View Single Post
03-21-2013, 02:28 PM
Registered User
GrizMint's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2010
Country: United States
Posts: 307
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by 1994sec311 View Post
Thanks. His stuff is generally very good. His point about hitting generally is that hitting for its own sake has a correlation with losing. He thinks the stats show you should hit to separate a man from the puck , but not just for its own sake, because there are cost opportunities with hitting.
After taking a quick look at the article, I think the next step is to really look at hits per zone. While separating the puck is certainly the best part of an average hit, it isn't the only perk, especially in the offensive zone.

Almost have to make the distinction, Offensive Hits, Netural Zone hits, Defensive Zone hits.

While hits in the defensive zone can be game changers, (like Staals huge hit to Matt Stajan)... high hit totals reflect having poor puck possession time, or being pinned down.

When you think the offensive zone, you have to be happy with hits because you are trying to put pressure on, force bad plays and keep them on their heels even if you don't seperate the puck because you have plenty of time to recover.

Neutral Zone depends entirely on the teams system. (Rangers don't get hit too often because they dump 99%, but also don't hit often because they collapse) Wouldn't mind stepping up more often against the Penguins and faster teams to try and slow them down.

With the way the team has been playing this year, even before the article, I would have thought if the Rangers out hit the other team 30 to 15, it was because they were running around without the puck. I am just shocked with last year because I felt we had so many good games we won, where we smoked the other team in the hit department. (At least on the stat sheet)

GrizMint is offline   Reply With Quote