Episode 129: Hockey's Equivalent of a Chess Match
00:00Are you ready for the most ridiculous internet sports show you have ever seen?Welcome to React, home of the most outrageous and hilarious videos the web has to offer.So join me, Rocky Theas, and my co-host, Raiders Pro Bowl Defensive Inn, Max Crosby,as we invite your favorite athletes, celebrities, influencers, entertainers infor an episode of games, laughs, and, of course, the funniest reactions to the wildest web clips out there.Catch React on YouTube, and that is React, R-E-A-X-X.Don't miss it.This podcast episode is brought to you by Coors Light.
00:37These days, everything is go, go, go.It's non-stop hustle all the time.Work, friends, family.Expect you to be on 24-7?Well, sometimes you just need to reach for a Coors Light because it's made to chill.Coors Light is cold-loggered, cold-filtered, and cold-packaged.It's as crisp and refreshing as the Colorado Rockies.It is literally made to chill.
01:00Coors Light is the one I choose when I need to unwind.So when you want to hit reset, reach for the beer that's made to chill.Get Coors Light and the new look delivered straight to your door with Drizzly or Instacart.Celebrate responsibly.Coors Brewing Company, Golden Colorado.Regressing to the mean since 2015, it's the Hockey PEDEOCast with your host, DmitriFilipovich.Welcome to the HockeyPedioCast.
01:27My name is Dimitri Filipovich.And joining me is my good buddy, Jack Hahn.Jack, what's going on, man?Not too much.I'm Matt McGill right now, so look into some video and, you know, try to figure things out for our team.You're always working, man.Every time I talk to you, you're always grinding.You know, I had you on this summer for people that may or may not remember.
01:49And since then, you've blown up a little bit.You got featured by the hockey godfather, Bob McKenzie.You're writing some stuff now for the Bloss.something athletic and you're still as you mentioned working for the university of mcgill women's hockey teamyep um trying to stay busy and you know doing hockey full time now so so very exciting got somesome really good stuff coming up at mcgill we're um you know we're we're definitely gutting fora national title this year we're we're all in and uh so hopefully we can we can execute well okaylet's let's get into it because we've been kind of discussing back and forth uh in our messages
02:28sort of what we wanted to talk about here. And I think that it's a good opportunity for us to justget a little bit nerdy and discuss systems and fundamentals and stuff like that that we don'ttypically get to. So much of it is just sort of numbers-based analysis and we never really kind ofget it to dive into the minutiae of it. So I'm looking forward to having this chat with you.Yeah, absolutely. So I think that, you know, something that's near and dear to my heart is an areaof the game that I feel like for a while was underappreciated, but now it's definitely starting to gain moretraction and steam and and recognition for how important it is as the product's evolving.And that's the transition game from your defensive zone to the neutral zone and hopefully
03:07all the way through to the offensive zone if you do it right.And I know that you know you have some thoughts on certain forechecks and sort of how to breakthose and how to get out of your zone cleanly.So I don't know.Let's just like get into it.How do you think we should start this discussion?You know, you mentioned that very good article about.D-to-D passing from the Boston Bruins.
03:31Yep.Yeah.So that was Fluto Shenzawa at the Boston Globe.I think it was a few weeks back.And he basically just kind of laid out the idea that the D-to-D pass in the defensivezone is becoming a bit phased out as teams are, you know, as opposing teams are movingfrom the 1-2-4 check to the 2-1-2 alternative.It's making it, you know, defensemen are doing that less and instead opting to either kind of
03:58get it out of the zone themselves or moving it up to their forward.Yeah, so, you know, excellent point.He were a really good article.I generally enjoy the things that he writes about.And, you know, if you think about forecheck schemes, you know, the 2-1-2 is really,it's popular at almost every level of hockey now.And how that works is you send your first two forwards, F1 and F2,and they just go, you know, balls out.
04:29And your F1 goes in the puck carrier full speedand your F2 goes on his partner full speed.And you're trying to force is you want that defensemanwith the puck to play the puck up the boards.And because what happens is in hockey generallywhen you play the puck up the boards,you give a possession.So that's really a great way to get the puck back.
