Coaches,
We all hear about statistics such as SOG, PPG, GF,GA.etc. These are the statistics that I want to stay away from in this post.

I want statistics that will help coaches understand critical area's and strength and weakness on the ice. We all see mistakes that players and teams make , but how many times are these mistakes made consistently and what is the percentage of a scoring chance because of these mistakes.

On the flip side , percentages for goals being scored and where they come from.

Example- 70-80 % of goals are scored from a rebound or second chance. ( if that stat is accurate ).
- 85-90 % of shots off the outside pad of a goalie (low ) will have a rebound out in the slot.

Can anyone answer the following statistics.
1- Turnovers at the blue off the rush ?(Offensive) . What is the percentage of scoring chances create from these turnovers?
2- Turnovers 5-8 ft from the defensive blue line on the breakout (failing to get the puck out) ? Scoring chances from these turnovers.?
3- Percentage of goals or scoring chances from uneven numbers at defensive blueline? (Poor back check)
4- Goals or scoring chances created from the quiet zone.?
5 - Point shots ?

If anyone has the answers it would be neat to start a list . Any coaches that have any statistics that or want to know statistics from certain area's of the ice. Learning where the high risk area's are , would be a first step in fixing them.

Thanks in advance
RookieCoach

Quote by: RookieCoach

Coaches,
We all hear about statistics such as SOG, PPG, GF,GA.etc. These are the statistics that I want to stay away from in this post.

I want statistics that will help coaches understand critical area's and strength and weakness on the ice. We all see mistakes that players and teams make , but how many times are these mistakes made consistently and what is the percentage of a scoring chance because of these mistakes.

On the flip side , percentages for goals being scored and where they come from.

Example- 70-80 % of goals are scored from a rebound or second chance. ( if that stat is accurate ).
- 85-90 % of shots off the outside pad of a goalie (low ) will have a rebound out in the slot.

Can anyone answer the following statistics.
1- Turnovers at the blue off the rush ?(Offensive) . What is the percentage of scoring chances create from these turnovers?
2- Turnovers 5-8 ft from the defensive blue line on the breakout (failing to get the puck out) ? Scoring chances from these turnovers.?
3- Percentage of goals or scoring chances from uneven numbers at defensive blueline? (Poor back check)
4- Goals or scoring chances created from the quiet zone.?
5 - Point shots ?

If anyone has the answers it would be neat to start a list . Any coaches that have any statistics that or want to know statistics from certain area's of the ice. Learning where the high risk area's are , would be a first step in fixing them.

Thanks in advance
RookieCoach

Hockey is a TRANSITION WORLD... we gotta adapt and play in it!

A turnover must be capitalized upon within 3 seconds! This is why the principle of TRANSITION is so important. The game is comprised of 100's of transitions per game. Look at Kai's video of Detroit with the Red, Yellow, Green highlights indicating the other team has possession / loose puck / your team has possession (a '0-1-2' situation).

The answers to these questions are found within Bjorn Kindling's study "Transition", using the 1990 World Championships (Men) and World Cup 1994. His presentation, in it's entirety, can be found (purchased from Hockey Canada) in the 1994 Advanced 2 Proceedings. Also try Googling it...

There might be additional data / studies available since, but I can't find them right now. Of course, you could record some current NHL or age-appropriate games yourself and code it yourself... if you have time!! (Not likely...!)

Understand that the level he used to study mirrored professional play, with the rules, skill sets and philosophies of the early 1990's. Things have changed... rules, player fitness, height, weight, overall skills, philosophies, etc! So take this info with a grain of salt. It is 20 years old!


A few quotes from Bjorn:

"In top international play, for instance the final game of the 1994 World Cup, puck possession changed from one team to the other 7.7 times per minute. There's just no time to get the whole team 100 percent into defending before there's a chance to attack again... you are constantly playing "transition hockey" "

"In 1990, I studied and analyzed the transition in 'modern' ice hockey. The study included games from the World Cup Pools A and B, the Swiss and German playoffs and the NHL. The result showed that 60 percent of all goals were scored on the transition, which means, that almost three times as many goals are scored on transition as on the power play (23 percent). But how many teams practice transition three times as much as they practice the power play?"

