Cornell at Harvard postgame

Disappointing weekend. Hard to tell which was worse:
- Cornell's offensive play ...
- Cornell special teams PP and PK ... or
- the CSTV feed. So many choices.

[edit add] We're left to rooting for RichS to cheer home Clarkson over Q'pac so we get a home ice bye if I have the playoff options correct. And wondering just how far this season will go.

P.S. I'm not trying to hog the postgame thread first-posts. I even waited about 10 minutes. But nobody else seemed psyched.

The PP. Definitely the PP.

Oh, Matt Moulson...how I miss thee...

So where do the possible outcomes of the other games leave us?

ithacat
Oh, Matt Moulson...how I miss thee...

... you miss having somebody else to rag on for our lack of scoring punch? <g>

French Rage
So where do the possible outcomes of the other games leave us?

I'm not sure, see JTW's sight, or Sully's update in the Clarkson game thread. Union is in 12th place according to the standings board just shown on EspnU.

For ECACHL playoffs, I believe it's

1 SLU bye
2 Clarkson bye
3 Dartmouth bye
4 Cornell bye if Clarkson beats Quinnipiac <-- this happened
4 Quinnipiac bye if Fighting Deerticks win/tie Clarkson <-- didn't happen
5 Cornell or Quinnipiac host Union first round
6 Princeton host Brown
7 Harvard hosts RPI
8 Yale hosts Colgate
9 Colgate
10 RPI
11 Brown
12 Union

Standings with some not all Saturday games in 
 Team GP  W-L-T Pts. GF-GA     GP  W-L-T GF-GA 
1 St. Lawrence 22 16-5-1 33 73-55     34 20-12-2 105-91 
2 Clarkson     21 12-5-4 28 70-52     33 20-8-5 118-84 
3 Dartmouth    22 12-7-3 27 69-60     29 16-10-3 89-79 
4 Quinnipiac   21 10-7-4 24 73-59     33 16-12-5 121-91 
  Cornell      22 10-8-4 24 64-55     29 14-11-4 88-74  
6  Harvard      22 10-10-2 22 67-65     29 12-15-2 80-82 
  Princeton    22 10-10-2 22 69-63     29 13-13-3 89-83 
8 Yale         22 8-13-1 17 56-72     29 11-15-3 75-91 
  Colgate      22 7-12-3 17 53-60     36 13-19-4 91-92 
  Rensselaer   22 6-11-5 17 55-84     34 10-16-8 86-123 
11 Brown       22 6-12-4 16 65-69     29 10-13-6 88-86 
12 Union       22 7-14-1 15 54-74     34 14-17-3 98-111 

billhoward

ithacat
Oh, Matt Moulson...how I miss thee...

... you miss having somebody else to rag on for our lack of scoring punch? <g>

I miss the discussions about how all he could do was score powerplay goals.

Damn, I forgot that my alarm only works if I turn it on, and thus woke up at 3:15, once the game was over. Listening to Tech-Q now. Fortunately all of my interests align:

A Q loss lets Cornell back into a bye.
A Cornell-Q tie for 4th would come down to record vs top 8, while the RPI-Colgate-Yale tie for 8th comes down to record vs top 4. I.e., infinite loop time!
Clarkson is my second favorite team in the ECAC.

ithacat

billhoward

ithacat
Oh, Matt Moulson...how I miss thee...

... you miss having somebody else to rag on for our lack of scoring punch? <g>

I miss the discussions about how all he could do was score powerplay goals.

Now that we could use a lot of. Seems like the Fab Four, or however many high-scoring freshmen we have, are no-shows every other weekend.

Just got back to the hotel from Bright, and some notes:

Scrivens played well...the first H goal was a beautiful wrister that was ripped from the point, and was essentially a heat-seeking missile. The second goal happened during a scramble in front of the net, and barely actually went in...it zinged in barely under the crossbar and skipped right back out, but apparently crossed the goal-line for about 3 milliseconds. The third goal was a freak tip off someone's stick (a Sucks players I believe)...absolutely not softies though, and some good saves for Scrivens to boot.

