It's your site, Age, but what the fudge?

I never said Murray was Cornell's best defenseman ever, although I do think he's the best I've seen since '81. I'm sure Dan Lodboa fans would have a lot to say about best ever.

But the real question is, what the (insert chocolate product here) is it with you and always slagging Murray? If I want to compliment a Cornell player on USCHO, I really think I ought to be able to without a Cornell fan immediately and monotonously chiming in to the contrary. Yeah, yeah, it's your Constitutional right and all that, but GIVE IT A REST already...

I know that a few of us wanted to vote for "a large Swedish man" but it's not a choice.

Because some people sitting on the other coast that see a handful of games a year (and none this year) have clearly painted a delusional image of Doug in their minds and on various fora, which I feel the need to offset. And as you can clearly read, I am not the only one in my camp. I can think of 2 people in particular who know more than both of us put together, and a group of visiting Canadian Juniors players who agree with me.

These were the visiting Canadian Juniors on whom Hornby made such an impression, right?

yes

While you're certainly entitled to your opinion, and make some valid points supporting it, I have to agree with Greg that maybe bashing Murray on USCHO isn't the best idea. Solidarity and all that; there are enough Westerners bashing our team without us doing it for them.

I don't know. I don't think bashing is called for but neither is overstating. If Murray is praised as being all that then when people from other NCAA teams see him for the first time they will more likely be disappointed. If we keep things on a more or less even keel - "yeah he's good at these areas, needs work on this and overall is a decent player" then they'll likely go away pleasantly surprised.

OTOH, if we have everyone worrying about Murray, they may be surprised by Bâby, and Vesce, and Paolini, and the McRaes, and Hornby, and Wallace, and ...

It's your post, Greg, but do you have to drop an f-bomb in the thread title? What about the children???

big red apple wrote:

It's your post, Greg, but do you have to drop an f-bomb in the thread title? What about the children???

I think they prefer to be called "undergrads".

Watch it Herman. . .you're not that much older than I am.

Maybe he's been watching "the Sopranos" too much....

Mark McRae is the best defensive defensemen on the team this year, and Brian McMeekin was probably the best last year, and Danny Powell before that. Murray on the other hand MIGHT be the best player, who happens to play defense during that stretch.

Murray is not playing good defense this year. He often gets caught trying to do "too much" and is usually out of the play. On the other hand, the other defensemen consistantly do the little things that win the puck and clear the zone, and as a result they are making Doug look bad by playing such solid defense.

I wish Doug played as intelligent a game as Mark McRae. He would easily dominate in the ECAC and probably the NCAA.

I just question the people of the Doug Murray fan club because he doesn't play nearly as well as they would like to think he does.

Agreed about McMeekin, based on what I saw last year he was the biggest loss going into this season, bigger than Undy.

my $.02

(1) Murray is a very good player but definitely not the best ever or at this stage even the best on the team. What you can't see from just reading the point tallies is that many of those assists come from completely missing the net and then Ryan, Steve, Mark or Sam pick it up off the end boards and make a play with the puck. It would be interesting to see how many of Doug's assists are of the Boston Garden variety. I have a feeling close to half (if not more) might fit into that category.


(2) Right now some would argue Ryan Vesce is a better defensemen than Doug Murray. I'm not "bashing" him but stating a simple observation (I've attended 10 of 15 games so far). He has not been the same player he was last year, he hasn't been the mean, raw, nasty Doug we've all come to know. Does he make some big hits...Yes. Does he sometimes have trouble holding the zone (not just on the PP)...Yes. Dose he sometimes have trouble clearing the zone...Yes. But as has recently been mentioned, expectations are high (maybe too high) and he has yet to meet them. Bottom line is there are plenty of games left for him to pick it up and meet such expectations, let's hope for his sake an that of the team he can. I have nothing more to say about the Murray issue.


(3) Anything we lost with McMeekin we've gained in stepped up defensive intensity by our forwards. Vesce is always back in the play (even more than last year) whenever he is on the ice; Pegoraro has consistently been a solid back-checker as have the Abbott twins, and our rock solid positional play from almost everyone on the bench (most of the time) gives the team an even more dominating feel for the opposition than in the past.


