How much does "Physicality Matter"?

[ESH]

One of the biggest reasons Washington won the Cup last year was their physicality. They were killing teams with their forecheck.

 

[Billy Kvcmu]

It only matters when the outdated oops school analyst ran out of things to talk about

 

[Mark Stones Spleen]

Not as much as size.

 

[43sfriends]

I coached a 12U team in a tournament around Christmas. We played a 10U that was playing up a division. Before the game when we saw them our players became giddy, they knew they'd be able to push the smaller kids around. Sure enough, we won every board battle and dominated the front of the net - both offence and defence. We lost 8-2.

That says more about your coaching than anything else.

 

[eco's bones]

A team really needs all kinds of different elements to win and physicality is just one of them. There are skilled players that are very physical and they're more valuable because of it. Having each others backs is another thing that builds a winning atmosphere and that implies a team being able to defend itself against aggressors. That said fighting is down but fighting is hardly the only way to play physical. To me an honest player gives and takes hits--he doesn't pass up a chance to take a hit as long as it doesn't take him away from the play and he doesn't avoid taking a hit to make a play.

 

[Portable Mink]

Depends on your roster.
Caps are big and played big and won the cup.
Detroit were a finesse team and controlled the puck most of the game, they won cups.

Play to your roster strengths whatever that may mean.
But given the option between physical and non-physical regardless of all other factors? You of course take physical.

 

[Stephen]

Successful playoff teams usually win first and foremost by being able to set the tone on how the match up will be played.

Physicality can be used as a tool to disrupt the opponent and also to put "wear and tear" on the other team's key players. Every hit is an investment in the attrition game. Physicality is also a tool that you need to be able to withstand that game within the game. You can ignore it if you don't think its important. Just depends on whether you group can actually win without it.

 

[MartinS82]

That says more about your coaching than anything else.

Lol...probably right.

 

[lancer247]

I guess It’s like a gun, it’s better to have it and not need it then to need and not have it. But, then again maybe it’s just the American in me (using the gun metaphor that is).

I think In a seven game series where teams are matched fairly evenly it helps to be able to where down the opposing d especially.

 

[CanadienShark]

You need a mix. Ideally you have a skilled guy with a physical game, but you can't always have it all.

 

[CapnZin]

What are you talking about??? Ovechkin, Tom Wilson, TJ Oshie, Yea, Kuzy is soft but Backstrom is a freaking load to play against game after game. You add Orpik who does damage every game to Carlson and Niskanen that are heavy to play against even if not huge hitters, you have a team that wore down every opponent they faced. The end of all 4 series were the same.

The Capitals were the biggest team in the NHL last season and they play like that.

Edit, you can make a fair case that the difference between the great teams that could get over the hump and last season was the elevation in Wilson's game and his increased role. That tipped them over the top.

While their team may be heavy, I don’t think they handled some physicality well. After the 15-16 series against PHI, didn’t Trotz say that series was the main reason they faltered against Pittsburgh? They were run down by PHI physicality. I know Wilson, Ovechkin, and Orpik played big, but Schenn, Simmonds, White, and company really took a toll on the defense.

I could, 100%, be wrong, but I remember watching or hearing something along the lines of Trotz saying that.

 

[MattMartin]

We will find out with Toronto this post season. I'm not being a jerk here, but they are very talented, yet very soft.

 

[cliffclaven]

Lmao. “Physicality” is non existent anymore. You hit someone hard, you get a penalty, or suspended. It won’t change in the playoffs, and it will get worse year after year. “Defense” consists of swinging your stick around for a poke check or rubbing someone out against the boards.. which anymore can be interference if they dumped the puck.

Fight? Good luck, if the refs are having a bad day you get 2+5+10.

Anyone that thinks “physicality” is still in the league, or will intensify in the playoffs is delusional.

 

[Cup or Bust]

It's good to have some physicality, but now its about being hard on the puck in all three zones and not giving the other team space to make plays. Fast and hard on the puck is what matters now.