On that note, major props to Tyler Mugford for diving to clear a puck that snuck through Scrivens's five-hole and was sitting on the goal line behind him.

The PP was terrible, and seemed to have changed with Milo now on the point and Salmela down low? It seemed to be clicking much better with Salmela running the plays. Not that we had many opportunities to cycle though as Harvard's D was very stingy. The McCutcheon goal was similar to to our failing PP earlier in the season when we would rely on Bitz and 'Cutch shots from the point...just happened to work this time.

Harvard's D was very tight as I mentioned before, and they had a real aggressive forecheck...we weren't able to clear our zone very often, which led to a few of their goals.

The guys just didn't seem to have the jump in their step that they had for the last 3 weekends. Even with Scrivens pulled (which barely happened thanks to Harvard's forecheck), they just didn't seem desperate...pretty unbelievable considering how important this game was standings-wise...although thanks to Clarkson, we go running back to Ithaca with our tails between our legs, barely getting that bye.

Not much to say about that one. The highlight may have been the pregame festivities at John Harvard's. Then after missing the first period to a broken water main on Soldier's Field Road (1 hour to inch a mile down the street), I was treated to that .

Once Bitz took the 5 minute major the offense seemed to reel it in a little, and there was no more buzz around the net. Cornell was losing all the little battles, and needed a two man advantage to muster a score.

That was Cornell's first zero-point weekend in league play, not counting home-and-home series with Colgate, since 2001.

Trotsky
That was Cornell's first zero-point weekend in league play, not counting home-and-home series with Colgate, since 2001.

... after getting 19 goals and going 3-0-1 the previous two weekends, we were on a roll. We thought.

billhoward

Trotsky
That was Cornell's first zero-point weekend in league play, not counting home-and-home series with Colgate, since 2001.

... after getting 19 goals and going 3-0-1 the previous two weekends, we were on a roll. We thought.

Yeah, the true measure of this team is somewhere in between the last two weekends. They truly aren't as bad as they look when they lose nor as good as they look when they win.

Quinnipiac is going to rock Union, so we're looking at a very interesting series in two weeks. I'll be taking Friday and Monday off, just to be sure.

I think we are are steeled for any outcome from failing to get out of Ithaca to making the NCAAs via the ECAC championship, since I think our hopes of an at large bid are somewhat modest.

Quinnipiac is beatable as we showed a couple weeks back. St. Lawrence, which would be our natural opponent Friday of ECAC semis if all higher seeds win going into Albany, is beatable. Should luck hold up, we then get to try our luck against Clarkson or Dartmouth for the title game. Clarkson we've shown we can beat. Dartmouth we've shown we can, well, ... anything can happen in one game. I'd be happy with either a NYS college representing the ECAC in the NCAAs or an Ivy institution. Of course, the one school that can do both is us. Plus, this freshman class is going places the next three years (let's hope not the NHL) and while it's over-rated, I think the experience of playing in the NCAAs as freshmen will serve the team well in following years when our chances to make a mark are markedly better.

I can just see us making the NCAAs and playing on an Olympic sheet against the No. 1 team on power play percentage. Hey, it would be great to go.

[www.uscho.com]

This guy may very well be the worst sportswriter in history.

Beeeej
http://www.uscho.com/recaps/20062007/m/02/24/cor-hu.php

This guy may very well be the worst sportswriter in history.

Aside from his lousy English, what was the controversy about the delay of game penalty?

Brian Sullivan, USCHO
Teammate Jimmy Fraser was whistled for a controversial delay-of-game with 1:56 remaining in Morin’s penalty,

The Harvard player took the puck and threw it out of the zone, controversy?

Does anyone know the Cornell fan who went over to the 'Sucks student section and let loose with some "HAAAAAHHHVAHHHD...SUCKS" cheers...and then got physically shoved off his feet by some of Harvard's finest and even-tempered young minds, before some other Harvard fans broke it up?

