And what do the Rangers do after they score six? Play the trap for the latter half of the game. TB doesn't know what he's talking about. Vigneault has had the same MO for a long time now.

I would recommend watching how the Wild manage the neutral zone next time you catch a Wild game.

That last statement you made is simply wrong. Shame on you for speaking in definitives; especially about statistics you admit to not fully understanding.

I've told you great goaltending is a product of systems and proper shot management enough times. If you won't listen - your loss. Said goalies don't exist in a vacuum out there.
- fry

That's not even remotely true.

And what do the Rangers do after they score six? Play the trap for the latter half of the game. TB doesn't know what he's talking about. Vigneault has had the same MO for a long time now.

I would recommend watching how the Wild manage the neutral zone next time you catch a Wild game.

That last statement you made is simply wrong. Shame on you for speaking in definitives; especially about statistics you admit to not fully understanding.

I've told you great goaltending is a product of systems and proper shot management enough times. If you won't listen - your loss. Said goalies don't exist in a vacuum out there.
- fry

Both this TB and the other one DO know what they are talking about. Tightening up on defense when you have a lead is not employing the trap. It's not even close to the same thing. Find some video of the Devils in the mid-nineties and you will see the difference.
The Rangers have poor possession stats because they have played with a lead for most of the season. More than that, they play a speed game - through the neutral zone with speed or a long pass, and attack the net with speed and skill rather than try to set up. That style does not lend itself toward heavy possession. They actually need to do better at cycling and controlling the puck a little more.
You have sacrificed facts and perspective in your attempt to attack Tanner. I know, I've done it too. It's fun sometimes, but it doesn't make you know what you're talking about.

Then how do you explain why those systems' goalies can't sustain their play long term? You're the one who doesn't know what he's talking about.
- James_Tanner

By long term do you mean over a season? Five years?

There is such thing as an evolving league metagame. If you don't understand fundemental trap hockey, then it's easy to misunderstand various team's ability to adapt over a full season to finding successful ways to take the blueline through a heavy trap. As players interchange, the team in it's self gains or loses the ability to break or maintain the trap effectively.

It's not the goalies that can't maintain those numbers; its a team of 20 players varying in their ability to stay ahead of the meta while maintaining a 1-1-3, 0-2-3, or 1-2-2 system.


Don't tell me I don't know what I'm talking about when you admit you can't recognize and remember a system you see a team play on any given night. How long have you been watching hockey?

Both this TB and the other one DO know what they are talking about. Tightening up on defense when you have a lead is not employing the trap. It's not even close to the same thing. Find some video of the Devils in the mid-nineties and you will see the difference.
The Rangers have poor possession stats because they have played with a lead for most of the season. More than that, they play a speed game - through the neutral zone with speed or a long pass, and attack the net with speed and skill rather than try to set up. That style does not lend itself toward heavy possession. They actually need to do better at cycling and controlling the puck a little more.
You have sacrificed facts and perspective in your attempt to attack Tanner. I know, I've done it too. It's fun sometimes, but it doesn't make you know what you're talking about.
- Tonybere

I've watched the Rangers fall back into a 0-2-3 after gaining a lead so many times this year. I'm sure you have too.

That's not even remotely true.
- j.boyd919

Care to elaborate? I didn't realize goalies exist in a vacuum out there but clearly you have a reason to disagree.

I've watched the Rangers fall back into a 0-2-3 after gaining a lead so many times this year. I'm sure you have too.
- fry

I didn't say they haven't fallen back. That is simply the smart thing to do when you've built a comfortable lead and have a trustworthy goaltender. I'm saying there is a vast difference between eliminating the forecheck to protect a lead and not employing a forecheck at any time in the game in order to pounce on the opposition at your blueline and generate your offense that way. That is a trap system. The devils used to win the opening faceoff and not bother to attack.

Care to elaborate? I didn't realize goalies exist in a vacuum out there but clearly you have a reason to disagree.
- fry

I feel like his point is that the system that is employed is a product of realizing that you have great goaltending and play to your strengths. Not the other way around.

