Crease Movement Advice

[Punisher Goalie]

Hoping to get some advice about efficient crease movements. 

I’m primarily thinking about when the opposing team has possession in the zone and is moving the puck around the perimeter. When that’s happening, is it better to (a) stay at an aggressive depth the whole time as you track the puck, or (b) does it make more sense to stay at a conservative depth while you change your angle until you anticipate a shot, then move out to an aggressive depth?

My issue is that I feel like if I stay at an aggressive depth, I have to make big long t-pushes, etc to keep up with the puck, then I drift back into the net if the puck is moved in. It just does not feel efficient. I’m wondering if I should stay at a more conservative depth for cross-crease movements so it more efficient/shorter travel time, establish myself at the correct angle, then add depth and set my feet if I can as I anticipate a shot, depending on the play. 

Hopefully my question makes sense but looking forward to any advice you all have. Thanks!

[loki1416]

Personally, I stick to short movements (so about a foot off the goal line) until it looks like a shot is about to be taken. If I stay on top of the crease following the puck, it's a long way to travel (for me). I'm all about the conservation of energy until it is needed. So why make bigger, more energy costly movements, when I can conserve that energy by moving small and then exploding out to an aggressive position.

So when I'm picturing perimeter play, I'm picturing the winger passing from the corner around the goal line(ish) area to the point and the point man passing to the other point for a shot. To go from the winger to the point, thats a couple of easy, small shuffles. If the point man holds for a sec or two and is looking at the net, then I would come out aggressively expecting the shot. But if he (the point) catch's and releases to the other point, yes, that is a long t-push (in my case I use the b-fly slide a lot as I feel I'm quicker with that to cover large ground) and there is nothing you can do about it but do it. 100 shuffles isn't going to get you over there in time, so it's time to use that energy.

 One of the biggest problems I have with crease movement is the level of play. In the lower levels, I don't ever worry about one timers as it seems no one has the hand/eye to pull it off. Everyone (if they catch it) catch's it and holds it forever. I have enough time to leave my post, skate behind the net and come back out on the other post and STILL will have time to be in position. Higher levels, I use a lot of energy to keep myself in position because these guys are better about quick releases and one timers. Like I said above, the b-fly slide is my go to. It requires some energy, but it's fast and my recover is immediate. Plus, as we all know, it takes away the bottom of the net. I had a lot of problems controlling my b-fly slide (over sliding, under sliding, or sliding into the wrong depth), so went to stick and puck and spent the entire hour just doing slides and recovers, 2-3 times a week over several weeks.

All the above said, I play with your "B" option. Especially if I know the team has some guys who are going to screen me. A surprising amount of teams I play against has no one who will get in front of me so I have the room to play aggressively and will do so at times just to change things up so they don't get used to me doing a specific skill set. So in essence, will switch to option "A" if I can/to throw teams off a little. Whether it does or not, I don't know. But I like to think it does. And it keeps me entertained.

[old but slow]

I'd like to think I stay aggressive, or at least my mind set is to stay aggressive. Distance traveled is distance traveled whether it's cross crease or explosive. I just find it easier to get set if I'm already out there.  I find it harder to set myself if I'm trying to explode and cut down angle.

[Punisher Goalie]

13 hours ago, loki1416 said:

Personally, I stick to short movements (so about a foot off the goal line) until it looks like a shot is about to be taken. If I stay on top of the crease following the puck, it's a long way to travel (for me). I'm all about the conservation of energy until it is needed. So why make bigger, more energy costly movements, when I can conserve that energy by moving small and then exploding out to an aggressive position.

So when I'm picturing perimeter play, I'm picturing the winger passing from the corner around the goal line(ish) area to the point and the point man passing to the other point for a shot. To go from the winger to the point, thats a couple of easy, small shuffles. If the point man holds for a sec or two and is looking at the net, then I would come out aggressively expecting the shot. But if he (the point) catch's and releases to the other point, yes, that is a long t-push (in my case I use the b-fly slide a lot as I feel I'm quicker with that to cover large ground) and there is nothing you can do about it but do it. 100 shuffles isn't going to get you over there in time, so it's time to use that energy.

