Big Red 4-Onion 4

O.K., it may be Super Bowl Sunday, but no matter.
Doing my best Chewbacca imitation.........










































Or, am I missing something?

That wasn't wholly disappointing. Frustrating, as Chewbacca says, but not disappointing.

Whenever you are behind the first-place team in your conference (on the road) after one, come back to lead in the second, and then hold on for at least a tie, it's not bad. My questions are these:

(1) When is Espo coming back? All you have to do is look at our record when he is absent and you know he is an important cog in the machine. (By rankings of +/- and points-per-game, he is the third-best forward on the team.)

(2) Is Birch's concussion bad? I certainly hope not. Looked to me like he got hit in the nads too.

(3) When and if Birch comes back, what do you do with the defense? Both Brisson and Gotovets have played well lately; indeed, Gotovets seems to have fully recovered from his defensive meltdown vs. Brown early in the season. I remember Whitney playing quite well as a forward ("extra defenseman" ) at the end of the 2010 campaign. Why not pop him up to the fourth line to replace DeSwardt or Craig? I also love having an extra D in the lineup just in case someone goes down during a critical game and giving our younger D some time playing pressure hockey. (Something that Whitney, well... has never been very good at IMHO.)

(4) When will the PK gel? It has to at some point. I know, with Iles's size, it won't be the kind of strength it used to be. (He's a much better traffic/5-on-5 guy.) But come on! Learn how to clear the damn puck and learn not to dick around with it.

(5) The team has been getting better at blocking shots. Which line will step up and become the third-period shutdown (but not checking) line? I do think, maybe just this weekend, Collins is starting to bring on a senior push. I nominate that line.

Five seems a good number.

Outcome could have been better, tough to see a 2-goal lead go away again. But, in person, a great game to watch. And it was one more rink where sellout doesn't meant there aren't 100-200 empty seats scattered around.

Scersk '97
That wasn't wholly disappointing. Frustrating, as Chewbacca says, but not disappointing.

Whenever you are behind the first-place team in your conference (on the road) after one, come back to lead in the second, and then hold on for at least a tie, it's not bad. My questions are these:

(1) When is Espo coming back? All you have to do is look at our record when he is absent and you know he is an important cog in the machine. (By rankings of +/- and points-per-game, he is the third-best forward on the team.)

(2) Is Birch's concussion bad? I certainly hope not. Looked to me like he got hit in the nads too.

(3) When and if Birch comes back, what do you do with the defense? Both Brisson and Gotovets have played well lately; indeed, Gotovets seems to have fully recovered from his defensive meltdown vs. Brown early in the season. I remember Whitney playing quite well as a forward ("extra defenseman" ) at the end of the 2010 campaign. Why not pop him up to the fourth line to replace DeSwardt or Craig? I also love having an extra D in the lineup just in case someone goes down during a critical game and giving our younger D some time playing pressure hockey. (Something that Whitney, well... has never been very good at IMHO.)

(4) When will the PK gel? It has to at some point. I know, with Iles's size, it won't be the kind of strength it used to be. (He's a much better traffic/5-on-5 guy.) But come on! Learn how to clear the damn puck and learn not to dick around with it.

(5) The team has been getting better at blocking shots. Which line will step up and become the third-period shutdown (but not checking) line? I do think, maybe just this weekend, Collins is starting to bring on a senior push. I nominate that line.

Five seems a good number.

I agree with your assessment, however, I feel we lost a great W opportunity- considering Union's starter suffered a groin injury during Thursday's practice. Andy has not been sharp lately,
it seems the second games of a weekend have been weaker performances, could fatigue be setting ?