I'm curious to hear what actually happened, because it was difficult to see much of the commotion from where I was.

More on-topic, can anyone who was there shed light on what Bitz might or might not have been thinking with his boarding major & DQ? We seem to get one DQ per season against them, and all deserved.

JohnnieAg'99
More on-topic, can anyone who was there shed light on what Bitz might or might not have been thinking with his boarding major & DQ? We seem to get one DQ per season against them, and all deserved.

Not a DQ, a game misconduct. Big difference, since a DQ would mean Bitz would be suspended for the first game of the playoff series.

At the time the Bitz-Sawada-Greening line was trying to throw their weight around. Bitz had just checked one player before going in on the second hit. I could see it coming, and was already shaking my head before he made contact. In my opinion, a pretty clear major. It is stupid because at that time Cornell was starting to generate some action around the Harvard net, and they were never really the same afterwards.

That being said, it was not nearly as stupid as our old friend Chad Morin head butting Krueger.

oceanst41
That being said, it was not nearly as stupid as our old friend Chad Morin head butting Krueger.

I got to speak to Chad briefly after the game as my girlfriend is friendly with his family over in Auburn, and she and his sister were waiting to see him. He said that Krueger was essentially playing dirty, holding him and pretty much refusing to get out of his face...so he did the only thing he could think of. I don't know why head-butting was the only thing he could think of, nor am I defending him...just interesting to hear him explain it.

Had no idea there was a specific head-butting penalty before this game...what might the ref signal be...?

sah67
He said that Krueger was essentially playing dirty, holding him and pretty much refusing to get out of his face...so he did the only thing he could think of.

I had an idea of why he did it. I was down that end of the rink and was able to read Krueger's lips. Let's just say he would've been thrown out of Lynah with that kind of language.

I think a face wash would've sufficed though.

oceanst41

sah67
He said that Krueger was essentially playing dirty, holding him and pretty much refusing to get out of his face...so he did the only thing he could think of.

I had an idea of why he did it. I was down that end of the rink and was able to read Krueger's lips. Let's just say he would've been thrown out of Lynah with that kind of language.

Did he insult Morin's sister?

[en.wikipedia.org]

Noticed this on the back of the Harvard senior night poster:

Harvard
Volunteer Assistant: Bruce Irving (Cornell '85)


Disappointing weekend. This team has no right to sit next weekend out. That was a long trip from Ithaca.

ebilmes
Disappointing weekend. This team has no right to sit next weekend out. That was a long trip from Ithaca.

So, just who does have that right? Somebody has to do it, might as well be us.

As I said before, with the team losses we had, a finish in the top 4 and chance to go to Albany and win another cup, is the best we could hope for. Yes, this season has been frustrating for us, think how the players and coaches feel. As far as the coaches go, they are still transitioning from grind it out, to a passing offense. We have a ways to go, but whatever we do from here we are building for the future.

Better to have a rebuilding year like we are, than to have a "performance year" like Harvard and Colgate were suppossed to have. That said, either of those two could end up with the trophy.

Jim Hyla
Better to have a rebuilding year like we are, than to have a "performance year" like Harvard and Colgate were suppossed to have. That said, either of those two could end up with the trophy.

Six straight ECAC final fours for Harvard--and five straight appearances in the finals--with three titles. Wouldn't bet against them. Goaltending may be their Achilles' heel this year, however.

oceanst41
That being said, it was not nearly as stupid as our old friend Chad Morin head butting Krueger.

Agreed that Morin was much stupider, but Bitz's hit was much more dangerous - I don't like to see anyone, least of all us, do that.

So, Ocean, give us a hint!

Jim Hyla

ebilmes
Disappointing weekend. This team has no right to sit next weekend out. That was a long trip from Ithaca.

So, just who does have that right? Somebody has to do it, might as well be us.

