HFBoards

HFBoards (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/index.php)
-   New York Rangers (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/forumdisplay.php?f=24)
-   -   Reason for man-to-man (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/showthread.php?t=1593781)

SKjEi o2 01-29-2014 08:20 PM

Reason for man-to-man
 
Is there a benefit for man-to-man coverage? Very few teams around the league use it. Seems more trouble than its worth, especially since our dmen have played zone since they've been in the league. Maybe it's necessary for AV's system?

Officer Friendly 01-29-2014 08:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SKjEi o2 (Post 79007749)
Is there a benefit for man-to-man coverage? Very few teams around the league use it. Seems more trouble than its worth, especially since our dmen have played zone since they've been in the league. Maybe it's necessary for AV's system?

Not 100% sure but I do think having the zone was better for the type of D that Torts ran here. The reason that they went to the man D probably has a bit more to Ulf Samuelsson then AV... Maybe since he is the D coach, AV seems to let the other coaches coach their specialty.

Mikos87 01-29-2014 09:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NYR2047 (Post 79008979)
Not 100% sure but I do think having the zone was better for the type of D that Torts ran here. The reason that they went to the man D probably has a bit more to Ulf Samuelsson then AV... Maybe since he is the D coach, AV seems to let the other coaches coach their specialty.

No he played Man in Vancouver. It's not that it doesn't work, but teams can create a lot of scoring chances against through their passing or hitting.

If the Rangers beat a guy to the puck or get a 50/50 battle out or win the race to the puck, it allows for a fast transition game if the Ranger passes connect.

The risk is that constant pressure, and straight man having lots of moving defenders instead of parking themselves in the slot equals a lot of high quality scoring chances if the opposition out possesses the Rangers.

Bigger, tougher, teams that own the boards will beat up on Man defenses. Look at the Rangers record this season against the heavier teams and you'll see a losing record.

Officer Friendly 01-29-2014 09:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mikos87 (Post 79010627)
No he played Man in Vancouver. It's not that it doesn't work, but teams can create a lot of scoring chances against through their passing or hitting.

If the Rangers beat a guy to the puck or get a 50/50 battle out or win the race to the puck, it allows for a fast transition game if the Ranger passes connect.

The risk is that constant pressure, and straight man having lots of moving defenders instead of parking themselves in the slot equals a lot of high quality scoring chances if the opposition out possesses the Rangers.

Bigger, tougher, teams that own the boards will beat up on Man defenses. Look at the Rangers record this season against the heavier teams and you'll see a losing record.

ha shows how much I paid attention when i was watch Canucks game (I consider them as my second favorite team) as far as the board battles they would occur with the Zone D as well. I always thought that the man D would be better because it calls for accountability, if Moore doesn't get Ovi and Ovi scores it is easy to tell who was the one who missed their coverage.

Greg02 01-29-2014 09:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SKjEi o2 (Post 79007749)
Maybe it's necessary for AV's system?

I asked that same question a while back, and people said that the man-to-man defense is strictly defensive zone and isn't needed for AV's breakout system.

Raspewtin 01-29-2014 09:29 PM

Faster and more efficient breakouts, the bread and butter of AV's system.

If our D could move the puck better, and our centers were a bit faster, you'd absolutely love it.

I don't agree with going full man though, I'd like some sort of hybrid.

Raspewtin 01-29-2014 09:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Greg02 (Post 79011947)
I asked that same question a while back, and people said that the man-to-man defense is strictly defensive zone and isn't needed for AV's breakout system.

I don't agree.

These are my observations.

The Rangers, notably tonight, have stopped zone entries a lot more with the new man system. The full collapse Torts had them do allowed for very passive zone entries, making our own end look like a shooting gallery at points. This team takes away the lines when they can, and they negate zone entry, or force opponents to make a dump in.

A great example of how effective this can be for creating speed would be Nash's goal against New Jersey. Stralman stood up Greene at the blueline, Kreider and Nash went full speed ahead in the other direction, Staal stretched a pass to Stepan, and we've got a goal. The Devils barely blinked and we were on the scoreboard.

Also from the Devil's game, Zuccarello's second goal is a good example. Eric Gelinas left the line to step up on Pouliot, and Pouliot was far at the top of the blue line, where he was able to protect the puck and leave it for a streaking Brassard, which created a 3 on 1. In a typical collapse system, he'd be way below the blue line, and such a play wouldn't happen.

Man defense also has made our PK more effective, it forces other teams to make much quicker decisions. Albiet, if they CAN make those quicker decisions, the team can get burned. But it's been relatively successful, as long as the players keep tabs on their assignments.

There's a lot more examples of how the man system has helped, but I think you get it.

