The 3-on-3 Thread

[JLP]

Thought we might want a thread to discuss Habs and other teams' approach to the new OT format, re players and strategies.

Observations after watching TB vs Philly:

• Possession is paramount, better to circle back into your own zone than to give up possession
• Self-passes off the boards work
• Goalies should not smother the puck, given the new D-zone faceoff protocol
• Price will get some assists!

Thoughts?

Click to read more...

 

[Dagistitsyn]

Hate it.

 

[peate]

Love it, so much better than 4 on 4 and the shootout. How about that nifty kick pass that led to the winning goal.

 

[JLP]

Hate it.

Yeah, but like it or not it's here so how could we master it?

 

[GREMLIN]

I really like the cycle the Bolts work at the beginning of the OT, the way the dish the puck back a couple times forcing the Flyers to be flat footed at their blue line making for an easy zone entry with speed.

Size and skill is key, you need to have players that can maintain possesion of the puck and are hard to knock off the puck, when you have possession you need to keep it its that simple, hence why they use Killorn before the triplets or Stamkos. Its also way easier to defend with bigger players.

 

[Dagistitsyn]

Yeah, but like it or not it's here so how could we master it?

Win the faceoff. If you don't theres a good chance it's over.
I want to watch real hockey, not a game of pond hockey keep away.

 

[Lebowski]

I think it's a lot better than shootouts.

Wish there would be a 5 minutes of 4 on 4 and another 5 of 3 on 3 if needed, but at this point, I rather have 3 on 3 and limit shootouts than 4 on 4.

I don't think it'll always be as exciting as the TB vs PHI clip but man... The NHL must be pretty damn pleased after seeing that.

 

[Ezpz]

Desharnais is going to start every 3 on 3 OT so no point doing anything but preparing yourself to lose an extra 10-15 points this season.

 

[Baruch]

Desharnais is going to start every 3 on 3 OT so no point doing anything but preparing yourself to lose an extra 10-15 points this season.

If Therrien is that oblivious to common sense, he shouldn't keep his job I hope.

____

Should the Habs use 2F+1D or 1F+2D?
Imo it should be 2 forwards + 1 defenseman without question, but don't hesitate to make your point on it.

Order of defenseman on the 3on3:
-Subban
-Petry
-Beaulieu

Strong skating D is a must.

I'd like to see Byron, Weise, Patches on the 3on3, only because of their speed...

 

[President XD]

After watching this clip, I'm sold. Just some nice fast paced hockey. There were quite a few scoring chances before the goal.

I'd go with Chucky, Patch and Subban on the first wave.

 

[hototogisu]

Am I the only one that thinks pulling the goalie for an extra attacker would pay off more often than not?

Possession is key in 3-on-3, and from what I've seen so far possession generally only changes after a shot on goal. There's no tight checking, no forced turnovers at the blueline because there's so much space.

So pull the goalie as you're leaving the defensive zone. If you can gain the line (the biggest if, of course...if you turn it over you've pretty much lost the game) you've basically got a 4-on-3 powerplay. I don't know the exact figure but I'm pretty sure the odds of scoring a goal on a 4-on-3 are ridiculously high. The other team can take cracks at the empty net but if they miss, you start in their zone on the icing. Win the faceoff and you're already set up 4-on-3.

Doubt coaches would be ballsy enough to try it (cmon Roy don't let me down) but I think it could actually work out for you more than you'd get burned. Especially if you have guys who can take the zone with speed like, I don't know, Subban or Beaulieu or Petry.

 

[GREMLIN]

Am I the only one that thinks pulling the goalie for an extra attacker would pay off more often than not?

Possession is key in 3-on-3, and from what I've seen so far possession generally only changes after a shot on goal. There's no tight checking, no forced turnovers at the blueline because there's so much space.

So pull the goalie as you're leaving the defensive zone. If you can gain the line (the biggest if, of course...if you turn it over you've pretty much lost the game) you've basically got a 4-on-3 powerplay. I don't know the exact figure but I'm pretty sure the odds of scoring a goal on a 4-on-3 are ridiculously high. The other team can take cracks at the empty net but if they miss, you start in their zone on the icing. Win the faceoff and you're already set up 4-on-3.

Doubt coaches would be ballsy enough to try it (cmon Roy don't let me down) but I think it could actually work out for you more than you'd get burned. Especially if you have guys who can take the zone with speed like, I don't know, Subban or Beaulieu or Petry.

I think that if you pull your goalie and get scored on you lose the loser point.

 

[hototogisu]

I think that if you pull your goalie and get scored on you lose the loser point.