Well, yes. I'm not unhappy with finishing fourth--the team, and my vocal chords, could use a weekend off, I just don't think we deserved to end up 4th after ending the season with a no-point weekend. We were lucky.

ebilmes
Well, yes. I'm not unhappy with finishing fourth--the team, and my vocal chords, could use a weekend off, I just don't think we deserved to end up 4th after ending the season with a no-point weekend. We were lucky.

But it doesn't matter when we got the points, just that we got them. We could've started the season 0-10-0 in-league and then ran the table and still ended up in the same place. Shuffle the schedule or our hot/cold streaks any way you want, fact is that we played the same schedule as everyone else, and we had the 4th highest point total. I don't think anyone would want a world where the final few reg. season games are worth more points.

Using your point-of-view, I could argue that Quinnipiac was simply unlucky by having to play three of the top four teams in the last two weeks of the season.

Since it's Oscar Night, I'll quote "Unforgiven": Deserve's got nothin' to do with it.

RichH
Shuffle the schedule or our hot/cold streaks any way you want, fact is that we played the same schedule as everyone else, and we had the 4th highest point total.

Well, tied for 4th highest, with a head-to-head split, same record vs top 3 (above tie) and a better record against the top 9 (above and including the tie for 8th, which was not resolved by comparing records head-to-head or vs the top 5 (above and including the tie for 4th)).

jtwcornell91

RichH
Shuffle the schedule or our hot/cold streaks any way you want, fact is that we played the same schedule as everyone else, and we had the 4th highest point total.

Well, tied for 4th highest, with a head-to-head split, same record vs top 3 (above tie) and a better record against the top 9 (above and including the tie for 8th, which was not resolved by comparing records head-to-head or vs the top 5 (above and including the tie for 4th)).

24 was the 4th highest point total, period. Which was all I wanted to say, Mr. Tiebreaker. My point is that it doesn't matter in what order any particular team amasses that total. All that matters is that they attained that number, and (in this case) against which teams they earned those points.

Who is at fault??? The Coachs and 1st unit. Its still a JOKE, they can not score because there are NO Goal scorers on that line. The 2nd unit is on the ice for the last 20 to 30 seconds of the PP. The 1st unit is out there for 1 1/2 minutes with NO shots.. at least McCutheon, Greening, Romano get something accomplished. Its sad 29 games later and still No idea how to Coach a PP.

I'm surprised by the couple of comments in this thread and the Goaltenders thread saying that Scrivens played pretty well on Saturday.

This was my first time seeing him in-person, so maybe he doesn't have the credibility of past performances with me, but I thought he was extremely shaky the whole night. Was there a shot that he didn't give up a rebound on? Or so it seemed... He also never seemed very sure of where the puck was when he couldn't corral it cleanly. Also of note was the unblocked, unscreened, fairly easy wrister in the 1st period that ended up loose behind him and could have easily been poked home by an opportunistic Sucks.

True, maybe on the goals themselves -- although honestly, those are less vivid in my mind than the myriad of rebounds coughed up back in front of the next all night -- he couldn't have done a whole lot more to stop them, but I thought Sucks had a whole lot more opportunities to score.

Jordan 04
I'm surprised by the couple of comments in this thread and the Goaltenders thread saying that Scrivens played pretty well on Saturday.

This was my first time seeing him in-person, so maybe he doesn't have the credibility of past performances with me, but I thought he was extremely shaky the whole night

Your comments about Scrivens are right on target. But the key is, this was the first time you saw him play. I've only seen six games in person this season, but it seems that Scrivens has played in most of them. It's never a dull moment when he's in goal. But this was the best game I've seen him play. Even so, it's still scary how many rebounds he gives up, and in general, he doesn't inspire a lot of confidence. Personally, I still prefer Davenport, and a friend of mine who sees almost every game and whose opinion I respect predicts that in a year-and-a-half, Scrivens will be a top-notch goalie. But it doesn't really matter who's in goal for us if we continue to struggle so much on the power play and make stupid plays like Bitz's penalty.

