Cornell at Harvard postgame

[RichH]

[quote 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.[/quote]

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.

[jtwcornell91]

[quote 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.[/quote]

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)). ::nut::

[RichH]

[quote jtwcornell91][quote 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.[/quote]

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)). ::nut::[/quote]

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.

[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.

[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.  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.

[dbilmes]

[quote 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[/quote]

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.

[Cornell95]

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!

[ithacat]

[quote billhoward][quote ithacat][quote billhoward][quote ithacat]Oh, Matt Moulson...how I miss thee...[/quote]

... you miss having somebody else to rag on for our lack of scoring punch? [/quote]

I miss the discussions about how all he could do was score powerplay goals.[/quote]

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.[/quote]

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.

[ebilmes]

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

 

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?[/quote]

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."

[Dafatone]

[quote 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.[/quote]

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.

[calgARI '07]

[quote 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.[/quote]

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.

[BCrespi]

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

[/quote]
You mean like college football?::yark::

[CU at Stanford]

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!

[Dafatone]

[quote 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.[/quote]

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.

[Josh '99]

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