Forechecking and the Defensive Zone
"There’s a lot about that team that’s scary. Today, especially in the second, the came at us hard, forechecked hard and were tough to handle that way. Very aggressive on the forecheck. That’s maybe something we hadn’t seen [before Dale Hunter]." - Pittsburgh Head Coach Dan Bylsma after last week's Caps/Pens game
Under Bruce Boudreau, the once high-flying Washington Capitals had all but abandoned an aggressive forecheck, instead often attempting to carry the puck into the opposing zone and sagging back to the neutral zone at the first sign of opposition possession.
Dale Hunter wants to be much more aggressive, it seems, and much more interested in dumping and chasing. And why not? He's got a slew of big wings who love to hit, including Alex Ovechkin and Troy Brouwer on the top line and throughout the depth chart, and getting physical with opposing defenders can wear them out during the course of a game and especially within a playoff series (cue Jim Mora).
But a successful forecheck often starts at the other end of the ice. As Hunter himself put it after last week's Penguins game, "[W]e have to move the puck quicker out of our end. We spend too much time, and it wears out our offense."
It's similar to a point we made in our recap of that game:
The Caps had a better forecheck against the Penguins than they did against the Blues. Why? Because they were able to break out of their own zone better than on Tuesday night (though they certainly still need work in that aspect of the game). The result is that instead of going for line changes as soon as the puck comes to neutral, forwards could dump the puck in, chase it down and hammer Pittsburgh blueliners.
After the jump, two examples that hammer home the point.
Both of these clips show the hard work of Brooks Laich's line during the second period of Saturday night's game against Ottawa (there are better examples, no doubt, but these work to demonstrate the point). In the first clip, most of that work takes place in the defensive zone. Let's take a look:
The Caps spend most of the latter part of that shift hemmed in their own zone, so when they finally do get control of the puck and move it to neutral ice, Joel Ward has to dump it in and go for a change, handing the puck over to the Sens. Granted, that might have been their best option even if they'd cleared the zone quicker, given the time elapsed on that shift by that point, but by struggling to clear it sooner, the Caps were left with no choice in the matter.
This next clip shows what happens when the Caps get the puck out quickly and under control:
The Caps clear the puck and are in a position to carry it or dump it. Once they do (and perhaps Ward should've gone with the cross-corner dump-in, but that's neither here nor there), they can set up their forecheck, which forces a turnover and ultimately an icing. That's how it's supposed to work.
Dale Hunter's first order of business since taking the reins of the team he once captained has been to tighten up the defense. And while we didn't see it last night, the first three games of the new regime certainly were modest steps in the right direction. The obvious payoff there will be fewer goals allowed. But if the defense - and that means defensemen and forwards - can spend less time in its own zone and move the puck out of its own end better than they were able to under Boudreau, it's going to allow them to forecheck more aggressively and effectively and that's going to lead to more goals-for. (Fewer goals-against, more goals-for... what's not to like?)
So the next time you lament the lack of a Caps forecheck, take note of what's happening at the other end of the ice - it's the likeliest culprit.
33 comments
|
4 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
If average shift length for a forward is 45 seconds, then it becomes a matter of zone management. Maybe it’s 15-15-15 in terms of seconds spent in each zone. But if it’s taking you 20-25 to get out of your end, or you’re dawdling in the neutral zone and having the puck shoved back in your end, then that last 15 — those seconds in the offensive zone — dwindle to 10, 5, or none if you have to dump and go for a change. It’s how that 45 seconds gets split up and why Bylsma’s mantra is to spend only ‘x’ seconds in the defensive zone.
If you've read this far...seek help.
Right. Point being, how effective you are in your defensive zone very directly impacts how effective you can be in the offensive zone. It’s why puck-moving D, forwards helping out (both defensively and giving targets on the breakout), winning battles on the boards, etc. all matter.
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
Back in the Early Days of Ovi Greatness he tended to score a lot in the 3rd period. I remember seeing folks post stats here on that. Tie that to his long shifts and one reasonable take was that he wore out the guys keeping him in check.
