Tag: Power Play

HIFK’s power play delivers in 3-1 win without Lehterä

By IceHockeyMan Editorial Team | Published:

Story Summary

Helsingin IFK ended a four-game losing streak with a 3-1 victory over Oulun Kärpät in the season’s first North-vs-South fixture. HIFK’s power play produced a goal even without Jori Lehterä, while Vincent Marleau scored to put HIFK 2-1 ahead – his second of the season. Kärpät’s Roni Hirvonen had earlier scored the 1-1 equaliser, while Kärpät goaltender Visa Vedenpää made several important saves in the second period. HIFK registered 17 shots on goal after managing only six against Lukko.

Key Facts

  • Helsingin IFK beat Oulun Kärpät 3-1, ending a four-game losing streak.
  • HIFK’s power play produced one goal despite Jori Lehterä not featuring.
  • Roni Hirvonen scored the 1-1 equaliser for Kärpät.
  • Vincent Marleau scored HIFK’s go-ahead goal, his second of the season.
  • Kärpät goaltender Visa Vedenpää made several standout saves in the second period.
  • HIFK had 17 shots on goal in this match versus six in the recent game against Lukko.
  • Five-on-five play favoured Kärpät, while HIFK were more threatening on the power play and in quick counterattacks.
  • Matyáš Kantner controlled the puck in HIFK’s defensive zone during a spell in which HIFK’s defensive play looked disorganised.

IHM Discussion

The result offers HIFK both immediate relief and a clearer view of where progress is real and where work remains. The team improved its offensive urgency and shot volume compared with the Lukko game, converting more possessions into chances. That is evidence that HIFK can generate opportunities without relying on one player.

Yet the match also exposed issues at five-on-five. Kärpät had the edge at even strength, although HIFK’s defence prevented them from creating the very best chances. There were moments of unclear marking and hesitant decision-making, particularly during spells when Matyáš Kantner carried the puck in the HIFK zone. Clearer defensive responsibilities would help limit those lapses.

Why It Matters

The win ends a losing run and shows that HIFK’s special teams can contribute even without Jori Lehterä. Vincent Marleau’s second goal of the season is another positive, while Kärpät goaltender Visa Vedenpää’s second-period saves kept the visitors in the game. HIFK’s five-on-five play still leaves room for improvement, so this was a step forward rather than a finished product.

Mini Q&A

Did HIFK end their losing streak?

Yes. HIFK ended a four-game losing run with a 3-1 win over Oulun Kärpät.

Was Jori Lehterä playing in the match?

No. HIFK’s power play produced a goal without Jori Lehterä in the lineup.

Who scored HIFK’s go-ahead goal?

Vincent Marleau scored to put HIFK 2-1 ahead; it was his second goal of the season.

How did Visa Vedenpää perform?

Kärpät goaltender Visa Vedenpää made several important saves in the second period, helping keep his team in the game.

Coach Mark Comment

HIFK’s power play created danger without Lehterä, but the five-on-five picture was less convincing. The next coaching priority is clearer defensive-zone communication, especially when opponents are able to carry the puck through the zone.

IHM Final View

HIFK’s 3-1 victory is a meaningful corrective after a string of defeats, with the power play providing a clear positive. Kärpät goaltender Visa Vedenpää’s saves kept the margin tight, while HIFK still need greater control at five-on-five and clearer defensive roles to build on the result.

Kimmo Rintanen praises L-line’s chemistry as TPS power play clicks

By IceHockeyMan Editorial Team | Published:

Story Summary

Kimmo Rintanen, back at TPS after five seasons as an assistant coach with Swiss club Kloten in the NL, is encouraged by the strong start from TPS’s L-line and the club’s power play. Rintanen, who served as TPS assistant coach from 2015-2021 (except 2016-17 when he worked with the A-junior team), now oversees the team’s power-play work. He highlighted the on-ice chemistry and leadership of the L-line – 26-year-old Lukas Wernblom, 29-year-old Lukas Haudum and 33-year-old Lars Bryggman – and noted that TPS’s only goal against Sport came on the power play during the opening rounds.