"If we focus on play with equal numbers of players on both sides, then 88 percent of all goals are scored on transitions... 94 percent of all first class scoring chances are created on transitions."

"...if you want to be good in the game of hockey you have to be great in the game of transition."

"FACTOR 1: TIME. Approximately 88 percent of all goals are scored within 10 seconds after the transition has taken place. But your advantage at the transition moment only lasts for about three seconds. Three seconds is the time a top level team needs to regroup from O to D.Your advantage depends on whether you can surprise your opponent by attacking while they are still in an offensive position. This means, you have a three second limit to make a decision which will determine the success of the whole attack."

"FACTOR 2 - FIRST PLAY. The first play has to go forwards or sideways..."

FACTOR 3 - SCREENING. [No longer allowed in today's rules!]

"FACTOR 4 - THE GOALTENDERS. Your GT is the player who can most often start an attack on the transition from your end."

[Do you include the goalie in passing skills / activities where they must handle and pass the puck / be part of the play? If not, you are way behind the times, my friend! Soccer has been including their goalies for years!]

"FACTOR 5 - POSITION OF PLAYERS. As the game is shifting back and forth from D to O there's no time for major changes of position to either start an attack or to get going with the defensive duties. Each player's O position should therefore be as identical as possible with his / her D ones."

I can't replicate his diagram of where his numbers are on a hockey rink... so try to follow me.

Looking 'down' at a rink. Left hand side is your zone (DZ) and right hand side is the O zone.

Bjorn draws a line in the zone to separate the prime scoring area, but makes it go from the both posts, to both end zone faceoff dots, straight out (90 degrees) to each wall and all the way up to the blueline. From the side, it looks like a "V" with wings.

Both corners of your DZ, connected behind the net (1 large area) are 35%.

The rest of your DZ (the "V" with wings) is 46%.

Blueline to blueline is 30%.

Opposite end zone (OZ) "V" with wings area is 29%.

Opposite end zone in both corners connected behind the net are 13%.

"Figure 1 shows the relationship between transitions and the percentage that led up to an O benefit such as a goal, a scoring chance, a shot on goal or a power play."


If you are still interested, I suggest you find / buy the article / proceedings as I can't type it all in; or do justice to the diagrams!

Hope this helps...

RookieCoach,

Here is another article on Transition that refers to Bjorn's study. The drawback: does the author definitively state 'how' to increase the amount of transitions in practice? He refers to drills containing transitions (which is a start) but for best effect, one should use games! (I taught this fellow how to skate as a U5... now he must be 30 something. Time flies! Nice kid!)

-----

Hockey is a game in 'a constant state of transition'

Posted in Alberta Edition, www.hockeynow.ca, March 02, 2009
By James Poole, director of hockey operations, National Sports Development


Although, it has been used to describe many different parts of the game, TRANSITION can be simply described as the instance the puck changes possession from one team to another.

It is a simple concept, but many good coaches often neglect the importance of being a good transition team. Well, here is a tip to successful coaching: to be good at the game of hockey, you've got to be great in the game of transition.

It is often said that stats don't lie, well think of it in these terms: the puck changes possession on average up to 450 times in a hockey game. Also of note, in an average shift of one minute, there will be eight turnovers that take place; furthermore, a turnover occurs, on average, every 4.7 seconds during a hockey game. These numbers were accumulated in a study done by Bjorn Kinding.

With this in mind, it could be stated that hockey is a constant state of transition. As a team, you are constantly transitioning from offense to defense, and defence to offence. There are many skills involved in transition hockey that coaches can teach their players, but even more important is teaching proper transition habits & instincts. At the highest levels of hockey, it takes a team three seconds to recover from a turnover and set up their defence no matter where the turnover occurs, whether it be offensive zone forecheck or defensive zone coverage.

So conversely, a team has three seconds to attack after a turnover before your advantage is negated. If you can teach your players the right habits in those three seconds, you're going to be a successful hockey team.