04:52And at the same time, your F3,you're one in that 212.he'll kind of, he'll hang back, he'll read the play.And if he can get a turnover, if you can get that puck and go, he'll do that, right?Whereas, you know, a few years ago, what was more popular, the one-two is your first guy,your F-1 cuts the ice in half.So he takes away that passing lane for the D-D.Your second player tries to go on the puck carry, and then once again, your third guy is reading.
05:22But 2-1-2 is a little bit more dynamic, let's say, you know, you want to take time,way and that's what you'll see mostly when you watch NHL hockey these days.So you think that most teams these days are sort of doing that more modern high at F3where they're kind of playing that sort of forecheck?I mean, it's really hard to say where that high F3 concept comes from because the F3 reallywhat he's doing is he's connecting the two four checkers and a defenseman.So if your F3 becomes too aggressive, all of a sudden,You have a huge gap and you can give up very easily an on-bat rush.
06:01Whereas, you know, if your F-3 is nice and patient and he reads what's happening and he can get the puck back and he can start to attack.Well, I think this is the sort of stuff that really intrigues me because it is like the ultimate game of chess here.And I think that finding the most efficient ways to move for one point of the ice to the other without giving up the puck is huge.I mean, hockey already just by nature has so many of these 50-50 puck battles, especially deep in the,the zone along the boards that I think if you can limit the number of them when you already have thepuck like there's no need to kind of start another one of those rather than trying to just pass it offto your teammate and get something going that way and I think that you know you watch a team likethe penguins for example and we hear all about how is a copycat league and and if someone's
06:45doing something well teams will eventually start to take it for themselves and I mean they'vehad a lot of success of the past year or so under mike Sullivan with this sort of a breakout schemewhere they basically just whoever retrieves the puck deep in his zone,just flings it up in the air and lobs it into an open sheet of ice in the middle of the,in the middle of the ice and just gets their speedy winger to get it.And, you know, when you have guys like Carl Hagelin, for example,or Phil Kessel retrieving the puck, I think your odds of completing it successfullyprobably increased, but I'm not sure how, you know,
07:15sustainable of an option that is for a lot of other teams out there that aren't blessedwith those types of players.Yeah, I mean, you actually see quite a few teams doing that.you know, Montreal does it quite a bit,maybe a little bit less now,and they're having a little bit more success.I find they're using lateral pass a little bit more,but, you know, Calgary does it.
07:33I think the Rangers do it quite a bit.Let me think.I mean, you know, most teams will kind of go for that long pass optionbecause they know that the other team is sending two four checkers.And the thing is that, you know,tactically, I find most teams play similar,but because of your, you know, some teams just don't have the talent.and they can't make it work for them.
07:55And that's how you see a lot of icings,a lot of uncontrolled exits,you know, a fairly poor coursey at the end of the dayif you don't have a good team.So, well, I mean, where are you out of that?Like, if you're coaching one of these teams,would you, like, I'm of two minds of itbecause on the one hand,
08:11I understand why teams are doing it.Sometimes it's at a necessity.You don't have any other options.And, you know, there are certain waysif you have the right playersand you're doing it at the right timesto increase your odds of successfully completing it.But I'm never a proponent of just giving away the puck just for the sake of doing it.
08:27It seems like I understand that hockey is a conservative nature by sport.And by nature, and teams generally like to just get it out of their own zone and outof harm's way and kind of worry about stuff later.But I think that it'll eventually come back to bite you if you just keep giving the puck awayoff the boards like that.Yeah.And I mean, I think tactically, you know, there's probably like a most efficient way to playthe game.
08:51But it really depends on who you have.and how they prefer to play, right?Because I'm sure that there's some people, you know,whether it's fans, media, or, you know,those working in hockey even who consider Chris Russelland Brian Campbell to be very similar players.Because they're undersized guys who are lefties and,you know, move the puck in a certain way.
