hockey defense 101?

[Cornell95]

I am hoping the eLynah community can fill me on hockey defenses, specifically the "trap".  I havent ever been a hockey player and am clueless about defensive alignments/systems... can someone more knowledgeable fill me in?  I frequently hear commentators and other fans speaking about how Cornell uses the neutral ice trap (denied by other Cornell fans).  If you feel like really going all out I would love to hear more on hockey defense in general (forecheck, backcheck, etc.)  I was at the Cornell/Brown game last week and from what I could tell they (Brown) was actually playing a trap more than Cornell if I actually understand what it is...

thanks in advance, cant offer anything but gratitude and maybe clarification on volleyball systems and rules (my sport of choice to play)

Kevin

[Jeff Hopkins \'82]

This explains it pretty well:

http://www.geocities.com/Colosseum/1571/neutrap.htm

Basically it's a 1-2-2 zone defense that forces the puck carrier to the boards when he's trying to clear his zone.  At that point, he can be double-teamed while simultaneously preventing him from making a cross-ice pass.

JH

[atb9]

very informative for the neophytes

[cbuckser]

The two-man forechecking system Cornell typically uses is a variant of the left-wing lock, which is described at the same web site Jeff found.

http://www.geocities.com/Colosseum/1571/lock1.htm

The two-man forecheck is a much more aggressive and physical defensive system than the neutral-zone trap.  People who don't watch Cornell play unfairly stereotype the Big Red as a trapping team because the team gives up so few goals against.

[Jeff Hopkins \'82]

As an interesting aside, a buddy of mine coaches a midget team.  He taught his team the left wing lock and went from losing by a few goals to winning by a few goals in the span of a season.

Seems the other coaches hadn't caught on to it, and despite inferior talent his team won with a good system.

Hmmm.  There's a lesson there.

JH

[Cornell Fan]

My question after reading that description is why do many commentators tend to speak disdainfully about the trap (e.g. the Brown hacks last weekend)?  The description made it sound like a system that makes sense and puts effective coverage/pressure on the offense.

[ugarte]

Cornell Fan wrote:

My question after reading that description is why do many commentators tend to speak disdainfully about the trap (e.g. the Brown hacks last weekend)?  The description made it sound like a system that makes sense and puts effective coverage/pressure on the offense.

Because it takes a connoisseur to appreciate a game in which scoring is depressed and the action is kept in between the blue lines.  It is good strategic hockey, but less "exciting" hockey.

[Keith K \'93]

Yeah, the average guy would rather see 10-7 shootouts than a 2-0 defensive game.  Of course, he'd probably want to see lots of fights most of all...

[Ben Doyle 03]

A.K.A - Hockey East fans:-P