Yeah, I see that and expanded on it below that post. It still doesn't make the caption any less funny.
News Article: Why the best defencemen have to be proficient on offence
- Thread starter joshjull
- Start date
Yeah, I see that and expanded on it below that post. It still doesn't make the caption any less funny.
struckbyaparkedcar
Guilty of Being Right
Oh absolutely, I just viscerally hate the notion that Yandle's crappy defense doesn't cost you anything because he drives possession.
Really? I took it as an observation, not a blanket "you're a ****** playoff dman if you suck on the retrieval and breakout"...
joshjull
Registered User
Actually he did. He quite obviously could have reversed to his partner. Its a pretty basic play made by dmen in that situation. Thats option 2 btw. His partner (who was still near the net and not going to change yet in pic #1 and pic #2) would have easily read it as soon as the reverse took place and been there to receive the pass. Its d-partner support 101. With the Kings leaving the zone it leaves Polak's partner with the puck and Sharks in possession. They could then complete the change with zero worries.
As someone that grew up playing defense as well as coaching it later, I'm somewhat surprised how such a simple and obvious option is dismisses as not possible.
He also could have tried to skate it out more. He had a enough of a head start to get much closer to the blue line before shooting it out. Thats assuming he couldn't actually make it to the blue line. But based on the fact he pulled up into a stop in pic #2 as he chipped it out. He was just going to flip it out and those other options were never on his radar.
joshjull
Registered User
It puts Fowler in a good light and that gets him very ornery.
This info, like any other, is just helping give part of the picture.
struckbyaparkedcar
Guilty of Being Right
Or I've listened to him talk about this exact subject, at length, for pretty much this entire season on his podcast.
Yost and Filopovic's analysis really doesn't go beyond corsi, breakout stats that only they have access to, and P/60.
Eh, I still think Roman's too slow to gain the blueline cleanly, head-start or no. And the lane back to his partner is closed by the forechecker. Hard around the boards would put it into a position where his partner has to retrieve and attempt to make a play, perhaps an option but does the King in the slot contend it and continue to force the Shark line to stay on, extending further? I don't think this particular example is all that bad.
joshjull
Registered User
I agree he's probably too slow. But my point was more that he wasn't even going to try as evidence by his stopping as he flipped it out.
As for the pass on option #2 being taken away. It 100% is not. The pass (an indirect one) is made by running it back along the boards as the forechecker closes on him. Then his partner drops back below the goal line to get it. Its a basic d-support play thats made multiple times a game. I'm not talking about a direct pass to where his partner is currently standing. Just look at pic #2. He makes that back pass along the boards and no one is near his partner who easily picks it up. As I said previously, thats d-support 101 thats taught as part of reversing the puck in the zone. The dman in front is always reading for that. I'm somewhat shocked that this is even a debate.
Last edited:
joshjull
Registered User
I also think getting too caught up with that one example is missing the forest for the trees. Tells me some didn't bother reading anything and just looked at the pictures. 
I also think getting too caught up with that one example is missing the forest for the trees. Tells me some didn't bother reading anything and just looked at the pictures.
I took the premise to be shedding light on yet another aspect of a dman that makes them important to success. If you have guys who excel in this area, it's a good thing for the team... Fairly simple.
joshjull
Registered User
Crazy Tasty
Registered User
It's an extremely simple concept that so many people just don't understand.
Playing years of "semi" competitive indoor soccer, the only time our teams were any good is when we had to solid defenders that could get the ball and make that first (successful) pass.
It drives the offense, 80% of the time.
Playing years of "semi" competitive indoor soccer, the only time our teams were any good is when we had to solid defenders that could get the ball and make that first (successful) pass.
It drives the offense, 80% of the time.
joshjull
Registered User
All I got out of this article about Yandle is he helps the Rags transition and go on the attack better than the other Rags dmen. How does that translate into saying his defense doesn't cost you?
When we get back to the playoffs, I sure hope our guys don't try doing things they aren't capable of... In their own zone
As for option 2, what's the game scenario on this play? Late lead? Puck reversals do lead to turnovers, and while the probability of the chip out leading to a turn of possession is high, a turnover on the reversal leads to quality scoring chances against, especially if your mates are going for a change.
struckbyaparkedcar
Guilty of Being Right
Because the point of the article is to re-brand breakout skills vs in-zone defense as the primary attribute of a "safe" defenseman.
wunderpanda
Registered User
- Apr 9, 2012
- 5,532
- 526
Pretty common sense to say a puck moving defenseman is better at moving the puck than 3rd pairing guys. I agree with that much of it, hard to accept a chart that has McBain more proficient at anything than Shea Weber.
Then he focuses the article on a guy at the low end of exit attempts. No mention of variable matchups or situation and a loose definition of getting the puck out of the D zone while retaining possession. No mention on how that defenseman gained the puck either- if only the 1st pass by a defender is being counted (ex. de Haan gains the puck & makes 3 foot pass to Leddy who carries it out) is de Haan being credited or Leddy?
