A critical aspect of the modern game is understanding the interaction between angle, squareness, and depth. While all modern minds for goaltending wouldn't contest that those three principle components form the core of how we understand positional play, it appears as though there are differing philosophies on their priority in practice.
The prevailing wisdom for several years (as far as what I can gather) is that priority is Angle -> Squareness -> Depth. For instance, during the save recovery cycle following a rebound pushed to the weakside, the goalie
rotates for recovery back to post, and pushes (either backside recovery or recovery to feet with a t-push) (angle)
Gets to post, rotates body to face puck (squareness)
Moves back to top of crease (depth)
However, now have heard of prioritizing squareness over angle (e.g. Nick Dahan, "The Three Components of Positioning" on YouTube.) The same cycle:
rotate the body such that the plane of the goalie's profile will be perpendicular to the play once angle is gained (squareness)
recovery to the post (angle)
Move back to top of crease (depth)
Now I have also heard of prioritizing depth over angle or squareness (e.g. Dave Prior, https://ingoalmag.com/news/vegas-goalie-coach-dave-prior-explains-his-old-school-approach/). The same cycle, I think:
Move to top of the crease, where you would want to be ideally if a shot were taken immediately (depth + angle)
Rotate to face the play (squareness)
I've been schooled in the traditional system of ASD, but there's an intuitive quality to DAS/DSA: Shouldn't we be seeking the shortest paths (i.e. straight lines) to where we want to be ultimately for a shot?
My thoughts aside on this, what have you been taught in terms of positional priorities? Do you have a preference and why?