OBXer

Hockey 101

Recommended Posts

If you are new to hockey or new to the board, Don't Be Shy, Post your questions, observations and comments here. We were all hockey newbies at one time. Board Members will try and help you enjoy the Greatest Game on Ice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello, dear OBXer, I'm very new to such a thing (I consider stupid) as co-captaincy. Do you know any other recent (or not so) cases of it in the NHL? Do you think we should add a third one next season when black jerseys are back?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I doubt this is unprecedented in the NHL, but it's freakin' rare. In 45 years of following this league I've never seen it. And I'm right there with you, Ryazan: It's stupid, and then some. It shows, by turns, indecision, incompetence, and very possibly fear about ******* somebody off. Except, apparently, Jeff Skinner.

 

Yesterday I joked about a captain controversy to start the season. Today we have one, as far as I'm concerned. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, RyazanCaniac said:

Hello, dear OBXer, I'm very new to such a thing (I consider stupid) as co-captaincy. Do you know any other recent (or not so) cases of it in the NHL? Do you think we should add a third one next season when black jerseys are back?

 

Agree is it unusual to have co-captains.  I don't like it.  What I DO like, RyazanCaniac, is that you dressed up for the new season.  Very spiffy.  :)

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Didn't some team switch off captains every month a few years back?  That's goofy too but at least it's one guy at a time.

 

I like Ryazan's thought of having a third captain when they bring back the blacks.  And we could always introduce different captains based on foe - Staal can be the captain for home games against Eastern Conference teams, Rask for Western... Faulk for Eastern road games, Skinner for Western road games.  With a special clause that Lindholm gets the C every-other Thursday...

Edited by realmdrakkar
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gotta wonder if the primary reason they didn't name tri-captains is there's not as logical a way to split the games.  As far as next year, do we ever wear the black on the road, or is it always at home?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you OBXer for starting this much needed thread.

 

On the hot topic of co-captaincy, I found here that the Rule 6.1 saying:

"One Captain shall be appointed by each team, and he alone shall have the privilege of discussing with the Referee any questions relating to interpretation of rules which may arise during the progress of a game. He shall wear the letter “C,” approximately three inches (3”) in height and in contrasting color, in a conspicuous position on the front of his sweater. No co-Captains are permitted. Either one Captain and no more than two Alternate Captains, or no Captain an no more than three Alternate Captains are permitted (see 6.2)."

Does the bolded part mean: at any given game?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, Caniac514 said:

Does the bolded part mean: at any given game?

Yes. Theoretically teams could appoint different Cs and As every night.

 

But let's not give the brain trust any ideas.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, LakeLivin said:

Gotta wonder if the primary reason they didn't name tri-captains is there's not as logical a way to split the games.  As far as next year, do we ever wear the black on the road, or is it always at home?

I believe you've just fallen into a gaping sarchasm, expertly excavated by Ryazan & Realm Site Contractors .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, top-shelf-1 said:

I believe you've just fallen into a gaping sarchasm, expertly excavated by Ryazan & Realm Site Contractors .

I caught it, but given the decision it wouldn't shock me if they had named tri-captains if it had been more convenient logistically, so I responded seriously. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Caniac514 said:

Thank you OBXer for starting this much needed thread.

 

On the hot topic of co-captaincy, I found here that the Rule 6.1 saying:

"One Captain shall be appointed by each team, and he alone shall have the privilege of discussing with the Referee any questions relating to interpretation of rules which may arise during the progress of a game. He shall wear the letter “C,” approximately three inches (3”) in height and in contrasting color, in a conspicuous position on the front of his sweater. No co-Captains are permitted. Either one Captain and no more than two Alternate Captains, or no Captain an no more than three Alternate Captains are permitted (see 6.2)."

Does the bolded part mean: at any given game?

 

Only one Captain a game is permitted. The plan as I understand it is the J. Staal will wear the letter C at home and the letter A on the road while Faulk is captain on the road and wears the A at home. The intention is that they will change the rotation half way through the season. Skinner will have a A and serve as alternate captain all season. It is a bit unusual. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, RyazanCaniac said:

Hello, dear OBXer, I'm very new to such a thing (I consider stupid) as co-captaincy. Do you know any other recent (or not so) cases of it in the NHL? Do you think we should add a third one next season when black jerseys are back?

