Jump to content
The Official Site of the Carolina Hurricanes
Sign in to follow this  
TSA

Charlotte Checkers Information

Recommended Posts

I'm honestly not sure.  I fully intended on going to a few games this season, but for various reasons it never happened.  I need to do better next season.  According to their depth chart, though, they were the top 2 LDs.  Which means we're even more full up on LDs and still in need of RDs.  Rats...

 

Oh well. Still, nice to have a couple of guys there who have been through an AHL season to give some experiential stability to the Checkers' back end. Plus they'll have McKeown and Fleury coming in, I hope - that's a right-left pair.

 

In general, I'm kinda curious how one is slotted at right or left defense. I know some of it has to do with which side one shoots from, but I don't think that's all of it - I recall seeing amongst forwards that there are RW who shoot right-handed and others who shoot left-handed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh well. Still, nice to have a couple of guys there who have been through an AHL season to give some experiential stability to the Checkers' back end. Plus they'll have McKeown and Fleury coming in, I hope - that's a right-left pair.

 

In general, I'm kinda curious how one is slotted at right or left defense. I know some of it has to do with which side one shoots from, but I don't think that's all of it - I recall seeing amongst forwards that there are RW who shoot right-handed and others who shoot left-handed.

 

 

People seem to want to base it on the shooting hand and put all the lefties on the left and righties on the right, but i would think the player's particular comfort zone would be the deciding factor.  Whenever i played hockey or soccer (mind you i didn't get much further than boys club teams) i tended to play on the left side despite being a righty both shooting and kicking because i was most-comfortable there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

People seem to want to base it on the shooting hand and put all the lefties on the left and righties on the right, but i would think the player's particular comfort zone would be the deciding factor.  Whenever i played hockey or soccer (mind you i didn't get much further than boys club teams) i tended to play on the left side despite being a righty both shooting and kicking because i was most-comfortable there.

 

Oh, okay. I never did understand the whole "right-shooters play right side, left-shooters play left" concept - doesn't that mean that they're going to be shooting from a greater angle? I would think that it would be smarter to have the shooting hand be to the middle of the ice, not to the board side....

 

Oh well. That's why I'm a fan and not a coach. :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is something I found in a NY Times story from a couple of years ago touching on the righty-lefty Dman theory and quoting Mike Babcock. 

 

Babcock likes his defensemen playing on their natural side because of the advantage they have making basic plays. They can theoretically execute better when passing on the forehand to escape an opposition forecheck, or when attempting a cross-ice pass while skating through the neutral zone, or when dashing to the boards to keep a puck in the offensive zone.

 

 

 

There are plenty of exceptions of course.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is something I found in a NY Times story from a couple of years ago touching on the righty-lefty Dman theory and quoting Mike Babcock. 

 

<quote from article, talking about Babcock's preference for defensemen playing on their "natural side", clipped because I can't figure out how to include it in while using the Quote button on the forum>

 

There are plenty of exceptions of course.

 

I can see that - if a "natural side" defenseman (which I'm assuming means right-shooting on the right side of the ice, left-shooting on the left) is going to make a pass or defend the point, they're going to be doing so with their forehand, which is the stronger, presumably more accurate side.

 

Insofar as escaping the forecheck, I'm not so sure (or maybe I'm confused - that's always a possibility, if not a probablility). Keeping the puck on one's forehand with one's body between the puck and the defender means no easy sweep or poke checks, but it also means that all the defender has to do is skate the puck-carrier into the boards.

 

Maybe that's part of hockey as a probabilistic sport?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If i'm a righty on the point and i want to make a one-timer, am i better on the left side or the right?

 

Your guess is as good as mine - better, really, 'cause I know nothing.

 

I was thinking that taking a one-timer from the left as a right-hand shooter would mean that you'd be shooting from less of an angle than a left-hand shooter. It wouldn't be a huge difference - maybe five degrees or so, depending on the player's reach and the distance to the goal.

 

Then again, I suppose it could be argued that a left-hand shooter from the left side of the ice means that the goalie has to cover the angles better, or that shooting from a greater angle means that the sides of the net are more open.

 

I don't know which is the prevailing wisdom. Is the data out there to make a definitive statement one way or another? Maybe, but even if it proved that it's better to shoot from less of an angle, hockey is such a tradition-bound game that coaches will most likely follow their own convictions, true or otherwise.

 

Sorry if this isn't the place for such "speculation". Let me know if it isn't and I'll remove the post or move it to an appropriate sub-forum.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your guess is as good as mine - better, really, 'cause I know nothing.

 

I was thinking that taking a one-timer from the left as a right-hand shooter would mean that you'd be shooting from less of an angle than a left-hand shooter. It wouldn't be a huge difference - maybe five degrees or so, depending on the player's reach and the distance to the goal.