Your job as coach is to teach your players the importance of attacking immediately after turnovers. This habit is all based on attitude. Teach your players to immediately go forwards or sideways, never back, with the puck as the same study shows that 88 per cent of goals are scored within the 10 seconds after the transition has occurred.

Even tougher to teach, is the habit of your players transitioning from offense to defense. Every coach stresses to their players the importance of limiting turnovers, but do you also stress the importance following a turnover of limiting the time before you recover to your forecheck or defensive zone coverage? If you can cut the other teams advantage after turnovers to three seconds or lower, you're well on your way to being a good defensive hockey team. Many coaches work on defensive zone coverage, offensive zone fore-checks and wonder why these systems falter in games. The majority of your problems are because your players are slow at reacting in transition and the opposition is attacking before your team is defending.

When dealing with high-level teams from Peewee upwards, run multifaceted drills that simulate turnovers and teach your players to read & react accordingly. In hockey, good teams maximize their time with the puck and limit the opponents - great teams accomplish this plus also have a mental plan for transition. Best of Luck!

James Poole is currently director of hockey operations at National Sports Development and head hockey instructor. James also is in his second-year as head coach of the Calgary Midget AAA Buffaloes, leading them to the 2008 AMHL and Pacific Regional Championship, and most recently the 2008 Gold Medal Mac's Midget Championship.

(Poole is no longer with NSD but the head coach of the Okotoks Oilers of the AJHL)

Kai, I think this is a good place for this discussion.

Playin transiton games in practice has players going through all 4 game playing roles. In drills like a 3-2 you just play offense or defense and don't go from defense to offense or visa versa. Also doing games, drills and competitions that require quick decisions such as 2 touch, Baggo, 2" with the puck only get the playes used to quick decisions, close support and sudden role changes.

As far as systems to me it seems logical to pressure all of the time in order to cause the opponents to play out of their "comfort zone." If 22.7% of the time you get a scoring chance out of offensive zone turnovers then it also seems logical to me that your team should pressure in that zone and not fall back into the nzone and trap.

I have known Bjorn Kinding for a long time. He is now the Head Master at a sports school in Quebec. When I talk with him he says it takes 2" and not 3" for a team to transition from offense to defense and visa-versa. I was at the conference he gave that presentation.

The biggest difference that separates players is how quickly they transiton between the 4 game playing roles, 1-with the puck, 2-support the puck, 3-check the puck carrier, 4-cover away from the puck and the game situations 0-Loose Puck, 1-Offense, 2-Defense. Good players can skate, shoot, pass etc. just as well but they don't change roles as quickly or as seamlessly because they don't 'anticipate' the 'next play' but instead 'react' to the next play.

A lot of this antcipation is learned 'tacit learning', that we get through experiencing situations; such as playing many regular games and practicing game situations.

Quote by: hockeygod

Quote by: Kai K

This is interesting topic.

The question is; do you play fast forward to attack 1vs3, 2vs4, 3vs5 etc. where the risk of opponents turnover is high. Or do you pass backwards to regroup attack 5 vs 5?

But maybe I should continue with this subject in a Game intelligence thread.

Kai,

You could continue to talk about stats here; or about Transition itself in Game Intelligence. No worries either way!

How I understand your comment: do you attack even when outnumbered (high in the opponents zone) or do you pass backwards to regroup 5 v 5?

I believe the stats would say, "yes - attack sideways or forward immediately" - if your team recovers the puck after a turnover in this zone. Move the puck sideways or forwards right away as you have 3 seconds at the highest / most skilled levels. If you move the puck back (especially if you have already gained this much ice), you negate the critical "moment in transition" where the team who has lost the puck is in /no-man's land'. By moving the puck back, you give them time to adjust - and might have to wait for your team to get onside too!

Besides, in minor hockey, you would most likely have more time... maybe 4-5 seconds - to take advantage of the turnover (in the critical 'moment in transition') - even if your team is outnumbered on the rush / attack!

This is based on how I interpret the stats, discussions with Bjorn and my personal experience as a player and a coach.

