Should our players hit more?

dumbdick

Galactic Defender
May 31, 2008
11,292
3,700
I've always wondered why there are guys that rarely hit. It's teachable and when used properly it's pretty effective, especially come playoff time. Guys are constantly saying slow guys need to work on their skating, but rarely do they say that those who don't hit need to learn how to do it. I don't think it would ruin Spezza's game if he devoted a bit more time to improving his hitting.

Why do players get a pass on not hitting and why don't more teams focus on team hitting as part of their overall game?

(Sens by the way are 9th in the league in overall hits).
 
Last edited:

WhiteLight*

Guest
Hitting can take you out of position. Opens up open ice for the other team.

Guys like Karlsson are so light that hitting does almost nothing.

When your skill level/hockey IQ is high, there are more effective ways to defend/forecheck/take back the puck.

Hitting takes a toll on your body too, not just the opponent's. And it attracts retaliation/physical confrontation by the other team.



These are reasons why not to hit.

Guys like Spezza and Gonchar are so fragile, they try to avoid physical play as much as possible. Can't say I blame them, they are most effective in other ways. Why waste your energy on hitting? Makes no sense.
 

Benjamin

Differently Financed
Jun 14, 2010
31,118
438
yes
Most of the time its better to skip finishing the hit and get back to back check.
 

WhiteLight*

Guest
I've always wondered why there are guys that rarely hit. It's teachable and when used properly it's pretty effective, especially come playoff time. Guys are constantly saying slow guys need to work on their skating, but rarely do that say that those who don't hit need to learn how to do it. I don't think it would ruin Spezza's game if he devoted a bit more time to improving his hitting.

Why do players get a pass on not hitting and why don't more teams focus on team hitting as part of their overall game?

(Sens by the way are 9th in the league in overall hits).

There is no positive correlation between winning and hitting.
 

The Expert

Registered Expert
Aug 31, 2008
13,277
1,253
BC
Yes, absolutely.

Judging by the posts in this thread, there aren't many good reasons why they shouldn't.
 

The Expert

Registered Expert
Aug 31, 2008
13,277
1,253
BC
Leafs always beating the Sens in the playoffs was a direct reflection of physical play.

Anaheim Ducks.

There is really no reason for him to say that in the first place, unless he's trying to argue that hitting is a negative, which would be the dumbest argument you can make.
 

WhiteLight*

Guest
Leafs always beating the Sens in the playoffs was a direct reflection of physical play.

Or maybe this little thing called goaltending.

Leafs were a better team than the Sens. Their team just happened to have more physical players than the Sens.

Coincidence.

If the Sens, with the same personnel, suddenly started to hit more, it would not translate to more wins. It might actually have the opposite effect.

Best defensemen in the league = does not hit much. That's all that needs to be said here. Hitting is overrated.
 

WhiteLight*

Guest
Anaheim Ducks.

There is really no reason for him to say that in the first place, unless he's trying to argue that hitting is a negative, which would be the dumbest argument you can make.

I'm not saying it's negative. I'm saying it's just a playing style. If one player is effective defensively because of hitting, then so be it. Keep on hitting.

Some players are effective without it, and for some it would hinder their games to be more physical.
 

dumbdick

Galactic Defender
May 31, 2008
11,292
3,700
Michalek threw 36 hits over 77 regular season games, then 15 in 7 playoff games.

By some of the logic so far, these guys shouldn't be hitting more in the playoffs since it's not their game style and thus detrimental to the team.

I don't think not hitting is an option in the playoffs, so I'm going to suggest they should be practicing it more in the regular season.
 

dumbdick

Galactic Defender
May 31, 2008
11,292
3,700
They shouldn't hit more. Don't need more person acting like Cowen and going for a hit then missing and resulting in a goal against us..

If I had the effort I would pull a clip of us throwing a hit in that series which led to a turnover and a goal for. I don't have that effort, so here's a clip of two cats playing.

 

Wham City

Registered User
Oct 27, 2006
4,312
0
Whistler
There is no positive correlation between winning and hitting.

Yep.

Last three seasons of total hits to team point percentage shows no real relationship.

screenshot20121222at426.png
 

The Expert

Registered Expert
Aug 31, 2008
13,277
1,253
BC
Yep.

