HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Metropolitan Division > Philadelphia Flyers
Notices

Reactions to the Trap

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
11-10-2011, 06:54 PM
  #76
Beef Invictus
Global Moderator
AICMAM
 
Beef Invictus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Alexandria
Country: Liberia
Posts: 34,172
vCash: 156
A better change would be to compel the defending team to send at least one person to get the puck

__________________
Down in the basement, I've got a Craftsman lathe. Show it to the children when they misbehave.
Beef Invictus is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
11-10-2011, 08:06 PM
  #77
Ryker
Registered User
 
Ryker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Edmonton, AB, Canada
Country: Slovenia
Posts: 2,181
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ph View Post
At one point in time intentionally putting the puck over the glass from the defensive zone was a legitimate system/strategy/style of play.
You raise a valid point, and I'm not trying to argue from the standpoint that what's good now will always be good. I just don't think there's anything wrong with the trap, other than that it's boring, and I think the only think that's wrong with this whole thing is that we were blown down to have a face-off in the defensive zone.

Ryker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-10-2011, 08:19 PM
  #78
GKJ
Global Moderator
Entertainment
 
GKJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Do not trade plz
Country: United States
Posts: 107,620
vCash: 6115
RT @TSNBobMcKenzie: 18 GMs responded. 13 said Tampa more responsible, 3 said it was PHI, 2 didn't take a position. Asked a second question, as follows:

RT @TSNBobMcKenzie: Are you in favor of rules/legislation to ensure no repeat of last night: 8 of 13 who chose Tampa favor a rule change, 1 of 3 who picked PHI.

RT @TSNBobMcKenzie: Some GMs say they are concerned with decreasing offense in NHL. 6.1 goals/game in 1st year after lockout. 5.4 gpg so far this season.


Boom. Roasted.

GKJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-10-2011, 09:14 PM
  #79
litflyersfan
Registered User
 
litflyersfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Lower Makefield, Pa
Posts: 949
vCash: 500
If you can't beat'em, join'em. Teams should play this system against Tampa. If anyone knows how to beat it shouldn't be Tampa. By playing against their own system, Tampa would be showing the entire league how to beat it. If anything else it might frustrate the living daylights out of them.

litflyersfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-10-2011, 09:46 PM
  #80
BernieParent
HFB Partner
 
BernieParent's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Montreal, QC
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,480
vCash: 500
GMs will vote in favour of making Tampa Bay renovate their arena to accommodate a European-sized ice surface. That'll show 'em.

BernieParent is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-10-2011, 09:48 PM
  #81
lancer247
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,885
vCash: 500
Just like the league made the two line pass legal to help reduce the effectiveness of the trap it should maybe adjust the icing rule to further reduce the effectiveness of the trap. I am not saying this because it is another teams style but because it does bring the game back to pre-lockout style. The league is starting to generate TV ratings and new fans so why go back to a boring style of play.

If the defensive team isn't pressuring the puck then the offensive team shouldn't be penalized for icing if they try a stretch pass or dump the puck to generate offense.

Icing for the most part is meant to penalize a team for just throwing the puck down ice to avoid pressure but if a team isn't pressuring then why penalize the offensive team for trying to move the game forward. I hate subjective rules that rely on the refs interpretation but i don't think this would be that far along those lines.

lancer247 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-10-2011, 10:28 PM
  #82
haleks
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Country: Canada
Posts: 115
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by lancer247 View Post
Just like the league made the two line pass legal to help reduce the effectiveness of the trap it should maybe adjust the icing rule to further reduce the effectiveness of the trap. I am not saying this because it is another teams style but because it does bring the game back to pre-lockout style. The league is starting to generate TV ratings and new fans so why go back to a boring style of play.

If the defensive team isn't pressuring the puck then the offensive team shouldn't be penalized for icing if they try a stretch pass or dump the puck to generate offense.

