HighSchoolHockeyForums.com

Question to those who have experience at this level - Is teaching the "dump and chase" as a strategy a legitimate system to use at the Squirt B level? This has become a hot issue on my son's team in that many say the kids need to work on carrying the puck (using their puckhandling skills) if they are to improve and while dumping and chasing may work ok right now, the kids will not get any better by doing it. I can see their point but cannot believe how much animosity this has caused towards the coaches. Just wondering what other's thoughts are. Thanks.

Definitely no dump and chase at the squirt and peewee levels in imho.

the strategy should be:

fun, fun, fun, skills, skills, skills, play all postions, repeat....

Definitely no dump and chase at the squirt and peewee levels in imho.

What about a 2 on 3 situation where two defenders await puck carrier at the blueline and the offensive teamate is covered by the 3rd defender?

InigoMontoya wrote:

Definitely no dump and chase at the squirt and peewee levels in imho.

What about a 2 on 3 situation where two defenders await puck carrier at the blueline and the offensive teamate is covered by the 3rd defender?

At the squirt level? IMHO they should be trying to stick handle around/through them and/or pass the puck to teammates whenever possible. Improve the stick handling and vision skills. IMO, dumping and chasing isn't a "skill" per se, atleast not the type we are talking about here. I'd rather see them try and take them on and try and beat them, try and carry it inot the zone themselves if there is no pass outlet. Sometimes they will sometimes they won't but that's how they learn IMHO. If they can't try that stuff at the squirt age when are they going to eb able to, by the time they are 2nd year pee wees and up it's basically too late to first start attempting that stuff. The teams that dump and chase and do system stuff now will look good now, the teams who allow creativity nd allow for skill development and stick handling will look good later when it matters more. Again, this is just my humble opinion, you are free to disagree.

Sounds like a turnover to me.

They can also try to shoot from behind the net, that doesn't mean they should. If it's just about going out and figuring it out for themselves, then why are there 4 guys with matching jackets standing behind them. Try the 1 on 3 stuff at the park, play smart hockey on your team.

If it's just about going out and figuring it out for themselves, then why are there 4 guys with matching jackets standing behind them.

IM that is the best question ever posed on this here board!!! I think you should present that question to the geniuses up at USA hockey. Thank you sir for sharing and take care of yourself we need you around!!

I think IM has a good point.

A coach who mandates dump & chase is eliminating options and that will inhibit players' growth.

But the same can be said for the coach who insists on always maintaining puck possession.

Teach them all of their options: deke, pass or put it somewhere safe where they (or a teammate) can go get it. Never panic as the puck carrier. If you are late in a shift, it is good to get it over the red, dump it, and get to the bench. Give the decision making responsibility to the players.

Teach them the situational ethics of hockey. And be patient, because they're not going to master this as B2 squirts.

Cowboy wrote:Definitely no dump and chase at the squirt and peewee levels in imho.

Alrighty.. I'm ready to get ripped on this one but I think that you teach good decision making by telling the kids to dump and chase.. especailly at Squirts. too many tommy toepulls and kids bringing the puck to the middle of the ice to try to beat two d. Most of the Squirts I would guess especially at B2 if there is such a team should learn the basics of aggressive forecheck and playing behind the opponents net. Things that they cannot do if they don't get the puck low. I would teach the kids to get the puck deep no matter how they do it.. 1. going wide on a rush...2. head manning the puck. and 3 yeah dump and chase. My guess is they will have more success down the road if they learn to be fast and aggressive rather than becomming an ovetchkin like dangler....Practice and outdoor rinks are there for the kids to be creative and try to do new moves. Don't sell the coaches short they might be giving your kids an advantage that will pay off in the pros..

InigoMontoya wrote:They can also try to shoot from behind the net, that doesn't mean they should. If it's just about going out and figuring it out for themselves, then why are there 4 guys with matching jackets standing behind them. Try the 1 on 3 stuff at the park, play smart hockey on your team.

