Kraken coach Dave Hakstol’s scheme and philosophies: the power play (part 9)

by Curtis Isacke | Apr 27, 2022 | Coaching Scheme

In part 8 of this series, I examined the penalty kill tactics of Kraken coach Dave Hakstol and his staff. In this part, I will continue to focus on Seattle’s special teams, with a look at the coaching philosophy and schemes at work when the Kraken are on the power play.

Hakstol’s philosophy: smart possession plays

A power play is an enormous, structural advantage, but only for a limited period of time. If an NHL team of average power play skill skated a full 60 minutes worth of 5-on-4 time, it would be expected to outscore the opponent almost 7-to-1, per MoneyPuck. Over a two-minute increment, however, the pressure to convert opportunity into production is intense. The natural instinct is to rush pucks to the net.

Yet Hakstol and his staff emphasize a patient, meticulous approach on the power play that prizes possession. The lesson presents as similar to that of the tortoise’s race against the hare: a humble, methodical approach will prevail in the end.

Why? The penalty killers know a power play is a race against the clock to convert. Their goal is to limit the shot quality by guarding the net front, and burning time whenever they can put possession in dispute or gain the puck outright.

An overanxious outside shot is often a win for the penalty killers because the defense has positioned itself to maximize recovery of missed or blocked shots and clear the puck 200 feet down the ice. It could be 30 seconds or longer before the power play is able to re-establish itself in the offensive zone following a successful clear.

The same is true for uncontrolled, dump-in zone entries. If the penalty killers get the opportunity to create a scrum, they can drain precious time; and worse still, the penalty killers can gain possession and clear.

The risk of losing one quarter or more of your power play reorganizing whenever the opponent touches the puck countenances taking a few extra seconds to be smart in possession plays, both at the blue line and in the OZ.

Let us take a look at how the team manages man advantage possession with its scheme and then return to the issue of the team’s patient, methodical approach when grading the team’s performance.

Power play NZ transition scheme: double late forwards

Personnel-wise, the Kraken will deploy four forwards and one defenseman on most power plays. After the puck has been cleared by opposing penalty killers, the Kraken reorganize at or behind their own net.

Typically the defenseman controls from the DZ and skates the puck up the middle of the ice with speed. Two forwards—typically the F1 and F2, who will assume positions along the boards in the OZ scheme described below—advance on each wing. This approach is designed to drive the penalty kill forecheck back at least past the center line.

While this advance is happening, F3 and F4 are looping behind the play and then turn to gain speed, sprinting forward from the Kraken DZ as the defenseman hits the center line. At or around the red line, the d-man needs to decide whether he can achieve a controlled entry himself. Ordinarily, with four set penalty killers staring straight at him, there is no such opportunity.

Thus, the D typically fires the puck back to the advancing F3 or F4, whichever is determined by the coaching staff to be the superior possession player. This player (we’ll say F3) receives the puck and attacks what should be a flat-footed defense core with as much speed as possible.

By this point F1 and F2 should have drifted near the OZ blue line at the boards, either ready to receive an entry pass or jump into OZ play or forecheck formation.

In this clip, Vince Dunn (No. 29) advances from behind the Kraken net up the middle. Jared McCann (No. 16) advances as F1 along the far-side boards at the top of the screen and Matty Beniers (No. 10) advances as F2 at the bottom of the screen. At the same time, Alex Wennberg (No. 21) and Jordan Eberle (No. 7), F3 and F4 respectively, circle behind to gather speed. Dunn fires the puck back to Eberle who attacks through the neutral zone at high speed. The Kraken achieve a controlled entry when Eberle taps the puck to McCann at the far boards. McCann cycles the puck around the boards to Beniers and Beniers sets up the OZ structure.

* * *

After the D fires the puck back, the two late forwards (F3 and F4) cross in their advance with the player in possession slightly ahead of the other advancing forward. If the possession forward is checked in the neutral zone and does not see a path to a controlled zone entry, that player has one last option before aborting the rush. He can make a drop pass to the other late forward advancing along an almost perpendicular line so that he can carry speed attacking the opposite half of the ice.

In this clip, we see two consecutive drop pass attempts, the first unsuccessful and the second somewhat more so. At first, Carson Soucy fires the puck back and Wennberg advances. Seeing his avenue toward a controlled entry at the near-side boards closed off, Wennberg executes a further drop pass to Eberle. Unfortunately, the pass is just a little too late, and penalty killers are on Eberle just as he receives the puck.

