Teaching One-Handed Puck Control

Teaching one-handed puck control
By Fred Pletsch
Nov 5, 2001, 19:58

Fred Pletsch

Conventional hockey wisdom teaches young puck-chasers to always have two hands on your stick. But watch an NHL player on a breakaway or Mario Lemieux making another defenseman look like a neon orange pylon and you realize there are situations where having two hands on your stick can be a hindrance rather than a help.

“Going around a defenseman to the outside is a situation where having one hand on your stick is the desired solution to the problem,” explains Jim Webster, an astute hockey man with playing and coaching experience at the professional, European, college and junior levels.

It’s a very common hockey move where a forward comes down the ice towards a defenseman, maybe fakes a shot, and pulls the puck to his backhand. “You want to try and keep the puck as far away as possible from the defender and that’s much easier to do with one hand on your stick.” says Webster. “It increases the distance between the puck and the defenseman by another two feet. You also get your body between the puck and the defenseman in a puck protection situation.’

Pittsburgh puck-handling wizards Lemieux and Jaromir Jagr provide all-star examples of players proficient at manipulating the puck with one hand on their stick, according to Webster, who used few tricks of his own to finish third in the Central Hockey League scoring race one season while a member of the New York Islander organization. “They can put the biscuit quickly from way out on the forehand to way out on their backhand with one hand on their stick and, with their reach, the puck can move about 10 feet from one side to another. So if a youngster can put it all the way out with his stick totally extended, he is able to move the puck from one place five or six feet to the right or left very quickly and that makes it very hard for a defenseman to stop him.”

Webster details a learning progression system, the kind utilized in the Huron Hockey School curriculum, for teaching the skill.

“Start by spreading your players out. Give each one a puck, and make them assume the forehand shooting position with the puck on the forehand side of their stick,” details Webster. “Then, on command, have them pull the puck quickly and laterally all the way out and extend their arm and stick on the backhand side, full extension, while still being able to control the puck.” This procedure is repeated until players are comfortable with it. “Again, take it back to your forehand side and pull it all the way out onto your backhand with one hand on your stick.”

Once this element of skill is mastered it’s time to incorporate skating. “Next, have your players skate towards a series of pylons and, at each pylon, they’re asked to pull the puck way out to their backhand and see if they can get their body between the pylon and the puck.” At this stage, the pylon serves as the rear-guard the puck-carrier is trying to shield the puck from, adds Webster.

The final act in the series of progression is to have your player go up against a “dummy” defenseman. “A coach could stand there and all the kids could skate towards him and they would have to go around him to their backhand side, trying to keep the puck away from the coach with one hand on their stick,” concludes Webster.

If ice time permits, it’s sound coaching to introduce the three phases of this skill over three separate practices. Especially at an early age, it’s best not to overwhelm your players with too much to grasp at one particular practice. At the same time it’s a good idea to review phase one at the the second practice before proceeding to phase two.

You should keep two hands on your stick when you’re directly involved in the play, looking for a pass, or carrying the puck in traffic. But there are also definitely times when the youngster should be encouraged to learn how to manipulate, or at least control, the puck with one hand on his stick.

The puck protection technique outlined by Jim Webster is a very common move that’s easy to teach and one he believes we shouldn’t be ignoring at a young age.

Fred Pletsch is the Sports Director at radio stations CJSS/CFLG-FM in Cornwall, Ontario. He served as the play by play voice of the Cornwall Royals for nine seasons.

This first appeared in the 06/1994 issue of Hockey Player Magazine®
© Copyright 1991-2001 Hockey Player® and Hockey Player Magazine®

Making Proper Nutrition a Priority – Part 2

In our last article we talked about the importance of eating a good breakfast to start your day. Let’s now focus on the other meals of the day. It goes without saying that your body will perform much better if you use premium fuel to keep it going. There is a lot of information out there about proper nutrition and what we should or shouldn’t eat. We will review those concepts here.

Joffrey Lupul, Toronto Maple Leafs, Hockey OT Athlete

Lunch and dinner should consist of balanced and high quality nutrition. Fresh produce, whole grain carbs, healthy fats and lean protein/meat comprise the foundation of what hockey players should be eating. Thinking ahead and preparing “take along” meals helps to alleviate the temptation to eat food that could be detrimental to nutritional needs, thus negatively affecting performance.

Eating every 3-4 hours will prevent your body from burning muscle for energy. If you skip meals, the body will preferentially burn lean tissue, which will ultimately affect performance. Always plan to have healthy snacks to eat between meals if needed.

Eating soon after a workout can also help to rebuild muscle. It is ideal to eat within an hour after dry-land training or games to refuel the body. This keeps the body from breaking down more protein than it can rebuild. Again focus on lean protein and high quality carbs. You should eat 2-3x more carbs than protein in this meal. Information on quality carbs and lean proteins are plentiful in the literature.

So, make sure you listen to your mom! Eat a good breakfast, eat your veggies, and make sure you fuel your body with high octane energy!

Along with working with HockeyOT.com, Mike Beckman is a physical therapist and founder of Valley Rehabilitation Services.  He has been in practice since 1986.  He has worked with athletes at all levels and sports in both rehab and performance training.

Be Active in the Off-Season

Be active in the off-season
By Mitch Korn
Nov 5, 2001, 19:55

So it’s the “off-season,” you are out of school, and there is not a lot of ice time available. What should you be doing?

First, I’ll tell you what you should not be doing. You are a hockey player, and athlete, and you should not be like the other “normal” people. More and more of the youngsters I meet in the summer are overweight, spending more time in central air conditioned homes with Nintendo and computer games than ever before.

It used to be that when I would ask a group of 32 goalies at one of my schools how many played organized baseball, the response would be almost 100%. Now less than 50% play organized baseball.

Athleticism is the key

Athleticism is the No.1 key trait for a successful goaltender. Guys like Dominik Hasek, Mike Richter, Curtis Joseph and Kelly Hrudy are excellent athletes. You cannot be a great athlete sleeping until noon, spending all day on the couch, and not participating in athletic activities.

I remember being a kid (I’m only 36) and playing outside all day in the summers. We never even wanted lunch. Stick ball, baseball, street hockey, basketball, soccer and other made-up games which involved hand-eye coordination, aerobic training, body flexibility, and the competitive spirit.

I recently went back to my roots in New Jersey. The box on the wall where we all played stick ball was gone. The patch of grass that was always dirt because of a variety of baseball-type games was green and thick. The basketball court had 2 broken hoops. The parking lots where we played street hockey had a few very young kids messing around. I had no problems finding teens hanging out smoking and drinking after dark, What’s going on here?

Today, you have the opportunity to get the jump on your competition and opponents by preparing yourself right now for next season. Work on strength training if you are 16 years of age or older… spend a lot of time on lower body flexibility (the best goalies have it)… watch your diet, and most importantly be active.

Mitch Korn is the goaltender coach for the Buffalo Sabres of the NHL. In addition, he is an administrator at Miami University (Ohio) and directs the 8-week Summer Hockey School. Miami has Division I ice hockey in the CCHA.

This first appeared in the 06/1994 issue of Hockey Player Magazine®
© Copyright 1991-2001 Hockey Player® and Hockey Player Magazine®

How Equipment Changed the Game

How equipment changed the game
By Bill Ferguson
Nov 5, 2001, 19:54

To put this topic in proper perspective, we must start in a gray area, as the origin of hockey is claimed by both Canada and Russia. Regardless, it is safe to say that at some point in time, someone somewhere strapped a pair of skate blades to their boots, picked up a stick and used either a rubber or leather puck—or a can of frozen salmon cut into disks—to shoot into a goal. Voila! Hockey.

Bear in mind that with each minor improvement in equipment came at least some minor improvement in how players could utilize their skills.

It is also safe to say that in those early days the skates were made of steel—and so were the players, because there was no protective equipment. We know that most teams were clubs, formed for the game, which were usually centered around either companies, or towns.

About this time, someone said “Ow, that hurts!,” and stuck some newspapers in their pants. The first shin guards were born. And when this player zipped around a defenseman who whacked him on the shins and, instead of falling in pain, kept going and scored, the defenseman undoubtedly said, “I gotta get me some of them!”