09:11Right.But, you know, you and I both know that if you,if you tell Chris, Chris Russell to play the same way as Brian Camble and vice versa,you know, you're probably not going to like the results.So I think if, and that's where,we use analytics a lot at McGill is to value our players and track their progress and see,you know,how can we help those players find themselves in good situations to express their skill sets?
09:35Yeah, I think that's something we don't really, as a community, spend enough time consideringand walling over when analyzing, you know, just the raw production of players.It's how the role and the skill set of the people they're interacting with and playing with mostfrequently and the system their coaches using affect these numbers.And I think this is a perfect segue to a discussion we wanted to have about a guy like GabrielLandisog, for example, who has been in the headlines recently as a name, the avalanche are eitheropenly shopping or if not, then they're at least fielding a high volume of calls on.And he's an interesting player because, you know, he's always been a positive play driver
10:12in the sense that his team gets a larger share of the shots whenever he's on the ice versus off of it.And that's a good thing.But I find it a little bit alarming that his individual shot rate for himself isratered each season since his rookie year and we're at the point now where it's nearly half ofwhat it was in that rookie season. So I don't know, it's always tough to evaluate with guys likethat. How much of it is, you know, how much he's responsible for and how much of it is hisgame just not developing as much as we would have thought early on in his career and how much of itis just he's been put in a, in a tricky situation and maybe it might be the players he's playing
10:43with. I mean, you know, I don't know his situation intimately, but, you know, he's not gettingold. He hasn't been...Well, we're all getting a bit older, Jack.Yeah, yeah. But, you know,by hockey, even by hockey standards,he's still fairly young, and he hasn't hadany massive injuries that kind ofprevents him from playing his game, not
11:06that I'm aware of.But, you know, I mean, if you look at Coloradoas a whole, I mean, you know,that team as a whole has been trending downfor what, the past three, four years.Yeah. So,so, you know, like, it's,like, I would much rather look at
11:22the, you know, his surroundings then just say, okay, well, he's trending down.Right. Well, it's interesting because in that rookie season, he was playing a lot with a guy likeRyan O'Reilly, for example, who is more of like a prototypical center in terms of a guy thatwants to distribute the puck and is very good at retrieving it. And I think that for playingwith a guy like Lannisog, that lended itself well to him being a high volume shooter becausehe was put in a lot of situations to do so. But since then, he spent a lot of time with,you know, for a while he was playing with both Dushain and McKinnon at the same time and since he'sbeen playing a lot with McKinnon. And I think that's an interesting discussion in and of itself.
12:01Like if Landis Gog is just deferring a bit because, you know, he does sort of play thatthat style of game where he can go and retrieve the puck and get it to a guy like McKinnon.But at the same time, I'm not sure if I was coaching that team, I would be telling him to do soconsidering that McKinnon's quietly been one of the least efficient volume shooters in the leaguesince he came into the NHL.So I think that, you know,how much of that is responsible for itis also an interesting thing to consider.
12:26Yeah, because the thing with McKinnon is,you know, like I had the opportunityto watch him live in December.And, I mean, he's probably one of the best skatersI've ever seen, like, you know,on zone exits, zone entries, he's amazing.But once he gets into the offensive zone,I just find that he doesn't, like,
12:44he's a good shot, but it's not incredibly accurate.And I don't think he has,same nose for the scoring areas that Duchenne or even a gillistowe has.Well, it's tough because obviously you don't want to just write off a guy as sayingthis is just going to be the way everything's going to go for the rest of his career,considering McKinnon's like 21 years old still.You'd like to think that he'll eventually figure it out and find better ways to use hisspeed and get into those areas.
13:11But we're going on, what, three, almost four years now of him being like an 8.5% shooter.and you know everyone's going to point to a guy like evander kane as also being a similar type of player where like you watch him and sometimes he scores these goals and you're like he should be much more effective than he is offensively but then you look at the numbers then the season and there's just there's a there's a gap there yeah and for me like i don't really think a player's ability to get into positions to get shots and his ability to bury shots are necessarily you know the same skill at all because i thinkMcKinnon, you know, he puts himself in good spots.He can carry the puck.He can win the battles.But if you just look at him from a shooting point of view,you know, his shot is, it's okay.It's nothing amazing.
