Davenport Has Left the Team
Posted by calgARI '07
Davenport Has Left the Team
Posted by: calgARI '07 (---.union.edu)
Date: January 15, 2005 12:50PM
I can't really reveal my sources, but Troy Davenport has left the team and school. I'm not sure of his reasons, but it probably has something to do with McKee starting 47 straight games and him being only a sophomore.
Re: Davenport Has Left the Team
Posted by: The Rancor (---.2.156.11.lightlink.com)
Date: January 15, 2005 02:54PM
yet another notch in the belt for chabot then. hope he has fun in juniors.
Re: Davenport Has Left the Team
Posted by: atb9 (---.nycap.rr.com)
Date: January 15, 2005 03:31PM
Why another notch in the belt of Chabot? I was hearing he was no where near the ice.
Maybe I'm not understanding what you're trying to say but to me, a notch in the belt, is for a victory. Frankly, I think this scares the crap out of Chabot.
Maybe I'm not understanding what you're trying to say but to me, a notch in the belt, is for a victory. Frankly, I think this scares the crap out of Chabot.
___________________________
24 is the devil
24 is the devil
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/15/2005 03:32PM by atb9.
Re: Davenport Has Left the Team
Posted by: calgARI '07 (---.union.edu)
Date: January 15, 2005 04:13PM
Scares the coaching staff more than Chabot I think. Looks like they're gonna have to coax an '06 into coming next fall.
Re: Davenport Has Left the Team
Posted by: Avash (---.ipt.aol.com)
Date: January 16, 2005 03:13AM
[Q]calgARI '07 Wrote:
I can't really reveal my sources, but Troy Davenport has left the team and school. I'm not sure of his reasons, but it probably has something to do with McKee starting 47 [now 48] straight games and him being only a sophomore.[/q]
I think the Cornell record for consecutive starts by a goaltender is 56 - Laing Kennedy (1961-1963). According to TBRW, no other goaltender even played a minute during those 3 seasons (McKee, meanwhile, has played 2950 minutes the last two seasons, with Marr and Davenport combining for the remaining 23 minutes).
I can't really reveal my sources, but Troy Davenport has left the team and school. I'm not sure of his reasons, but it probably has something to do with McKee starting 47 [now 48] straight games and him being only a sophomore.[/q]
I think the Cornell record for consecutive starts by a goaltender is 56 - Laing Kennedy (1961-1963). According to TBRW, no other goaltender even played a minute during those 3 seasons (McKee, meanwhile, has played 2950 minutes the last two seasons, with Marr and Davenport combining for the remaining 23 minutes).
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 01/16/2005 03:15AM by Avash '05.
Re: Davenport Has Left the Team
Posted by: Greg Berge (---.frdrmd.adelphia.net)
Date: January 16, 2005 03:27AM
McKee has started all 49 (32+17) games of the past 2 seasons. He is already 13th all-time in GP among G's. Corrie D'Alessio holds the record with 94 games. If McKee starts all 12 games remaining in the RS, his 61 GP will put him 9th going into the PS.
McKee is 27-14-8, 13th all-time in Wins. Ken Dryden's 78 career wins is probably safe (he was 78-4-1!) but Brian Cropper's 2nd place 51 is well within reach.
The Top 10:
78 Dryden
51 Cropper
48 D'Alessio
45 Elliott
42 Hayward
42 Underhill
39 LeNeveu
38 McKibbon
37 Dadswell
36 Eliot
One more fun stat: McKee's 8 career shutouts are already 4th all-time. The only guys ahead of him:
13 Dryden
11 LeNeveu
10 Kennedy
McKee is 27-14-8, 13th all-time in Wins. Ken Dryden's 78 career wins is probably safe (he was 78-4-1!) but Brian Cropper's 2nd place 51 is well within reach.
The Top 10:
78 Dryden
51 Cropper
48 D'Alessio
45 Elliott
42 Hayward
42 Underhill
39 LeNeveu
38 McKibbon
37 Dadswell
36 Eliot
One more fun stat: McKee's 8 career shutouts are already 4th all-time. The only guys ahead of him:
13 Dryden
11 LeNeveu
10 Kennedy
Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 01/16/2005 03:38AM by Greg Berge.
Re: Davenport Has Left the Team
Posted by: billhoward (---.union01.nj.comcast.net)
Date: January 16, 2005 12:37PM
Of course, LeNeveu's career stats are really one full season (less two games off for the Juniors) plus half of his rookie season (less Underhill doing all the playoffs). And Dryden would have had may 100 wins if he was eligible as a freshman. If, if, if.
Meanwhile, no scoring records set by forwards seem to be in danger from this year's team, or last year's, or next year's. Not that we should complain when the team goes this far (ie at least making the ECACs with home ice and usually the championship round) so many years in a row.
Meanwhile, no scoring records set by forwards seem to be in danger from this year's team, or last year's, or next year's. Not that we should complain when the team goes this far (ie at least making the ECACs with home ice and usually the championship round) so many years in a row.
Re: Davenport Has Left the Team
Posted by: The Rancor (---.clarityconnect.com)
Date: January 16, 2005 03:03PM
what i ment to say was that he must be feeling at least confadent in his spot on the team as he hasnt left yet, and is now the #2 man again, where i think he should be.
Its a one man campain that i've run for the last 2 years that depth wise, Louis Chabot is better than the 'faithfull' (faithless) will give him credit for. If he sucked as bad as Ari (who i think knows lots about this team, and i am not atacking, just pointing out that he feels L.C.'s a no show for this program) and some of the woofers on this site say he does, he would have left the team long ago, in fact its likely he wouldn't be here in the first place. to this day i have (still) not heard, from the coach, in writing or any maner other than hearsay that Chabot is so awful that he could never play ever ever ever never. Davenport is and was a very highly regarded recruit. also it apears that he is a crybaby that isnt fit for Goaltender U.
Chabot is, apparently. my 2.5 cents.
Its a one man campain that i've run for the last 2 years that depth wise, Louis Chabot is better than the 'faithfull' (faithless) will give him credit for. If he sucked as bad as Ari (who i think knows lots about this team, and i am not atacking, just pointing out that he feels L.C.'s a no show for this program) and some of the woofers on this site say he does, he would have left the team long ago, in fact its likely he wouldn't be here in the first place. to this day i have (still) not heard, from the coach, in writing or any maner other than hearsay that Chabot is so awful that he could never play ever ever ever never. Davenport is and was a very highly regarded recruit. also it apears that he is a crybaby that isnt fit for Goaltender U.
Chabot is, apparently. my 2.5 cents.
Re: Davenport Has Left the Team
Posted by: atb9 (---.nycap.rr.com)
Date: January 16, 2005 03:44PM
Or he was extremely comfortable with the #3 spot and enjoyed partying...just my 2 cents from living on campus
___________________________
24 is the devil
24 is the devil
Re: Davenport Has Left the Team
Posted by: calgARI '07 (---.resnet.rochester.edu)
Date: January 17, 2005 02:19AM
Chabot likes and accepts his role on the team. Most guys in his position do not like it, but he seems to enjoy being part of a team, which is what a lot of guys want.
Re: Davenport Has Left the Team
Posted by: billhoward (---.union01.nj.comcast.net)
Date: January 17, 2005 08:30AM
It would be great if there was a stat for shutouts plus one-goal (allowed) games. The two are the same give or take one lucky/unlucky break. McKee seems to have more than his share of one-goal-allowed games. [Edit:] A quick scan for one-goal-allowed games shows ~14 for McKee, or just under half his games with not more than 1GA.
Is Dryden's 78 victories safe? Nineteen wins a season for a four-year starter would do it.
The stats are dryer, but when you go back to all-time records, you really should be comparing per game stats over the whole career. If he played four years and ten not nine games, Marinaro would have rushed for 6,000 yards. Mike French might have had 400 lacrosse points. LeNeveu had he played all four years would have had 20-plus shutouts (let's assume he would have gotten as many as McKee).
Is Dryden's 78 victories safe? Nineteen wins a season for a four-year starter would do it.
The stats are dryer, but when you go back to all-time records, you really should be comparing per game stats over the whole career. If he played four years and ten not nine games, Marinaro would have rushed for 6,000 yards. Mike French might have had 400 lacrosse points. LeNeveu had he played all four years would have had 20-plus shutouts (let's assume he would have gotten as many as McKee).
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/17/2005 08:45AM by billhoward.
Re: Davenport Has Left the Team
Posted by: The Rancor (---.2.156.11.lightlink.com)
Date: January 17, 2005 01:52PM
[Q]atb9 Wrote:
Or he was extremely comfortable with the #3 spot and enjoyed partying...just my 2 cents from living on campus[/q]
most likely your right!
Or he was extremely comfortable with the #3 spot and enjoyed partying...just my 2 cents from living on campus[/q]
most likely your right!
Re: Davenport Has Left the Team
Posted by: billhoward (---.union01.nj.comcast.net)
Date: January 17, 2005 02:04PM
At some point in the life of most athletes, they come to grips with their status of their skills not being able to take them to the next level - HS to college, college to college starter, starter to pro draft pick - and they turn to other pursuits: GPA and grade school, grad school, parties, whatever.
