Opinions on defensive face-off alignments

[Jason Harris 31]

I'm coaching my daughters' high school team, so tonight I went over face-off plays. I could tell both the girls, as well as another coach, didn't like that I had the old school alignment of LW-LD-C-RW with the RD at the bottom of the circle. They're used to RW-LW-C-RD with the LD at the bottom of the circle, although that's a relatively recent strategy. I don't recall it being around until maybe five to seven years.

I kind of feel the change in alignment solved one problem -- the inside winger being held up by the offensive winger -- yet leaves the inside defensemen in a one-on-one battle for any pucks won to the corner.

So who likes what alignment and why?

[Chadd 916]

I like having a D on the winger in the slot, two D if the other team is trying to overload the middle. With a winger on the boards, I have them take a stride towards the opposite side defense, so they pass through the area behind the center to pick up loose pucks and get into the shooting lane for their man faster. In fact, with a winger on the boards, I have both wingers take that angle. With both wingers in the middle, I send one on the outside of the guy in the slot and one at an angle out to their defense.

With a winger on the boards, my low D is responsible for any pucks to the boards or behind the center. The D in the slot is responsible for their man first and foremost. The C has to take their man if they lose the draw as well.

It's amazing how often you can spring players on breakaways when they pick up a puck just behind the opposing center by taking the angle into the circle.

[chippa13 1844]

It depends on whether the opposition puts the "board wing" in a shooting position or not. If they do then I bring our board winger into the middle so it is wing-d-wing on the net side with the inside wing responsible for shooter/far d since he is coming out at that angle.

[chk hrd 164]

I have always preferred to have both wings on the inside, one behind the other and the inside D next to them or between them with the corner D at about 4 or 5 o'clock on the circle. This is a typical setup you see on most high level teams. Unfortunately it confuses a lot of players that have never played this system or are new to hockey but once they learn it, it works great.

This is based on the face off being to the goalies right: When the puck is dropped the right wing (closest to the circle) is responsible for cutting through the circle to pick up the puck if it is behind the other teams center or go to the board side D of the other team to play the puck and take up the shooting lane. The left wing (farthest from the circle) is responsible for taking the D man at the high slot. The left D is responsible for the slot coverage and the other teams wing lined up at the hash marks. The right D (lined up at 4 or 5 o'clock) is responsible for the other teams wing on the board if the puck gets to him or for any pucks behind the center or in the corner. Center takes center.

I don't like the standard beer league or low level set up of having a wing on the board to cover the other teams wing. If the puck is won to the other teams D on the board all the other teams wing has to do is tie up your wing which gives them to much time to get a shot off, pass the puck or get everyone set up plus your wing on the board is limited in what he can be effective in. If the puck goes into the corner he can hold up the other teams wing but that takes him out of the play because the D should be covering it already and if he goes down to help he is getting to deep and has to come back up for a breakout if you win the battle in the corner.

[chippa13 1844]

You do that and if your center wins the draw there is noone to take the puck with time to make a play. You want a d somewhere behind your center if he is on his strong side toward the corner.

[ktang 34]

With both wingers inside, on a lost draw the other team's shooting lanes are blocked. On a won draw the board-side defenseman has the winger right on her, but if she loses her battle the puck is in the corner and the slot is clogged up. So, playing the percentages.

With the old way, the board winger is not in the shooting lane for over 2 seconds. It's all about the angles.

[chippa13 1844]

I don't have a problem with putting the two wings in front and having one d on the board wing. Anaheim did that quite a bit last night.

[Chadd 916]

With both wingers inside, on a lost draw the other team's shooting lanes are blocked. On a won draw the board-side defenseman has the winger right on her, but if she loses her battle the puck is in the corner and the slot is clogged up. So, playing the percentages.

With the old way, the board winger is not in the shooting lane for over 2 seconds. It's all about the angles.

I agree that it is all about the angles, but disagree with how long it takes to get into the shooting lane. If you have both of your wingers angle into the circle, it only takes the winger on the boards one stride to get into the shooting lane and your inside winger should already be in that lane. Either way, it's all about reacting to what the other team gives you and trying to cover them and create a potential advantage for yourself.

[chk hrd 164]

If the center wins the draw behind him you have the D on the bottom of the circle (usually at about 5:00) to get the puck and either ring it off the board to get it out, set up for a breakout for the wing that was responsible for the D man on the boards or reverse it for a breakout on the opposite side. You can put the low D right on the wing at the boards, he should still win the race to the puck if it goes into the corner. I like to play the D at 5:00 in case the center from the other team gets by your center.

