Silver Seven Senators Long-Term Outlook: Defense

[JD1]

Strong hand or off hand simply changes perspective, outlets and break outs. An off hand D cannot go up the board as easily, he can wrap around the boards better to a D partner or winger coming low

I'm not sure it is harder per se, it certainly takes getting use to. Some guys developed as LDs might not be able to switch at the pro level. Some can.

Bottom line there isn't a one size fits all rule book on this

 

[Sweatred]

Strong hand or off hand simply changes perspective, outlets and break outs. An off hand D cannot go up the board as easily, he can wrap around the boards better to a D partner or winger coming low

I'm not sure it is harder per se, it certainly takes getting use to. Some guys developed as LDs might not be able to switch at the pro level. Some can.

Bottom line there isn't a one size fits all rule book on this

NHL coaches mainly use right handed D as RD. I would assume somewhere in the range of over 80%+ of 5v5 shifts are performed with Left handed D playing LD and right handed D playing RD (for orgs that have the options). There is a reason....

If it wasn’t harder better we would see a 50/50 dispersion of left/right handed D playing left/right D.

 

[JD1]

NHL coaches mainly use right handed D as RD. I would assume somewhere in the range of over 80%+ of 5v5 shifts are performed with Left handed D playing LD and right handed D playing RD (for orgs that have the options). There is a reason....

If it wasn’t harder better we would see a 50/50 dispersion of left/right handed D playing left/right D.

I'm not going to argue you with you on this. You have an opinion. I have a different view of it. The end.

 

[trentmccleary]

NHL coaches mainly use right handed D as RD. I would assume somewhere in the range of over 80%+ of 5v5 shifts are performed with Left handed D playing LD and right handed D playing RD (for orgs that have the options). There is a reason....

If it wasn’t harder better we would see a 50/50 dispersion of left/right handed D playing left/right D.

The personnel on NHL defenses aren't 50/50. Right-handed D probably only make up about 35-40% of the league. That's why most defense corps are 4-3 or 5-2 left.

 

[Sweatred]

The personnel on NHL defenses aren't 50/50. Right-handed D probably only make up about 35-40% of the league. That's why most defense corps are 4-3 or 5-2 left.

That’s why I said “when org’s have the option”....

for example what % of RD in the league play more shift as a LD 5v5 ?

 

[Micklebot]

That’s why I said “when org’s have the option”....

for example what % of RD in the league play more shift as a LD 5v5 ?

This is like saying mire people write right handed than left handed therefore it must be harder to write left handed otherwise we'd see a 50/50 split. The reality is kids go through their formative years playing primarily one side, only a small number make it to the nhl having the experience of playing their off side to any significant degree.

Nurture plays a huge role in whether a player is going to do well on their off side.

 

[Alf Silfversson]

The personnel on NHL defenses aren't 50/50. Right-handed D probably only make up about 35-40% of the league. That's why most defense corps are 4-3 or 5-2 left.

And this is true in our case, at least as it pertains to our better D prospects.

Our three best D prospects are all LH shots. If Brannstrom and Sanderson develop as expected and so do our RD as it looks now we have:

LHD - Chabot, Brannstrom, Sanderson all capable of playing top 4 minutes
RHD - JBD or maybe Thomson are capable of being top 4 D though neither is as likely as any of our LHD.

We could very easily have 3 LHD capable of top 4 play and only one or even none who are RHD. If this scenario develops then we would be crazy not to try our LHD who has had success playing the right side at every level up until now.

Just my 2 cents.

But yeah RHD are harder to come by for sure.

 

[Sweatred]

This is like saying mire people write right handed than left handed therefore it must be harder to write left handed otherwise we'd see a 50/50 split. The reality is kids go through their formative years playing primarily one side, only a small number make it to the nhl having the experience of playing their off side to any significant degree.

Nurture plays a huge role in whether a player is going to do well on their off side.

No ... sorry, that has nothing to do with why Right-handed D play RD.

Right handed D play RD because coaches value their net contribution more on that side of the ice. If they liked them on the left side they would play them there and vice versa.

 

[Micklebot]

No ... sorry, that has nothing to do with why Right-handed D play RD.

Right handed D play RD because coaches value their net contribution more on that side of the ice. If they liked them on the left side they would play them there and vice versa.

A players net contribution on one side vs the other is unique to that player, not some universal constant. Their abilities are based on their experience, their muscle memory, ect.

The whole system of player development starts with rules of thumb and filters kids into typical roles resulting in far more players being experienced on primarily their strong side. Only a few get significant experience playing the off side.

Coaches value their contribution on the strong side more often because systemically they are trained to be better on that side, it's a chicken or the egg scenario.

Those that break the mold and get significant off side experience though don't show the giant drop in defensive accumen playing the weak side, guys like Phaneuf and Josi did it often enough that they and their coaches prefered them on their off side.

 

[Sweatred]

A players net contribution on one side vs the other is unique to that player, not some universal constant. Their abilities are based on their experience, their muscle memory, ect.

The whole system of player development starts with rules of thumb and filters kids into typical roles resulting in far more players being experienced on primarily their strong side. Only a few get significant experience playing the off side.

Coaches value their contribution on the strong side more often because systemically they are trained to be better on that side, it's a chicken or the egg scenario.

Those that break the mold and get significant off side experience though don't show the giant drop in defensive accumen playing the weak side, guys like Phaneuf and Josi did it often enough that they and their coaches prefered them on their off side.

You are reaching - lots of kids play both sides - most have dominated at lower levels and been able to roam and carry the puck all over the ice. Many were good enough they could easily overcome defensive weaknesses on their off side with their talent gap.

Stop trying to google your way out of an argument you shouldn’t have gotten into. Players play RD or LD because their coach thinks they are better there.