I was mad at the effort of most games in the past month, especially the Harvard and Colgate games. Last night, I came away feeling good. Yes, that was a winnable game, and yes, there were still mistakes. But the effort was much, much better. To me, the 3rd period showed a much more energetic squad that played with some deliberate focus. I saw much more attention to taking care of the puck and some drive to maintain puck possession, instead of "oh, we'll just try to be positionally ready and play the bodies as they come." It resulted in a much cleaner game, stronger neutral zone possession, and frankly, that style suits this team very well. They anticipated Union's transitional passing much better, which is one of their strengths, and CU was much more successful at carrying the puck deep into the offensive zone than they have been during this listless stretch. Union also relies on getting the puck to the forehand way too much, and almost never tries anything on the backhand. I think I saw the defense exploiting that, and stole the puck several times as their forwards were pivoting to the forehand. Maybe I imagined that being a conscious thing, though.

I'll hang 2 of the goals on Iles, including the tying goal. He overcommitted on a goal in the 1st period, leaving an easy tap-in waiting at the far post. The tying goal came from the same point, but it was after a questionable decision to try to cover a puck squirting behind the net. It completely took him out of the play, and while 2 CU defenders attempted to play goaltender, Union is so, so good at getting the puck to the front of the net quickly. Once the puck got away from Isles, it was only a matter of time. 2 hiccups in an otherwise decent game for him.

Mowry played a strong game, I thought. I have been and continue to be a fan of Gotovets. Ferlin is one of the strongest stick-handlers I've ever seen play for CU, and he's using his whole body to essentially strong-arm ( "Heisman" ) opponents away from his stick-handling all while maintaining possession. I'd like to see him work in his passing into that part of his game, but what a beast. This was the most invisible I've seen Ryan, but that's OK.

I hope this is the game that taught this team that there's a possession-oriented style of game that they can use to be successful.

Some reports had it that Union's starter got hit in the foot by a puck late in the week. Note that Union played its backup in some games to give him practice in case he was needed for a big weekend, and he helped give Union a 3-point weekend. Cornell is going all-or-nothing with Iles.

billhoward
Cornell is going all-or-nothing with Iles.

Yep, that's apparent. The gap in ability is big enough that the coaching staff doesn't really have a choice but to ride Iles. We've been in this position before. I'm sure they are beavering away looking for prospects, and they do have an emergency back-up.

Trotsky

billhoward
Cornell is going all-or-nothing with Iles.

Yep, that's apparent. The gap in ability is big enough that the coaching staff doesn't really have a choice but to ride Iles. We've been in this position before. I'm sure they are beavering away looking for prospects, and they do have an emergency back-up.

It would appear there is more to this than an apparent 'gap'. You do not evaluate a goalie by not playing them at all - it is common understanding that practice is one thing, game action is another important dimension in an evaluaton and development process. Garmin did not even get a minute in exhibition games with Scrivens, Marozzi played a whole 3rd period in the second exhibition game of which he showed decent skills in movement and puck handling, and Omar for the first time saw 8mins of an exhibition but didnt see a shot.
At the beginning of the season, Schafer stated he wasnt ready to pronounce Iles as the starter so he took a long a hard look at the other two..really...Iles was average if not below the first few games, until he got some confidence and with lots of help from Mayotte.
I believe there is more to why Garmin left early, now you bring in a blue chip mature goalie with significant experience, and key accomplishments to only waste away that asset? Beavering away for prospects? A good goalie prospect will not want to come to Cornell until Iles leaves because only after Iles has many below average games will the other guy get a shot..seeing how Schafer has a history of riding one guy, it would have appeared he broke that temporarily last year when Iles arrived. This year Iles needed all the exposure to make the National team and get drafted in his last year of eligiblity. Most Coaches thrive to have a great tandem duo back there. Schafer has been lucky so far riding one guy, giving him all the confidence and opportunity to develop, hope nothing happens to Iles in an urgent situation like playoffs and this questionable style of coaching doesnt come back to bite us.

The only backup goalie in the unbeaten season of 1970 under Brian Cropper (it was Cropper, right? I don't want to contradict NBC Sports and the Ken Dryden legend last Friday) was Bob Rule, a lacrosse goalie who was shown a pair of ice skates and told to hold the stick down not up. The value of having a good backup was apparent in 1971 when Rule went down in Cornell's march to the lax title and a very good backup goalie came in, Bob Buhmann, and made 22 saves in the 12-6 title game win over Maryland. (Good in the title game; he let in 16 at Army but Cornell scored 17.) But I believe Rule did get some game time during the hockey season.