Icing for the most part is meant to penalize a team for just throwing the puck down ice to avoid pressure but if a team isn't pressuring then why penalize the offensive team for trying to move the game forward. I hate subjective rules that rely on the refs interpretation but i don't think this would be that far along those lines.
That is actually a good idea. It could be something like, if all the defending players are in the neutral zone and/or their own defensive zone (or all defending players are skating backward/standing still) then the team with the possession of the puck should not be ruled icing if they attempt a stretch pass/dump in to get the offense going.

haleks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-10-2011, 10:38 PM
  #83
JinzoBlaze
Registered User
 
JinzoBlaze's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 583
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by lancer247 View Post
Just like the league made the two line pass legal to help reduce the effectiveness of the trap it should maybe adjust the icing rule to further reduce the effectiveness of the trap. I am not saying this because it is another teams style but because it does bring the game back to pre-lockout style. The league is starting to generate TV ratings and new fans so why go back to a boring style of play.

If the defensive team isn't pressuring the puck then the offensive team shouldn't be penalized for icing if they try a stretch pass or dump the puck to generate offense.

Icing for the most part is meant to penalize a team for just throwing the puck down ice to avoid pressure but if a team isn't pressuring then why penalize the offensive team for trying to move the game forward. I hate subjective rules that rely on the refs interpretation but i don't think this would be that far along those lines.
The problem is the last guy down near his own net, you can ice it all day, it will just be a turnover, you're not gonna beat that guy to the puck.

I like that you can wait it out and have the ref blow the whistle, and have a faceoff in the defensive zone of the 1-3-1 team. That would probably stop it for the most part.

JinzoBlaze is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-11-2011, 03:33 AM
  #84
FlyersFanSinceBirth
Registered User
 
FlyersFanSinceBirth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 99
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by mirimon View Post
Gary Bettman is quoted on NHL.com

Quote:
"The notion of a trap goes back decades, probably to the '60s," he said. "The normal, the predictable, the traditional trap of a 1-2-2 is something we've lived with for years and even in the '90s and recently, teams that have won the Cup have done it playing some trapping. It's a tactic. OK, so Tampa, Guy Boucher uses a 1-3-1, a little bit different, and so Philadelphia decided that they were not going to attack the defense, but the defense wasn't going to attack the offense. They did it in Tampa's building, the fans reacted.

"Did I like it? No. Is it the most horrible thing I've ever seen on the ice? No. But I do think it has now added another agenda item to the general managers (meetings) next week. The officials whistled down play when there was no puck movement and it was appropriate. Do we need to eliminate the trap? You know, there are a lot of people who love the game the way it is who say no. If you're playing smart, tactical hockey, that's your prerogative and it's incumbent on the other team to figure out how to deal with it. By the same token, if this became too prevalent and too much of the game and too regular, then I think we'd have to deal with it, and we will."
There were a lot of people who loved the game the way is was before it was turned into a penalty fest where divers are rewarded constantly. A lot of people liked when defensemen were actually allowed to defend. A lot of people liked it when goalies were allowed to play the puck. A lot of people liked it when you could lift a players stick without it being called hooking. A lot of people liked not having the dumb ass instigator rule. Since when does this piece of garbage give a **** about not changing the game because a lot of people like it the way it is?

FlyersFanSinceBirth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-11-2011, 05:19 AM
  #85
Giroux tha Damaja
Registered User
 
Giroux tha Damaja's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Mount Holly, NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 9,218
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Giroux tha Damaja
Quote:
Originally Posted by JinzoBlaze View Post
The problem is the last guy down near his own net, you can ice it all day, it will just be a turnover, you're not gonna beat that guy to the puck.

I like that you can wait it out and have the ref blow the whistle, and have a faceoff in the defensive zone of the 1-3-1 team. That would probably stop it for the most part.
That would be such a ******** rule. The onus is on the team with the puck to press the action in my mind. You ought to be allowed to defend however you want.

Giroux tha Damaja is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-11-2011, 07:22 AM
  #86
Protest
C`est La Vie
 
Protest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Deptford, NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 4,069
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by McNasty View Post
It's called a trap because it's designed to force you to pass the puck and then be able to swarm the puck carrier, which is exactly what that was. 1-3-1 is simply the formation they take in the neutral zone it doesn't mean 1 fore checker.
Yes, it's 5 guys standing in the neutral zone, I don't care how they're positioned. They don't force the play to one side or the other, they just stand there. Even the Devils trap was more aggressive than that. I've seen that kind of thing in roller and dec hockey. To me it seems more lazy than ingenious.