Not that this is Chabot. But it could be someone in a similar situation. The guy won't show up hung over for practice, but he knows he's unlikely to start unless the starter is hurt, and if the starter is hurt and there's a real skills gap, the team is pretty much going to check out of the playoffs in the first round.
Recall how thin the goaltending was in 1970: Bob Rule, lacrosse team (All-America, admittedly) was pressed into service as Brian Cropper's backup. I bet the defensemen knew Job One was to keep forwards from crashing into the crease and into Cropper.
Curious to know how many players have quit the team, gone elsewhere, and done exceptionally well at the D1 level or even DII/DIII. I think one of the two problems - the main one being stuck in a team deep with talent - is the missed perception of how good you are. The player thinks he's an 8 or 9, the coach thinks he's a 5 developing to a 6 or 7 and maybe 8 by junior year.
Not that this is Chabot. But it could be someone in a similar situation. The guy won't show up hung over for practice, but he knows he's unlikely to start unless the starter is hurt, and if the starter is hurt and there's a real skills gap, the team is pretty much going to check out of the playoffs in the first round.
Recall how thin the goaltending was in 1970: Bob Rule, lacrosse team (All-America, admittedly) was pressed into service as Brian Cropper's backup. I bet the defensemen knew Job One was to keep forwards from crashing into the crease and into Cropper.
Curious to know how many players have quit the team, gone elsewhere, and done exceptionally well at the D1 level or even DII/DIII. I think one of the two problems - the main one being stuck in a team deep with talent - is the missed perception of how good you are. The player thinks he's an 8 or 9, the coach thinks he's a 5 developing to a 6 or 7 and maybe 8 by junior year.
Re: Davenport Has Left the Team
Posted by: mgl11 (---.client.comcast.net)
Date: January 17, 2005 03:08PM
I might have missed this tid-bit...but any idea if Davenport is going to transfer to another school or if he is going to go the major junior route? If he's transferring, it makes sense for him to leave now...he'll only have to sit out part of next season.
Re: Davenport Has Left the Team
Posted by: atb9 (---.nycap.rr.com)
Date: January 17, 2005 03:46PM
[Q]billhoward Wrote:
The guy won't show up hung over for practice, but he knows he's unlikely to start unless the starter is hurt[/q]
Exactly, except in Chabot's case prior, the injury bug needed to plague McKee and Davenport. I think he was comfortable being #3. Worked hard, sure, but was not expecting playing time.
As a freshman, I lived in Boldt with the last goalie to leave, Chris Gartman. He went to Michigan, rode the pine and got an equally fine education.
The guy won't show up hung over for practice, but he knows he's unlikely to start unless the starter is hurt[/q]
Exactly, except in Chabot's case prior, the injury bug needed to plague McKee and Davenport. I think he was comfortable being #3. Worked hard, sure, but was not expecting playing time.
As a freshman, I lived in Boldt with the last goalie to leave, Chris Gartman. He went to Michigan, rode the pine and got an equally fine education.
___________________________
24 is the devil
24 is the devil
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/17/2005 03:47PM by atb9.
Re: Davenport Has Left the Team
Posted by: Give My Regards (---.oracorp.com)
Date: January 17, 2005 03:59PM
[Q]mgl11 Wrote:
If he's transferring, it makes sense for him to leave now...he'll only have to sit out part of next season.[/q]
I'm not sure, but I think it's still the case that if he transfers to a school playing Div II or III hockey, he wouldn't have to sit out at all.
If Davenport is leaving, he joins Mike Doyle as the only Cornell goaltenders to post a 1.000 save percentage since Lynah Rink opened. (Doyle played about five minutes of a game in the mid-70's) Chabot is, of course, currently on a pace to join them...
If he's transferring, it makes sense for him to leave now...he'll only have to sit out part of next season.[/q]
I'm not sure, but I think it's still the case that if he transfers to a school playing Div II or III hockey, he wouldn't have to sit out at all.
If Davenport is leaving, he joins Mike Doyle as the only Cornell goaltenders to post a 1.000 save percentage since Lynah Rink opened. (Doyle played about five minutes of a game in the mid-70's) Chabot is, of course, currently on a pace to join them...
___________________________
If you lead a good life, go to Sunday school and church, and say your prayers every night, when you die, you'll go to LYNAH!
If you lead a good life, go to Sunday school and church, and say your prayers every night, when you die, you'll go to LYNAH!
Re: Davenport Has Left the Team
Posted by: Roy 82 (---.SRI.COM)
Date: January 18, 2005 12:06AM
According to the Cornell Hockey Database (available through the Roster link at the left) Davenport has played in 13 of the teams 15 games.
Seriously, I could see why he might want to try his luck elsewhere. Sad but understandable.
Seriously, I could see why he might want to try his luck elsewhere. Sad but understandable.
Re: Davenport Has Left the Team
Posted by: CowbellGuy (Moderator)
Date: January 18, 2005 01:00AM
If a goalie (or any other player) dresses for a game, he's played in the game, regardless of whether he logs minutes.
___________________________
"[Hugh] Jessiman turned out to be a huge specimen of something alright." --Puck Daddy
"[Hugh] Jessiman turned out to be a huge specimen of something alright." --Puck Daddy
Re: Davenport Has Left the Team
Posted by: calgARI '07 (---.rochester.rr.com)
Date: January 18, 2005 01:25AM
[Q]CowbellGuy Wrote:
If a goalie (or any other player) dresses for a game, he's played in the game, regardless of whether he logs minutes.[/q]
Maybe you're talking about the Cornell database, but as general statistics go, a goalie or any player has to be on the ice for at least a second to have played in the game.
If a goalie (or any other player) dresses for a game, he's played in the game, regardless of whether he logs minutes.[/q]
Maybe you're talking about the Cornell database, but as general statistics go, a goalie or any player has to be on the ice for at least a second to have played in the game.
Re: Davenport Has Left the Team
Posted by: CowbellGuy (Moderator)
Date: January 18, 2005 09:38AM
There are two stats for each goalie in the CHDB: Games Played and Games Played In. The former is the number of games dressed, the latter is the number of games in which minutes were logged. So either way you want it, there it is.
___________________________
"[Hugh] Jessiman turned out to be a huge specimen of something alright." --Puck Daddy
"[Hugh] Jessiman turned out to be a huge specimen of something alright." --Puck Daddy
Re: Davenport Has Left the Team
Posted by: pfibiger (---.dfafunds.com)
Date: January 18, 2005 02:39PM
I was looking for info about a recruit Cornell lost out on to Union...
from uscho forums:
----------
Rory Farrel
18 year old captain of the USHL Des Moines Buccaneers.
He is 6' 4" and 205# and was talking to Brown, Cornell and Harvard
-----------
and when i was looking through the player list, I saw this:
[www.bucshockey.org]
So apparently Davenport is playing in the for the Des Moines Buccaneers in the USHL. Same team Gartman went to when he left CU.
from uscho forums:
----------
Rory Farrel
18 year old captain of the USHL Des Moines Buccaneers.
He is 6' 4" and 205# and was talking to Brown, Cornell and Harvard
-----------
and when i was looking through the player list, I saw this:
[www.bucshockey.org]
So apparently Davenport is playing in the for the Des Moines Buccaneers in the USHL. Same team Gartman went to when he left CU.
Schafer comments in the Journal
Posted by: Al DeFlorio (---.ne.client2.attbi.com)
Date: January 21, 2005 07:33AM
Re: Schafer comments in the Journal
Posted by: atb9 (---.nycap.rr.com)
Date: January 21, 2005 07:45AM
This is what I love about Coach:
"I thought he let the team down by leaving."
"I thought he let the team down by leaving."
___________________________
24 is the devil
24 is the devil
Re: Davenport Has Left the Team
Posted by: Greg Berge (---.frdrmd.adelphia.net)
Date: January 21, 2005 08:22AM
The upside is, the incoming freshman goaltender in Fall 2006 may be one of the most highly prized in the country:
+ McKee with just one year remaining
+ No other competition (the stop-gap who comes in next Fall will have to be a mudder)
+ A ranked team, conference powerhouse, and national contender (hopefully)
+ One of the best defensive systems in the nation to assure eye-popping numbers and a Hobey run
+ All the positives of Cornell and the hockey program as sugar on top
+ McKee with just one year remaining
+ No other competition (the stop-gap who comes in next Fall will have to be a mudder)
+ A ranked team, conference powerhouse, and national contender (hopefully)
+ One of the best defensive systems in the nation to assure eye-popping numbers and a Hobey run
+ All the positives of Cornell and the hockey program as sugar on top
Re: Davenport Has Left the Team
Posted by: billhoward (---.ziffdavis.com)
Date: January 21, 2005 12:56PM
[Q]Greg Berge Wrote:
The upside is, the incoming freshman goaltender in Fall 2006 may be one of the most highly prized in the country:
+ McKee with just one year remaining
+ No other competition (the stop-gap who comes in next Fall will have to be a mudder)
+ A ranked team, conference powerhouse, and national contender (hopefully)
+ One of the best defensive systems in the nation to assure eye-popping numbers and a Hobey run
+ All the positives of Cornell and the hockey program as sugar on top[/q]
The flip side is if Cornell doesn't get someone as a backup goaltender in the fall of 2006, then there's a gaping hole looming and incredible pressure to recruit a person who steps in as a starter in the fall of 2007. But that's still a year off if terms of recruiting.