On the second advance, Soucy fires back for Eberle, who drops for Ryan Donato (No. 9). Donato has exchanged with Wennberg as one of the “late forwards” on this second rush. Donato takes the puck and achieves an uncontrolled entry at the near-side boards.

Power play OZ scheme: 1-3-1

Once established in the offensive zone, the Kraken deploy in a 1-3-1 formation. D is at the top of the formation at the center of the blue line. F1 and F2 are aligned by the circles at the near and far half boards. F3 is positioned directly in front of the net. And F4 is aligned in the slot directly between the other four players. From this alignment, the team runs various set plays designed to manipulate the defense and generate prime scoring opportunities.

The top defenseman is the point player and quarterback of the power play. He moves subtly along the blue line to keep himself aligned with an open lane for a shot to the goaltender (through tips and screens from F3 and F4) and with an open lane for passes to F1 and F2. If a shot is not available, the point man’s role is to quickly move the puck from one half-boards player to the other.

The half-boards forwards (F1 and F2) are the most important decision makers since they initiate most shot/pass options in the 1-3-1. While facilitation is important, these players also should have a capable-or-better one-timer slap shot. Typically, you want these players on their off wing, meaning a right shot on the left side and a left shot on the right side, to allow for effective weak-side one-timer opportunities. Alex Ovechkin built his reputation as one of the greatest scorers ever in large part off of his prodigious half-wall one-timer ability on the Capitals’ power play.

The slot-positioned bumper forward (F4) is positioned to hold the top of the penalty killing defense from pressuring puck possession high. The bumper player is constantly shifting his angle to keep his stick free to receive a pass for a quick one-timer or further pass from the slot.

The net-front forward (F3) is positioned to provide screens, tips, and recover rebounds under heavy pressure from the defense. This forward will also at times leak out to the near side corner to attempt a high-to-low play with the bumper player.

In theory, the 1-3-1 alignment makes switching the puck from the near-side boards to the far-side boards easy without realigning personnel. Whichever side the puck is on, there is a triangle formation to create pass/shot options, and a weak-side half-boards player ready to receive a cross-ice pass for a one-timer shot if that passing lane opens.

Set play 1: the point shot

The first set play utilized by the Kraken in the 1-3-1 is the point shot. The puck is distributed side-to-side in an effort to get the defense and goaltender off angle, and then the point defenseman takes a one-timer or snap shot from the point through screens and potential tips from F3 and F4.

In this clip, McCann takes and wins the OZ draw after Wennberg is kicked out of the face-off circle. The two therefore exchange positions in the 1-3-1, with Wennberg staying on the near-side half wall and McCann moving to the net position. Dunn gathers possession and fires a point shot looking for the top left corner of the net or a McCann deflection at the net mouth. McCann connects and almost directs the puck in. A rebound slides out into the slot and Beniers—wisely crashing from the weak-side half boards—cleans it up for his first ever goal.

As is the case at even strength, the Kraken frequently deploy and rely on these orchestrated point shots on the power play. Per Corey Sznajder, the Kraken have set up more point shots on the power play than any other team in the league.

Set play 2: the half boards shot

The second set play is a shot from the circles by a half boards forward. D cycles down to F2, who has the option of a quick shot or a pass across the seam to F1 for a weak-side one-timer.

In this clip, Dunn sends the puck from the point down the near-side boards to Victor Rask (No. 49). When Rask sees a seam for a cross-ice pass open, he delivers the puck on target to the other half-wall player, Daniel Sprong (No. 91), who rips a one-timer into the net.

Here is another example of a shot from the half boards that created a net-front rebound and an eventual power-play goal.

Set play 3: net front release/low play

The next set play involves the net-front player moving away from the top of the crease a few strides to the strong-side of the formation, hopefully drawing out a defender with him. He makes himself available for a pass, and after a receiving the puck immediately looks for a low-to-high angle to send the puck back up to the bumper or across to the weak-side half boards for a one-timer directly on goal.

In this clip, Wennberg releases from the net front low at about :07 to maintain possession after a rebound and then cycles the puck high. Having moved out, he holds that position to create a passing opportunity from the strong-side half-wall player McCann. When Wennberg then receives the puck back, the defense collapses on the bumper player, Eberle, leaving a passing lane to the crashing weak-side half-boards player, Beniers. Wennberg connects on the pass to Beniers and Beniers gets a quick one-timer on goal, but is robbed.

Set play 4: the bumper shot

Seattle’s final commonly used set play is a bumper shot play. The half boards player holds the puck and moves to pull the penalty killer coverage off the bumper player just far enough to allow for a pass into the slot and a quick shot from the bumper.

In the first half of this clip, Eberle and Wennberg exchange to execute a variation on this net-front release play described above. Eberle, the bumper player, releases low to receive a pass, and Wennberg, who had been playing net front rotates up into the slot. Eberle attempts this centering pass at :12, but the defense breaks up the play.

In the second half of this clip, the Kraken re-form the 1-3-1 after the Senators failed to clear the zone. At :22, Beniers is at the near-side half boards. Finding the passing lane open, Beniers feeds the puck to Eberle in the bumper position. Ultimately, the one-timer attempt from Eberle was thwarted.

* * *

Three-forward puck retrieval and centering pass

As described above, the Kraken’s NZ transition scheme on the man advantage prioritizes controlled OZ entries, but certain penalty kill schemes are specifically designed to frustrate controlled entries by stacking the penalty killers at the defensive blue line. Against such schemes, or against particularly skilled defensive penalty kill units, Seattle will more frequently dump the puck into the zone and recover possession in the corners before initiating any of the 1-3-1 set plays described above.

In these circumstances, the Kraken will commit three forwards deep to win the puck battle (typically the bumper player, the near-side half-boards player, and the net-front player).

In a typical 5-on-4 scenario, the opposing penalty killers are then faced with two options. First, commit only two skaters to retrieval, which gives the power play the numbers advantage. Or, second, commit three penalty killers, leaving only one skater in net-front coverage. The latter scenario should leave a power-play skater unchecked for an immediate centering pass off of a won puck battle. You can see an example of this in the clip above.

Scheme scorecard: Disciplined play but static sets, stagnant goal production

Through these schemes the Kraken have been successful managing the puck on the power play. Per Money Puck, the Kraken power play ranks in the top five in fewest takeaways conceded to the opposing penalty kill (40 total) and in the top 10 in fewest giveaways to opponents (26 total).

Likewise the Kraken’s NZ scheme has done well to avoid disruptions at the blue line. Per stats compiled by Corey Sznajder, the Kraken rank sixth in the league in controlled entry percentage on the power play, crossing the blue line with full possession 60.1 percent of the time. From that point, the Kraken rank 11th in the league in successfully establishing their OZ structure off an entry, doing so 39.3 percent of the time. In a situation where every second is important, these are solid numbers.

As an aside, keen observers or long-time readers here may note that this emphasis on controlled OZ entry is in stark contrast with the team’s even-strength approach. As it stands now, only approximately 50.1 percent of Seattle even-strength entries are controlled entries, per Corey Sznajder.

The Kraken’s judicious puck management has also served them well to avoid conceding a significant number of quality scoring chances to opposing penalty killers. Per Natural Stat Trick, the Kraken have generated 89 percent of the total high-danger scoring chances when on the 5-on-4 power play, which is second overall in the NHL. And when accounting for all shots taken by both teams during a power play, the Kraken rank fourth in the league in xG percentage at 90.75 percent. All of these underlying possession and defense numbers are very good.

Yet, similar to the refrain about this team at even strength, the inaugural Kraken just haven’t scored. The team is currently fourth worst (29th overall) in the league in power play conversion percentage, potting a goal in just 14.6 percent of opportunities. Per MoneyPuck, the team ranks in the bottom ten (23rd overall) in xGF per 60 minutes on the power play.

The Kraken do rank a somewhat more respectable 21st overall in expected goal differential per 60 minutes on the man advantage, with this number buoyed somewhat by the team’s responsible defensive play. But the team needs to score more power play goals.

The power play was all too often static and over-determined this season, with passes exchanged between immobile half-boards players and the point defensemen leading to a relatively low-percentage point shot. This need not be the case. The scheme is flexible and provides players with myriad options, but the team needs the talent, creativity, and practice time to decipher and drive the various set plays laid out above. The side wall facilitation, in particular, hasn’t been good enough. The Kraken didn’t move the puck side-to-side or high-to-low nearly well enough to regularly pull penalty killers or the opposing goaltender off their lines. Scoring often seemed to depend on a remarkable individual effort. This shouldn’t be the case.

Matty Beniers has shown some juice as a decision maker (and also as a shooter) on the half boards in the early going. Kraken fans should hope that this is a glimpse of a more dynamic power play to come. But, as it stands, Yanni Gourde has recapped the team’s performance on the power play well.

Next: post-season series recap

And, with that, we’ve made it through nine parts, addressing numerous core schemes, tactics, and philosophies deployed by Coach Hakstol and his staff in this inaugural Kraken season. I plan to return with a final post sometime soon after the season to recap the series, update some of the numbers we’ve looked at, and provide some overarching reflections. Thanks for following along.

Kraken coach Dave Hakstol’s scheme and philosophies: the penalty kill (part 8)

by Curtis Isacke | Apr 22, 2022 | Coaching Scheme

Welcome back to our series examining the systems and schemes that the Kraken have employed throughout this inaugural season. In part 7, I wrapped up my look at the team’s even-strength scheme by diving into a few of the Kraken’s offensive zone plays. In this part 8, I analyze how Dave Hakstol and his staff draw up the defense when killing penalties.

Hakstol’s philosophy: communicate and play connected

Tactics and approach take on exaggerated significance when a team is at a manpower disadvantage. In these scenarios, it is by definition not enough to win one-on-one. To the contrary, individual, improvised play can expose the defense by taking a player out of position. On the other hand, skilled opposing forwards will skate and pass through an over-determined, reactive penalty kill unit like traffic cones. The unit needs to play connected to cover for the absence of one or two teammates.

The specific coaching points on the penalty kill are myriad and include:

1. Protecting the slot from the highest-danger opportunities.
2. Prioritizing stick checks over physical play to thwart net-front passes and shots.
3. Conservative, straight-line pressure from the goal outwards, looking for a shot block when an opposing player has the puck in a shooting position high.
4. Aggression when the puck is loose along the boards or the opposing player doesn’t have the puck in a shooting position.

But, above all, the key is for the penalty kill units to communicate and develop chemistry. When one skater advances to create puck pressure, the others need to react in unison to maximize the chance of a takeaway and minimize the defensive risk.

On Feb. 14, the Kraken lost to the Toronto Maple Leafs 6-2. At the time, Darren Brown noted the dispirited effort as the nadir of the season. The Kraken appeared entirely outclassed, and nowhere was this more evident than on the penalty kill, which allowed the Maple Leafs to convert both of their two manpower advantages into goals.

At that point, the team had attempted multiple defensive-zone penalty kill schemes, including the triangle-and-one, the diamond formation, and others, but the schemes hadn’t been particularly effective at creating coordinated puck pressure or turnovers leading to breakaway opportunities going in the other direction. Of particular concern, the Kraken appeared static in their positioning.

Following the Toronto game, the team focused on improving on the penalty kill. Over the next six games, Seattle killed 16 of 17 penalties, while notching two shorthanded goals of their own for a remarkable +1 overall on the penalty kill. A couple days after a particularly encouraging five-for-five penalty kill performance against the Boston Bruins on Feb. 24, Dave Hakstol was asked about the improved play and alluded to scheme adjustments that I’ll dive into below. But he also emphasized the improvement of his penalty killers in playing connected hockey within the scheme. Communication and the ability to exchange positions when a player advances is key.

Hakstol 5-on-4 neutral zone scheme: Same side pressure/1-1-2 formation

The goal of the neutral zone forecheck when killing a penalty is to deny controlled entry into the offensive zone. If the penalty kill can force a contested possession scenario at the defensive blue line or force a dump in, the defense can bleed time or gain possession and quickly clear the zone. The penalty killers will, of course, look to capitalize on a giveaway. But getting too aggressive on the forecheck can expose the team to a rapid strike off a zone entry.

When the opponent has full possession at or near its own net, Seattle’s F1 (the top forward in the formation) will attempt token pressure that forces the power play to commit to a path of attack. F2 then supports from farther back looking to create a wall parallel to the boards with the F1, funneling the advance into half of the ice. D1 and D2 are positioned at the back near the blue line, prepared to deny entry if the rush has faltered or retreat into the defensive zone if a controlled attack has materialized.