Actually you posed the question about a 2 on 3 situation with one of the 3 defenders having the other guy. So in that case it's a 1 on 2 (not a 1 on 3)and frankly, at the squirt level a one on two doesn't require a dump and chase method (certain variables not withstanding). Assuming the teams are of similar skill level, which they should be theoretically if theya re in the same division, then stick handling through, or aroudn the side or carrying it in is viable at all levels not just squirts. As for the four other guys, well according to you one is covered and apparently the other three are trailing the play..... why????? As for the 1 on 3 comment, you didn't say 1 on 3 you said 2 on 3, big difference. As for "smart hockey" they are squirts, and in this scenaro B2's at that, that is an oxymoron of the highest degree. As for shooting from behind the net, if they think they can bank it off the goaltender then I say go for it. Now is the time to try that. I saw multiple goals scored up athe Minnesota meltdown from guys shooting from behind the net and having it riccochet off the goaltender, I thought it was brilliant they would even think to try that in a game. Creativity evolves the game, I watn an evolving game, not a stagnant one.

As for this comment:

Practice and outdoor rinks are there for the kids to be creative and try to do new moves.

The park can be a great place to be creative, I have yet to see an organized squirt practice where the kids have the time or the freedom to work on that kind of creativity. Games and the park are for creativity, games are the reward for practice. Practice is where you shoul dbe learning the proper way to skate, stick handle, play with your head up, and get the basics of the game taught and as yougrow older more advanced levels fo the game taught. Fancy moves are for the park and then hopefully in the right spots in games.

Please note I do not think there is a RIGHT or a WRONG answer here, but obviously strong opinions exist.

I disagree with you boys puck controlling teams are a blast to watch (even though at B2 level you just will not see it due to lack of talent) race horse hockey is too easy to play and it is safe hockey. 90% play that modern crap and it is vanilla hockey. Make the "4 guys with matching jackets" look brilliant and notches the W column which keeps mom and pop happy but we lose the team game. East is a program that constantly controls the puck and their kids are fun to watch. Red wings were the same a few years ago. You like that Gopher style? Come on boys think about it for a while especially at the young ages. 1 on 1's, 2 on 1's 3 on 2's 2 on 2's breakout, breakout against forecheck, breakout with regroup and you have yourself a team teaching your kids to use the other guys around them......priceless!

northwoods oldtimer wrote:I disagree with you boys puck controlling teams are a blast to watch (even though at B2 level you just will not see it due to lack of talent) race horse hockey is too easy to play and it is safe hockey. 90% play that modern crap and it is vanilla hockey. Make the "4 guys with matching jackets" look brilliant and notches the W column which keeps mom and pop happy but we lose the team game. East is a program that constantly controls the puck and their kids are fun to watch. Red wings were the same a few years ago. You like that Gopher style? Come on boys think about it for a while especially at the young ages. 1 on 1's, 2 on 1's 3 on 2's 2 on 2's breakout, breakout against forecheck, breakout with regroup and you have yourself a team teaching your kids to use the other guys around them......priceless!

I agree with you. I am not preaching that you should breed selfish puck hogs but teaching confidence and carying the puck with confidence breeds a better brand of hockey in the long term in my opinion. Some may disagree, they may like the other brand but there are those of us who like the other brand and think it's more fun to watch and eventually brings out more skilled and more complete teams by the time they reach high school.

Wow, thanks for all the replies. Obviously there is a time for dumping the puck (i.e. on the penalty kill or when trying to get a line change) but I'm skeptical about drilling into the kids heads "this is what you do when you cross the red line". Bottom line is that kids who play traveling hockey at the B2 level (or any level for that matter) want to become better hockey players (that's why their parents fork over the big bucks) and the more time they have with the puck on their stick the better.

northwoods oldtimer wrote:I disagree with you boys puck controlling teams are a blast to watch (even though at B2 level you just will not see it due to lack of talent) race horse hockey is too easy to play and it is safe hockey. 90% play that modern crap and it is vanilla hockey. Make the "4 guys with matching jackets" look brilliant and notches the W column which keeps mom and pop happy but we lose the team game. East is a program that constantly controls the puck and their kids are fun to watch. Red wings were the same a few years ago. You like that Gopher style? Come on boys think about it for a while especially at the young ages. 1 on 1's, 2 on 1's 3 on 2's 2 on 2's breakout, breakout against forecheck, breakout with regroup and you have yourself a team teaching your kids to use the other guys around them......priceless!

Vanilla? Tell Gaborek that his style is vanilla.. although chip and chase is a bit different than dump and chase. Watch a Pro game and you rarely see guys beating people one on one.