And what happens if McKee gets really good and desides to try his hand at the pros early. So far, no indication of him thinking about two- or three-and-out?
The upside is, the incoming freshman goaltender in Fall 2006 may be one of the most highly prized in the country:
+ McKee with just one year remaining
+ No other competition (the stop-gap who comes in next Fall will have to be a mudder)
+ A ranked team, conference powerhouse, and national contender (hopefully)
+ One of the best defensive systems in the nation to assure eye-popping numbers and a Hobey run
+ All the positives of Cornell and the hockey program as sugar on top[/q]
The flip side is if Cornell doesn't get someone as a backup goaltender in the fall of 2006, then there's a gaping hole looming and incredible pressure to recruit a person who steps in as a starter in the fall of 2007. But that's still a year off if terms of recruiting.
And what happens if McKee gets really good and desides to try his hand at the pros early. So far, no indication of him thinking about two- or three-and-out?
Re: Davenport Has Left the Team
Posted by: pfibiger (---.dfafunds.com)
Date: January 21, 2005 02:05PM
I was poking through league statistics for the nahl, ushl, bchl, etc to see what 'top' goalies are still available for next year..a couple caught my eye..
Cory Milan - Penticton Vees, BCHL. Went to Northwood Prep for a year, from MA.
Dan Tormey - Cedar Rapids Rough Riders, USHL. Grew up in Syracuse, played for the same junior team Jeremy Downs did.
A lot of the top goalies in all the major leagues are taken, but these guys are statistically top-5 in their respective leagues and still haven't committed (at least as far as Heisenberg's site says).
Cory Milan - Penticton Vees, BCHL. Went to Northwood Prep for a year, from MA.
Dan Tormey - Cedar Rapids Rough Riders, USHL. Grew up in Syracuse, played for the same junior team Jeremy Downs did.
A lot of the top goalies in all the major leagues are taken, but these guys are statistically top-5 in their respective leagues and still haven't committed (at least as far as Heisenberg's site says).
Re: Davenport Has Left the Team
Posted by: atb9 (---.nycap.rr.com)
Date: January 21, 2005 02:06PM
Something tells me his parents won't let him out of Cornell until he graduates--it doesn't sound like the family needs the money.
___________________________
24 is the devil
24 is the devil
Re: Davenport Has Left the Team
Posted by: ugarte (---.ny325.east.verizon.net)
Date: January 21, 2005 02:13PM
[Q]atb9 Wrote:
Something tells me his parents won't let him out of Cornell until he graduates--it doesn't sound like the family needs the money.[/q]It isn't always about the money. Career advancement can be enough to entice a player to leave early. That said, I don't think I've read anywhere that McKee is a pro prospect. Particularly when there is no NHL hockey on the horizon anyway.
Something tells me his parents won't let him out of Cornell until he graduates--it doesn't sound like the family needs the money.[/q]It isn't always about the money. Career advancement can be enough to entice a player to leave early. That said, I don't think I've read anywhere that McKee is a pro prospect. Particularly when there is no NHL hockey on the horizon anyway.
___________________________
quality tweets | bluesky (twitter 2) | ALAB Series podcast | Other podcasts and writing
quality tweets | bluesky (twitter 2) | ALAB Series podcast | Other podcasts and writing
Re: Davenport Has Left the Team
Posted by: atb9 (---.nycap.rr.com)
Date: January 21, 2005 02:25PM
[Q]ugarte Wrote:
It isn't always about the money. Career advancement can be enough to entice a player to leave early.[/q]
Very true...
Selfish (therefore rational?) old Adam pokes his head out....I just want to see him stay all four years!
It isn't always about the money. Career advancement can be enough to entice a player to leave early.[/q]
Very true...
Selfish (therefore rational?) old Adam pokes his head out....I just want to see him stay all four years!
___________________________
24 is the devil
24 is the devil
Re: Davenport Has Left the Team
Posted by: billhoward (---.ziffdavis.com)
Date: January 21, 2005 04:48PM
[Q]ugarte Wrote:
atb9 Wrote:
Something tells me his parents won't let him out of Cornell until he graduates--it doesn't sound like the family needs the money.[/Q]
It isn't always about the money. Career advancement can be enough to entice a player to leave early. That said, I don't think I've read anywhere that McKee is a pro prospect. Particularly when there is no NHL hockey on the horizon anyway.[/q]
That would be an interesting recruting tactic (and maybe one Schafer is doing, whether deliberately or because of Cornell's scholarship cap or because it's the coach's style): Each year bring in five to eight really good players but no first-round draft picks / early departure candidates. Thus you have them for four years, not just the two of a Chris Higgins who's two-and-out.
If you get a Leneveu or possibly a Pokoluk in the draw, you deal with it the best you can if they catch fire. <g>
Re: Davenport Has Left the Team
Posted by: Chris 02 (---.icsincorporated.com)
Date: January 23, 2005 02:26PM
Re: Davenport Has Left the Team
Posted by: Greg Berge (---.frdrmd.adelphia.net)
Date: January 23, 2005 02:33PM
That's the compensation of our limitations: we rarely lose anybody early. But I doubt Schafer would turn his back on a blue chipper who had the grades to get in, even if he was a risk of 1-and-done.
Re: Davenport Has Left the Team
Posted by: Robb (---.external.lmco.com)
Date: January 23, 2005 02:37PM
[Q]Greg Berge Wrote:
That's the compensation of our limitations: we rarely lose anybody early. But I doubt Schafer would turn his back on a blue chipper who had the grades to get in, even if he was a risk of 1-and-done. [/q]
Yep, that fits in with Schafer's philosophy of "best team on the ice every night" that we've seen pretty consistently from him.
That's the compensation of our limitations: we rarely lose anybody early. But I doubt Schafer would turn his back on a blue chipper who had the grades to get in, even if he was a risk of 1-and-done. [/q]
Yep, that fits in with Schafer's philosophy of "best team on the ice every night" that we've seen pretty consistently from him.
Re: Davenport Has Left the Team
Posted by: Avash (---.twcny.rr.com)
Date: January 23, 2005 02:53PM
[Q]Chris 02 Wrote:
He gave up 8 goals last night in a loss.
[/q]
...although, to be fair, the night before, he made 41 saves on 42 shots in a 2-1 (shootout) win. And in the shootout, he only allowed one goal in NINE rounds.
[www.ushl.com]
He gave up 8 goals last night in a loss.
[/q]
...although, to be fair, the night before, he made 41 saves on 42 shots in a 2-1 (shootout) win. And in the shootout, he only allowed one goal in NINE rounds.
[www.ushl.com]
Re: Davenport Has Left the Team
Posted by: The Rancor (---.twcny.rr.com)
Date: January 23, 2005 06:21PM
what about David Grossman (i think its his name)? who is the star goalie for the Ithaca High School team? he is attending Cornell and playing goalie for the lacrosse team next year, and he's a multi year starter at IHS, with great stats (coming soon when i can find some) he's at least a 2nd or third string guy, i'd guess.
Re: Davenport Has Left the Team
Posted by: atb9 (---.nycap.rr.com)
Date: January 23, 2005 06:23PM
If that is his name, any relation to Prof. Grossman?
___________________________
24 is the devil
24 is the devil
Re: Davenport Has Left the Team
Posted by: billhoward (---.union01.nj.comcast.net)
Date: January 23, 2005 06:33PM
[Q]Greg Berge Wrote:
That's the compensation of our limitations: we rarely lose anybody early. But I doubt Schafer would turn his back on a blue chipper who had the grades to get in, even if he was a risk of 1-and-done. [/q]
Not that Coach Mike would be so Machiavellian, but if you take somebody who bails after two years because you're overstocked in that position, you've denied him in perpetuity to the Cantabs and Colgate and BC, etcetera. ... And it's possible that a Davenport if he returns to college might (not would) choose a DIII team because he wants to play right away.
OTOH I think prospects have better information now than a generation ago and so they know who has two good goalies who are freshmen/sophomores so they're less likely to choose the wrong school (if you can call Davenport choosing Cornell to be a wrong school - it was for him). I mean, you could always find out by calling around, but now you just go online and it's clear.
That's the compensation of our limitations: we rarely lose anybody early. But I doubt Schafer would turn his back on a blue chipper who had the grades to get in, even if he was a risk of 1-and-done. [/q]
Not that Coach Mike would be so Machiavellian, but if you take somebody who bails after two years because you're overstocked in that position, you've denied him in perpetuity to the Cantabs and Colgate and BC, etcetera. ... And it's possible that a Davenport if he returns to college might (not would) choose a DIII team because he wants to play right away.
