Princeton Postgame

[cbuckser]

[quote Doug '08]To Princeton's credit, they played a solid game and made few mistakes.  That being said, they will almost certainly be in the bottom half of the conference and if we can't win games like that at home, we will too.[/quote]

Before the weekend, I suspected that Princeton was underrated.  Now, I think it's pretty likely that the Tigers will do better than the preseason ECAC poll predictions (8th place).

[sah67]

The archived video of Princeton and Quinny are now posted on the redcast site.

[redhair34]

[quote sah67]The archived video of Princeton and Quinny are now posted on the redcast site.[/quote]

Did you actually see any video?  When I click on the links Media Player can't find the files.

[Townie]

[quote cp20]DiLeo certainly can't be any worse than we saw last night ![/quote]

I wouldn't put any money on that....

[sah67]

[quote redhair34][quote sah67]The archived video of Princeton and Quinny are now posted on the redcast site.[/quote]

Did you actually see any video?  When I click on the links Media Player can't find the files.[/quote]

Good call...perhaps I should have actually tried the links before posting. They don't work for me either.  It really seems like nothing gets accomplished with Redcast unless we whine to them about it non-stop, and then it gets only quasi-accomplished.

[hockeydude]

If you are going to say Davenport played with no confidence and he definitely wants two goals back, how about you say what goals and why you think this. The third goal was not as weak as many people are trying to make it seem. I am not saying that he probably wants it back, but it was not as bad as you are trying to make it. Also the whole worst game you have ever seen by a Cornell goalie? You must not watch many games or you must not know what you are watching. Bouncing pucks are beating him and many things are scaring you. Just because you are scared by a play a goalie makes or something that happens does not mean that it is a bad play or that the goalie has no confidence or is shaky. Davenport stood tall in that game and challenged shooters and made some big saves and to say he didn't give the team a chance to win I do not understand. You lose a game by one goal and the team has no chance to win, how does that work. Especially after all of the penalties and missed open chances by the offense, but Cornell had no chance to win because of Davenport, I guess that makes sense.

[evilnaturedrobot]

[quote hockeydude] Also the whole worst game you have ever seen by a Cornell goalie? You must not watch many games or you must not know what you are watching.[/quote]

How much Cornell hockey are you watching in Rhode Island?  I've only been on campus for 3 years, which I stated when I made the comment.  Over that time I have never felt less comfortable with the play of the goal tender.  You're free to disagree, but don't be childish and claim that I don't watch or know what I'm talking about.
I've been Ranger fan all my live, a Cornell fan since  I got my acceptance letter, and I also happen to play a bit in my spare time. Along the way I've actually watched a game or two.

Now I will back off the "worst game I've seen by a Cornell goal tender" because I only believe that one of the goals (the last) was legitimately soft.  But as I said, Davenport's overall demeanor just appeared uncomfortable to me.  And it wasn't just the soft goals, or even the numerous bouncers that he almost let in, but he just generally seemed indecisive.  So I will revise my statement to say that I've never felt less comfortable with a Cornell goalie than I did on friday night.  Doesn't mean I want to see him benched, I'd love to see him rebound and I think he should get the chance.

[amerks127]

Edit: I see you've revised your post.  I'm too lazy to do the same.

Well first of all, I think hockeydude was responding to Doug's post, not yours evilnaturedrobot.  Notice how it was posted in response to Doug's, not yours.

Second of all, calling hockeydude childish is, what, more mature?

Third of all, I don't know how long hockeydude has been following Cornell hockey, but I'm guessing from your post you didn't follow it before you came here, and so you know little of Cornell goaltending outside of McKee, LeNeveu, Dryden, Cropper, and maybe Pelletier.

Doug, I think your characterization of Davenport is unfair.  Did you go the Onion game last year?  Anyone remember how poorly Scriv played?  Davenport's performance last night was definitely not the worst ever.  Yes he fought some pucks, but the ice was definitely soft this weekend...remember how Sawada almost scored from our own zone last night?  To call his performance awful in the first real home game of the season against a league foe, with a pretty poor defense in front of him is unfair to say the least.  Jubinville was alone all night and capitalized by being alone in the slot and having his shot deflect off of a defenseman, and by banging home a rebound on the fourth try.

Cornell has been blessed with some all American and Hobey Baker finalist goalies, but you can't expect that every season, and you certainly can't expect Davenport to pitch a shutout with the defense he has in front of him at present.