Early protective gear allowed players to be a little more intense, a little more competitive, and not get killed. It’s been said that the early hockey players were mostly lumberjacks who played on their days off for fun—so those of you out there who are “wood choppers” come by it honestly.

The earliest true hockey skates were no more than regular boots with blades attached. Even 25 years ago, most skates lacked much in the way of protection and tended to be too flexible, causing many first time skaters to think “My ankles aren’t strong enough to skate.” Blade holders at this time were all steel, with a plastic tip on the back end as required by USA Hockey rules, to prevent serious injuries. Graf was one of the first manufacturers to go more toward the ski boot type of construction, and their early models gave great support, but were significantly heavier than most other brands. Modern manufacturers have learned to incorporate high tech materials like Kevlar and other composites to give excellent support and light weight. Lighter skates make for faster skaters.

One word: plastics

The first hockey gloves were made from a canvas type material, which was superseded by leather. For the next 100 years, all protective gear was made from a combination of these materials, yet it was heavy, especially when wet—and the more they protected, the more inflexible they tended to be.

It wasn’t until the late 40s or early 50s that plastic was incorporated into these designs. Plastics afforded a little more protection, and a little less weight, but could only be used in certain areas, primarily shin guards, cups and shoulder pads. Keep in mind, however, that as recently as 25 years ago, most protective gear—with the exception of shin guards—appeared flimsy by today’s standards.

In the early ‘80s, Cooper incorporated a bubble-foam type material into their shoulder pads which was very lightweight, and gave incredible protection, allowing a player to take a butt-end to the chest without injury.

In the early seventies, few players wore helmets. Those who did were considered “less manly” by their teammates. Eventually the NHL made helmets mandatory for all new players, but even before that, many old timers were decrying the helmet as a detriment to the game. Their logic? When no one wore a helmet, all players were a little more conscious of keeping their sticks down. With everyone wearing a helmet this wasn’t as necessary in order to survive the game, so newer players came in with high sticks as a matter of course.

This debate rages on even today, as visors and cages—some say—accentuate the problem of careless, or reckless, stickwork. Can it be true that there is sometimes a price to pay for progress?

You’ll also hear old timers whine about the curved stick, and how “it ruined the game.” But from Bobby Hull forward, the vast majority of players have embraced the curved stick as a significant improvement in the development of equipment. One can definitely fire the puck harder with a curved stick, and even squirt-age players can learn to offset the downside of the curved blade to utilize their backhand.

Another stick change that changed the game, albeit less so than the curved blade, is the aluminum or composite stick. The biggest difference with these new type of sticks is that by simply changing a blade, a player gets a “new” stick with exactly the same feel as his old one. Even pro model sticks, which are custom made to player specs, can vary in feel from one to another. The aluminum stick, created by baseball bat manufacturer Easton, changed all that. More recently, sticks made from composite materials have appeared on the hockey scene, and while no one has proven that these new sticks shoot any harder than the old wood ones, some players like them better—so say no more.

Changing pants, shirts

Even something as basic as hockey pants have changed over the years. The old style ones hung from the body and were almost baggy compared to today’s sleek contoured models. This trend toward a snug fit was started by Cooper with their original “Cooperall” pants. The pads were contained in a “girdle” that looked almost like a pair of women’s nylons covered by either a short or long nylon shell. With the short shell, they appeared no different than conventional pants, but with the long shell, no socks were worn. Some NHL teams, like the Flyers, even adopted this long pant as their uniform for a while. But goalies complained they tended to lose the puck in the “sea of black” in front of the net, so the NHL outlawed them. Another shortcoming was that the long pants would really slide on the ice, making it a little harder to control yourself and get back on your skates. While you rarely see these long-legged dinosaurs any more, the contoured style has stuck around.

What about “silly” stuff like lighter-weight jerseys? Think about it. All jerseys used to be made of a heavyweight cotton, which was hot and held water, or sweat—meaning they grew heavier as the game wore on. Most jerseys today are a lightweight mesh that breathes and allows air flow—meaning the player stays cooler—and don’t hold water, so they don’t gain weight as the game wears on. Sometimes you only need a little edge to look, and feel, a lot better.

Certainly the one player who has gained the most from technological breakthroughs is the goalie, and the single most important aspect of how these modern innovations have improved his game is in reducing the weight of his equipment. Whereas forwards and defensemen can share equally in the benefits of new, lightweight gear, the goalie stands alone, so to speak; there is no one skating with him. Give him faster reflexes and greater mobility through lighter, more flexible gear—while offering as good or even better protection—and you have a quicker, more agile goalie. It’s easy to see how this would make him look better. Add to this the more scientific, innovative training techniques and one can begin to understand why goals against averages have been plummeting in the NHL.

The most visible equipment innovation for goalies was obviously the mask. Prior to Jacques Plante’s invention, which was viewed at the time as a mere curiosity, goalies were expected to make the save with their face if needed. Imagine that! Come to think of it, the mask came along a little after the slapshot, so maybe it was a cause and effect thing. Originally no more than a piece of plastic, then a cage, today’s goalie mask is a custom made, form fitted fiberglass composite affair that is designed to deflect both the impact away from the goalies face, and the puck into the corner. There are no flat surfaces on these face savers, and the fanciest ones are a mask/helmet combination complete with custom paint jobs that can run well over $1000! No problem! Is your face worth it?

Time rolls on

There is one equipment innovation that you never see in an NHL game, yet which has done more for the sport of hockey than anything since Gretzky: inline skates. When Larry Bruyere, owner of the All Star Hockey and Sport chain of pro shops first showed us an early pair of Rollerblades, we all thought “how cute!” When he asked if we wanted to try them, we said “get out of here”.

Of course, now we all own several pairs, as do our kids. Even more important, players at all levels can now skate year round in exactly the same skating stride one uses on ice, with the only difference being in stopping. They allow the player to enjoy the outdoors while training (as opposed to a gym), and have even created another level of pro hockey player. Many players of less-than-NHL caliber who used to only skate the “Iron Leagues” in the winter months, now enjoy a “second season” with RHI. Some even consider it their Number One season!

Of course, the inline skate is an innovation widely recognized as having been born in Eastern Europe as an offseason training aid for speed skaters. Perhaps if Canada knew how hot inlines would eventually become, they would be fighting over credit for them, too!

Inline hockey has also introduced an entire generation of American kids to the game of hockey, which will benefit pro hockey in many ways for years to come. Thank goodness they don’t have to just stand around a field all summer, waiting for someone to hit a ball to them. They can now enjoy the non-stop action that is hockey.

Better ice, too

How about non-player stuff?

There are a couple of things that changed the game which players don’t wear, like fiberglass boards. Boards used to be boards. Then they covered them with plastic. That helped, but not as much as when they began to make them with fiberglass. Pucks bounce perhaps two-to-three times farther off fiberglass boards than they do off plywood. This opens up a whole new dimension, the vertical one, that just wasn’t as useful prior to the advent of fiberglass. It can make a defenseman look foolish, and has made even NHL goalies sometimes appear out to lunch—such as when a lively bad carom goes into the net instead of behind it.

Then there’s the ice itself, or more importantly, the equipment that prepares it.

Newer icemaking equipment is more energy efficient because the pipes are smaller than they used to be, yet closer to the ice surface. The game has benefited from technology that allows rinks to make ice much faster than they used to: the quicker the ice freezes, the less chance for flaws in the ice, and the easier it is for multi-use facilities to get a good surface down.

An even greater improvement came with the Zamboni, or rather the blades on it. An old time rink owner recently told me he changes his blade three or four times per year. He uses a stainless steel “disposable” blade which cannot be sharpened. State of the art facilities use steel blades which are changed once per week, and can be reused after sharpening. It’s more work but, because of an ever-sharp edge, gives a much smoother surface.

These are things that make the game faster, and allow the players to utilize more of their skills.

And as we all know, sometimes you just need that little edge to come out on top.