 

I don't off hand but I'm sure it has happened before

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, RyazanCaniac said:

Do you know any other recent (or not so) cases of it in the NHL?

 

Found this


 

Quote

 

in the 1985–86, when Boston Bruins captain Terry O'Reilly retired, Ray Bourque and Rick Middleton were named as co-captains of the team. Middleton wore the "C" during home games and Bourque for road games during the season's first half, and the two switched for the second half.

 

Some teams name two (such as the Buffalo Sabres during the 2005–06 and 2006–07 NHL seasons) or three (such as the Vancouver Canucks during the 1990–91 season) captains for a season. Some teams rotate captains rather than keep one for an extended period of time (the Minnesota Wild rotated captaincy every one or two months until the 2009–10 season, when Mikko Koivu was named the first permanent captain since the franchise's inception).

 

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This may be a bit of a higher level question than 101, but it is a hockey protocol question so I'll just put what I've found here.

 

I have been curious about the NHL Concussion protocol for a while now. It is confusing because as it turns out, there is "The Protocol". Which is a written description of how to watch for and catch concussions in game and test and remove that player, and there is this tendency to refer to guys recovering from concussion as being "in the protocol".

 

There is good information about The Protocol for taking guys out of games, but what is the protocol for return to action?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I shall now attempt to answer my own question. This gets a bit long, but only because of the quotes and tables.

 

The actual NHL protocol on this is somewhat vague. This is what it says:

 

A Player who is diagnosed with a concussion shall not return to practice or a game on the same day that the event occurred, irrespective of how quickly his symptoms resolve.
 
A Player may return to unrestricted play at a time later than the day the event occurred if
the following three circumstances have occurred:
 
(1) there is complete recovery of concussion-relate symptoms at rest;
(2) there is no emergence of concussion-related symptoms at exertion levels required for competitive play; and
       (3) the player has been judged by the Club’s Physician to have returned to his neurocognitive baseline
       following an evaluation by the Club consulting neuropsychologist.
 
There is no mandatory period of time that a Player must be withheld from play following a concussion, as the return to play decision is based on the individual circumstances of that Player.
 
The Club Physician remains solely responsible for making return to play decisions based on these parameters, including in circumstances where the Player is referred to a consultant for management and treatment. Prior to making the return to play decision, the Club Physician shall ensure that all aspects of the Protocol have been satisfied, including referral for neuropsychological assessment.
 
I get why they are vague. For one thing, one concussion is very different than the other. For another thing, they want medical decisions (correctly IMO) made by the treating physician with the patient in front of them. And lastly, they want the liability to stay with the treating physician.
 
That's IMO, how it should be. But it doesn't tell us fans what to expect. OK the basic thing to expect is the unexpected. Returning to a game could technically be any period of time that is "not on the same day it occurred." But no player actually comes back the next day unless it is determined that there was not a concussion. Why?
 
This. Consensus statement on concussion in sport: the 4th International Conference on Concussion in Sport held in Zurich, November 2012
 
The NHL protocol for return to play references treatment in accordance to it, and here is the way that conference determined an athlete should be gradually returned to full play:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK the end of that post got buried in a way that I can't even figure out how to fix. I'm going to post the recommendations that the NHL protocol references

then post my final thoughts.

 

Table 1

Graduated return to play protocol

 
Rehabilitation stage Functional exercise at each stage of rehabilitation Objective of each stage
1. No activity Symptom limited physical and cognitive rest Recovery
2. Light aerobic exercise Walking, swimming or stationary cycling keeping intensity <70% maximum permitted heart rate
No resistance training
Increase HR
3. Sport-specific exercise Skating drills in ice hockey, running drills in soccer. No head impact activities Add movement
4. Non-contact training drills Progression to more complex training drills, eg, passing drills in football and ice hockey
May start progressive resistance training
Exercise, coordination and cognitive load
5. Full-contact practice Following medical clearance participate in normal training activities Restore confidence and assess functional skills by coaching staff
6. Return to play Normal game play  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The NHL leaves it up to the treating physician how fast to return the player. The only rule is that it can't be the same day of the injury. The Zurich consensus statement says there is no absolute time table for those steps above either. BUT it does say that generally each step should be taken no less than 24 hours after the previous one, so at a minimum it would take 6 days to get through those steps.