 

Then again, I suppose it could be argued that a left-hand shooter from the left side of the ice means that the goalie has to cover the angles better, or that shooting from a greater angle means that the sides of the net are more open.

 

I don't know which is the prevailing wisdom. Is the data out there to make a definitive statement one way or another? Maybe, but even if it proved that it's better to shoot from less of an angle, hockey is such a tradition-bound game that coaches will most likely follow their own convictions, true or otherwise.

 

Sorry if this isn't the place for such "speculation". Let me know if it isn't and I'll remove the post or move it to an appropriate sub-forum.

 

 

Yeah, we're kind of hi-jacking the Checkers thread so put the hammer on it if you need to, guys, but if i'm righty on the left side, i'm there with my stick in the air ready for the pass from anywhere so i can hammer it home (OK, if it's really me the puck would end up anywhere but home, but pretend i'm a quality hockey player for the sake of discussion),  Meanwhile if i'm righty on the right side, the one-timer's only happening if the pass comes from the RW.  Anywhere else and it just feels awkward.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hurricanes Re-sign Derek Ryan

 

The Checkers’ captain is remaining with the organization, as Derek Ryan has inked a one-year, two-way contract with Carolina.

 

The nature of his two-way deal means that Ryan could be in Charlotte next season, which would give the Checkers their most dangerous player back, though his strong play during his brief NHL stint could make Ryan a candidate to make the Hurricanes out of camp.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ryan got what I call a "modified 2-way" contract: $600k NHL, $300k AHL, and $350k guaranteed. I suspect that without the boost to his AHL salary he'd be on his way back to Europe.  Good move by the Canes!   

 

I found it interesting that even though his AHL salary is $300k he's guaranteed $350k regardless.  I wonder if that might reflect that RF told him he'd likely get some NHL time next season if he stayed? Putting some "money where his mouth is" if you will (I'm guessing that you can't specify NHL play in a contract outside of a No Move Clause).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh, okay. I never did understand the whole "right-shooters play right side, left-shooters play left" concept - doesn't that mean that they're going to be shooting from a greater angle? I would think that it would be smarter to have the shooting hand be to the middle of the ice, not to the board side....

 

Oh well. That's why I'm a fan and not a coach. :lol:

 

I believe it has something to do with digging the puck out along the boards, keeping it in the zone, etc, which is harder when you are doing it on your backhand.

Edited by hag65

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe it has something to do with digging the puck out along the boards, keeping it in the zone, etc, which is harder when you are doing it on your backhand.

 

Yes, that makes sense - of course, I thought of that a minute after I posted.

 

I still wonder, though - I may look at rink dimensions and such and see what happens when one calculates angles and such. Of course it would be idealized and made with a lot of assumptions (one thought was "goalie predicated as a block 2 1/2' wide by 1 1/2' deep and as tall as the crossbar"), but I'm just curious about things like one-timers from the circles, points shots and so on....

 

I did a preliminary search for NHL rink dimensions, and the toughest measurement to find is where the faceoff dots/circles are in the zones. The drawings I found online don't specify that, so I don't know if that's a variable thing (why would you do that?) or if it's just an oversight in the drawings.

Edited by JonKerfoot

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ryan got what I call a "modified 2-way" contract: $600k NHL, $300k AHL, and $350k guaranteed. I suspect that without the boost to his AHL salary he'd be on his way back to Europe.  Good move by the Canes!   

 

I found it interesting that even though his AHL salary is $300k he's guaranteed $350k regardless.  I wonder if that might reflect that RF told him he'd likely get some NHL time next season if he stayed? Putting some "money where his mouth is" if you will (I'm guessing that you can't specify NHL play in a contract outside of a No Move Clause).

 

I don't know if having contract langugage like that is allowed, but I could see any GM saying "hey, we're planning to keep you up in the NHL after training camp for a while, to see how you do at the start of the season" or "based on your performance last year, you're probably going to be the first guy we call up if injuries happen, so we figure you'll get seven or so games in the bigs if injuries happen at an average rate."

 

Sure makes it sound like guys like PDG are gonna "stay up", based merely on DR's contract. What say you?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know if having contract langugage like that is allowed, but I could see any GM saying "hey, we're planning to keep you up in the NHL after training camp for a while, to see how you do at the start of the season" or "based on your performance last year, you're probably going to be the first guy we call up if injuries happen, so we figure you'll get seven or so games in the bigs if injuries happen at an average rate."

 

Sure makes it sound like guys like PDG are gonna "stay up", based merely on DR's contract. What say you?

 

Yeah, that's pretty much what I meant.  I did the math and a $350k minimum corresponds to .17 of the NHL season or 14 games. For a guy of Ryan's age I'm guessing that the opportunity to play NHL games (even if not contractually guaranteed) meant a lot in his contract negotiations. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ulf Meets the Charlotte Press

 

 

Have to love his take on Francis friendship @ 1:33 in.. :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...