Key Facts

  • Kimmo Rintanen is TPS assistant coach and responsible for the club’s power play.
  • Rintanen served as TPS assistant coach from 2015 to 2021, with the 2016-17 season spent as an A-junior assistant.
  • He spent the previous five seasons working abroad as an assistant coach with Kloten in Switzerland’s NL.
  • Rintanen said his return to Finland was welcome because his family is now nearby after living in Switzerland without them.
  • Rintanen contrasts Liiga’s more tactical, tight and physical game with the NL’s more open, faster and attack-oriented play, noting greater puck skill among top players in Switzerland.
  • TPS’s power play has been performing well in the first three rounds; TPS’s only goal against Sport came on the power play.
  • The L-line is formed by Lukas Wernblom (26), Lukas Haudum (29) and Lars Bryggman (33).
  • Rintanen said the trio has created many dangerous situations in every game and carries significant responsibility and ice time, including on the power play.
  • Off the ice, Rintanen praised the line for setting an example in their roles and behaviour, singling out Bryggman for his experience and understanding of what winning teams require.
  • Rintanen described Haudum as competitive, hardworking and eager to develop, and Wernblom as the youngest of the trio who has played effectively and produced consistent results at TPS year after year.
  • According to Liiga, Wernblom’s start to the season is historical: no TPS player had previously recorded seven points in the first two games of a season.

IHM Discussion

Rintanen’s return to TPS brings back a coach who knows the club and has extensive experience of Swiss hockey. That dual perspective offers useful context as he oversees the power play. The early evidence is encouraging: TPS’s power play has run smoothly through the first three rounds, and the club’s only goal against Sport came on the man advantage.

The L-line combines Bryggman’s experience, Haudum’s competitive drive and Wernblom’s productive start to the season. Rintanen highlighted both the trio’s on-ice cohesion, particularly in the offensive zone, and its example-setting away from the rink. That blend helps explain the line’s substantial ice time and power-play role early in the campaign.

Rintanen’s comparison of Liiga and the NL also underlines the differing demands of the two leagues. He sees Liiga as more tactical, tighter and more physical, while describing the Swiss game as more open, faster and attack-oriented.

Why It Matters

A functioning power play can be decisive in close Liiga games, and TPS have made an encouraging start on the man advantage. The L-line’s early chemistry, substantial role and leadership example give the club a valuable foundation. If the trio maintains that connection, it can remain an important source of offence and experience for TPS.

Mini Q&A

Who is Kimmo Rintanen and what is his role at TPS?

Kimmo Rintanen is TPS’s assistant coach responsible for the team’s power play; he previously worked as TPS assistant coach from 2015-2021 (except 2016-17) and spent the last five seasons as an assistant at Kloten in Switzerland’s NL.

Which players make up the L-line?

The L-line consists of Lukas Wernblom (26), Lukas Haudum (29) and Lars Bryggman (33).

How has TPS’s power play started the season?

TPS’s power play has been running well in the first three rounds, and the team’s only goal against Sport came on the power play.

What did Rintanen say about the differences between Liiga and the Swiss NL?

Rintanen said Liiga tends to be more tactical, tighter and more physical, whereas the Swiss NL is more open, faster and attack-oriented with more puck skill among top players.

What historical milestone involving Lukas Wernblom was noted?

According to Liiga, no TPS player had previously recorded seven points in the first two games of a season; Wernblom’s start reached that seven-point mark.

Coach Mark Comment

The early value of this line is its ability to create chances while carrying a sizeable workload. The coaching priority is to keep its power-play reads clear and ensure the three forwards remain connected when opponents begin to adjust.

IHM Final View

Rintanen’s return gives TPS a coach with experience of both Liiga and the Swiss NL, while the early power-play form and L-line chemistry offer encouraging signs. Bryggman, Haudum and Wernblom have quickly taken on a significant role for the club.

What Is a Minor Penalty in Ice Hockey?

IHM Knowledge Center

What Is a Minor Penalty in Ice Hockey?

What is the most common type of penalty in hockey, and how does it affect the number of players on the ice?

Editor: Coach Mark • Updated: April 19, 2026

Short Answer

A minor penalty is a 2-minute penalty given for common rule violations, causing the penalized team to play shorthanded.

Full Explanation

Minor penalties are the most frequent penalties in hockey and are called for standard infractions such as tripping, hooking, or slashing.

When a minor penalty is assessed, the penalized player leaves the ice for two minutes, and their team must play with one fewer player.

This creates a power play for the opposing team.

If the opposing team scores during the power play, the minor penalty ends early.

NHL vs IIHF Rule Differences

Both NHL and IIHF use 2-minute minor penalties for most standard infractions.

The rules regarding power plays and penalty duration are very similar.

Minor differences may exist in how strictly certain infractions are enforced.

The structure remains consistent.

Common Minor Penalties

Minor penalties are given for a wide range of infractions, including:

These penalties are meant to control gameplay and ensure fairness.