Hope I have interpreted your question correctly? If not, please advise...

Yes Dean, you interpreted it correctly. (i'dont mean in OZ, but in DZ or NZ)

There has been great debate over this " fast to north or regroup when outnumbered" here in Finland for few years.

At first I was really sceptic about this puck possession style of the game, where teams if outnumbered would regroup. But I'm starting to see the idea behind it.
Firts option is to win space towards the opponents goal. which is passing or skating forward.
Second option is (if we cant play forward) to create space to win the space, by passin the puck sideways or backwards. So opition one (win space) if we can create even numbered attack (1-1, 2-2, ,3-3) or a odd man rush (2-1, 3-2, 4-3, 3-1). Option two (create space) If opponent outnumbers us .

So as I understand this philosophy, we are trying to minimize the opponent's chances to turnovers. Because if we attack unoranized when we are outnumbered the risk of giving up an odd man rush is high, (our player are out of position or distances between the players are too big.). But when we regroup and gather the five players we can control our distances and we are more likely to be in postion or inside the game if we loos the puck. " good attackin produces good defending".
And it works in defense too, good backchecking keeps the five players tight and allows fast short passes.

I hope english isn't too painfull to read and this makes somekind of sense to you, if doesn't make sense please ask, I'll try to explain my self better.
--------------------------------------------
What I teach is a 3 options.
1. Get the puck and make a play i.e. carry or pass.
2. If there is no play in front of you, you are outnumbered etc. then Regroup.
3. No play or regroup is possilbe then gain a zone. i.e. dump it out, get it in deep.
Tom
---------------------------------------------

Quote by: TomM

Kai, I think this is a good place for this discussion.

Playin transiton games in practice has players going through all 4 game playing roles. In drills like a 3-2 you just play offense or defense and don't go from defense to offense or visa versa. Also doing games, drills and competitions that require quick decisions such as 2 touch, Baggo, 2" with the puck only get the playes used to quick decisions, close support and sudden role changes.

Further support to Igor's results -
• While improving offensive game activities of individuals in typical 1 on 1 game situations, game exercises and preparation games should be applied under conditions similar to matches.

As far as systems to me it seems logical to pressure all of the time in order to cause the opponents to play out of their "comfort zone." If 29% of the time you get a scoring chance out of offensive zone turnovers then it also seems logical to me that your team should pressure in that zone and not fall back into the nzone and trap.

Especially against teams with equal or less skill - even skilled players take time to adapt to pressure when they don't face it on a regular basis! Pressure reduces time and space, so closing the gap quickly, getting bodies in the way, sticks on the ice to close passing lanes, taking approaches from the middle to steer / influence them to one side of the ice... all are effective in helping create turnovers!

I have known Bjorn Kinding for a long time. He is now the Head Master at a sports school in Quebec. When I talk with him he says it takes 2" and not 3" for a team to transition from offense to defense and visa-versa. I was at the conference he gave that presentation.

(14 Jun 2011 – The Fort McMurray Jr. A Oil Barons (AJHL) are pleased to announce that they have added Bjorn Kinding as an Associate Coach effective immediately.)

The biggest difference that separates players is how quickly they transiton between the 4 game playing roles, 1-with the puck, 2-support the puck, 3-check the puck carrier, 4-cover away from the puck and the game situations 0-Loose Puck, 1-Offense, 2-Defense. Good players can skate, shoot, pass etc. just as well but they don't change roles as quickly or as seamlessly because they don't 'anticipate' the 'next play' but instead 'react' to the next play.

100% agree! Quick decision-making (hockey sense or game sense) separates great from good players...

A lot of this antcipation is learned 'tacit learning', that we get through experiencing situations; such as playing many regular games and practicing game situations.

I agree. Implicit learning through experience (tacit learning) - the game teaches the game - is the best way to create long-term Game Intelligence!

Interesting topic. Thanks for all the posts. Here's another look at modern puck "possession," really puck retrieval, using the red wings and canucks as examples:

(Attached as PDF since it was detected as spam....it's not, I swear!)

