Learning Hockey, a Summer Series: Previously College Hockey 101, Nuts and Bolts 1: Transition Play, Nuts and Bolts 2: Forechecking, Nuts and Bolts 3: Power Plays

Part 4 of our Nuts and Bolts series will look at the penalty kill. Monday's piece took a look at power plays, and so today we handle the opposite. If you haven't read part 3, I'd recommend doing so, because this deep dive on PK's goes hand-in-hand with that one on the PP, and I will make references to that piece here. Penalty killing is an extremely important component of the hockey game, even if it is only a small sliver of the total time on ice. Teams with poor penalty kills can see all their hard work at 5v5 erased in the matter of seconds if they cede a PPG or two to the opposition. Michigan Hockey fans may remember the 2017-18 Michigan team, whose bid for a national title was dashed because the team consistently couldn't kill penalties effectively in big moments. Penalty killing is every bit as important as the power play, and good teams should also be at least competent on the PK to seriously threaten for a championship in their respective league. 

Penalty Killing 

Killing penalties is the flip side to power plays and it often involves a different set of players. Though some elite forwards and defensemen can play on both the PP and PK (Owen Power, Nick Blankeburg, Matty Beniers, and Thomas Bordeleau all play on both for Michigan), you often switch out some of those high skill passers and shooters for players with more refined skill sets, ones who can block shots, win faceoffs reliably, and battle in the corner for loose pucks. Relentless forechecking ability, size, and smarts are valued on penalty kills, and those forwards and defensemen not known for offense who play down in their team's lineup often appear on penalty kills, which in Michigan's case tends to be guys like Nolan Moyle and Garrett Van Wyhe. 

Penalty killing is less schematic than some of our previous topics (forechecking, PP's), and so instead I'm going to just go through several components of the penalty kill and identify traits that come in handy and that coaches value when building their penalty kills, although there will be some strategic discussion. 

[AFTER THE JUMP: Let's Kill Some Penalties!]

Pictured: A faceoff [MG Campredon]

PK Faceoffs

Even more than on the PP, faceoffs are absolutely crucial on penalty kills. Analytics folks generally scoff at the importance of faceoffs and it is true that the vast majority of even strength faceoffs don't affect the game all that much in the grand scheme of things, but on the penalty kill, faceoffs actually do matter, a lot. And there are few things a hockey coach loves more than a center who can win a faceoff at a high clip. 

Winning a faceoff on the PK is of utmost importance because it immediately allows the team a chance to clear the puck out of the offensive zone and down the length of the ice. One full-length clear typically kills ~20 seconds, or a full 1/6 of your standard minor penalty. But winning faceoffs is not just a center's responsibility. Anyone who has watched hockey knows there are plenty of examples where the draw is tied up between the centers, and the wingers have to step in to try and muscle the puck free and wrest possession away from the opponent. Those wingers play a big role here and how they are positioned to help out, and where they're trying to win possession back to, are very important factors. I won't go into tons of detail on faceoff alignments because that's pretty in the weeds, but I'll just say that faceoffs are as much an individual effort as a team one. 

Assuming the draw is in the PP's OZ, if the offensive team wins the faceoff, they can begin with their power play set up (which we discussed in Part 3 of this series) and the section below labeled "PK defensive zone play" ensues. However, if the defensive team wins said faceoff, they can attempt to clear the puck. A successful clear can come any number of ways. Sometimes it's through the air down the middle of the ice between the defensemen at the point. Other times it's rimmed along the boards and down. The opposition PP will do everything they can to put bodies in the way to keep the puck in, and failed clears leading to long PP possessions are often some of the most dangerous situations for PK units to be in. There isn't a ton of strategy in how to clear the puck, it's mostly just individual performance on any given play. If the PK successfully clears it down the ice, then neutral zone play begins.

PK Neutral Zone Play

Once the puck is cleared down ice, the penalty killing team has an opportunity to get new players on the ice and go for a change. Generally speaking, coaches like shifts on the PK to last around 30 seconds, so if it has been that long and the puck is completely in the other end, the penalty killing team will change. Afterwards, they have to set up their neutral zone forecheck, much like a team would at 5v5. The difference, though, is that on the penalty kill, a NZ forecheck is less interested in obstructing movement and forcing turnovers, and is more interested in stopping the entry/protecting the blue line. That's what we discussed when we talked about breakout strategies with the PP on Monday. There won't be tons of pressure up ice, but there will be a lot of bodies congregated around the defensive blue line. 