Good point by redbear_71 that when one goalie gets all the playing time, goalie prospects may apply elsewhere. Still, we're looking pretty good this year in the ECAC, give or take Union, and if a goalie leaves early for the pros, you can try to get a delayed commit to come in a year early, such as David McKee for David LeNeveu. Not much help for a midseason goalie injury, though.

redbear_71

Trotsky

billhoward
Cornell is going all-or-nothing with Iles.

Yep, that's apparent. The gap in ability is big enough that the coaching staff doesn't really have a choice but to ride Iles. We've been in this position before. I'm sure they are beavering away looking for prospects, and they do have an emergency back-up.

It would appear there is more to this than an apparent 'gap'. You do not evaluate a goalie by not playing them at all - it is common understanding that practice is one thing, game action is another important dimension in an evaluaton and development process. Garmin did not even get a minute in exhibition games with Scrivens, Marozzi played a whole 3rd period in the second exhibition game of which he showed decent skills in movement and puck handling, and Omar for the first time saw 8mins of an exhibition but didnt see a shot.
At the beginning of the season, Schafer stated he wasnt ready to pronounce Iles as the starter so he took a long a hard look at the other two..really...Iles was average if not below the first few games, until he got some confidence and with lots of help from Mayotte.
I believe there is more to why Garmin left early, now you bring in a blue chip mature goalie with significant experience, and key accomplishments to only waste away that asset? Beavering away for prospects? A good goalie prospect will not want to come to Cornell until Iles leaves because only after Iles has many below average games will the other guy get a shot..seeing how Schafer has a history of riding one guy, it would have appeared he broke that temporarily last year when Iles arrived. This year Iles needed all the exposure to make the National team and get drafted in his last year of eligiblity. Most Coaches thrive to have a great tandem duo back there. Schafer has been lucky so far riding one guy, giving him all the confidence and opportunity to develop, hope nothing happens to Iles in an urgent situation like playoffs and this questionable style of coaching doesnt come back to bite us.

At the beginning of his tenure, Schafer used a two-goalie rotation (until the playoffs) most of the time: Skazyk/Elliott, Elliott/Pelletier, Burt/Underhill, and even Underhill/LeNeveu. In fact, that was seen as one of the reasons Pelletier left early, because he was only going to get to play half the time until Elliott graduated. The only exception was after Pelletier's exit, when Elliott played every game until he got hurt and Burt got pressed into service. So either Schafer's style has changed with time, or he chooses the strategy best suited to the players at his disposal.

jtwcornell91

redbear_71

Trotsky

billhoward
Cornell is going all-or-nothing with Iles.

Yep, that's apparent. The gap in ability is big enough that the coaching staff doesn't really have a choice but to ride Iles. We've been in this position before. I'm sure they are beavering away looking for prospects, and they do have an emergency back-up.

It would appear there is more to this than an apparent 'gap'. You do not evaluate a goalie by not playing them at all - it is common understanding that practice is one thing, game action is another important dimension in an evaluaton and development process. Garmin did not even get a minute in exhibition games with Scrivens, Marozzi played a whole 3rd period in the second exhibition game of which he showed decent skills in movement and puck handling, and Omar for the first time saw 8mins of an exhibition but didnt see a shot.
At the beginning of the season, Schafer stated he wasnt ready to pronounce Iles as the starter so he took a long a hard look at the other two..really...Iles was average if not below the first few games, until he got some confidence and with lots of help from Mayotte.
I believe there is more to why Garmin left early, now you bring in a blue chip mature goalie with significant experience, and key accomplishments to only waste away that asset? Beavering away for prospects? A good goalie prospect will not want to come to Cornell until Iles leaves because only after Iles has many below average games will the other guy get a shot..seeing how Schafer has a history of riding one guy, it would have appeared he broke that temporarily last year when Iles arrived. This year Iles needed all the exposure to make the National team and get drafted in his last year of eligiblity. Most Coaches thrive to have a great tandem duo back there. Schafer has been lucky so far riding one guy, giving him all the confidence and opportunity to develop, hope nothing happens to Iles in an urgent situation like playoffs and this questionable style of coaching doesnt come back to bite us.