HatTrick Swayze 01-29-2014 09:35 PM

I don't even understand how having both dmen below the goal line, and by extension 1-2 forwards having to drop deep to cover the slot, is even supposed to create more efficient breakouts.

I don't understand why it would ever be prudent to have both defensemen chasing to one half of the ice.

Seems counter-intuitive all the way around if you ask me. You can play a zone with an emphasis on pressuring the puck and holding the blue line on zone entries. Running around like they are within coverage does not make sense to me.

Raspewtin 01-29-2014 09:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HatTrick Swayze (Post 79012357)
I don't even understand how having both dmen below the goal line, and by extension 1-2 forwards having to drop deep to cover the slot, is even supposed to create more efficient breakouts.

I don't understand why it would ever be prudent to have both defensemen chasing to one half of the ice.

Seems counter-intuitive all the way around if you ask me.

Now this I agree with.

Every system has it's faults, I'd rather some kind of hybrid, as this team loses it's coverage alarmingly easily sometimes.

Mikos87 01-29-2014 09:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Greg02 (Post 79011947)
I asked that same question a while back, and people said that the man-to-man defense is strictly defensive zone and isn't needed for AV's breakout system.

Yeah it is, when there is a turnover created, and a soft relay pass connects before the breakout pass, a Man defense will transition up the ice with speed and numbers. So yeah it's needed for that.

There is also Box+1 defense, where the center plays "man defense" until a teammate releases, while the rest box up. Most teams play this way, or zone as it keeps slower skaters from being exposed defensively.

The teams that have size, and physical maturity up and down their line up, and either play zone or Box+1 are the best defensive teams in the league, even without an elite goaltender (ANA, STL), because there are so few scoring chances against a team that can own board battles with tight coverage will give up very few prime scoring chances. Most of these teams are among contender status this year, or have a good hold of a playoff spot.

pld459666 01-29-2014 09:44 PM

I think a lot of the lost coverage stems from the fact that they are still learning a vastly different system from one that worked very well under Torts.

players in all sports have trust issues with systems until they see that it works. It is part of what keeps them from understanding and accepting the fact that it works.

Over the last month-2 months, the team has started to become a lot better with the man coverage and while they still have their brain farts, they are getting better and better all the time.

Cliffy1814 01-30-2014 08:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pld459666 (Post 79013027)
I think a lot of the lost coverage stems from the fact that they are still learning a vastly different system from one that worked very well under Torts.

players in all sports have trust issues with systems until they see that it works. It is part of what keeps them from understanding and accepting the fact that it works.

Over the last month-2 months, the team has started to become a lot better with the man coverage and while they still have their brain farts, they are getting better and better all the time.

Definately better which gives hope that more improvement on the way.
That said, too many guys all alone in the slot. There were a couple last night where the Isles passes just didn't connect.
Then again, we have a well paid world class goaltender so if we are trading a couple of scoring chances per game for a faster breakout that is probably a decent risk to take.

Did anyone notice Staal and Stralman were matching up with Taveras line in 3rd period last night? Was it that way all night? I am so used to seeing Mc D and Giardi match up with top line I was suprised at first. It makes sense though. When Staal is on his game that is what he is supposed to do. If we could free up MC D to play against 2nd line and create more offense.

Off Sides 01-30-2014 09:07 AM

Just my 2 cents,

It's not pure man to man, the defender do switch off their checks when the situation calls for it.

The forwards is much more man to man, they are tasked with following their checks all over the place regardless of if they go behind the net. It's why we see some pick plays being used against them and why they work when they are not called.

Levitate 01-30-2014 09:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Off Sides (Post 79031549)
Just my 2 cents,

It's not pure man to man, the defender do switch off their checks when the situation calls for it.

The forwards is much more man to man, they are tasked with following their checks all over the place regardless of if they go behind the net. It's why we see some pick plays being used against them and why they work when they are not called.

Yeah analysts like McGuire keep trying to say the Rangers are playing pure man to man and never leave your guy type of thing but that's not really what they're doing. They're also playing the points pretty soft as well and not necessarily pressuring the puck hard when it goes up towards the blueline

Mikos87 01-30-2014 10:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Levitate (Post 79032597)
Yeah analysts like McGuire keep trying to say the Rangers are playing pure man to man and never leave your guy type of thing but that's not really what they're doing. They're also playing the points pretty soft as well and not necessarily pressuring the puck hard when it goes up towards the blueline

No the Rangers play straight man. When your defensemen switch sides to defend, they play straight man to man. There are switches however, that's why you don't see guys chasing the puck carrier out there outside of John Moore.

It's during those switches where guys get open in the slot.