Still, there are different formations for how a team may want to stop an entry, some more aggressive than others. Here's an example of a more aggressive NZ forecheck that a penalty killing team may use, the tandem pressure alignment: 

In this look, two forwards both loop up into the offensive zone to keep the opposition's PP honest, and to slow down the speed that the PP wants to generate (which we discussed when talking about the drop pass breakout strategy). Unless there's a turnover, the forwards will retreat back to get in position as the PP moves through the middle. The weakness of this strategy is the trade-off of aggressiveness: a turnover can kill off an extra 15-20 seconds, but if the forwards don't get back quickly enough, the rare odd-man rush or an easy zone entry could be the result. 

Now here's a more conservative NZ forecheck look, the passive 1-3: 

This is pretty simple. F1 provides no real pressure on the opposition and tries to push the play to the boards, while the other three players make a line that will attempt to stand the play up at the blue line. You have much less chance of forcing a turnover but keep the manpower back to try and deny an entry at all costs, and at the very least, force a dump-in (which is always preferable to a controlled entry). 

These are just two examples of plays that penalty killing teams may want to go to in situations where the opposition is trying to gain the zone on the PP. The goal of neutral zone play on the PK should always be to stop a controlled zone entry. If you can stop the puck from entering the zone at all, that's optimal, as it will force the PP to reset and will burn off 10-20 seconds. But if you can't keep it out of the DZ, at the very least, you have to force a dump-in, which becomes a contested puck battle. A good PK isn't going to stop every entry; the numerical disadvantage is simply too great. But great PK units are able to regularly deny controlled entries to limit the amount of time the puck is in the defensive zone where the opposition is totally set up. 

PK Defensive Zone Play

But let's say you lost the faceoff, or couldn't deny the entry, or lost the puck battle after a dump-in, and now the opposition PP has the puck in your zone and has their given alignment (be it a 1-3-1, an umbrella, or an overload scheme) set up. What do you do now? Well, another decision that a coach has to make is how aggressive they want their PK unit to be in their own zone. Some coaches prefer a very conservative approach that focuses on taking away shooting lanes and the high danger zone between the faceoff dots. This approach essentially turns the opposing PP into a firing squad, with the freedom to move the puck around the perimeter but the PKers are ready to block any shots on net to ensure that no pucks get in on the goalie. And once a shot is blocked, it becomes easier to clear the puck down the length of the ice. Here's an example of what that sort of approach looks like in real life: 

The Jackets mostly keep their PKers between the faceoff dots, with one forward at the top providing a small bit of resistance but otherwise, Columbus is mostly focused on taking shooting lanes away. And no one here is taking away more shooting lanes than Vladislav Gavrikov, who is performing a masochistic routine in sacrificing his body to block shots which is simply impeccable to watch. Most hockey coaches dream of having penalty killers who are willing to do what Gavrikov is doing here. Since the focus here is on blocking shots, this approach to penalty killing generally requires big, hulking bodies to run (Gavrikov is a big boy, 6-3, 214). Players with premium size and a willingness to sacrifice their body to block a shot are a must, as opposed to those with skating ability or skill. 

Other coaches prefer a slightly more aggressive style, one that tries to stop shots from ever being taken, as opposed to merely stopping shots from getting to the goalie. These sorts of stylistic debates really come down to what a coach is comfortable with, both in the neutral zone and the defensive zone. A more defensive, conservative coach will want his team to only attempt to stop entries in the NZ and then focus on blocking shots in the DZ. A more aggressive, confident coach will focus his team on applying a bit more pressure in the NZ and then try and force turnovers through direct pressure in the DZ. 

Regardless of what kind of PK approach your coach chooses, nearly all coaches are going to value the same things and these are attributes every good penalty kill must do in the defensive zone: 

1. Be willing to outwork the opposing power play. Too many power plays get complacent and expect to succeed because they have the extra player. A hardworking PK that recognizes when the PP is getting lazy and out-hustles the opposition for loose pucks and applies surprise pressure that can make life a lot easier for itself. 
2. Retrieve the puck after a shot is taken. No matter whether the shot is blocked before it gets on goal or if it is saved by the goalie, the penalty killers have to be ready to grab the ensuing loose puck. It often ricochets to the corners or along the wall, and those puck battles are absolutely pivotal. Having penalty killers who can win battles and retrieve loose pucks are a necessity on any good penalty kill. 
3. Use your sticks to take away passing lanes. This is something Michigan struggled with last season early on, as teams were easily able to change sides with cross-zone passes. Those are the most dangerous passes in hockey and good penalty killers know how to keep their sticks on the ice to obstruct those high-danger passes. You're going to cede shots on the PK by virtue of the situation; you cannot afford to give up high-danger passes across the zone too. 