OTOH I think prospects have better information now than a generation ago and so they know who has two good goalies who are freshmen/sophomores so they're less likely to choose the wrong school (if you can call Davenport choosing Cornell to be a wrong school - it was for him). I mean, you could always find out by calling around, but now you just go online and it's clear.
Re: Davenport Has Left the Team
Posted by: Greg Berge (---.frdrmd.adelphia.net)
Date: January 23, 2005 06:39PM
[Q]billhoward Wrote:you've denied him in perpetuity to the Cantabs and Colgate and BC [/q]Excellent point. And I like how your mind works. Evil.
Re: Davenport Has Left the Team
Posted by: Lauren '06 (---.twcny.rr.com)
Date: January 23, 2005 07:00PM
[Q]billhoward Wrote:
Greg Berge Wrote:
That's the compensation of our limitations: we rarely lose anybody early. But I doubt Schafer would turn his back on a blue chipper who had the grades to get in, even if he was a risk of 1-and-done. [/Q]
Not that Coach Mike would be so Machiavellian, but if you take somebody who bails after two years because you're overstocked in that position, you've denied him in perpetuity to the Cantabs and Colgate and BC, etcetera. ... And it's possible that a Davenport if he returns to college might (not would) choose a DIII team because he wants to play right away.
OTOH I think prospects have better information now than a generation ago and so they know who has two good goalies who are freshmen/sophomores so they're less likely to choose the wrong school (if you can call Davenport choosing Cornell to be a wrong school - it was for him). I mean, you could always find out by calling around, but now you just go online and it's clear. [/q]
The Ithaca Journal article about his leaving suggests that Schafer thought that Davenport might replace or at least share time with McKee. He might have been slipped that line or given that impression while he was being recruited.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/23/2005 07:01PM by Section A Banshee.
Re: Davenport Has Left the Team
Posted by: atb9 (---.nycap.rr.com)
Date: January 23, 2005 07:06PM
*warning, speculation zone!*
And coming from Minnesota, I'd bet that Davenport had some arrogance in his ability to compete and start for a team in the Northeast, even Cornell.
His lack of patience in competing with an incumbent starter is a little upsetting but, oh well, right?
And coming from Minnesota, I'd bet that Davenport had some arrogance in his ability to compete and start for a team in the Northeast, even Cornell.
His lack of patience in competing with an incumbent starter is a little upsetting but, oh well, right?
___________________________
24 is the devil
24 is the devil
Re: Davenport Has Left the Team
Posted by: billhoward (---.union01.nj.comcast.net)
Date: January 23, 2005 07:10PM
[Q]Section A Banshee Wrote:The Ithaca Journal article about his [Davenport] leaving suggests that Schafer thought that Davenport might replace or at least share time with McKee. He might have been slipped that line or given that impression while he was being recruited.[/q]
I believe Schafer also said in the Journal he was also shocked, shocked by how McKee developed this year early on.
We don't know what the coach told the recruit, but I think there's enough wiggle room in what he said/implied for Davenport not to have been misled. I bet he said, and Schafer was right, "You appear to have the ability to compete with David McKee even if he was co-rookie of the year, especially if you work hard and progress the way you're capable of." He certainly beat out Chabot for that ten minutes in the wipeout against Army.
I believe Schafer also said in the Journal he was also shocked, shocked by how McKee developed this year early on.
We don't know what the coach told the recruit, but I think there's enough wiggle room in what he said/implied for Davenport not to have been misled. I bet he said, and Schafer was right, "You appear to have the ability to compete with David McKee even if he was co-rookie of the year, especially if you work hard and progress the way you're capable of." He certainly beat out Chabot for that ten minutes in the wipeout against Army.
Re: Davenport Has Left the Team
Posted by: David Harding (---.dsl.emhril.ameritech.net)
Date: January 23, 2005 07:33PM
[Q]billhoward Wrote:
Section A Banshee Wrote:The Ithaca Journal article about his leaving suggests that Schafer thought that Davenport might replace or at least share time with McKee. He might have been slipped that line or given that impression while he was being recruited.[/Q]
I believe Schafer also said in the Journal he was also shocked, shocked by how McKee developed this year early on.
We don't know what the coach told the recruit, but I think there's enough wiggle room in what he said/implied for Davenport not to have been misled. I bet he said, and Schafer was right, "You appear to have the ability to compete with David McKee even if he was co-rookie of the year, especially if you work hard and progress the way you're capable of." He certainly beat out Chabot for that ten minutes in the wipeout against Army. [/q]
You also have to remember the timetable on recruiting Davenport. McKee was scheduled to be a freshman this year after spending a year in the Nanaimo Clippers pipeline. It was only in the summer, after Lenny's departure, that he was encouraged to enroll last year. Even for the first months of the season it was not at all clear that he was going to excel as he did, and by that time Davenport had committed. Then McKee took another step up.
Re: Davenport Has Left the Team
Posted by: atb9 (---.nycap.rr.com)
Date: January 23, 2005 07:42PM
[Q]David Harding Wrote:
You also have to remember the timetable on recruiting Davenport. McKee was scheduled to be a freshman this year after spending a year in the Nanaimo Clippers pipeline. It was only in the summer, after Lenny's departure, that he was encouraged to enroll last year. Even for the first months of the season it was not at all clear that he was going to excel as he did, and by that time Davenport had committed. Then McKee took another step up.
[/q]
Very good point.
You also have to remember the timetable on recruiting Davenport. McKee was scheduled to be a freshman this year after spending a year in the Nanaimo Clippers pipeline. It was only in the summer, after Lenny's departure, that he was encouraged to enroll last year. Even for the first months of the season it was not at all clear that he was going to excel as he did, and by that time Davenport had committed. Then McKee took another step up.
[/q]
Very good point.
___________________________
24 is the devil
24 is the devil
Re: Davenport Has Left the Team
Posted by: billhoward (---.union01.nj.comcast.net)
Date: January 23, 2005 09:07PM
Some players fear they're not as good as their clippings, that they got lucky over and over. (Richard Burton went to his grave believing he was a fraud as an actor and simply tricked the critics a bunch of times.) There are probably more players who overestimate their ability and it's reinforced by fans, parents, press clippings, and recruiters.
As for the timetable of Davenport arriving, it's a good point that McKee was supposed to be a freshman this year. Still, by the May 1 deadline that Cornell the university has for its students saying yes or no, Davenport had learned of McKee's freshman-year abilities and seen his ECACHL rookie of the year trophy. Maybe Davenport realized it was going to be tougher to beat out (or alternate with) McKee than he'd expected, but Davenport probably thought it was still enough of a horse race to not give up all the plaqns he'd made. True, most other schools had locked in their goaltending needs, but Davenport only needed to have found one, say, ECACHL team in need of help.
One thing I'm not sure I like is the coach's quote from the Journal saying Davenport was selfish in leaving the team. Maybe a generation ago that would have been clear. In a more self-focused era, I'm not sure I agree. I don't think Davenport was more selfish in saying, Oops, wrong place for me, than Leneveu was selfish in furthering his career by turning pro after two of his four years. With Lenny in goal this year, maybe we'd be in the top five, not top ten, and we'd have an incredible backup goalie in freshman David McKee, fresh off his prep year with Nainamo. Too bad the Journal didn't ask Schafer if Davenport would or would not have been selfish if he stayed the year and then left.
All of this is moot if Mckee stays healthy the next 2-1/2 years and we find a dynamite backup in the next 24 months.
As for the timetable of Davenport arriving, it's a good point that McKee was supposed to be a freshman this year. Still, by the May 1 deadline that Cornell the university has for its students saying yes or no, Davenport had learned of McKee's freshman-year abilities and seen his ECACHL rookie of the year trophy. Maybe Davenport realized it was going to be tougher to beat out (or alternate with) McKee than he'd expected, but Davenport probably thought it was still enough of a horse race to not give up all the plaqns he'd made. True, most other schools had locked in their goaltending needs, but Davenport only needed to have found one, say, ECACHL team in need of help.
One thing I'm not sure I like is the coach's quote from the Journal saying Davenport was selfish in leaving the team. Maybe a generation ago that would have been clear. In a more self-focused era, I'm not sure I agree. I don't think Davenport was more selfish in saying, Oops, wrong place for me, than Leneveu was selfish in furthering his career by turning pro after two of his four years. With Lenny in goal this year, maybe we'd be in the top five, not top ten, and we'd have an incredible backup goalie in freshman David McKee, fresh off his prep year with Nainamo. Too bad the Journal didn't ask Schafer if Davenport would or would not have been selfish if he stayed the year and then left.
All of this is moot if Mckee stays healthy the next 2-1/2 years and we find a dynamite backup in the next 24 months.
Re: Davenport Has Left the Team
Posted by: Greg Berge (---.frdrmd.adelphia.net)
Date: January 24, 2005 09:57AM
[Q]One thing I'm not sure I like is the coach's quote from the Journal saying Davenport was selfish in leaving the team. Maybe a generation ago that would have been clear. In a more self-focused era, I'm not sure I agree.[/Q]
Did you just say that the more selfish people get, the less selfish they are?
