PK FORECHECK
TYPES OF PK FORECHECK
The three most common PK strategies are the Diamond, the Box, and the Wedge+1. Teams will use each of these penalty kills depending on what powerplay formation they are up against.
1-2-1 DIAMOND
I am fairly certain that the 1-2-1 Diamond shape is a totally outdated way to defend shorthanded.
the Diamond simply isn’t a very good geometric solution to the problem(s) posed by most modern powerplay formations.
More and more we are seeing very skilled teams collapsing less (the Capitals come to mind) and instead are aggressively attacking the three high shooters. The idea is less about trying to score shorthanded goals, but more about disrupting teams from getting into formation.
2-2 PASSIVE BOX
The Simple Box isn’t all that different than your basic low zone collapse formation during 5-on-5 hockey.
The idea is to simply shut down the middle of the ice and eliminate prime scoring chances.
This strategy is most often used against the Overload, where you are basically allowing the other team to have the puck so long as they are along the perimeter.
The biggest threat to score is the opposing player who’s positioned at the far post, so defenders must pay attention to where this player is in order to cut off his passing lane
TRIANGLE + 1
The Triangle + 1 is the PK structure of choice for the vast majority of NHL teams.
It’s simply the most appropriate answer to the question: “How do we keep the puck out of the high-danger area when playing 4v5?”
T-FORECHECK
.
The T-Forecheck is an aggressive (1-1-2) forecheck designed to disrupt the opposing team’s breakout on the power play. The general idea is that F1 will explode off the pass and try to force a turnover along the boards against X2, who will likely be receiving the puck in motion from X1.
One of the biggest issues on the PK is opposition entries. Here, the Rangers employ a retreating box, which is designed to force the other team to dump the puck in.
In theory, I get why the Rangers would use this tactic, as most teams have a smaller chance at getting a shot on goal after a dump-in vs. attacking the blueline with speed. The problem is this strategy puts the onus on your defenders, since someone has to retrieve a dump-in.
Instead, I’d rather AV run a T-forecheck, which is what Torts employed, or some other more aggressive tactic in the neutral zone that would put the onus on our forwards to create turnovers
Comentários