This first appeared in the 11/1995 issue of Hockey Player Magazine®
© Copyright 1991-2001 Hockey Player® and Hockey Player Magazine®

Adam Oates: Center of attention

Adam Oates: Center of attention
By Stan Fischler
Nov 5, 2001, 19:49

©BBS

“Class” comes in assorted shapes and forms in the NHL.

There are classy players on the ice whose form lifts them above the masses because of their sheer ability. And there are classy players off the ice who converse and cooperate as if to the manner born.

But there are precious few who fulfill both ends of the classiness scale. One of those few happens to be Boston Bruins center Adam Oates, who has demonstrated that his class transcends the hockey rink, the dressing room and the television studio.

“I miss him immensely, “ says Brett Hull. “I really do, and it’s not just on the ice. It’s away from the ice as well, especially when you’re as close as we were. It was fun to go to the rink together, fun to go on the road together and be roomies. We had a tremendous amount of fun together.”

The Bruins—Cam Neely and Ray Bourque in particular—are no less appreciative of Adam. For the past three years he has been the balance-wheel of the Bruins attack. Last season, despite a nagging hand injury, he totaled 12 goals, 41 assists for 53 points in 48 games. He has since been repaired, and Oates is looking to 1995/96 in the hopes of repeating what he did in 1992/93 when he reached a career high 142 points.

In the following interview, Oates offers his thoughts on a variety of topics, starting with his youth.

Tell us about your family, your brothers and sisters.

I have an older brother and two younger sisters. They all live in Toronto, where I grew up. My parents still live there. My older brother played hockey growing up. He was a good athlete. He got into education more than sports as he got older. He works for the government now. One sister is a teacher and the other is in school.

Did your brother have much influence on your playing hockey?

Very much so. He really influenced me a lot. You go to your older brother’s games and you play with his buddies, and obviously the talent level is better and (you) get to kind of keep rising in the ranks. I was always the guy who got to tag along, and in that sense I was really a rink rat growing up.

Do you remember your first pair of skates?

I remember that I was four-years-old when I got them. I am sure that my dad bought them for me. I don’t remember much more about them.

What kind of a kid were you?

I played lacrosse in Canada growing up. I played a lot of hockey in the winter (and) lacrosse in the summer, so I was busy all the time. I played every sport—basketball, football, whatever. I was very active. I actually love both (hockey and lacrosse), but hockey is obviously the way to go. I did an assortment of different things while growing up. I worked as a landscaper. I worked at a gas station. The usual odd jobs. A hockey player is really all I ever wanted to be. That’s what I still want to be.

What was your favorite team growing up?

The Chicago Blackhawks. Bobby Hull and Tony Esposito were my favorite players. I liked Toronto—I liked to watch Darryl Sittler—but Chicago was my favorite.

Talk about your first organized hockey game.

I don’t remember too much. I played for a team called Burt Robinson’s Flyers, which was a city team in Toronto. I was four years old. It was like seven in the morning and my dad tells me he dressed me at home and I’d sleep in the car on the way to the rink. I don’t know how he did it. I don’t know how any fathers do it. That’s all I remember.

What was the best team you played on growing up?

That’s a tough decision, because when you grow up in Toronto you play for so many different teams. A couple of years I played for a few teams at the same time. It’s not like it is in the States where you play for a high-school team and then a college team. A team I played for, the Toronto Kings, when I was still a pee-wee was a very good team. We went to a famous pee-wee tournament. We did very well there, but lost in the finals.

When did you think that you had the potential to play in the NHL?

Well, I never thought about it until we made the finals at RPI and then all of a sudden people started talking about it and I was surprised. I was really exited. Then we won the title and all of a sudden it turned into a whirlwind.

Were you scouted at all?

Yes, but I was the epitome of a late bloomer. I didn’t get drafted until Major A. I was really slow, and I played in a lot of leagues where no one ever got drafted. I played in Tier II, but by then I was too old. You get drafted when you are 18, and I was 19 playing in that league. I played with Steve Thomas, who plays for the Islanders. Both of us were in kind of the same boat and never got too much attention. Fortunately for me I got a chance to go back to school. I never had played high school hockey.

After college which teams approached you?

After we won the NCAAs about 15 teams—because I was a total free agent. So just about everyone was an option. I kind of wanted to sign with the Rangers, but it didn’t work out. I was really happy to go to Detroit. I felt at the time that I had a good chance of making the team and playing.

Why do you think that you weren’t drafted?

I grew late. I was slow. I never really got the exposure. I was never really an attractive player to scout. I wasn’t surprised that I wasn’t drafted. I kind of understood it. But I did score a lot of points on every level I played on. In the ten rounds in the draft teams always take a lot of gambles; I always thought that I would have been a good one.

How did you end up signing with Detroit?

It was pretty wild because it was kind of like an auction. It got down to five teams; both New York teams, Washington, Minnesota and Detroit. At the last second Detroit kind of sweetened the pot. It was pretty cool. It all came down to money. All the years of hard work, and then all of a sudden…this.

What do you remember about your first NHL game?

My first game was about the only good game I played in six months. Camp was very tough, though I learned a lot. The first game I played in Minnesota, I didn’t play that much. I played with John Ogrodnick and Ron Duguay. In the second period I scored the first goal of the season for the team. We were on the power play and I put in a rebound.

About five minutes later I sent John Ogrodnick in on a breakaway and he scored. So I had two points in my first three shifts. I didn’t play much the rest of the game, and we tied like 6-6. So for a debut it was a good game.

What problems did you encounter in your first year?

I didn’t really get along with coach Harry Neale. He was actually a nice guy—we got along personally. As a player, however, our team was struggling and he really didn’t like me too much as a player. I wasn’t playing that good, necessarily. I am a guy who needs ice time; most finesse guys do. I didn’t get to play too much, and the team was playing awful. That was the year that the Wings ended up with like 40 points.

There were many games where I sat on the bench and I didn’t even get to play at all. But I learned a lot that year. They sent me down in the middle of the season and I got my confidence back. Then they fired Harry Neale and replaced him with Brad Park. Parkie liked me and I got a lot of playing time after that. My last twenty games I had like 20 points, and I played really well.

How did you feel about getting sent down to Adirondack?

I saw it coming for a while. I hadn’t played in a couple of weeks, and the club was losing. We lost like three in a row to the worst teams in the NHL. A few nights later we were embarrassed by our rival, the Toronto Maple Leafs, by a 9-2 score. After practice the next day they sent me down. I think that it was for the best to be sent down because I didn’t really play (with Detroit) for three weeks. I lost my confidence and was out of shape. So it was good to go to the minors and play a lot of hockey.

Were you sorry that you were traded to St. Louis?

Our team was upset in the playoffs by Chicago, and they kind of had to make a move and I became the most likely candidate. I was devastated. I couldn’t believe it at all. It made no sense at all. I loved Detroit so much, but I think that it really helped me as a hockey player.

Brett Hull speaks very highly of you. How was your relationship with him, on and off the ice?

It was as good as it can get. You don’t get to spend that much time with one of your best friends when you get older. People get jobs and move away and that sort of thing. It was just great. Going out every night and having a blast. Unfortunately, Hullie was getting paid and I wasn’t. As much fun as it was, you have to think about your future. I wanted a piece of the pie and they didn’t want to give it to me.

We both helped each other’s careers out tremendously, and he’s the best goal scorer in the NHL. Obviously goal scorers are paid more money, that’s no question. However, (St. Louis) had made me a promise that they didn’t keep.

What was management like in St. Louis?

St. Louis was going through some hard financial times then. Nobody really knows. They’ve done some weird deals. The Scott Stevens deal was weird. They treated me very well over there until my last contract. Trouble seems to follow them.

Did you like playing at the Boston Garden?

I loved it. It was absolutely fantastic. It was my favorite place to stay. The atmosphere was so unique and traditional. I think that the Boston fans are very special and unique. It’s been a lot of fun to play here. I’m very lucky.

Did you want to come to Boston?

Yes, Boston or Los Angeles were the two cities that I wanted to go to. I always wanted to come here and play with Cam Neely, or go to Los Angeles and play with Wayne Gretzky.

How do you feel about fights in hockey?