Take a step back and look at the original ? the fact that these kids are B2 Squirts has a lot to do with my original answer. We have Squirt A's that can't skate the puck from one end of the rink to the other without losing it and that is without pressure. Let them succeed instead of doing what every kids instinct is ...Take it to the middle of the ice and try to go through the defensemans stick. Creativity will come with them learning the team game and making good decsions. The puck control d to d to wing regroup d to d to center might work with an all star squirt team but ya gotta be realistic. I have coached this level for a long time and the kids that move up and have success keep it simple and make the right play.

dogeatdog1 wrote:

northwoods oldtimer wrote:I disagree with you boys puck controlling teams are a blast to watch (even though at B2 level you just will not see it due to lack of talent) race horse hockey is too easy to play and it is safe hockey. 90% play that modern crap and it is vanilla hockey. Make the "4 guys with matching jackets" look brilliant and notches the W column which keeps mom and pop happy but we lose the team game. East is a program that constantly controls the puck and their kids are fun to watch. Red wings were the same a few years ago. You like that Gopher style? Come on boys think about it for a while especially at the young ages. 1 on 1's, 2 on 1's 3 on 2's 2 on 2's breakout, breakout against forecheck, breakout with regroup and you have yourself a team teaching your kids to use the other guys around them......priceless!

Vanilla? Tell Gaborek that his style is vanilla.. although chip and chase is a bit different than dump and chase. Watch a Pro game and you rarely see guys beating people one on one.

Take a step back and look at the original ? the fact that these kids are B2 Squirts has a lot to do with my original answer. We have Squirt A's that can't skate the puck from one end of the rink to the other without losing it and that is without pressure. Let them succeed instead of doing what every kids instinct is ...Take it to the middle of the ice and try to go through the defensemans stick. Creativity will come with them learning the team game and making good decsions. The puck control d to d to wing regroup d to d to center might work with an all star squirt team but ya gotta be realistic. I have coached this level for a long time and the kids that move up and have success keep it simple and make the right play.

Come on dogeatdog, Squirt A's who can't carry it from one end to the other without losing it with no one pressuing them. I suppose it depend son how big your association is and when kids are starting, but on average that seems like a pretty big stretch of the truth. We have an extremely small association with only one squirt team period, that is it, one. So the "talent" is hugely different from kid #1 to kid #14 and there are some on the bottom end of the spectrum that struggle but the majority of kids can carry the puck without losing it. So I have struggle to believe that a minnesota Squirt A level team woudl have any of those kids.

I'm having a hard time imagining myself watching a kid trying to bank a shot off the back of the goalie and thinking, wow what a creative and brilliant play - I'm thinking, wow how jacked up that car ride home must be that a kid would be so selfish - the creative play would be to create a play that creates a score by including his teamates. Likewise, a kid that skates into two defenders and turns the puck over while his teamates are on a line change create a two-on-the-poor-goalie situation the other way screams 'not a team player' to me. I guess I'm too old school to stand watching a kid put on a stickhandling clinic around 5 kids when it's not the correct play - that will become a 'welcome to peewees, kid' situation next year.

Dog I am off pace here for a B2 thread, you are correct, I need to save my rant for A level thread instead.

even though at B2 level you just will not see it due to lack of talent)

InigoMontoya wrote:I'm having a hard time imagining myself watching a kid trying to bank a shot off the back of the goalie and thinking, wow what a creative and brilliant play - I'm thinking, wow how jacked up that car ride home must be that a kid would be so selfish - the creative play would be to create a play that creates a score by including his teamates. Likewise, a kid that skates into two defenders and turns the puck over while his teamates are on a line change create a two-on-the-poor-goalie situation the other way screams 'not a team player' to me. I guess I'm too old school to stand watching a kid put on a stickhandling clinic around 5 kids when it's not the correct play - that will become a 'welcome to peewees, kid' situation next year.

Give me a break. First of all it's squirts, not pee wees or bantams, anything that is out of the box and requires a creative thought process is brilliant and creative at that age. And what the heck is "jacked up car ride", maybe I am too old school to even know what that is. To call a kid like that selfish, or to even think it, is not old school, it's silly. Second, who said anything about changing on the fly and by doing so would create a "two-on-the-poor-goalie situation", I don't know hardly any squirt B2 level teams that change on the fly and NONE in which that scenario would occur. Good luck getting B2 kids to "change on the fly" as a unit, cause if they are that good to chaneg on the lfy as a unit either A) they are spending to much practice time on changing, or B) they are way better than B2 and I doubt they'd be turning it over for a 2 on 0. Also, who said anything about skating into the two defenders, how about throgh or around, why 'in to". FYI, there is NOTHING about dumping and chasing that makes some one a team player and there is nothign about it that doesn't make them a team player at the SQUIRT level. I don't care if it's squirt A's, B's or C's. All of it is a learning experience and all of it is supposed to center around teaching skills and having fun. Save the holier than thou stuff for the older levels. FYI, sometimes putting on a "stick handling clinic" IS the correct play. Not always, maybe not even a majoirty of the time but sometimes it is but the thing is if you can't do it at squirts, it's highly unlikely you'll have the ability or confidence level to do it at any other level either and if you can't do it AT ALL at the higher levels then good luck......