At the beginning of his tenure, Schafer used a two-goalie rotation (until the playoffs) most of the time: Skazyk/Elliott, Elliott/Pelletier, Burt/Underhill, and even Underhill/LeNeveu. In fact, that was seen as one of the reasons Pelletier left early, because he was only going to get to play half the time until Elliott graduated. The only exception was after Pelletier's exit, when Elliott played every game until he got hurt and Burt got pressed into service. So either Schafer's style has changed with time, or he chooses the strategy best suited to the players at his disposal.

He uses his goalies as best suited. Think about what we are implying in our wish that Iles isn't the loan goalie this year. That Schafer could have recruited another goalie of Andy's ability when the early exit of Garman was unanticipated? (As an aside, did no one know he would/could graduate in three years? When my three buddies did the three year undergrad routine, leaving in '73 rather than '74,it took an inordinate amount of effort to get the OK from Day Hall. How did Garman do this undercover?) If it was that easy to recruit, then wouldn't all the division one teams in the top 20 have two great goalies on the roster with one incoming every other year or so?

I'm as nervous about Iles making it through the season as anyone, but that's our hand.

(As another aside, Seth Appert pulled Merriam as RPI was getting bombed in the game on Saturday. But after Diebold let in three, he threw Merriam back on the ice to finish the game. And this from a former goalie (Appert). So was Appert trying to save Merriam's psyche and then trying to save Diebold at Merriam's expense?? Moves like this are typical of why many of us don't hold Appert in high esteem.)

Anyone who thinks it's easy to be in Schafer's spot is just nuts.

marty
As an aside, did no one know he would/could graduate in three years? When my three buddies did the three year undergrad routine, leaving in '73 rather than '74,it took an inordinate amount of effort to get the OK from Day Hall. How did Garman do this undercover?

By the time I was there (90-94), it was automatic. I could have graduated a semester early, but I had a partial (private) scholarship toward my undergrad tuition, so I intentionally delayed one of my required undergrad classes until my 8th semester (stayed for an MEng) so that I wouldn't accidentally graduate in 7. The registrar told me that once I completed all the courses for my undergrad degree, I would automatically be considered graduated and would not be able to enroll as an undergraduate for that last semester.

marty

jtwcornell91

redbear_71

Trotsky

billhoward
Cornell is going all-or-nothing with Iles.

Yep, that's apparent. The gap in ability is big enough that the coaching staff doesn't really have a choice but to ride Iles. We've been in this position before. I'm sure they are beavering away looking for prospects, and they do have an emergency back-up.

It would appear there is more to this than an apparent 'gap'. You do not evaluate a goalie by not playing them at all - it is common understanding that practice is one thing, game action is another important dimension in an evaluaton and development process. Garmin did not even get a minute in exhibition games with Scrivens, Marozzi played a whole 3rd period in the second exhibition game of which he showed decent skills in movement and puck handling, and Omar for the first time saw 8mins of an exhibition but didnt see a shot.
At the beginning of the season, Schafer stated he wasnt ready to pronounce Iles as the starter so he took a long a hard look at the other two..really...Iles was average if not below the first few games, until he got some confidence and with lots of help from Mayotte.
I believe there is more to why Garmin left early, now you bring in a blue chip mature goalie with significant experience, and key accomplishments to only waste away that asset? Beavering away for prospects? A good goalie prospect will not want to come to Cornell until Iles leaves because only after Iles has many below average games will the other guy get a shot..seeing how Schafer has a history of riding one guy, it would have appeared he broke that temporarily last year when Iles arrived. This year Iles needed all the exposure to make the National team and get drafted in his last year of eligiblity. Most Coaches thrive to have a great tandem duo back there. Schafer has been lucky so far riding one guy, giving him all the confidence and opportunity to develop, hope nothing happens to Iles in an urgent situation like playoffs and this questionable style of coaching doesnt come back to bite us.

