Has Blocking Shots Become the NHL's New Version of the "Trap?"

The hockey world was buzzing yesterday after a controversial article by The Hockey News' Ken Campbell made it to the Internet.

In his column, Campbell claims the New York Rangers are bad for hockey because of their shot-blocking mentality—a mentality that has been around the game for years.

Here's an excerpt from his article:

"

Part of the reason for this is I’ve grown to hate blocked shots. It didn’t used to be that way. There was a time when the blocked shot was an art, almost a thing of beauty, executed only by those players who could summon the courage to sacrifice their bodies to keep a puck from getting to the net. These days, though, there is no gallantry involved in blocking shots, otherwise everyone wouldn’t be able to do it. Protected by the best equipment the game has ever seen, players are no longer the least bit hesitant to put themselves between a slapshot and the net because they know there’s almost no chance they’ll get hurt. That’s why now when a guy winds up from the point, the defending team collapses in front of the net like a building being imploded. You call that exciting? I call it bloody maddening. But that’s the kind of play that has been earning rave reviews throughout the playoffs.

"

Bear in mind these comments come from a man who has never played an NHL game before in his life. To suggest there's no courage in going down to block a slap shot—no matter how much equipment the player has—is asinine.

It takes a lot to convince yourself going down to block a projectile coming at you at close to 100 mph is not only good for the team, but is not going to hurt. Ask Ryan Callahan how he felt after taking a Zdeno Chara shot off his ankle before last year's postseason. He missed the entire playoffs because of the injury. 

But has shot-blocking become the 21st-century version of the neutral-zone trap?

Back in the mid 1990's, the New Jersey Devils, under coach Jacques Lemaire, perfected the neutral-zone "trap" en route to their Stanley Cup in 1995 and subsequent championships in 2000 and 2003. By having nearly all your players in the neutral zone, it limits the opposition's chances of breaking out of their zone cleanly and increases the chances of a turnover.

Until the lockout in 2004, the NHL saw other teams adopt the "trap" in order to shore up their defenses. The game also became maddeningly bogged down by low-scoring affairs and a change was needed. Upon resuming play for the 2005-06 season, the NHL eliminated the two-line pass rule in the neutral zone in an attempt to allow offenses a way around the trap.

It was the NHL making a statement that the neutral-zone trap wasn't good for the game. Is the NHL going to do the same in regards to blocking shots?

Absolutely not, and to suggest otherwise is outright lunacy. Blocking shots has always been, and always will be, part of hockey. Would you tell a defensive lineman in football he's not allowed to bat down a pass at the line of scrimmage? Or tell a soccer player that he can't get in front of a kick? 

The trap is still used by NHL teams today. It's a label for a 1-4 or 1-2-2 defensive system, meaning one player goes in on the forecheck while four stack the neutral zone to prevent any home-run passes or up the ice. I don't hear an uproar to outlaw it completely.

Campbell's argument is also flawed because of the numbers.

In his piece, Campbell states no one attempts to block more shots than New York. During the 2012 NHL playoffs, it's the Washington Capitals, not the Rangers, who lead the NHL in blocked shots with 308, and they were eliminated in the second round. There was no mention of them being a problem in his article.

During the regular season, New York wasn't even the league leader in blocked shots (1338). Three teams finished ahead of them: Montreal (1341), Minnesota (1347) and, leading the league, the New York Islanders (1364).

How can you attack the Rangers for their "mentality" when they're clearly not the only perpetrators? It's biased reporting to fit an agenda to an argument and it smears the already-questionable reputation of The Hockey News that much more.

Blocking shots isn't bad for the NHL. Selective reporting, however, is.