The main reason you play this system is to take up the passing and shooting lanes if you loose the draw and you get help for any pucks that go behind the other teams center since your wing is already angling through that area. The wing skating from the inside hash mark to the D on the boards is taking the lane away from the D. If the wing was on the board it's much harder to get there because the other teams wing holds you up. The only thing you limit the D from doing at this point is putting the puck into the corner. There is a reason high level teams use this set up. Try it if you haven't, it works great when done right. If you force the D to make a cross ice pass there is a good chance the wing cover the high slot can get to it. I can't tell you how many times I've rushed the board side D and forced a shot that bounces off of me and starts a breakaway.

[chippa13 1844]

You can't leave the opposition's board winger free and clear. Any team worth their salt will exploit that for possession and suddenly you're chasing.

[ktang 34]

I agree that it is all about the angles, but disagree with how long it takes to get into the shooting lane. If you have both of your wingers angle into the circle, it only takes the winger on the boards one stride to get into the shooting lane and your inside winger should already be in that lane. Either way, it's all about reacting to what the other team gives you and trying to cover them and create a potential advantage for yourself.

In the worst case scenario, the draw is won to the opposing boards defenseman who has the skill to walk the blue line to the middle. As she does so, the defensive boards winger has to travel a longer distance, hence the 2 seconds.

If the inside winger gets in the opposing boards defenseman's shooting lane, that defenseman can go D-to-D, and then the other defenseman is uncovered and can walk in for a good shot.

[chippa13 1844]

The inside winger is in the shooting lane with one stride. They don't chase out to the far point but maintain position in the lane. This doesn't leave the middle D uncovered because one stride back to the middle puts the inside wing in that shooting lane.

[ktang 34]

The inside winger is in the shooting lane with one stride. They don't chase out to the far point but maintain position in the lane. This doesn't leave the middle D uncovered because one stride back to the middle puts the inside wing in that shooting lane.

On higher-level teams that have defensemen that can walk the line, the middle defenseman would move even with the weak-side faceoff dot, or farther, to accept the D-to-D pass. The inside winger who commits to getting into the boards defenseman's shooting lane has her momentum going the wrong way, so the D-to-D recipient is uncovered and can walk in.

[ktang 34]

I just remembered a few more things.

On a clean faceoff loss, having the defensive defenseman back means that the play starts at 4 vs 5, and that can lead to running around.

Against mid-calibre teams, having the defenseman back isn't so bad on the lost draw to the opposing boards defenseman. Often what happens is that the defenseman will focus on the winger coming up the boards, and because s/he is looking in that direction, will dump the puck off the boards for the defending defenseman to pick up at the goal line.

[Chadd 916]

In the worst case scenario, the draw is won to the opposing boards defenseman who has the skill to walk the blue line to the middle. As she does so, the defensive boards winger has to travel a longer distance, hence the 2 seconds.

If the inside winger gets in the opposing boards defenseman's shooting lane, that defenseman can go D-to-D, and then the other defenseman is uncovered and can walk in for a good shot.

The winger on the boards isn't covering the D in the middle of the ice and the winger in the middle isn't responsible for covering the D on the boards. It works quite well at all levels and the technique came from an NHL coach, who used it regularly.

[ktang 34]

The winger on the boards isn't covering the D in the middle of the ice and the winger in the middle isn't responsible for covering the D on the boards. It works quite well at all levels and the technique came from an NHL coach, who used it regularly.

Oh-oh, I think my point is being misunderstood. I was replying to Chippa's statement in Post #13, where he states "The inside winger is in the shooting lane with one stride. They don't chase out to the far point but maintain position in the lane. This doesn't leave the middle D uncovered because one stride back to the middle puts the inside wing in that shooting lane." That was why I was talking about the inside winger's predicament if s/he covers the opposing boards defenseman; I was pointing out that this doesn't work.

From what I've seen, the NHL teams use the modern alignment (defensive D on the boards covering the offensive winger, both defensive wingers starting from the middle). Yes, the NHL did used to have the defensive strong-side winger on the boards, but I haven't seen that lately (similar to not seeing pure stand-up goalies).

Anyways, back to the original post's questions: why use the modern defensive faceoff alignment? Because in the case of the pure lost draw, everything is covered. Why not use the old-style defenseman-back faceoff alignment? Because in the case of the pure lost draw, the defenseman at the bottom of the faceoff circle isn't covering anybody, so the rest of the skaters are defending 4-on-5.

