One of the things a lot of practitioners struggle with is off-ice test selection. The reason I say they struggle is because I see a lot of paralysis by analysis; we collect and have access to so much data that we don’t know what to do with it all
The more concerning aspect of this is that a lot of practitioners loose sight of the big picture: on-ice, in-game performance. Everybody in the performance and rehab world wants to improve off-ice testing numbers. Practitioners will declare their rehab or off-season a success with improved off-ice performance, yet players might still be slow and stagnant on the ice. A few reasons why this might happen are:
- Poor test selection
- Poor metric selection
- Poor test interpretation
Using testing frameworks can help select appropriate tests.
I’m a big fan of Franco Impellizeri’s theoretical framework of sport performance.
In simple terms, this model breaks down sport success into parts. One can then find the most appropriate tests to measure the identified parts. The trouble with testing in ice hockey is there are few tests that are highly correlated to on-ice performance. So the best approach in selecting appropriate tests might be to break down the skills and find valid and reliable proxy tests.
Here’s an example that I put together for stride length & width, which is a determining factor in skating speed.
In theory, to improve stride length and width one would have to increase the distance covered per stride and the width of each stride. Measuring relative peak power in a jump or lateral bound distance would be an indicator of distance covered per stride, while Y-balance lateral, hip abduction and ankle mobility would be indicators for stride width. Unforutnately, there is no evidence that these tests are related to stride length and width. But these are valid tests for lower body power and lower body stability/mobility. So in theory, they would be valid tests for stride length and width.
Ecologically Valid Off-Ice Tests for On-Ice Performance
This is the most challenging part of measuring off-ice performance…
Ecological validity is the ability for a test to represent real-life outcomes. In other words, how well an off-ice test will predict in-game success. Where most research has focused on the relationship between off-ice test results and on-ice sprint performance, there is a lot more that goes into in-game success. Some research has looked at off-ice test performance and on-ice success mostly by comparing draft selection order or team selection. Vertical jump performance seems to have the best success in predicting player selection, suggesting it might be the most ecologically valid test. However, that could be endlessly argued.
Figure out who your athletes need to be, and test that.
This was the advice I was given by a coach with much more knowledge and experience than I have.
Because there is no right or wrong answer to determine which off-ice tests are best for hockey players, figure out who the athlete needs to be and test that. Are they known to be a power-forward who can protect the puck? Measure their upper and lower body strength and power. Do they lack the speed and agility to make the jump to the next level? Measure their speed and change of direction.
Off-ice testing can be challenging, hope this cleared some muddy waters.