The Big Sheet

Ok, ok...I know that we address this issue almost every year around this time on this Forum...BUT:

How do you think the "big sheet" at Placid will impact this year's team, if at all? Are there certain teams in this year's tourament who have a style of play that is suited to the wide open rink?

Any thoughts would be appreciated.

Sure; the Big Red will be able to flatten opposing players much more easily without risk of getting called for Boarding.

Beeeej

Well, everyone and their uncle likes to state that the big sheet hurts Cornell more than other teams, with Cornell's relatively slower team speed as the reason given. Whether there is any truth to that claim I'll leave to others to speculate, but I would offer that some of Cornell's relative strengths --good positioning and efficient powerplay-- will benefit from the larger sheet. (I think more space makes it easier to exploit teams less disciplined about positioning and easier to run the pp, especially against an aggressive pk which seems to be more troublesome to Cornell than a pk that stays in the box and tries to take away the inside option).

Schafer may have been blowing smoke last year, but I found his reasoning that the bigger sheet would *help* Cornell somewhat believable. The argument was that the extra space served as a multiplier for Cornell's size advantage, because the ability to control physical play translates into much bigger territorial advantage.

A big sheet is definitely going to bring out our speed disadvantage, but you can't accelerate when you've got a guy in front of you checking you off the puck. Also, Cornell actually *does* have skilled forwards. While they don't come in waves like run and gun teams, they can set things up and move the puck. And it's going to be fun when the first power play unit has all that open ice to play with, with Doug waiting with his howitzer.

Can anyone document a real speed "disadvantage" top-to-bottom on the roster? I, for one, don't buy it.

I think Cornell's record at Lake Placid pretty much refutes the notion that the larger surface puts us at a disadvantage. I agree with Al. In the past we have been pretty slow, but this year I don't think most other schools have a significant edge. The NMU coach specifically said they were caught by surprise by Cornell's speed. We seem more comfortable skating with other teams now, tho it's clear Schafer still prefers grinding away in the corners.

Cornell is faster this year than last, and last year was faster than the year before that. The thing about Cornell is that the skaters are in good position and don't have as far to go, so you don't see so much of the wild power skating. Also, big people look slower than they really are, and fast people look smaller than they really are. Figure that one out, and why it's important, and you'll be way ahead of me.

The thing is that Cornell's faster skaters are the less visible ones. Guys like Palahicky and Hornby move pretty well, but they're checking line forwards that use their speed to hit everything in the wrong color jersey and play defense. Harvard and Yale, on the other hand, have all of their speed up front trying to set up nice goals.

Personally, I believe Schafer's ideas about the surface at Placid. Cornell plays physical, position defense, which is less likely to break down on the big sheet than a system that more or less relies on team speed to make up for minor flaws.

I think the biggest adjustment will be playing the angles. For the skaters it may not be as big of a deal, but for the goalies this could be crucial. I think Cornell has the best netminders in the league, and Underhill has played at Placid before, so if anything I think the big surface will favor Cornell slightly. In the end, all 5 teams have to make the same basic adjustments, and I doubt there'll be much of a difference in the way they respond beyond a couple of misplayed pucks around the boards.

Man, Hornby's going to love that reduced chance of boarding. . . )

> Can anyone document a real speed "disadvantage" top-to-bottom on the roster? I, for one, don't buy it.

It's hardly conclusive, but every opposing fan who evaluated Cornell says three things: (1) they're good, (2) they're big, and (3) they're slow.

That'll hold up in court. It's an easy thing to say: They're big; they must be slow. Like Eric Heiden.

Baloney.

Well, He did have HUGE thighs!!

Since none of the other teams have much experience on the big surface either...in fact, probably LESS than cornell does...I'd say the "adjustment" factor is in cornell's favor.

Well, I wouldn't argue it in front of a judge either, but short of getting out the speed gun, we don't have anything much better to rely on than the consensus of those who have seen the Red skate. And, it may not necessarily be the case that folks are saying "they're big, therefore they must be slow" but rather "they're both big and slow", which begs the question, are people deceived into believing that Cornell is slower by some sort of optical illusion caused by their large size.

(Answers to other questions: Yes, this post really didn't contribute much to the discussion, and, yes, I'm dying waiting for Friday evening to get here.)

Tom Lento wrote:

Man, Hornby's going to love that reduced chance of boarding. . . )

Unless it turns into an increased chance of charging...

The perception and to some degree, the reality, is that with much of the focus directed at Murray and Bâby and to a lesser degree, McMeekin, due to their physical stature, some see them and therefore us, as slow. While these three may not be the fastest players on the ice...or on our team, they make up for that deficit with size, reach, linemate pairings, and most of the time, positioning. Note that Murray and McMeeking are paired with faster d-men and Bâby with faster o-men. Beyond these three, our team is well represented in the speed/quality skating category and a couple of our taller men, Christoff W. and M. Iggulden, are two of our better skaters, while a couple of our shorter players, Hornby and Palahicky, are two or our best hitters. This is a well-balanced, talented team that is well-coached, using its assets to advantage during particular parts of each game. Too much of a good thing is not necessarily good, whether it is size, speed, physical play, etc. unless that trait is accompanied by a full set of the remaining traits recognized as necessary for a complete player, and God knows, there are very few complete players. I recently spoke to a well-respected NHL scout and commented that if Cornell had a couple real snipers, we could win the NCAA's. His response, without hesitation, was that there are virtually no snipers today, not as the game is presently played. Given that assessment, we can win the NCAA's just as easily as any of the other 11 teams that will make the march (seems we're poised to go as well as anyone). And I doubt that we will see many, if any, teams that have players the size of Murray, Bâby and McMeekin, who are also among the fastest, best-skating, headiest players on the ice. If we do, look for them leaving early for the NHL.