The disadvantage of the modern defensive faceoff alignment is that, in the case of a won draw, the defenseman on the boards has to get the puck with the opposing winger right on him/her. Usually, the defenseman is stronger and can outmuscle the winger. However, if the defenseman loses that battle, the puck is in a "safe" area.

So, the modern faceoff alignment plays the percentages.

[chk hrd 164]

Your disadvantage isn't really a disadvantage. Like you said, the D either wins the race to the puck or it ends up in the corner. There is a reason high level teams use this setup...it works by minimizing what the other team is able to do.

If you have never tried this line up you should. When everything is done right it works. The only thing I suggest in Beer league or lower levels is taking your D man on the boards and move them down away from the wing. The extra space makes it easier for the D to get the puck if it goes to the corner. If the puck goes to the wing it doesn't take long to get to them and the wing is in a position where they are limited in what they can do.

[Chadd 916]

I think it's good to be prepared and have multiple alignments at your disposal. Just as importantly, being able to recognize the strength and weakness of your opponent's alignment will help you and your players.

[psulion22 402]

Your disadvantage isn't really a disadvantage. Like you said, the D either wins the race to the puck or it ends up in the corner. There is a reason high level teams use this setup...it works by minimizing what the other team is able to do.

If you have never tried this line up you should. When everything is done right it works. The only thing I suggest in Beer league or lower levels is taking your D man on the boards and move them down away from the wing. The extra space makes it easier for the D to get the puck if it goes to the corner. If the puck goes to the wing it doesn't take long to get to them and the wing is in a position where they are limited in what they can do.

I would also recommend having an off-hand defenseman on the boards. This way when the puck gets won back, he/she is on the forehand to move the puck behind the net. If both dmen would be on the back hand, I'd suggest the better puck handler of the two is in that spot.

The bottom line is that the modern alignment puts all 5 players in a defensive position right off the draw, and also puts both wingers in the guts of the ice and then working out from there. On a clean loss, both wings begin in the shooting lane of the point. The old alignment, the corner dman is not in a defensive position nor is the board side wing, which leaves one less guy in the guts. The new way is better from a defensive standpoint. There's just no way to argue otherwise. The old way allows the corner dman to have a little more time on a clean win, but the options are still the same - either the puck has to go behind the net or it has to go back up the boards to a stationary wing in the dot where everyone just was. That's not a good second option. In the new alignment, the dman will have less time to make a play, but will have better possession options when he does make the play. By putting both wings inside you create a few advantages, It allows a 2 man breakout on the wrap play (W1 goes to the boards, W2 acts like the center, C goes wide like the W should. Easy breakout). It also creates a player advantage below the hash marks because the other team's inside wing has to make a decision. He either has to stay inside, which would leave the wrap to be an easy breakout with 2 W's on the 1 D, or go hard to the board to play the wrap which leaves the inside Dman uncovered for a short D to D pass behind the net and still an easy breakout. And if the board side Dman has to reverse and go up the same boards, the wing is now moving which is a lot harder to defend. You can argue that the dman is better off having more time, and I can see that. But I still think since the play is most often going to be a wrap in either alignment, you're better off having a defensive advantage than an offensive one.

My team won't switch to the new alignment because they don't get it (and they still stress the wings have to cover the point tactic, but that's a whole nother thread) so last night I was the board side wing on a D zone draw. The first one, they won clean and I went inside, got into the lane, and blocked the shot over the glass. So on the resulting draw, they won on a 50/50 but their wing picked me. I didn't get back to the point guy in time, he got the puck, walked to the middle, and scored. I got to the bench and got the "you have to get to the point guy" speech like that wasn't what I tried to do (and hadn't done the draw before). I replied that if we lined up the way I wanted to, and all NHL teams do, I would have already been in his lane and been able to make a play on both draws..