[hockeydude]

Very well said amerks and I agree. I have seen numerous Cornell games and hockey games of all levels, more than you may think but I will not go into that. And robot, well said on your edit and you are entitled to your feelings, but people on here seem to say many things but do not back them up. I think if you are going to say things and try to call people out you should try to support what is being said. You also call me childish. Just because I say what I am thinking does not make it childish. Many people on here try to call out the goalies, or other players and make comments with no support or thoughts to back up what they say. Many people also have grudges against players that are extremely evident. Maybe people should try and take an unbiased look at the player's and team's performance, instead of always trying to single out individuals for a teams' mistakes. When players become scared of making a mistake (not saying that what people say on message boards would make a player scared of making a mistake), that is when their play and the team's play suffers more. This is something I think may be occurring with Cornell along with numerous other things, but that is for a different discussion. I thought people on this board were Cornell fans, but some, not all, are individual player fans and constantly sit on here looking for things to single out individuals. This is not just dealing with the goalies, but others. That is one thing that I think is wrong with this team (and numerous others) and why they have struggled recently. Too many individuals, not enough team, and not enough accountability. This seems to resemble some of the fans on here.

[Beeeej]

[quote hockeydude]I think if you are going to say things and try to call people out you should try to support what is being said.[/quote]

Amen.

Now go back and read your first post on this thread.  You basically spent two long paragraphs saying, "You're wrong and I'm right because I know better."

You may be right; you may even know better.  But nothing in that entire post demonstrated either one even a little bit.

To sum up:  Mote/plank.

[hockeydude]

Do I not go on to explain the goals and why they were not weak like previously stated. Do I not go on to give examples about how Davenport played during the game and saves that were made to keep Cornell in the game. Do you really want me to explain how Dileo in goal would not have been better than Davenport. I also talked about a goal given up the weak before. I also did not want to go into goaltender positioning and all of the things that I have mentioned on here before. I could go into the mistakes and missed opportunities by Cornell if you would like, but that would take up a lot of space. So I am not sure how I did not offer backup to my points.

[Townie]

[quote hockeydude]The third was a turnover at center ice with a bad change taking place and a 4-2 coming back in with the Princeton player using our d-man as a screen. You could tell Davenport didn't pick up the puck until it was about 5 feet past the d-man already. Granted he may have been able to come up with that save, put to call these goals weak is a joke. [/quote]

I think Troy made some good saves due to good positioning, but from where I was sitting in Section K (Troy's right), the 3rd goal looked very weak to me.  IIRC, a left-handed shooter was skating in with a d-man on him,  The d-man was positioned in the center, and the shooter drifted to his left and released a forehand near the top of Troy's right face-off circle that beat Troy low and right (short-side).  I was looking at the play, not Troy, so I couldn't judge whether "Davenport didn't pick up the puck until it was about 5 feet past the d-man already." But from the positioning of the d-man, it didn't seem like a screen to me.  

I'm curious how you are able to judge the play so closely.  Are you viewing replays?

Something to keep in mind:  Schafer didn't play Troy against Quinnipiac.  I think that suggests something....

[ugarte]

[quote Townie]Something to keep in mind:  Schafer didn't play Troy against Quinnipiac.  I think that suggests something....[/quote]
I think it suggests that he is continuing his long standing practice of splitting weekends until one goalie establishes himself as #1.

[Beeeej]

[quote hockeydude]Do I not go on to explain the goals and why they were not weak like previously stated.[/quote]

Yes, here, you did explain a little.

Do I not go on to give examples about how Davenport played during the game and saves that were made to keep Cornell in the game.

Not really.  You sort of described one example vaguely; but I watched the entire game, and I don't remember what save you're talking about, so it wasn't a very good description.  Other than that one, you again just gave your opinion:  That he was good, and anybody who feels differently must be wrong.

Do you really want me to explain how Dileo in goal would not have been better than Davenport.

Yes, if I'm to believe your argument at all that he wouldn't be, I'd like an explanation better than "come on."  Ah, but wait, you said, "come on" twice - perhaps that was enough.

I also talked about a goal given up the weak before.

You mentioned a goal on Scrivens that in your opinion was weaker, but didn't say which one and didn't back it up.

I also did not want to go into goaltender positioning and all of the things that I have mentioned on here before.

So instead of you backing up your arguments in your actual post, we are supposed to incorporate all the things that you had said in the four or five posts you had previously made in your lifetime on this board?

So I am not sure how I did not offer backup to my points.

You didn't really back up your points, and I sure didn't see you offer to do so, either.

Useless discussion.  I'll be spending my time on other things, now.

[Trotsky]

[quote Doug '08]To Princeton's credit, they played a solid game and made few mistakes.  That being said, they will almost certainly be in the bottom half[/quote]Maybe not.  The Tigers shut out Colgate 2-0 Saturday.  They have improved: they played much better defense than Quinnipiac.