Loading video...

Video Failed to Load

Go Home

Oregon OL coach A`lique Terry - DBL Team Combinations & Technique Take His Hip / Take His Soul Knock-over Player - OL clearing 1st level defender to make easiest exit to 2nd level Takeover Player - OL responsible for covering & blocking 1st level defender Coach Terry allows the...

70,337 views • 2 years ago •via X (Twitter)

2 Comments

Rian Winter's profile picture
Rian Winter2 years ago

⛽️⛽️⛽️

Coach Hargitt's profile picture
Coach Hargitt2 years ago

@prestonsimpson5

Related Videos

KIDS: Every level you go up, the less likely you are to see a player try to beat a defender 1v1. Why? The higher the level you play, the less likely you are to beat a defender 1v1. Defensemen are too good. They are faster, smarter, close quicker, and there’s less time and space to even try to attempt it. If you want to play at higher levels of hockey, beating defenders down the ice 1v1 is not what is going to get you there. Developing your hockey sense by using your teammates and understanding how plays develop…that’s what translates to the next level. Check out Matt Barzal on this play. It’s 3v3 overtime so he has plenty of time and space to beat the defender up the ice 1v1, especially with his elite skillset. But no. He brings the puck to the middle, uses his situational skating to protect it, and bides time for his teammates to get open. And once Horvat does get open – he hits him for the overtime winner. 1v1 hockey does not translate to the next level. Hockey sense and awareness does. I’ve seen so many kids that were bigger and faster than everyone at young ages be rewarded for taking the puck end to end and scoring. That gets you wins at young ages, but it does not make smart hockey players. Because when everyone else catches up physically, if that player wasn’t taught the right way to play…they will get passed by. Smart hockey players make it to higher levels. Fast players who do not know how to use their teammates do not. Coaches, please coach accordingly.

Topher Scott

264,653 views • 2 years ago

If the Wolves were able to have a cap space team (maybe Brooklyn or Chicago) absorb Julius Randle's contract next season ($33M), that would open up three interesting roster building tools I want to highlight. I think this is relevant because the Wolves front office has a history of kind of stringing together transactions -- even over the course of multiple transaction windows (offseason and trade deadline). The Randle trade would be Randle + draft compensation for say Brooklyn to absorb the contract - maybe: Randle + No. 28 for a future 2nd (Adjust compensation as you see fit. Not the point of this exercise. Obviously if this would cost a bunch, they wouldn't do it. Or maybe they'd have to move to using Gobert's salary as the salary moved into another team's cap space.) Shedding Randle's salary would drop the Wolves well below the *1st* apron (about $52M). And while beneath the 1st apron, the Wolves would open up the ability to three additional roster building tools for spending that $52M... (If Ayo Dosunmu were to sign for $17M, that would be $35M in room below the 1st apron. And need to make sure to get the roster to 14 players.) 1. The non-taxpayer midlevel exception ($15M) - The "big MLE" is a $15M gift card for teams to spend above the salary cap but below the 1st apron. So if the Wolves were to use this, they would be hard-capped at the 1st apron ($13M below 2nd apron). If a team is over the 1st apron, they only have access to the taxpayer or "mini MLE", which is $6M next season - Could go out and sign a free agent for up to $15M in starting salary - Could also use this $15M as a trade exception and trade for a player who makes up to $15M 2. The trade exception generated in the Mike Conley salary dump trade to Chicago ($10.77M) - A trade exception allows a team to trade for a player without sending back matching salary for up to the amount of the trade exception - So with access to this trade exception, the Wolves could trade for a player making up to $10.77M - Using a trade exception also hard caps a team at the 1st apron ($13M below 2nd apron) 3. Making a Randle trade to a team who absorbs his contract into cap space would also create another trade exception (up to $33M) - The size of that trade exception would be Randle's $33M, minus whatever the Wolves took back in the trade - Might not need that for spending this summer. But doesn't expire for 365 days. The downside of working below the 1st apron as opposed to the 2nd apron is it restricts overall spending power by $13M -- because that's the gap between the two aprons.

Dane Moore

509,821 views • 2 months ago