 

[TheDawnOfANewTage]

I think "physicality" only matters in terms of protecting the puck, winning 1-on-1s, and hounding the puck carrier. You don't need to have a Wilson, you just need a roster that isn't thrown off by the other team ramping up the checking. Throw some hits of your own, win battles, forecheck hard and you're good.

Bergeron is my example- dude doesn't throw massive hits, but he shows up for the playoffs. He's skilled, but it's a skill that isn't thrown off by a bit of extra contact. Some skilled guys have that, others can't adapt.

 

[txpd]

While their team may be heavy, I don’t think they handled some physicality well. After the 15-16 series against PHI, didn’t Trotz say that series was the main reason they faltered against Pittsburgh? They were run down by PHI physicality. I know Wilson, Ovechkin, and Orpik played big, but Schenn, Simmonds, White, and company really took a toll on the defense.

I could, 100%, be wrong, but I remember watching or hearing something along the lines of Trotz saying that.

I seem to recall that Flyers series as being more dirty than straight up physical and that the Flyers did get their licks in. That doesn't change the fact that the Caps wore out their opponents last playoffs.

 

[Agent Zub]

being relentless matters

 

[c9777666]

physicality and playing heavy hockey don’t matter in the regular season but are huge in the playoffs. Over a 7 game series, when the intensity has ramped up, teams that come in waves shift after shift wear the other team down and it leads to turnovers (you also need skill to capitalize on those turnovers). Physicality IMO was a huge factor to why the Capitals beat the Lightning in the ECF.

Find the right balance of skill and physicality.

You don’t want to be too soft, but there can be such a thing as too much grit.

 

[MadLuke]

The 3 best players post 2003-2004 lock out were quite physical and great at it, so it does seem to be still quite nice to have and obviously Jagr before them, but there is way around it.

 

[c9777666]

We will find out with Toronto this post season. I'm not being a jerk here, but they are very talented, yet very soft.

Last year, the LA Kings were the opposite- tons of veteran grit, lacked high end skill.

Unlike the Leafs, they didn’t even win a playoff game.

I don’t think we’re gonna see teams that play like the 1996 Panthers or 2004 Flames or 2006 Oilers thrive in the spring in this day and age unless their goalie gets white hot

 

[cliffclaven]

It's good to have some physicality, but now its about being hard on the puck in all three zones and not giving the other team space to make plays. Fast and hard on the puck is what matters now.

which is sad.

 

[TheDawnOfANewTage]

which is sad.

I don't think so, I love seeing pressure until someone makes a mistake. Makes a true test of desire and skill. There's still hitting, you just can't Scott Stevens a team now.

 

[Bertuzzzi44]

Last year, the LA Kings were the opposite- tons of veteran grit, lacked high end skill.

Unlike the Leafs, they didn’t even win a playoff game.

I don’t think we’re gonna see teams that play like the 1996 Panthers or 2004 Flames or 2006 Oilers thrive in the spring in this day and age unless their goalie gets white hot

The Kings were just way too slow, you have to be able to actually catch someone to be able to hit them. They couldn’t impose their will and Vegas was playing keep away.

 

[c9777666]

The Kings were just way too slow, you have to be able to actually catch someone to be able to hit them. They couldn’t impose their will and Vegas was playing keep away.

Although you couldn't tell by the scoreboard (4 1-goal games)

 

[CapnZin]

I seem to recall that Flyers series as being more dirty than straight up physical and that the Flyers did get their licks in. That doesn't change the fact that the Caps wore out their opponents last playoffs.

It’s easy to call a team “dirty”, but some of the plays were edgy. The Bellemare-Orlov and Schenn-Kuznetsov slash headline that, but naturally playoffs are in the edge. Let’s not call out teams or give out half-witted remarks because the capitals/Tom Wilson can fall under the “dirty” distinction easily.

My comment was the appropriation of the “wear down” factor of physical play. I can’t find the video, but I do remember Trotz hinting at the series being a reason why the Pittsburgh series didn’t go so well, however that may just be an excuse. Whether or not I’m remembering correctly that series was filled with physical play both ways. My point is that in games that matter, the playoffs, physical play can be the difference or make up the spread of skill. It’s pretty amazing just from looking at the rosters how PHI even managed to get 6 games out of that series.