INTRODUCTION
ZE ARTICLE ARCHIVE
(Links Page to further articles)
ALL THREE ZONES
Zone entries and being able to enter the offensive zone with possession of the puck is a major factor in out-shooting your opponent during five-on-five play.
Entries done by possession lead to twice as many shots as compared to dumping the puck in
ZONE ENTRIES
ISOLATING NZ AND OZ RESULTS
Having more zone entries than your opponent at 5-on-5 means that more often, when the puck was in the neutral zone, your team was able to control it and advance it into the offensive zone
It’s been established that teams take fewer shots when they are leading, and at least in this sample that seems to be largely the result of conceding the neutral zone
Winning the neutral zone battle to get the puck into the offensive zone is one thing, but teams still need to generate shots once they’re there.
It looks like the defensive shell involves not getting too aggressive in the neutral zone, but when a team has a chance to bring the puck forwards, they will still press the advantage and try to get their shots.
So score effects left their zone entry total looking artificially inflated, but the attack zone issues – giving up about 12% more shots per entry than they got – were real and not a simple function of situation.
ASSESSING ZE METHODS
teams do better when they carry the puck in.
One thing there is no doubt about whatsoever is that teams get substantially better outcomes when they carry the puck in than when they dump it or even pass it in.
When teams carry the puck in the conditions are usually very good for the offensive team and when they dump it in they are usually bad. I think it’s pretty clear that the circumstances would drive the numbers in exactly the way they appear.
Some numbers:
The top line (Hartnell, Giroux and Jagr) carried the puck in 3.1 times as often as they dumped it in.
For second and third liners this drops to 2.2 times as often and for the fourth liners it’s all the way down to 1.4 times.
Better players tend to carry the puck in more compared to dumping it.
when the puck is carried in the results are better than for any other type of entry going by shots/entry, chances/entry, goals/entry and how often the next play is in the defensive zone.
the team carrying the puck in gets the next shot off 69.8% of the time, just above passing it in (68.6%) and well above both deflecting (62.4%) and dumping it in (56.3%)
carrying the puck into the zone is substantially more advantageous than getting a faceoff in the offensive zone, going by any of the above metrics.
When the Flyers have a lead of 2+ in the first two periods or any lead in the third, so their opponents are taking risks, 58% of their zone entries are carried in or passed in where they maintained control.
When trailing, their opponents are more defensive minded, this figure drops to 48%. When the game is close and the opponents are more balanced it is in the between at 55%.
The ability to carry the puck, or pass it in with control, is a fantastic proxy for winning the neutral-zone and transition-game battle
ZONE ENTRIES AND SCORING CHANCES
Carrying the puck in definitely generates more offense, and should be attempted at every opportunity when trailing.
The top 9 should usually try to carry the puck in whenever they can, and top-9 players who often carry the puck in are helping the team with their aggressive play.
However, with a lead towards the end of the game there may be cause to run designed dump-in plays that give up fewer counterattacks.
The fourth line should carry the puck in when they have a clear opportunity, but should be a bit more cautious with borderline plays.
DOES AGGRESSIVE PLAY EQUAL RISKY PLAY
It would seem that dumping the puck in is the least defensive play – the least likely to prevent the opposition from shifting the play to your end of the ice.
Dumping the puck in actually results in the most odd man rushes against.
Dumping the puck in generates half as many shots as carrying it or passing it, and it results in more chances against and more odd man rushes against.
Keeping control of the puck is just better.
ASSESSING PERFORMANCE IN ALL THREE ZONES
we now have a second team for which shots per offensive zone possession seems irreproducible over 50-82 game sample sizes.
It seems hard to believe, but it seems increasingly likely that if some players have the ability to get more shots from each offensive zone possession, it takes more than a season to tell which players they are.
Moreover, the previous observation that zone entries with possession generate twice as much offense as entries without possession still clearly holds
We now have a second set of data that suggests that shot differential is largely determined in the neutral zone, as teams strive to push the puck forwards and retain possession as they cross the blue line.
Entries with possession produce twice as much offense as entries without possession, and some individuals have a clear talent for gaining the zone.
At the 50-82 game level, players do not show a clear offensive zone talent for generating shots; shot generation comes largely from how (and how often) they enter the zone, with offensive zone talent then limited to shot quality effects.
