The Teach Me About Hockey Thread

[DMelt36]

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?

1. I'd love to see a Hawks/Penguins series just to get a full 7-game matchup of Toews and Crosby. Also because I think the Hawks would demolish them. But Pittsburgh probably won't get out of the first round.
2. I do not want them to play the Rangers, because the Rangers play an incredibly defensive style of hockey that will make for games that will likely be boring at times. Also a style of hockey that doesn't exactly favor the Hawks, IMO.

 

[DMelt36]

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)

Man, I went to an XFL game once. Chicago Enforcers vs. Orlando Rage. It wasn't great, but I enjoyed myself.

I get that complaint about football. But it's the sport I grew up playing and watching, it's sorta the family tradition, and I don't think I'll ever stop watching it. I think every sports has some stupid rules though ... like the NHL's shootouts, delay of game penalties, and the instigator rule.

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.

Different tastes for sure. I find that as I grow older I just appreciate watching people compete more and more. Been getting into soccer a ton more in the last 4-5 years, and the World Cup only added more fuel to that fire. Trying real hard to go see the US Women play in the World Cup this summer in Canada, actually.

Golf and tennis are probably the only two sports I haven't been able to get into, but just about everything else is something I'll watch as long as there's decent competition happening. Ya know what sport I really can't wait to see again at the summer Olympics? Team handball. Watched it in 2012 and loved every second of it.

 

[Popinski Soda]

By "boring" you mean "anxiety-filled, heart-attack inducer?" That's how I felt every time they played during the regular season.

Richards' goal at MSG was a thing of beauty.

 

[DMelt36]

By "boring" you mean "anxiety-filled, heart-attack inducer?" That's how I felt every time they played during the regular season.

Richards' goal at MSG was a thing of beauty.

I just worry that'll be a dump-and-chase, neutral zone trap kinds of series. Yeah, they'll be plenty of heart attacks and all that but I bet the Rangers try to clog the neutral zone which slows down the Hawks' game incredibly ... because NY is really good at it.

 

[Popinski Soda]

I just worry that'll be a dump-and-chase, neutral zone trap kinds of series. Yeah, they'll be plenty of heart attacks and all that but I bet the Rangers try to clog the neutral zone which slows down the Hawks' game incredibly ... because NY is really good at it.

Fair enough.

 

[clonetrooper264]

Can someone explain the importance of the dump and chase? I see it in like every game, but I'm never sure why exactly guys do it? It seems like an all out sprint to get back to the puck and then you fight over it on the boards and chase it around some more. It's never really seemed advantageous to me, but I could just be missing some detail because I'm a noob.

 

[Variable]

Can't always carry the puck in when they stack the blue line. Kane might be able to do it but the majority of players don't have his kind of puck handling ability.

 

[Tater]

Can someone explain the importance of the dump and chase? I see it in like every game, but I'm never sure why exactly guys do it? It seems like an all out sprint to get back to the puck and then you fight over it on the boards and chase it around some more. It's never really seemed advantageous to me, but I could just be missing some detail because I'm a noob.

Other teams know how good the Hawks are when they can carry the puck in the zone and pass it around. To stop that, they stack up several players on their blue line to prevent someone from skating in with the puck and the only option left is to dump and chase.
The Hawks are not built for that kind of board work but dumping it in is often the only option.

 

[Shantz My Pants]

Dump and chase used to be a favorite tactic amongst many teams back in the 80s and 90s (so much so the Hawks ran that all the way to the cup finals in 92).

Primarily, the idea behind it is to dump the puck in deep, forecheck hard (chase) and try and force the other teams defensemen to turn it over due to the checking pressure.

Nowadays, with so many teams having defensemen who can actually handle the puck, teams only use it as an option if they can't enter the zone with possession or have run out of options once in the zone and are being closed in on (also referred to as chip and chase). Plus, with goaltenders able to handle the puck behind the net, not much sense in purposely turning the puck over when trying to generate offense unless you know you can beat the defender to the puck.

You really need a team of guys willing to throw their weight around and play the forechecking system to a tee (Blues and Bruins as example) to be effective with it. The Hawks aren't really that type of team and instead prefer possession more so than the dump and chase. They still do it like most teams when needing a line change, or trying to get the puck deep to sustain pressure, but it's not as prevalent as before.


Sent from my Texas Instrument Calculator

 

[Tjodalv]

It should also be noted that they attempted to revive the dump and chase (forechecking is "exciting") game in 2005 with the "Brodeur Rule," i.e. the implementation of the restricted play areas in the corners below the goal-line. Back in the late 90s/early 2000s New Jersey and other teams were dominating defensively by providing zero forecheck and backing all their players out the second they gave up offensive zone possession in order to clog up any passes/fast skating through the neutral zone (the "NZ trap") -- this in turn forced teams to dump the puck (much like Tater describes as what teams try to force the Hawks to do) and goaltenders with excellent puck handling skills (Brodeur being the prime example) could beat any of the attacking skaters to the puck in the corner, preventing any sort of attack from even getting started.

It worked a little; getting your wingers or a wing and C skating full speed at the blue line simultaneous to the dump can still get you numbers in the corner much more easily than it was to do a decade+ ago.

If you're curious, goaltender specific rules are under section 27 of the NHL rulebook (pp. 41-43 [51-53 of that PDF]).

 

[LordKOTL]

It should also be noted that they attempted to revive the dump and chase (forechecking is "exciting") game in 2005 with the "Brodeur Rule," i.e. the implementation of the restricted play areas in the corners below the goal-line. Back in the late 90s/early 2000s New Jersey and other teams were dominating defensively by providing zero forecheck and backing all their players out the second they gave up offensive zone possession in order to clog up any passes/fast skating through the neutral zone (the "NZ trap") -- this in turn forced teams to dump the puck (much like Tater describes as what teams try to force the Hawks to do) and goaltenders with excellent puck handling skills (Brodeur being the prime example) could beat any of the attacking skaters to the puck in the corner, preventing any sort of attack from even getting started.

