Quote by: hockeygod

I like the idea of "Question of the Day." I think it should be "Quandry of the Week" (or bi-montly)

Well this obviously needed thread of it own....

And I'll start with two questions.

1. Why / how did the Sweden U20 team win WJC? Was it tactical or individual superiority? What were the key elements?

2. How will the game develop? tactical evolution of the game? possesion vs. fast transition? etc.

It would be interesting to hear your views.

Here's some of my thoughts on question 1.

As you can see in the image below I made some notes from the WJC Final.
I counted attacks of the team Sweden and I divided attacks by different pace.
And then I tryed to determine how the attacks ended. (it's 5v5 and not the OT)

Attacks from the DZ

• fast = vertical pass and / vertical movement of the puck carrier
  
• semi-fast = lateral pass and the vertical movement or pass ( D to D to F)
  
• delay = D stops behind the net
  
• 3+ = 3 or more passes
  

Attacks from the NZ

• fast = vertical pass and / vertical movement of the puck carrier
  
• semi-fast = lateral pass and the vertical movement or pass ( D to D to F)
  
• delay = D stops behind the net
  
• 3+ = 3 or more passes
  
• return = puck is passed at least once towards the own net
  

So Sweden played mainly fast up in their DZ but they did some regroups at the NZ.
Many of their attacks resulted a long cycle at their OZ. (I normaly list also OZ turn overs).
Sweden had really good stick on stick pressure on defensive

What I saw the Swedish U20 Team do was 'have incredibly good habits' They played on the defensive side with 'body on body and stick on the puck' and when they got possession they prtotected the puck with their body and made the easy play, always having close support. The puck carrier used a lot of cut backs while protecting the puck.

In 2010 the Swedes sent an entire bus load of coaches to the International Coaching Symposium during the IIHF World Championships. The goal was to imporve the coaching in Sweden. The 1-3-1 that Tampa bores everyone with originated in Sweden in the 70's when a coach won with a not very good team. It became the Swedish way to play hockey. So they had all these great players like Forsberg but played a boring passive style. They have changed the way they play from within.

Some things to note are that they play cross ice until the players are 10 years old. This causes 600% more touches (I watch my grandsons full ice games and the stars from each team are always getting breakaways while the rest watch.)

The Swedes teach technique and put the technique into game situations and transition games. I posted a practice from Sweden that I took a video of while my college team warmed up for their game. It is a great example of how to practice.

I watched lots of U20 teams practice during the World juniors earlier in the month and the Swedes had the best flow and most touches.

Something to note that is that in the 2011 IIHF finals last year when the Swedes played Finland the Finnish team won the gold because the Swedes kept regrouping and stressed puck possession instead of attacking quickly. The Finns played more of a north-south game and won. Maybe Sweden learned from this and tried to attack an unorganized defense instead of hanging onto the puck until the other team was ready to defend. That 3 second principle is important because you are attacking 3-3, 2-2, 3-2 etc. instead of 5-5.

http://www.hockeycoachingabcs.com/mediagallery/media.php?s=20080726154046510 Anders teaches a skill then has efficient drills to practice it, moves to small area games and finishes with a transtion game. This is a good model for practices.