13:59Right.But I mean, he should conceivably not be like one of the worst shooters in the league, though.Like, I'd be like, even if he was like around league average,that would be a pretty dramatic improvement for his goal total.I mean, I don't have any difficulty believing that he's at least a league average shooter.So maybe it's just the case where, you know,magically next year he's going to shoot 10% and we're going to forget about this whole discussion.I hope you're right because I'm a fan.
14:25So for a guy like Landiscag, I mean, if you're a team like the Bruins has been rumored to be in on him or maybe the Kings or whoever, like I wonder how much of it is one of these things where it's very correctable.If you just put him in a better situation with players that'll be more like get him in a better position to succeed, how much his career will wind up kind of revitalizing itself or whether it is just something.where he's just going to be this type of playerand we just maybe overestimatedhow good he'd be early on.I think so because, you know,if you're saying that he had a really good rookie yearwith Rino Liley, who's,
15:01you know, a past first player, who's really goodin transition, who's also really good at winning battles,and all of a sudden he's not playing against,he's not playing with that kind of player anymore,or Paul Statsy, for that matter,you know, if you just put him with a player like that,I have a very hard time believe that he's not going to improve,magically, you know, being on a line that kind of plays more to the strength.
15:25Yeah.Yeah, that makes sense.Well, I mean, just that entire concept of putting players into positions to see.That's something that I know is near and dear to your heart as well.And you sort of touched on it, at least briefly, in your most recent breakdown videowhen you were discussing Thomas Vanek and how he's been succeeding in Detroit just based onthe position they've put him into.And it's very similar with the drum of it beating regarding what Columbus has done.
15:50with Sam Gagne this season, it's that, you know, these guys are basically hockey's equivalentof a designated hitter where you're not asking them to do much defensively and you're notreally relying upon them much at 5-1-5. But once you get into areas where you can score,particularly on the power play, you send them out there and they can actually be a net positivefor you. Yeah, exactly. And I think hockey's trending more toward being a generalist kind ofsport, you know, where it's very, like a lot of people, especially on Twitter, they're always askingyou know, like when is total hockey going to happen?Like, when are we going to have five positionless players?
16:23Well, it's going to happen when all five players are good at roughly the same things,which mean that, you know, like, in that kind of world, like, there's no place for a ThomasVannick or for a Sam Gagnan because, you know, they can't play the fast F1 role or they can'tplay the physical F2 role or, you know, they might not be smart enough defensively to playF3 or, you know, and they definitely can't play defense, so where are they going to play, right?So it's kind of like we're diverging a little bit here because if you look at a team like the Maple Leafs,and I think they've done a really good job of, you know,getting the young players into offensive situations,
17:00but also teaching them how to play F3, how to cover for a defenseman who pinches,how to move as a five-man unit.So, you know, when you watch the least play, like that's what you're going to see.You're going to see five guys who, if you didn't know them at all,like you wouldn't know who's the defense and who's the four.you know like jake gardner will routinely go down deep in his own and you know MitchMartin or austin matthews or uh william neilander they're getting better and better at playing thehigh f3 and staying up near the points and diving down only when there's an opportunity yeah and i think
17:32that that's definitely like the future of the league right as as as teams become smarter and evaluatingand as i mean you know players are just becoming more and more skill than more and more versatile andit makes sense that eventually, I don't know when that'll be.It seems like with hockey, it takes a long time for this stuff to sort of, for us to seethese actual changes, meaningful ones at least, to take effect.So I don't know when it'll happen.But I think that eventually we'll basically just see that where it's just, you know,five guys who are just very interchangeable and all can do pretty much the same thing.