 

[Micklebot]

You are reaching - lots of kids play both sides - most have dominated at lower levels and been able to roam and carry the puck all over the ice. Many were good enough they could easily overcome defensive weaknesses on their off side with their talent gap.

Stop trying to google your way out of an argument you shouldn’t have gotten into. Players play RD or LD because their coach thinks they are better there.

No I'm not reaching yes many players have done it but few have near the experience they do on the strong side, but you are resorting ad hominem attacks, why deal with the credibility of the argument when you can attack the credibility of the person, right?

 

[Sweatred]

No I'm not reaching yes many players have done it but few have near the experience they do on the strong side, but you are resorting ad hominem attacks, why deal with the credibility of the argument when you can attack the credibility of the person, right?

Yawn ... you attack as many posts around here as anyone. Google can’t help you on this one. I’ll pick this up with someone who knows that they are talking about.

 

[BondraTime]

Yawn ... you attack as many posts around here as anyone. Google can’t help you on this one. I’ll pick this up with someone who knows that they are talking about.

I agree with Mick, for almost all the same reasons.

Completely player preference based, same as guys playing their off wing. Majority of both D and F like to play their on side, not because it’s easier but because that’s how they are started out, and makes shooting and passing easier at the growing level. Once you’re a pro, passing and shooting on your offside isn’t really an issue, or something that hasn’t been practiced thousands of times over the past decade of playing. Brannstrom is just one guy like this, he finds his offside more comfortable, the Sens want him on his left side. Makes sense to me to try him on his preferred side, like we did when Gonchar was our #2, and #1 when Karlsson was out.

I’ve coached and scouted more than a few guys who were forced into their off-hand side in their 1st midget year due to the teams they were on, get drafted and then play out their Q/Pro career on that side.

 

[Sweatred]

I agree with Mick, for almost all the same reasons.

That’s cute ... what exactly are you agreeing disagreeing with ? You don’t believe left handed D are better on their left side ? Do you think coaches play them on the left side because they like them there ? Or what you think the who league (and hockey world) is clueless about the +/- reasons to play off side defense?

 

[Sweatred]

Not really, just agreeing with something that’s pretty easy to understand, or at least I thought so.

Ahhhh ... you guys are smarter than every pro coach in hockey. Got it.

 

[BondraTime]

Ahhhh ... you guys are smarter than every pro coach in hockey. Got it.

There are literally dozens upon dozens of guys playing their offside every single year...

 

[Cosmix]

Obviously I'm biased, but we have a legit shot of having a top 3 defense corps in the NHL.

Chabot:Already a #1
Sanderson: Potential #1,
Brannstrom:Top pair potential
JBD:Very good chance at being a top 4 guy, decent shot at being a top pair D.

Then you have others like Kleven and Thomson.

This is akin to "chicken counting" using eggs. The LD position looks OK at the moment. I think the Senators need higher end RD prospects than what we have now. Hopefully in the next draft we could get a top RD prospect to fill the RD hole; however, the team also needs some top forwards, specifically centers for the first two lines. Stuetzle may be a top line center; however, he might only become a top line winger. .

 

[trentmccleary]

That’s why I said “when org’s have the option”....

for example what % of RD in the league play more shift as a LD 5v5 ?

Yes, coaches going through the ranks will prefer to keep kids on their natural side, but there aren't enough righties at any level to make that stick. The fact is that right-handed d-men are rare, so the answer to your question is that right handed d-men almost never play their opposite side... while left handed d-men will almost always play their off-side at some point in their careers (possibly even the majority of it). When these defense prospects mature, odds are that 1 or 2 left handed d-men will have to play their opposite sides.

 

[Sweatred]

There are literally dozens upon dozens of guys playing their offside every single year...

Sure - and probably 5x more playing their proper side. What’s your point ?

 

[Sweatred]

Yes, coaches going through the ranks will prefer to keep kids on their natural side, but there aren't enough righties at any level to make that stick. The fact is that right-handed d-men are rare, so the answer to your question is that right handed d-men almost never play their opposite side... while left handed d-men will almost always play their off-side at some point in their careers (possibly even the majority of it). When these defense prospects mature, odds are that 1 or 2 left handed d-men will have to play their opposite sides.

Yes - we know this. The question is do coaches generally prefer lefties to play left ? Lefties to play right ? Or they don’t care.

 

[Sens of Anarchy]

There are literally dozens upon dozens of guys playing their offside every single year...

Everyone that plays D will have played their offside at some point

 

[Wallet Inspector]

This is akin to "chicken counting" using eggs. The LD position looks OK at the moment. I think the Senators need higher end RD prospects than what we have now. Hopefully in the next draft we could get a top RD prospect to fill the RD hole; however, the team also needs some top forwards, specifically centers for the first two lines. Stuetzle may be a top line center; however, he might only become a top line winger. .

Brannstrom can play on the right.

 

[Sweatred]

Everyone that plays D will have played their offside at some point

Totally irrelevant... most forwards have played D at some point, heck... most players have played goalie at some point.

 

[JD1]

Yes - we know this. The question is do coaches generally prefer lefties to play left ? Lefties to play right ? Or they don’t care.

I think it's pretty clear that the general rule of thumb is that lefties play left, righties play right. That's clear

I think it's also clear that there are pros and cons to playing your off side

It's also clear that while most guys prefer their strong side, some guys prefer there offside

Hopefully that settles it

 

[Sens of Anarchy]

Strong hand or off hand simply changes perspective, outlets and break outs. An off hand D cannot go up the board as easily, he can wrap around the boards better to a D partner or winger coming low

I'm not sure it is harder per se, it certainly takes getting use to. Some guys developed as LDs might not be able to switch at the pro level. Some can.

Bottom line there isn't a one size fits all rule book on this

And defending the puck carrier on a rush.