I would argue that anticipation plays a huge role in puck retrieval and transition play too. The question I'm battling with is how to teach anticipation?

Thanks,
Dave

Okay I'll try to answer to this first....

Quote by: hockeygod

The puck carrier (and their teammates) need to understand the 'where and when' or 'time and space' or 'risk vs. reward' and be able to respond quickly (within the critical 2-3 seconds for pros) depending on the outcome (either offensively or defensively). Maybe this is what you mean by 'good attacking produces good defending?'

Yes... it's defensive readiness when attacking... I don't know if if this is good example but I'll try.
Here is a diagram of quite typical Finnish "delay" or controlled break out.

Here's how it continious to NZ. F1 (with the puck) should keep the puck to draw the opponents Ds closer to him and then pass to F2 or 3

This is how they enter the OZ wide, with good balance (3 lanes) now from here we are ready to use that 3 seconds if there is a loose puck from shot or from goalie's save and we are allso ready to react and give pressure if we have to defend. It's too bad i made these diagrams for another subject so it doesn't show Ds movement.
D1 plays to the high slot


It's getting late here, I hope it makes some sense.

Kai,

"...defensive readiness when attacking" - I understand perfectly now! I agree - you want to be ready to pounce on a loose puck or forecheck (back pressure / backcheck) from a position of strength, in a perfect world!

I love your diagrams. You are way ahead of me technology-wise! Can you please email me a blank one and tell me what program did you use to draw this stuff on it? I might be able to draw the diagram with the percentages on it - then I can post it.

Thanks!

Rookie Coach and Dean.

I share my material such as the transition games that you refer to. I would like to read the discussion about them.

How have you used them? What adjustments have you made? How did the players adapt to them???? Do they seem to make a difference in the way your team plays in regulation games?

Quote by: TomM

Rookie Coach and Dean.

I share my material such as the transition games that you refer to. I would like to read the discussion about them.

How have you used them? What adjustments have you made? How did the players adapt to them???? Do they seem to make a difference in the way your team plays in regulation games?

Tom / coaches,

Since I coach at skill academies (therefore no team!), I can't extrapolate the impact of the transition games in a team setting. But I have my suspicions... plus some experience back from when I was coaching a team!

I think that 'teaching the game through the game' philosophy using our Game Intelligence activities and Tom's ABC games are the most effective way to teach.

In my 8th year of teaching grade 7-12 in skill academies, the players really express their desire to play our Game Intelligence Training activities! Kids love to move; to compete; to play. They hate standing around, either listening to a coach talk, or do the same boring thing ad nauseum. I haven't used Tom's ABC games as much as I would like; I feel they are ideally suited if you have groups that are similar ages and skill levels - like on an age group team. In our academies, we have a very wide spread of skills and ages and levels - from immigrants first time on the ice; to learn to skate kids; to community house level; to ringette players; to girls hockey players; to division 1-9 community; to bantam AA and AAA / minor midget AAA / midget AA / midget AAA!

One of my Cochrane academies has a fairly homogenous group of midget players (depending on the semester, we average between 12 skaters / 2 goalies to 18 skaters, 3 goalies) and I have adapted some of Tom's ABC games there in the past with much success (Tom came out as a guest coach once last year). Primarily we use GIT and compete every day, keeping score throughout the semester.

My Cochrane kids have asked me to coach their midget AA team for the past several years after experiencing the 'different' methodology and the GIT! They don't 'like' their 'regular' style of coaching as much as they like my GIT approach. The teacher and principal are always commenting, "I don't know what you are doing in Sport Performance but the kids are always talking about it and looking forward to it..." to "The kids are getting to the rink 30 minutes earlier than they need to be with the hope that you will get there early too, so they can play more of your games" to "The kids are always chirping each other on the bus on the way back - celebrating who won the game today - and who 'sucked'... they sure have fun in your class!" I think that these frequent comments from the teachers and administration, along with the kids constantly asking me to coach their team, over a several year period, that there is more than a little something going on here... no?