(4) As for the loss of Undy, I would say it wasn't all that huge. IMO, we are better off with Dave in net than we were with Matt. Lenny is a better goalie now than Undy was anytime last season.

> What about the children???

Age Bowdlerized (sp?) the thread title, and I took care of my post. This was perilously close to the Simpsons' line, "won't someone thnk of the children!!!"

And Age, while naturally I appreciate your dismissal of the opinion that Murray is a great player as that of someone who hasn't seen a game this year, (1) Adam who sees every game and is in a lot better position that you to evaluate the players' attitude towards the talent on their own team is always going on about how Murray is a great player and how his detractors are frankly full of it, both on air and off, (2) many other Faithful who see as many as or more games than you agree with me and also think it's a little odd and incredibly annoying that your particular soapbox is to trash one of our own, (3) I'm not the Coach who plays him 35 minutes every night, and (4) I'm not the one who voted him a Hobey finalist.

You have blinders on about Murray, Fine; as I have mentioned before I hated every second of watching Gary Cullen play, and he was one of the best stickhandlers and playmakers in the last 20 years of Cornell hockey -- didn't matter, I decided he sucked and that was that. You've got the same bug up your butt about Doug and God Bless America that's your right. I do wonder, if you've got to go pick a mission in life, why does it have to be to tear down a Cornell player? Why not register your displeasure with my (and my friends', and the announcers' and the team's, and Schafer's, and the Hobey Committee's) error with your eerily profound silence and frightening soul-withering withholding of approval?

I know I said I wasn't going to say anything more. . .but

Greg,
Not having seen any games this year you only have the information from the games you saw last season and this years radio broadcasts to base your opinion. Like it or not Age has a valid point. . .he ain't the Douggie of last year and pretending he is can get somewhat tiresome. IMO should Doug be a Hobey finalist this year, NO. . .at least not yet. Could he be a Hobey finalist this year, YES. . .but it will take more than last years stats and the opinions of the Faithful (and/or radio guy) to get him there (no offense). Coach plays him 35 minutes a game b/c he's a damn good player. The games are played so we can see who really is the best, so far this year it's not Doug. Don't get me wrong, his contributions to the team are quite valuable but right now he should be neither criticized nor praised for his efforts. If his performance last season raised the bar, he isn't there this year. . .at least not yet. Is it also possible that the team got that much better and Doug stayed at the same level and therefore doesn't look as good as he did last season?!?

Like him or not, here's to a great second half of the season!

Boy, I think we really need to get some games going. Four games in five, or is it six, weeks is really too much free time. I wanted to edit a smiley in but can't.

While driving home from the north country last weekend, I was thinking about Murray and the varying opinions of his play. What came to mind was watching Joe Nieuwendyk play in a Cornell uniform. I think most would agree that he was pretty special as a college player, and that he has done fairly well in the NHL.

However, there were still people in the Lynah stands who would say things like "He doesn't shoot enough on the powerplay" or "He takes too many hooking penalties" or "He didn't get back on the play as quickly as he should have." And in his junior year, when a bunch of his teammates had graduated and it became clear that he couldn't win every game all by himself, the criticism increased. He was still a good player, but we were disappointed that he didn't score on every shot and win every game single-handedly.

Now, before you all go ballistic, my intent is NOT to compare Murray and Nieuwendyk in any way. The point is, if you watch carefully enough, you're going to see every player make mistakes or do things that just don't work out quite right. That doesn't mean that the same player can't turn around and make a good play on the next shift, or in the next game. And it doesn't mean that the person who appreciates a player's good plays is necessarily stupid or blind to his faults.

To shift topics somewhat, I have to say that I love the big shot from the blue line. I think it's really cool when the puck cuts through a sea of bodies and goes in the net, and when the opposing players duck because they don't want to be hit. I even like what can happen when the shot misses -- it seems to me that giving Vesce, Bâby, and Paolini a chance to score on the rebound is part of our powerplay strategy. So, I guess it's no surprise that I can forgive Murray a few lost pucks at the blueline. Besides, I've seen a player give up 3 shorthanded breakaways in the same game (it was truly ugly). He never played point on the powerplay again (at least, not at Cornell).