DMPD 01-30-2014 10:06 AM

I think SFW is our resident expert on man-to-man. I know he has played that system before. I think he could maybe explain what in particular is beneficial to this roster. I know Killem Dafoe also said he was a big fan of man-to-man even before AV got here.

Blue Seat Spartan 01-30-2014 06:52 PM

Contrary to what Pierre McGuire says on NBC telecasts, the Rangers employ a hybrid system in the defensive zone that starts as man-on-man and becomes a staggered/overload coverage. It depends on the opposition's zone entry. If the forwards carry the puck into the zone, the Rangers' forwards seem to pick their man at around the blue line on the backcheck to negate any odd-man rushes. Conversely, when the enemy forwards dump the puck in, the Rangers engage in a Staggered/Strong Side Overload to pin the opponents along either side of the defensive zone:

http://www.blueseatblogs.com/wp-cont...8165293308.png

There's a component of man-to-man coverage when the puck is moved up to the points, that you'll see the Rangers' forwards actively pressuring the point man, denying the defensemen time to wind up for a slap shot. However the primary emphasis on the overload system is to "Out-man" the opponent along the boards and win more loose pucks from the one-on-one battles in the perimeter of the defensive zone.

If you notice from early in the season, this is AV's ideal method of playing in the defensive zone, which ironically is more efficient in puck retrieval than Torts' straight-up collapsing box system.

http://www.blueseatblogs.com/wp-cont...10/photo-1.png

I think the Rangers D-corps has become comfortable with the hybrid man/overload system as they are now being supported more effectively by the forwards in gap control, coverage, and puck management. And for emphasis, they have the mental agility to adapt to and implement Vigneault's defensive scheme, which his predecessor was to stubborn to realize.

In case you're wondering, here's a good source to read through:

http://www.blueseatblogs.com/2013/02...ne-strategies/

dethomas07 01-30-2014 06:55 PM

everyone knows there responsibility, better accountability and hockeys all about winning 1 on 1 battles

Miller Time NYR 01-30-2014 07:55 PM

We've been playing a hybrid zone/man for the most part this season, I think AV wanted to play more man on man but it just didn't work out. I like the hybrid system as long as the defenders know their responsibilities and swap assignments easily. The only part of the system that is really man to man is with the forwards and its really the two high forwards, it helps lock off the pass out of the corner and creates far more turnovers than zone does.

district9 01-30-2014 10:11 PM

Man to man is good if you're looking to keep the pressure on the offensive players, literally the exact opposite of what Torts' system preached. Under Torts you collapsed into the zone and let them take the shots, but you blocked them. Man to man is so they don't ever get those shots off in the first place. High pressure = greater chances for mistakes/broken plays

Kwayry 01-30-2014 11:58 PM

Mostly to limit the opposition's time in the zone and force turnovers, quicker breakouts.
It is painful to watch if the players do not work as a unit.

Miller Time NYR 01-31-2014 12:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kwayry (Post 79091257)
Mostly to limit the opposition's time in the zone and force turnovers, quicker breakouts.
It is painful to watch if the players do not work as a unit.

That about sums it up, it was sure as hell painful to watch the first 7 games or so.

BwayBshirt 01-31-2014 12:44 AM

The worst thing about the defense under AV is that the breakdowns are glaringly obvious when they happen.

The best thing is that the team is no longer wasting extra energy in the defensive zone. Energy that could be used attacking the offensive zone.

In fact, since that one particularly painful homestand back in December they haven't been shelled in a single game since. Been a while since this kind of run.

Kwayry 01-31-2014 01:46 AM

One of the flaws of the man to man is the confusion on who covers who.
Here is a sample, this is from the the 1/21 Islanders game, the 2nd islander goal by Hickey.


http://cdn.makeagif.com/media/1-31-2014/kHEiDw.gif

Vanek is Girardi's man, Hickey is Stepan's man.
Hickey skates around both Girardi and Vanek, Stepan stops, Vanek has a clear path to the crease.
Although the blown coverage appears to be Girardi's, it is really not. There must be some communication between Stepan and Girardi to switch or Stepan should have cutoff his man instead of stopping.
The other interesting here is why is McDonagh following JT behind the net? JT can use the net to create separation and have a free stick. That should be either a brain fart of a flaw that needs to be corrected. If he stops and waits for JT to come around, the pass doesn't come through the vacant crease.
This is something to look for in the game Friday by the islanders.

Tawnos 01-31-2014 07:18 AM

The point of man-on-man is that when you force turnovers, you have the numbers to take advantage and transition to offense.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:14 AM.

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com, A property of CraveOnline, a division of AtomicOnline LLC ©2009 CraveOnline Media, LLC. All Rights Reserved.