This can also be said of all the players (and coaches) when I have given clinics. Using the 'normal, old-school boring drills way', everyone gets antsy, starts screwing around, not paying attention and very little opportunities for inspired, deliberate practice are provided. 'Coach Whisperer's' who provide a spark / ignition, need not apply... this is a 'De-training Mission!' For example, why do we ask kids to stand still and handle a puck for 2 - 5+ minutes - similar to a 'typical' hockey school / skills session? Their focus and attention span is about 10 seconds. Even the most dedicated ones can't do this. Try doing something like this yourself. Put a timer on and stick handle (or whatever) for 5 minutes. Did you do it? Did you keep perfect form? Did your mind wander? Were you bored to tears? How much of those 5 minutes do you think could be actually classified as 'deliberate practice'? Argh!

When I introduce our Game Intelligence Training and 'the game is the best teacher' (minimal talking on behalf of the coach - maximal competitive activity on behalf of the players), the players and coaches (when they participate as players) LOVE IT! It is such a positive change! I have done "old school' and GIT on players from U5 to U18. The feedback I ALWAYS receive is: "NO!" to old-school; "YES" to GIT!

Now when coaches participate at clinics as coaches, sometimes it takes time to educate them on the 'new ways' and it can be frustrating for them; particularly if they are not open minded and / or experienced. That is why I like to run my clinics with the coaches PARTICIPATING as players - FIRST in dryland and THEN on ice - AS I help educate them on the theory. This absolutely sells the methodology and the games to them! THEN I have them coach their age group kids using the same stuff they experienced (from a participant's eyes) and mentor them.

I think I am at about a 99% success rate / buy in from the coaches if I do these things first. If I do only theory (sit and take notes / classroom session) or start trying to teach them 'how to coach' this way, my positive feedback and success rate drops significantly. It might go as low as 50% or less. "I hear, I see, I do"...

Now some comments from when I was coaching...

When I took over the U of C Dinos (girls) at the end of the year, at John's prodding, we started training in the gymnasium 5 times per week for 1.5 hours and we used our Smart Transitional Games. We saw an immediate increase in competitiveness and intensity. We did a few of these on the ice the next two years (I was still a 'drill coach' at this point - starting to evolve, thanks to John!) and I really thought they prepared the players for a 'real game'. We continued to do our Smart Transitional Games in the gym three days per week right after morning practice, for 1 hour. I wish we had video footage... truly these were magical times as the players drastically improved their understanding of the game (as did I!)

As Tom will attest, we had a pretty poorly skilled team in the first two years I was there. We had inherited some absolutely excellent people, but their skill sets did not allow us to compete at the level required... so in my last (third) year, we made wholesale changes because I recruited like crazy. The rookies had better skill sets than the vets, so I think we only kept 1 skater and 1 or 2 goalies that third year. It was one of the toughest things to have to cut some people you went to battle with for the previous two years; but in the interest of improving the program, I had to 'take the harder right'. So we were really young (avg age -18) and lacked leadership depth (our returning vet, Beth, was excellent) but our performance really picked up. We closed the goal differential (for and against), competed much harder and started winning. Larry Hofmann, another fellow I coached against for those three years said we steadily improved our skill set and by the third year; he hated playing us because we always competed so damn hard... his girls weren't used to our intensity. Just shows you what these games will do (primarily off-ice in this example because I was still more of a Neanderthal coach, but if we would have used them more often on ice, I think we would have had even better results.)

If I had to do it all again, with an average-to-good group (ie: relatively open mindset) of college players, I would really embrace these activities / style of coaching full-time on and off-ice and I believe the players would seen the benefits too! At the university / pro categories, one would need to 'take the temperature in the room', identify the leadership core and make sure they understood that this approach will make them individually better; which in turn will make the team collectively better. It is up to the coach to make sure they approach it / sell it the 'right' way.

Now that I have had several years to experiment with our Game Intelligence Training and philosophy and Tom's ABC activities in the skill academy / coaching clinic / private coach mentoring settings, etc, I see how quickly and significantly they can make a positive difference.

