STRUCTURED FORMATION ON THE POWER PLAY
STRUCTURED CREATIVITY
You have 120 seconds to generate offensive. You want as little dead puck (or non o-zone) time as possible, you want to be set up in the offensive zone with a plan.
So where does “structured creativity” come in? Adam Oates brought power play rules with him to Washington, about where players could shoot from at what times, for example, to ensure possession wasn’t wasted and seconds weren’t taken off the clock without good reason.
With “structured creativity” come the perks of unpredictability with the advantage of a structure that has been polished over a number of practices.
NZ REGROUPS ON PP
Getting into formation for a power play unit is an important part of clicking at a high rate, no matter who you are. And that all starts with the regroup.
The benefits of such attempts are obvious: They save valuable seconds, they can force tired penalty killers to remain on the ice, and sometimes they can even catch opponents napping on the break.
Generally a good entry will lead to more seconds in the zone than a poor one, even if the latter technically crosses the blue line.
Zone time measurements aren’t great though, because spending time fighting for pucks along the wall, while advantageous at even strength because you’re in essence preventing goals against while trying to generate offense, on the power play every second counts.
But teams don’t attempt neutral zone regroups on the power play because they think they’re the most successful, they do it to save time.
So the critical next question is, how much time do they save?
The answer appears to be “a lot”. The average neutral zone regroup try takes 5.27 seconds, whereas the average full regroup costs 14.25 seconds.
So a neutral zone regroup try leads to on average 0.39 more shot attempts than a full regroup.
Now there are a few necessary caveats. I don’t believe that shot attempts are a great way to measure power play success, as evidenced by the low correlation between shot attempt numbers and power play success the last few years.
Neutral zone regroups appear to be best practice in a lot of cases
Beyond that, I’m still somewhat skeptical than an improvised congested neutral zone regroup without an option easily available is preferable to a well-crafted set play.
With additional practice time devoted to the power play, I think full regroup rates could be boosted to the point where only with obvious openings are neutral zone regroups justified.
ZEFR
what are the primary objectives of a power play breakout?
· Get the puck into the OZ
· Get/keep control of the puck once in the OZ
· Get set up in formation as quickly as possible
· Generate a dangerous rush chance
Getting into formation for a power play unit is an important part of clicking at a high rate
getting into formation efficiently — most frequently a 1-3-1 — is a catalyst for power play success.
Zone Entry to Formation Rush rate:
Percent of 5-4 zone Entry attempts with a certain player on the ice that result in either a scoring chance off the rush or the team getting set up in formation.
ZEFR Rate is the most effective metric at evaluating power plays we have so far.
IMPORTANCE OF STRUCTURE ON PP
· We can measure a team’s power play structure using shot location data, creating a Power Play Structure Index that quantifies their ability to establish and shoot from a structured formation.
· A Team’s Power Play Structure Index is a stronger predictor of future goal scoring than past goals, but weaker than shot attempt generation.
· When examined together with shot attempt generation, power play structure is a significant predictor of future goals, although slightly less important than shot attempt generation.
· A team’s structure index can provide valuable additional insight into why certain power plays succeed or fail.
Teams who quickly set up on formation score more goals than those who do not.
Teams who are well-structured on the man advantage will see their players frequently creating opportunities from the same part of the ice.
PP Structure Index is nearly as good at predicting goal scoring as shot attempts, and much better than past goal scoring, confirming our original hypothesis about the importance of structure in creating a dangerous power play.
shot attempt generation and PP structure are somewhat independent skills.
power play structure is a key driver of team success,
Comments