way behind on chiming in... but I will add a few observations

nice to see the Cornell fans in force as always, early on I would have guessed more than 50% Cornell fans, but the sections behind the Harvard bench did fill up after the 2nd period started

I was directly behind the Harvard goal (periods 1&3) and Cornell had 4-5 great quality chances early in the 1st. I dont know where the offense disappeared to, but if one of those had gone in it would have been a much difference game (both Cornell playing with the lead and Harvard playing down a goal - see Beanpot)

The 5-3 goal was a total laser, but when we didnt take the lead on the remaining non-releasable 5-4 I could see the writing on the wall that the game wasnt going to end well for Cornell fans

This is the only live game I was able to see... unless we get Taylor D back and either Seminoff back or a significant improvement out of the PP efficiency I wouldnt buy tickets for Albany ahead of time. That said, depending on which Cornell team shows up for the playoffs (the bye was a huge victory for us even if we backed into it) and which team has the hot goalie (I dont think it has to be us, it just cant be the other team) we have an outside shot of playing in the final... hopefully with a chance to face SUCKS again!

billhoward

ithacat

billhoward

ithacat
Oh, Matt Moulson...how I miss thee...

... you miss having somebody else to rag on for our lack of scoring punch? <g>

I miss the discussions about how all he could do was score powerplay goals.

Now that we could use a lot of. Seems like the Fab Four, or however many high-scoring freshmen we have, are no-shows every other weekend.

I hope that's just some growing pains.

Oddly, this year's team is actually scoring more PP goals per game than last year's.

Jim Hyla
Aside from his lousy English, what was the controversy about the delay of game penalty?

Brian Sullivan, USCHO
Teammate Jimmy Fraser was whistled for a controversial delay-of-game with 1:56 remaining in Morin’s penalty,

The Harvard player took the puck and threw it out of the zone, controversy?

The call was controversial because the Harvard students chanted "bullshit." Oh, wait, they did that for every call.

Compare to Bitz's "brutal and unmistakable hit."

plrd78
Who is at fault??? The Coachs and 1st unit. Its still a JOKE, they can not score because there are NO Goal scorers on that line. The 2nd unit is on the ice for the last 20 to 30 seconds of the PP. The 1st unit is out there for 1 1/2 minutes with NO shots.. at least McCutheon, Greening, Romano get something accomplished. Its sad 29 games later and still No idea how to Coach a PP.

The 2nd PP line has been awful all year. As in, never able to get the puck into the offensive zone. I wouldn't blame Schafer for this.

Dafatone
The 2nd PP line has been awful all year. As in, never able to get the puck into the offensive zone. I wouldn't blame Schafer for this.

Why not? He chooses the players out there and the combinations. He hasn't made one solitary change to the setups all season and has made very few changes to the personnel all season. That is except for last weekend when he miraculously used Salmela as the first unit's quarterback and took Bitz out of that role. They coincidentally generated chances and scored goals that weekend.

The issue with the powerplay all season is not that they cannot get it in the zone but that they don't generate any chances whatsoever because they play along the perimeter and take 20 minutes to make decisions as well as the fact that they only use one play - the one timer to the left point. It is extremely easy to kill penalties against this team because their powerplay is so predictable and slow to make decisions with the puck.

Byron Bitz does not even resemble a powerplay quarterback and does not have the skill set for that role yet he has been in it all season except for last weekend when it produced. As a result, the first unit (the unit he has been on all season) has been horrible all season while the second unit has been sporadically successful. I like Gallagher quarterbacking the second unit.

RichH
I don't think anyone would want a world where the final few reg. season games are worth more points.

You mean like college football?

Wife and I made it back to SF after an enterprising United agent rebooking us on American BOS to SFO non-stop Sunday night. We got home just before midnight, without getting stuck at Logan or Denver's airport.

I agree with much of this particular posting. I am surprised that few have pointed out how well Harvard played toward the end of Saturday's game. Their goal No. 2 came about after much fore-checking. I remember thinking if Cornell could not clear the puck, then Harvard would scroe, because they were pressing relentlessly and working the boards hard. Sure enough...a garbage goal after a pile-up in front of the Cornell net.

