Systems Lab 1

I need to make more introductory tactic articles- I think there is simply not enough on the internet right now to help a casual fan or beginning player understand the game on a deeper level yet. That said, I got a little bored with it, which is why I haven't had the willpower to write any more in the last few months (if you're patient, I have a half-finished writeup on rush tactics), and I want to get into some more creative territory. That's why I'm introducing a new series: The Systems Lab.

In these posts, I'll explore some tactical concepts of my own creation. We'll probe the tactics to figure out if they're any good, and if so, when they could be useful. We'' go over every phase of play at some point, both sides of the puck- breakout/forecheck, regroup/press, offense/defense, and powerplay/penanty kill. If people request things, I'll look into them, but otherwise it'll just be whatever strikes my fancy.

Tactic 1: Posted Center Breakout

Let's set the scene. We've won the puck in our defensive zone. Off of coverage, off of a dump-in, doesn't matter. Our opponents are coming at us with a 1-2-2. F1 wants to force us wide, where their F2 will smother the puck and win it back. They have a lone forward in the middle of the ice clogging up any adventurous passes, and both defensemen patrol the blue line. It's bog standard stuff, and teams have been running some variation of it for decades.

We'll be targeting their F3. Most teams in this situation will either go up the boards, facing the forecheck head-on (and asking a lot of that strong-side winger), or they will reverse, hoping for open space on the weak side. Instead, we're going to plop our center relatively high in the zone- the goal is to get into a "corridor of uncertainty" between F3 and D territory. We'll have our center posted up, facing towards the puck. Toes towards our own goal. That takes away some threat of pinch from the defense, because a sturdy player can hold off contact in this situation. Our center needs to be very aware of the position of every other player on the ice, and constantly check over their shoulders to be sure that the D is not already upon the to pick their pocket.

From here, our play starts. Both our wingers swing towards the strong side. The strong-side wing takes away any support from F2. With F1 attacking our puck carrier, and the D at the blue line, that forces F3 to make a choice. The natural inclination will be to take away the center- it's a telegraphed passing option, a static, easy to cover player, and it's high-value real estate.

But that's the wrong choice. If F3 picks up the center, our weak-side winger gets the puck in the middle of the ice at top speed (because they were already cutting and building speed) and with tons of open ice. The play will most often devolve into a 2v2 rush, with both our wingers escaping with speed against both opposing defenders. Not great for rush offense, but it will get consistent entries. If F2 isn't ready for that pass or isn't hustling to back check, our weak-side D can join the rush and push for a 3v2.

So what if F3 takes the winger? Our D has to make a pass through F1, and now our center has the puck. They're facing the wrong way, flat footed, and can't see if the defenseman is coming down on top of them. Looks bad for us.

But it's not. If the D stays back and F3 recovers to the puck, our center can lay a pass off for the weak-side winger. With our weak-side D joining the rush, that's a 2v1 at the blue line. Depending on how the play unfolds, it will most likely evolve into a 3v2 by the time we reach the far blueline. Perfect.

If we do that once, F3 will know better, and stick to our winger. Now we read the D. If the D stays back, our center can turn up-ice and we've got a 2v1 at the blueline. Depending on how much space our strong-side wing gets from their check, we could be looking at a 2v3 (not great, we probably chip that out), a 2v2, or a 2v1 up ice.

Our opponents aren't cowards. They'll pinch on the center. That's worse for them, actually. Sneaking up on someone, it's easy to steal the puck with a poke or a stick lift, but against someone who knows you're coming, having their back turned is an advantage. They can bully away their defender and nullify a stick check- just like basketball players in the post or soccer players shielding. So now our strong-side winger can cut in, getting separation from F2, and has a very good chance at a breakaway. 

This seems like a pretty good play. Every option gets the puck out and can potentially get the team an odd-man rush. The reads are simple, and it plays well to strengths of different types of player. But what could go wrong? For starters, most centers are not built to play this way- it may be better to have a wing pop up to the "center" spot, since most teams build around their velvetier players at center and their sand-paper-ier players on the wing. Trying to have your big, hulking players get separation from a curl and confining your fast, creative players to a tight contact area is cruel.

But even if you do have the personnel, the pass has to get through. At higher levels of hockey, it's not difficult for a defenseman to make a tightly contested pass through the F1. But teams will adjust, most likely by sending a second forechecker at the puck, but possibly by dropping a defenseman down to pre-emptively cover the center. That pass becomes much more difficult, and the only option becomes the checkdown pass to the weak-side D. That's not the end of the world, but that play is going to move more slowly, so it's less likely to turn into an explosive odd man rush.

Tactic 2: Cycle with Screen

I love the cycle. It blends together everything that's great about hockey. There's teamwork, there's skating, there's physicality. Patient teams can hold the puck long enough to asphyxiate defenders, then make sneaky one-at-a-time line changes to take advantage. Every skillset helps in the cycle, nobody is the "wrong" player for it- fast players can slip past defenders, powerful players can fend off checkers, feisty players can keep winning the puck back to keep the play going, stickhandlers can embarrass a winger who gets over-eager at cutting the play off.

The only real weakness in the cycle is that it lacks threat. Teams can comfortably collapse into a box+1 and let your forwards dizzy themselves in the corner. They can also engage their wingers, taking advantage of all 5 of their defenders against the offense's only 3 forwards. In the last 3 years or so, teams have started to counter the latter play with more active defenders who cut to the net. The aggressiveness is destabilizing, and it can lead to some exciting plays, but it's muzzled. What would be better would be to have the defenseman be a part of the cycle, freeing up a forward to cause trouble in front of the net.

From here, we have options. The most obvious is to simply shoot off the wing, taking advantage of the net front forward as a screen. The screen increases the chance a low-percentage shot goes in, and depending on the talent of that net front forward, low percentage shots become very dangerous deflections or a flurry of rebound chances. 

The next option is the caveman offenes. Feed the point, big slap shot, hope for something afterwards. While this is available, one would hope that the offense can do better than this most of the tie- it's one step above a turnover unless the player in front makes magic out of it.

The trick is that the net front player doesn't need to stay there. Instead, they can slip into the cycle, freeing up another player to sneak out. Even a tiny moment of confusion can lead to a blown assignment and a shot in the slot.

The extra player can sneak behind the net too. It's an easier pass, almost a double cycle. While it's pretty rare to score directly from behind he net, forcing the goalie to hug a post and turn to find the puck makes their job harder, and puck-watching defenders can free up cutting lanes for passes.

Pretty slick. I would have loved to play this kind of offense as a player- my only real hockey talent was playing in front of the net, and playing in a system which is both screen-heavy and cycle-heavy would be like eating candy 3 meals a day. That being said, this system leaves you WIDE open to counterattacks. You effectively play with just one defenseman, meaning any steal immediately becomes an Xv1 odd man rush. Your other defenseman, the one in the cycle, is going to get tired much faster, and that could become a problem when it's time to backcheck and defend. There's also a chance that uncreative players fall back on the caveman offense, and you lose much of the benefit of a cycle-style offense, without the quick puck retrieval of a triangle or the easier rebounding of a crash-based offense.