You might be right, now that you mention it I seem to remember that rule from when 4-on-4 was introduced. Not sure if it carried over but I assume it did.

But a 4-on-3 gives you a vastly better chance at a goal than a 5-on-4 would if you pulled the goalie in 4-on-4 OT. So I still think it could be worth the risk. Maybe.

 

[sharks9]

Desharnais is going to start every 3 on 3 OT so no point doing anything but preparing yourself to lose an extra 10-15 points this season.

Not every thread needs to be derailed into a discussion of much you hate DD and Therrien.

On topic, to me that Flyers-Bolts 3 on 3 was exciting but also pretty much a crapshoot of 2 on 1's going back and forth until someone manages to bury one. Just gotta hope Price makes the saves when they come down our way.

 

[Rosso Scuderia]

Win the faceoff. If you don't theres a good chance it's over.
I want to watch real hockey, not a game of pond hockey keep away.

The NHL tries to find a better a way to end the game without tie, without taking too long and keeps the important parts of the game which is faceoff, hitting, passing, team play, rebound, odd man rush, forecheck, backcheck, etc etc.. all the things that does not exist in the shootout. It's a situation that could happen in the game so it's still real hockey.

I think it's an interesting option. Exciting for the fans.

 

[shawdowmaker]

I would prefer 3 on 3 best 2 out of 3 and a time clock to get a shot on net sort of like the shot clock in basketball. For example 50sec to get a shot or change of possession.

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

Am I the only one that thinks pulling the goalie for an extra attacker would pay off more often than not?

Possession is key in 3-on-3, and from what I've seen so far possession generally only changes after a shot on goal. There's no tight checking, no forced turnovers at the blueline because there's so much space.

So pull the goalie as you're leaving the defensive zone. If you can gain the line (the biggest if, of course...if you turn it over you've pretty much lost the game) you've basically got a 4-on-3 powerplay. I don't know the exact figure but I'm pretty sure the odds of scoring a goal on a 4-on-3 are ridiculously high. The other team can take cracks at the empty net but if they miss, you start in their zone on the icing. Win the faceoff and you're already set up 4-on-3.

Doubt coaches would be ballsy enough to try it (cmon Roy don't let me down) but I think it could actually work out for you more than you'd get burned. Especially if you have guys who can take the zone with speed like, I don't know, Subban or Beaulieu or Petry.

That is a very interesting idea. If you get possession and get it into the other team's zone, it might actually work.

 

[Ezpz]

That is a very interesting idea. If you get possession and get it into the other team's zone, it might actually work.

You lose the extra point if you get scored on with an empty net in OT.

 

[MXD]

I know I would go for two very mobile guys who would change quickly and one puck distributor who doesn't necessarily have to be very mobile and who would change when the need arises, all the while being somewhat stationnary between the bluelines, unless he's all alone in breakaway. If that distributor doesn't have to be very mobile, so be it.

Pacioretty - Subban - Semin
Galchenyuk - Eller - Markov
Plekanec - Petry - DD
Byron - Gallagher
Beaulieu - DSP

Or least I'd try something of that ilk. We have a terrific goalie who's also very good at handling the puck, so why not take advantage of this (names can be changed obviously; Markov and Semin must be puck distributors...). Not even mandatory to have one D-Men on the ice, as it's pond hockey, after all.

 

[MXD]

Am I the only one that thinks pulling the goalie for an extra attacker would pay off more often than not?

Probably, because 0 pts if goal scored on. Unless that has been changed.

EDIT : Meh, beaten to it by EZPZ.

 

[JayKing]

No strong opinion on it other than I think that the NHL and NHLPA messed up by not having 4v4 before going to 3v3.

 

[JayKing]

You lose the extra point if you get scored on with an empty net in OT.

Off topic: Do you lose the extra point if you score on yourself on a delayed penalty in OT? (My guess is no, but I want to make sure)

 

[MXD]

Actually, while possession is paramount, D&C tactics could be VERY, VERY useful at 3-on-3 in certain circumstances. Especially if there's a (or 2) defenders ahead AND not-so-tired players on the opposing team.

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

You lose the extra point if you get scored on with an empty net in OT.

Sure, but you gain a point if you score.

If you get possession in the other team's zone and you've got a four on three, you've got a great chance at winning. Plus if they're at even strength I think icing rules would apply so the other team can take a shot at the empty net from their own zone but if they miss you get an offensive faceoff.

It's worth thinking about.

 

[Rapala]

Desharnais is going to start every 3 on 3 OT so no point doing anything but preparing yourself to lose an extra 10-15 points this season.

We picked up seven points last year in the OT portion i believe.
I'm not convinced the league should be giving a ROW for a gimmick win?