northwoods oldtimer wrote:Dog I am off pace here for a B2 thread, you are correct, I need to save my rant for A level thread instead.

even though at B2 level you just will not see it due to lack of talent)

I think I went a bit overboard the other way too.. bottom line is we all see the squirt A that can go coast to coast and win a game single handedly. On the same team you have kids that struggle to get the game and most likely will chuck the puck as soon as look at it. We as coaches need to coach to the level and if dumpin is in the best interest then dump...that is the beauty of squirts and the good coaches manage the top and bottom

If you coach dump and chase you are emphasizing the defensive game. If you coach carry the puck AND pass you are emphasizing the offensive game. Teams that are more skilled generally carry the puck and pass, while lessor skilled teams will dump and chase. More often than not the the teams that carry the puck and pass are the better teams and will win. However, If a team is truly outclassed the best game plan is to dump and chase, and/or ice the puck. I recently witnessed a game where a team should have lost about Twelve to Zero based on skill. They only lost Two to Zero as the coach instructed the kids to Ice the puck every time they touched the puck. That is right...the Breakout plan...Ice the Puck. There was close to Twenty or more icings in this game. My question? Good coaching to only lose Two to Zero instead of running time?

PanthersIn2011 wrote:Teach them all of their options: deke, pass or put it somewhere safe where they (or a teammate) can go get it. Never panic as the puck carrier. If you are late in a shift, it is good to get it over the red, dump it, and get to the bench. Give the decision making responsibility to the players.

There is a book called Whose Puck is it Anyway? where a AAA Mite (Novice) team in Canada - comparable skill level to Squirt B2 in Minnesota - had a Head Coach that felt this way. His assistants were Steve Larmer and Greg Millen. They wanted to make sure they let the kids play how they wanted to play. Emphasis was on helping kids understand the options available to them rather than dictating what the right play would be.

Pass, carry, shoot, dump, etc...

Panthers, you are wise to make this point. Sports today are "overcoached and undertaught". Your suggestion fixes that.

My original response was to "definitely no dump and chase". That is a flavor of the day response that takes no thought to give and elicits no thought on the receiver. Are there circumstances in which the puck should be dumped? Yes. Should the kids be taught to sling it as soon as they cross the red line? Absolutely not.

To think an 11 year old boy can be selfish is "silly"? Tell that to his little sister after he's eaten all the cookies before she gets off the bus. There are absolutely selfish squirts skating on the ice, selfish mites, as well; most of it comes from mom or dad jacking up their egos on the ride home by telling them how awesome their 9 goal shift was in the cross ice game; how many assists did he get? Well...none.

A squirt B team can't change on the fly? What? I don't know where you're from, but at the squirt B games I've been to they don't honk the horn every 90 seconds leaving the puck where it is, while five fresh kids race from the bench to get it. Mites used to do that periodically, mostly toward the end of the year - prior to the zero tolerance full ice nazis.

I certainly don't consider myself to be holier than thou, I just disagree with thou. I think if you want to teach a kid to stand flat-footed, continue to put him on the ice with a kid that teaches the stick handling clinics.

My original response was to "definitely no dump and chase". That is a flavor of the day response that takes no thought to give and elicits no thought on the receiver. Are there circumstances in which the puck should be dumped? Yes. Should the kids be taught to sling it as soon as they cross the red line? Absolutely not.

I am, in turn, not trying to insinuate that a kid should never ever dump the puck in the zone. My response was more to the idea of teaching a dump and chase SYSTEM at this age. Are there times to dump it at the squirt level, sure. Is it always selfish for a skilled kid to try and take on a couple of defenders 1 on 2, NO. Should you teach a system at this age, any system at all, IMHO no.

To think an 11 year old boy can be selfish is "silly"? Tell that to his little sister after he's eaten all the cookies before she gets off the bus. There are absolutely selfish squirts skating on the ice, selfish mites, as well; most of it comes from mom or dad jacking up their egos on the ride home by telling them how awesome their 9 goal shift was in the cross ice game; how many assists did he get? Well...none.

