Adam's assessment of freshmen

Wow. Adam definitely was impressed by the freshmen (about halfway through the article). Adam's not exactly known for rampant homerism or excessive exuberence, so this gives me great hope! Anyone who saw the U-18 game care to comment?

I'm particularly hoping "a goaltender that could be the surprise of the group" will come to pass. And I think there's a good chance of that happening.

[Q]They all still have a lot to learn, and Mike Schafer may pull out a lot of hair before they all figure out how to play Cornell Defense[/Q]
I think that's a very important and accurate analysis. From watching the U18 game, I thought there were some very talented freshmen out there, but there were also some glaring defensive mistakes some of us weren't used to seeing. A more talented opponent would cash in on them. Give them time to learn the system and work on it, and I think it'll be a good learning curve.

Although the sweeping generalizations Adam made in that column about a certain non-hockey related fan-base grated me a little...

Hey Wodon, you turd, why don't you stick to writing about hockey? Way to abuse a public forum for your own petty gripes. Very professional.

Adam is right on. I was at the game. we dominated, and the under 18 kids were way overmatched but the freshman were impressive, esp our newest goalie. I think the learning curve will not be along one...

So I assume you'll be first in line to think of an appropriate "penance" for Adam, then?

This class does have a good deal of potential that will likely see seven freshman regulars (two more than last year). O'Byrne, Bitz, Glover, McCutcheon, and McKee could all be studs.
That's the potential. Potential no longer matters, however. How these guys perform will be how they are perceived from now on.
The most important freshman is McKee. How he plays will likely have the biggest impact on the season.
In general, the faster the freshmen develop and adjust, the better Cornell does this season. That may seem obvious but their development could be the difference between making the Frozen Four and not even making the NCAA's.
That said, the continued development of the sophomores, who are essentially taking over the offense (from McRae, Bâby, Paolini, Palahicky) as well as the necessity for Wallace, Cook, and Downs to all emerge as top pair defensemen will also factor in heavily.
I think this season will be more exciting and interesting than last simply because there are many more unknowns. At the same time, I believe the ceiling for this year's team may be higher than last year's.

Don't jump the gun. The U18 team was blown out by many DI schools. At this time, they are equivilant to a upper DIII, lower DI caliber team. The learning curve will be a long one. There will likely be three regular freshmen defensemen (O'Byrne, Glover, Salmela). That alone is cause for concern. I do not question the ability of these guys to step up, but it takes time for anyone to adjust to this level.

And I assume your poll about the number of World Series wins belongs on a hockey forum, Age?

I know we get off topic sometimes, but baseball season is over (thank God!)

JH

Jeff Hopkins '82 wrote:

And I assume your poll about the number of World Series wins belongs on a hockey forum, Age?

Someday Age will hear about the goose and the gander...one hopes.

No, but obviously a good number of Yankee-haters need a reality check about the Yankees winning "every year" and as long as they're going to pollute this place with their blather, I'm not going to sit idle.

Jeff Hopkins '82 wrote:
And I assume your poll about the number of World Series wins belongs on a hockey forum, Age?

Come on, people. Baseball is over for the year. We've reached the part of the calendar where we all AGREE on something. (Shut up, RichS. ) How about not having a flame war about this?

Since 1979:

Number seasons per Yankees WS titles: 6 (no WS in '94) . This including one of the longest dry period for the Yankees .

Next closest teams... Dodgers, Blue Jays, Marlins: 12 seasons per title

Whole rest of baseball other than the Yankees: 36 seasons per title

All of baseball other than the 4 teams above: 51.4 seasons per title

(Note, the last two numbers don't include the effect of teams being added, but I'm sure if you did do that, the numbers would still be within 30% or so)

So while the Yankees may not win "every year", even including their almost two-decade cold spell, they still have won twice as much as any other team, including that period. And over 5 times as much as all of the rest of baseball put together (Btw, include 1977 and 78 and the Yankees # is 4.3 seasons per WS title since then.). So "every year" is an exagerration, but they are still and incredibly priviledged team and fan base, and that's the only point.

I too would like to leave this alone, since baseball is over, but I wanted to prove the general point. Yes, Age is right, it isn't "every year", but it's a hell of a lot more than anyone else.



Post Edited (10-28-03 19:13)

Actually, the Marlins (*cringe*) are 5.5 seasons per title when you consider that they have only existed for 11 years. And they still haven't managed to finish in first place. But a diatribe against the wild card would seem like sour grapes right now...

Keith K '93 wrote:

Actually, the Marlins (*cringe*) are 5.5 seasons per title when you consider that they have only existed for 11 years. And they still haven't managed to finish in first place. But a diatribe against the wild card would seem like sour grapes right now...

Isn't it an even 5? 1993 plus 1995-2003 would be 10 years. Assuming I'm write about that, the Marlins have won 20% of the World Series played during their existence, second only to the Yankees 26% (26/99). No one else has even won 10% (the Athletics and Giants appear to be tied for third with 9/99=9%).



Post Edited (10-28-03 19:59)

Well, that's what I meant when I said that it didn't take in account the effect of teams being added. I didn't realize it also effects the Marlins calculation.

Believe me, the Marlins are about my second to last choice to win the series next year, they've won plenty recently. If they won next year again, I'd probably even pick the Yanks over them after that (then Yanks would be second to last).