18:03Yeah, like if you watch like high level minor hockey or if you watch like US high school hockey,like you'll see guys like, you know, the forwards can play defense.the defenseman can jump up into the attack.Like when I play high school hockey,like it wasn't a super high level,but we literally had guys who couldn't take a slap shotor who couldn't pivot backwardsor who couldn't take a one-timer
18:23or couldn't lift the puck in their back hands.But now like the kids,they're so good at, you know,learning from what they're seeing on TV,learning from YouTube,getting specialized skills coaching,that you're seeing less and less of that.And that's probably, you know,
18:38why the game is changing from a grassroots levelas well.Okay, something else I wanted to talk to you about while I still have you is this idea ofplaying slow versus fast and how the construction of your team should affect that.And I think that, you know, we still have very rough estimates of what quote unquote pace isbecause we don't have something like synergy stats or something like they have in basketballwhere we can measure it more accurately.Instead, we're using stuff like shot rates, which is open to a lot of error based on obviously
19:10is scorer bias, but also like, you know, a team like the Arizona Coyotes, for example,is third or fourth in the league in terms of pace if you look at shots for and against.And a lot of that is just because they're just getting absolutely buried in shots against.And, you know, their own shots four aren't necessarily that high.So if you're a really bad team, you're probably going to wind up looking like you'replaying pretty fast, even though you might not actually be.But on the other end of things, I think an interesting team is the Canucks where, you know,I think on most nights, it's fair to say that they're playing.
19:40probably going to be the worst of the two teams, at least in terms of ability and skill throughoutthe lineup. But they're playing the slowest pace in the league right now this season. And I wonderif that is something they should be doing because it makes sort of intuitive sense that you decreasethe number of meaningful events that are taking place. You increase the chances that, you know,you get a few bounces here or there and all of a sudden you opportunistically steal a win asand while you're like decreasing your exposure to other team's skills. So I don't know,Like if you were coaching a team that you knew was going to be playing an uphill battle every night,like is that something you'd want to sort of instill, just kind of slowing the game down and grinding it out,
20:16as opposed to leaving yourself open to kind of a back and forth track meet?Yeah, like I don't know if any coaching staff consciously, you know, decides at the start of the year that,okay, we're going to play a slow-paced game in terms of shots.Certainly you have certain players.Let's say, you know, the Sadiq is like they like to cycle, right?Like when you cycle the puck, nothing happens from a shot point of view, either for or against, for a while, you know, because you're on the, you're on the sidewall for like 30 seconds. You're moving the puck back and forth. And I mean, I can see it from that point of view. I don't really know about the rest of the lineup. But like on that note, like one of the great coaching jobs I find in the modern NHL era, like maybe, you know, since we have analytics since, you know, 2007, I think the greatest coaching job out of it.of any team in that era was what Babcock did his last two years in Detroit.So that's between 2013 and 2015, correct?
21:18Yeah.So what happened there, you know, is, you know, they had a great team for many, many years,and they played, you know, like a medium pace,maybe a little bit faster than average.But then in his last two years with Littstrom gone and Zetterberg slowing downand that took slowing down and crawlwall slowing down and, you know,like their core generally becoming older.and not as good.
21:37They started playing this really low event game,and they maintained that coursey,kind of that positive coursey,and they were able to win a lot of gamesjust by slowing things down.So,I mean, like when I watch them,they were just generally a very sound team
21:53in all areas of the ice.You know, they had good D zone structure.You know, they played a high F3 as well.They were very disciplined.But, you know, is there anythingthat really really,jumps out at me that says this team is consciously trying to play slow, I don't know,because it's a small gap.
22:12Well, I think, you know, you're not necessarily telling your team, like, okay, we'regoing to go out there and take a bunch of shots here and really speed things up, or we'regoing to just kind of hold the puck up against the boards for 40 seconds at a time and not letanything transpire.But I think, you know, you can sort of definitely see certain teams are more willing toopen it up versus others.Maybe a lot of that is just sort of the chess pieces that you have and the way you canplay with the guys you're afforded.