 

However, a player cannot move into those steps until he is symptom free at rest, which could take a while. That same paper states that 70-80% of concussions resolve in 7-10 days. However, that would be the day a guy could start into those 1 per day steps. Thus, if a guy woke up on day 2 with no symptoms and progressed at one step per day, the very soonest a guy could realistically return is about 6 days. But in reality, that would be a guy with either the most trivial concussion or a guy who was misdiagnosed, and never had a concussion. Since most concussions will have symptoms for at least a few days at rest, it would be a rare concussion that wasn't out for at least 8-10 days.

 

I am assuming that those steps are what coaches and GM's are referring to when they speak of a guy in the days after a concussion being "in the protocol".

 

So, what I gather is that somewhere around 75% of players with concussion will be out 8-17 days. 100% will be out at least 6 days, and about 20% will be out longer than 17 days.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Question?

When it comes to the 3 forwards we play, is there usually a strategy that we play with? Like straight speed, shooters on wings, or other? Not sure if this even makes sensor if thre is some type of scheme we usualy go with. Trying to get a sense of why certain players are played with others. I keep hearing we are a faster playing team this year.

 

thanks in advance

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bb86

 

disclaimer: not every roster allows for these situations.

 

typically on a scoring line you want a sniper, assist machine, and a dirty goal guy (in front of net guy that gathers the shooter’s rebounds for easy goals). 

 

Considerations for line creation:

one of those three guys good at faceoffs?

do they have chemistry? If not you got to mix it up

your skill by position: if you don’t have a RW, LW and C that fits that combo then you have to change strategies.  I.e every Canes lines.  We go for speed, zone transition that will catch their defense before it sets, and possessing the puck until we find a hole/tire out the opposing team because they cant substitute.  We do this because we don’t have any dirty goal guys and we have only one true sniper, skinner. 

Line speed: obviously you can’t force a true combo if one guy is slower than the other two.

 

IMO chemistry is more important than getting a true sniper, assist machine, and dirty goal combo.

 

Then again, non of what I just matters as sometimes you have to force a trio together to put a line out there.

 

Lastly you want one solid, hard working shutdown line.  To help defeat the other teams best forwards.  3 guys who know they are there to keep the puck from, take away the puck from, and overall annoy the crap out of their top line.  Usually they start in the defensive zone and need to be able to win faceoffs regularly. We have 2.  We were hoping Staal would return to offensive Staal (like the season we traded for him and paid him a butt load) because we have another shutdown line.  We aren’t asking Staal and Co to take 60% defensive faceoffs so he should have more opportunities.  We’ve seen a slight increase but not as much as we would hope.

 

Hope this helps. There isn’t an exact science to it but here is some considerations.

Edited by gocanes0506
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, gocanes0506 said:

Bb86

 

disclaimer: not every roster allows for these situations.

 

typically on a scoring line you want a sniper, assist machine, and a dirty goal guy (in front of net guy that gathers the shooter’s rebounds for easy goals). 

 

Considerations for line creation:

one of those three guys good at faceoffs?

do they have chemistry? If not you got to mix it up

your skill by position: if you don’t have a RW, LW and C that fits that combo then you have to change strategies.  I.e every Canes lines.  We go for speed, zone transition that will catch their defense before it sets, and possessing the puck until we find a hole/tire out the opposing team because they cant substitute.  We do this because we don’t have any dirty goal guys and we have only one true sniper, skinner. 

Line speed: obviously you can’t force a true combo if one guy is slower than the other two.

 

IMO chemistry is more important than getting a true sniper, assist machine, and dirty goal combo.

 

Then again, non of what I just matters as sometimes you have to force a trio together to put a line out there.

