3 Lines? 4 Lines?

VarsityDad · Post by **VarsityDad** » Mon Dec 17, 2012 10:49 am

We just played a top team over the weekend and got killed - bad. We probably shouldn't even be playing this level team. What was funny was that they only skated 3 lines all game, and their dominant first line played the whole game. They don't even dress a 4th line. And this team has a large JV team. We got destroyed bad. They skated all three lines all game even when it was hopelessly out of reach. Is this a standard practice among the top teams? Not complaining that they were piling on, they really could have named the score. Why wouldn't you want to develop more kids, especially sophomores and freshmen? Do the top kids need better stats or something?

allhoc11 · Post by **allhoc11** » Mon Dec 17, 2012 11:33 am

This has been debated for years on this forum, and the bottom line is there is no one answer, and this usually isn't a good thing for either team. The best answer is if it can be avoided (not a conference or section game) neither team should have the game on their schedule.

inthestands · Post by **inthestands** » Mon Dec 17, 2012 12:17 pm

No one develops in games like this.

In some cases sitting your top line isn't a good coaching decision. Say there is a top level team coming next on their schedule, everyone needs to be prepared for that game as well.

There are also those cases you mention where stat padding occurs, but that would be rare..

No one knows the answer other than the coach of that team.

MN_Bowhunter · Post by **MN_Bowhunter** » Mon Dec 17, 2012 1:07 pm

Welcome to Girls High School Hockey.

Is your school/community geographically close to the team that thrashed you? Do the most talented girls from your program transfer to that school? I've seen this enough times that I believe it's a recruiting tool. Make sure you humiliate and demoralize the competition so the young talent coming up knows they will never win unless they transfer.

To be fair though our team just got beat badly and then the next night did the same thing to a different team. We probably could have pulled up a line from the JV but didn't.

D6 Girls Fan · Post by **D6 Girls Fan** » Mon Dec 17, 2012 2:42 pm

The top 2 teams in the state play only 3 lines, despite having enough good kids to play 4. Maybe limiting the team is why they're #1 & #2.

Puck Hog · Post by **Puck Hog** » Mon Dec 17, 2012 4:03 pm

Wow I'm surprised, 4 lines? I'd say the norm is more like playing 2 lines and ocasionally the 3rd line. Rarely see 20 kids on the bench let-alone have them all play. Just my observations.

Good Luck!

Nimrod · Post by **Nimrod** » Mon Dec 17, 2012 4:47 pm

My daughter was on the "winning side" of one of these games this weekend. I can tell you that nobody wins in these games. Its no fun for either team. I could go on and on about why its just a bad thing for both sides and should be avoided whenever possible. However, Inthestands, IMO, hit this particular example pretty close. While lots of things were done to keep the score from getting even more lopsided (stopped using our PP line, started our second goalie, started 3rd line and gave them a little more work than normal - which is usually even anyway, stopped shooting late in the third, etc.), the coach still has to get his players prepared for the next game, which is a BIG one. IMO, its better to play in a lopsided game then take several days off and expect to compete well against a top team.

demongoed · Post by **demongoed** » Mon Dec 17, 2012 4:48 pm

From what I've seen the norm is 2 lines as well, 3 if you're lucky. On the girls side, it's the rare school that could put 4 lines on the bench night after night primarily because of the logistics of the 4-period rule. Most teams don't cut girls, and there are many schools that need varsity players to fill in during the JV game.

There are a few schools where running up the score is the norm, both on the boys and girls side . . .

sinbin · Post by **sinbin** » Mon Dec 17, 2012 10:14 pm

I've been on both sides of this coin, both as a player and coach, and in numerous sports. As a player, being on the losing side, I absolutely loathed a team that would feel sorry for us and take it easy at the end. Hey, you're the better team, you beat us, let us take our lumps and we'll make it a better game next time. That being said, there is a middle ground, although it's difficult to hit perfectly each time. Hockey doesn't have the luxury of playing out the games with 2nd and 3rd strings, although you certainly can let the 3rd and 4th lines (if you have one), play a greater proportion of the time. Maybe change shifts up a bit. Since the 3rd period is running time, you can take a little longer during stoppages to change shifts. I don't like just passing the puck around and not shooting, either. It doesn't help either team prepare for the next game under realistic conditions. What I do see often from the winning teams is a lack of discipline in that those players who haven't scored yet will try to carry the puck longer than they should and try to score on their own. I suppose that this actually helps the losing team since it's difficult to do. IMHO, I say that you continue to allow your players to play the game the way it's meant to be played while they're on the ice, but bend over backwards to do all the other things possible as a coach to respect your opponent and keep the score manageable.