Why These Calls Are Controversial

Minor penalties are controversial because they can significantly impact the game by creating power play opportunities.

Fans may disagree with the severity or timing of the call.

Controversy usually arises from:

  • Soft or borderline calls
  • Game context
  • Consistency of officiating
  • Impact on scoring chances

Even small infractions can change the outcome of a game.

Edge Case: Goal Scored During Power Play

A key edge case occurs when the opposing team scores during a minor penalty.

In this case, the penalty immediately ends, and the penalized player returns to the ice.

This does not apply to major penalties, which continue regardless of goals scored.

This rule affects strategy during power plays.

IHM Signal System: How to Read the Situation

To identify a minor penalty situation, focus on these signals:

  • Infraction signal: Was a standard rule violated?
  • Severity signal: Was the action non-dangerous but illegal?
  • Game impact signal: Does it result in a power play?

Trigger-level rule:

If a player commits a standard infraction that affects play but is not severe, a minor penalty is almost always called.

If the infraction is more dangerous, a major or match penalty may be assessed instead.

IHM Insight: Why This Rule Is Misunderstood

Minor penalties are misunderstood because fans often focus on the severity of the contact rather than the rule violation itself.

Even small infractions can result in penalties if they affect the play.

The rule is about fairness and control, not just impact.

Understanding rule vs impact is key.

Mini Q&A

What is a minor penalty?
A 2-minute penalty for common infractions.

Does it create a power play?
Yes.

Can it end early?
Yes, if a goal is scored.

What are common examples?
Tripping, hooking, slashing.

Why is it used?
To control gameplay.

Why This Rule Exists

The minor penalty rule exists to enforce standard rules and maintain fairness without overly punishing players.

It keeps the game controlled and structured.

Key Takeaways

  • Minor penalties last 2 minutes
  • Create power plays
  • End early if goal is scored
  • Used for common infractions
  • Maintain game control

What Is a Power Play in Ice Hockey?

IHM Knowledge Center

What Is a Power Play in Hockey?

What is a power play in hockey, how does it create an advantage, and what determines when it starts and ends?

Editor: Coach Mark • Updated: April 11, 2026

Short Answer

A power play occurs when one team has more players on the ice due to an opponent’s penalty, creating a temporary man advantage.

Full Explanation

A power play is created when a player from one team is sent to the penalty box, forcing that team to play with fewer skaters for a set amount of time.

The opposing team gains a numerical advantage, most commonly 5-on-4, although situations like 5-on-3 can also occur.

This advantage allows the attacking team to control the puck, create space, and generate higher-quality scoring chances.

The power play continues until the penalty time expires or a goal is scored, depending on the type of penalty.

This is closely related to “man advantage hockey”, “penalty box rules hockey”, and “special teams hockey systems”.

How a Power Play Starts and Ends

A power play begins when the referee signals a penalty and the penalized player leaves the ice.

It ends in one of three main ways:

  • The penalty time expires
  • The attacking team scores (for most minor penalties)
  • A new penalty changes the on-ice player balance

Major penalties, however, continue for the full duration even if a goal is scored.

Types of Power Play Situations

Power plays vary depending on the number of players involved:

Each situation creates different spacing, passing lanes, and tactical setups.

NHL vs IIHF Power Play Differences

Both NHL and IIHF follow the same core rules, but game pace and tactical execution can differ.

NHL power plays often rely heavily on structured formations and quick puck movement, while international play may emphasize more direct shooting and simpler setups.

These differences affect scoring rates and tactical approaches.

Decision & Controversy Layer

Power plays can become controversial due to how penalties are called and interpreted.

Fans often focus on whether a penalty “should have been called,” while referees judge based on rule violations and positioning.

A borderline call can completely change game momentum by creating a power play opportunity.

This leads to debate in “power play penalty calls hockey”, “soft penalty controversy NHL”, and “game changing penalties hockey”.

Edge Case: Simultaneous Penalties and No Power Play

An important edge case occurs when both teams receive penalties at the same time.

In these situations, teams may play 4-on-4 instead of creating a power play, because both sides lose a player equally.

This changes game dynamics completely and removes the expected advantage.

IHM Signal System

Signal: Space Creation vs Defensive Collapse

To understand power plays, focus on how space is created and used:

  • Is the attacking team spreading the defense?
  • Are passing lanes opening between players?
  • Is the defense collapsing toward the net?
  • Is puck movement forcing goalie repositioning?

Trigger-level rule:

If the attacking team maintains controlled puck movement and forces defensive rotation, a high-quality scoring chance will almost always develop.