Protest is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-11-2011, 08:17 AM
  #87
McNasty
Registered User
 
McNasty's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Rutgers
Country: United States
Posts: 5,490
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Protest View Post
Yes, it's 5 guys standing in the neutral zone, I don't care how they're positioned. They don't force the play to one side or the other, they just stand there. Even the Devils trap was more aggressive than that. I've seen that kind of thing in roller and dec hockey. To me it seems more lazy than ingenious.
Well since your so experienced...

McNasty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-11-2011, 08:35 AM
  #88
FreshPerspective
We don't need one!
 
FreshPerspective's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Philadelphia
Country: Italy
Posts: 9,728
vCash: 500
Some of the latest comments by the Flyers..Pronger seems the most annoyed

Quote:
"What do you want us to do if they're not going to forcecheck?" Pronger asked rhetorically in a conference call from Naples, Fla., where the Flyers started a two-day bonding trip. ". . . If they want to just stand there, why would I want to skate into it? It's asinine to think so.

Quote:
Flyers coach Peter Laviolette said "the onus to me comes to the person without the puck to get it back."

Laviolette didn't think the Flyers lost because of the trap, but because "we went to the penalty box too much and had costly turnovers."

Laviolette conceded that trying to penetrate into the Tampa Bay zone "was like throwing a pass into the end zone with 10 defenders on the goal line."

"At the end of the day, we're in the entertainment business, so the league will have to decide if they like it," said center Danny Briere, adding that the fans "lose" when forced to watch that type of game.

Read more: http://www.philly.com/philly/sports/...#ixzz1dPK2jr8s

FreshPerspective is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-11-2011, 08:36 AM
  #89
Protest
C`est La Vie
 
Protest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Deptford, NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 4,069
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by McNasty View Post
Well since your so experienced...
Ah yes, I've never played in the NHL. I must not have a clue.

The point that you missed was the fact that I've seen teams do this in such low level settings. Also, these teams were usually either not that great, or were much slower. They employ the strategy of sticking everyone in the neutral zone and taking advantage of the confined space because it was the only way they could hang. It isn't "the trap," it's the trap on boring steroids. The Devils at least had someone to force the puck carrier.

Protest is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-11-2011, 08:50 AM
  #90
Krishna
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Krishna's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Philadelphia
Country: Canada
Posts: 81,723
vCash: 50

Krishna is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-11-2011, 09:24 AM
  #91
McNasty
Registered User
 
McNasty's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Rutgers
Country: United States
Posts: 5,490
vCash: 500
Do people not remember the game last year against Chicago where the Flyers just didn't forecheck at all and played a trap that stifled the Blackhawks? I don't remember anybody on this board criticizing the Flyers, instead they were being applauded for coming up with a game plan that worked and (outside of Hossa's penalty shot) shut down their opponent.

Sure Tampa shares some blame and I don't care what Lavy says that was 100% a message, just like it was last year. The Flyers struggle against the trap so they decided they weren't going to try and attack it, rather they would try to force Tampa out of it.

McNasty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-11-2011, 09:30 AM
  #92
philly_28
Valar Morghulis
 
philly_28's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Country: Austria
Posts: 887
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pwnz0rs View Post

philly_28 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-11-2011, 10:52 AM
  #93
Icedog2735
Registered User
 
Icedog2735's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: New Haven, CT
Country: United States
Posts: 294
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JinzoBlaze View Post
The problem is the last guy down near his own net, you can ice it all day, it will just be a turnover, you're not gonna beat that guy to the puck.

I like that you can wait it out and have the ref blow the whistle, and have a faceoff in the defensive zone of the 1-3-1 team. That would probably stop it for the most part.
If this were the case and the Icing rule was changed as suggested, the Flyers could position the 4 other players at Tampa's blue line and then ice the puck. You know Tampa will give you time to do it because they aren't going to forecheck. I like our chances having 4 players swarming that 1 Tampa player who is near his own net. ... Unless Hartnell is on the ice because you know he'll fall down in which case it's a 3 on 1 haha!