22:35but I think that, you know, you look across the league and there are, I feel like there's certain teams that would be better suited playing a different style of game than they are playing based on the players they have.Like you mentioned the Jets, right?Yes.Yeah.I mean, the Jets are like, I think they're 28th in the league in pace right now.And I mean, that makes no sense to me when you look at the lineup where they have all these young, skilled, fast guys both on defense and up front.And they're just kind of grinding these games out.and that doesn't make sense to me,
23:04considering that they should,like on most nights,they should be in an advantageous positionto sort of play that fast game against their opponent.And I don't know if it's something Paul Maurice is doing consciouslyor what's going on there.I haven't really dug into a deeper,but that's one of the teams that really jumps off the page to me.
23:24Is it because they don't trust their goaltending by any chance?Because, you know, if I coach a teamand I didn't trust my goaltending,I'd probably lean toward playing that kind of style.So it's interesting.I think that, you know, unless I'm mistaken or I'm mixing it up,I think that the year they made the playoffs and they lost it a ducks was the year theylike really slowed it down and Pavlick started playing better or started at least having
23:46better numbers.And they succeeded for a while there.And I don't know, maybe they're trying to kind of recapture that.But I think that it's a little bit ill-advised, especially since I think that, you know,while Connor Haleboyke hasn't necessarily had the eye-popping numbers, we would haveexpected him to have.Like, he's perfectly fine, and at least you know that he's not a complete liability backthere like Pavlik was for so long.
24:08So I think if I was coaching that team, there's a lot of hidden value there and justthem kind of opening up the game and trying to get into a few more track meets here and there.Mm-hmm.Yeah.All right, before we get out of here, I wanted to ask you something that people ask me prettyfrequently, and I think that, you know, you're as qualified to answer this as anyone Iknow considering it's your job.When you're watching tape, or how do you go?
24:31go about doing it.Are there certain things you're looking for or certain, you know, if you look at maybetrends that are going on in the numbers, then you kind of go to the tape to see what's goingon or just what's your process in terms of breaking all of it down?Yeah, I think the stats are, they're a really good first step for me because I thinkI mentioned this before, but like the perfect video analyst has 500 pairs of eyes because,you know, otherwise you just can't see a big enough sample size when you just look at video.So what I would do is, you know, if I think, let's say if Winnipeg I think is playing really slow,
25:07well first I have to look at the stats to see whether they are playing really slow.Right.Right.Because if I just go straight to the tape, then I don't have enough time in the world to really determine whether they're playing slower than let's say, Pittsburgh or Montreal.So, you know, so, yeah, so the public analytics databases I use a lot just to kind of narrow down what I want to look at.And then afterwards, you know, that gives you an idea of what I want to focus on.So, but I mean, are there certain things you're prioritizing or focusing on more than others?Or is it just sort of you go into an open mind and see where it takes you?
25:47It's hard to say.It's depending on the area of play, you know, I kind of have an idea of what most HL teams are able to do or prefer to do.And then you just try to figure out how often they get to do that.Right.Because the NHL is purely, like I would say, like everybody is able to execute everything,but the difference is the best teams execute it more often.Right.So it's purely evolving league in terms of, you know, what kind of plays are able to generate.
26:16So I guess an interesting, like a relevant follow-up question than that,or maybe a better way to put it is like, is there, we've obviously made a lot ofadvancements over the past handful of years in terms of both stuff we know and stuff werecognize, but also just like merging all of these different, uh, tools together with videoanalysis and, and data and everything, so on and so forth. Like, what do you think is the nextfrontier, the next sort of thing that we should be focusing on? Because like, as I mentioned earlier,for some, for me, um, you know, stuff like zone entries, for example, has gotten a lot ofattention for a while now, but I think that, uh, improving, uh, the way you actually exit your
26:56zone to begin with is something that is still has a lot of hidden value. Like, if you,could improve that or maximize the way you're doing it or as you mentioned the volume just howfrequently you're able to succeed doing something uh in that category like you could definitelyimprove your overall performance a lot is there is there something other than that that you'relooking at that like you think that you know if if a team got better at this or prioritized it a bitmore or even on a player level uh it could do wonders for their overall output well like one thingthat's very salient for coaches um is how often as a teamteam, you're able to switch sides on the ice.