Did you just say that the more selfish people get, the less selfish they are?
Re: Davenport Has Left the Team
Posted by: billhoward (---.union01.nj.comcast.net)
Date: January 24, 2005 03:32PM
The full quote didn't say selfish directly. Schafer was quoted in the Journal as saying ...
[q]"(Davenport) didn't see himself getting in the net, playing behind David," Schafer said. "We are disappointed. I thought he improved a lot as a goaltender. I thought he let the team down by leaving. He is looking out for the best interests for himself down the road.
"When Troy came in, I thought without question he would battle against (McKee) much like David LeNeveu came in and battled against Matt Underhill (LeNeveu and Underhill split time when LeNeveu was a freshman and Underhill was a senior in 2001-02 season). But what happened is David McKee elevated his game and got better. For Troy and (backup goalie Louis Chabot), that doesn't leave much room for those guys to play, especially if you want to be a top-10 team. You can't experiment. I've always said the better player plays." [/q]
.... and my point was that a generation ago people had a different mindset: long hair was not good on athletes, blacks should be grateful for the opportunity to be in college playing sports, it was selfish to turn pro before you played four years as an undergrad (never mind that in football or basketball at least, the only person not making money on college sports was the person who played it). Now I think many people see a more middle ground: Too bad Davenport left the team in mid-year, and in that sense he let down Cornell because it was counting on him to be part of the team ... but Cornell wanted to maximize its utility in having Davenport on the team (albeit on the bench waiting for McKee to pull a groin muscle) at the same time Davenport wanted to maximize his chances of getting ahead. Because Davenport wasn't as good as Cornell/Davenport thought, or because McKee got way better than anyone expected (do *we* think McKee is way better than last year, or is it more of the expected yearly improvement?), he didn't play.
[q]"(Davenport) didn't see himself getting in the net, playing behind David," Schafer said. "We are disappointed. I thought he improved a lot as a goaltender. I thought he let the team down by leaving. He is looking out for the best interests for himself down the road.
"When Troy came in, I thought without question he would battle against (McKee) much like David LeNeveu came in and battled against Matt Underhill (LeNeveu and Underhill split time when LeNeveu was a freshman and Underhill was a senior in 2001-02 season). But what happened is David McKee elevated his game and got better. For Troy and (backup goalie Louis Chabot), that doesn't leave much room for those guys to play, especially if you want to be a top-10 team. You can't experiment. I've always said the better player plays." [/q]
.... and my point was that a generation ago people had a different mindset: long hair was not good on athletes, blacks should be grateful for the opportunity to be in college playing sports, it was selfish to turn pro before you played four years as an undergrad (never mind that in football or basketball at least, the only person not making money on college sports was the person who played it). Now I think many people see a more middle ground: Too bad Davenport left the team in mid-year, and in that sense he let down Cornell because it was counting on him to be part of the team ... but Cornell wanted to maximize its utility in having Davenport on the team (albeit on the bench waiting for McKee to pull a groin muscle) at the same time Davenport wanted to maximize his chances of getting ahead. Because Davenport wasn't as good as Cornell/Davenport thought, or because McKee got way better than anyone expected (do *we* think McKee is way better than last year, or is it more of the expected yearly improvement?), he didn't play.
Re: Davenport Has Left the Team
Posted by: KenP (---.abrfc.noaa.gov)
Date: January 24, 2005 04:24PM
[Q]billhoward Wrote:
...Too bad Davenport left the team in mid-year, and in that sense he let down Cornell because it was counting on him to be part of the team ... [/q]
Based on the conversation in this thread he was absolutely the #2 goalie in the system. Without him, the remainder of Cornell's hockey season is one injury (on or off the ice) away from calamity. IMO, putting your team in that situation, especially 2/3 through the season, is very selfish. I wish him well, but he still deserves a big fat
...Too bad Davenport left the team in mid-year, and in that sense he let down Cornell because it was counting on him to be part of the team ... [/q]
Based on the conversation in this thread he was absolutely the #2 goalie in the system. Without him, the remainder of Cornell's hockey season is one injury (on or off the ice) away from calamity. IMO, putting your team in that situation, especially 2/3 through the season, is very selfish. I wish him well, but he still deserves a big fat
Re: Davenport Has Left the Team
Posted by: CUlater 89 (64.244.223.---)
Date: January 24, 2005 04:51PM
Of course his leaving the team in mid-season is "selfish" -- the decision was made in his own best interests, not those of the team (leaving a team is rarely an unselfish decision, unless it's a case of "addition by subtraction". The question is, is it inappropriately selfish, or unwarranted? Probably in his mind, the answer is no. Schafer presumably promised him a chance to compete for ice time and Davenport felt he had earned more than he was given. He likely agreed to enroll at Cornell this past fall on the basis that he'd be playing some. When McKee stepped up his game this season and Schafer responded by giving him all of the starts (no matter how well Davenport might have been playing), Davenport no doubt saw that his chance of ever playing in the next three years rested on rooting for McKee to play poorly or get hurt. McKee had clearly become the "favorite" with the coach, so Davenport was going to leave at the end of the season anyway. Why should he sit around the next few months, when he could be playing in games elsewhere? Yes, he had made a commitment to the team for this season, but the coach (in Davenport's mind) had made a commitment to give him ice time.
Re: Davenport Has Left the Team
Posted by: KenP (---.abrfc.noaa.gov)
Date: January 24, 2005 05:03PM
Inappropriately selfish.
CUlater, the point is he made a commitment to the Team. There are no buts about it. I don't care if his feelings were hurt. He agreed to take on a role on the Team. "Backup" does not mean "unplayed". If McKee has a bad game, he's in. If McKee gets hurt or catches the flu or get's rear-ended on Seneca Ave, Troy's in. His choice to leave now let's everybody down -- Coach, David, Matt, Shane, Topher... you get the point.
Also, if the rationale going through his mind was as you suggest, he's not necessarily someone I would want playing for me...."I'll play on your team as long as you promise I always get to start." Get over yourself! It's an overused cliche, but still true --- there's no "I" in T-E-A-M.
CUlater, the point is he made a commitment to the Team. There are no buts about it. I don't care if his feelings were hurt. He agreed to take on a role on the Team. "Backup" does not mean "unplayed". If McKee has a bad game, he's in. If McKee gets hurt or catches the flu or get's rear-ended on Seneca Ave, Troy's in. His choice to leave now let's everybody down -- Coach, David, Matt, Shane, Topher... you get the point.
Also, if the rationale going through his mind was as you suggest, he's not necessarily someone I would want playing for me...."I'll play on your team as long as you promise I always get to start." Get over yourself! It's an overused cliche, but still true --- there's no "I" in T-E-A-M.
Re: Davenport Has Left the Team
Posted by: Jordan 04 (12.42.45.---)
Date: January 24, 2005 05:06PM
[Q]KenP Wrote:
It's an overused cliche, but still true --- there's no "I" in T-E-A-M.
[/q]
But there is an M-E.
It's an overused cliche, but still true --- there's no "I" in T-E-A-M.
[/q]
But there is an M-E.
Re: Davenport Has Left the Team
Posted by: Al DeFlorio (---.ne.client2.attbi.com)
Date: January 24, 2005 05:08PM
[Q]CUlater 89 Wrote:
Of course his leaving the team in mid-season is "selfish" -- the decision was made in his own best interests, not those of the team (leaving a team is rarely an unselfish decision, unless it's a case of "addition by subtraction". The question is, is it inappropriately selfish, or unwarranted? Probably in his mind, the answer is no. Schafer presumably promised him a chance to compete for ice time and Davenport felt he had earned more than he was given. He likely agreed to enroll at Cornell this past fall on the basis that he'd be playing some. When McKee stepped up his game this season and Schafer responded by giving him all of the starts (no matter how well Davenport might have been playing), Davenport no doubt saw that his chance of ever playing in the next three years rested on rooting for McKee to play poorly or get hurt. McKee had clearly become the "favorite" with the coach, so Davenport was going to leave at the end of the season anyway. Why should he sit around the next few months, when he could be playing in games elsewhere? Yes, he had made a commitment to the team for this season, but the coach (in Davenport's mind) had made a commitment to give him ice time.[/q]
Big leap to go from "presumably promised him a chance to compete" to "made a commitment to give him ice time."
Of course his leaving the team in mid-season is "selfish" -- the decision was made in his own best interests, not those of the team (leaving a team is rarely an unselfish decision, unless it's a case of "addition by subtraction". The question is, is it inappropriately selfish, or unwarranted? Probably in his mind, the answer is no. Schafer presumably promised him a chance to compete for ice time and Davenport felt he had earned more than he was given. He likely agreed to enroll at Cornell this past fall on the basis that he'd be playing some. When McKee stepped up his game this season and Schafer responded by giving him all of the starts (no matter how well Davenport might have been playing), Davenport no doubt saw that his chance of ever playing in the next three years rested on rooting for McKee to play poorly or get hurt. McKee had clearly become the "favorite" with the coach, so Davenport was going to leave at the end of the season anyway. Why should he sit around the next few months, when he could be playing in games elsewhere? Yes, he had made a commitment to the team for this season, but the coach (in Davenport's mind) had made a commitment to give him ice time.[/q]
Big leap to go from "presumably promised him a chance to compete" to "made a commitment to give him ice time."