Well first, down here the oldest a squirt can be is 10, not 11 (rememebr we have different cut off dates). So when I think of squirts i am thinking of 8, 9 and 10 year olds (and yes it makes a difference because an 11 year old is likely a 6th grader in intermediate school, a 8 or 9 year old is a 3rd or 4th grader in grade school, big difference if you ask me).

To that end, I have three kids, and can they be selfish to each other, yes, of course. However you said that a kid who is behind the redline with the puck, recoginzes that the goalie is too far out of the goal and not in proper position, and then chooses to shoot the puck off the goalie into the goal is automatically selfish and is having some sort of "jacked up car ride home". I think that is a humungous stretch to think that, especially when the kid I saw do it I know to be one of the more unselfish kids on the team with a real good mom and dad (and no it's not my kid, that isn't is style, but I do not berate the style either).

A squirt B team can't change on the fly? What? I don't know where you're from, but at the squirt B games I've been to they don't honk the horn every 90 seconds leaving the puck where it is, while five fresh kids race from the bench to get it. Mites used to do that periodically, mostly toward the end of the year - prior to the zero tolerance full ice nazis.

When I think of "changing on the fly" I take it quite literally. Do our teams change players on and off the ice during the course of play, yes. Would I call it "changing on the fly", no. Maybe it's just a semantics thing and maybe it is changing on the fly by technical defnition but that is not how I took it. Changing on the fly to me means teams who change as a unit, who know to dump it and fly off the ice and get a change etc... etc... Most squirt changes I see are usually the coach yelling at each kid individually to get off the ice, half the time the kids don't listen, the other half they don't uderstand exactly when the right time to change is, and majority of the changes happen usually upon puck stppages like off sides, after goals, icing, the goalie freezing the puck etc....

I certainly don't consider myself to be holier than thou, I just disagree with thou. I think if you want to teach a kid to stand flat-footed, continue to put him on the ice with a kid that teaches the stick handling clinics.

I think there is a middle ground. I was always taught from the defensive position that if you want the puck then "go get it" (aka make the other guy not want to stick handle around you, make him want to give it up) and from the offensive position if you don't have the puck you need to move to get open so you deserve a pass. Again I do think team and associaiton size have something to do with being flexible n how you teach the kids. On our little team in our little town we literally have AAA caliber kids playing with kids who should be on innhouse Squirt C teams and everything in between just so we can field a team. It's tough to tell the AAA kids not to stick handle when they are usualy competitive and want to win while at the same time trying to teach them that if they give up the puck to their friends it will make their friends better and they will be better down the road. Kids have a tough time seeing further than what's in front of them. The higher end kids get visibly frustrated because they do try and listen and they try to be unselfish but everytime they pass the puck the kid on the receiving end can't even catch the pass. It's not either kids fault that they arguably are on a team that neither should be on but that is the cards you are deal depending on where you live. So as I said in an earlier post, there is not right answer and your teams situation probably dictates your point of view somewhat.

O-townClown wrote:

PanthersIn2011 wrote:Teach them all of their options: deke, pass or put it somewhere safe where they (or a teammate) can go get it. Never panic as the puck carrier. If you are late in a shift, it is good to get it over the red, dump it, and get to the bench. Give the decision making responsibility to the players.

There is a book called Whose Puck is it Anyway? where a AAA Mite (Novice) team in Canada - comparable skill level to Squirt B2 in Minnesota - had a Head Coach that felt this way. His assistants were Steve Larmer and Greg Millen. They wanted to make sure they let the kids play how they wanted to play. Emphasis was on helping kids understand the options available to them rather than dictating what the right play would be.

Pass, carry, shoot, dump, etc...

Panthers, you are wise to make this point. Sports today are "overcoached and undertaught". Your suggestion fixes that.

These responses seem reasonable. Lettign kids know what their options are and then letting them figure it out for themselves is part of skill development to me. The original poster led me to beleive a SYSTEM of dump and chase was being implemented and that is what I disagree with. That leads me to believe they are being taught to always and only do this. In turn I do not advocate a player always and only trying to take guys on one on one or 1 on 3 or 1 on 4 or whatever. If it sounded like that then I didn't make myself clear and apolgize. Teaching skills, letting kids know the options but then letting THEM figure it out at these ages is what I advocate. I think that is what these two posters are saying anyways.