If puck movement is slow or predictable, the advantage is reduced.

IHM Insight

Most fans think a power play is just about having more players, but the real advantage comes from structure and puck movement.

At the professional level, teams use specific formations to manipulate defensive positioning and create shooting lanes.

A poorly executed power play can look ineffective despite the numerical advantage.

The difference between average and elite teams is how efficiently they convert space into scoring chances.

Mini Q&A: Power Play Explained

  • What creates a power play?
    A penalty that forces the opponent to play with fewer players.
  • Does a power play end after a goal?
    Yes, for most minor penalties.
  • What is a 5-on-3 power play?
    A two-player advantage situation.
  • Can both teams have penalties at the same time?
    Yes, which can cancel out the power play.
  • Why do some power plays fail?
    Due to poor puck movement and lack of structure.

Why This Rule Exists

The power play rewards teams for drawing penalties and enforces discipline by penalizing rule violations with a competitive disadvantage.

Key Takeaways

  • A power play creates a man advantage.
  • It begins after a penalty is called.
  • Structure and puck movement determine success.
  • Not all advantages lead to goals.
Vancouver Canucks 3-5 Winnipeg Jets | IHM Game Recap

Vancouver Canucks 3-5 Winnipeg Jets | IHM Game Recap

Vancouver Canucks 3-5 Winnipeg Jets

Date: November 12, 2025   |   Author: IHM News

Deck: Special teams swung the night – Winnipeg scored twice on the power play and survived a late push before sealing it with an empty-netter.

At Rogers Arena, Winnipeg cooled off Vancouver with a 5-3 road victory built on crisp special-teams execution and a steady night from Connor Hellebuyck (30 saves). The Canucks actually grabbed a brief lead in the first, but a rapid two-goal response from the Jets flipped the script and forced Vancouver to chase. A scoreless second tightened the screws before Winnipeg’s power play struck again early in the third; Brock Boeser’s late goal gave the building life, yet Alex Iafallo hit the empty net to close it out.

How the game flowed

First period: Winnipeg opened through Jansen Harkins/Toews J. (listed as Toews J. on the feed) at 4:57 for 0-1. Vancouver answered at 10:21 via Kiefer Sherwood (1-1), then took a 2-1 edge on a Jay DeBrusk power-play marker at 11:58. Winnipeg answered immediately: Josh Morrissey tied it 2-2 on the PP at 14:38, and Nino Niederreiter pushed the Jets ahead 2-3 at 14:53.

Second period: Tight, heavy sticks and blocked lanes. No scoring; Vancouver switched in net as Kevin Lankinen relieved Thatcher Demko to start the frame.

Third period: Another Winnipeg PP conversion – Gabriel Vilardi made it 2-4 at 0:48. Vancouver kept grinding and Brock Boeser cut it to 3-4 at 18:30. With the Canucks’ net empty, Alex Iafallo finished it off at 19:14 for 3-5.

Numbers box

  • Shots on goal: Vancouver 33, Winnipeg 30
  • Shooting %: VAN 9.09% (3/33), WPG 16.67% (5/30)
  • Power play: VAN 1/2, WPG 2/4 (two key conversions – Morrissey, Vilardi)
  • Blocks: VAN 17, WPG 14
  • Goaltenders: Demko/Lankinen combined 25 saves on 29; Hellebuyck 30/33 (90.9% SV)
  • Penalties (min): VAN 4 (8), WPG 2 (4)
  • Game-winners: Vilardi PP early 3rd proved decisive; Iafallo EN sealed it

Team notes

  • Jets: Top unit moved the puck quickly through the flank and bumper; Morrissey’s one-touch timing dismantled Vancouver’s box. Hellebuyck was tidy on screens and tips.
  • Canucks: First-period push was strong, but the parade to the box in the opening frame ceded momentum. Boeser continues to be the late-game threat.

Coach Mark comment

Winnipeg won the situational minutes – goals inside 2-3 shifts of swings, especially after Vancouver’s PP marker. Morrissey controlled the weak-side seam, and Vilardi’s inside-lane timing on the third-period PP is tape-to-teach. Vancouver’s PK spacing got stretched east-west; that’s the clip they’ll work on before the next one.

Questions & Answers | IHM Performance Metrics

Q: What was the turning point?
A: The 15-second, two-goal reply in the first (Morrissey PPG, then Niederreiter 5-on-5) flipped score effects and forced Vancouver to chase.