How long must someone who skates the puck out retain possession in the neutral zone to qualify? Is getting over the blue line before making a bad pass (or other neutral zone turnover) any different than lobbing the puck out of the zone? Do they need to cross center ice, or is just crossing the blue line before losing the puck enough?
I haven't read his previous bits, just curious if he feels the same way about dumping the puck in when entering the O-zone.
<Roman pics>
I don't see a terrible difference between options 1 & 3, either way there are no other Sharks to get the puck and the only outcomes are icing or a turnover. Roman isn't someone who should skate with the puck towards the net either, he made the safe play for him. Center ice lob at least puts the possession change closer to the Sharks coming off the bench. (like punt return coverage, kinda, work with me on that one)
There is also value in him gaining the puck to begin with, nothing else in the article happens without that stage.
Then he focuses the article on a guy at the low end of exit attempts. No mention of variable matchups or situation and a loose definition of getting the puck out of the D zone while retaining possession. No mention on how that defenseman gained the puck either- if only the 1st pass by a defender is being counted (ex. de Haan gains the puck & makes 3 foot pass to Leddy who carries it out) is de Haan being credited or Leddy?
How long must someone who skates the puck out retain possession in the neutral zone to qualify? Is getting over the blue line before making a bad pass (or other neutral zone turnover) any different than lobbing the puck out of the zone? Do they need to cross center ice, or is just crossing the blue line before losing the puck enough?
I haven't read his previous bits, just curious if he feels the same way about dumping the puck in when entering the O-zone.
<Roman pics>
I don't see a terrible difference between options 1 & 3, either way there are no other Sharks to get the puck and the only outcomes are icing or a turnover. Roman isn't someone who should skate with the puck towards the net either, he made the safe play for him. Center ice lob at least puts the possession change closer to the Sharks coming off the bench. (like punt return coverage, kinda, work with me on that one)
There is also value in him gaining the puck to begin with, nothing else in the article happens without that stage.
Yeah, I understand all that and as someone who is dead slow and plays defense, I still think his best option in that particular scenario is exactly what he did: get it out without putting it at risk, get the change.
The hard effort back along the dasher isn't as sure of a thing as the lob.I also think getting too caught up with that one example is missing the forest for the trees. Tells me some didn't bother reading anything and just looked at the pictures.
I also said "in this particular example". Maybe some don't bother reading.
Jim Bob
RIP RJ
brian_griffin
"Eric Cartman?"
It's 1:15 into the 3rd pd with a 2-0 lead, both teams making what was likely their 2nd line change (maybe, maybe, maybe their first change), so a chip-out was OK.
100% agree with jj that if he doesn't have the skating skill (or has tired legs in a later-game situation), advancing the puck a couple more strides before backing it around to his d-parter is the best option. Game situation makes the chip-out acceptable.
I so wish BUF can obtain (draft, acquire, develop-in-system) two different player equivalents of Andrej Sekera. A skill set like that is exactly what BUF needs for legit playoff push, and 2 of them for deep playoff runs.
Brodin/Fowler, #8OA, etc.,
What type of D-man would people project Guhle to be (ceiling and floor)?
I don't see Sekera-lite in McCabe.
Guhle is very much a mobile defender who makes good puck security decisions, if that's the sort of parallel to Sekera you were looking for.
Der Jaeger
Generational EBUG
Guhle is my favorite prospect for that reason. Eventually, and if he continues to develop, I think Guhle - Ristolainen is the first pair.
joshjull
Registered User
Yeah, I understand all that and as someone who is dead slow and plays defense, I still think his best option in that particular scenario is exactly what he did: get it out without putting it at risk, get the change.
Agree to somewhat disagree. Only in the sense that some were arguing option #2 isn't available. It clearly is. Dumping it out like he did isn't the end of the world. I just feel option # 2 is best because it keeps possession and allows for the change.
That comment wasn't directed at you.
It's also a bit of me laughing at myself. Since I destracted from the articles overall point by posting the pics. Making that such a focus
Last edited:
Possibly. Or if he hits his potential, he becomes their Hjalmarsson and anchors a decent 2nd pair and maybe allows Risto to get some offensive zone minutes instead of being constantly saddled with d-zone starts. He has the VO2 freakishness to skate big minutes... *shrug*
joshjull
Registered User
The primary point I got was that being good at breaking out and transitioning the puck to your forwards helps your offense.
You obviously came into the thread having an issue with this guys take based in things other an the article.
joshjull
Registered User
If Polak isn't capable of making that reversal pass then he doesn't belong in the NHL.
Reversing off the boards in pic #2 leaves very little chance of a turnover. It's also close to a 100% chance of keeping possession since his partner didn't go to change yet. Plus the forechecking forward was supplying token pressure as he was heading out of the zone. He then went to change.
Polak's partner went to change after the chip out. But clearly in pic #2 he was in a support position for his partner. Perfectly ready to receive that reversal pass had it been made.
This play happens multple times a game. If his partner got the pass he would have waited behind the net for the forwards to finish changing. They keep possession and go from there.
Ad
Latest posts
-
-
Post-Game Talk: ECQF GAME 4 - BRUINS head home with a 3-1 series lead.- Latest: Bruinswillwin77
-