I'm logical about this... I don't like teams that win a lot. I didn't like the Bulls or the 49ers or the Cowboys, I hate the Lakers. If I was old enough I'm sure I would have hated the Islanders in the early 80s. I hated the Red Wings when they won twice.

Teams that win too much bug me. The Yanks just happened to be the worst offender over the longest period of time.

[Q]Teams that win too much bug me. [/Q]
I can understand that. I couldn't stand the A's in the late '80s when they were the class of the AL. Insofar as I care about the NBA the Bulls pissed me off in the '90s. But obviously it's different when it's your team doing the winning. So I respect people who hate the Yankees. Actually, it warms my heart, because nobody bothered to hate the Yankees ten years ago (well, not many outside of New England ).

BTW - you are right Whelan. I try to forget about '94...

[Q]Teams that win too much bug me. [/Q]I wasn't going to respond to this Yankee bashing, buuuut... doesn't anyone see the similarity between those that bash the Yankees and those that do it against us? After all if you look at ECAC Championships we certainly have won the highest %, and maybe about the same as the Yankees have.

So if we hate those that hate us just for winning, should we turn around and do the same to another team? It sure would be calmer if we could just be for someone and not have to hate someone else.

D'backs are 10% as well: 1/10.

I hate expansion teams. I rooted against the Marlins (and, naturally, lost).

When the Yankees win it's the same as a year without a Series -- it doesn't suck, like a Marlins win, but it isn't anything worth celebrating, either. The odds are always stacked in favor of the House -- when the wheel comes up 0 or 00, everybody loses and you just spin again. When the Yankees win, the guy who runs the game cleans the table. Not hateful -- just grimly inevitable.



Post Edited (10-28-03 21:08)

Ah, excellent, I can combine my responses to Keith and Jim, cause it's pretty much one topic.

Rule #1 is 'root for your team', so I don't blame Yankee fans for being Yankee fans (I do blame half of them for acting like jackoffs when they win, however). I also don't like it when some Yankees fans get pissed off at it. All teams that do well get negative feelings towards them - especially multiplied when they spend 60% more than the nearest competitor. I dunno if it should 'warm your heart', Keith ... but it's certainly a reaction to positive events on your end .

On the same note, I certainly do see the similarity to people who don't like us. And I don't blame them. Of course I'm gonna root for my own team, but if we were to win a few championships in a row, I would certainly understand the people who think it's boring for everyone else and/or annoying. I mean, who here really thinks the ECAC is best served with us blowing away the competition every year in the regular season?

Doesn't mean I still wouldn't say... Let's Go Red!

P.S. Oh, one more thing...
[Q]It sure would be calmer if we could just be for someone and not have to hate someone else.[/Q]
This is a Cornell fan saying this?? Yeah, cause I can't think of anyone we hate . And isn't this essentially the same reason that we hate Hahvahd? Both academically and sports-wise, they're often at or near the top, and you wanna knock the top down. Nothing wrong with it, but Yanks fans shouldn't think they're singled out any more than their overall success deserves. The attitude of "it's not fair that people hate us" is just not reasonable... and kinda snobbish to imply that everyone's gotta love the dear old Yanks.



Post Edited (10-28-03 21:17)

[Q]This is a Cornell fan saying this??[/Q]Yeah, it is a Cornell fan that is saying this! And you know what, I don't hate Harvard. Yeah, I always want to beat them, and yeah, if I do go to some of their package games, I'll root against them. But hate, well that is not an emotion that I have found to give me much satisfaction over the years.

In fact, some of my most satisfying moments have been when I could watch some of those Cornell haters when we won, yet again. Certain Vermont fans in the mid 90's come to mind.

So, you can certainly hate if you want to, but don't imply that someone who has seen countless more games than you have, needs to hate to be a Cornell fan.

[Q]but don't imply that someone who has seen countless more games than you have, needs to hate to be a Cornell fan.[/Q]
Nah, never meant to imply it, Jim. No disrespect meant. I can certainly see that it's not a prerequisite, but it is very common, so my suprise is understandable I'd hope . Sure, no one needs to hate, but it's often natural and sometimes it's fun, and when it's both, I'm not gonna stop. I'd rather have a rooting interest in a game than sit there not caring. It means more to me.

So anyway, I hope I showed why I don't like the Yankees, why it's common, and how it's not just the Yankees that are affected by the concept. It's not just "you suck, die", it's "I'm getting tired of this and I'd like to see a little more long term variety (oh, btw, you suck, die )".

Back to your regularly scheduled program... how 'bout those freshman?



Post Edited (10-28-03 21:38)

Arizona is actually 1/6 (started in '98) or 16.7%.

The short list:

Yankees     26.3%
Marlins     20%
Arizona     16.7%
Athletics   9.1%
Cardinals   9.1%
Blue Jays   7.7%
Dodgers     6.1%
Reds, Red Sox, Giants, Pirates all tied at 5.1%

If we consider teams separately when in different cities (e.g. the Giants in NY and SF are separate), which is what the official records do, then Oakland jumps to 11.4% and LA is up to 11.1%.

Greg wrote:

[Q] I hate expansion teams. [/Q]

This from a Mets fan?

Sorry Greg, couldn't resist.

Hey, let's not forget Cornell men's hockey: 10/42 = 23.8%, versus an "expected" value of 2.89 championships over that run (if all teams had an equal chance of winning every year), for a "championship ratio" of 3.46 times as many as we should have won. I don't know how that compares to the Yankees (not sure how many baseball teams there were each season), but it's pretty impressive!