 One of the biggest problems I have with crease movement is the level of play. In the lower levels, I don't ever worry about one timers as it seems no one has the hand/eye to pull it off. Everyone (if they catch it) catch's it and holds it forever. I have enough time to leave my post, skate behind the net and come back out on the other post and STILL will have time to be in position. Higher levels, I use a lot of energy to keep myself in position because these guys are better about quick releases and one timers. Like I said above, the b-fly slide is my go to. It requires some energy, but it's fast and my recover is immediate. Plus, as we all know, it takes away the bottom of the net. I had a lot of problems controlling my b-fly slide (over sliding, under sliding, or sliding into the wrong depth), so went to stick and puck and spent the entire hour just doing slides and recovers, 2-3 times a week over several weeks.

All the above said, I play with your "B" option. Especially if I know the team has some guys who are going to screen me. A surprising amount of teams I play against has no one who will get in front of me so I have the room to play aggressively and will do so at times just to change things up so they don't get used to me doing a specific skill set. So in essence, will switch to option "A" if I can/to throw teams off a little. Whether it does or not, I don't know. But I like to think it does. And it keeps me entertained.

What you are describing is exactly what I was considering doing. My thinking is that angle is more important than depth. If I’m on the wrong angle, it won’t really matter how far out I am. I was thinking that if I change my approach to something like what you described, I could stay closer to the net longer, which would take less energy to get on angle also make it easier to be on the correct angle when I do move out.

12 hours ago, old but slow said:

I'd like to think I stay aggressive, or at least my mind set is to stay aggressive. Distance traveled is distance traveled whether it's cross crease or explosive. I just find it easier to get set if I'm already out there.  I find it harder to set myself if I'm trying to explode and cut down angle.

Yeah this is a good point, I’m just thinking about overall efficiency - whether it makes more sense to make smaller adjustments to angle until its time to commit vs. being at a more aggressive depth and needing longer movements to get on angle.

I suppose there is another element to consider, which is if you are at a more aggressive depth while the play is developing, are you perhaps deterring the shooters from shooting? That is, if you spend more time in option B mode, showing more net to the shooters, are you going to make it more likely that they take shots? Compared to option A mode, where you (assuming you are are angle) are showing less net?

[loki1416]

1 hour ago, Punisher Goalie said:

I suppose there is another element to consider, which is if you are at a more aggressive depth while the play is developing, are you perhaps deterring the shooters from shooting? That is, if you spend more time in option B mode, showing more net to the shooters, are you going to make it more likely that they take shots? Compared to option A mode, where you (assuming you are are angle) are showing less net?

If you are playing at a level where the shooters have their heads up, yes. If your playing at a level that doesn't, your starting depth will make no difference. So that depends on your league and the players in it.

[jeff da goalie]

Play at proper depth for a shot.  The east-west play at your level isn't generally that good.  Don't show net if you can avoid it.  It's easier to maintain depth and move a little more than have to adjust since you'll wind up moving back too far.  I try to avoid coming too far into the paint.  I'm far more likely to get burned on a shot where I'm too close in than from a backdoor shot.  I play a few levels higher and even there, 85% of the time the pass recipient will miss the shot.

[CG35]

On 2018-02-28 at 8:34 PM, old but slow said:

I'd like to think I stay aggressive, or at least my mind set is to stay aggressive. Distance traveled is distance traveled whether it's cross crease or explosive. I just find it easier to get set if I'm already out there.  I find it harder to set myself if I'm trying to explode and cut down angle.

Staying aggressive on the shooter is still the way... likely just need to look at more efficient angle choices during puck movement.

This article explains things pretty well... Here.

[Chenner29]

On 2/28/2018 at 5:05 PM, Punisher Goalie said:

Hoping to get some advice about efficient crease movements. 

I’m primarily thinking about when the opposing team has possession in the zone and is moving the puck around the perimeter. When that’s happening, is it better to (a) stay at an aggressive depth the whole time as you track the puck, or (b) does it make more sense to stay at a conservative depth while you change your angle until you anticipate a shot, then move out to an aggressive depth?