Scrivens played well enough. He kept Harvard off the score board for a long stretch of the game, and there was no way he was going to stop the laser shot resulting in Goal No. 1 for the bad guys. Scrivens also made a few spectacular saves that kept us in the game. And Cornell did have 4-5 good chances in the 1st period. But that sharpness disappeared about half-way through the game. Which was too bad.

It is now 0-2 for us...but we are already looking forward to November and will be making our plane reservation soon.

Off to Asia later this week!

calgARI '07
The issue with the powerplay all season is not that they cannot get it in the zone but that they don't generate any chances whatsoever because they play along the perimeter and take 20 minutes to make decisions as well as the fact that they only use one play - the one timer to the left point. It is extremely easy to kill penalties against this team because their powerplay is so predictable and slow to make decisions with the puck.

Byron Bitz does not even resemble a powerplay quarterback and does not have the skill set for that role yet he has been in it all season except for last weekend when it produced. As a result, the first unit (the unit he has been on all season) has been horrible all season while the second unit has been sporadically successful. I like Gallagher quarterbacking the second unit.

Believe me, I'm no fan of Bitz on the point for the PP. He's been playing better overall lately, but there was a point this year where I strongly considered suggesting we bench him. That being said, the first PP line has always looked decent at getting the puck into the zone, with no ability to score after that. The second PP line has been simply awful at getting the puck over the blue line. I do like Salmela on the point, and Barlow looked alright as well.

Our PP suffers because we lack booming slapshots, passing ability, and big players with stick skills to park in front of the net. If we had one or two guys that were a real shooting threat from the blue line, everything else would open up.

CU at Stanford
I agree with much of this particular posting. I am surprised that few have pointed out how well Harvard played toward the end of Saturday's game. Their goal No. 2 came about after much fore-checking. I remember thinking if Cornell could not clear the puck, then Harvard would scroe, because they were pressing relentlessly and working the boards hard. Sure enough...a garbage goal after a pile-up in front of the Cornell net.

I don't think calling a laser of a shot like that one a "garbage goal" gives the shooter enough credit.

Ari,

You have been railing on Schafer all season for not finding the right mix on the powerplay. As much as you seem to be involved with the team, I am guessing you don't sit and watch every practice. The powerplay has been incredibly frustrating, and I'm sure there are multiple reasons, but how do you know he hasn't been trying different powerplay combinations during practice and just hasn't come up with anything better? Nobody's perfect, but we are talking about someone who coached the #1 powerplay in the country just a couple of years ago.

cth95
Ari,

You have been railing on Schafer all season for not finding the right mix on the powerplay. As much as you seem to be involved with the team, I am guessing you don't sit and watch every practice. The powerplay has been incredibly frustrating, and I'm sure there are multiple reasons, but how do you know he hasn't been trying different powerplay combinations during practice and just hasn't come up with anything better? Nobody's perfect, but we are talking about someone who coached the #1 powerplay in the country just a couple of years ago.

I'd be shocked if Schafer couldn't find a better combination! Have you seen our PPs? Just the inclusion of Salmela made the PP look light years better. Yes, Schafer has shown he is capable of coaching a good PP, but this year's is just awful and it is clear that Bitz should not be on the ice for it.

ebilmes

cth95
Ari,

You have been railing on Schafer all season for not finding the right mix on the powerplay. As much as you seem to be involved with the team, I am guessing you don't sit and watch every practice. The powerplay has been incredibly frustrating, and I'm sure there are multiple reasons, but how do you know he hasn't been trying different powerplay combinations during practice and just hasn't come up with anything better? Nobody's perfect, but we are talking about someone who coached the #1 powerplay in the country just a couple of years ago.

I'd be shocked if Schafer couldn't find a better combination! Have you seen our PPs? Just the inclusion of Salmela made the PP look light years better. Yes, Schafer has shown he is capable of coaching a good PP, but this year's is just awful and it is clear that Bitz should not be on the ice for it.

