Read on Twitter
I just really, really, really don't understand what CHI is trying to do in their DZ coverage. Ds chase for days and Fs get put in uncomfortable spots.
They're playing man-to-man here with TBL in possession high in the zone.
This is fine, though most NHL teams would rather give up a high 3v2 and have F3 stay in the middle of the slot to outman the other team low.
This is fine, though most NHL teams would rather give up a high 3v2 and have F3 stay in the middle of the slot to outman the other team low.
TBL goes D-to-D, high-to-low, then TBL91 rolls up with the puck. All of a sudden we're NOT man-on-man anymore.
Ds are boxing out at net, that's ok. But TBL has so much room to work with.
Ds are boxing out at net, that's ok. But TBL has so much room to work with.
This picture looks more like a 4v5 PK than 5v5 DZ coverage.
Looks like one of Point's many PPGs from the bumper spot a couple of years ago.
More on the CHI Ds chasing:
Look at RD CHI51. LD CHI44 is his partner but it looks like they're playing on diff teams.
0:18 he chase behind the net and ends up on the wrong ice of the ice (if CHI was playing zone). Then it really goes bad.
Look at RD CHI51. LD CHI44 is his partner but it looks like they're playing on diff teams.
0:18 he chase behind the net and ends up on the wrong ice of the ice (if CHI was playing zone). Then it really goes bad.
Playing DZC should be *simple*, if not easy.
For me the automotive equivalent to CHI's scheme is a 1970s Alfa Romeo: looks interesting and possibly has some cool features. But shoddily put together and breaks down if you look at it wrong.
For me the automotive equivalent to CHI's scheme is a 1970s Alfa Romeo: looks interesting and possibly has some cool features. But shoddily put together and breaks down if you look at it wrong.
Instead what I'd be after is something like an early 2000s Honda Civic:
Simple, reliable, cheap (in time/effort to implement). You can trick it out a little bit, if needed. Stands up to the test of time.
Simple, reliable, cheap (in time/effort to implement). You can trick it out a little bit, if needed. Stands up to the test of time.
For me these two pictures represent the same thing:
