Fingers crossed for Schroeder.

Maybe the reason we haven't seen much of him is that he is already penciled in as 3rd line centre or more likely they didn't want to rush him back if he wasn't fully recovered, hopefully he is no Booth.

Fingers crossed for Schroeder.

Maybe the reason we haven't seen much of him is that he is already penciled in as 3rd line centre or more likely they didn't want to rush him back if he wasn't fully recovered, hopefully he is no Booth.
- hillbillydeluxe

At this point its his spot to lose.

A nice little write up on Torts' system.

http://www.blueseatblogs.com/2012/02/21/draft/

A nice little write up on Torts' system.

http://www.blueseatblogs.com/2012/02/21/draft/
- Nucker101

informative.

A nice little write up on Torts' system.

http://www.blueseatblogs.com/2012/02/21/draft/
- Nucker101

This is an awesome site, thanks!

This is an awesome site, thanks!
- 1970vintage

Listening to players on this team talk about blocking shots like its something alien but teams are blocking more than ever according to that article.

was wondering what two teams didn't block the 1000 shots?

" Last season all but two teams blocked over 1,000 shots."

Here's another piece that goes in-depth about shot blocking and gives a little hope to those that don't like Torts' and his shot blocking system.

http://www.mc79hockey.com/?p=6292

For you lazy guys, here's his summary and conclusion:

Whoa. So there’s your difference between Vancouver and New York. The Canucks didn’t block very many shot attempts from forwards – New York specialized in it. San Jose, Montreal, Anaheim and the Rangers are kind of in their own world in terms of doing this

Isn’t that fascinating? Teams that blocked a higher percentage of shot attempts from forwards tended to see a lower percentage of the shot attempts against them being taken by forwards. I caution that this is one year’s data but it’s pretty easy to imagine a reason why that might be: you don’t just decide to block shot attempts by forwards, you do things in the defensive zone that put you into a position to block shot attempts by forwards. Maybe you’re pulling your players in close to your net, clogging the area in front of it.

Forwards, finding little space to make plays and shoot, might quite reasonably lapse into sending the puck up high towards the blue line, where there’s more space. This might lead to defenders shooting the puck more. So it’s possible, if shots from defencemen tend to a have a lower expected value in terms of goals, that there’s an unseen value in what the Rangers, Ducks and Habs were doing.

As these things tend to do, this leads to a bunch of questions. The first, and most important, is whether this phenomenon tends to repeat or whether I’m seeing numbers and inventing a relationship to explain the noise. If it is real though – and I’d have to check – it defines the debate about what the Canucks and Rangers did (and might do in reverse this year) a little more sharply. We can see definite differences in tactics and start to ask better questions and get better answers about whether those tactics make sense.

Seems a little promising for the Canucks.

My blog on Torts system and the effects of shot blocking:

http://tinyurl.com/kdhru49


Please leave any comments you'd like on the blog. Thanks for reading.