I think you're not quite getting the premise of the question. If it's clear that Bitz shouldn't be on the ice for it, tell us who should QB the PP - and what your case is for it. cth95 suggested, quite reasonably, that Schafer is not so stupid as to not look for other combinations during practice. Your shock or lack thereof at the results doesn't mean that the results are impossible.

cth95
Ari,

You have been railing on Schafer all season for not finding the right mix on the powerplay. As much as you seem to be involved with the team, I am guessing you don't sit and watch every practice. The powerplay has been incredibly frustrating, and I'm sure there are multiple reasons, but how do you know he hasn't been trying different powerplay combinations during practice and just hasn't come up with anything better? Nobody's perfect, but we are talking about someone who coached the #1 powerplay in the country just a couple of years ago.

I sure have been railing on Schafer all season for not finding the right mix on the powerplay. That is because he hasn't found the right mix on the powerplay and has continually let the same guys run it. Bitz is not a quarterback and I would think that this should have been obvious to Schafer in November. Whatever unit he has been running has not produced, period.

It isn't that they get chances and can't find the net, they don't get any shots to the net. The guys he has running the powerplay just keep the puck along the perimeter and hope for the best. No pucks get to the net and very little happens.

I certainly do not sit through practice and watch combinations but all comments from Schafer this year have been about how he is very impressed with how the powerplay does in practice. There is not one coach I have ever seen that sticks with the same concept for this long without changing things up but Schafer is hell bent on the powerplay running through Bitz despite the fact that it has had almost no success with that setup. The best that unit has looked all season was last weekend when a true quarterback, Salmela, ran it and Bitz had his most productive game when moved near the net.

Two weeks ago, Mike Eaves put his fourth line out for a powerplay because his normal guys weren't getting it done. Schafer never does that even when his regular guys don't generate a shot for the first three minutes of a five minute powerplay.

I'm not interested in what Schafer accomplished with the powerplay in 03. He did a great job with that team and he had some great players that he got a lot out of, but this is a different team. Different types of players with different strengths. It is his responsibility to come up with solutions that best-utilize them and it is very clear he has failed to do that this season. He has just gone with the status quo with giving Bitz the ball every single time. I applaud him for moving Gallagher to the point of the second unit as that has improved it. At the same time, it is really hard not to notice that through the 29 games I have been at this season that whichever unit Bitz is quarterbacking does nothing. As I said in an earlier post, the second unit has been sporadically successful.

I believe Bitz can be a big contributor to the powerplay and that was clear last weekend, but not as the quarterback as he has been this entire season. He does not see the ice well enough nor does he make good enough decisions to be a quarterback. He does have good hands and great reach which makes him a natural fit to be around the net.

This whole post is a waste of time though because it has become very clear that Bitz will not be moved off the point of the first powerplay unit.

Beeeej

I think you're not quite getting the premise of the question. If it's clear that Bitz shouldn't be on the ice for it, tell us who should QB the PP - and what your case is for it. cth95 suggested, quite reasonably, that Schafer is not so stupid as to not look for other combinations during practice. Your shock or lack thereof at the results doesn't mean that the results are impossible.

With regard to the question, the first powerplay should look just like it did last weekend when it had success.

Salmela and Barlow or Milo in the back with Bitz, Sawada, and Scott up front. Salmela is a natural quarterback while both Barlow and Milo are smart players who read the play well. Bitz and Sawada are both good around the net and capable of winning battles for lose pucks on the boards while they both have pretty good offensive ability. Scott sees the ice well and has creativity and has a knack for finding the open man. He has been useless on the powerplay because nobody gets open for a shot because he along with Bitz and whoever else is up high don't move the puck quick enough so opposing penalty killers can adjust with ease.

From Section 19, Harvard's Goal No. 2 looked like a garbage goal. You might have had a better viewpoint, but from where I sat, that was what appeared.

Laser was meant for Goal No. 1.