At the beginning of his tenure, Schafer used a two-goalie rotation (until the playoffs) most of the time: Skazyk/Elliott, Elliott/Pelletier, Burt/Underhill, and even Underhill/LeNeveu. In fact, that was seen as one of the reasons Pelletier left early, because he was only going to get to play half the time until Elliott graduated. The only exception was after Pelletier's exit, when Elliott played every game until he got hurt and Burt got pressed into service. So either Schafer's style has changed with time, or he chooses the strategy best suited to the players at his disposal.

He uses his goalies as best suited. Think about what we are implying in our wish that Iles isn't the loan goalie this year. That Schafer could have recruited another goalie of Andy's ability when the early exit of Garman was unanticipated? (As an aside, did no one know he would/could graduate in three years? When my three buddies did the three year undergrad routine, leaving in '73 rather than '74,it took an inordinate amount of effort to get the OK from Day Hall. How did Garman do this undercover?) If it was that easy to recruit, then wouldn't all the division one teams in the top 20 have two great goalies on the roster with one incoming every other year or so?

I'm as nervous about Iles making it through the season as anyone, but that's our hand.

(As another aside, Seth Appert pulled Merriam as RPI was getting bombed in the game on Saturday. But after Diebold let in three, he threw Merriam back on the ice to finish the game. And this from a former goalie (Appert). So was Appert trying to save Merriam's psyche and then trying to save Diebold at Merriam's expense?? Moves like this are typical of why many of us don't hold Appert in high esteem.)

Anyone who thinks it's easy to be in Schafer's spot is just nuts.

I think you are missing the point, Garmin sat for two whole years, not one minute of play...third year rolls around and he needs to split 50/50 with a freshman right off the bat? He was the hot during playoffs and Schafer still continued with Iles. It would have been in Garmin's interest with Pro to stay on another year for development and playing time - I think he saw the writing on the wall. In terms of our hand is only limited to having Iles - well every good goalie wants to play, I hardly think Marozzi who played significantly back in Spruce Grove, had impressive success and from what I read a strong competitor was recruited on the basis of a pure #2, with no opportunity for any minute of playing time. No competition in that position is not healthy for the goalies themselves but more importantly, for the team, and future recruitment as well. Schafer is gambling - taking unnecessary risks.

Garman split with Iles b/c last year was a rebuilding year, and by the time the team was ready to compete nationally again, Garman would've been gone anyways, plus Iles was a blue-chip recruit, so it makes sense to play him and get him ready for the future. Marozzi was a last minute backup addition. I'm sure the ideal goal is to bring in Iles' true successsor likely during his senior year, as presumably Iles isn't leaving early.

underskill
Garman split with Iles b/c last year was a rebuilding year, and by the time the team was ready to compete nationally again, Garman would've been gone anyways, plus Iles was a blue-chip recruit, so it makes sense to play him and get him ready for the future. Marozzi was a last minute backup addition. I'm sure the ideal goal is to bring in Iles' true successsor likely during his senior year, as presumably Iles isn't leaving early.

Ok, 10 freshmen this year makes it a non-rebuiding year ? Missing the point, Schafer is not applying prudence. Even if Iles was destined to be the #1 guy, wouldnt a coach want a good capable #2 developing at what 70 - 30%, 80- 20%, 90 - 10% split? If something goes wrong with you #1 guy, you would have some insurance in place... or is this just too much of common sense?

redbear_71
Ok, 10 freshmen this year makes it a non-rebuiding year ? Missing the point, Schafer is not applying prudence. Even if Iles was destined to be the #1 guy, wouldnt a coach want a good capable #2 developing at what 70 - 30%, 80- 20%, 90 - 10% split? If something goes wrong with you #1 guy, you would have some insurance in place... or is this just too much of common sense?