In this clip, Riley Sheahan (No. 15) is F1 at the top of the formation, supported by Joonas Donskoi (No. 72) as F2. Sheahan provides pressure, forcing the Blackhawks to advance up the far boards and is supported by Donskoi. This thwarts the advance, and the Blackhawks look to break pressure by sending the puck across the ice. Sheahan and Donskoi reform and similarly pressure the near-side advance. This time the Blackhawks achieve a controlled entry and the penalty killers assume their defensive-zone positioning.

This approach is sometimes called same-side forward pressure. It also resembles the team’s conventional 1-2-2 neutral zone forecheck but with one of the middle-layer forwards removed. Here is another example. And one more that shows the risk when the high token pressure gets caught too deep.

The Kraken’s current approach seems to be a slight a variation from what the team utilized early in the year, which resembled more of a 2-2 (sometimes called a “retreating box”) neutral-zone forecheck. In this version, after providing token pressure, F1 would typically retreat into a formation at the same level as F2.

This forecheck is less aggressive and keeps F1 in position to rapidly enter the defensive zone. Here is another early-season example.

You will still see a neutral zone forecheck that resembles a 2-2 formation when the advance of the opposing power play has stagnated at center ice. But the team’s current default approach keeps F1 in a more aggressive position up ice.

5-on-4 DZ scheme: triangle and one

Once in the defensive zone, the Kraken deploy in a triangle-and-one formation. The two defensemen default to positions just above the outer edges of the crease (forming the base of the triangle) and a forward is positioned in the mid-to-high slot (completing the triangle). These defenders form the core of the defense and will look to thwart cross seam passes and scoring opportunities with active stick checks.

The second forward (the “and one” penalty killer) activates in a straight line from the goal toward the opposing player in possession of the puck. The player’s goal is to be in a position to block a shot and then either force the opposing player to concede possession or angle him to a lower-danger portion of the ice. The tactic of forcing an opposing player into a lower position for coordinated pressure is sometimes called the “Czech press.” The Kraken utilize this strategy when they can.

The key to a successful triangle and one is communication and coordination because the “one” player can change at any time based on puck position. For example, if the “one” forward’s puck pressure at the near-side point causes the opponent to pass across to the other point, it is often the case that the forward at the top of the triangle will be in the best position to create immediate pressure on the other point. Accordingly, he immediately activates into the “one” position and the previous pressure forward rotates down to fill the vacated spot in the triangle. (See diagram 3.)

Here Yanni Gourde (No. 37) starts as the “one” penalty killer but exchanges with Karson Kuhlman (No. 25) fluidly several times. This effective tandem work serves to create pressure without unnecessarily exposing the middle of the defense to prime scoring opportunities. Briefly at around :19 there is confusion between Gourde and Jamie Oleksiak (No. 24) about who would play where in the triangle. This leads somewhat directly to a moderate-danger chance and serves to underscore the importance of communication.

This clip further shows that exchanging is key not just for the forwards. Defensemen can activate out into the “one” position when there is controlled, threatening possession low along the boards. In this case a forward needs to crash down to protect the near side of the net and re-form the triangle. Here is another example showing defensemen stepping out into the “one” position to challenge low possession, leading to various exchanges within the triangle-and-one formation.

As Hakstol noted, this exchanging of positions was not nearly as fluid early in the season, causing Kraken pressure to come late.

This clip is from a Nov. 21 home tilt against the Capitals. You can see that the Kraken are deploying a similar triangle-and-one concept. But the penalty killers are just a beat slower in their reactions and exchanges, appearing uncertain at times whether the closer player will activate to become the “one” player. This leads to a more static triangle defense, often with one player chasing the play all over the ice.

* * *

In addition to the base triangle-and-one scheme, the Kraken will deploy other schemes in specific defensive-zone scenarios. For example, when the puck is at or below the circles, and the opponent has not established puck possession, the Kraken will aggressively press that side in an attempt to win a puck battle and force a turnover.

The Kraken send up to two penalty killers into the corner, while the others cover the slot low and high, forming a box in the lower half of the ice where the puck is in dispute. The risk comes if this pressure is broken. In the clip above, the Flames break the Kraken’s corner pressure and force them to transition back into their base triangle-and-one defense. Before Seattle can get established, however, Calgary gets a clean shooting lane to the net and scores. Here is another example of the Kraken transitioning in and out of this tactic in connection with their base triangle-and-one scheme.