SPREAD OF CARRY IN RATES
High-end forwards carry the puck into the offensive zone on more than 70 percent of their entries, while the grinders are as low as 30 percent.
Consistently gaining the blue line is one of the strongest individual contributions a player can make to driving possession.
DOES PLAYER SKILL MATTER
(Aug 2014)
It turns out that once a player is in the offensive zone, his skill level has very little bearing on the rate at which his team generates shots.
Goons and stars alike generate shots at the same rate after a carry-in, and the same is true on a dump and chase.
The primary thing that determines the rate at which shots are generated is the ability to enter the offensive zone with possession,
Top 6 forwards, tend to have a similar 14-15% zone entry failure rate.
After that the team clumps into predictable ranges, with the rest of the top 6 hovering in a band at 51-56% controlled entries, the third line players bunching together below that, and the fourth liners having less success.
I strongly believe that your #1 centre has got to be involved in advancing the puck and generating offence
WHY POSSESSION AND ZE MATTER
Zone time, or generally speaking the flow of the game, has a tighter, much more normal distribution that the distribution of shots.
What does this mean?
This means that things like how you enter the zone (zone entries), and how you control the puck in the zone (possession, or passing) can make a pretty big difference in how you generate scoring opportunities.
GAINING THE OZ
Zone exits are very important to getting the offense going. The first pass in the defensive zone on the breakout is crucial to getting things moving.
Lane & Motion Regroups:
A Lane Regroup is only different from a Motion Regroup in that the Center does not switch spots with a Wing like he would be permitted to do on a Motion Regroup.
Motion Regroups create a lot of movement in the neutral zone and because they nearly always start out looking the same way, they cause confusion among the players defending it.
The key to these types of plays is to execute them quickly so that the forwards do not stagnate in the neutral zone. Speed coming into the offensive zone is essential so D2 must read the coverage quickly and make a decision
Zone Entries:
Entering the offensive zone following a breakout or regroup is organized and often happens when the opposing forecheck is established. When we get into “end to end” action situations, the task of getting the puck from the defensive zone to the offensive zone becomes far less structured and reliant upon creativity and speed.
Controlled Entries:
Defensemen may be the ones leading the rush depending on the skill of the player.
Dump Ins:
Dumping the puck into the offensive zone will likely be a last resort option.
Chip & Chase:
Because each team has a few defensemen that are very good at standing players up at the blue line, the chip and chase will become more important.
OZ ENTRIES
Uncontrolled Entries & Shot Generation:
The rate at which teams dumped the puck into the offensive zone didn’t really have much of a connection to the rate at which those teams created shots.
Controlled Entries & Shot Generation:
When we compare each team’s Controlled zone entry rate (Controlled Zone Entries Per 60) and All Shot Attempts Per 60 for each team, the correlation percentage comes out to 51.09% which is obviously substantially higher than the 0.75% we saw with Uncontrolled entries.
Uncontrolled Entries & Shots Against:
When teams allow Uncontrolled entries at a higher rate, we see a slight negative relationship to the rate of shot attempts against the team. When you think about it, it makes sense. When teams dump the puck in, they create less shots, so teams forcing their opponents to dump the puck in as opposed to carrying it in will have lower shots against.
The thing to remember here is that teams that allow a higher number of zone entries overall will have higher shot attempt rates against them simply because they are allowing the attacking team to gain the offensive zone.
Controlled Entries & Shots Against:
When we compare the rate at which teams allow their opponents to execute a Controlled zone entry with the rate of shot attempts they allow, the correlation skyrockets from 4.48% (Uncontrolled) to 61.27% (Controlled).
GENERATING OFFENSE AND SHOTS PER ENTRY
61% of all entries are cleared out of the zone without a shot. Another 30% achieve only 1 shot. Considering these odds, any entry that includes at least one shot should be considered at least somewhat successful.
Almost two-thirds of goals were scored on the first shot following a zone entry, and another quarter were scored on the second.
In sum, we see that almost all entries lead to no shots or just one shot. When a team does get a lot of shots on a single entry, each additional shot has a higher chance of becoming a goal.
4.4% of all carry-ins led to goals compared to just 1.8% of dump-ins.
Carry-ins are no more likely than dump-ins to lead to high-shot entries.
Furthermore, shooting percentage for each shot in the entry is nearly identical between entry types.
carrying in the puck makes it significantly more likely that the offense will produce at least one shot.
