News Article: Horachek preaching 5-5-5 defense

[realgoodleafs]

Yea, this is a fantasy. All 5 leafs were not only always in the defensive zone, they were usually all below the hashmarks. This idea that Kessel or JVR stayed up at the red line waiting for passes is pure fantasy.

The only thing that's significant about Horachek's statement is the idea of keeping all 5 leafs in the neutral zone (instead of surrendering it) and using all 5 leafs in the offensive zone. They didn't do that last season.

Once they recovered the puck though the forwards would try to get to the opposing blue line for a tip in to the zone to avoid icing. That was basically their breakout strategy. The other was a chip off the boards.

Both usually led to line changes lol

 

[Mess]

Yea, this is a fantasy. All 5 leafs were not only always in the defensive zone, they were usually all below the hashmarks. This idea that Kessel or JVR stayed up at the red line waiting for passes is pure fantasy.

The only thing that's significant about Horachek's statement is the idea of keeping all 5 leafs in the neutral zone (instead of surrendering it) and using all 5 leafs in the offensive zone. They didn't do that last season.

Leafs aren't weak offensively they are weak defensively.

This is 5,5,5 is far more about team defense and support by having all players in the same zone, between the bluelines and in the defensive zone to give dmen options for getting the puck out of their own zone to help cut down the goals and scoring chances.

You're saying there is always 5 in Dzone only in the wrong defensive coverage positions. That is systemic issues and has nothing to do with the 5 comment of Horachek.

What do you think Drew Doughty meant went he said via Twitter "On the Leafs top line, they're one dimensional and they cheat to get breakaways and turnovers."?

Its the same thing I said of Leafs forwards waiting for long breakout passes instead of coming back to support the defense in their own zone. Horachek is saying the same thing as Drew Doughty with his 5,5,5 reference.

 

[gravyface]

Once they recovered the puck though the forwards would try to get to the opposing blue line for a tip in to the zone to avoid icing. That was basically their breakout strategy. The other was a chip off the boards.

Both usually led to line changes lol

The breakout once they cleared their zone wasn't so much the problem, it was that they lived in their zone, deep, as the swarm is designed to do, but failed more often for lack of commitment. They just couldn't contain the puck or recover it or they made mistakes that are magnified greatly when 2/3s of the zone is available; that's the risk of the swarm.

The swarm is meant to quickly regain possession by attacking the puck carrier with force (it's like an overload, but more aggressive) whereas a man-to-man collapse is meant to be between the puck and the net, but relies on bigger/stronger defensemen and forwards able to win battles and clear out a large area in front of the net.

The swarm is useful for smaller forwards and mobile defensemen who can/should be able to transition quickly after regaining possession, but require help (sometimes double-pinning) to do so.

Problem is, the Leafs didn't execute very well and as with any system, a lack of commitment is fatal.

5-5-5 to me signifies a higher level strategy for defensive responsibility and puck support/back pressure team-wide. Yes, it's just words right now, but hearing that from a coach with Horachek's background and experience gives me hope.

 

[Mess]

5,5,5, is also about compete level in all zones and that if a puck is turned over they want the Leafs to ALL hustle to aggressively back-check as vigorously as they like to attack.

 

[Gallagbi]

Leafs aren't weak offensively they are weak defensively.

This is 5,5,5 is far more about team defense and support by having all players in the same zone, between the bluelines and in the defensive zone to give dmen options for getting the puck out of their own zone to help cut down the goals and scoring chances.

You're saying there is always 5 in Dzone only in the wrong defensive coverage positions. That is systemic issues and has nothing to do with the 5 comment of Horachek.

What do you think Drew Doughty meant went he said via Twitter "On the Leafs top line, they're one dimensional and they cheat to get breakaways and turnovers."?

Its the same thing I said of Leafs forwards waiting for long breakout passes instead of coming back to support the defense in their own zone. Horachek is saying the same thing as Drew Doughty with his 5,5,5 reference.

Your original post was misguided and he called you on it. Anyone who watched the Leafs on a regular basis knows that wingers were often too low instead of too high under Carlyle's system. Collapsing down low pulled the wingers down closer to the slot area that most systems and took away outlet options for the defensemen.

More often than not "cheating" in high level hockey is being on the wrong side of the puck, not standing at center ice waiting for a stretch pass like you suggested. So no, what Doughty said is not the same as what you suggested.

I agree that the 5,5,5 is more about compete, but that has been more of a buzz word in Toronto than a "plan" going back to the Wilson days.

 

[TieClark]

The Leafs counter-attack was great - we had an average offense despite spending the least amount of time in the offensive zone in the entire NHL.

You can't win with just a strong counter attack. When was the last time you saw a successful team that gets all their goals on the rush? That just doesn't happen. And the Leafs never had the puck because if the opposing team had no play towards the net they could just dump it to the point or half wall knowing the Leafs weren't going to challenge them there and they could just reset the play. The Leafs did force the play to "those areas". Instead of getting the puck back. That's the crux of the problem.

In today's NHL possession time translates to shots translates to scoring chances translates to goals. If you divide goals against by time spent in own end the Leafs actually stack up alright. We spent 37% more 5v5 time in the defensive zone than Chicago (as estimated by faceoffs), and only allowed 12% more goals. You look at this sort of thing and you see that this team could actually defend halfway decently on a per-minute basis, and it was just the sheer crazy amount of time they spent in their own end that killed them.

Quality>Quantity every time. Any team with strong goaltending can allow twice as many shots against if they're keeping them from long distance and to the outside and still succeed if they can still maintain strong chances for.

Actually it is a big deal. They couldn't maintain possession in the other teams zone because by the time they got out of their own zone - IF they got out of their own zone - they were too tired to do anything besides a "one and done" play before peeling off for a change.

If you can't transition out of your zone, you will always have a terrible team.

It isn't.

You don't need to out possess the other team in order to win. If you're able to have more quality chances than the other team, there is absolutely no reason to worry about having less possession time.

Again, the issues arose when the Leafs couldn't control the other teams to the outside and therefore were allowing quality chances against regularly.

 

[zeke]

5,5,5, is also about compete level in all zones and that if a puck is turned over they want the Leafs to ALL hustle to aggressively back-check as vigorously as they like to attack.

christ, Mess, stop repeating this simplistic BS over and over again.

 

[zeke]

Yea, this is a fantasy. All 5 leafs were not only always in the defensive zone, they were usually all below the hashmarks. This idea that Kessel or JVR stayed up at the red line waiting for passes is pure fantasy.

The only thing that's significant about Horachek's statement is the idea of keeping all 5 leafs in the neutral zone (instead of surrendering it) and using all 5 leafs in the offensive zone. They didn't do that last season.

exactly.

thank you.

 

[zeke]

I do want to say that Carlyle's system did work at one point, and might work again in the future again when its more of a surprise. It's simplistic but not completely moronic.

But as of now, teams are all over this system and know exactly how to exploit it.

 

[pspot]

They can play any formation. They want but if the players on the ice aren't willing to win puck battles it won't matter