Icedog2735 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-11-2011, 11:54 AM
  #94
orangey
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 37
vCash: 500
Briere was right. It is supposed to be entertainment and that crap isn't going to win the scarce entertainment dollar. Expect a rule change that at least one player has to forecheck or it is an illegal defense.

orangey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-11-2011, 12:28 PM
  #95
haleks
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Country: Canada
Posts: 115
vCash: 500
It is more of a 0-4-1 (0 in offensive zone, 4 in neutral zone, 1 in defense zone) than a 1-3-1... IMO

I don't know why people are saying it's up to the Flyers to move the puck up ice...
They are basically saying it's alright for a team to stay idle (passive) and not the other team.

It is as much of the Tampa Bay's job to try and take possession of the puck as it is the Flyers job to move it up ice.

Why would ANY team just force the play and give it to the opposing team? I thought hockey was about pursuing the puck, get possession of the puck and score goals. Not sit in the neutral zone, wait till the other team turns it over than score goals.

haleks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-11-2011, 12:34 PM
  #96
drownedsailors
Registered User
 
drownedsailors's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Earth
Country: United States
Posts: 1,941
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by McNasty View Post
Do people not remember the game last year against Chicago where the Flyers just didn't forecheck at all and played a trap that stifled the Blackhawks? I don't remember anybody on this board criticizing the Flyers, instead they were being applauded for coming up with a game plan that worked and (outside of Hossa's penalty shot) shut down their opponent.

Sure Tampa shares some blame and I don't care what Lavy says that was 100% a message, just like it was last year. The Flyers struggle against the trap so they decided they weren't going to try and attack it, rather they would try to force Tampa out of it.
Everyone traps at some point in the season; but those are the key words "some point", that was a one time game plan that Lavy did because it was the second night of a back to back, they were the road team and it was a noon game. Also after the Flyers got the lead over Chicago you'd think they would have trapped even more; but instead they had multiple shifts where they were really aggressive on the forecheck.

Tampa howevere almost always plays the 1-3-1 (which is really a 0-4-1) and I think that's why everyone is getting pissed considering the fact that they don't have to play that way with all the talent on that roster...I still think this is all a MAJOR overreaction...

drownedsailors is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
11-11-2011, 01:01 PM
  #97
McNasty
Registered User
 
McNasty's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Rutgers
Country: United States
Posts: 5,490
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Icedog2735 View Post
If this were the case and the Icing rule was changed as suggested, the Flyers could position the 4 other players at Tampa's blue line and then ice the puck. You know Tampa will give you time to do it because they aren't going to forecheck. I like our chances having 4 players swarming that 1 Tampa player who is near his own net. ... Unless Hartnell is on the ice because you know he'll fall down in which case it's a 3 on 1 haha!
So what happens when the goalie or the defenseman gets to the puck and gets it past the all out blitz of a forecheck? You then have a 4 on 1 the other way

McNasty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-11-2011, 01:36 PM
  #98
BruceOp
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 454
vCash: 500
I don't think they should 'outlaw' a system like the 1-3-1, but alter rules a bit, like if it causes a stand still in the other teams defensive zone, and the trapping team doesn't go after it, then whistle the play dead, and put the face off all the way down in the trapping team's end.

BruceOp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-11-2011, 01:46 PM
  #99
GentlemanOfLeisure
Ride Space Mountain
 
GentlemanOfLeisure's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: East Windsor NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 5,938
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Unstable View Post
So apparently Devils fans are pro-trap.

This is a new and fascinating development.
I'm sorry, what system did you guys play under Hitchcock????

GentlemanOfLeisure is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-11-2011, 01:47 PM
  #100
BernieParent
HFB Partner
 
BernieParent's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Montreal, QC
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,480
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pwnz0rs View Post
That's excellent!! Well done.

Can we also start referring to the Lightning as being from Trapma Bay?

BernieParent is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:24 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.