My issue is that I feel like if I stay at an aggressive depth, I have to make big long t-pushes, etc to keep up with the puck, then I drift back into the net if the puck is moved in. It just does not feel efficient. I’m wondering if I should stay at a more conservative depth for cross-crease movements so it more efficient/shorter travel time, establish myself at the correct angle, then add depth and set my feet if I can as I anticipate a shot, depending on the play. 

Hopefully my question makes sense but looking forward to any advice you all have. Thanks!

I've posted about the changes in how goaltending is coached nowadays in a separate thread (I think it was your video thread?)

When I was working with a goalie coach, I was taught to always be outside the crease.  "Blue paint = dead" was drilled into my head for a long time.

What's crazy to me is that when I was playing competitive, my coaches would get all over me if they felt I was playing "down" too often.  Watch goalie training videos nowadays - a lot of it is edgework while on your knees!  I digress.

Anyway.  I've noticed goalies these days actually max out at the top of their crease. The game at the highest levels is too fast and much more open than it was in the clutch & grab eras of the past; playing 6" to a foot outside the blue paint will get you burned on a cross ice play. 

What's the mantra nowadays? "Square angle depth makes shooters SAD" or something like that.

I would suggest B, get square, find your angle and play your depth conservatively inside the crease.  Once you read shot, you can work to close that by telescoping out.
You see slightly more ice by playing more conservatively, plus it's easier to manage your post play and behind the net shenanigans.

[Mroy31]

9 hours ago, Chenner29 said:

I would suggest B, get square, find your angle and play your depth conservatively inside the crease.  Once you read shot, you can work to close that by telescoping out.
You see slightly more ice by playing more conservatively, plus it's easier to manage your post play and behind the net shenanigans.

This was one of the biggest things I've noticed since playing in the A division in my beer league.  There is a team that is young and fast, and a team that is older and wily, and they both will burn you back door but in somewhat different ways.  The older guys will just find a way to already be waiting back door even on an odd-man rush, so they just put the puck to a place that's easy for the other guy to tip/hammer home.  The younger guys will play an NHL style diamond and move the puck across the ice so fast that even a onetimer from the top of the faceoff circle will beat you like you're a full step behind the play.

Not saying I've mastered this yet, but it's definitely something I'm working on in my game.

[Punisher Goalie]

On 3/26/2018 at 1:56 AM, Chenner29 said:

I've posted about the changes in how goaltending is coached nowadays in a separate thread (I think it was your video thread?)

When I was working with a goalie coach, I was taught to always be outside the crease.  "Blue paint = dead" was drilled into my head for a long time.

What's crazy to me is that when I was playing competitive, my coaches would get all over me if they felt I was playing "down" too often.  Watch goalie training videos nowadays - a lot of it is edgework while on your knees!  I digress.

Anyway.  I've noticed goalies these days actually max out at the top of their crease. The game at the highest levels is too fast and much more open than it was in the clutch & grab eras of the past; playing 6" to a foot outside the blue paint will get you burned on a cross ice play. 

What's the mantra nowadays? "Square angle depth makes shooters SAD" or something like that.

I would suggest B, get square, find your angle and play your depth conservatively inside the crease.  Once you read shot, you can work to close that by telescoping out.
You see slightly more ice by playing more conservatively, plus it's easier to manage your post play and behind the net shenanigans.

On 3/26/2018 at 11:13 AM, Mroy31 said:

This was one of the biggest things I've noticed since playing in the A division in my beer league.  There is a team that is young and fast, and a team that is older and wily, and they both will burn you back door but in somewhat different ways.  The older guys will just find a way to already be waiting back door even on an odd-man rush, so they just put the puck to a place that's easy for the other guy to tip/hammer home.  The younger guys will play an NHL style diamond and move the puck across the ice so fast that even a onetimer from the top of the faceoff circle will beat you like you're a full step behind the play.

Not saying I've mastered this yet, but it's definitely something I'm working on in my game.

Thanks to you both, great points here. I have been experimenting with this in pickup sessions and I think, on balance, it has helped my game. The way I see it, I’m prioritizing angle by taking the shortest route to get there, then, if time allows, I’m managing depth.

If I try to stay at a more aggressive depth, its going to take me longer to get on angle and I may miss the chance to make the save altogether.