First, long shifts with multiple shots in a single entry are responsible for very little goal production. Second, carry-ins are more valuable than dump-ins because they are much more likely to lead to at least one shot before the zone exit.
WHICH ZE ARE MOST SUCCESSFUL
I think the general rule should be that if you have the skill to pull off specially crafted stretch passes or other plays into the middle of the ice to try and spring your fastest, most skilled player, then go for it (as seen below).
Otherwise, keep the puck to the outside. No need to force plays either into the middle or across ice with waiting sticks.
a player with time should always look to keep possession and keep the puck off the boards.
ZONE TIME AND GOALS
% Of Goals Off Entry Type
· Controlled – 64.16%
· Uncontrolled – 22.42%
· Faceoff – 11.47%
· Turnover – 1.96%
Average Time To Goal Off Each Entry
· Controlled – 7.6
· Uncontrolled – 13.4
· Faceoff – 11.8
· Turnover – 8.0
IMPORTANCE OF INDIVIDUAL PLAYER ZE CREATION
First is Entries per 60, which is a simple measurement of total entries created by a player accounting for ice time in a situation.
Second is Controlled Entry Percentage, which is a ratio measuring the number of entries created by a player with possession of the puck versus the total entries created (controlled and uncontrolled).
Both metrics have their inherent weaknesses.
Entries/60 does not account for the quality of the entries created;
Controlled Entry Percentage has the opposite problem, as a player with one controlled entry and zero uncontrolled ones would appear at first glance to be more impressive than a rival with a three controlled/one uncontrolled ratio. Clearly, that doesn’t pass the common sense test.
For forwards: There a few obvious findings here. First, the strongest relationship is between the entry metrics and shot generation metrics, which makes perfect sense because entry creation is rightfully viewed as an offensive skill. There is no obvious relationship between entries and shot suppression, implying that players who are adept at making plays with the puck in the neutral zone are not necessarily stellar in terms of shot suppression
For defensemen: The general findings from the forwards hold true for the defensemen, as well.
Yet again, shot generation and entry generation have the strongest relationship, with on-ice shot suppression barely moving the needle. However, the relationships on the whole are much weaker than those of the forwards. This is likely due to the fact that defensemen simply generate less entries than forwards on results.
Since their individual entries have less of an impact on the game when it comes to raw volume, it makes sense that defensemen wouldn’t move the needle much in this regard when it comes to shots, at least compared to forwards.
We now know that when looking at individual player entry generation metrics, they have their most value in terms of their connection to on-ice shot generation, particularly for forwards. We also know that success in terms of entry creation is repeatable on the individual player level
· Entry creation appears to be repeatable on the individual player level.
· Entry metrics are best viewed as a component of on-ice shot generation. The relationship between entry creation and shot prevention is nonexistent.
· Weighted Entries/60 (wE/60) should replace raw Entries/60 as the best way to measure individual entry creation volume. It is more repeatable, correlates stronger with on-ice shot generation, and predicts both shot and goal generation better than E/60.
· Individual entry metrics are more useful in evaluating forwards than defensemen.
· If only one entry metric is available, Controlled Entry Percentage appears to be the most valuable in evaluating forwards. It showed the highest level of repeatability, was correlated strongest with on-ice shot creation, and predicted both shot and goal generation better than wE/60.
· While Controlled Entry Percentage appears to be superior to wE/60 in terms of presenting the degree to which a player’s neutral zone performance affects his team’s shot generation, wE/60 still retains value because it directly measures the total individual contribution to expected shots via neutral zone play.
OFFENSIVE ZONE ENTRIES
(Dec 17, 2017)
In this article, we will address the one, most fundamental type of 3-man zone entry, the WIDE DRIVE
The most common type of zone entry is often called “wide drive” and it is the bread and butter of understanding a systems-based offensive zone entry
BREAKING DOWN THE POSTSEASON TEAMS
(July 31, 2020)
Zone Exits
Exiting the zone with possession of the puck is a crucial part of a team’s transition game. They lead to a zone entry almost 90% of the time, while dumping the puck out of the zone leads to offence less than a quarter of the time.
Zone Entry Denials
This measures the percentage of zone entry attempts against are broken up by the defence at the blueline, and functions as a proxy for how aggressively a team likes to defend their zone
This isn’t a measure of player defensive ability: stepping up at the line can be risky and some excellent chance-suppressing defencemen and teams prefer to play conservatively and protect the slot rather than take a chance at turning away an opposing forward.