It worked a little; getting your wingers or a wing and C skating full speed at the blue line simultaneous to the dump can still get you numbers in the corner much more easily than it was to do a decade+ ago.

If you're curious, goaltender specific rules are under section 27 of the NHL rulebook (pp. 41-43 [51-53 of that PDF]).

My solution to this was simple--the Netminder can play the puck anywhere, but they could only freeze the puck in the crease or in the trapezoid (along with area in front of the crease. If the Goalie goes into the corners they cannot freeze it, they have to play it and are subject to be treated like a skater. I doubt it would ever fly with guys like Miller whining about contact.

Man, I went to an XFL game once. Chicago Enforcers vs. Orlando Rage. It wasn't great, but I enjoyed myself.

I get that complaint about football. But it's the sport I grew up playing and watching, it's sorta the family tradition, and I don't think I'll ever stop watching it. I think every sports has some stupid rules though ... like the NHL's shootouts, delay of game penalties, and the instigator rule.

I like the concept of Delay of Game--it prevents guys from pulling bullshit like "spiking the ball" in Gridiron. I don't like the shootout especially since it's not weighted properly against a normal win.
As for Gridiron I grew up with it too, but I tended to get more interested in hockey the older I got, and less interested in Gridiron the older I got. I just wish Rugby was a bit easier to come by in the states.

Different tastes for sure. I find that as I grow older I just appreciate watching people compete more and more. Been getting into soccer a ton more in the last 4-5 years, and the World Cup only added more fuel to that fire. Trying real hard to go see the US Women play in the World Cup this summer in Canada, actually.
I probably never would have got into soccer as much as I did if I didn't live in Portland. I think it's all in the locale but the more I was exposed the more I got interested in the nuances of the sport.
Golf and tennis are probably the only two sports I haven't been able to get into, but just about everything else is something I'll watch as long as there's decent competition happening. Ya know what sport I really can't wait to see again at the summer Olympics? Team handball. Watched it in 2012 and loved every second of it.

Honestly, I hate golf--with a passion. I can tolerate tennis but it does get boring quickly. I would like to see Rugby 7's enter the summer olympics--there would be a lot of potential there.

 

[CLWolf81]

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?

1. Overall, the New York Islanders. I'd love to see that team make it in. The series would be extremely interesting line-wise, we'd have home advantage, and goaltending is a joke at best. They play a Western-style game we are all used to, so it won't be difficult to deal with. Plus, who wouldn't want to see Nassau Coliseum in a last hurrah before the Isles move to Brooklyn next season?

For the O6 factor, I'd go with Montreal. They have vulnerable spots the Hawks can take advantage of.

2. I wouldn't want to face the Rangers. Series against teams like them could go a very long 7 games. They're deep defensively and can wear us down fast. I wouldn't want to deal with them.

 

[clonetrooper264]

Someone explain to me why the Hawks power play is so terrible. Y THEY NO SHOOT MOAR?!?!?!

 

[TCD]

Someone explain to me why the Hawks power play is so terrible. Y THEY NO SHOOT MOAR?!?!?!

No mortal man has the answer.

 

[HawkWriter]

Someone explain to me why the Hawks power play is so terrible. Y THEY NO SHOOT MOAR?!?!?!

In regards to last night - I'd give a lot of the credit to the Predators. Predators were playing extremely aggressive on the PK and the Blackhawks simply couldn't get set up for the most part. Something they will have to adapt to for the next game.

I'm always a fan of simply letting the guys up top (if in a simple umbrella) rip shots. Take a low hard shot with a screen and usually only good things are going to happen. A goal, a rebound, havoc around the net, etc. Easier said than done at times though.

I really am not a fan of the second PP unit that the Blackhawks have been running out but hopefully they put it together. Saad/Richards/Versteeg up front just results in chaos it seems.

 

[Chief Walking Stick]

Someone explain to me why the Hawks power play is so terrible. Y THEY NO SHOOT MOAR?!?!?!

No one knows clone. They have arguably the best #1 PP unit but they just want to be the Globetrotters and fucking pass 10K times instead of getting pucks on net.

 

[TCD]

No one knows clone. They have arguably the best #1 PP unit but they just want to be the Globetrotters and fucking pass 10K times instead of getting pucks on net.

The only guy on the hawks who can pass as a globetrotter is oduya.

If you catch what i am trying to cook in my smell.

 

[ClydeLee]

It's cause he's Swedish right?

Idk, people say the Hawks need to shoot more to be good but seriously, I see constant efforts to just set up one time point range shots and it goes only one in a blue moon in... if you watch or recall when they literally wer #1 & #2 in PP units for stretches around 2010 & 2011, it wasn't because they were shooting more. They actually set up a lot more around the net area and distributed the puck.

Since Haviland was removed from the unit because it sputtered starting the 2012 season, the system has been more get 1 net presence guy, have the skilled forwards pass along the sides until they get a open one-timer.

but their two goals in that game one... a cross crease set-up which was a staple of that old system and Toews from the side of the net crashing. I'd rather see that attempted 9/10 more times than just more shots from the point or sideboards.

 

[pslbluesfan]

I have been hawks fan for decades, my 1 major complaint until the 3'd period last night has always been, keeping guys on point! Last night they did just that. Kept puck in the preds zone and just hammered the puck at rinne. It was so awesome to see them get rebound after rebound!

 

[clonetrooper264]

I've wondered this for awhile now...why do fans who sit by the glass bang on it when players are there? What are they hoping to accomplish?