The X’s and O’s of hockey are a complicated topic. On any given play, the picture changes incredibly quickly, and there are few set plays available to both teams.
Comparing hockey to the other three major American sports, it’s harder to put hockey onto a whiteboard than football, baseball, or even basketball. While basketball is fluid, much like hockey, possession is given over to the opponent after scoring. In hockey, any play stoppage begins with a contested possession: the faceoff.
Even so, every professional hockey team uses a set of systems to get all its players on the same page amid that chaos. Without access to team meetings, it’s nearly impossible for casual fans to identify the shifting roles and intentions of all five skaters, let alone the way your team’s systems interact with the opponent’s game plan.
Jack Han’s Hockey Tactics 2026 is a resource that makes this more accessible. Every year, Han diagrams the system used by each NHL team on offense, defense, transition, and special teams.
It’s an invaluable resource if you’re looking to learn more about the sport at the professional level. Han did not ask Hockey Wilderness to promote his book. It’s just such an excellent project that I encourage our readers to consider buying it, both for their own enjoyment and to support Han’s work.
Comparing the Minnesota Wild’s systems from this season to last year, a few crucial changes stand out. In 2024-25, Hynes’s systems featured modern concepts focused on puck possession. There’s a different theme this season: a new twist on the old classics.
The offensive zone is a good example. Whereas last season’s Wild team played a 2-3, which prioritizes possession and dares the opponent to come take the puck away.
I personally enjoy this system; however, it struggles when the opponent is patient because it’s difficult to gain an advantage at the net with so many players on the perimeter. That problem is compounded when the Wild trail on the scoreboard and opponents are happy to protect the dangerous areas of the ice.
This year, the Wild are running a 2-1-2. It’s the classic beer league or youth hockey shape: two defensemen at the top of the offensive zone act as passing options, one forward supports the puck carrier, and the remaining forward looks for space in the high slot.
It’s not new or sexy, but it’s a classic for a reason. With all three forwards in position to attack the net-front, Quinn Hughes has three passing options after he beats his man. When he can get past his check, he creates a four-on-three opportunity at the front of the net.
Crucially, if Minnesota needs a goal late in the game, this shape attacks passive defenses more effectively.
The 2-1-2 also creates more space for Hughes. Most opposing defenses, when faced with three forwards at the net, will keep at least three of their own skaters in the slot. That means that Hughes has a few extra steps of space near the blue line to evade pressure, unlocking his superpower.
One downside of this change is that it requires more defensive attention from the forwards. After a turnover in the 2-3, one of the forwards was usually already working back to the blue line. In the 2-1-2, forwards have to be ready to retreat on a turnover, even if their momentum isn’t already taking them back towards neutral ice.
Despite this additional risk, the team’s five-on-five play has been much better than last year’s. According to MoneyPuck.com’s xG model, Minnesota’s 2024-25 five-on-five defense ranked 11th. This year, it’s ranked 8th. On offense, the Wild improved from 29th to 11th.
In the defensive zone, the Wild have not changed their coverage structures. They still run a hybrid style, a mix of man and zone defenses. Minnesota’s defensemen cover their man at the goalmouth, while their forwards defend the point more passively (the “zone” part of the hybrid scheme).
Another defensive zone play stands out as a change from last year, though: the breakout. In ‘24-25, the Wild tended to change sides by carrying the puck behind the net, allowing the weak-side defenseman to find space as a shallow outlet pass while the forwards skated up ice.
This is an effective way to buy skaters time to get down the ice. Especially for a team with older, slower forwards, such as the Wild, it can help buoy the offense. It requires great passing and skating from the defensemen, which the Wild had in spades with Jared Spurgeon, Jonas Brodin, and Brock Faber.
The downside of this play is that it leaves a forward to defend the net front. Nobody’s perfect, and breakout passes sometimes become turnovers. With both defensemen far from the front of Minnesota’s goal crease, it can lead to dangerous situations.
This year, the Wild are more apt to work the puck up the strong-side wall. While it doesn’t feature as much fancy footwork, it keeps the puck at the perimeter. If it’s turned over, the Wild have three defenders between the net and the puck.
It also allows the Wild to mitigate some of their low-end footspeed by giving freedom to the weak-side forward. He’s allowed to opportunistically leave the zone early, which opens space for the weak-side defenseman to join the rush.
That also suits Hughes well. He’s perhaps the best defenseman in the league at executing deep passes. Providing him a streaking weak-side forward opens an option for him. If that’s covered, it’s likely to result in space for one or both of the defensemen to join the rush, where Hughes also excels.
All things being equal, this breakout isn’t my favorite flavor. I prefer plays that feature four rush players without flying the zone early. For this year’s version of the Wild, though, I make an exception because it protects the weaker parts of the roster without neutering the best players.
Once again, it’s an old classic nicely suited to Hughes’s strengths.
As with any hockey team, Minnesota’s systems are more of a style of play than a playbook. In such a fluid sport, plans break down. Pick your favorite version of the quote, either “No plan survives first contact with the enemy,” or Mike Tyson’s “Everyone has a plan until they get punched in the mouth.” As true as that is in hockey, it’s still rewarding to understand what the players are trying to execute.
Once you have the answers to that test, the coaching staff’s vision becomes clearer. That also informs management’s roster decisions. As quickly as these systems can fall apart on the ice, understanding those systems provides a deeper understanding of the team — on and off the ice.