Although I think that top teams honestly try to make their schedule difficult so that it prepares them for the playoffs, there will certainly be a game or two each year that are mismatches.

Now, in this specific instance, if I can read between the lines and my guess is correct, the coach may well have been justified giving his top line sufficient work to prepare for tomorrow night's game (if that's the correct one). As the losing coach hearing that kind of rationale, I may not like it, but I would understand it.

MNHockeyFan · Post by **MNHockeyFan** » Mon Dec 17, 2012 11:21 pm

sinbin wrote:I've been on both sides of this coin, both as a player and coach, and in numerous sports. As a player, being on the losing side, I absolutely loathed a team that would feel sorry for us and take it easy at the end. Hey, you're the better team, you beat us, let us take our lumps and we'll make it a better game next time. That being said, there is a middle ground, although it's difficult to hit perfectly each time. Hockey doesn't have the luxury of playing out the games with 2nd and 3rd strings, although you certainly can let the 3rd and 4th lines (if you have one), play a greater proportion of the time. Maybe change shifts up a bit. Since the 3rd period is running time, you can take a little longer during stoppages to change shifts. I don't like just passing the puck around and not shooting, either. It doesn't help either team prepare for the next game under realistic conditions. What I do see often from the winning teams is a lack of discipline in that those players who haven't scored yet will try to carry the puck longer than they should and try to score on their own. I suppose that this actually helps the losing team since it's difficult to do. IMHO, I say that you continue to allow your players to play the game the way it's meant to be played while they're on the ice, but bend over backwards to do all the other things possible as a coach to respect your opponent and keep the score manageable.

Although I think that top teams honestly try to make their schedule difficult so that it prepares them for the playoffs, there will certainly be a game or two each year that are mismatches.

Now, in this specific instance, if I can read between the lines and my guess is correct, the coach may well have been justified giving his top line sufficient work to prepare for tomorrow night's game (if that's the correct one). As the losing coach hearing that kind of rationale, I may not like it, but I would understand it.

Very thoughtful response, sinbin. Agree 100% with everything you said.

Bandy · Post by **Bandy** » Tue Dec 18, 2012 1:09 pm

inthestands wrote:No one develops in games like this.

In some cases sitting your top line isn't a good coaching decision. Say there is a top level team coming next on their schedule, everyone needs to be prepared for that game as well.

There are also those cases you mention where stat padding occurs, but that would be rare..

No one knows the answer other than the coach of that team.

Agree that it's not fun... But I think the original poster hit on the issue where someone does develop. Put 3rd & 4th liners in more. Especially in the 3rd period.

If the top lines dominated the first two periods, I don't think they're going to rust in the 3rd period. Give some 4th liners and JV kids a chance to compete at the varsity level! They may still run up the score, as the losing team might be out of it, mentally, by the 3rd period. But at least you're trying to develop some players instead of padding stats.

As for padding stats--it may be rare because most players don't have stellar stats to pad. But I'm guessing that at least some of the players gunning for the Ms Hockey award are thinking stats big time. And I'm guessing that some of the coaches who nominate their star players are happy to oblige.

luckyEPDad · Post by **luckyEPDad** » Tue Dec 18, 2012 1:42 pm

Any coach that isn't a fool will play as many lines as she can. The number of lines you can play varies with your opponent. While playing Minnetonka you may only have two lines that can compete, so you play those two and get some extra rest by giving limited time to a third line. If you are in a blowout you play all the lines and maybe rest the first line to reduce the likelihood of injury. Your top players aren't getting anything out of a blowout and might even get lazy.