___________________________
Al DeFlorio '65
Al DeFlorio '65
Re: Davenport Has Left the Team
Posted by: madhatter (---.citlabs.cornell.edu)
Date: January 24, 2005 05:23PM
Chabot has been on the bench because he has a problem controlling his rebounds. Until he can improve in that area, and McKee craps the bed, he probably won't see much ice time.
Re: Davenport Has Left the Team
Posted by: CUlater 89 (---.nyc.rr.com)
Date: January 25, 2005 12:28AM
[Q]Al DeFlorio Wrote:
Big leap to go from "presumably promised him a chance to compete" to "made a commitment to give him ice time."[/q]
From what I understand, when Davenport agreed to come in for this season he was told that if he played well he would get to split time with McKee (actually, I had heard that Schafer really wanted Davenport to win the job because based on last season he thought McKee wasn't the long-term answer). Even Schafer admits that Davenport has improved his play. Davenport probably felt like he was playing well enough to start some games and Schafer either disagrees and/or believes McKee gives him the best chance to win games at this point, with his improvement over last season. Thus, Davenport feels like he held up his end of the bargain (improving his play and playing well enough to start) but wasn't going to get that chance.
Big leap to go from "presumably promised him a chance to compete" to "made a commitment to give him ice time."[/q]
From what I understand, when Davenport agreed to come in for this season he was told that if he played well he would get to split time with McKee (actually, I had heard that Schafer really wanted Davenport to win the job because based on last season he thought McKee wasn't the long-term answer). Even Schafer admits that Davenport has improved his play. Davenport probably felt like he was playing well enough to start some games and Schafer either disagrees and/or believes McKee gives him the best chance to win games at this point, with his improvement over last season. Thus, Davenport feels like he held up his end of the bargain (improving his play and playing well enough to start) but wasn't going to get that chance.
Re: Davenport Has Left the Team
Posted by: CUlater 89 (---.nyc.rr.com)
Date: January 25, 2005 12:38AM
[Q]KenP Wrote:
Inappropriately selfish.
CUlater, the point is he made a commitment to the Team. There are no buts about it. I don't care if his feelings were hurt. He agreed to take on a role on the Team. "Backup" does not mean "unplayed". If McKee has a bad game, he's in. If McKee gets hurt or catches the flu or get's rear-ended on Seneca Ave, Troy's in. His choice to leave now let's everybody down -- Coach, David, Matt, Shane, Topher... you get the point.
Also, if the rationale going through his mind was as you suggest, he's not necessarily someone I would want playing for me...."I'll play on your team as long as you promise I always get to start." Get over yourself! It's an overused cliche, but still true --- there's no "I" in T-E-A-M.
[/q]
"Backup" does mean "unplayed", at least under the current structure (except for mop-up duty). Davenport wasn't brought in with the understanding he'd be a backup all season (and potentially for 3 years if McKee continues to play on a high level). He expected to be playing some of the time and presumably feels he has earned it but won't get time because McKee is playing so well. Since his long term plan is no longer to stay at Cornell, why wait until the end of the season on the off-chance that McKee gets hurt and the team needs him to play? In terms of cost-benefit, the expected cost to the team for him leaving now rather than in April should be relatively low (knock on wood) while the benefit to him for leaving now rather than in April should be relatively great, since he gets to play on a regular basis and won't miss almost a full season of competitive action. On that basis, it makes sense to him to take the chance of harming the team and leave now.
Also, the team does have a backup goalie, one who I thought was highly recruited, notwithstanding what he's turned out to be.
Inappropriately selfish.
CUlater, the point is he made a commitment to the Team. There are no buts about it. I don't care if his feelings were hurt. He agreed to take on a role on the Team. "Backup" does not mean "unplayed". If McKee has a bad game, he's in. If McKee gets hurt or catches the flu or get's rear-ended on Seneca Ave, Troy's in. His choice to leave now let's everybody down -- Coach, David, Matt, Shane, Topher... you get the point.
Also, if the rationale going through his mind was as you suggest, he's not necessarily someone I would want playing for me...."I'll play on your team as long as you promise I always get to start." Get over yourself! It's an overused cliche, but still true --- there's no "I" in T-E-A-M.
[/q]
"Backup" does mean "unplayed", at least under the current structure (except for mop-up duty). Davenport wasn't brought in with the understanding he'd be a backup all season (and potentially for 3 years if McKee continues to play on a high level). He expected to be playing some of the time and presumably feels he has earned it but won't get time because McKee is playing so well. Since his long term plan is no longer to stay at Cornell, why wait until the end of the season on the off-chance that McKee gets hurt and the team needs him to play? In terms of cost-benefit, the expected cost to the team for him leaving now rather than in April should be relatively low (knock on wood) while the benefit to him for leaving now rather than in April should be relatively great, since he gets to play on a regular basis and won't miss almost a full season of competitive action. On that basis, it makes sense to him to take the chance of harming the team and leave now.
Also, the team does have a backup goalie, one who I thought was highly recruited, notwithstanding what he's turned out to be.
Re: Davenport Has Left the Team
Posted by: mjh89 (---.resnet.cornell.edu)
Date: January 25, 2005 01:12AM
Yes, it's her son. He's a great HS goalie and great kid, but I don't know if he is quite good enough to play for Cornell. I also think he is much more concerned with lacrosse.
Re: Davenport Has Left the Team
Posted by: billhoward (---.union01.nj.comcast.net)
Date: January 25, 2005 08:35AM
[Q]CUlater 89 Wrote: From what I understand, when Davenport agreed to come in for this season he was told that if he played well he would get to split time with McKee (actually, I had heard that Schafer really wanted Davenport to win the job because based on last season he thought McKee wasn't the long-term answer). [/q]
If so, Schafer has pretty high expectations for goaltenders. McKee seems to be a pretty decent year-at-a-time answer.
If so, Schafer has pretty high expectations for goaltenders. McKee seems to be a pretty decent year-at-a-time answer.
Re: Davenport Has Left the Team
Posted by: KenP (---.abrfc.noaa.gov)
Date: January 25, 2005 03:42PM
[Q]CUlater 89 Wrote:
...Since his long term plan is no longer to stay at Cornell, why wait until the end of the season on the off-chance that McKee gets hurt and the team needs him to play?[/q]
Because he made a commitment to the team, and if McKee gets hurt the team needs him to play. That "commitment" word means a lot to me. Falls in the same category of words like "trust", "promise", "character", "integrity", etc.
[q]In terms of cost-benefit, the expected cost to the team for him leaving now rather than in April should be relatively low (knock on wood) while the benefit to him for leaving now rather than in April should be relatively great, since he gets to play on a regular basis and won't miss almost a full season of competitive action.[/q]
Agreed on the latter. The cost to the team is they're left with a much weaker insurance policy, with no way to fix it until next season. Will it matter? Let's hope not.
[q]On that basis, it makes sense to him to take the chance of harming the team and leave now.[/q]
CUlater, we'll have to agree to disagree. I don't see anything in your argument that makes me think that Davenport didn't let down his teammates and reneg on a personal commitment.
[Q]COL Nathan Jessep said:
We use words like honor, code, loyalty...we use these words as the backbone to a life spent defending something. You use 'em as a punchline. I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very freedom I provide, then questions the manner in which I provide it. I'd prefer you just said thank you and went on your way. Otherwise, I suggest you pick up a weapon and stand a post. Either way, I don't give a damn what you think you're entitled to.[/q]
...Since his long term plan is no longer to stay at Cornell, why wait until the end of the season on the off-chance that McKee gets hurt and the team needs him to play?[/q]
Because he made a commitment to the team, and if McKee gets hurt the team needs him to play. That "commitment" word means a lot to me. Falls in the same category of words like "trust", "promise", "character", "integrity", etc.
[q]In terms of cost-benefit, the expected cost to the team for him leaving now rather than in April should be relatively low (knock on wood) while the benefit to him for leaving now rather than in April should be relatively great, since he gets to play on a regular basis and won't miss almost a full season of competitive action.[/q]
Agreed on the latter. The cost to the team is they're left with a much weaker insurance policy, with no way to fix it until next season. Will it matter? Let's hope not.
[q]On that basis, it makes sense to him to take the chance of harming the team and leave now.[/q]
CUlater, we'll have to agree to disagree. I don't see anything in your argument that makes me think that Davenport didn't let down his teammates and reneg on a personal commitment.
