Why isn't there a Tactics/Strategy/Systems subforum?

[sleepers]

Statistics is the closest I get to the actual crunching of how teams and players objectively perform, even if it may often be flawed or limited in one way or another.

The combination of such break-down of the teams/players in terms of where they hang out at the ice, where they take shots and score the most etc along with the playing system of the team would provide much more insight in the game - at least for me.

So - the question is simply - why isn't there a tactics/strategy/systems subforum, and would you also advocate for one?

What do you think?

Click to read more...

 

[Hi ImHFNYR]

Great idea. It always fascinates me that no one has discussions on that kind of thing around here. I strongly suspect it's bc most people here really don't know hockey or even pro sports very well and they are here more to inflate their egos

 

[Hivemind]

Would it be meaningfully different from the discussions you could have on the main board? Or do you simply want it to be a separate board so it segregates itself from the idiocy that happens there?

 

[sleepers]

Great idea. It always fascinates me that no one has discussions on that kind of thing around here. I strongly suspect it's bc most people here really don't know hockey or even pro sports very well and they are here more to inflate their egos

I am sure some people either have live experience of playing in line with a system or at least being exposed to it from the sidelines, don't you think?

If not, a start is even more justified to get closer and understand performance of the players and the team!

Would it be meaningfully different from the discussions you could have on the main board? Or do you simply want it to be a separate board so it segregates itself from the idiocy that happens there?

I think that it would be better as a seperate board or subforum just like this one or else there would be too much noise. One discussion or thread wouldn't be a viable way to disclose all the information that SHOULD be open for thought.

 

[Mickey Marner]

You should checkout IcyData » Scoreboard if you haven't already. They have some interesting data on shot clustering and penalties that provide some insight to coaching tactics.

For example, Mike Babcock coaches his teams run a lot of interference as part of his defensive strategy. His teams have taken 329 interference penalties in the last 8 seasons.
The top four teams in inference penalties in this time are Detroit-323; Toronto-272; Ottawa 246; Montreal 246.

 

[Laineux]

Because no one really understands crap about hockey here, including me. Sports fans generally do not understand much.

 

[Michael Farkas]

Yeah, look at all the threads that talk about actual tactics or other nuance to the game...those threads are bare (threadbare?). Only the "overrated/underrated" nonsense gets attention usually...the forum would be largely empty both in terms of threads/replies unfortunately...

 

[tarheelhockey]

I'd say it's mainly because tactics and strategy don't really lend themselves to discussion in the long term. You'd end up with about 10-20 threads, and that would be that. The forum would be dead in short order. It's easier from a user experience perspective, and also from a site management perspective, to just let people make those threads in The Rink or the main board, depending on the topic.

There are a ton of good resources online. It's really amazing how much you can learn just from YouTube alone. Changes your perspective on the game.

 

[Bear of Bad News]

One viable option could be to create a stickied thread in The Rink.

One book that I recommend in this light is Mike Smith's Hockey Playbook:

 

[Michael Farkas]

I have a few books like this, but never saw that one before. Purchased. Thanks for the tip.

 

[Bear of Bad News]

You got it! One of my favorites - and apparently others like it, too, because this is the fourth copy I've had to purchase.

 

[Bear of Bad News]

To the point of a dedicated sub-forum, I think that it's an interesting idea.

My recommendation (and I'm happy to seed the thread) is to start a stickied thread in the Rink subforum. It would then be easier to demonstrate interest to the administration if that thread were popular.

As has been pointed out, one of the problems of such a forum is that there's not a lot of discussion that's going to happen relative to other fora. That's similar to this forum, too.

 

[Filthy Dangles]

bumping this to say I am in favor of having something like this, opie. great idea. i was tirelessy searching for an x's and o's thread or something but nothing.

 

[Jumptheshark]

I'd say it's mainly because tactics and strategy don't really lend themselves to discussion in the long term. You'd end up with about 10-20 threads, and that would be that. The forum would be dead in short order. It's easier from a user experience perspective, and also from a site management perspective, to just let people make those threads in The Rink or the main board, depending on the topic.

There are a ton of good resources online. It's really amazing how much you can learn just from YouTube alone. Changes your perspective on the game.

Also how many actually understand all 3

 

[Filthy Dangles]

Also how many actually understand all 3

Who claims to know everything? Only people who don't know a whole lot.

 

[Filthy Dangles]

I have a few books like this, but never saw that one before. Purchased. Thanks for the tip.

Bumping this because I am wondering what books you have? I have the one by Walter and Johnston which I found decent.

 

[Canadiens1958]

To the point of a dedicated sub-forum, I think that it's an interesting idea.

My recommendation (and I'm happy to seed the thread) is to start a stickied thread in the Rink subforum. It would then be easier to demonstrate interest to the administration if that thread were popular.

As has been pointed out, one of the problems of such a forum is that there's not a lot of discussion that's going to happen relative to other fora. That's similar to this forum, too.

Also have to address the abstract and applied aspects of tactics /strategies /systems.

Example, theoretical handedness advantages and applied handedness.

 

[Michael Farkas]

Bumping this because I am wondering what books you have? I have the one by Walter and Johnston which I found decent.

One of my starter books was by Red Gendron...I'll see if I can unearth it when I get home...that provided a good foundation...now, I just kind of do my own thing...adaptations and adjustments of things I see while watching...like a crazy person, if I see something I like during a game or think of something while eating or whatever, I get up and draw it on my wall in my apartment (it's erasable) and then work with it from there...

As such, one of my living room walls is covered with Tarasov-esque weaving concepts against various forechecks and movements...like being a degenerate gambler, it's not really a problem if you're winning...(trademark pending)