Reply To: Game Intelligence / Decision Training

[Tom Molloy]

Rookie Coach, there are a few reasons why a team gives too big of a gap. The main reason is that in the forecheck the D are passive and simply back up. When your team is forechecking the D should be locking on attackers inside the opponents blue line and defending that blue line, the red line and your blue line.

You can play passively and wait in the nzone with a 1-4 like Edmonton and Calgary did at the game I went to last night. Awful to watch and I imagine awful way to play. But that is a story for another day. Who wants to play this way and who wants to watch it. Renney and Sutter should both be fined for making a travesty of the game.

If you watch Boston play (the champs) you see an aggressive forecheck and hard back checking that creates back pressure on the puck carrier and a defensive 2 on 1.

In the video section under transition games there are many games that require back checking and the players joining the play must identify who they must pick up and cover in the zone. The same titles should take you to a description in this section.

D100 x 2 Backchecking Transition – Dukla (I was teaching former Toronto D Petr Svoboda how to use transition games with his Czech U20 team. We met and planned the practices and he ran them on the ice while I watched and then we talked about them after. It was early season and he had a lot of goalies, so we ran two at once sometimes. there are quite a few videos from Dukla.

D100 Transition Game 3-2 to 3-3. In Salzburg they had F1 to come deep in the zone and play the low 3-3 while F2 and F3 were passive waiting for the breakout pass to attack the 2 waiting D and F1 joined them to make it a 3-2 the other way.

DT100 Examples of Sequence 1-1 to 3-2. This is a general description of the continuous flow.

D100 Transition Game with both the Forward and Defenseman joining the Attack. This is a great game.

DT100 Back Checking Game – this was demonstrated by my college women's team. It requires a breakout pass and the attackers have to be quick to beat the back checkers who identify who they are covering and tie up the sticks.

I don't keep track of all of the little details but instead talk to players as they return to the line or else follow the play and shout out key words. We keep score and the loser usually does something. As Juhani says in our book ' the answer is whether the puck is in the net or not.' Once in a while the winner does push ups etc. as winning is a reward in itself. I like intrinsic motivation. My motto is 'It doesn't matter whether you win or lose; just how much you win by.'

Sometimes we play tournaments and I keep track of the score in all the games and at the end the losing team skates, does exercises, or picks up the pucks. I am not saying this is right or wrong. It is my philosophy that I need to pay attention to the details during practice and the score is the outcome which is rewarded or punished.
Philosophically I am a Deductive Thinker (I work with the whole and identify the particulars) so we work on all the situations. Inductive Thinking is the opposite where you build the little pieces (like building a house) and end up with the Whole. Using 'Games to Teach The Game' is Deductive Thinking. I always used to get a kick out of the coaching clinics that would teach the "Whole part whole" method. You would expect that they would start with the game and then a detail of the game and then back to the game. Instead they would start with a drill, then a detail of a drill and then back to the whole drill.

Juuso has been promoting using games to teach the game since he retired from playing. Now that the Games Philosophy is taking hold i.e. at the 2010 conference in Germany they stressed using games. He has finally got his due and the Finnish association nominated him and he was inducted to the IIHF Hall of Fame about 5 years ago along with Kent Nilsson and Petrov from Russia.

So I have been pushing this idea with Juuso since we met in 1985 and he has been promoting the concept of games to teach the game since 74 when he finished playing for Finland and started coaching. I started this site because HC and the Provincial associations just pumped out drills. I had the same battles teaching PE in high school when I would use the F word (FUN) and say it was important that the students had a lot of game situations and have FUN in class. I ended up going back to Jr. High so I could run my own program. (it is always nice to have former students come up to me and thank me for getting them the fittest they ever have been in their life and the fun they had.)

Sorry for this long winded diatribe. I am just trying to point out that it isn't easy to fight against Conventional Wisdom. In two hours I will be playing +55 with a bunch of former pro's, police, fireman, teachers and farmers who played a high level of hockey – all who get good pensions or the crops are in. We play for FUN. Pick new teams every day, play games to 5 and it is very competitive. I think that is what it is all about. I play with this group M-W and a younger group on Friday. My Sunday hockey is impossible to make as the team I am coaching plays every Sunday morning.

We have three groups going at this arena that are age and ability grouped. I was talking to Mario the oldest player and he was telling me about a line he played on in a tournament this summer. Mario – 89 at centre and his wingers were 90 and 86. Maybe the oldest line ever. He came to Canada to work from Italy and fell in love with the game and plays it whenever he gets a chance. Hockey is easy on the knees and a great lifetime sport.

Tonight we have a team play scrimmage vs another Calgary team in our league and next week with a different team. We keep score on the time clock. If you can get a team that is a similar level to yours to do these team play scrimmages it is a great way to review everything in a competitive atmosphere.

'The Game is the Greatest Coach'
'Enjoy the Game'