I got into a couple in the minor leagues. I’m not a fighter, and I don’t pretend to be. I’m not big enough. I got beat up once by Daryl Stanley. In the NHL I fought Charlie Bouchina. He was a real big guy. It was more out of frustration than anything. I got killed.

What was your most memorable game?

I guess that would be in college. In the semi-finals I got five assists and we won in triple overtime. It was a wild game. We tied it up in regulation with 10 seconds to go. We beat Minnesota-Duluth.

Who would you say was your best coach?

Brian Sutter. I feel lucky because I think that Brian has turned into a really good coach. I think that its tough to play for a coach for six years and still have a great rapport. He’s a serious guy and I’m a serious guy. He’s ready every night, and he’s intense.

What accomplishment are you most proud of in hockey?

I was close to getting 100 assists in a season. I think that I’m also the only guy to play with two 50-goal-in-50-game scorers. Hullie had 50 in 48, and Cam got it in 40 or 42. I don’t think that any one else has done that.

This first appeared in the 11/1995 issue of Hockey Player Magazine®
© Copyright 1991-2001 Hockey Player® and Hockey Player Magazine®

Mike Keenan: Controversial but successful

Mike Keenan: Controversial but successful
By Stan Fischler
Nov 5, 2001, 19:45

©BBS

Controversial to a fault, but ever successful, Mike Keenan has emerged as the King of Hockey Coaches for 1993-94.

He guided his New York Rangers to the Presidents Trophy, and has melded one of the most powerful Big Apple hockey clubs since Manhattan’s 1940 Stanley Cup champions.

“I practice ‘tough love’ with my players,” says Iron Mike, who previously coached the Philadelphia Flyers and Chicago Blackhawks.

A stickler for discipline and meticulous about physical training, Keenan eschewed popular — but soft — Rangers heroes, such as James Patrick and Darren Turcotte, for more physical and diligent performers.

Although criticized by the New York media, Keenan stuck to his principles and the wins began to come. As a result, the Rangers emerged this spring as favorites to win the Stanley Cup.

In an interview with Hockey Player’s Stan Fischler, Keenan offered insights into himself and the art of coaching.

Who were the first individuals to mold you into the coach you are today?

I go back to my early days in Toronto. I had a minor hockey coach named Doug Williams, who had played hockey for a very good Canadian amateur team called the Whitby (Ontario) Dunlops. And my uncle Bob Keenan, like Doug, put me in leadership roles when I was still young. Then there was a fellow, Bob Blond, my junior coach at Oshawa, who instilled confidence just by the distribution of ice time. He was a thorough teacher and had a systematic approach. The three of them were very influential.

When did you actually decide that you wanted to make coaching your profession?

It started when I was teaching physical education, geography, and history at the Don Mills School in Toronto and then Forest Hill Collegiate, where I taught at the high school level for five years. I really started to enjoy coaching (although it wasn’t hockey, it was box lacrosse). I had been a good box lacrosse player at Don Mills and once went to the finals. At Forest Hill, I coached the hockey and swimming teams and then track-and-field and basketball. From there I moved to coaching Junior B hockey in Oshawa while I was still teaching.

What did you like about teaching and coaching at the time?

First of all, the contact with the children — or adolescents. I enjoyed the aspect of seeing them undertake (hockey) and enjoy the improvement. Eventually, I left teaching to coach and be general manager at Peterborough (Ontario). From there I went to coach Rochester (AHL) for three years and then back to the University of Toronto, where I taught and coached.

What’s different about you now than when you were a coach at Rochester?

First of all, I’m a lot more polished than I was then. I had the raw skills when I was younger but didn’t have the attributes that I’ve developed to this point. I’ve always had a strong intuitive sense for coaching and teaching — in particular the game of hockey — that is, as far as bench strategy is concerned. Over the years I developed my skills to a much greater degree than I had at the start. I’m more understanding, a lot more patient in terms of knowing the learning curve involved. It takes time and it’s a hard thing to find, because there’s so much pressure on you to win every night. Sometimes there’s a lot left to learn on those nights that you don’t win.

Some coaches believe that they must win every single game, including exhibitions. Do you feel that way?

No. The way I look at it is like this: It’s either you’re winning or you are losing — it’s not whether you won or lost. And if you’re winning, that means you’re teaching and there is a learning curve being developed here. It’s going to enhance your program and ultimately the performance level of the athletes. They’ll be better players as a result of teaching that takes place.

Sometimes you learn valuable lessons in losses. You have to be able accept the loss in light of the fact that you may have learned a great deal.

Who do you admire most in the NHL coaching fraternity?

Scotty Bowman. When I was in Rochester and he was in Buffalo (Rochester’s parent club), I had the opportunity to speak to him almost daily for three years. And just the hockey knowledge, and the aspect of preparing the team, and his bench work that are so critical at all levels — Scotty knew the league extremely well. He knew each player. He knew the schedule and how much each player was getting in ice time, what their roles were. He knew it for every team. That’s incredible knowledge that most coaches don’t pay attention to.

What else did he teach you?

The ability to win every night on a consistent basis. Well, maybe not every night, but more often then not. Also the ability to get the most out of personalities at the right time. Sometimes you didn’t have a superstar and you had to find somebody else that would deliver. In Montreal, Scotty had great teams, no question about that, but he also had to motivate the great players and that can be as difficult — if not more so — as motivating lesser ones. He had the opportunity of coaching more great players than probably anyone else. The other thing I learned from Scotty is the ability to change with the time. You don’t coach as long as he’s coached without changing with new styles. You have to be able to accept change in order to adapt to the different types of players. There are different dynamics to build on different ends. The economics of the game have changed as well, which means there are different requirements and needs of the athlete.

You had other employment options for 1993-94 besides the Rangers. So why did you choose New York?

Philadelphia was one, but I chose New York for several reasons. One was the money, but it wasn’t the only reason. I believed that the Rangers job provided me an opportunity to coach and have an impact on selling the game in a challenging marketplace. I feel strongly that the game has to be marketed properly in the U.S., and the greatest thing I could do in that direction would be to win a Stanley Cup for New York. By making the decision, I decided to give it a good shot.

You must be aware that the media and fan attention in New York is different than anything you experienced in Philadelphia or Chicago.

I really don’t think too much of it. It bothers Neil (Smith) and Mark (Messier) in terms of their feeling about exposure more than it affects me. They’re a lot more sensitive about it. The attention is part of being in New York, and a lot is going to be written.

A lot of the so-called experts picked the Rangers to win the Stanley Cup before the season even started. How do you feel about that?

I like to be the favorite. I enjoy the pressure. I’m at my best when there’s pressure. The more pressure, the better. I know the media has been comparing me with Pat Riley of the Knickerbockers. Well, I don’t care about the comparisons at all. Pat’s Pat and I’m Mike. Pat’s coaching basketball and I’m coaching hockey. I’ve got a great deal of respect for him and his coaching abilities and what he’s accomplished. Anytime I can learn from any coach, I’m going to be receptive.

What is your biggest concern about New York, in terms of the team?

Keeping the players focused with their minds on their responsibilities. And keeping the organization focused. You can’t let the media distract you. I have to do what’s right for the hockey club.

Do you want to replace Neil Smith as general manager of the Rangers?

I turned down jobs as general manager and coach (in Philadelphia) this spring. I did it for personal reasons. I wanted only to coach for the flexibility in terms of summer free-time. Personal time is a priority with me right now.

Will you promise New York hockey fans a Stanley Cup?

I can’t do that, but I can promise fans that we’ll compete and that we’ll extract every ounce of energy we can to run for the Cup. But you can never promise a Cup. There are too many factors beyond your control; injuries, the competition, etc.

Which player have you enjoyed coaching the most during your NHL career?

Chris Chelios. He loves the game of hockey. You can rely on him every night, and he really cares about his teammates. He’s a very sensitive individual and he’s a winner at all costs. Ronnie Hextall is right up there with Chelios. He’ll win at all costs as well.

You made a video last summer that depicted the parade-celebration scene when the Rangers finally do win the Stanley Cup. What was the purpose of doing that?