In which games would you have played Marozzi instead of Iles, and why?

Beeeej

redbear_71
Ok, 10 freshmen this year makes it a non-rebuiding year ? Missing the point, Schafer is not applying prudence. Even if Iles was destined to be the #1 guy, wouldnt a coach want a good capable #2 developing at what 70 - 30%, 80- 20%, 90 - 10% split? If something goes wrong with you #1 guy, you would have some insurance in place... or is this just too much of common sense?

In which games would you have played Marozzi instead of Iles, and why?

And more importantly, what would you have said to the people here if Marozzi had shipped five goals on fifteen shots in one of those games? This place would be full of garment-wrending and teeth-gnashing.

Beeeej

redbear_71
Ok, 10 freshmen this year makes it a non-rebuiding year ? Missing the point, Schafer is not applying prudence. Even if Iles was destined to be the #1 guy, wouldnt a coach want a good capable #2 developing at what 70 - 30%, 80- 20%, 90 - 10% split? If something goes wrong with you #1 guy, you would have some insurance in place... or is this just too much of common sense?

In which games would you have played Marozzi instead of Iles, and why?

And to what end? Is there a theory that Iles is the guy fading in the third period? Because it seems clear that the ice is tilted at him in the third and he's having to backstop everyone else's fatigue.

redbear_71

marty

jtwcornell91

redbear_71

Trotsky

billhoward
Cornell is going all-or-nothing with Iles.

Yep, that's apparent. The gap in ability is big enough that the coaching staff doesn't really have a choice but to ride Iles. We've been in this position before. I'm sure they are beavering away looking for prospects, and they do have an emergency back-up.

It would appear there is more to this than an apparent 'gap'. You do not evaluate a goalie by not playing them at all - it is common understanding that practice is one thing, game action is another important dimension in an evaluaton and development process. Garmin did not even get a minute in exhibition games with Scrivens, Marozzi played a whole 3rd period in the second exhibition game of which he showed decent skills in movement and puck handling, and Omar for the first time saw 8mins of an exhibition but didnt see a shot.
At the beginning of the season, Schafer stated he wasnt ready to pronounce Iles as the starter so he took a long a hard look at the other two..really...Iles was average if not below the first few games, until he got some confidence and with lots of help from Mayotte.
I believe there is more to why Garmin left early, now you bring in a blue chip mature goalie with significant experience, and key accomplishments to only waste away that asset? Beavering away for prospects? A good goalie prospect will not want to come to Cornell until Iles leaves because only after Iles has many below average games will the other guy get a shot..seeing how Schafer has a history of riding one guy, it would have appeared he broke that temporarily last year when Iles arrived. This year Iles needed all the exposure to make the National team and get drafted in his last year of eligiblity. Most Coaches thrive to have a great tandem duo back there. Schafer has been lucky so far riding one guy, giving him all the confidence and opportunity to develop, hope nothing happens to Iles in an urgent situation like playoffs and this questionable style of coaching doesnt come back to bite us.

At the beginning of his tenure, Schafer used a two-goalie rotation (until the playoffs) most of the time: Skazyk/Elliott, Elliott/Pelletier, Burt/Underhill, and even Underhill/LeNeveu. In fact, that was seen as one of the reasons Pelletier left early, because he was only going to get to play half the time until Elliott graduated. The only exception was after Pelletier's exit, when Elliott played every game until he got hurt and Burt got pressed into service. So either Schafer's style has changed with time, or he chooses the strategy best suited to the players at his disposal.

He uses his goalies as best suited. Think about what we are implying in our wish that Iles isn't the loan goalie this year. That Schafer could have recruited another goalie of Andy's ability when the early exit of Garman was unanticipated? (As an aside, did no one know he would/could graduate in three years? When my three buddies did the three year undergrad routine, leaving in '73 rather than '74,it took an inordinate amount of effort to get the OK from Day Hall. How did Garman do this undercover?) If it was that easy to recruit, then wouldn't all the division one teams in the top 20 have two great goalies on the roster with one incoming every other year or so?