27:33Let's say that you're breaking out, right?And you have a lot of foretick pressure coming in.What happens is most NHL teams will tend to want to play, you know,four skaters on one side and really overload that side of the ice.So as soon as you're able to kind of beat that pressure by moving the puck, you know,laterally D-to-D or, you know, reversing the puck, then all of a sudden you have a lot moreopen ice to work with.And that's something that I think you would find some interesting things if you try to
28:00capture that, you know, see which teams are able to go cross-ice better in the D-Zone to breakout and also obviously to go cross-ice in the O zone to create scoring chances.Because the NHL players are so fast that, you know, most coaches are able to get their playersto, you know, flood one side, one-half of the ice with big numbers, but then as soon as you'reable to kind of get to the other side, then, you know, you start creating opportunities.Yeah.Yeah, that makes sense.All right, Jack, where can people find your work
28:32And what can we expect from you moving forward?I know that you've been banging out these one-minute videos pretty frequentlyAnd they're always a must-seeWhat do you have on top?I don't know because I make them pretty much as aWhenever I feel like basis, you know, whenever I have some time from MiguelOr even, you know, if there's something that I want to illustrate to our playersOr to our coaching staff, I kind of, you know, I shared that with the point
28:59public, but also I use that internally with our coaching staff sometimes when I want to make a point.So that, that's helpful.So my Twitter handle is at ML underscore H-A-N.And I write for the athletic on a, you know, once every two-week basis.So, you know, I'll be using like Maple Leafs as an example for a lot of the, you know,the fairly simple tactical concepts that we have in hockey and trying to tie it back as wellto analytics and how that really drives results.Yeah, I enjoy how you blend those things together.
29:34I particularly enjoy the sort of real-life analogies you use for some of this stuff.Before I get you out of here, I mean, I feel like you need to share with the listeners.I remember you told me that story about, like, it was something about horse racing or somethingand your grandfather or something like that and how you could apply that to hockey.I kind of want you to share that with everyone before you go.I mean, it's kind of, it's like a long and complicated story if I just kind of share it like this.but Bob McKenzie, they're right about it.So I'll send you that link and you can share it
30:02because like written out it makes a lot more sense.But basically this Chinese general about,I want to say, 3,000 years ago,he invented line matching, right?Like the hard line match.He invented that in a horse racing context.So, you know,so whoever invented line matching to hockey,
30:21you know, he was probably 2,000 years too late.Yeah, he stole it from him.Like all the best.is. Jack, man, it's a pleasure.Hopefully we can get you back on as the year goes along here and break some,we should like break down some video together and just kind of do some more outside thebox stuff like this. Yeah, for sure.All right, man. Talk soon.
30:41Thanks to meet you. All the best.Wanted to get to just one more bit of housekeeping before we do finally end this episodeof the Hockey PEO cast. I want to remind everyone one more time that if they've beenfollowing along and enjoying the episodes, we've been putting out, you can go toiTunes and leave a rating and review. It only takes a minute or two.too, but all of them are greatly appreciated, and they definitely go a long way towards both bumpingthis podcast up the charts and keeping my bosses happy. I asked you guys to do so a few shows backand a bunch of you went ahead and did it, and it was awesome to see, so I greatly appreciate that.
31:11If you're not using iTunes to listen to this podcast, that's totally cool too. Your downloadsand listens all count the same, and that's ultimately all the matters. So as long as you keeplistening, I'll keep recording these and talking away. And if you've got any particular guestsyou'd like to see appear on here in the coming weeks and months,I'm always open to suggestions too.So you can either just tweet at either Dim Philipovich or The Hockey PDRCast on Twitter,or you can email in at Demetri.philipovich at gmail.com,and we'll see if we can make it happen.
31:40So anyways, with that out of the way,we'll be back later this week with another new episode.And until then, here's some outro music to put a bow on things.The Hockey P.D.O.cast, follow on Twitter at Dimphilipovichand on SoundCloud at SoundCloud.com.slash Hockey PDOCast.
There aren't comments yet for this episode. Click any sentence in the transcript to leave one.