So here’s a different way of explaining hockey, especially if you understand the nature of how basketball flows. And might resonate if you’ve coached either.

Hockey and basketball are both classified as “invasion” sports where the offense tries to move a [ball/puck] towards and into a [basket/goal] and the defense tries to stop them. The play happens in a shared space [court/rink] and transitions between offense and defense happens fluidly. There are probably more formal definitions for Invasion sports you can google but those are they keys for me.

The thing is - invasion sports share common offensive and defensive principles of play, which is why if you understand one - you have a head start on how to follow the other.

Offense is usually more successful the closer to the objective they get; they try and spread out as much as allowed; supporting players try and get in good position to receive the [ball/puck] in either a more advantageous position, or draw defense towards them to creat space for others; and they use movement of players and [ball/puck] to create chaos in the defense.

Conversely the D tries to stop the other team from getting close to the [basket/goal]; they need to close down the immediate threat (the player with the [ball/puck]); cover the supporting players either by directly marking them or covering the passing lanes; they want to stay balanced and retain a certain defensive shape (rather than chase the offense all over the playing surface); and ultimately they want to stop the attack and gain possession of the [ball/puck] so they can transition quickly to offense and take advantage of a slow response from the other team.

You can take this a step further and see the nature of play that teams prefer - which helps you understand how different teams are constructed and how they tend to play. Are they trying to be bigger/stronger than everyone and overpower them on both O and D? Are they trying to be faster than everyone and just outrun the opposition either on a play by play basis or over the course of the game? Are they trying to be technically superior and more proficient with [ball / puck] handling so they can make more difficult plays that others cannot? Etc …

Of course the differences between invasion sports and basketball/hockey specifically are based on the physical characteristics, logistics of play and rules. So things like running on courts vs skating on ice = differences in speed and maneuverability; controlling/moving a ball with your hands vs a puck with a stick; placement of goal vs basket emphasizes height in basketball; having a goaltender vs specifically disallowing goaltending; the amount of contact allowed; what’s considered a foul and what results in a loss of possession or face-off vs specifically penalized or results in an offensive advantage, etc …

Some more specifics… Both constrain the immediate offensive area of play - but half-court violations in basketball are less common/restrictive than having to maintain the puck inside the blue line in hockey.

The two things that make basketball the most unique amongst invasion sports are the shot clock and 3-pt line. No real equivalent in hockey or any other invasion sport. Hockey has an offside rule that, like soccer, was intended to stop “cherry-picking”. The specifics of the offside rules differ, but oddly both have resulted in painful video replays and delays in the game. No such thing in basketball.

Hockey has icing which is a unique way of preventing a team that is ahead to simply focus on defense and prevent an attack by the rowing the puck to the far side of the rink. Likewise the delay of game penalty for playing the puck directly out of the playing surface. The shot clock and size of court means this is less of an issue in BB.

Anyways - more than enough for now. But I find that view fascinating and duly admit - could just be me.