 

Lastly you want one solid, hard working shutdown line.  To help defeat the other teams best forwards.  3 guys who know they are there to keep the puck from, take away the puck from, and overall annoy the crap out of their top line.  Usually they start in the defensive zone and need to be able to win faceoffs regularly. We have 2.  We were hoping Staal would return to offensive Staal (like the season we traded for him and paid him a butt load) because we have another shutdown line.  We aren’t asking Staal and Co to take 60% defensive faceoffs so he should have more opportunities.  We’ve seen a slight increase but not as much as we would hope.

 

Hope this helps. There isn’t an exact science to it but here is some considerations.

 

Thanks Man, this was very helpful!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

bb86, to add to what gocanes expounded nicely on, something I've heard mentioned frequently by Coach Peters is emphasizing Pairs of players, then trying out the 3rd forward to complement those. It would appear that he believes, and it probably makes better sense, that to fit 2 players together is easier than 3. And in addition, their is more fluidity in lineups currently, as the coach appears to be attempting to "jump start" several players he needs to be scoring by teaming them with a player, such as Williams who can coax them out of their early season funk.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm a brand new fan, recruited to this side in January and have since become a STM. LOVE this sport, OMG. And the team struggles but I love them. But please, for the love of all that is holy, can someone tell me why Coach thought it would be a fine idea to pull Darling at 2:53 last night? I understand, get more guys to shoot. But really, that early? It deteriorated quickly after that.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I posted this over in another thread.  Some will still disagree with the decision, but at least this should explain the rationale behind it.  Oh, and welcome aboard.  We don't get too many women here anymore (as far as I can tell, anyways), don't be a stranger.

 

49 minutes ago, LakeLivin said:

I didn't have a problem with pulling Mongo so early.  Every analysis I've seen on the subject shows that it pays off more often than not.  Here's a couple of excerpts:  

  • "For the pulled goalie strategy to be effective, a necessary condition is that the team pulling the goaltender has to score at a higher rate when playing 6-on-5 than 5-on-5 with both goaltenders. Combining road and home statistics, teams playing 6-on-5 score a goal every 8.5 minutes, which is way below the sample means of 28.6 and 26.2 minutes when playing 5-on-5 with both goaltenders for the road and home teams, respectively."
  • "What we can say is that during the 2015–16 NHL regular season and the first few nights of playoff action, teams that pulled their puckstopper for the final time with between 90 seconds and five minutes remaining in a one-goal game tied the contest approximately 16 percent of the time; those that waited until there was less than a minute and a half left squared the affair approximately 10 percent of the time."

Problem is, even though pulling the goalie early works more often than waiting, it still doesn't work very often. I've seen estimated increases in success rate of tying the game ranging from 3% to 6%.  But even though the success rate is increased, it still doesn't work more than 80% of the time. Not sure how often the other team scores an empty netter during those times it doesn't work, but I suspect it's often enough to leave a coach open to lots of criticism, even if the overall strategy is sound. 

 

The estimates I've seen on pulling the goalie early are that the strategy would earn a team an average of an extra 1-2 points a season.  I guess the question becomes: is an extra point or two over the course of a season worth watching some games go from a 2-1 loss to a 5-1 loss?

 

Oh, and on the timing: I see top's point about the risk of leaving the net empty for a faceoff.  On the other hand, it presented an opportunity for BP to get the exact 6 skaters he wanted out there on the ice which is hard to do if it's dependent on your having possession in your own zone first.  And even if the Bolts win the faceoff, it's in their zone and they probably usually win it back, which still leaves us the opportunity to backcheck with an extra man.  So from my perspective, there were factors that at least somewhat mitigated the risk.

some articles I found:

http://people.stat.sfu.ca/~tim/papers/goalie.pdf

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/nhl-coaches-are-pulling-goalies-earlier-than-ever/

https://www.hockeywilderness.com/2016/10/4/13160374/nhl-pulled-goalie-patrick-roy-minnesota-wild-hockey-extra-skater-overtime

http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/whens-ideal-time-pull-goalie/

 

 

 

Edited by LakeLivin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now