Q: Why did the Jets’ power play work?
A: Quick puck speed through the flank to the point, Morrissey shooting without dusting it, and Vilardi arriving to the slot line on time.

Q: Did Vancouver deserve more at 5-on-5?
A: They edged shots 33-30 and zone time was fine, but Winnipeg owned the high-leverage sequences (special teams + goalie saves).

Q: Goalie edge?
A: Hellebuyck’s 30/33 with strong rebound control vs. a Canucks tandem at 25/29; that’s the difference in a one-goal game before the EN.

Q: Any lineup nuggets?
A: Jets’ top pair (Morrissey-DeMelo) handled the heavy minutes; Boeser’s line generated Vancouver’s late push and should stay intact.

More NHL news on IHM

Colorado Avalanche 4-1 Anaheim Ducks | IHM Game Recap
Colorado Avalanche 4-1 Anaheim Ducks - Finished | IHM Game Recap

Colorado Avalanche 4-1 Anaheim Ducks | IHM Game Recap

Colorado Avalanche 4-1 Anaheim Ducks

November 12, 2025 – Author: IHM News

Wedgewood turns away 35 shots; Necas nets the dagger on the power play as Colorado controls the third.

Colorado snapped out quickly and never really let go, beating the Anaheim Ducks 4-1 at home after a wire-to-wire, shot-heavy night. Artturi Lehkonen scored 28 seconds in, Gabriel Landeskog restored the lead in the second, and Martin Necas delivered the key third-period power-play strike before an empty-netter sealed it. Scott Wedgewood handled the rest with a composed 35-save performance, outdueling Lukas Dostal as the Avalanche managed special teams and game state down the stretch.

How it happened

First period – 1-1. Colorado set the tone immediately: Lehkonen finished from the slot at 00:28 off touches from Nathan MacKinnon and Cale Makar. Anaheim answered late when Leo Carlsson tied it 1-1 at 18:16, capping a greasy sequence around the crease. The frame also featured a parade of minors that foreshadowed a special-teams-tilted night.

Second period – 2-1 COL. With the game tightening, the Avalanche leaned on their forecheck and blue-line activation. Gabriel Landeskog snapped the 1-1 deadlock at 11:37, finishing a feed from Valeri Nichushkin with defenseman Sam Malinski jumping into the play.

Third period – Avalanche close the door. A delay-of-game minor put Anaheim under pressure, and Colorado cashed: Necas ripped the PPG at 07:02 (Lehkonen, MacKinnon) for a crucial two-goal cushion. With Dostal pulled, Parker Kelly iced it into the empty net at 17:39 (MacKinnon, Nelson). From there, Wedgewood’s structure-clean lanes, square on first shots-did the rest.

Numbers Box

  • Shots on goal: COL 36, ANA 36
  • Shots off target: COL 15, ANA 9
  • Shooting %: COL 11.11% (4/36), ANA 2.78% (1/36)
  • Blocked shots: COL 19, ANA 13
  • Goalie saves: Wedgewood (COL) 35/36 – 97.22%; Dostal (ANA) 32/36 – 91.43%
  • Penalties: COL 3, ANA 5
  • PIM: COL 6, ANA 10
  • Power play: COL 1/5, ANA 0/3
  • Notable: Lehkonen GWG + 2-point night; MacKinnon 2 A; Necas PPG; Colorado wins the special-teams battle.

Team Notes

  • Colorado: Fast start metric matters-Lehkonen’s first-minute goal set the ice tilt. Blue line activation (Makar/Toews/Malinski) drove the middle frame.
  • Anaheim: Created volume (36 SOG) but struggled to get interior looks; 0-for-4 on the power play proved costly.

Coach Mark Comment

Colorado’s neutral-zone work funneled Anaheim outside and protected the slot. The third-period detail on the PP was clinical- quick puck speed, middle-lane presence, and a one-touch finish from Necas. Wedgewood’s reads were calm, especially on east-west.

Questions & Answers | IHM Performance Metrics

Q1: What was the true separator at 5-on-5?

A: Colorado’s controlled exits and layered entries-defenseman activation plus F3 discipline-tilted possession even with shots equal.

Q2: How did special teams impact the result?

A: The Avalanche went 1/4 and denied Anaheim on all four attempts; the single PPG arrived at a clutch game state to make it 3-1.

Q3: Which matchup mattered most?

A: MacKinnon’s line versus Anaheim’s top six; Colorado generated interior touches and drew the key penalty that led to the dagger.

Q4: Goalie edge?

A: Wedgewood (97.22% SV) out-performed Dostal (91.43%), particularly on first-chance looks from the dots.

