special teams personnel?
- Thread starter BigFatCat999
- Start date
Slats432
Registered User
Not that I have ever seen. (And you are not a moron.) Also it is personnel based. You need to run 2 d pairs and 2 f pairs, because you can't run them for the full 2 minutes and you will need fresh d after the PK is over.
BigFatCat999
First Fubu and now Pred303. !@#$! you cancer
I thought about this and I was wondering; with 6 d-men on an NHL roster you could cycle 1 center, 3 dmen on PK1, leave your best PKer on the ice (or most athletic skater) and switch to a 2 F, 2D for PK2
EDIT: As for the idiot part, I have MS, (SLED HOCKEY Y'ALL!!!!) and when my meds are low internally it feels like my brain is boiling.
Slats432
Registered User
Tough to gauge, what do you do if one of your dmen is in the box? And you can't successfully run one guy for 2mins.
BigFatCat999
First Fubu and now Pred303. !@#$! you cancer
Then 2D, 2F. If we are talking about experienced hockey players, they should be able to mentally switch.
Slats432
Registered User
At the highest level, it isn't necessarily easy to play F or D and switch. I coach club hockey and would never consider 1F 3D approach. Even conceptually forwards forecheck so up top, you would want your forwards to attack aggressively.
BigFatCat999
First Fubu and now Pred303. !@#$! you cancer
I'm looking at the shape. Usually I see a diamond shape so that's one guy. 1 forward. Wouldn't a taller PKer with speed be better? (The Hal Gill effect). Just for reach?
Slats432
Registered User
BigFatCat999
First Fubu and now Pred303. !@#$! you cancer
If the 'Home plate' area is the high percentage area why not make a perimeter of home plate? Play the odds.
Slats432
Registered User
It is high percentage played as it is now. If teams collapse too far I am sure that would give other opportunities. Never seen it tried though.
BigFatCat999
First Fubu and now Pred303. !@#$! you cancer
Just an Idea from a fan who has worked in many sports; ex-ATC, use the perimeter of home plate as the 'slots' for your players to play 'slot hockey'. Just like in 'slot hockey' the players can only skate along the perimeter of 'home plate'.
Two at the top, two at the middle. Only collapsing is from the middle 2 skaters. If the puck gets to the goalie, the two middle skaters follow the 'slots' of the 'home plate' to the goalie. No collapsing, the goalie is responsible for the middle of home plate when he or she has visibility. Just an idea that can be shot full of holes. (Also kills the concept of positioned PK, I would want the most mobile skaters.)
Slats432
Registered User
If you let NHL players with a free shot at the top of the homeplate with a clear sight at the net, it won't end well. Forwards who do well on the PK get into the shooting lanes.
BigFatCat999
First Fubu and now Pred303. !@#$! you cancer
Who says there will be a clear shot? The 2 at the top of the plate would follow the top 'slot' to prevent that.
tarheelhockey
Offside Review Specialist
Personally I prefer the 2-2 alignment to the 1-2-1, mainly because I don't like the idea of isolating a defenseman in front of the net.
That said, I think the argument is that 2-2 can be manipulated to create a clear lane down the middle. For what you're talking about here, you have a strong possibility that the 4 PK'ers lose track of someone in front of the net, to the extent that he has all the time in the world to pick a corner.
Also, watching the Canes regularly, I've come to appreciate the effectiveness of putting intense pressure on puckhandlers at the perimeter, even to the point of overloading one side of the ice. It's very hard to thread a pass through traffic if you've got a guy right in your face. The Canes are very, very effective at forcing PPs to chase their own passes around the zone without getting possession. Only when they gain complete uncontested control of the puck do the Canes fall back into a conservative posture protecting the middle of the ice, and they become much less effective defensively when that happens. For that reason, I'm becoming philosophically sceptical of conservative PK schemes.
biturbo19
Registered User
- Jul 13, 2010
- 25,768
- 10,820
The reality is that "positions" don't actually matter on the PK.
What's important is a players ability to operate as part of a unit to telescope or collapse that box or diamond appropriately.
There's basically zero reason to think a natural defenceman would be better at reading and reacting to movement at the point than the Forwards who are inherently programmed to work that situation at even strength.
What's important is a players ability to operate as part of a unit to telescope or collapse that box or diamond appropriately.
There's basically zero reason to think a natural defenceman would be better at reading and reacting to movement at the point than the Forwards who are inherently programmed to work that situation at even strength.