Ben,

Thanks, I certainly accept everything you say. I do also have the opinions of those who do see games to rely on, but what the hell, your points are still valid.

To sum up my own, after which I promise to shut up (er, on this particular subject).

1. Murray doesn't suck. He belongs on the team. He should not be dropped for Jan Pajerski.

2. After a player gets a reputation there is a tendency to nitpick him to death. There are always people who will tell you "X is overrated." I think if you try as best you can to go into a game utterly ignoring Murray's reputation, at the end of it you would be impressed by his contribution.

3. Without him the team was losing; with him the team is winning. He gets played to death, especially in critical situations, and the teams wins. That's the bottom line.

4. Civility is as civility does. Age took my name off the "best D-man ever" snipe, so Bob's your uncle.

5. There is no 5, except I hope we win every game from now on, and I'm going to come east to watch games and either kick Age's ass or buy him a beer and recommend my optician.

Alas. It was supposed to be exactly that Simpsons line. My memory is fading.

I would like to point out that Doug Murray and the rest of the team for that matter are amateurs.

I don't know how many of you remember the Vinnie Auger bashing a few years ago. Many on the forum couldn't believe how weak he was playing. It turned out that he was hurt to the degree that he was cosidering never playing again.

To ask for more from the team is great. To demand a certain level of play seems rude at best. Even pros have bad nights and bad seasons for that matter. I just love to watch these guys do things that I can't even do when I go to bed at night and have a pleasant dream. Luckily the goons at RPI don't kill me in my dreams either but I love watching and love yelling at the top of my lungs.

So bring on the Dutchmen and the little red RPI drones. They are looking at bit better than they were in November but I think we may see a certain friend make them look like Swedish meatballs come next weekend. And even if he doesn't, I'm sure his team will help with the cooking.

LGR!!

Good post, Marty. Your Vinnie Auger observation actually reminds me of Murray at Placid in '01. He played that tournament on a bad wheel (I think it was his foot or ankle) and he could hardly even walk when he got off the ice. There is no questioning his heart, in my humble opinion.

I'm not really familiar with this Murray controversy (I'm a relatively new poster here) and being so far away now I've only made it to one game this year. However, I was there for Murray's first two years, and in that time he proved that he puts it on the line as much as any player on any night. Whether he's "great" on any given night, we should remember he's one of our own and give him our support! That's what I always loved most about Lynah.

I doubt anyone can say that a player who was a Hobey Baker finalist is overrated. As far as I'm concerned, I'm sure that no team looks forward to playing against Murray, I doubt opposing players ever overestimate him, and I'm sure that Cornell is just thankful he is on their team and not opposing them.

Jason wrote:

I doubt anyone can say that a player who was a Hobey Baker finalist is overrated.

I'm not going to argue the point any more, but just for semantics' sake, this is precisely the sort of reason you might say someone is overrated. If the person in question weren't on anyone's radar, they couldn't really be overrated, could they?

There are thousands of people who think each Hobey Baker winner is overrated by the exact margin that he defeated their favorite.

There's a balance somewhere between being a ninny of a Lynah Faithful, never criticizing a player ever and going a little over the top. Doug seems to be receiving the latter.

Me, I used to cringe every time Jason Dailey ever tried to bring the puck out from behind goal (half of the time he coughed it up before making the blueline), but all is forgiven since he scored an amazing first goal in the '97 ECAC finals. I think a Doug cut a break by the Faithful is more likely to bounce back than a Doug hassled by his own fans.

Let's remember some of our sacred traditions, like never booing our own players. Use all of that intensity to hassle the opponents, not our own team. Ferchrissake, we're the 4th ranked team in the nation, our players aren't being paid a dime for their hard work, and we don't have any idea what injuries they may be battling but not talking about.

Let's kick some Union and RPI ass.