There are lots of ways of lifting the confidence and expectation level of the players. It’s fine to talk about goals, but they have to visualize the success they can enjoy if they are willing to see themselves in that setting. If you can’t see yourself in certain situations, you’re probably not going to achieve them.

Despite your success, a number of players have registered unhappiness with your tough style. Peter Zezel said he learned a lot from you, “But it wasn’t worth it.” How do you explain that?

At the time I was more forceful and demonstrative than I am now. But the lessons were the same: sacrifice and commitment are necessary to win. And it takes a certain amount of courage, as well, to accept that responsibility. I think Peter would appreciate them more now that he’s 27 than he did when he was 19, and just happy to be in the league.

It seems to me that you, too, have to have a certain courage to be tough, both as a coach and a parent.

That’s called “tough love.” You love ‘em. You try to do what’s right. You explain it to them. Sometimes you have to say “I love you, but this time it’s No.” But that doesn’t mean I don’t care for them. I care for them a lot more then they can ever imagine. But sometimes I just have to say “no.”

Some of your supporters claim you are misunderstood. Is that true?

Quite a bit, there’s no question about that. But I’ll take some of the responsibility for that because in my younger years I probably didn’t take the time to show them that side of me, and at the same time it was part of my upbringing. I was taught that you have to be stoic, strong and be there for everyone. As a result, I didn’t show them the emotional, sensitive side of Mike Keenan. The players in Chicago saw it, but not Philadelphia.

Who influenced you this way?

My mother to a certain extent. I was brought up in an Irish-Catholic home in Toronto and I went to a Catholic School. More often than not, I was put in leadership roles. I was an alter boy for eight years and went to church every Sunday for eight years. I was named captain for every team I’ve been associated with in athletics, so I’ve always been in a leadership position. I liked it and I liked the responsibility. I liked the sense of confidence that it gave me, but on the other hand I began to believe you had to be stoic and strong and not show any sensitivity, which was a contradiction in my personality because I am extremely sensitive and caring. I’m very proud of certain accomplishments I’ve made since I came from a poor background.

Why did you take that insensitivity with you to the NHL?

Mike Keenan came into the league as an unknown. I had never played in the big league and I had come from out of nowhere. I knew that the tenure for coaches in the NHL at that time was less then two years. It was a matter of survival for me.

What’s the best way to handle the press?

Be available to them. They’ll respect that and respond. I hope they take an approach that’s not totally counterproductive in term of team performance. I understand that they have papers to sell, but not at the expense of the player performances.

You came within three goals of winning the Stanley Cup in 1987, when you took Edmonton to seven games before losing 3-1 in the final. What went wrong?

They were too strong for us and we finally ran out of gas. We took a 1-0 lead on them in the first period of Game 7, but we just couldn’t hold them off. We kept it 2-1 until late in the third, but then Glenn Anderson blew a hard one past Ronnie Hextall, and that goal said it all. We were beat up physically and mentally after that. There was nothing left. But we can be proud of our accomplishment.

You took the Blackhawks to the finals in 1992. It looked like you had Pittsburgh in Game 1. Twice you had a three-goal lead, and then Jaromir Jagr tied it by going around three of your four Chicago players.

We were playing them well and I felt that we could have beaten them. I was very disappointed in the league because of that series. It took us four years to get to that position, and now that we’re there, look what happened: on Jagr’s goal, not one, but two penalties could have been called against Pittsburgh on the play. I mentioned that play to John Davidson recently and, without my saying anything, he told me, “Two penalties could have been called against them before Jagr scored.” Andy van Hellemond was the referee, and as far as I’m concerned he’s too veteran a referee to allow that to happen in the finals. There were penalties — holding of the stick was one — that could have been called against Mario Lemieux, but none were called. That tells me the league has an influence on who’s ultimately going to win. It’s a sad situation, but true, and it took the heart out of me and my team. We lost in four games, but it didn’t have to be that way. It could have been different, and imagine the millions of dollars that were lost by the league because it ended in four. The league disappointed me.

How did you prepare your team in the layoff period the first and second round this year?

We prepared by making a very big commitment. It was a tremendous amount of hard work. We had a good rest but we worked very, very hard in the middle of the week. It is important to raise the intensity level. You can work as hard as possible in preparation, but it takes the intensity of competition to raise the emotional level.

Rangers fans have had suffered their share of heartbreaks during their 53 years without a Stanley Cup. Since they haven’t won since 1940, do you think there’s really a “Rangers Curse?”

(Laughs) That was nine years before I was born. Besides, I’m not bothered by any curse.

Stan Fischler writes regularly for several major sporting publications.

This first appeared in the 06/94 issue of Hockey Player Magazine®
© Copyright 1991-2001 Hockey Player® and Hockey Player Magazine®

The Tretiak clinic

The Tretiak clinic
By James Baxter
Nov 5, 2001, 19:40

Tretiak On What It Takes to be a Goalie

A goalie must be (well) above average in all of these areas:

• Coordination of movement, fluidity

• Concentration

• Thinking, clarity and quickness of thought

• Agility, quick up and down

A goalie must also be thick-skinned, a good listener and learner, a hard worker, and something of a perfectionist. It also helps to have a higher-than-average tolerance for pain.

On the Offseason

Take a rest from hockey, but do not let your reactions slide.

“You should always be working with your gloves,” says Tretiak. “All year long, you should be catching balls and pucks in your glove. That (reflex) goes fast and is hard to get back.”

Bouncing a ball or puck on the deflector is also good practice.

On The Warm-Up

Tretiak could not have survived at the elite level of world hockey for 13 years without knowing a thing or two about conditioning. Like most members of the Soviet Red Army squad, Tretiak was never allowed to get out of shape.

Tretiak’s warm-up consists of a series of long stretches, followed by a series of quick bursts that simulate that motion in game situations. For instance, after a pre-practice stretch in the locker room and then several laps of the ice (so you feel warm), begin with the following drills.

• The standard stuff (gloves and mask off) including; neck rolls, fingers, hands (palms) forearms and shoulders, trunk rotations, hips (left/right/front/back), lower back (drop butt to the heels), hurler’s stretch and, kneeling, lean as far back as possible.

• In a butterfly stance, drop one knee to the ice (pad & toe forward, skate blade toward goal post) and hold for a count of eight. Repeat five times, on both sides. Then begin doing the motion quickly.

• Skating forward in a butterfly stance, drop one knee to the ice with the pad on its side and the toe pointing toward the boards. Hold until nearly at a standstill—the stretch is the focus. Alternating knees, do five times on each. Then, drop one knee, immediately get up, drop the other knee and immediately get back up. Speed now becomes the focus.

• Backward “cha-cha” (as in the dance). The truth is any dance will do, but what the 1-2-3, 1-2-3 motion of the cha-cha allows is the full weight of the player to be transferred from one foot to the other quickly and with some grace. It’s fast, fun and a good way to shake out after the warm-up.

On The Butterfly Stance

Balance is everything in this position. To remain balanced, Tretiak adopted a very compact style that allowed him to explode out to block any puck fired toward the net. Some points:

• Knees bent over 90°, so that the back is curved and butt is low.

• Head is always looking up ice.

• Deflector is angled off the top of the leg pad, slightly in front, not touching.

• Trapper is angled forward, elbow in tight.

• The stick is flat and resting comfortably on the ice with little weight on it. The stick must not be too far forward (creating a “ramp” over the goalie’s shoulder) or too close to his/her feet.

On Drills

A good butterfly goalie must have a sense of the whereabouts of a puck before it is shot. Tretiak insists that good goaltending is the result of using all of one’s senses. To that end, the Red Army developed drills that train goalies to fight through screens, move with the puck and concentrate on eliminating scoring chances before they happen. Here are a few:

Set up two or three shooters in the zone around the tops of the circles. Use one goalie to screen the other. There is little risk of injury (as both goalies are prepared to block shots) and there is a fierce element of competition between goalies and between shooters. The only rules are no screens in the crease, and no contact.

Line up two shooters three feet to the side of each goal post and level with the top of the crease. Starting slowly, the shooters pass back and forth across the crease, and the goaltender slides to keep pace. After three passes, the puck is live and the shooters try to score. To keep the shooters from getting too aggressive, make push-ups or quick skates the punishment when no shot is taken because of bad passing or the shot misses the net.

