Have you watched the Chicago Steel in the last 3 hockey seasons?
In my recent rabbit hole on mental models, I have again come across the idea of barbell thinking.
Black AND White Thinking instead of black or white. Playing both sides instead of picking one.
The gray area = Bad
Black and White, Barbell Hockey
In this case, the gray area is punting and chipping pucks.
These are the turnovers in hockey that some coaches don’t even think about.
Giving the puck away via punting out of your DZ to the opponent’s defensemen is a turnover.
So is getting stripped off the puck via a stick lift.
But at the risk of getting stripped, you are also trying to play through that pressure to improve the conditions of the puck. Quick poker analogy…
Playing through pressure is a ‘bet.’
Punting the puck gives possession away 100% of the time. Punting is a ‘fold'.
Extending the play and taking your chances on playing tape to tape is actually less risky than punting in terms of avoiding certain turnover.
Watching the Chicago Steel reminds me of this idea.
It is considered “higher risk hockey” by playing tape to tape or tape to space all the time. But building space, extending plays, and valuing possession by improving the conditions of the puck is the name of their game.
General Ideas and Observations of Steel Hockey ( That I’m observing without being on the inside)
improve conditions of the puck
playing “tape to tape” valued and attempted consistently
playing to 100% possession preferred, playing to a 50/50 puck 2nd best, punting or chipping (also a turnover) avoided at all costs
more positive puck touches to 100% possession
more negative touches(turnovers because they are trying to make a hockey play)
more black and white, less grey
make plays and extend plays to create more tape to tape and fewer dumps, throwaways
this idea also increases the risk of turnover (inviting pressure, multiple cutbacks to keep and extend possession)
But playing this way has proven to be successful in terms of player development and win-loss record
Higher risk, but proving to be very high reward as well.
I know what you’re saying…
You need the right personnel to execute this at the junior hockey level.
But if you are coaching youth hockey or any level of hockey other than the NHL you are in the player development realm. This will develop players.
You might give up a couple more goals per game in the first couple of months, but in the long run, your players will thank you for setting them on a path to succeed and develop beyond your 12u dump and chase philosophy and give the puck to the best player mentality you’re pushing on them.
Come on, we all know one of them.
If you’re interested in some visual examples of these ideas, check my