Aside form the philosophy and activities, the aspect that makes the biggest difference is coaching experience. From this I mean that you, Tom, are personally highly experienced as an educator and specifically, with your ABC games; thus you can tailor individual activities from the book to suit your age, skill level, number of athletes, etc. on the fly. Just because someone reads your book, doesn't mean they will be able to run your activities as successfully as you... they won't have the same gut feel, eye for detail; nor the ability to know how to fine-tune them to make them work the best. This comes with experience. Same as with our Game Intelligence Training.

But I encourage coaches to try this philosophy ("let the game teach the game") and these activities; but have patience! Keep notes and challenge yourself and your other coaches. John and I are constantly learning every day, "How can we fine-tune our games?" Once we think we have one mastered, something surprises us and we tweak it. The day you stop learning is the day you need to get out of coaching and do something else!

Quote by: TomM

Rookie Coach and Dean.

I share my material such as the transition games that you refer to. I would like to read the discussion about them.

How have you used them? What adjustments have you made? How did the players adapt to them???? Do they seem to make a difference in the way your team plays in regulation games?

Tom, As I mentioned earlier in this post somewhere , I'm fairly new to your site. After purchasing your book (Hockey Coaching ABC's Book 2) it has made me think about game situation roles and game phases. Your book contains a different way of looking and reading the game than the typical hockey book OR course.

I mentioned too Dean that the DT transition drills on this site caught my attention the most. I guess that's is why I asked the question about Statistics - for critical area's on the ice. Referring to turnovers and the transition part of the game. Some of these stats that have been posted here by yourself ,Dean Kai , Dave really have to make a coach look at this part of the game.

Last practice that I ran for a local team , I used D100 2/3 s ice Attack-defend- rest games. Also Dean suggested to me about card240 of your book and card 241 when I was asking about backchecking games.
The flow was great , the players picked up on these games quickly. It was an introduction for them and myself running these games. I would stress the quickness and supporting player making himself available sooner next time , but for the first time all went well. I will definitely try them again.
I have used foe a few years now a game at the end of practice. Box game with jokers at the point. 2on2 but the rule is before they can attack they must pass to their joker who now joins in for a 3on2 , 3 on 3 etc, Players for some reason love this game.

Thanks again for your input on these statistics. I don't know where Dean finds all these articles but it's great reading and learning material.
One thing I will say at times it's overwhelming trying to implement a new type of practice from the old traditional way. I seem to be the type of coach that must understand it completely before hit the or try new things. I like for the players too think I know what I'm talking about.
Thanks

RookieCoach
---------------
RK, it takes a while to get used to "Looking at old things through New Eyes." I met Juhani in 85 when he was brought here to do a coaching symposium at the university. I was head coach of a college mens team at the time. I knew team play etc. but my practices were pretty standard drills centred and not very good. Juuso was only here for two weeks but in a 40 hour seminar you get a lot of info. I found that he was running hockey practices in much the same way I taught my PE classes. He also was a PE teacher and had players like the Koivu brothers and Kirprosov in his hockey class. He asked me to start writing the manual with him and I got more familiar with using games, tournament, modified rules etc. in pracitce. Erkka came here in the early 90's and much the same thing happened with transition games.

The thing that really forced me to use these ideas was I went to a new school and now had double PE classes. 48-60 students at once in a small gym for 13 years. It was become more efficient or die. The model of small teams, tournaments, modified rules made it easy to teach these large groups. There is a video of one of the classes in the files section. You can see how many kid's are in the small space.

Good luck with it! I enjoy reading the discussions you start because they stimulate me to look for workable solutions to the problems mentioned.

An aside is that I got a call from Finland this morning to inform me that one of the 93 born players I coached with the Red Bulls in Austria has just been named to the Finnish U19 team. They play a tournament in Switzerland and 2 of the D from the U19 team will join the U20 team at the World Championships here just after Christmass. So go Otso go.

Quote by: RookieCoach

Thanks again for your input on these statistics. I don't know where Dean finds all these articles but it's great reading and learning material.

One thing I will say at times it's overwhelming trying to implement a new type of practice from the old traditional way. I seem to be the type of coach that must understand it completely before hit the or try new things. I like for the players too think I know what I'm talking about.