Even assuming Ovi is not double-shifted a lot less, the shorter shifts and O responsibility in the D zone are going to make it easier on opposition matchup players. It’s still better for consistency, the playoffs, and the long run, but I don’t know that it directly helps Ovi’s scoring. A lot of that needs to come from him though.
No, I don't think I'll ever get over Macho Grande
I’d take the easier line matching if it made AO fresher and more explosive in each shift (which shorter shifts will do, no doubt).
Please, call me F&B.
Problem is Ovechkin hasn’t looked fresher or more explosive. Less ice time and shorter shifts aren’t helping him so if the idea was to keep him fresh to channel his explosiveness the results haven’t been there.
No, but longer shifts isn’t going to solve that either. It’s science, after a minute there’s no point being on the ice.
Please, call me F&B.
Isn’t the quote something like, “Nothing good happens after 2:00 AM”? In this case, nothing good happens after one minute – penalties, missed coverages, icings… get on, do your thing and get off.
And yes, that’s what she said.
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
I’m in no way suggesting longer shifts is the solution. I’m just observing that IF the intent was to shorten his shifts in order to keep him fresh and channel his explosiveness it hasn’t happened. Maybe it will pay off in the long run, maybe not. If it doesn’t pay off then something else must be done to get the desired results.
First – great post JP.
Second – re: shorter shifts – it’s only been 4 games under Hunter & the new system. As JP noted above, they’re not yet always successful getting out of their own zone quickly in order to set up the forecheck. I’m thinking better results will come as they get more locked in to the new system. Still seems like they’re thinking a little too much out there.
Saw something in the Pens game I hadn’t seen in a while: the Caps dealing out punishment (besides the usual 2-3 players).
I think that could be huge for this team. Get the other team worried about taking a pounding, instead of being worried solely about playing tight defense and shutting down a non-physical team.
Forechecking is central to this.
"By far the worst performers on the (Redskins) are in the front office." – Sally Jenkins
Let’s take Bylsma’s words with a grain of salt. He could be trying to play mind games with the Caps to get into their heads ad plant thoughts of incertainty in order to convince them to play into the Pens hands next time they play each other but more importantly if they meet in the playoffs.
Obviously we can’t blame all of this on one player, but it just emphasizes how important Mike Green is to this team. I know there was an earlier post about protecting Green by having others chase pucks, but he’s probably the best we have at retrieving, controlling, and moving pucks out of the zone. Without him we seem to be struggling with this.
Do you have any sense for how these categories would be broken down last night:
a) # of forechecks failed because Caps didn’t break it out of their own end/had to change
b) # of forechecks failed because Caps dumped it in, but Florida broke it out
c) # of successful forechecks (resulting in icing or turnover)
Nope. Not something I (or anyone else I know of) tracks. But it’d be great if someone(s) would try it for a few games and report back.
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
maybe JP can borrow OFB’s intern?
Pledge Drive 2011-2012: CARSON KOLZIG FOUNDATION! Season Pledge total--$631.76!
"...and with Jeremy's help we'll find that chicken"

No, I don't think I'll ever get over Macho Grande
Last night was rough to watch. i am glad they made it exciting at the end but the first 40 minutes was embarassing. I understand the often mentioned sentiment that the team needs time to gel under Hunter’s new system (especially the offensive/forechecking portion); but why fire Boudreau midseason then, especially if he was on such a short leash that the first sign of trouble he’d be gone. I think McPhee is a great GM, but this decision was questionable and may cost him his job here (which i really hope doesn’t happen, good season or bad)
its getting to the point where we cannot afford time to pick up the system. Though potentially great for the playoffs, I don’t see it nearly effective enough in the regular season to dominate later and jump several teams into a playoff spot. Therefore…
Pick it up quick Caps!
And if you want a great example of what can happen when you get the puck up ice quickly, look no further than the Pens game.
That’s a horrible, non-textbook breakout though.
Please, call me F&B.
What’s the opposing center doing at the end of that play?
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
Nah, #87 at least looks like he’s somewhat prepared to make a hockey play. Ovie would be standing straight up
