This drill trains goaltenders to move with the puck and seal the post. It has the added benefit of teaching forwards to be patient with the puck and to score from in close.

Set pucks at three or four points in the defensive zone. From the crease, the goalie must rush toward the puck, pokecheck (not stickhandle or pass) it across the blueline and skate return to the crease—all while keeping his/her eyes up ice (direct eye contact with the coach works well). This drill is to teach goalies to explode toward the puck, maintain their balance, effectively negate a potential scoring threat, and then return to the net without breaking concentration.

Variations on this drill include:

• Adding a shot from the point as the goalie returns to the net.

• Starting a forward from outside the blueline in a race to the puck. If the goalie fails to get the puck first, he/she must get back to the net and seal off the post while always facing the shooter. The shooter gets one shot.

This first appeared in the 11/1995 issue of Hockey Player Magazine®
© Copyright 1991-2001 Hockey Player® and Hockey Player Magazine®

Don Cherry; Tart, not sweet

Don Cherry; Tart, not sweet
By Bill Ferguson
Nov 5, 2001, 19:38

©BBS

Don Cherry has been a part of hockey since long before any of us touched a puck. He is the embodiment of old-time hockey. No fancy footwork here; just grind it out and stuff it in. In talking to the man during the course of this interview, he came across as genuine, opinionated, unguarded and courteous, with an unrestrained passion for the game. His high profile and love of hockey have made him “the most recognized man in Canada” according to Sports Illustrated. His unguarded comments, meanwhile, and the unrestrained nature of his feelings for the game, have led to his living life on the bubble.

While Cherry’s act is never easy to follow, his wake is always full. It’s a trail littered with the bodies of countless European players, and with numerous hockey road signs that lie trampled like strings of old tape on a locker room floor. Things like helmets and visors, and players who are allowed to freewheel through an entire team without being touched, aren’t given much room in Cherry’s heart. You may not want to follow Don Cherry, but you won’t have any trouble seeing where he’s been.

And he’s been everywhere. 16 years in the minors – back in the days of a six-team NHL – when the competition at that level was more intense than anything we might ever see again in this age of expansion and watered-down talent pools. Then, after coaching the NHL’s Boston Bruins and Colorado Rockies, he moved into full-time TV work in 1980 with a regular feature on Hockey Night in Canada called “Coach’s Corner.” His popularity zoomed. Cherry can no longer attend any banquet, or walk down any street in Canada without drawing a crowd. His ongoing series of rough-and-tumble videos, “Rock ‘Em, Sock ‘Em Hockey,” is in it’s fifth volume. These video records of the good, the bad, and the ugly in the NHL are always well received by Cherry’s many fans. Yet in spite of his popularity, Don “Grapes” Cherry believes that one day it could all be gone.

You worry that all the success you’ve achieved could vanish overnight. Why?

I’ve got an awful lot of enemies; and not only in the NHL. The company I work for, Canadian Broadcasting Company, is not too crazy over the things I do either; and when you constantly rub people the wrong way, eventually you’re going to rub enough of them the wrong way and they’re going to say ‘see you later’.

Do you think you’re close to that point now?

It could be this year, it could be (anytime). My wife tells me that if I don’t hear from the (CBC) by Thursday, then I’m on for Saturday. That’s the way it works. That’s the way I want it. When they say that’s it, you can’t go on any more, I’ll say, ‘Fine, thanks very much. It was a nice ride.’ It’s not an act, it’s exactly the way I feel.

Meanwhile, enemies and all, you’re on top of the hockey world. How do you explain that?

The secret of my success is I don’t pull any punches and I tell the truth.

People say that you have a “provincial” attitude towards hockey, meaning if you’re not from a province of Canada, then you don’t belong in the NHL. Don’t you think that if you’re good enough, no matter where you’re from, then you belong in the league?

Well, you’re absolutely right – if they’re good enough to be in the game. But what’s happened is we’ve got Europeans coming over here who are not good enough. First of all, it used to be a badge of honor that you played on the power play. You earned your way onto the power play, whereas (the Europeans) have to earn their way off the power play.

For instance, there was a guy named Kaminsky down in Moncton making $500,000 playing in the American League, and Keith Tkachuk up in Winnipeg was earning $400,000. So what I’m saying is yes, if they’re good enough to be here. But there’s an awful lot of European players stealing their money. As we speak right now, in the top 15 scorers there’s one European, Fedorov. How could you knock Fedorov, the way he’s producing? As long as they produce, they should be out there.

So you’re saying that the Europeans get measured with a different yardstick than everybody else?

You got it. The Canadian kids are going in 18-19 years old, and if they don’t produce right away, they’re gone. But if the Europeans don’t produce, “they’re adjusting.” It’s funny, but they come over here 30-years-old and they make it, but the American and Canadian kids are “too old” at 27. It’s not just the Canadians. Some of my favorite players are American; Keith Tkachuk, I call him K-Chuck, Kevin Stevens, I could go on down the line. My wife’s an American, my two kids are American.

The Russians coming into the NHL seem to be fundamentally stronger at skating, passing and shooting than a lot of North American kids. Are the Russians getting better training than we are?

No. In fact, they’re on their way down right now as you can see over in the Olympics.

But aren’t all their best players in the NHL?

Yeah, no kidding. But we don’t bring them over here to hit do we?

The one thing we bring them over here for is to score a lot of points, right? You know how many of them are in the top 15 in scoring? One. Fedorov. You know how many Russians were in the top scoring in (last year’s) playoffs? None. There was only one European; Jagr. So this nonsense that some day they’re gonna take over the NHL? It’s a myth.

If you had one thing to say to the American public, what would it be?

If you’re not watching hockey, you’re missing out on the most exciting sport in the world. It has the athletic power of baseball and football, but it’s played on 1/8” stainless steel blades. It’s got the roughness of football, the finesse of baseball and it’s the same as basketball; you put it in the hoop, you put it in the net. It’s got all the ingredients of all the sports combined, so anyone who goes to a hockey game is usually a fan for life.

How do you view the popularity of hockey south of the border?

Hockey is growing in the States, with Wayne Gretzky out in California. The Mighty Ducks and the Sharks usually play to 98% sellouts. They’ve got a few weak sisters here in the East, but we’ve got some big, heavy hitters in hockey now, with Blockbuster Huizenga down there in Tampa. Nobody expected them to get 23,000 a game.

What about the television situation?

I still maintain that (hockey) will never be on a major network regularly, once a week. I really believe that. They’ll show the All-Star game and a few play-off games, but it is not strong enough for the major networks once a week. It’s just not popular enough over all the United States to be on regularly. Too many people would rather watch re-runs of “The Rifleman.’”

Some blame hockey’s lesser popularity on fighting. How do we put fighting in perspective for a little kid?

The thing is that it’s the only sport in the world that goes 25 mph. It’s played on 1/8” stainless steel, and there’s boards around; it’s not like football, basketball and baseball, where you can run out of bounds. To me the fighting, you’re right, it’s tough (for) people who really don’t know hockey, but what happens is this: If I check you from behind and you can’t drop your gloves and take care of me, then you’re going to wait till the first opportunity you get…and give me your stick.

So you think the fighting itself is harmless?

Where most people get hurt in hockey is checking from behind, which is the most dangerous of all, and (from using) the sticks. Very few people have been seriously hurt in a fight, other than a few broken noses and things like that.

I have to laugh when I hear Americans who can’t believe the violence in hockey, when every Sunday the idea is to kill the quarterback. I think it was 12 quarterbacks in six weeks (who) bit the dust. I have to laugh, too, when…I see a pitcher throwing a baseball at a guy’s head at 100 mph. By the way, there’s more bench clearing brawls in one week of baseball than there’s been in the last eight years of hockey.

When (Americans) talk about violence, they should take a look at their own sports. When they say the fighting isn’t hockey, I don’t know…maybe it’s not their version of hockey.

Speaking of fighting, Probert’s getting up there in years. Who’s the next king of the hill?