Q5: What’s the takeaway for the next meeting?

A: If Anaheim doesn’t win the net-front and PP entries, Colorado’s pace and blue-line support will keep dictating shot quality.

More NHL news on IHM

Top-10 Hockey News & Rumors of the Week
New York Rangers 6-3 Nashville Predators | Game Recap | IHM News

New York Rangers 6-3 Nashville Predators | Game Recap | IHM News

New York Rangers 6-3 Nashville Predators

Date: November 11, 2025
Author: IHM News

Rangers Finally Win at Home, Snap Franchise-Worst Streak

The New York Rangers erupted for six goals at Madison Square Garden, snapping a franchise-worst seven-game home losing streak and earning a much-needed 6-3 win over the Nashville Predators. Artemi Panarin struck twice, Alexis Lafreniere fueled the offense with a multipoint night, and rookie Gabe Perreault collected his first NHL point as the Rangers rediscovered rhythm on home ice. For Nashville, Matthew Wood’s first career NHL hat trick wasn’t enough to offset defensive breakdowns and inconsistent goaltending.

Rangers Take Control Early

Mika Zibanejad opened the scoring at 10:39 of the first period, breaking a long home scoring drought for New York. Although Matthew Wood tied the game on a power play, Vladislav Gavrikov restored the lead late in the period with a quick strike that lifted the building and set momentum in the Rangers’ favor.

Second Period Surge Breaks Nashville

New York struck three times in the middle frame, showcasing pace, puck movement, and confidence that had been missing in previous home losses. Lafreniere sliced through the defense for a power-play goal, Panarin blasted a one-timer through Juuse Saros, and Will Cuylle finished a clean 3-on-2 rush to make it 5-1.

Predators Push Late but Fall Short

Wood completed his hat trick with two more power-play markers in the third period, but the Rangers countered quickly. Panarin banked a sharp-angle shot off a defender and in, stopping any Nashville comeback hopes and sealing New York’s first home victory of the season.

Numbers Box

  • Shots on Goal: Rangers 18, Predators 30
  • Power Play: Rangers 1/2, Predators 2/4
  • Goalies: Shesterkin 27 saves; Saros 7 saves on 12 shots; Annunen 5 saves
  • Notable: Wood’s first NHL hat trick; Perreault first NHL point; Rangers snap 0-6-1 home start

Coach Mark Comment

Rangers finally built a layered offensive game at home. Their pace through the neutral zone and quick-touch plays on entries created high-quality looks. The Predators generated on special teams, but their five-on-five structure broke too often. New York needed belief, and tonight’s execution gave them that.

Questions & Answers | IHM Performance Metrics

Why did the Rangers’ offense break through tonight?
They attacked in waves, supported entries better, and finally converted on Grade-A chances.

How much did Trocheck’s return matter?
His presence stabilized matchups, improved faceoffs, and lifted the entire top six emotionally.

Was Nashville’s loss mostly goaltending?
Saros struggled, but defensive gaps and failed clears played a larger role.

Is Wood’s hat trick a sign of long-term breakout?
The tools are real – shot, timing, positioning – but the Predators need more team cohesion to sustain his production.

What’s next?
Nashville travels to Stockholm for the Global Series; Rangers aim to build momentum at home.

More NHL coverage available now on IHM.

Vegas Golden Knights 2-3 Florida Panthers – Game Recap
Vancouver Falls 4-5 to Colorado in Overtime | NHL Recap | IHM News

Vancouver Falls 4-5 to Colorado in Overtime | NHL Recap | IHM News

Vancouver Canucks 4-5 Colorado Avalanche (OT)

Date: November 10, 2025
Author: IHM News

Vancouver Falls 4-5 to Colorado in Overtime | NHL Recap

Vancouver Falls 4-5 to Colorado in Overtime | NHL Recap | IHM News

The Colorado Avalanche escaped Rogers Arena with a 5-4 overtime win after a chaotic, momentum-swinging game that featured elite finishing, defensive breakdowns, and special-teams volatility. Vancouver erased a two-goal deficit twice, forcing overtime with a late power-play goal, but Colorado’s skill core delivered when it mattered most.

Nathan MacKinnon powered the Avalanche with a dominant performance, scoring twice in the first period – including a power-play blast – and adding multiple primary contributions across all zones. Vancouver responded with structured pressure and opportunistic scoring, solving Colorado’s defensive coverage in the second and third periods.