I'm as nervous about Iles making it through the season as anyone, but that's our hand.

(As another aside, Seth Appert pulled Merriam as RPI was getting bombed in the game on Saturday. But after Diebold let in three, he threw Merriam back on the ice to finish the game. And this from a former goalie (Appert). So was Appert trying to save Merriam's psyche and then trying to save Diebold at Merriam's expense?? Moves like this are typical of why many of us don't hold Appert in high esteem.)

Anyone who thinks it's easy to be in Schafer's spot is just nuts.

I think you are missing the point, Garmin sat for two whole years, not one minute of play...third year rolls around and he needs to split 50/50 with a freshman right off the bat? He was the hot during playoffs and Schafer still continued with Iles. It would have been in Garmin's interest with Pro to stay on another year for development and playing time - I think he saw the writing on the wall. In terms of our hand is only limited to having Iles - well every good goalie wants to play, I hardly think Marozzi who played significantly back in Spruce Grove, had impressive success and from what I read a strong competitor was recruited on the basis of a pure #2, with no opportunity for any minute of playing time. No competition in that position is not healthy for the goalies themselves but more importantly, for the team, and future recruitment as well. Schafer is gambling - taking unnecessary risks.

I thought the point was Schafer has a history of riding one guy, so he'll never be able to get a prospect, and he's taking huge risks with the team by not playing the backups. Now you're saying he's a schmuck for platooning the goalies last year because that caused Garmin to leave. Protip - when making arguments, try not to adopt mutually exclusive positions in the space of two statements. If your point is that Schafer should play his backups more often than never, fine, say it. It's a valid criticism.

Let's get one thing straight about the Garmin situation - it was not in his interest to stay in college for one more year of development unless he was going to play pretty much every minute of every game, and even then it's questionable. The writing was on the wall - Garmin was going to platoon, at best, and everyone knew it because it was obviously the best move for the future of the program.

ugarte

Beeeej

redbear_71
Ok, 10 freshmen this year makes it a non-rebuiding year ? Missing the point, Schafer is not applying prudence. Even if Iles was destined to be the #1 guy, wouldnt a coach want a good capable #2 developing at what 70 - 30%, 80- 20%, 90 - 10% split? If something goes wrong with you #1 guy, you would have some insurance in place... or is this just too much of common sense?

In which games would you have played Marozzi instead of Iles, and why?

And to what end? Is there a theory that Iles is the guy fading in the third period? Because it seems clear that the ice is tilted at him in the third and he's having to backstop everyone else's fatigue.

Third period shots on goal last eight games: Cornell 32; opponents 71. That's four per game for Cornell. Maybe redbear_71 wants Iles to shoot more.

marty

jtwcornell91

redbear_71

Trotsky

billhoward
Cornell is going all-or-nothing with Iles.

Yep, that's apparent. The gap in ability is big enough that the coaching staff doesn't really have a choice but to ride Iles. We've been in this position before. I'm sure they are beavering away looking for prospects, and they do have an emergency back-up.

It would appear there is more to this than an apparent 'gap'. You do not evaluate a goalie by not playing them at all - it is common understanding that practice is one thing, game action is another important dimension in an evaluaton and development process. Garmin did not even get a minute in exhibition games with Scrivens, Marozzi played a whole 3rd period in the second exhibition game of which he showed decent skills in movement and puck handling, and Omar for the first time saw 8mins of an exhibition but didnt see a shot.
At the beginning of the season, Schafer stated he wasnt ready to pronounce Iles as the starter so he took a long a hard look at the other two..really...Iles was average if not below the first few games, until he got some confidence and with lots of help from Mayotte.
I believe there is more to why Garmin left early, now you bring in a blue chip mature goalie with significant experience, and key accomplishments to only waste away that asset? Beavering away for prospects? A good goalie prospect will not want to come to Cornell until Iles leaves because only after Iles has many below average games will the other guy get a shot..seeing how Schafer has a history of riding one guy, it would have appeared he broke that temporarily last year when Iles arrived. This year Iles needed all the exposure to make the National team and get drafted in his last year of eligiblity. Most Coaches thrive to have a great tandem duo back there. Schafer has been lucky so far riding one guy, giving him all the confidence and opportunity to develop, hope nothing happens to Iles in an urgent situation like playoffs and this questionable style of coaching doesnt come back to bite us.

