meanwhile Carolina and Calgary haven't come close to sniffing a cup win while emphasizing volume over quality. You don't win without a some amount of offensive volume either, but the NHL has been moving away from it as the #1 priority for a couple years now.
- May 9, 2014
- 5,025
- 8,590
This. If you have the right personnel then every system can be very effective although it also matters majorly what system you are up against, which is why every coach should have more than one tool in his toolbox. The backcheck/forecheck schemes matter too for transitioning.
Therefore, my favourite system is the right one.
SeanMoneyHands
Registered User
- Apr 18, 2019
- 13,145
- 17,225
Like the saying goes, the best offense is the best defense. The more time your team has possession of the puck, the more to your advantage and the less defending you're doing. Defending and chasing the puck is 10x more exhausting on a team than going on the attack.
This is why the wings on the 2000s were so good, they literally always had possession of the puck.
This is why the wings on the 2000s were so good, they literally always had possession of the puck.
Users who are viewing this thread
Latest posts
-
-
Series Talk: ECF: (M2) Carolina Hurricanes vs (A3) Florida Panthers (FLA Leads 1-0) (54 Viewers)- Latest: Beezeral
