What if the Leafs experimented with 3 defencemen & 2 forwards? It’s worth a shot

[RedHot25]

https://www.thestar.com/sports/leafs...th-a-shot.html

For a guy who identifies the peak of his on-ice career as a stint as the sixth-worst player on his Montreal high school hockey team, Jack Han has put together an impressive enough NHL resumé.

Now age 31, he’s already worked for both of Canada’s heritage NHL franchises, most recently wrapping up a three-season stint working for the Maple Leafs as an assistant coach for the AHL Marlies.

Given his recent experience behind the curtain in Leafland, it’s been intriguing to get his take on what we’ll see from the blue and white whenever the NHL next convenes. Among Han’s most compelling predictions is the notion that head coach Sheldon Keefe might, at some point, deploy an on-ice configuration that plays against convention.

In a recent edition of his Hockey Tactics Newsletter, Han discussed the potential merits of icing two forwards in front of three defencemen, as opposed to the typical allotment of three and two. Han is of the belief that Keefe, with whom Han worked on the Marlies, may be inclined to try such a strategy in the coming season.

“I haven’t talked to Sheldon (since writing about the concept) but I would say the likelihood is pretty high. I think you’ll see some of that,” he said.

[868904]

Makes sense, the Leafs have so many great forwards and so few defensemen.

Can't wait to see Bogosian with 20 minutes a night.

[ForeverFlameFan]

That just screams recipe for disaster.

[Jiri Hrdina]

If they were going to try this, why the heck would they talk about it publicly?
Dude should have been better NDA'd.

[Elkyiv]

It always struck me as odd how the sports of hockey and basketball do not change their player formations like soccer.

If you have more players who are stronger offensively, why not use that to your advantage 5 on 5? Why only the PP?

Same with defence. Suppose you've collected 10 defensemen who are all above average, and half of them are shut down where the opposition is really going to struggle to break them down and score, why not roll 3 D for the whole game?

You'll see some soccer clubs employ anywhere from 3 to 4 to 5 defenders.

[GreenLantern2814]

You need 12 forwards because skating forward and forechecking at an NHL pace is exhausting.

You can roll with 6 D because they get to skate backwards and follow the play up ice at a more conservative pace.

[The Cobra]

Originally Posted by 868904

Makes sense, the Leafs have so many great forwards and so few defensemen.

Can't wait to see Bogosian with 20 minutes a night.

I'm guessing that they would still have 3 forwards and 2 d on the ice, but one forward would play a different style of positioning.,

[neo45]

Someone should tell the leafs their forwards are a lot better than their D men so maybe don’t try this?

[neo45]

Originally Posted by The Cobra

I'm guessing that they would still have 3 forwards and 2 d on the ice, but one forward would play a different style of positioning.,

Teams basically already do this by dropping the center back further and more often than they use to

[CroFlames]

It works sometimes, if you have the right players for it.

Dougie Hamilton, Brent Burns, Erik Karlsson, etc. These are guys who are kinda like midfielders in soccer that can roam up and down the ice and contribute on offence and defense.

Straight up icing 3 d and 2 forwards for the sake of it is a dumb idea since your two forwards won't be able to generate any offense on their own.

[Da_Chief]

Originally Posted by Elkyiv

It always struck me as odd how the sports of hockey and basketball do not change their player formations like soccer.

If you have more players who are stronger offensively, why not use that to your advantage 5 on 5? Why only the PP?

Same with defence. Suppose you've collected 10 defensemen who are all above average, and half of them are shut down where the opposition is really going to struggle to break them down and score, why not roll 3 D for the whole game?

You'll see some soccer clubs employ anywhere from 3 to 4 to 5 defenders.

Basketball has really done it the last few years. The role of big men is almost gone.

Most teams are playing 6'9" centers, heck Houston completely abandoned C and PF this last year and went with a small lineup that could shoot 3s. Raptors really rely on D, same as Miami. Houston is all isolation. Lakers is give it to Lebron.

You see it in football too with nickel and dime packages on D and different receiver sets on O.

Like you mentioned soccer has different formations.

Baseball has had some new strategy last few years with the shifts and the relievers starting games.

Hockey is really set in their old ways. You hear it from guys like Burke, even though hes not managing a team he has enough influence on some guys that are running teams. You see it from a guy like Treiliving, bringing in a guys like Brouwer, Tanev, Neal year after year.

Hockey really lacks innovators, look at the drop pass on the powerplay, you saw one guy do it and everyone copied him. Teams literally force that play. Teams define a players role and they just stick to it, how often to teams change line combos? Really lack creativity of any kind.

[Dan403]

Who cares what the Leafs do?

[Jacks]

If anyone should try this it should be the oilers with their lack of decent wingers. Probably wouldn't work, that would require at least 6 NHL calibre Dmen.

[Itse]

In soccer different formations are trivial to execute because every team already has extra players for every position in reserve for every game. In hockey you'd have to sign and dress at least 3-4 extra defenseman, which is a huge commitment with guaranteed contracts.

You'd have to basically commit to it for at least a season by signing more defenseman and less forwards. To really be successful you'd probably have to prepare for by drafting extra defense men, and less forwards. Then if it doesn't work, you'd have a completely effed roster.

Serviceable D-men are also in shorter supply than forwards.

That said, you'd think teams would sometimes do this while protecting a lead.

[Robbob]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

If they were going to try this, why the heck would they talk about it publicly?
Dude should have been better NDA'd.

I think it would have come out regardless considering they would probably work on it in practice.

[topfiverecords]

Brodie would make a great midfielder.

[keenan87]

Originally Posted by Elkyiv

It always struck me as odd how the sports of hockey and basketball do not change their player formations like soccer.

If you have more players who are stronger offensively, why not use that to your advantage 5 on 5? Why only the PP?

Same with defence. Suppose you've collected 10 defensemen who are all above average, and half of them are shut down where the opposition is really going to struggle to break them down and score, why not roll 3 D for the whole game?

You'll see some soccer clubs employ anywhere from 3 to 4 to 5 defenders.

Agreed. Or trying out other new things.

Down by 2 goals with 3 minutes remaining.. take out the goalie and play 6 forwards (basically the entire top 6)..worth a shot imo. Or 4 forwards and 1 dman if down by 3 with 10 mins to go

[PaperBagger'14]

Of course its worth a shot, I mean it can't go much worse for them because 1967

[FireGilbert]

Odd proposal. Most teams send the first winger to forecheck, the centre to support, and the other winger gets open in the slot. It would be tough to generate offence taking one of the wingers out of the equation. I guess if the plan is to play the same style but replace a winger with an offensive D man that could work but I don’t see the point unless your team somehow has an unbalanced roster with more NHL D than forwards.

[MrMike]

Psh we are way ahead of them. Remember when we played 4 or 5 defencemen at once, I think it was under Brent Sutter.