[psulion22 402]

So this week for this team, after we got scored on off a clean faceoff loss, I just started lining up on the inside in the modern alignment (and got my other wing to do it too). I would just line up there and everyone would say I was in the wrong place, and I would just say "don't worry about it." We ended up with 3 breakaways, a 2/1, and 2 goals on lost draws once we switched. The other team didn't know what to do because I kept coming in across the dot. The first one, I just picked up the puck on the way through the dot towards the point and split the d going out of the zone. It was too easy, the defenseman thought he was going to have a clean shot because I hadn't lined up to cover him. I didn't score though. On the next, the defender came down closer to the dot so I couldn't get that loose puck again. Clean win for them right back to him. I blocked the shot just because I was in the lane, the puck went off my shin and out of the zone - breakaway #2. I did score this time. The next time, the D stayed a little higher. Clean win to him, I skate to him, he tries to go point to point, my other wing picks it off, chips it into the neutral zone - breakaway #3. The defender caught up to me, so I tried to pull up and make a pass that got poke checked by the goalie. And the last was on the opposite side, the inside defenseman moved closer to the center to avoid another clean break. I told my other wing to line up on the inside like I had, and then what to do on the draw. The draw was a squibbler to near the top of the circle, he battled the defenseman for it and fired it out of the zone across the ice. I skated out to it, we went in 2 on 1 and he scored goal #2.

None of those plays happen in the old alignment. The crazy thing was that even though it had been so successful, my teammates were still resistant to it. After the 2 on 1 goal, I told my wing to line up that way every draw. But my center, who is also the captain, said no because I was "screwing up his draws". I told him I didn't care, and my way was working better. We kept doing it and didn't give up a chance off the draw the rest of the game, and broke the puck out on draws he won easier too. The other line, who didn't use this alignment, allowed another goal that came from possession after a lost draw back to the point that the wing couldn't get to. Especially against teams that don't know what to do, the new alignment just works much better.

[ktang 34]

I think that the resistance is partially due to not opposing authority. The old-style coaching of the old-style defensive zone faceoff alignment is still "respected", even though the game has evolved, and even in the face of evidence to the contrary.

When things change there is always resistance because humans are creatures of habit. So the 40 year old faceoff alignment still has its supporters.

[boo10 323]

Both alignments have merits, but to say the new way has no flaws is simply not true. Clean win to the board side point, D doesn't shoot into the scrum, but instead moves down the boards, that winger releases to the corner, now you have a two on one against the defensive D on the boards. A skilled team will turn this into a shot on goal almost every time.

The new alignment is used mostly because it supports the current trend of collapsing to the front of the net and clogging up the middle. Teams are starting to beat this tactic by faking the shot and throwing the puck out wide to a winger that has released to wait for a clean shot. Funny they showed this exact thing on Coaches Corner tonight.

[Chadd 916]

So this week for this team, after we got scored on off a clean faceoff loss, I just started lining up on the inside in the modern alignment (and got my other wing to do it too). I would just line up there and everyone would say I was in the wrong place, and I would just say "don't worry about it." We ended up with 3 breakaways, a 2/1, and 2 goals on lost draws once we switched. The other team didn't know what to do because I kept coming in across the dot. The first one, I just picked up the puck on the way through the dot towards the point and split the d going out of the zone. It was too easy, the defenseman thought he was going to have a clean shot because I hadn't lined up to cover him. I didn't score though. On the next, the defender came down closer to the dot so I couldn't get that loose puck again. Clean win for them right back to him. I blocked the shot just because I was in the lane, the puck went off my shin and out of the zone - breakaway #2. I did score this time. The next time, the D stayed a little higher. Clean win to him, I skate to him, he tries to go point to point, my other wing picks it off, chips it into the neutral zone - breakaway #3. The defender caught up to me, so I tried to pull up and make a pass that got poke checked by the goalie. And the last was on the opposite side, the inside defenseman moved closer to the center to avoid another clean break. I told my other wing to line up on the inside like I had, and then what to do on the draw. The draw was a squibbler to near the top of the circle, he battled the defenseman for it and fired it out of the zone across the ice. I skated out to it, we went in 2 on 1 and he scored goal #2.

None of those plays happen in the old alignment. The crazy thing was that even though it had been so successful, my teammates were still resistant to it. After the 2 on 1 goal, I told my wing to line up that way every draw. But my center, who is also the captain, said no because I was "screwing up his draws". I told him I didn't care, and my way was working better. We kept doing it and didn't give up a chance off the draw the rest of the game, and broke the puck out on draws he won easier too. The other line, who didn't use this alignment, allowed another goal that came from possession after a lost draw back to the point that the wing couldn't get to. Especially against teams that don't know what to do, the new alignment just works much better.

We get those breakaways all the time by having the wingers angle behind the opposing center on their first step, instead of trying to skate through the man. In fact, I had to take a lot of draws this week and I was just poking them through the other center's feet and having my wingers pick it up on the other side.