Trap vs. Torpedo

Discussion in 'The History of Hockey' started by Ribban, May 17, 2005.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Ribban

    Ribban Registered User

    Joined:
    May 16, 2005
    Messages:
    1,511
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    USA
    In the 2002 Salt Lake City Games, team Sweden came out flying against Canada with a brushed up version of the Torpedo (The first version of the torpedo was actually made up by the old CCCP coach Tarasov back in the early 70's).

    Torpedo hockey is many times fast and exciting and the dialoge has been going if the ever more stagnating, trap infested NHL would do well from incorporating Torpedo hockey (which essentially was designed to penalize the trap).

    A few negatives possibly getting in the way for the torpedo to succeed in the NHL are:
    * The red line - Tough for the "half backs" to hit their "torpedos" when the defense steps up to check them.
    * Could a team possibly continue to play the very demanding torpedo style of hockey well for 82 games + play-off?
    * Does the NHL really have the player personnel capable and willing to subordinate itself to the discipline required to execute torpedo hockey effectively?

    ... and the concerns:
    * Would it really drive up the scoring and the excitement for the "non-hockey" fan?
    * Would it be exciting or too different for the already die-hard fans used to a more physical dump-and-chase hockey?
    * Would there be more breakaways or more icing calls in the NHL because of torpedo hockey?

    Your thoughts?
     
  2. Wisent

    Wisent Registered User

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2003
    Messages:
    3,667
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Occupation:
    Student
    Location:
    Mannheim
    Home Page:
    I don't see how a trap and the torpedo system are exclusive, since trap is played on the defense and the torpedo is mostly played by the attacker. A torpedo by the defender is far to demanding IMO. In addition, I think that dump and chase and torpedo are not exclusive as well. You can to go in to the zone first then you can establish the torpedo. It could be that the torpedo causes more breakaways by the defending team, since the points are both open. It's certainly fun to watch people play the torpedo.
     
    Last edited: May 17, 2005
  3. Ribban

    Ribban Registered User

    Joined:
    May 16, 2005
    Messages:
    1,511
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    USA
    You're right. The trap and the torpedo isn't mutually exclusive at all. My point was rather that the torpedo is in many ways designed to beat the trap by taking advantage of a two-line pass (from the defensive zone to hit one of two torpedos) to beat the weak-side defender in the 1-2-2 trap (making him play two people) coming in speed.

    As for dump-and-chase in torpedo hockey, you actually see that quite a bit if the passing game isn't crisp :) If you miss your "torpedo," it's a footrace for the puck, and this is also how the torpedo model 2-2-1, is also applied defensively (Two torpedos going in for the corners and the two half backs wait at the blue line with the libero in the very back as the "chief of security." But as you pointed out, it is incredibly demanding.

    I can't help to think though that if the red line was taken out of the NHL, torpedo hockey could be a great thing for the NHL being that icings aren't called until a defender touches the puck, and it would force a lot of team to re-think its defensive scheme.
     
  4. Prof_it

    Prof_it Registered User

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2004
    Messages:
    152
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Interesting topic...i enjoy threads on strategy so thanks for posting


    I saw an interview after the 2002 olympics with lemaire in which they asked him about the torpedo and if it would be coming soon to the NHL. I remember him making 2 points against it. The first was that until the red line was taken out, the torpedo would not be effective. Second, he thought it would take a European coach to be the first to implement the system. After the lockout, with some NHL'ers playing in Europe (hopefully bringing back what they've learned) and potential red line rule change, there may be a place for it.

    I would like to see it tried. I think for many teams it would be a good fit. You can maximize your playmakers, giving them more icetime and allowing them to be the decision makers. There is some risk, but as already raised these systems are not exclusive of each other. Also, sometimes the torpedo seems to be thought of as the 'silver bullet', a magical new system that automatically leads to more scoring. As with every other system in the past, it is only as effective as the personnel allow.

    More than anything, I'd love to see the coaches allow the players more input in reading the play. There are so many NHL games where you watch players that allow the system to dictate the game...leading to a lack of flow, emotion, etc. Ideally, as these are the best players in the world, allow them to read the play, communicate with each other, and react accordingly. If the opportunity arose to speed ahead and pressure with your torpedos, then do it, while the teammates would adjust their positioning as well. I've always seen the game as read/react instead of playing out a script.
     
  5. sunb

    sunb Registered User

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2004
    Messages:
    3,232
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Yale University
    I don't know, I wouldn't go anywhere near the "Torpedo" conidering Sweden was eliminated by the 8th seeded Belarus.

    Whoever implements the system better know what they're doing and they'd be either extremely stupid or extremely smart to live and die by the system in the NHL over the course of a regular season + the playoffs.
     
  6. GKJ

    GKJ Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2002
    Messages:
    139,827
    Likes Received:
    2,291
    Trophy Points:
    232

    I don't think Sweden lost because of the torpedo. They made Canada look absolutely silly in the olympics.



    The problem with the torpedo is that it can only be run successfully in the international game because they don't use a red line. If not, you would been an all-world passing defenseman passing the puck.
     
  7. Wisent

    Wisent Registered User

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2003
    Messages:
    3,667
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Occupation:
    Student
    Location:
    Mannheim
    Home Page:
    Well, the Russians played it very long and they were very succesful with the torpedo.
     
  8. Wisent

    Wisent Registered User

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2003
    Messages:
    3,667
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Occupation:
    Student
    Location:
    Mannheim
    Home Page:
    That's right, if the red line would be removed that would be great for a torpedo. If not, I see a constant torpedo style would be too demanding to play all the game IMO. Also, I think the torpedo applied as a defense concept would be very demanding as well, but it would result in more turnovers by the attakcing team. But to play it can be very dangerous for the defender as well, because it creates big holes in the defense. I would prefer a torpedo style in the attacking zone solely, that would be very exciting to watch and still be relatively safe to defend in case of a turnover.
     
  9. Crosby=Gretzky

    Crosby=Gretzky Registered User

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2004
    Messages:
    959
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Occupation:
    School
    Location:
    i lost myself
    Don't remind us Swedes of that game. The name Vladimir Karpov is still in our heads.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

monitoring_string = "358c248ada348a047a4b9bb27a146148"