In 3 on 3 Overtime.....

[Mandar]

I have been wondering why teams don't use 3 forwards for the majority of the OT. While I understand the use of primarily offensive D-men (Karlsson, Letang, etc.) at times, why don't teams put out a forward line that is used to playing as a line?

Defensively, 3 on 3 is typically man on man, so the use of defenseman doesn't necessarily have to be important.

Would like to hear others take on this......

Click to read more...

 

[The Macho King]

Part of it is likely so there is an instinctive understanding of their role. Also - probably better at skating backwards.

 

[maacoshark]

I have been wondering why teams don't use 3 forwards for the majority of the OT. While I understand the use of primarily offensive D-men (Karlsson, Letang, etc.) at times, why don't teams put out a forward line that is used to playing as a line?

Defensively, 3 on 3 is typically man on man, so the use of defenseman doesn't necessarily have to be important.

Would like to hear others take on this......

Defenseman are usually better at covering one on one than a forward. BTW its not necessarily offensive defencemen that play on 3 on 3 but defencemen that are good skaters.

 

[txpd]

defensemen are better at defense than forwards as a general rule. 3 on 3 is as much about defense as offense. A team with 3 forwards that doesn't have the puck is in big trouble

 

[Tage2Tuch]

The BCHL (Junior A) has had 3 on 3 for 10-12 years, instead of a shootout its regular 4 on 4 for 5, then 3 on 3 for five, then a tie.

I knew doing those games that 3 on 3was something the NHL needed to adopt and I'm glad its here.

But the idea behind a good D-Man with two dynamic forwards is the ideal set up.

I suppose you could put out Boston's top line since Bergeron is a good defensive center and they all know each other but I think you're safer with Marchand-Pastrnak and whatever guy they use, Carlo, Chara, Mac, Krug? They have a sick top four d and top four forwards.

 

[King'sPawn]

Better skating + better reads of odd-man rushes during the very high probability the opposition gets a 2-on-1.

 

[Raccoon Jesus]

Kings have always tried to make it a race out there with 2 forwards and an offensive d-man, but I've noticed we often play against one forward and two d-men, and often they're just playing "we're going to hold the puck as long as we can so you can't change," sort of playing not-to-lose instead of to win. In other words, most teams probably aren't using three forwards because teams are trending to making 3-on-3 a defensive battle via possession instead of raw offense.

 

[ESH]

I have been wondering why teams don't use 3 forwards for the majority of the OT. While I understand the use of primarily offensive D-men (Karlsson, Letang, etc.) at times, why don't teams put out a forward line that is used to playing as a line?

Defensively, 3 on 3 is typically man on man, so the use of defenseman doesn't necessarily have to be important.

Would like to hear others take on this......

The fact that it’s man on man defense would make me feel more inclined to have a solid defenseman out there

 

[Trojans86]

fwiw the ducks play a lot of 2 defensemen out there and they're far and away the worst 3v3 team out there.

 

[Hint1k]

Good question btw, if you scored a goal in OT, you don't have to defend.
For example, team Russia scored the golden goal of 2008 world champ with 4 forwards on ice (4-on-3 pp):

 

[PeanutButterPoti]

Having a forward caught on a 2-on-1 usually spells disaster, which usually occurs when the attacking team loses possession on their rush. Competent defenders are more likely to be able to read those plays and break them up better than a forward can.