I didn't say they haven't fallen back. That is simply the smart thing to do when you've built a comfortable lead and have a trustworthy goaltender. I'm saying there is a vast difference between eliminating the forecheck to protect a lead and not employing a forecheck at any time in the game in order to pounce on the opposition at your blueline and generate your offense that way. That is a trap system. The devils used to win the opening faceoff and not bother to attack.
- Tonybere

They were definitely the polarized version of a trap system and I get the feeling there's definitely some resentment from those times.

That said, the trap is alive today and is found in many variances. Vigneault loves him some counter attack hockey and that all begins with clogging the neutral zone and frustrating the opposition. Add to the fact that theyre 0-2-3 or 1-2-2 out there while doing that and.. You're looking at a modern trap. Despite it being fun to watch haha.

I think the Rags and Vigneault are awesome though. Cheering for them out of the East. Tons of fun to watch this year.

Care to elaborate? I didn't realize goalies exist in a vacuum out there but clearly you have a reason to disagree.
- fry

Lundqvist, who has been the best (minus this year) in the league over a long period of time.. and his Rangers have given up the most scoring chances at 5v5 since 2011.

Corey Crawford, who is very underrated but is also a great goalie, his Blackhawks have given up the 3rd most scoring chances since 2011.

2014-15 - Price won the Vezina, the Habs were 11th in scoring chances against.

but then there are seasons from Holtby, Bob, Rask where their scoring chances against were in the bottom half of the league.

I personally do not believe great goaltending is ALWAYS a product of the system. At times it can be, but not always. Take Pittsburgh this season for example. Murray and Fleury have pretty much split starts (or close). They've both seen about the exact same scoring chances against.. Pens play the exact same system with both goalies.. and Murray's numbers are outstanding and Fleury's are pedestrian.

I feel like his point is that the system that is employed is a product of realizing that you have great goaltending and play to your strengths. Not the other way around.
- Tonybere

We can probably agree that it's a symbiotic relationship.

I've seen the Coyotes try to open up their system and Mike Smith subsequentially bite the statistic dust one too many times..

Also, I have Brian Elliott on my local team. He's a bit of a polarized example of being great in a trap system and sub-par anywhere else.

Lundqvist, who has been the best (minus this year) in the league over a long period of time.. and his Rangers have given up the most scoring chances at 5v5 since 2011.

Corey Crawford, who is very underrated but is also a great goalie, his Blackhawks have given up the 3rd most scoring chances since 2011.

2014-15 - Price won the Vezina, the Habs were 11th in scoring chances against.

but then there are seasons from Holtby, Bob, Rask where their scoring chances against were in the bottom half of the league.

I personally do not believe great goaltending is ALWAYS a product of the system. At times it can be, but not always. Take Pittsburgh this season for example. Murray and Fleury have pretty much split starts (or close). They've both seen about the exact same scoring chances against.. Pens play the exact same system with both goalies.. and Murray's numbers are outstanding and Fleury's are pedestrian.
- j.boyd919

"Scoring chances" are still a bit arbitrary. Is a shot from the outside counted as a scoring chance in one arena where it wouldn't in the other?

Yeah, I shouldn't speak in absolutes. My bad on that. The Pens are a solid example.

"Scoring chances" are still a bit arbitrary. Is a shot from the outside counted as a scoring chance in one arena where it wouldn't in the other?

Yeah, I shouldn't speak in absolutes. My bad on that. The Pens are a solid example.
- fry

I do agree it can be a bit arbitrary, but I think over the course of a season, those would kind of wash out (the discrepancy between what a chance is and isn't). But yeah, I just think sometimes superior athletes can mask the fact they are seeing A LOT of rubber (Hasek, Crawford, Hank, etc.) but you definitely have the great goalies coming from system play (Broduer, Roy, Rask, etc.). It just goes both ways IMO.

I do agree it can be a bit arbitrary, but I think over the course of a season, those would kind of wash out (the discrepancy between what a chance is and isn't). But yeah, I just think sometimes superior athletes can mask the fact they are seeing A LOT of rubber (Hasek, Crawford, Hank, etc.) but you definitely have the great goalies coming from system play (Broduer, Roy, Rask, etc.). It just goes both ways IMO.
- j.boyd919

Hah I can agree with that.