The Teach Me About Hockey Thread

[Ares]

What does a PK specialist do?

Usually play on the 3rd or 4th line but come out on the 1st PK line.

Kruger and Smith were our PK specialists most of this year.... Smith went to San Jose in that trade, but Kruger still a great PKer.... usually you want very solid defensive forwards with high energy whom both have the ability and the willingness to block shots...

 

[clonetrooper264]

Usually play on the 3rd or 4th line but come out on the 1st PK line.

Kruger and Smith were our PK specialists most of this year.... Smith went to San Jose in that trade, but Kruger still a great PKer.... usually you want very solid defensive forwards with high energy whom both have the ability and the willingness to block shots...

So basically just hyper defensive players? Makes sense...

 

[MassHavoc]

So basically just hyper defensive players? Makes sense...

They have to have some value somewhere on the regular lines though, a team will almost never pick up a guy just because he's good on the PK and then try to force him into the lineup somewhere. Luckily like was mentioned that is what the 3rd and 4th lines are for. If a guy is good on the PK he usually has enough hockey skills to contribute to the even strength.

 

[clonetrooper264]

They have to have some value somewhere on the regular lines though, a team will almost never pick up a guy just because he's good on the PK and then try to force him into the lineup somewhere. Luckily like was mentioned that is what the 3rd and 4th lines are for. If a guy is good on the PK he usually has enough hockey skills to contribute to the even strength.

So you can't just be a defensive player...you need to have some offensive competence.

I'm guessing the PP specialist is the opposite idea? Good offensive player, but can do ok defensively as well?

 

[Chief Walking Stick]

So you can't just be a defensive player...you need to have some offensive competence.

I'm guessing the PP specialist is the opposite idea? Good offensive player, but can do ok defensively as well?

So do u think we should trade down to get some special teams specialists now?

 

[clonetrooper264]

So do u think we should trade down to get some special teams specialists now?

Seems like a good idea...said only one poster ever

 

[Ares]

So you can't just be a defensive player...you need to have some offensive competence.

I'm guessing the PP specialist is the opposite idea? Good offensive player, but can do ok defensively as well?

No certainly not... a PK "specialist" will still have offensive ability, but the defensive part of their game is usually top notch.

I think when you look for whom is going to be a PK specialist on your team you wanna look for the hard workers.... Kruger....Smith.... dudes who will work their ass off to get to the puck and get it cleared.

You will have the Toews and Hossa PKers too... guys who are just good forecheckers, great all-around players.... but the PK specialist types will usually be hard working 3rd or 4th line guys who don't have a great offensive game, but they are responsible on D and they are hard workers.

 

[MassHavoc]

So you can't just be a defensive player...you need to have some offensive competence.

I'm guessing the PP specialist is the opposite idea? Good offensive player, but can do ok defensively as well?

Yeah Kinda, I just mostly wanted to illustrate that it's not like in other sports where they have players for one specific singular role, like the DH, a closer, place kicker, guy who comes in just to foul shaq... They are on the ice because they are capable 5 on 5 players, but if they are really good on the PK it can give them a big of a value edge.

 

[clonetrooper264]

Yeah Kinda, I just mostly wanted to illustrate that it's not like in other sports where they have players for one specific singular role, like the DH, a closer, place kicker, guy who comes in just to foul shaq... They are on the ice because they are capable 5 on 5 players, but if they are really good on the PK it can give them a big of a value edge.

I guess in my mind I was thinking of a Tony Allen type player in basketball. For those who don't know, Tony Allen is one of the best one on one defenders in the game today. Basically this generation's Bruce Bowen. His offensive game is basically nonexistent, but he still plays lots of minutes.

I guess hockey is different in that you need to have competence on both sides. This leads me to ask...what about a guy like Kane? He isn't really a good defensive player at all right? But he isn't necessarily poor either. It's not like his amazing offensive abilities outweigh his nonexistent defense or something like that?

 

[Chief Walking Stick]

I guess in my mind I was thinking of a Tony Allen type player in basketball. For those who don't know, Tony Allen is one of the best one on one defenders in the game today. Basically this generation's Bruce Bowen. His offensive game is basically nonexistent, but he still plays lots of minutes.

I guess hockey is different in that you need to have competence on both sides. This leads me to ask...what about a guy like Kane? He isn't really a good defensive player at all right? But he isn't necessarily poor either. It's not like his amazing offensive abilities outweigh his nonexistent defense or something like that?

