Post by forrest on Dec 19, 2014 16:17:24 GMT -4
Size only has something to do with it when your along the boards fighting for the pucks. Not when your trying get the puck out of the zone. Limiting turnovers is done by moving the puck quickly and for that, you need speed which smaller players have.
Bigger/stronger players are usually stronger on the puck than a guy that's 3-4 inches shorter and 30lbs lighter.
Speed is definitely an asset, but in hockey, sometimes space is tight, especially against big and skilled teams. They take away time and space and put small players at a disadvantage. You can have a few, but not 7-8.
You're right that bigger players are stronger on the puck... But that's not what I'm talking about. The turnovers and low percentage plays that this team is known for aren't related to being strong on the puck. It's related to having guys out of position or not moving at all which often leads to players trying individual plays.
How many times have we seen a "smurf" get out with the puck along the boards only to lose it immediately after because he lacks the options of making a good pass or tries a pass that results in giving the puck immediately. In cases like that, the other 4 players don't need to be big and strong, they need to be smart and fast.
So yes I agree a team shouldn't be built with too many small players. But my point is there is a far more concerning issue regarding their defensive play that isn't related to their size.
I could draw you a picture, but my drawing isn't better than my handwriting.