Game Flow

MacKinnon opened the scoring at 6:41 of the first period on a setup from Nichushkin and Makar, beating Lankinen cleanly from distance. He struck again at 8:10 on the power play, firing home a rebound after strong puck circulation from Olofsson and Nichushkin.

Vancouver cut the deficit to 2-1 at 11:47 when Leo Karlsson converted a rebound created by Hronek and Kane. Early in the second period, Kiefer Sherwood tied the game 2-2 at 1:44 by capitalizing on a loose puck around the crease.

Colorado regained the lead 3-2 at 0:28 of the third when Artturi Lehkonen cleaned up a rebound created through net-drive pressure from Burns and MacKinnon. Vancouver answered shorthanded at 7:26 when O’Connor jumped on a turnover and beat Blackwood to tie it 3-3.

Lehkonen struck again at 9:47 on the power play, finishing a crisp passing sequence from Necas and MacKinnon. But Vancouver refused to go away – Jake DeBrusk hammered home a power-play equalizer at 16:59, with Boeser and Hughes setting up a perfect shooting lane.

In overtime, Colorado sealed the win quickly. Gavin Brindley scored just 1:08 into the extra frame off a feed from Makar and MacKinnon, giving the Avalanche a hard-earned 5-4 victory on the road.

Numbers Box

  • Shots on Goal: VAN 33, COL 33
  • Shots off Target: VAN 22, COL 13
  • Blocked Shots: VAN 13, COL 18
  • Goalie Saves: Lankinen 28/33 (84.8%), Blackwood 29/33 (87.9%)
  • Penalties: VAN 3, COL 5
  • PIM: VAN 6, COL 10
  • Power Play: VAN 1/5, COL 2/3 (based on shown scoring events: MacKinnon PPG, Lehkonen PPG x2, DeBrusk PPG)
  • Notable: MacKinnon 2G, Lehkonen 2G (including PPG), DeBrusk SHG + PPG, Brindley OT winner

Coach Mark Comment

MacKinnon drove the entire game with pace and control. Colorado’s power-play puck movement was sharp, and Lehkonen’s timing around the crease created consistent problems. Vancouver showed real fight, but their defensive detail in overtime cost them.

Questions & Answers | IHM Performance Metrics

Why did Colorado control the key moments?

Their top line generated the highest-danger touches, and their puck retrievals on the power play kept pressure sustained. MacKinnon dictated tempo every shift.

How did Vancouver stay in the game despite defensive issues?

Their transition counters were efficient, and they capitalized on Colorado turnovers. The shorthanded goal was a major momentum swing.

What made Lehkonen so impactful?

His crease positioning and timing off MacKinnon’s entries created repeat scoring chances. He won most of the inside-lane battles.

What ultimately decided the OT?

Colorado won the opening faceoff, gained clean entry, and used a quick rotation to isolate space for Brindley. Vancouver never touched the puck.

More NHL news and updates on IHM.

Anaheim Ducks 4-1 Winnipeg Jets | IHM Game Recap
Anaheim Ducks 4-1 Winnipeg Jets | IHM Game Recap

Anaheim Ducks 4-1 Winnipeg Jets | IHM Game Recap

Anaheim Ducks 4-1 Winnipeg Jets

Date: November 10, 2025
Author: IHM News

Ducks dominate Jets with special-teams precision, extend home momentum

Anaheim delivered another composed, structured home performance, beating the Winnipeg Jets 4-1 behind two power-play goals from Leo Carlsson and a standout all-situations night from rookie Beckett Sennecke. Winnipeg generated a shot edge but struggled to break Anaheim’s layered defensive zone reads, while Lukas Dostal delivered calm, technically precise goaltending to steady the Ducks throughout.

Game Flow

1st Period: Anaheim controlled pace early and struck first at 07:18 when Beckett Sennecke buried a rebound created through Corey Gauthier’s entry pressure. Physicality ramped up, but the Ducks kept composure. At 19:03, Carlsson doubled the lead on the power play, snapping a one-timer off a crisp Terry-to-Kreider passing rotation for 2-0.

2nd Period: Winnipeg responded quickly at 04:22 through Kyle Connor, finishing off a Morrissey-Scheifele sequence. Anaheim stabilized fast, and Sennecke answered at 11:48 with his second of the night after controlled middle-lane support from McTavish and Gauthier, restoring a 3-1 lead.

3rd Period: Early in the period at 02:46, Carlsson struck again on the power play, timing the weak-side seam perfectly for 4-1. Winnipeg thought they pulled one back at 19:13, but a successful goalie-interference challenge overturned the goal. Anaheim closed out confidently.