[Q]COL Nathan Jessep said:
We use words like honor, code, loyalty...we use these words as the backbone to a life spent defending something. You use 'em as a punchline. I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very freedom I provide, then questions the manner in which I provide it. I'd prefer you just said thank you and went on your way. Otherwise, I suggest you pick up a weapon and stand a post. Either way, I don't give a damn what you think you're entitled to.[/q]
It's Coach's fault too
Posted by: JohnnieAg'99 (---.equityresources.com)
Date: January 26, 2005 02:28PM
[Q]billhoward Wrote:Not that Coach Mike would be so Machiavellian, but if you take somebody who bails after two years because you're overstocked in that position, you've denied him in perpetuity to the Cantabs and Colgate and BC, etcetera.[/q] This just isn't true - he could sit out and then go to any school he wants. Sucks' sieve Tobe went to MSU at 17, got bombed, went to the USHL, and then went to Sucks. Davenport could do the same.
I think Coach deserves alot of the blame here - most coaches put their backups in for a few games during the season (Mazzoleni's 'fight' with the parents was with their back-up goalie's dad, who 'only' played a few games- inlcuding a loss to Princeton). If Coach isn't going to develop a backup at all in games, he is going to have to suffer the consequences, which are pretty predictable.
I think Coach deserves alot of the blame here - most coaches put their backups in for a few games during the season (Mazzoleni's 'fight' with the parents was with their back-up goalie's dad, who 'only' played a few games- inlcuding a loss to Princeton). If Coach isn't going to develop a backup at all in games, he is going to have to suffer the consequences, which are pretty predictable.
Re: It's Coach's fault too
Posted by: Greg Berge (---.cust-rtr.swbell.net)
Date: January 26, 2005 03:56PM
[Q]JohnnieAg'99 Wrote:I think Coach deserves alot of the blame here - most coaches put their backups in for a few games during the season (Mazzoleni's 'fight' with the parents was with their back-up goalie's dad, who 'only' played a few games- inlcuding a loss to Princeton). If Coach isn't going to develop a backup at all in games, he is going to have to suffer the consequences, which are pretty predictable. [/q]
That's easy to say, but we have no idea what was going on during practice, how Davenport looked, whether he progressed, whether he had a good attitude, etc.. It might, for instance, be a pretty fair indicator of his attitude that he split midway through the season with no warning, thus screwing his teammates. And for all we know, Davenport himself might have been cool with the whole thing, but undone by pressure from a relentless stagemother-type relative. We really have no way of knowing, so casting the blame either way is pretty dumb.
That's easy to say, but we have no idea what was going on during practice, how Davenport looked, whether he progressed, whether he had a good attitude, etc.. It might, for instance, be a pretty fair indicator of his attitude that he split midway through the season with no warning, thus screwing his teammates. And for all we know, Davenport himself might have been cool with the whole thing, but undone by pressure from a relentless stagemother-type relative. We really have no way of knowing, so casting the blame either way is pretty dumb.
Re: Davenport Has Left the Team
Posted by: KenP (---.abrfc.noaa.gov)
Date: January 26, 2005 04:55PM
Dammit Greg, why do you always have to be a voice of reason? Now it's you're fault he left. Stupid facetimer.
Re: Davenport Has Left the Team
Posted by: Jacob 03 (---.carlsl01.pa.comcast.net)
Date: January 26, 2005 05:09PM
Silly Greg! Don't you know it's "the fan" that matters? Why let relationships between players and coaches be dictated by...the players and coaches? We can't have that, not when there are the rumormongering masses and overeditorializing sportswriters to think about!
Re: Davenport Has Left the Team
Posted by: ugarte (---.ny325.east.verizon.net)
Date: January 26, 2005 05:28PM
Let me be the first to just stand up for the poor kid.
Davenport's decision was not inappropriately selfish. He found himself on the bench behind a sophomore goalie who proved himself worthy of playing every minute of every game. It is actually more selfish of the team and its fans to expect that Davenport would sacrifice anywhere from one to three years of development at a crucial stage of his career in order to serve as an insurance policy. That isn't loyalty; it is suicide. He doesn't owe the team his continued services any more than the team owes him guaranteed playing time.
Davenport's decision was not inappropriately selfish. He found himself on the bench behind a sophomore goalie who proved himself worthy of playing every minute of every game. It is actually more selfish of the team and its fans to expect that Davenport would sacrifice anywhere from one to three years of development at a crucial stage of his career in order to serve as an insurance policy. That isn't loyalty; it is suicide. He doesn't owe the team his continued services any more than the team owes him guaranteed playing time.
___________________________
quality tweets | bluesky (twitter 2) | ALAB Series podcast | Other podcasts and writing
quality tweets | bluesky (twitter 2) | ALAB Series podcast | Other podcasts and writing
Re: It's Coach's fault too
Posted by: billhoward (---.union01.nj.comcast.net)
Date: January 26, 2005 06:26PM
Can't believe we're several screens deep in this discussion before you pointed out an obvious other possibility: the parents from hell.
We don't know if Davenport's parents are loving, caring, nurturing, and decent. Or not. But a statistically disproportionate number of sports parents believe their baby is the best catcher, quarterback, goalie, or pole vaulter to come out of Long Island or the Iron Mountain Range, and if he isn't starting in college, it's because the coach isn't coaching right, the refs are biased, the coach can't tell who has the obvioiusly superior skills set, the defense is buddies with the other goalie and conspires to make their goalie / wonder-son look bad, yada yada.
You've seen the PSA commercial during the college hockey games about the mother who stalks away when her little girl misses up on pin-the-tail-on-the-donkey at the birthday party -- "You get your own ride home now, Missy. I can't believe I missed Pilates for this" - and then you get the tagline, ~ "If it isn't right there, why is it right here [at the rink]?" There's a reason those commercials run, and should be running.
Again, this may not be the case at all with the Davenport family.
Girlfriends can be equally protective since a lot of them (okay, some of them) have their status wrapped up in whether he's a star, starter, or reserve.
Same thing with little ballerinas and teen actresses. There was an article a year ago with a very funny line, that Hilary Duff's mom sets the gold standard for stage mothers. It probably affects her ability to land some of the roles she wants.
One last time: We don't know Davenport's parents, we don't know the above describes them. But it's like with a homicide: Make sure you question the family.
We don't know if Davenport's parents are loving, caring, nurturing, and decent. Or not. But a statistically disproportionate number of sports parents believe their baby is the best catcher, quarterback, goalie, or pole vaulter to come out of Long Island or the Iron Mountain Range, and if he isn't starting in college, it's because the coach isn't coaching right, the refs are biased, the coach can't tell who has the obvioiusly superior skills set, the defense is buddies with the other goalie and conspires to make their goalie / wonder-son look bad, yada yada.
You've seen the PSA commercial during the college hockey games about the mother who stalks away when her little girl misses up on pin-the-tail-on-the-donkey at the birthday party -- "You get your own ride home now, Missy. I can't believe I missed Pilates for this" - and then you get the tagline, ~ "If it isn't right there, why is it right here [at the rink]?" There's a reason those commercials run, and should be running.
Again, this may not be the case at all with the Davenport family.
Girlfriends can be equally protective since a lot of them (okay, some of them) have their status wrapped up in whether he's a star, starter, or reserve.
Same thing with little ballerinas and teen actresses. There was an article a year ago with a very funny line, that Hilary Duff's mom sets the gold standard for stage mothers. It probably affects her ability to land some of the roles she wants.
One last time: We don't know Davenport's parents, we don't know the above describes them. But it's like with a homicide: Make sure you question the family.
Re: It's Coach's fault too
Posted by: KenP (---.abrfc.noaa.gov)
Date: January 26, 2005 06:46PM
So Bill, you agree then that his actions were inappropriately selfish, you just choose to not assign blame? That sounds reasonable to me. My main issue is with the people who feel his actions were appropriate.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/26/2005 06:50PM by KenP.
Re: Davenport Has Left the Team
Posted by: CowbellGuy (Moderator)
Date: January 26, 2005 07:04PM
Umm, didn't Davenport see McKee standing there when he decided to come to Cornell? This wasn't a surprise to him. If he wanted to leave early, the proper thing to do would have been to let the coaching staff know so they could find a replacement and at least finish out this season. Furthermore, I'm sure he was getting some nice grants and very favorable conditions to earn an Ivy League degree. It's not like he wasn't getting anything out of it.
___________________________
"[Hugh] Jessiman turned out to be a huge specimen of something alright." --Puck Daddy
"[Hugh] Jessiman turned out to be a huge specimen of something alright." --Puck Daddy
Re: Davenport Has Left the Team
Posted by: ben03 (---.rochester.rr.com)
Date: January 26, 2005 07:30PM
By leaving his team mid-season monsieur davenport (a) serves only his interests (b) leaves his team(mates) in a percarious position (c) looks v. bad to future coaches (d) shows his true character. Like it or not, he's a freshman in a major college athletic environment who has a big head/ego (no matter what the coach may or may not have told him). It's public knowledge the best player plays, he had to have known that coming in. Troy wasn't #1 so instead of being a man about it and playing out the rest of this season, he upped and left his team.
___________________________
Let's GO Red!!!
Let's GO Red!!!
Re: It's Coach's fault too
Posted by: billhoward (---.union01.nj.comcast.net)
Date: January 26, 2005 09:51PM
[Q]KenP Wrote: So Bill, you agree then that his actions were inappropriately selfish, you just choose to not assign blame? That sounds reasonable to me. My main issue is with the people who feel his actions were appropriate.[/q]
It's difficult to respond to a question where someone has reshaped the first person's comments and then asked for agreement or not.