This current corner checking tactic also seems to be a slight variation on the team’s early-season approach. In the fall, it was not uncommon for the Kraken to send three penalty killers into a corner scum, leaving only one skater to protect the middle. There are obvious risks to committing three of four skaters into the corner, and the Kraken have seemingly moved away from this practice.

Finally, earlier in the season, the Kraken also used a diamond formation penalty kill at times.

This clip is from Seattle’s Feb. 1 game in Boston. In theory, the Kraken likely formed this way to get width near the circles in an attempt to derail the Bruins’ lethal weak-side one-timers. In practice, the Kraken looked static and uncertain and gave up that precise type of goal anyway. This was just a couple weeks before the penalty kill corrections Hakstol described above.

5-on-3 NZ and DZ schemes

When at a two-man disadvantage, the Kraken deploy similar, though inherently more conservative, concepts. Going up against a five-on-three power play, the team is very likely to concede controlled zone entries and exterior shots on the power play. Accordingly, the goal is two-fold: (1) limit the highest danger shots and (2) hold the opponent to one-and-done opportunities by recovering saved or blocked shots and quickly clearing the zone.

In the neutral zone, the Kraken retreat in a 1-2 formation. Compared with the five-on-four penalty kill, the Kraken remove the advance forechecking forward and play far more cautiously. The goal is to force zone entry toward the boards. This formation also allows for an easy transition into the similar defensive zone structure.

In the defensive zone, the Kraken typically employ a triangle formation when the opponent is in full possession high. Compared with the standard penalty kill, the additional “one” forward is removed. The top forward will at times look to create token pressure high, but will not extend as far as the blue line because this would risk breaking down the defense entirely. The goal is to disrupt shots and passes when they do happen rather than preventing them entirely.

Penalty kill possession and offense

When the puck ends up on a Kraken penalty killer’s stick, the player faces a decision point: clear immediately, possess and kill time, or attempt an offensive advance. Penalty kill offense is all about opportunistic transition play. So the calculation the player needs to make is usually one of arithmetic.

If there is a turnover in the neutral zone or a shot block or turnover high in the defensive zone, and the potential for an odd-man transition breakaway presents itself, the Kraken have been inclined to push the issue over the last few months. Gourde and Colin Blackwell were dynamic in tandem on these attacks.

The triangle-and-one can be a particularly effective scheme at creating turnovers high in the defensive zone that lead to breakaways, often led by the “one” penalty killer. For more on how the Kraken look to create offense on the penalty kill, check out this truly outstanding stuff from Alison Lukan.

That said, if the arithmetic is not in favor of a breakaway or the penalty killers are at the end of a long shift, Kraken penalty killers will prioritize possession time to bleed the clock, provided there is no risk of a turnover.

In the likely scenario that an opponent quickly engages to contest possession, the Kraken (like all teams) immediately look to fire the puck all the way down the ice rather than risk a defensive-zone turnover.

Scheme scorecard: Net improvement over early-season play

Overall the Kraken rank in the bottom third of the league in both goals allowed per sixty minutes on the penalty kill (ranking 30th out of 32 teams) and expected goals allowed per sixty minutes on the penalty kill (ranking 23rd out of 32 teams), per MoneyPuck.

And the team’s goal prevention alone has not improved markedly, even after the team’s mid-February adjustments noted above. Through the Feb. 14 Maple Leafs game, the team had allowed 31 goals on 123 opponent power play opportunities, for a kill percentage of just under 75 percent. Since that time, the team has allowed 20 goals on 84 opponent power play opportunities, for a kill percentage of just over 76 percent.

That said, the team’s improved coordinated aggression on the kill has facilitated more successful counterstrike opportunities while on the penalty kill. Again using Feb. 14 as our dividing line, the team had scored just 2 shorthanded goals in the 123 opportunities through the loss to Toronto. Since that time, the team has potted 6 goals in 84 opportunities.

On a net basis, the team allowed .235 goals per power play through Jan. 14, and has only conceded .167 goals per power play since that time. With this improved production, the Kraken now rank 16th overall in the NHL (approximately average) in expected goal differential on the penalty kill, per MoneyPuck.

The defensive zone production needs to improve, especially for a team that wants to make defense its calling card. But, with more time to work on their communication and chemistry, the trend is positive moving into next year.

Next: decoding Hakstol’s power play scheme

In part 9, I’ll look at how Hakstol and his staff scheme the power play to create scoring opportunities.