“Oh, he’s not up there that much. There’s some young guys coming along… Sandy McCarthy, a young guy (in Calgary), Darren McCarty for Detroit, they’re good. Tie Domi…you can go down the line. But when Probert feels like going, he’s still the champ. And he’ll be the champ for the next 3-4 years…as long as he wants to be.”

Did you see Probert and McSorley fight?

Yeah, that was a beauty. I put it on Coach’s Corner, the whole minute and 42 seconds. It’s an automatic for Rock ‘Em, Sock ‘Em 5.

It seems they’re giving out lengthy suspensions for lesser infractions than they used to. Were the games rougher in the old days or are we just becoming wimps?

No, the games were rougher then, but when the helmet and visor came in, the sticks came into play. The only way you’re ever going to keep the sticks down (is) to suspend guys. You can fine them, and…I know (the fine) will hurt them, but you’re gonna have to suspend guys when they use the stick like Granato did (against Chicago’s Neil Wilkinson). He’s sorry about it, but you just can’t do that stuff. He knows he shouldn’t have done it, and that’s why he didn’t say anything about the suspension, because he knew he deserved it.

How about Rick Zombo slashing the linesman who got in his way?

That was a tough one. But if they let that one go then what’s next for the linesmen if they get in the way?

But with so much at stake you could see why Zombo was upset at the linesman.

That was Kevin Collins, and Kevin was afraid there might be a fight going on and he (wouldn’t have been in position) to break it up.

Are there any other of the “new” rules you like?

I like the penalty for hitting from behind, but it’s the old story again…the players are taking advantage of it. They show their numbers, as the players say, so they will get hit head first and get a five minute major sometimes. We never used to do that before we had helmets. Nobody would ever think of crashing somebody head first into the boards.

Everyone loves to hate “Grapes”

So there you have it, the “Grapes” everybody loves to hate. And is it any wonder? He closed out this Hockey Player interview by noting that some figure skaters had taken the ice. “I asked them to come over. I want to see the next draft picks of the Winnipeg Jets!”

But even if you do hate Don Cherry, you have to respect him for his forthrightness. He may never be politically correct, but few people in hockey are as colorful as “Grapes,” and few have done as much to popularize the game. Or at least keep it in the headlines.

If you don’t hate Don Cherry, you’re probably anxious for the next Rock ‘Em, Sock ‘Em video to hit the market. And you’re probably not European.

For more information on Don Cherry’s videos contact Quality Records & Video, at 1-416-291-5590

Bill Ferguson is a fan and player of hockey whose life-long dream is to be the subject of a Rock ‘Em Sock ‘Em video.

This first appeared in the 06/1994 issue of Hockey Player Magazine®
© Copyright 1991-2001 Hockey Player® and Hockey Player Magazine®

Goaltending the Tretiak Way

Goaltending the Tretiak way
By James Baxter
Nov 5, 2001, 19:34

©BBS

The following article is based on a two videotape series from the Hockey Hall of Fame’s Center for Hockey Excellence. The tapes include an extensive interview with Vladislav Tretiak—the only Soviet player ever elected to the Hall—and excerpts from a Tretiak-run goalie clinic.

Vladislav Tretiak seems to believe that goalies are born, good goalies are coached, and the great goalies make themselves.

It is a strange philosophy for a man who makes his living coaching Ed Belfour of the Chicago Blackhawks, arguably the NHL’s top goaltender for the past five seasons. But even one of the greatest butterfly goaltenders of the last half century admits there is only so much he can do to make Belfour any better.

“A goaltender is a special player and he must be his own coach,” says the former star of the Soviet Union’s Red Army team. “Then he will be a good player.

“I would think a good time for a goalie to start is at about six years old,” Tretiak says, adding that a child can never be pushed to play goal. “He must love hockey…love it. He must listen to his coach and be able to learn. And he must be the kind of player who likes to work hard.”

Tretiak always worked hard, and, having been blessed with tremendous athletic ability and a terrier’s tenacity, he admits one of his toughest battles was against his own fears.

“Only fools are not afraid (of the puck), and I am not crazy,” says Tretiak with a deadly serious stare. “Especially in practice, as you are likely to not be paying as close attention. During a game, you can stop a puck with your bare face. If you are focused (in a game), you just don’t stop to think you could get injured. You forget everything in a game. You just stop the puck. In practice, you might let down.”

Two masters

Tretiak’s tale is one of a diligent young man; two driven task masters; World Championships; Olympic Gold Medals, and a Canada Cup. During his tenure as goaltender for the Red Army Team between 1972 and 1985, Tretiak played for coaches Anatoly Tarasov and Viktor Tikhonov. Tretiak says Tarasov made him strong, but Tikhonov made him resilient.

As a rule, butterfly-style goaltenders—which in essence means they drop their knees inward toward the ice to make stops—do not tend to have the longevity of stand-up style goaltenders. The first reason may be that butterfly-style netminders depend on their reflexes much more than their stand-up counterparts do, and age just has a way of eroding these reactions. More visible, though, is the physical toll that the position takes on the player, especially his legs.

“For the first few years after I came up from junior, Tarasov used to make me go along the blueline jumping back and forth in full equipment,” recalled Tretiak, a hint of pain flashing in his eyes. Tarasov had a belief that if you made practices excruciatingly difficult, players would have more jump for games. In Tretiak’s case, it seems to have worked.

“Back and forth, first one leg then the next, for as many times as I could. After that, games were no trouble, because I didn’t have to jump.”

As a retired athlete, Tretiak’s body tells a story.

His upper body has softened from the days when he was driven 12 months a year by the Soviet military’s fitness plan. He may even have added a few pounds to his stocky frame. His legs, however, are still enormous and powerful. But while Tretiak’s mother was a gymnastics coach at an elite level for the Soviet Union, Tretiak says he probably never got from her what he needed most.

“My flexibility is very bad,” he says through a laugh. “I could never even do a bridge. I was strong, which kept me from injury.” Tretiak, it seems, does not doubt that he could have played longer if he had been more flexible.

Two Tretiaks

Still, his lack of gymnastic prowess never stopped him from standing on his head in some memorable international contests. While Tony Es-posito, Ken Dry-den and Bernie Parent dominated the NHL, none were as consistent or lightning quick as Tretiak. The difference? His concentration.

That is where Tikhonov comes in. While Tarasov created the physical Tretiak, Tikhonov honed the mental Tretiak.

While Tretiak is often modest to a fault about his physical abilities, he is downright boastful of his abilities to remain focused. His rationale is simple: he was born with his physical ability, but he made himself a great goalie.

“When I look at (an opponent’s) eyes, 100% I can tell you if he will pass or shoot,” says Tretiak with certainty. “I can always tell.”

Part of Tretiak’s confidence comes from “his secret,” which he now chooses to share. Tretiak says he can tell what his opponent will do because he has already evaluated all of the opponent’s options before the opponent has. In essence, a player has, at best, only five options that can result in a goal; shoot, or pass to one of his four teammates. By studying the opponent’s options and mentally preparing a response for each one, Tretiak was always ready for anything.

“I look at the eyes,” says Tretiak. “I follow the puck, but I see everybody on the ice. I look to see who is ready, their position and their motion. That way, I know what to do if a pass goes to another player.

“A goalie must see everything,” Tretiak repeats. “He must be ready for all possible plays and have prepared a response. But he must also wait until the last possible moment to make his move.”

Here is where the few of the good goalies graduate to being great ones.

Tretiak believes that only the goalies who think this way can ever enjoy success over a long term. He concedes that there are “reaction” goalies who can survive, but Tretiak was no mere survivor. He was a predator.

“Concentration is not only focus,” Tretiak insists, “it is awareness. It is being able to use all of your senses to tell you where you are (on the ice) and where the game is at all times. All goalies practice concentration…they know it. But when they get into a game, under pressure, they lock onto the puck. They begin to look like a python stalking a rabbit—rigid.”

Tretiak notes that the best predators know their surroundings, their options, their limitations and, most importantly, are constantly aware of the dangers lurking in their vicinity. And if they do, he states—with typical Tretiak confidence—the inevitable result: “Then, the puck just hits you.”