D6 Girls Fan · Post by **D6 Girls Fan** » Tue Dec 18, 2012 2:44 pm

Again, I point out that the top 2 teams run 3 lines or less - no 4th line at all - despite having talented and deep JV teams, populated by 3-4 kids who would probably make 80-90% of the Varsity teams in the state. If you think they're doing it wrong, their results back them up.

inthestands · Post by **inthestands** » Tue Dec 18, 2012 3:10 pm

Lots of differing opinions on this, as always.

Right or wrong, each coach will handle it their way and not worry about parental concerns.

They'll make decisions based on what they feel is best for the team.

sinbin · Post by **sinbin** » Tue Dec 18, 2012 3:57 pm

The fewer lines you play, the more fingers you cross hoping no one gets hurt.

U10Father · Post by **U10Father** » Wed Dec 19, 2012 8:55 am

Was at the big #1 vs #2 last night. Seemed like neither team went too deep and the best players definitely saw more ice.

Also saw end of JV game. Both teams have a couple very good players there. I assume that in blowout games those kids get to play some varsity, no? Kind of scary how deep these teams are...

inthestands · Post by **inthestands** » Wed Dec 19, 2012 8:56 am

sinbin wrote:The fewer lines you play, the more fingers you cross hoping no one gets hurt.

Theres lots of finger crossing on 90% of the girls teams..

luckyEPDad · Post by **luckyEPDad** » Wed Dec 19, 2012 9:33 am

U10Father wrote:Was at the big #1 vs #2 last night. Seemed like neither team went too deep and the best players definitely saw more ice.

Also saw end of JV game. Both teams have a couple very good players there. I assume that in blowout games those kids get to play some varsity, no? Kind of scary how deep these teams are...

Watched a scrimmage between BSM and EP JV. It was very early, but I was not impressed with BSM. Wayzata has a deep and talented JV.

Nimrod · Post by **Nimrod** » Wed Dec 19, 2012 11:18 am

U10Father wrote:Was at the big #1 vs #2 last night. Seemed like neither team went too deep and the best players definitely saw more ice.

Also saw end of JV game. Both teams have a couple very good players there. I assume that in blowout games those kids get to play some varsity, no? Kind of scary how deep these teams are...

I was there too. During even strength play, Tonka played maybe 7 forwards and 4 D; BSM rolled 3 lines with only 3 or 4 exceptions to avoid some of the first line vs. third line scenarios. BSM also went with 4 D. Tonka is obviously very good but their top players simply got worn out. After controlling most of the first period, BSM was called for a LOT of penalties in the 2nd and 3rd periods - which kept the game close and affected play time for players on both sides.

sinbin · Post by **sinbin** » Thu Dec 20, 2012 12:59 pm

Agree Tonka players got worn out (except for the several of them sitting on the bench most of the game). I think there were several Tonka forwards on the ice for 3 minutes straight at the end until the empty netter. If there's one criticism of Tonka, it's that they don't develop (or utilize) their 3rd line. The ironic thing is that they have several players who can compete very nicely with any opposing teams' lines, but they do a lot of sitting or playing JV. All you really need to do is have your 3rd line play even +/- and you keep your top line fresh(er). Yes, it worked for Tonka the last two years when they won State. It backfired on them the two years prior to that when they should have made it to State and challenged for titles, but lost in the Section finals each year because their top line was gassed. Live by the sword and die by the sword, as it were. One might think that a team with 8 future D1 players should never lose a game, but the coaches have yet to figure out a way for all of them to be on the ice at the same time for all 51 minutes. Using your 3rd line makes your 1st line better and results in more wins, both short term and long term, IMHO.

Bandy · Post by **Bandy** » Thu Dec 20, 2012 2:00 pm

sinbin wrote:... Using your 3rd line makes your 1st line better and results in more wins, both short term and long term, IMHO.

Well stated, sinbin. Agree.

It also makes the 3rd line better, which is important for many reasons -- like if injury or illness strikes a few star players. And some sense of fairness to the 3rd line players who worked hard & made the team.