I dont know, but for all the praise that Bâby gets, I just squirm a little when I watch him skate, hit and play in general. Sometimes he seems just a little TOO tall and kind of misses where he intends to hit. He also sometimes just seems like an awkward skater, but I feel like he compensates for it nicely with his long reach and power.

Hi, All;

Now that our beloved Big Red has won the league regular season by the largest margin in the ECAC (over that "second place squad" since Hockey East split off, I have come out of "Bear hibernation" (for a number of reasons beyond my control), and have NO doubt the "Big Sheet" will not hurt us in L-P

If it does favor one team, that is likely to be RIP, as they always seem to have very fast skating teams, offensively oriented, and that is the case again this time around, except they have been able to limit other teams from scoring, of late. People around here are getting all flush and puffed up that RIP is 'peaking at the right time' and they are "not afraid of Cornell". We'll we shall see about that.

The BEST news of course, is that Mark Morris, the 'Snidley-whiplash' of ECAC coaches has been all but ignored in the Capital area press, while our very own Mike Schafer is getting all number of quotes in the sports news. Hurrayyyyyyyyyyy!!!! It's about time.

Normally, I loathe the thought of cheering for 'Vard, but given the circumstances inthe early game at L-P Friday night (yes, I will be in attendance), I am conflicted, but leaning toward cheering for the Crimson against the Golden Bites.

Am I mistaken in this leaning? Should I be forsaking our Ivy League poor cousin bretheren for the sake of the thrill of once again humiliating the North Country's tarnished conquistadors and thrill to the prospect of madness to Snidley causing him to shave off the infamous mustachio?

What be the opinion of these merry Big Red lads and lassies on which way to play that first semi-game?

Thanks MUCH to our Big Red team for finally putting together the potential that I knew they had last season (if the net had just cooperated more)... they really put on a hockey clinic for the hapless Dutchmen in front of their remarkably subdued home fans. It was a pleasure to hear our Big Red Bandies at their finest too!

(if I were the onion fans, I'd run Sneddon out of town - Frosty Fridgen at least saved his but in the last ten games)

No comment on the RIP game, I couldn't see anything from where I was, but it sure was sweet to get a Capital Region sweep this year!

Thanks Coach Schafer!!!!

Let's GO BIG RED!!!!

--- Chief AA Bear

Welcome back, Chief! I knew that, eventually, the resurgent Big Red offense would bring you out of hiding! )

Damn. I knew there was a drawback somewhere. Stupid charging penalties. . .

But hey, there's still less of a chance of a Game DQ for hitting from behind. . . that's gotta count for something, right?

Bâby is not really a hitter. As someone pointed out on the USCHO boards, he's a playmaker. He's big, he sees the ice very well, he has decent hands for someone his size, and as you would expect from someone with good ice sense he stays in position. Not a great skater, not a big hitter, but a top quality defensive forward nonetheless.

McMeekin has just been amazing all year. Murray might get DDOTY from the ECAC, but McMeekin is, IMO, the best defensive defenseman on the team. After the Yale game I was actually wondering why he doesn't score more points, too. Seems like he should at least have a few more assists. Just bounces, I guess.

Beating Clarkson in the final would help us more in the selection criteria than beating Hahvahd (presumably because the Crimson are not a "Team Under Consideration", and might even--I shit you not--get us a first-round bye. I suspect losing to Hahvahd would also be worse, since going 2-0 would make them a TUC and add two losses and one win to our record vs TUCs.

...but every opposing fan who evaluated Cornell says three things: (1) they're good, (2) they're big, and (3) they're slow.

And (4) They beat our team.

Bring on the big ice sheet, more terrritory with which to beat them into submission and on which to crush them! LET'S GO RED! Please God let Friday get here faster!!!

Let them think we're slow. I don't really care. It may be more to our advantage this way and take them by surprise. Anyways, the same thing seems to get said every year.

And (4) They beat our team.

Except you know who in the east.

Hey CAAB. Welcome back. What could possibly have kept you away for so long? Did AOL cut you off?

> Let them think we're slow...... It may be more to our advantage this way and take them by surprise.

While the opposing fans might think we're slow, the opposing players know what the reality is. Although it's possible that some (or even most?) of those players may indeed be of the opinion that the Big Red is "slow", they certainly won't be surprised (at least not at Lake Placid... I suppose we could surprise someone in the NCAA's...).


"Historical perspective" on team speed:

Not surprisingly for me, this is totally useless info.... But, I'm sharing it anyway... My main memory of the '89 ECAC championships is watching the Big Red get thoroughly out-skated by eventual-ECAC-champion St. Lawrence and then also by eventual-NCAA-champion Hahvahd. It was painful to watch (it looked like we were stuck in low gear).

I seem to remember McCutcheon saying afterwards, [loose paraphrase] "We've got to get some speed on this team". I'll leave it to others to judge how successful he was in making that adjustment, but I'd say that the current situation (relative to the opposition -- not necessarily absolute speed) is significantly better than what it was 13 years ago. (???)