This first appeared in the 11/1995 issue of Hockey Player Magazine®
© Copyright 1991-2001 Hockey Player® and Hockey Player Magazine®

Inside the Trap

Inside the trap
By Bob Cunngingham
Nov 5, 2001, 19:24

Lemaire’s goal: Frustrate them. ©BBS

Some have called it the best coaching job in two decades. Others simply say that good strategy plus execution equals success. Regardless of how or why, the New Jersey Devils were quite a story after capturing the first Stanley Cup in franchise history last June.

Actually, though, it’s the how and why that most fascinate those close to the game. The biggest single strategic key to the resounding Devils triumph over the favored Detroit Red Wings in the Cup finals, as well as their victories in the Eastern Conference playoffs over Boston, Pittsburgh and Philadelphia, was their ability to neutralize the big offensive guns for the opposing teams before they could become threats inside the blueline and near the crease.

We’re talking some big names here—Cam Neely, Jaromir Jagr, Luc Robitaille, Eric Lindros, Sergei Federov—all ranked among the game’s premier scorers.

And all rendered totally frustrated by Devils coach Jacques Le-maire’s defensive tactics, which have become widely known as a form of a neutral-zone trap.

“But don’t call it a ‘trap’ when you talk to (Lemaire) about it,” warned a member of New Jersey’s public relations department.

Although utilizing the word ‘trap’ when discussing Lemaire’s philosophy isn’t truly accurate, those involved really don’t mind the characterization, simply for lack of a better term.

“I call it a trap when I talk about it, because that’s how everyone else seems to be referring to it,” says Los Angeles Kings head coach Larry Robinson, the one-time great defenseman who worked as an assistant coach under Lemaire in New Jersey for the past three seasons. “No matter what you call it, we did real well with it last year.”

It’s nothing new

Contrary to popular belief, says Robinson, this so-called neutral-zone trap is not new to the NHL. On the contrary, Robinson coins it as “good ol’ fashioned hockey. It’s been in effect since the ‘70s.”

The basic philosophy behind this form of early defense is to concentrate on an area rather than a specific player, at least initially. The more commonly acknowledged defense in the neutral zone is one in which the puck-handler is converged upon, forcing a pass that may be misdirected. Other players are accounted for, but the man with the puck is the primary concern.

But with the system the Devils utilize under Lemaire, the prime directive says to force the attack, as a whole, into a part of the ice that is most easily defended. Take away passing lanes and knock the wings off their paths toward the lane. The puck-handler may end up with more open ice in front of him, but it’s frozen real estate that he likely doesn’t desire to take.

“It’s an approach that takes away the options of the player with the puck,” explains Lemaire. “With nowhere to go and no one to pass to, it can be frustrating. We try to utilize these circumstances to force turnovers.”

The Devils also mastered the technique of effectively neutralizing players who didn’t have possession of the puck. It was a first priority, rather than a luxury.

“Any player that is rushed is not as effective as a player with free ice.” Lemaire said during the Pittsburgh series. “Players get frustrated. And any team is hurt if it gets frustrated. It becomes more difficult to keep your poise.”

In their championship run last year, the Devils utilized different forms of this same basic approach. At times, they’d break off from their territories and converge on the puck hoping for a quick turnover and a breakaway. Also, the Devils would often install specific players as shadows for an opposing team’s top scoring threat, making it a point to prevent that player from having any room to operate from the neutral zone on in.

“Our main goal was to get possession of the puck. It’s a way of disrupting the opposing offense, which is the best way to get turnovers,” Robinson says.

Claude Lemieux was most often the designated shadow, although they also possessed a designated Driver—first name Bruce. Although he has since been traded to the New York Rangers, Driver literally drove opposing attackers crazy with non-stop brushing, elbows, and consistent checking away from the puck.

Get ‘em up, ride ‘em up

Robinson likens the philosophy to cowboys successfully ushering livestock on the open range.

“It’s like herding a bunch of cattle into an open gate,” Robinson explains. “You do what you need to do to get people in an area you’re covering. It effectively shrinks the ice. You’re cutting off areas of the rink by forcing players over. It’s a lot easier to defend half the rink between the blue lines than it is a full rink that’s 90 x 200 (feet).

“Once you’ve got it cut off, you can attack the guy with the puck. Force him in with the rest. Make him go where he doesn’t want to.”

According to Robinson, Randy McKay, Mike Peluso and Bobby Holik were also key defenders for the Devils last season. Their common trait? All are veterans, all are disciplined, all know when to maintain their checks and when to break off, and all firmly believe in the system.

But like most concepts, it’s crucial that the ability to rotate people through without a fall-off in effectiveness be maintained.

“Truthfully, everybody on that team had a part in making it work,” Robinson says. “The main reason it was successful is because everyone bought into the system.”

Said forward Stephane Richer during the playoffs, “when I’m on the bench, I look down at (Lemaire and Robinson) and think ‘am I lucky or what?’”

What made the system work so well for the Devils was Lemaire’s mastery at shuffling line combinations to get desirable facets of the game working as one. If he felt the Devils needed to be quick to be effective in the neutral zone, he’d combine better skaters. If the situation called for physical over finesse, he would go for more strength.

Most often, however, Lemaire opted for familiar combinations. Reuniting players who had previously skated together. For instance, matching Richer and Lemieux, who had skated on the same line as teammates with Montreal in the mid ‘80s was a key in both the Pittsburgh and Philadelphia series. Lemaire knew this because he coached the Canadiens for two seasons when the linemates were there. In ‘86, both were instrumental in the Montreal’s Stanley Cup triumph over the Calgary Flames.

Familiarity breeds success

Familiarity appears to be a beneficial ingredient, as it is in most aspects of the game.

“You have to have players that work best together, because they must work together to make the system work,” Lemaire says. “If one guy isn’t doing his job, it won’t work.”

Lemaire drew praise—and Coach of the Year honors—for his juggling prowess. But another interesting aspect is that the trapping style doesn’t require all-star caliber players at every interval.

The Devils do have all-stars—Scott Stevens comes to mind—but it is not a team loaded with individual standouts.

Lemaire acknowledged the challenge in keeping the right combinations on the ice, stating, “the ability to keep the Devils prepared, ready to sacrifice for a common goal, and on an even emotional plain was of primary importance.

“You have to know your personnel,” he says.

Adds Robinson: “It’s a lot different than the type of defense (St. Louis head coach) Mike Keenan likes to play, where you’re pressuring the puck all over the place. To do that consistently and effectively for extended periods, you’ve got to have the personnel.”

OK, so if this strategy is less demanding from a player-personnel standpoint, why isn’t it more prevalent?

“The players have to buy into the system, but like anything else, it can break down,” notes the Kings coach. “If it does, your goaltender is facing a lot of situations in which he’s at a disadvantage.”

Robinson noted that Devils netminder Martin Brodeur was as important to the Devils shutting down opposing offenses as were the guys actually executing the traffic jams between the bluelines.

“Nothing works all the time, and Brodeur was excellent. You have to have outstanding goaltender play, too, because teams are still going to get off a certain amount of shots.”

Robinson explains that there are variations to the trapping system the Devils used, and the one he will most likely implement into the LA arsenal. For instance, ex-Florida Panthers coach Roger Neilson utilized a similar approach that was perhaps less aggressive.

“Theirs was a little more passive,” Robinson says of the Florida style under Neilson. “They wouldn’t forecheck as much. They tended to do more sitting back and waiting, (whereas) we would just try to get possession of the puck. That was the whole idea.”

One pressing question remains unanswered with all of this. How did the label “trap” get pinned on this philosophy, anyway? In reality, it’s not a trap at all. In basketball, a trapping defense is one that emphasizes constantly double-teaming and even triple-teaming the man with the ball, attempting to force him into a turnover. That explanation equates more to Keenan’s approach than to Lemaire’s.

No wonder Lemaire doesn’t acknowledge the name.

In fact, the accurate part of neutral-zone trap is ‘zone.’ And while a zone defense is illegal in the NBA, it’s a championship strategy in the NHL.

This first appeared in the 11/1995 issue of Hockey Player Magazine®
© Copyright 1991-2001 Hockey Player® and Hockey Player Magazine®