Thanks

RookieCoach

RK,

Thanks for the email - I will be in touch in a day or two... gotta take the kids out for Hallowe'en tonight!

I read extensively and have been coaching since the early 1980's... so I have lots of binders, 'friends in high and low places... and all levels in between' so articles are not hard to find!

Nice to have some feedback that someone reads them - thank you!

I must admit, some articles that I post reflect my own biases (particularly on hazing, abuse, general stupidity because I think it is our moral obligation of coaches to put an end to it! Not only was my dad a victim of sexual abuse from a trusted boy scout leader, I was bullied and hazed as a player myself... Why? How did this make me 'part of the team?' I still get pissed thinking about it and I sure as HELL don't want this to happen to ANY kids under my watch as an educator / coach... or happen to my OWN kids if they choose to play. (Tom, I know you have some stories to tell - I will leave that up to you.)

I get depressed reading all of theses depressing stories; but I think they need to be made an issue until they go away... which I hope they will! "If we ignore our history, we are doomed to repeat our past." It is tougher to find 'good news' for the Inspirational forum, but I hope it somewhat balances all the doom and gloom.) Others I post because I think they might be of interest to the regular readers of the site. Maybe someone will find something to 'spark' their interest? I hope that whatever I post, it has a special meaning for someone out there... I like to try to inspire people; get them to think.

RK, I was overwhelmed by all these new ideas and methodologies at first, too. I would say I went through a period of time where it was a process... try one thing and then retreat back to my comfort zone... then try another; or tweak something... then I had an epiphany, then settled back into more of a process. As the YEARS go by (and with John always talking to me daily), I grow bolder and now I have firmly "crossed over" to the "Game is the best teacher" side and have no regrets. I have daily "Ah Ha" moments when I do our Game Intelligence activities. This site helps me by allowing me to express some of them; and other questions / comments by others help me / challenge me to answer them using my methodology and 'where I am right now as a coach' on the trajectory of my coaching evolution. Yes, I am cognizant of how I introduce it, but my firm belief in it being 'the right way' and my self-confidence based on much trial and error, allows me to do so. Most players / coaches, if you show them the individual benefits and how it can help their team, they will buy in. The key is to get them to participate in it. Whenever possible, as above, I start with dryland first...

This 'Coaching REVOLUTION' takes time... I had the good fortune of a daily mentor (John the Colombian) and people like Tom, and several other coaches at various levels (college, university, pro, international) who I could turn to in times of indecision or doubt. If you don't have that... your (R)evolution may take longer; or not happen at all! Everybody needs a mentor of some sort!

Keep experimenting RK. It's OK to make mistakes. That's how we advance ourselves and society.

This is why I think we need to do a GAME INTELLIGENCE / ABC's COACHING CLINIC here in Calgary (and invite people on this forum to attend)... any interest? JOhn and I just did one a month ago and are looking to do another in the spring. (I would say lets do it in Hawaii, or somewhere warmer, but in Calgary, we are well-connected: we can get facilities and access to players to 'experiment with' during the clinic.) But if some of you think we could do something in your local area, email me. If we could get a bunch of players and coaches who could pay a fee, this would help offset the costs of John, myself and Tom coming to your area...!

OK Kai, this week I will see if I can import this into Powerpoint and draw those lines I was trying to describe, then re-post... thanks!

Great discussion guys..

Tom,

What is the title of the booklet and video and do you know where I could get it? Looks like it would be a nice addition to a lot of the games already on the site.

Great diagrams on transition stats. Hearing the numbers are always one thing but seeing them can touch another chord for some, myself included.

To answer Tom's discussion question on forechecks, I think the 2-1-2 w/pinch on a wide rim would be a great forecheck to run given the numbers on turnovers and generating offense. I think running the most aggressive 4-check is the most exciting to play. I think what makes it most difficult to use is that lack of patience coaches have at times. The longer teams stick with it the less breakdowns they would see.

"Safe is Death" Tampa Bay 2004