Asked & Answered: 2-3 vs. 1-3-1

Contrasting two modern OZ formations

Hi Jack,

What are the differences between the 1-3-1 PP and the old umbrella? Just curious, also wondering if there's any core concepts that are similar that caused them to be popular at different points in time.

Thanks for the help,

Dan

Hi Dan,

The 1-3-1 and the 2-3 Umbrella are two modern OZ schemes increasingly embraced by high-level teams, both at even strength and on the power play.

In the NHL, they’ve essentially supplanted the more old-school 3-2 Spread and 2-1-2 Box+1 due to the spatial benefits they offer.

Let’s take a look at the Florida Panthers chapter of Hockey Tactics 2023.

FLA uses the 2-3 Umbrella extensively at 5v5.

F1/F2 are stationed near the net for screens, tips, rebounds and corner retrievals.

The remaining skaters are above the tops of the circles and shoot from the perimeter

Advantages:

• Easy to create shot volume for the three high players

• Low players are already stationed at the net

• Ds can pinch aggressively knowing that there are always three skaters above the tops of the circles

Disadvantages:

• No high-slot presence

• Low players are unavailable to create seam plays

• High players need unusually powerful & accuracy shots to score

The 2-3 has gained in popularity at 5v5 because it stimulates shot volume while preventing odd-men rushes against. On the powerplay, it is more of a change-up play for teams looking to get into the opposing goalie’s face.

The 2017 Nashville Predators, with P.K. Subban, Roman Josi, Ryan Ellis and Mattias Ekholm on the back end, were one of the last NHL teams to rely on the 2-3 Umbrella at 5v4. They made it to the Stanley Cup final but were beaten by Pittsburgh and its more efficient 1-3-1 PP.