At the beginning of his tenure, Schafer used a two-goalie rotation (until the playoffs) most of the time: Skazyk/Elliott, Elliott/Pelletier, Burt/Underhill, and even Underhill/LeNeveu. In fact, that was seen as one of the reasons Pelletier left early, because he was only going to get to play half the time until Elliott graduated. The only exception was after Pelletier's exit, when Elliott played every game until he got hurt and Burt got pressed into service. So either Schafer's style has changed with time, or he chooses the strategy best suited to the players at his disposal.

He uses his goalies as best suited. Think about what we are implying in our wish that Iles isn't the loan goalie this year. That Schafer could have recruited another goalie of Andy's ability when the early exit of Garman was unanticipated? (As an aside, did no one know he would/could graduate in three years? When my three buddies did the three year undergrad routine, leaving in '73 rather than '74,it took an inordinate amount of effort to get the OK from Day Hall. How did Garman do this undercover?) If it was that easy to recruit, then wouldn't all the division one teams in the top 20 have two great goalies on the roster with one incoming every other year or so?

I'm as nervous about Iles making it through the season as anyone, but that's our hand.

(As another aside, Seth Appert pulled Merriam as RPI was getting bombed in the game on Saturday. But after Diebold let in three, he threw Merriam back on the ice to finish the game. And this from a former goalie (Appert). So was Appert trying to save Merriam's psyche and then trying to save Diebold at Merriam's expense?? Moves like this are typical of why many of us don't hold Appert in high esteem.)

Anyone who thinks it's easy to be in Schafer's spot is just nuts.

I couldn't fault Appert for his goalie moves on Saturday. Other things, yes. Merriam did give up some easy goals, and then Diebold wasn't the answer.

BTW, is a "loan goalie" one from whom you can borrow money?

Beeeej

redbear_71
Ok, 10 freshmen this year makes it a non-rebuiding year ? Missing the point, Schafer is not applying prudence. Even if Iles was destined to be the #1 guy, wouldnt a coach want a good capable #2 developing at what 70 - 30%, 80- 20%, 90 - 10% split? If something goes wrong with you #1 guy, you would have some insurance in place... or is this just too much of common sense?

In which games would you have played Marozzi instead of Iles, and why?

Beeeej nailed it. This is the rebuilding year, yet the team is highly ranked and challenging for first place in the league. Schafer might be more willing to experiment in games if we were totally out of the money or had a 5-game cushion over Onion. Instead and although it's unlikely we'll win a NC this year (but you never know!), being successful in the playoffs and playing a game or two in the NC$$'s will help the young players develop. So it could be a rational, calculated decision to ride a proven commodity even though it keeps Marozzi off the ice.

While it's true that one needs real game experience to develop completely, don't underestimate the value of practice. I'm sure Marozzi, and to a lesser degree Kanji, gets substantial playing time during practice. In a full-rink scrimmage, they're practicing against the #13 team in the country, one that took the current #1 to overtime and played pretty even with it, even dominating, much of the game.

Besides, some pretty good players have sat on the bench until an injury brought them into a game and they turned their butterflies into a stellar opportunity. In football, one future Hall-of-Famer did exactly that but still lost the Super Bowl last night.

Perhaps ominously in light of this goalie rotation conversation, Iles just tweeted:

A_Iles33
Sitting in the doctors office surrounded by people wearing face masks. Not loving it, get me out of here. #8squirtsofpurell

TV Coverage