Kane is above playing defense

 

[MassHavoc]

Kane is good enough defensively, and has gotten a lot better as he's matured. His speed also allows him to make up for errors along with Keith or Seabs being on the ice when he is... but that end of the day offensive players are different because their pro's far outweigh any defensive cons. Also a guy like kane who demands attention inadvertently does things defensively that don't really show up on paper. He makes the opposing team try to match up to him by putting certain players on the ice, usually more defensive minded players, which leaves a lot of the offensive players on the bench, so that's it's own form of defense. Also, he can keep the puck on his stick in the opposing teams zone for long periods of time, which as you know, it's much harder for the opposing team to score if they can't get the puck, or get the puck in their zone. Things like that. Kind of like a great shot blocker who alters shots or makes people not drive in the lane just by being in there.

 

[Novak]

We need one of these in the baers forum

 

[DMelt36]

We need one of these in the baers forum

The problem is everyone thinks they know everything about football, which is so far from reality it's quite hysterical. I think enough people are willing to freely admit that their hockey knowledge is limited because it's still a somewhat niche sport.

 

[Ares]

The problem is everyone thinks they know everything about football, which is so far from reality it's quite hysterical. I think enough people are willing to freely admit that their hockey knowledge is limited because it's still a somewhat niche sport.

Are you saying.... everyone.... doesn't know.... everything.... about football?

 

[Bigfoot]

Are you saying.... everyone.... doesn't know.... everything.... about football?

Pretty sure that is what he said

 

[DMelt36]

Are you saying.... everyone.... doesn't know.... everything.... about football?

I mean, I do know everything about football. But I'm probably the one person in the world that does.

 

[LordKOTL]

The only thing I know about gridiron football is that the older I've got, the more WWE and a waste of time it's got for me. Thus, I don't watch it anymore. I'd rather watch Rugby.

Still, I think it's impossible for anyone to know anything in any given sport--especially on a fan level. If they did, they'd be playing or coaching and not being air conditioner ballast like the rest of us.

 

[DMelt36]

The only thing I know about gridiron football is that the older I've got, the more WWE and a waste of time it's got for me. Thus, I don't watch it anymore. I'd rather watch Rugby.

Still, I think it's impossible for anyone to know anything in any given sport--especially on a fan level. If they did, they'd be playing or coaching and not being air conditioner ballast like the rest of us.

The most infuriating thing to me about football (which certainly carries over to other sports) is that there's not necessarily one strategy that's the sole path to success. There are a ton of approaches to the game that will work as long as you have the right pieces in place. Everything works in theory. It's in the practice of those approaches where things go awry.

 

[LordKOTL]

The most infuriating thing to me about football (which certainly carries over to other sports) is that there's not necessarily one strategy that's the sole path to success. There are a ton of approaches to the game that will work as long as you have the right pieces in place. Everything works in theory. It's in the practice of those approaches where things go awry.

To me my biggest annoyances about gridiron football is the fact that there's so much dead time when nothing is going on but guys standing around (60 minutes of time in the game, approx 13 minutes of actual time the ball is in play), the season being so bloody short, and the fact that there are a lot of things built into the game to artificially raise the suspense, like allowing the QB to spike the ball sto stop the clock (IMHO should be intentional grounding). To me, it poses more like sports entertainment, when there show and suspense are bigger than the game. Hence my comparing it to the WWE (or even the XFL--if you remember that)

With the exception of Baseball, every other sport I've followed at least somewhat at sometime in my life--Basketball, Ice Hockey, Box Lacrosse, Aussie Rules, Rugby Union, etc. the game time is as advertised--the game is in play for whoerver long the clock states. You got 48 minutes (I believe) in basketball, 60 in hockey, 60 minutes for Box Lacrosse, 80 mins for Rugby, 80 for Aussie rules, and 90 for Football (soccer). Baseball has no time limit, but it also advertises itself as a pastime. I don't think anyone every goes to a baseball game excpeting hard action and them selling you the entire seat but only needing the edge.

But hey, that's just my opinion. Everyone has different tastes. During the world cup half of my freinds (mostly americans) continued to blither on about soccer and how much it sucks. The other half of my freinds (mostly europeans), were blathering on about how much better soccer was than gridiron football. Some of my other friends say ice hockey's too difficult to learn, and others just say WTF! at Rugby or Aussie Rules.

 

[Gustavus Adolphus]

Assuming the Hawks make the cup, 2 questions:
1. Who do you want them to play, and why?
2. Who do you not want to see them play, and why?