Numbers Box

  • Shots on Goal: ANA 21, WPG 24
  • Shots off Target: ANA 23, WPG 19
  • Power Play: ANA 2/4, WPG 0/4
  • Blocked Shots: ANA 15, WPG 14
  • Saves: Dostal 23/24 (95.8%), Comrie 16/20 (80%)
  • PIM: ANA 8, WPG 8
  • Notable: Sennecke 2G, Carlsson 2 PPG goals, Ducks win special-teams battle

Coach Mark Comment

Carlsson’s timing on the power play keeps getting better. Sennecke showed real poise in tight areas, and Anaheim’s defensive reads were simple but effective. When the Ducks control their neutral-zone tempo like this, they’re difficult to break.

Questions & Answers | IHM Performance Metrics

Why did Anaheim control this matchup?

Their special teams dictated pace, and their neutral-zone layers forced Winnipeg into predictable entries. Dostal handled the rest.

What stood out about Beckett Sennecke’s performance?

His goal-scoring came from smart support routes and quick-release positioning. He consistently attacked inside ice.

How did Winnipeg generate more shots but fewer dangerous chances?

Anaheim kept most attempts to the perimeter. Jets lacked sustained slot penetration, especially at even strength.

What made Carlsson’s power-play goals possible?

Elite timing, clean east-west puck rotation, and Winnipeg’s passive penalty-kill spacing.

Is Anaheim’s home performance trend sustainable?

Yes. Their defensive structure and transition clarity hold up well against most opponents.

More NHL news available on IHM.

IHM Academy – Performance Metrics Masterclass • Lesson 1
Power Play Overload → Umbrella Rotation By Coach Mark Lehtonen · IHM Academy

IHM Academy - Lesson #11 · By Coach Mark Lehtonen

Power Play Overload → Umbrella Rotation

The best power plays don’t stand still.
They start in one structure and evolve as pressure shifts.

Overload creates pressure on the weak side and forces the PK to collapse and rotate.
Umbrella opens the high ice and shooting lanes once you stretch their shape.

The goal is simple:

Win numbers low → pull the PK in → strike high with layered traffic and deception.

Bad PP units run a formation.
Elite PP units run an evolution.

🎯 Objective

Use an overload entry and low-side manipulation to force the PK into coverage stress, then rotate into an umbrella to create:

  • 1-timer lanes up top
  • Slot seam plays
  • Net-front rebounds and tips
  • Extended zone control

We don’t chase a shot –
we manufacture the breakdown.

🧠 Core Concepts

PhasePurpose
Overload Set (3 players on one side low)Force PK into collapse, outnumber battles
Low Support + Quick TouchesFreeze the weak-side PK forward
Bumper Delayed MoveDrag middle PK defender down
Rotation Up TopStretch box → convert into umbrella
Middle Shooting ThreatIf they collapse again → seam pass option

This is three-dimensional PP thinking – puck, spacing, and timing.

🧩 Player Roles

Quarterback (QB-D)
Reads pressure
Buys time through deception
Initiates umbrella shift

Half-Wall Playmaker (F1)
Drives defender down
Low-high touch options

Goal-Line / Below-Goal Playmaker (F2)
Quick touch passes
Bait PK into switching coverage

Net-front (F3)
Screens → pops → high slot bumper timing
Battle positioning

Weak-side flank (F4)
Hidden shooter lane
Arrives as play swings high

🔧 Key Cues

  • Eyes up overload → attack the backside
  • Freeze PK feet before rotation
  • F3 always inside dots
  • QB never stands still
  • Bumper timing > bumper location
  • Use double fakes before high return pass

💬 Coach Mark says

“Standing PP dies.
Moving PP kills.”

“You don’t force shots.
You force panic.”

❌ Common Mistakes

MistakeWhy it kills the PP
Static formationPK reads easy, no breakdowns
Bumper too earlyMiddle lane disappears
Weak-side player watchingHe must arrive, not wait
Goal-line player passiveNeeds to be the bait engine
No net-front timingShots without layers = saves

🎓 Micro-Drills

Overload Touch Triangle → High Kickout
3 low players quick-touch
Kick puck low-high
Umbrella set → one-timer

Bumper Delay + Screen Switch
F3 screen
Pop high late
Return pass into seam

🧱 Summary

Overload earns gravity.
Umbrella weaponizes space.

We don’t pass for looks –
we pass to bend the PK shape
and fire when they’re stretched.

Elite PP isn’t a pattern –
it’s pressure, timing, deception, and structure discipline.