It's too bad Davenport left the team. We don't know what's happened; there's only so much light that can be shed by Mike Schafer's two paragraphs worth of comments as quoted by the Ithaca Journal. (Somebody should call Davenport and talk to him. Ari?) Yes, Davenport let the team down because the team was counting on him to, ah, ride the bench. But no, I guess I don't feel he screwed over Cornell royally by departing. I think I and others might have felt that way a generation ago. A generation and a half ago, lots of people felt athletes let their team down by seeking free agency, or holding out for better pay. (Maybe they might have pointed to a real team player like Pete Rose. (Insert wry comment here.)) Not as many people feel that way now. As a practical matter, this reduces Cornell from three to two healthy goalies. We don't know if that entered into Davenport's thinking.
A better solution? If Davenport had told Schafer, "Look, coach, this isn't working out. Either McKee is better than you and I thought, or I'm as good in my mind and I don't have your confidence, but I need to move on from this place ... after the season ends ... which gives you time to find a different backup for the fall who doesn't mind being No. 2 or who's so good in your mind he'll make McKee be No. 2." That magnamonious gesture of course would have guaranteed any mop-up duties would go to Chabot unless McKee got hurt bad. Goalie is an odd position, maybe like quarterback in football, where if you're not No. 1, you're not going to play. If he was the No. 2 defenseman (even No. 6), he'd see playing time. Even at No. 7, he'd have the ability to play by working hard and by improving (and waiting for No 1-6 to go down or get another game DQ).
The guys who've let their teams down? The drunken (apparently) team captain at North Dakota who may be lost for the season if ND has any spine and says, "Sorry, Matt [Greene], we don't want you representing the university if you put people's lives at risk with your actions." Or the guys at Clarkson who broke rules and got tossed / suspended. Or the ones who didn't hit the books hard and are ineligible for spring semester. That's selfish, inappropriate, and inexcusable.
It's difficult to respond to a question where someone has reshaped the first person's comments and then asked for agreement or not.
It's too bad Davenport left the team. We don't know what's happened; there's only so much light that can be shed by Mike Schafer's two paragraphs worth of comments as quoted by the Ithaca Journal. (Somebody should call Davenport and talk to him. Ari?) Yes, Davenport let the team down because the team was counting on him to, ah, ride the bench. But no, I guess I don't feel he screwed over Cornell royally by departing. I think I and others might have felt that way a generation ago. A generation and a half ago, lots of people felt athletes let their team down by seeking free agency, or holding out for better pay. (Maybe they might have pointed to a real team player like Pete Rose. (Insert wry comment here.)) Not as many people feel that way now. As a practical matter, this reduces Cornell from three to two healthy goalies. We don't know if that entered into Davenport's thinking.
A better solution? If Davenport had told Schafer, "Look, coach, this isn't working out. Either McKee is better than you and I thought, or I'm as good in my mind and I don't have your confidence, but I need to move on from this place ... after the season ends ... which gives you time to find a different backup for the fall who doesn't mind being No. 2 or who's so good in your mind he'll make McKee be No. 2." That magnamonious gesture of course would have guaranteed any mop-up duties would go to Chabot unless McKee got hurt bad. Goalie is an odd position, maybe like quarterback in football, where if you're not No. 1, you're not going to play. If he was the No. 2 defenseman (even No. 6), he'd see playing time. Even at No. 7, he'd have the ability to play by working hard and by improving (and waiting for No 1-6 to go down or get another game DQ).
The guys who've let their teams down? The drunken (apparently) team captain at North Dakota who may be lost for the season if ND has any spine and says, "Sorry, Matt [Greene], we don't want you representing the university if you put people's lives at risk with your actions." Or the guys at Clarkson who broke rules and got tossed / suspended. Or the ones who didn't hit the books hard and are ineligible for spring semester. That's selfish, inappropriate, and inexcusable.
Re: It's Coach's fault too
Posted by: KenP (---.abrfc.noaa.gov)
Date: January 27, 2005 09:32AM
Maybe I'm just getting caught up in the shades of grey. There's different levels of letting the team down. Making a mental mistake that leads to a goal is a "minor" offense. Quitting halfway through the season, regardless of your role is a more serious letting down. Ditto for not making grades, breaking team rules, and so forth.
Maybe Davenport's family can't afford his tuition and needs him to work to support the family. Maybe the guy who went drinking was consoling a friend who just learned they had 2 weeks to live. Maybe Brendan Fraser didn't hand in his thesis on time because he had to bury Joe Pesci (With Honors,1994). Desparate times call for desparate measures. The law don't consider someone a murderer if they kill in self defense.
My point? A more serious offense better have a damn good reason or it reflects poorly on the individual. IF Troy's logic was that it's okay to look out for his best career interests and leave because he wanted play time now now now, then I take exception.
[q]The guys who've let their teams down? The drunken (apparently) team captain at North Dakota who may be lost for the season if ND has any spine and says, "Sorry, Matt , we don't want you representing the university if you put people's lives at risk with your actions."[/q]Just read on USCHO that he's been suspended for the next two games...against Bemidji. That'll teach him! [www.uscho.com]
Maybe Davenport's family can't afford his tuition and needs him to work to support the family. Maybe the guy who went drinking was consoling a friend who just learned they had 2 weeks to live. Maybe Brendan Fraser didn't hand in his thesis on time because he had to bury Joe Pesci (With Honors,1994). Desparate times call for desparate measures. The law don't consider someone a murderer if they kill in self defense.
My point? A more serious offense better have a damn good reason or it reflects poorly on the individual. IF Troy's logic was that it's okay to look out for his best career interests and leave because he wanted play time now now now, then I take exception.
[q]The guys who've let their teams down? The drunken (apparently) team captain at North Dakota who may be lost for the season if ND has any spine and says, "Sorry, Matt , we don't want you representing the university if you put people's lives at risk with your actions."[/q]Just read on USCHO that he's been suspended for the next two games...against Bemidji. That'll teach him! [www.uscho.com]
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/27/2005 09:32AM by KenP.
Re: It's Coach's fault too
Posted by: JohnnieAg'99 (---.equityresources.com)
Date: January 27, 2005 10:12AM
[Q]KenP Wrote:
Quitting halfway through the season, regardless of your role is a more serious letting down. [/q]
We've blamed him, him, him, his parents, his girlfriend, etc. Back to Coach for a minute -
Coach's win-at-all costs mentality has obviously paid huge dividends. But it's hypocritical to get all sanctimonious when those costs occasionally have to be paid.
I've always been troubled by the fact that he (usually) plays his back-up very little (Lenny as a frosh was obviously different). Unlike SLUt, Sucks, & others, we've had a cupcake schedule this season (Sacred Heart & Canisius??). To pretend that Davenport was only good enough to get in for half a period against Army is ridiculous. Any goalie who is good enough for us to want at Goaltender U is going to have to have an ego. Coach needs to do a better job of developing his #2, for the good of the TEAM. Does anyone here want to go to Albany if McKee has the flu?
Quitting halfway through the season, regardless of your role is a more serious letting down. [/q]
We've blamed him, him, him, his parents, his girlfriend, etc. Back to Coach for a minute -
Coach's win-at-all costs mentality has obviously paid huge dividends. But it's hypocritical to get all sanctimonious when those costs occasionally have to be paid.
I've always been troubled by the fact that he (usually) plays his back-up very little (Lenny as a frosh was obviously different). Unlike SLUt, Sucks, & others, we've had a cupcake schedule this season (Sacred Heart & Canisius??). To pretend that Davenport was only good enough to get in for half a period against Army is ridiculous. Any goalie who is good enough for us to want at Goaltender U is going to have to have an ego. Coach needs to do a better job of developing his #2, for the good of the TEAM. Does anyone here want to go to Albany if McKee has the flu?
Re: It's Coach's fault too
Posted by: KeithK (---.external.lmco.com)
Date: January 27, 2005 10:57AM
Well, it could have been worse. He could've stayed the season and then decided to jump ship next August.
Re: Davenport Has Left the Team
Posted by: ugarte (---.ny5030.east.verizon.net)
Date: January 28, 2005 11:53AM
IIRC, NCAA transfer rules exact a semester's worth of delay in going somewhere else if he sticks it out and spends this semester on the Cornell bench. Leaving early doesn't just get him out of an uncomfortable situation, it allows him to move on with his career and makes him more attractive to any other teams interested in him.
Schafer is entitled to think that he isn't good enough to play and Davenport is entitled to find a place where they think he is. Davenport just doesn't owe the team that much.
Schafer is entitled to think that he isn't good enough to play and Davenport is entitled to find a place where they think he is. Davenport just doesn't owe the team that much.
___________________________
quality tweets | bluesky (twitter 2) | ALAB Series podcast | Other podcasts and writing
quality tweets | bluesky (twitter 2) | ALAB Series podcast | Other podcasts and writing
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.