SHOT GENERATION & SUPPRESSION
HOCKEY SYSTEMS
Puck possession essentially takes place in three phases that are all connected to each other: Regrouping, Support, and Flow.
Regrouping, Support, Cycling
“Regrouping” is having the puck and keeping control of it until you can gain the “Flow” (or cycling). Really good teams will cycle you to death in the offensive zone until something opens up on the weak side of the ice. Having proper puck “Support” is what makes all of this work.
Elite finesse teams constantly regroup until something opens up or a coverage mistake is made.
Dump’n’chase
A team that doesn’t like to “regroup” will instead opt to dump the puck into the offensive zone. The skaters will then converge on the puck, hit an opposing defensemen, and hope in the process a coverage mistake is made
Offense From Transition Rushes
More aggressive teams like the Rangers, who have very mobile offensive defensemen, like to send four skaters on the rush. Typically the team’s best defensemen is the one carrying the puck.
SHOT SUPPRESSION IS THE NAME OF THE GAME
Shot suppression is one of the true measures of the quality of a team’s defensive structure and systems.
Event Rates are often expressed as whatever metric is being used “Per 20” or “Per 60”. To understand how aggressive an offense is, CF or FF rates are very useful.
When the CA and FA rates are added into the mix, we can see which teams allow more shots than others. When used in combination with the team’s CF and FF marks we get a picture of a team’s event rates.
Teams with very low event rates both in terms of shots for and shots against often struggle to produce enough offense to consistently win games.
Likewise, teams with very high event rates in shots for and against tend to score quite a bit, but they also tend to give up a lot of goals.
Throughout the last several seasons, teams skilled in shot suppression have made the playoffs with far more regularity than teams having a higher than average FA60.
The moral of this story is simple. If teams want to make the playoffs, they have a better chance of doing so if they are skilled at shot suppression. If a team ends up a bit above the league average in giving up shots against, their goaltending needs to be very good to get them through. Once the playoffs start, it takes an amazing goalie performance to carry a team less adept at shot suppression through to the Stanley Cup Final and on to a victory parade.
SHOT GENERATION AND SUPPRESSION
(Sep 04, 2015)
Our simplest and most versatile measure for quantity (if not quality) of offence and defence is shots—that is, blocks, misses, saves, and goals.
The effective “hockey” upper-limit for NHL hockey is around 160 shots per sixty minutes, or about one shot every 22.5 seconds.
This is still quite a bit longer than the physical upper limit of how long it takes to get the puck from one end of the ice to the other, by about a factor of five or six, so that gives you some indication of just how much of the game is played in the contest to get the puck up the ice, into a position where you can shoot the puck.
GOOD SHOT GENERATION AND SUPPRESSION
Meaningful puck possession consists of two main elements: shot generation and shot suppression.
When you add shot generation and shot suppression together, the result is the pace of the game.
A team that is good at generating shots may not be good at suppressing shots.
Regardless of whether we are talking about generating or suppressing shots, good hockey teams have two critically important habits in common: Controlled Zone Exits and Puck Recovery.
SHOT GENERATION & PUCK RECOVERY IN THE OZ
Teams that excel in generating shots have a common habit in the offensive zone: Puck Recovery.
In the Offensive Zone, puck recovery is the best way to generate shots, wear down the defense and create “mini-rushes” within the zone much as power plays are designed to do.
Teams that excel at shot generation do so through puck recovery in the offensive zone even after they have taken a shot, after a passing turnover and after direct turnovers.
Teams that are good at generating shots use different methods to get into the offensive zone. What they do in the offensive zone really sets them apart.
· Overall zone entries and shots for the attacking team are all over the map with little appreciable correlation.
· Uncontrolled Zone Entries show a very slightly negative correlation, but again the correlation itself is negligible.
· Controlled Zone Entries and Shots For show a positive correlation.
· The overall zone entry numbers and offensive zone puck recovery measures show a slight correlation.
· Uncontrolled entries and puck recovery vary quite a bit and register no real correlation.
· Controlled entries show a similar positive relationship with puck recovery as they do with shots.
Recovering the puck in the offensive zone and generating shots showed a 61.46% correlation
The most useful measure we get here, in my opinion, is when we take the difference between Recovery per Possession and subtract the Turnovers per Possession.
The higher the Recovery/Turnover Rate Differential (Rec-X Diff), the better. It indicates that the attacking team is recovering loose pucks in the offensive zone at a higher rate (more frequently) than they are turning it over.
SHOT GENERATION & ZONE EXITS
Creating rushes into the offensive zone, i.e. dynamic changes in possession as compared to offensive attacks which start with a controlled breakout or regroup) lead to confusion among the defense, less defending players in the zone and chances to get a dangerous shot on the goalie.
Tape to tape passes among the attacking team are preferable to simply throwing the puck to an area of the ice.
If a team uses anything but a controlled zone exit to get out of their defensive zone, they are leaving their entry into the offensive zone up to chance and the odds are stacked against them.
You would expect that dumping the puck in would dictate that these teams don’t produce as many shots as teams who carry it in, but you would be wrong.
Here again we see teams producing shots regardless of the way they got into the offensive zone and prioritizing controlled zone exits.
SHOT GENERATION & GAME FLOW
The teams with the heaviest reliance upon single possessions to generate shots were also those with the lowest shot generation rates.
First, relying upon single possession rushes is a poor plan for generating shots.
When we pull out individual possessions where the teams generated more than one shot, the importance of puck recovery becomes even more apparent.
The ability to create multishot possessions, regardless of whether they occur within a period of consecutive possessions, is the key to success for these teams when they get to the playoffs.
The teams that routinely generate shots well spend the bulk of their offensive possessions recovering the puck, regrouping after the defending team dumps it out of the zone and relaunching their attack.
Building consecutive possessions or “tilting the ice” requires aggressive puck recovery structure in the neutral zone as well as the offensive zone.
PUCK POSSESSION & SHOTS
Shot generation (creating shots toward the net) and shot suppression (preventing shots toward the net) are actually the metrics that have been linked to success.
Shot suppression is not achieved simply by keeping the puck out of your defensive zone by holding it in the offensive zone.
Success is not really a matter of time of possession, but a matter of shot generation and suppression.
COACH’S IMPACT ON SHOT GENERATION & SUPPRESSION
(Oct, 2017)
There is almost no relationship between year to year CF% among teams that changed coaches between said seasons.
coaching can be responsible for up to 19% of the variance in a teams CF%.
Coaches appear to be responsible for roughly 16% of teams shot generation
Coaches can be responsible for up to 35% of shot suppression.
The fact that up to a third of a teams defense (when it’s defined as shot suppression) are simply the results of the teams’ coach is an impressively high number.
why coaches seem to love defense so much. It appears they have twice the impact on what happens without the puck rather than with it.
ความคิดเห็น