MNHockeyFan · Post by **MNHockeyFan** » Thu Dec 20, 2012 2:58 pm

sinbin wrote:Agree Tonka players got worn out (except for the several of them sitting on the bench most of the game). I think there were several Tonka forwards on the ice for 3 minutes straight at the end until the empty netter. If there's one criticism of Tonka, it's that they don't develop (or utilize) their 3rd line. The ironic thing is that they have several players who can compete very nicely with any opposing teams' lines, but they do a lot of sitting or playing JV. All you really need to do is have your 3rd line play even +/- and you keep your top line fresh(er). Yes, it worked for Tonka the last two years when they won State. It backfired on them the two years prior to that when they should have made it to State and challenged for titles, but lost in the Section finals each year because their top line was gassed. Live by the sword and die by the sword, as it were. One might think that a team with 8 future D1 players should never lose a game, but the coaches have yet to figure out a way for all of them to be on the ice at the same time for all 51 minutes. Using your 3rd line makes your 1st line better and results in more wins, both short term and long term, IMHO.

BSM rolled three lines during the 1st period, which was very fast-paced and penalty-free on both sides. But as soon as the puck dropped in the second period the refs decided they were going to take over the game, and they started calling one penalty after another. This continued for pretty much the rest of the game, as one team or both teams had players in the box for what seemed like the majority of the time. Many were of course deserved, but there were also many that were questionable...for both teams. At any rate, for Benilde this meant that the 3rd line didn't see much ice time at all in periods two and three, as the coach chose not to use them to kill penalties or on the power play. So the the first two lines (plus the four defenders who played the entire game) started to wear down (as did the Skippers) as the game progressed.

The Benilde girls might have had a little more energy towards the end, probably because the third line took a regular shift in the 1st period and occasionally in periods 2 and 3 when the teams were at even strength. I wish the "game sheet" on the Hub included the penalties because I'm curious how many there were for each team.

Nimrod · Post by **Nimrod** » Thu Dec 20, 2012 8:07 pm

There have been lots of good comments on the BSM vs. Tonka game. Both are very good teams and both teams will be in the hunt for the Section 6 state tourney representative. They will have plenty of challenges from several Section 6 teams. The most current rankings have 5 Section 6 teams in the top 13 and 6 in the top 20. Having said that, some of the comments about third line players not playing as much in the Tonka game should probably be corrected. BSM doesn't really play a first line, second line and third line. IMO they have two 1st lines and a second line. They have spread their talent amongst these lines. They have not loaded one line like most teams do. Not saying this is right or wrong, just saying people should not assume things. And to be clear, BSM does not sit all of its 3rd line players when on special teams. In fact, one of their 3rd line players (again i would say 2nd line players) is one of the first players out there on the penalty kill. In my opinion she is one of the best in the state at penalty kills and no she is not my daughter. Just saying what you think you are seeing is not always reality.

VarsityDad · Post by **VarsityDad** » Thu Dec 20, 2012 10:04 pm

Sorry to touch off all the controversy. I was just wondering why BSM didn't pull some 4th line or JV players up when we played them, that was all. It's been answered. Fortunately, we don't have them again.

MNHockeyFan · Post by **MNHockeyFan** » Thu Dec 20, 2012 11:49 pm

Nimrod wrote:BSM doesn't really play a first line, second line and third line. IMO they have two 1st lines and a second line.

Nimrod, unless my eyes were deceiving me, Kelley Pannek's line started in all three periods. Granted, there is plenty of talent spread throughout the lineup, but wouldn't starting each period qualify as the "first line"?

Nimrod wrote:They have spread their talent amongst these lines. They have not loaded one line like most teams do. Not saying this is right or wrong, just saying people should not assume things.

I would agree that BSM's talent is spread pretty evenly between the first and second lines, but there is clearly a third line that does not get nearly the icetime, in closely contested games like this one, that the first two lines get.

Nimrod wrote:And to be clear, BSM does not sit all of its 3rd line players when on special teams. In fact, one of their 3rd line players (again i would say 2nd line players) is one of the first players out there on the penalty kill. In my opinion she is one of the best in the state at penalty kills and no she is not my daughter. Just saying what you think you are seeing is not always reality.

Sorry, but I must have missed that one of BSM's normal 3rd line players was out there killing penalties. Perhaps you would want to give credit where credit is due - because penalty killing proved to be HUGE in this game - and mention which player you are referring to?

In any case, however the line combinations played out, it would be hard to criticize the BSM coach, who played the players that he needed to play to beat No. 1 Minnetonka in a very important "statement" type of game.