From a very young age, defensemen are taught to pivot from skating forward to skating backwards in an effort to square up, keep a tight gap, and body check or poke check the opposing puck-carrier who is charging down the ice. “Don’t play the puck, play the body!” is the rallying cry of hockey coaches across North America.

But last season, Lightning color analyst Brian Engblom remarked during a game that defensemen are being instructed to continue skating forward in earnest, eliminating the pivot. He showed a clip of Lightning defenseman Braydon Coburn skating in a straight line and never pivoting, and Coburn adeptly broke up the offensive foray. It was jarring to watch, like an elephant playing the saxophone.

While never a wiz at physics, this thinking makes sense to my most fundamental understanding of motion. A defenseman shifting his momentum from skating forward to backwards inevitably decelerates, at least slightly. He even risks losing his balance.

Almost every NHL player can skate faster forward than backwards, so the puck-carrier has his backwards-skating adversary literally on his heels. Part of the inclination to pivot to skating backwards comes from the desire for an improved vantage point. The defenseman then faces the barrel of the gun head-on rather than at an acute angle. In theory, by having a better vantage point, the defenseman is better equipped to block a pass in front of him or block the skating lane as the rush unfolds.

On a two-on-one, resisting pivoting to backwards has its perks. The forward-skating defenseman is more equipped to block a pass in front of him to an opposing forward, especially if the off-the-puck skater is powering toward the backdoor. He can also deny, with the reach of his stick, the puck-carrier’s shot attempt. By propelling forward, the defenseman can more quickly close down the shooting angle.

But without a pivot backwards there is reason for concern about blind spots in denying the pass. Couldn’t the puck-carrier thread a pass to his teammate behind the accelerating defenseman? That is one of the advantages of the backwards pivot when confronted by a 2-on-1: the defenseman knows where the puck is being moved, even if kinetically he is less efficient. But the spirit of the idea of resisting the backwards pivot intrigues me, even if it is substituting a flawed maneuver with another imperfect action. The erosion in importance of pivoting and backwards skating could portend the beginning of a new view of team positions.

***
A study recently conducted by Clifford S. Asness of AQR Capital Management, LLC and Aaron Brown of New York University demonstrated that a losing team pulls its goalie far too late. The analytics movement has been all over this unwarranted reluctance from NHL coaches, and these researchers found that, if trailing by one goal, the losing coach should pull its goalie with 5:40 left to play. A team down two goals should pull with 11:40 left, and, if down three, a few minutes into the third period.

This study underlines that NHL coaches are still far too conservative, and should be more aggressive offensively. In this context, it focused on what to do when trailing, but the ethos of the analytics movement are what strategies enable heaving more shots on net and allowing fewer against, which is why “possession” is used as a metonym for the movement. The question is: What is the roadmap for becoming as aggressive as possible without self-immolating?

What if NHL teams did not need to pull their goalies so early because they had more offensive creators available earlier on? At what point does an NHL coach consider gutting positions, subverting the team’s assigned roles and duties, and instead playing five players who can attack and defend based on their position on the ice? If skaters are going to stop skating backwards, why not just teach forwards to do it and have more offense in the arsenal? Suddenly, keeping a tight gap seems less worrisome if you have five skaters who are relentless back-checkers and are proficient at controlling the puck.

Switching is frequent now, as forwards and defensemen are expected to have chameleon qualities, but ultimately Victor Hedman retreats to the blue line and Brayden Point plays below the circles. Still, the elimination of positions, while initially chaotic, has the most offensive upside and could be the most frictionless. Gone would be the days of missed assignments. Your assignment is to deny the guy in front of you and rev up the engine for another attack.

In this parallel dimension, the offensive impotence of Anton Stralman and Ryan McDonagh make those two unplayable because they could never pass muster as forwards. They are too one-dimensional to succeed on a roster where positions are disassembled. If Point and Ondrej Palat came fourth and fifth into the offensive zone, they would be left having to defend in transition, possibly without needing to pivot. Teaching a pure forward to learn the entire repertoire of a defenseman would be rough at first, but with enough repetitions, would it be such a disadvantage? What is abundantly clear is that offensive talent trumps everything. Defense can be taught, and mostly it is about mobility, effort, and instincts. Forwards are so conscientious in 2018 that they are already capable of retrieving the puck on breakouts and making first passes.

The demolition of the pivot highlights the NHL’s rapid evolution. Swinging a sledgehammer to the concept of positions is the fullest manifestation of that vision. The NHL may not be moving toward five men attacking and defending based on proximity, but the diminution of established practices inches us closer to an NHL where maintaining forward-facing posture is the norm.

Join the Discussion: » 5 Comments » Post New Comment

» Verhaeghe's Role if Stamkos is Sidelined

» Stamkos's Linemates Should Feed Him in the Crease

» Three Personal Goals for the Grinders

» How COVID Could Test the Bolts' Depth

» What Happens to Cooper If TB Loses