If your penalty kill units can do those three things with regularity, it doesn't really matter the strategy you use defensively in your own zone and the neutral zone, because you'll probably have a great PK anyway. 

So what about scoring shorthanded?

You may be wondering about shorthanded goals and how those occur, since we have really just talked about defensive strategies. Shorthanded goals do happen every so often, but they aren't terribly common and coaches generally don't draw up specific plays to generate them. Shorties typically arise in two ways: either a bad turnover in the neutral zone by the power play team as they are trying to come up ice, or a loose puck in the penalty killing team's defensive zone that is then sent up ice for an odd-man rush. One important thing to remember about an opposition's power play is that it's going to be the other team's best offensive players, many of whom are not great defenders, so in the situations when a counter-punching chance arises for the PKing team, the opponent may be particularly vulnerable to a scoring chance, because they don't have the personnel on the ice to prevent it. 

As for the situations in which shorthanded goals happen, here's an example of the sort of ugly turnover by the PP team in the neutral zone leading to a SHG, that I was talking about: 

It doesn't get any more cartoonishly incompetent than that play (nor any more 2021 Buffalo Sabres than that play), but you get the gist. The PP team has the puck in the NZ or DZ, they do something stupid to turn it over, and suddenly a rush chance arises the other way for a goal. 

As for the other kind of shorthanded goal, this one starts where the PP is in the OZ with their foot on the gas, pressuring for chances. Suddenly, a loose puck ends up with the penalty killing team, be it off a turnover or simply a fortunate bounce off the goalie's pads. The PP is late to react, the PKers seize on the opportunity, break out of the zone with possession, and are off to the races with an odd-man rush. Here's an example of that where it's a combination of a fortunate bounce and a bad pinch by the PP defenseman at the line: 

The puck is rimmed around the OZ, the puck takes a strange hop off the boards and the defenseman on the PP, Neal Pionk (WPG4), can't find where it is. The PKer Nick Paul (OTT13) sees the loose puck, snags it, zooms around Pionk, and with the help of his rushing teammate Connor Brown (OTT28), he has a 2v1. Good passing ensues, and boom, it's in the back of the net. 

Most shorthanded goals arise because of two things: 1.) fortunate luck for the PK team, be it a weird bounce or simply a mistake by the opposing PP, and 2.) good hockey IQ from the PKers, who sense the situation and capitalize. Again, there aren't really any plays that coaches draw up to "create" SHG's. Rather, it's all situational, though teams do practice how to execute those sorts of plays, once they get the puck. Some teams teach F1 on the PK to begin creeping up the ice if there's a turnover in the defensive zone, to be ready for a potential stretch pass leading to a shorthanded breakaway chance. That combination of situational awareness and preparedness for how to convert when an opportunity arises is the 1-2 punch of how to score SHG's. 

Penalty Kills, in conclusion 

Like everything in hockey, there is no one particular way to kill penalties. Some units are passive and look to simply block shots, others look to pressure a bit and actively force turnovers in the DZ and the NZ. But the overriding traits that show up on good penalty kills tend to be universal, no matter schemes. Players who are hardworking and intelligent, those who can anticipate passes, get their sticks in passing lanes, win puck battles in the corner, and who are willing to sacrifice themselves for the good of the team are going to be successful penalty killers regardless of scheme. On any one PK shift you may be asked to block a shot, win a physical battle in the corner, and then skate the puck up the ice and drag opponents with you, allowing your teammates to change. It's a bruising, taxing responsibility to kill penalties, and that's why players who do it well are so valued. Coaches have schemes and general philosophies around penalty kills, but the amount of schematic coaching that goes into it is less than on the PP. Hardwork, talent, and individual effort stand out big time on the penalty kill.

To close this out, I want to leave a video of one of my favorite penalty killing clips of all time. This was Darren Helm in Game 5 of the 2009 Western Conference Finals: 

Helm gets the loose puck and heads up ice, allowing his teammates to change, and then proceeds to just skate around with the puck to kill as much PK time as possible. There was no coaching or strategy from Mike Babcock behind the bench here. It's just plain hard work and smart hockey from Darren Helm, outworking the opposition, winning puck battles, and doing whatever it takes to kill off that penalty to help his team win. That's the individual effort required in penalty killing at its finest.