View Single Post
05-05-2013, 06:41 PM
Registered User
dethomas07's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: New York, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 1,634
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by li97 View Post
Lol this team can work as hard as they want it's not going to matter if they don't have a good system in place.

Have you ever played hockey?
have you?

I actually have for a long time and at high levels hahah.. but work ethic is everything, how can you say its not a factor? Simply wanting it more then an opponent and having more determination is everything.. you didn't watch the islanders game today? they simply raised there game, and pitt underestimated them and we're lucky to get the win..

thats why i think hockey is the greatest game, bc of that sole reason... hockey is a simple game systems are usually how you apply pressure (2-1-2 or 1-2-2) and how you create that pressure to create turnovers into scoring chances.. as well as capitalizing on mistakes etc...we're more of a transitional game team, nothing wrong with it.. d applys pressure in the N zone, takes time and space, creates turnovers and goes the other direction..

Originally Posted by Blueshirt Believer View Post

The reason why the Rangers look a little non committal to the forecheck is that Torts was alternating between 1-2-2 forecheck and 2-1-2 high forecheck all game. Basically, Torts doesn't want his players getting caught below the hashmarks. So he has to have at least one player high to cut down any quick counter attacks.

The problem is that the Rangers will get bodies in the offensive zone but he doesn't want them to commit to the forecheck until one of the forecheckers can start a scrum. Its non-committal and its utterly pointless against the caps who can actually pass a puck out of a zone quickly. Its a good strategy against perhaps a slower transitional team like Boston. Not a good a strategy against quicker teams like Montreal, Pitt, or Washington. Unless, you want your high man to play transitional D all game.

They may as well trap with how ineffective their forechecking schemes are. Also, their poor transition game doesn't help with establishing a forecheck either. It has nothing to do with effort or compete level.

you want a 2-1-2 for loose puck battles, and 1-2-2 when the other team has possession so one guy chases and the other two stay high.. Essentially thats what hockey is, the system is always 2-1-2 or 1-2-2, what other deviations are effective otherwise? hockey is a very simple game.. you want 3 guys below the hash marks applying pressure? or to commit?

Compete level is everything, wanting to win the small battles to win the overall war is everything.. Strong on the forecheck applying one guy on the puck the second for support is what its all about.. DUmp and chase, thats hockey every team does it.. we just dont get there we have poor line changes which kill us and people on the ice way to longer then they should.. with the talent we have on offense, defense and in net theres no excuses this team should be dominate..

dethomas07 is offline