Last three seasons of total hits to team point percentage shows no real relationship.

screenshot20121222at426.png

No offense, but this is one of those things that is so obvious (and useless) it really shouldn't even be said.

No one has said hitting is the only route to success, or produces offence. As for the chart, when a large majority of fourth liners have a job that consists of forechecking and hitting, the hits-to-points is going to show that.
 
Jan 19, 2006
22,960
4,659
Calgary
Leafs always beating the Sens in the playoffs was a direct reflection of physical play.
2000
Conference Quarterfinals(First Round) in 6 games
(3)Toronto Maple Leafs™ vs. (6)Ottawa Senators™

2001
Conference Quarterfinals(First Round) in 4 games
(2)Ottawa Senators™ vs. (7)Toronto Maple Leafs™

2002
Conference Semifinals(Second Round) in 7 games
(4)Toronto Maple Leafs™ vs. (7)Ottawa Senators™

2004
Conference Quarterfinals(First Round) in 7 games
(4)Toronto Maple Leafs™ vs. (5)Ottawa Senators™

--

The Leafs were the higher seeded team in 3 out of the 4 series. So the team favoured to win based on the regular season won in the playoffs.

The Leafs didn't win because they hit more, they won because they were the better team.

Lol

Maybe you are too young to remember the 07 finals.

Oh I remember. I remember the Sens being carried by one dominant line that was shutdown by one of the best checking lines the NHL has ever seen that were supported by 2 Norris calibre defenseman in front of a Conn Smyth winning goaltender.
 

Wham City

Registered User
Oct 27, 2006
4,312
0
Whistler
No offense, but this is one of those things that is so obvious (and useless) it really shouldn't even be said.

No one has said hitting is the only route to success, or produces offence. As for the chart, when a large majority of fourth liners have a job that consists of forechecking and hitting, the hits-to-points is going to show that.

You misread, it's showing "team point percentage" not individual points.

ie. do teams that hit more win more often.
 

The Expert

Registered Expert
Aug 31, 2008
13,277
1,253
BC
2000
Conference Quarterfinals(First Round) in 6 games
(3)Toronto Maple Leafs™ vs. (6)Ottawa Senators™

2001
Conference Quarterfinals(First Round) in 4 games
(2)Ottawa Senators™ vs. (7)Toronto Maple Leafs™

2002
Conference Semifinals(Second Round) in 7 games
(4)Toronto Maple Leafs™ vs. (7)Ottawa Senators™

2004
Conference Quarterfinals(First Round) in 7 games
(4)Toronto Maple Leafs™ vs. (5)Ottawa Senators™

The Leafs were the higher seeded team in 3 out of the 4 series. So the team favoured to win based on the regular season won in the playoffs.

The Leafs didn't win because they hit more, they won because they were the better team.

You always post this and then get destroyed because in two of the three series' the Leafs were favoured, they were seperated by like 2 or 3 points.

Try again. Saying each one of those Leafs teams was better tells me you weren't a fan at the time.

You misread, it's showing "team point percentage" not individual points.

ie. do teams that hit more win more often.

Ah, I blatantly mis-read it! My apologies, kind sir.
 
Jan 19, 2006
22,960
4,659
Calgary
You always post this and then get destroyed because in two of the three series' the Leafs were favoured, they were seperated by like 2 or 3 points.

Try again. Saying each one of those Leafs teams was better tells me you weren't a fan at the time.



Ah, I blatantly mis-read it! My apologies, kind sir.
And the series went 6 and/or 7 games.

So a team that are marginally the favorite won in a long playoff series. I'm not sure what your point is.
 

McManked

Ooh to be a Gooner
Jan 16, 2011
19,520
3
Edmonton, AB
Hitting is becoming a lost art in hockey. Nowadays it seems like a "good hit" is one where the opposing player goes flying and gets the wind knocked out of him. In reality, the hits that best help the team are the ones that, in one way or another, separate the man from the puck.

The classic forechecking system of first man takes the body, second man takes the pick, third man takes the slot is one of the most important and vital aspects of the game if you're playing a 2-1-2.

I think hitting is tremendously important to the game, as long as it's used right.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->