HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Atlantic Division > Toronto Maple Leafs
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie
Notices

Let's Re-evaluate how we look at hits

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
02-27-2013, 05:35 PM
  #1
guitarist37
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 253
vCash: 500
Let's Re-evaluate how we look at hits

Don't get me wrong, I'm a big believer in the idea that physicality and "truculence/pugnacity...etc" go a long way to win games. It seems that a lot of our success this year is credited to that and especially the fact that we lead the league in hits. That's where I'm a bit weary.

My main argument (and feel free to Re-educate me if you think I'm wrong...this is a discussion don't get mad ) is that outhitting your opposition is a direct indicator of not having the puck. Does anyone else see that?

Can it be said that: More hits = less puck posession = bad?


Is my logic flawed?


Last edited by guitarist37: 02-27-2013 at 05:36 PM. Reason: spelling
guitarist37 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-27-2013, 05:39 PM
  #2
Mansfield
possession obsession
 
Mansfield's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Ontario, Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 13,494
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by guitarist37 View Post
Don't get me wrong, I'm a big believer in the idea that physicality and "truculence/pugnacity...etc" go a long way to win games. It seems that a lot of our success this year is credited to that and especially the fact that we lead the league in hits. That's where I'm a bit weary.

My main argument (and feel free to Re-educate me if you think I'm wrong...this is a discussion don't get mad ) is that outhitting your opposition is a direct indicator of not having the puck. Does anyone else see that?

Can it be said that: More hits = less puck posession = bad?


Is my logic flawed?
It's not entirely unreasonable - but bear in mind that hitting sometimes creates turnovers...

Mansfield is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-27-2013, 05:43 PM
  #3
mavis
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 1,705
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by guitarist37 View Post
Don't get me wrong, I'm a big believer in the idea that physicality and "truculence/pugnacity...etc" go a long way to win games. It seems that a lot of our success this year is credited to that and especially the fact that we lead the league in hits. That's where I'm a bit weary.

My main argument (and feel free to Re-educate me if you think I'm wrong...this is a discussion don't get mad ) is that outhitting your opposition is a direct indicator of not having the puck. Does anyone else see that?

Can it be said that: More hits = less puck posession = bad?


Is my logic flawed?
Yea I think it's flawed. More hits only implies less puck possession when you have more hits because of having the puck less. You can also have more hits because you just attack the puck carrier more aggressively.

I don't see any reason to assert puck possession stats based on number hits. It probably makes more sense to look at actual puck possession stats instead.

mavis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-27-2013, 05:46 PM
  #4
guitarist37
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 253
vCash: 500
How are we doing in that area?

guitarist37 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-27-2013, 05:52 PM
  #5
Brewsky
King Of The Ice Mugs
 
Brewsky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: King County
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,937
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to Brewsky Send a message via AIM to Brewsky Send a message via MSN to Brewsky Send a message via Yahoo to Brewsky Send a message via Skype™ to Brewsky
The other team is bound to get the puck, so why not hit the **** out of them while they have it.

I love it, **** it, hit those ********.

Brewsky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-27-2013, 05:52 PM
  #6
7even
Go on, do your duty
 
7even's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Georgia
Country: United States
Posts: 11,351
vCash: 500
I think there'd be a lot less ambiguity if they tracked hits that directly lead to a turnover instead. Much more helpful than just plain hits.

7even is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-27-2013, 05:59 PM
  #7
RedRenegade
Registered User
 
RedRenegade's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 797
vCash: 500
I agree, I'm so disappointed when the other team touches the puck in a 60 minute game. Why can't they control the game and not let the opponent get possession ever?

RedRenegade is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-27-2013, 06:08 PM
  #8
guitarist37
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 253
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RedRenegade View Post
I agree, I'm so disappointed when the other team touches the puck in a 60 minute game. Why can't they control the game and not let the opponent get possession ever?
That's not the direction I'm trying to take this conversation, lets avoid the sarcasm.

I realize the other team will have the puck for large parts of the game. Nothing wrong with that. I just feel as if people like to throw this Hit statistic around and not focus on the other side of it.

Nothing wrong with hitting when we don't have the puck. Of course its a good thing, that's not what I'm saying.

guitarist37 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-27-2013, 06:19 PM
  #9
robdicks
Registered User
 
robdicks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Welland ON
Posts: 5,522
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RedRenegade View Post
I agree, I'm so disappointed when the other team touches the puck in a 60 minute game. Why can't they control the game and not let the opponent get possession ever?
lol what? Why did you just assume that the OP never wanted the opponent to touch the puck?

He is just saying that more puck possession usually is a good thing, and tha tif you're hitting you're on the defensive more often. It's similar to the blocked shots statistic. If you lead the league in blocking shots it means that players are in your zone very often.

As for the original question, I'm not sure if hits automatically means you don't have the puck. Is there a team puck possession statistic? If we check that we can figure it out.

robdicks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-27-2013, 06:31 PM
  #10
Superstar
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 3,225
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by guitarist37 View Post
Don't get me wrong, I'm a big believer in the idea that physicality and "truculence/pugnacity...etc" go a long way to win games. It seems that a lot of our success this year is credited to that and especially the fact that we lead the league in hits. That's where I'm a bit weary.

My main argument (and feel free to Re-educate me if you think I'm wrong...this is a discussion don't get mad ) is that outhitting your opposition is a direct indicator of not having the puck. Does anyone else see that?

Can it be said that: More hits = less puck posession = bad?


Is my logic flawed?
You could have less puck possession and also not hit.