DUMP-INS
ADVANTAGES OF PUCK POSSESSION OVER DUMP AND CHASE
(July 11, 2012)
Do odd man rushes inflate the results of carrying the puck in?
· Gaining the zone on an odd-man rush is distinctly more dangerous than gaining the zone with even numbers.
· However, odd-man rushes are infrequent enough in today’s NHL that they don’t skew the numbers appreciably.
· Gaining the zone with even numbers is actually closer to an odd-man rush than it is to dumping the puck in.
· The 0.44 shots per entry figure is the average for everyone, but some lines carry the puck in on more of their entries and therefore get more shots per entry.
· The lines with the puck skills to carry the puck in more are also the lines least likely to turn the puck over in the neutral zone after they regroup.
Conclusion.
Carrying the puck in is way better than dumping it in, more than twice as good – and it’s not because of odd-man rushes or player skill or any other external factor; it’s just because having the puck in the opponent’s zone headed towards the goal is a lot better than trying to outrace the opponent to try to get the puck in the corner.
Even regrouping and trying again might be better than dumping the puck in, especially when the team has their top line on the ice.
THOUGHTS ON DUMPING THE PUCK IN
The end game in hockey is and will always be “pucks in net more often than your opponent,” and just firing the puck in for the purpose of getting it deep doesn’t help in that regard.
STOP WORRYING AND LOVE THE DUMP'N'CHASE
(April 15, 2016)
The Offensive Role Of The Defense:
The defensive structure drives puck retrieval and controlled exits from the zone. Controlled exits lead to successful entries. And successful entries lead to scoring.
The Role of Dump and Chase:
Even the most consistently successful ‘carry it in’ teams dump and chase 50% of the time
If you subscribe to the fantasy that you can carry the puck in all the time, the other team will be more than happy to choke off the neutral zone and stand you up at the blue line, and you’re toast. And frankly, we’ve seen that a lot
Even the best teams need balance.
Regardless of what style you play, the most critical aspect to scoring is getting repeated chances through aggressive puck retrieval.
You can do that with speed (like the Hawks) or with size and strength (like the Kings) – but if you don’t get the puck back, you don’t score
TRANSITIONING THE PUCK
here’s why it’s important to attack with the puck. Of all goals scored last year off a zone entry, 75% of them were scored within 10 seconds of gaining the blueline. Being able to generate quality looks in transition is clearly important if you want to be a high-scoring team.
While this would suggest the dump and chase style is outdated and no longer works in the current NHL, it’s worth noting that it allowed the Stars to have one of the stingiest defenses in the league.
Teams need to find that perfect balance between a more creative possession-based attack while maintaining that solid team defense.
DUMP’N’CHASE KEY TO DEFENSIVE SUCCESS
(Feb 18, 2019)
As a general rule, the more a team carries the puck through the neutral zone, the more susceptible they are to turning that same puck over and risking a scoring chance against off the rush.
High Risk-High Reward
So, while controlled entries are preferable from a pure offensive standpoint, it’s not always the best strategy if you want to come out on the right side of the goal differential at even-strength.
DUMP-INS: A TREND ON THE RISE
(Nov 26, 2019)
there’s a reason teams are doing it more and more despite studies showing that entering the offensive zone with possession of the puck leads to a sizeable increase in scoring chances.
Puck management is a concept many players and coaches seem to value over puck possession.
The connection between more dump-ins and fewer neutral zone turnovers as well as fewer odd-man rushes against is statistically highly significant. However, there is not a statistically significant association between neutral zone turnovers and odd-man rushes against.
the more you dump the puck in, the less you turn it over in the neutral zone and the fewer odd-man rushes you allow,
Carry the puck in if there’s a safe option to do so, if not, dump it in but with a plan to get it back.
Good teams manage the puck and it’s not about possession numbers it’s about possession and recovery numbers
So, while mitigating risk in the neutral zone with an effective ‘place-and-chase’ system appears to be an effective overall strategy to produce more offense than you allow, it isn’t necessarily the best option for all teams. Hockey is a messy and chaotic game.
Not only is it not practical to attempt to gain the offensive zone with a possession entry every time but for some teams, it’s not something they should be doing a majority of the time either.