Superstar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-27-2013, 06:53 PM
  #11
Leafs For Life*
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 6,636
vCash: 500
Every team gets puck possession. There are 2 main types of hits, along the boards fighting for the puck, or hiting the guy skating down the ice. We mainly have the former imo

Leafs For Life* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-27-2013, 07:01 PM
  #12
Superstar
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 3,225
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leaffan16 View Post
Every team gets puck possession. There are 2 main types of hits, along the boards fighting for the puck, or hiting the guy skating down the ice. We mainly have the former imo
Phaneuf is great with those open ice hits, but I think he's playing smarter and picking his spots; and that head shot rule has generally reduced those open ice hits due to the risk of hitting a player on the head and getting suspended. Those open ice hits are more difficult to execute correctly and any sudden, unexpected motion from the receiving player could result in a head shot or even a knee-on-knee collision.

Superstar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-27-2013, 07:32 PM
  #13
Muston Atthews
Bunch of Bangerz
 
Muston Atthews's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 24,400
vCash: 500
Let's reevaluate the rules on checking... apparently there is none allowed in the NHL anymore

Muston Atthews is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-27-2013, 07:48 PM
  #14
MakeTheIronSing
Registered User
 
MakeTheIronSing's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,265
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by guitarist37 View Post
Can it be said that: More hits = less puck posession = bad?


Is my logic flawed?
No it can't be said

Yes your logic is flawed

MakeTheIronSing is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-27-2013, 08:18 PM
  #15
achtungbaby
Registered User
 
achtungbaby's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,757
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by 7even View Post
I think there'd be a lot less ambiguity if they tracked hits that directly lead to a turnover instead. Much more helpful than just plain hits.
Agreed. Who cares how many times any team will weakly finish a check along the boards after it's already been passed? I can't remember the retired player who said it, but a hit just used to be a way to separate your opponent from the puck and that "finishing your check" usually only amounted to taking yourself out of the play for a few strides while the puck is already heading up the ice.

Regardless, counting hits in a game can be highly subjective and isn't something anyone should be taking too much pride in IMO.

achtungbaby is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-27-2013, 08:20 PM
  #16
achtungbaby
Registered User
 
achtungbaby's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,757
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MakeTheIronSing View Post
No it can't be said

Yes your logic is flawed
It's not flawed, if a player doesn't have the puck you can't hit them (within a few mississippi's) or it's interference unless I'm missing something here. If a team had 120 hits in a game I think it would be fair to say they hardly had the puck. Care to elaborate?


Last edited by achtungbaby: 02-27-2013 at 08:28 PM.
achtungbaby is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-27-2013, 08:23 PM
  #17
Hounsy
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: A wonderful location
Posts: 1,673
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by guitarist37 View Post
Can it be said that: More hits = less puck posession = bad?


Is my logic flawed?
Many hits happen on the fore-check I would think, which I can't see in any way as being a bad thing.

Hounsy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-27-2013, 08:23 PM
  #18
cup67
HAIL TO OUR LEADER
 
cup67's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: TORONTO
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,448
vCash: 500
any mods out there talk to me , why?

cup67 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-27-2013, 08:24 PM
  #19
Eb
U+0020 SPACE
 
Eb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,871
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brewsky View Post
The other team is bound to get the puck, so why not hit the **** out of them while they have it.

I love it, **** it, hit those ********.
**** ya! **** this, and **** that!

Eb is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-27-2013, 08:28 PM
  #20
cup67
HAIL TO OUR LEADER
 
cup67's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: TORONTO
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,448
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by cup67 View Post
any mods out there talk to me , why?
anybody?

cup67 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-27-2013, 08:29 PM
  #21
AvroArrow
#CaptainMorgan
 
AvroArrow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,634
vCash: 500
Your logic is flawed because your assuming high hits = low puck control. Yeah we do not have a lot of puck control BUT were finishing our checks opposed to other teams and thats why were at the top in hits. No ones passive except kessel and everyone finishing their checks adds up

AvroArrow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-27-2013, 09:13 PM
  #22
saffronleaf
Registered User
 
saffronleaf's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Country:
Posts: 4,270
vCash: 500
The number of hits stat tells us what the Leafs do when they do not have the puck. It does not necessarily say much about the amount of puck possession.

Conceivably, you can have a situation where you possess the puck 59:50 in a game, and in the 10 seconds without the puck, you could have delivered 10 hits. The other team, in their 59:50 without the puck only made 5 hits. In such a scenario, the hits say little (and indeed, they would suggest the opposite) of what actually occurred with respect to puck possession.

Hits only tell us that, at the instant of the hit, you did not possess the puck. It says nothing about the possibility that the hit was being delivered as soon as the puck carrier had received the puck, nor does it tell us anything about consequent turnovers.

saffronleaf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-27-2013, 09:30 PM
  #23
mavis
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 1,705
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by guitarist37 View Post
How are we doing in that area?
Not sure. But I can assure you any relation between the two is pure coincidental.

mavis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-28-2013, 02:01 AM
  #24
HellasLEAF
Auston 20:16
 
HellasLEAF's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 13,956
vCash: 500
at the end of the day, this is a positive stat for the team.

HellasLEAF is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-28-2013, 03:44 AM
  #25
Drama
Registered User
 
Drama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Ukraine
Country: Ukraine
Posts: 271
vCash: 500
A few days ago I read that Chicago was dead last in hits in the league.

Hitting and playing gritty is great but puck possession is what makes your team elite imo. It also starts from the back end so having a d that can control the play and slow down the pace of the game if needed is crucial if you want to win games. A big difference with Montreal this year and last is obviously the coaching but having Markov back is overlooked sometimes.

Drama 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 04:01 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. @2017 All Rights Reserved.