Cornell 1 at Harvard 2 postgame

[billhoward]

Not much Cornell energy in the first half of the third period.

Richter's a good goaltender. Still, we should be able to manage more than 1 goal a game.

Definitely not a case of looking ahead to Saturday's game.

[edit add:] We also scored again on PP (1x4) and held Harvard scoreless (1x3) which is an improvement over the early games. Too bad we had no goals to show for the energetic second period.

[redhair34]

Great effort and an exciting game.

-We lost the game in the 2nd period.  I think it was our best period of the year--We outworked and outplayed them, but came away with nothing.

-We didn't respond well after the 2nd Harvard goal--lackluster PP, poor PK.

-That fourth line didn't see much ice time and I wish they could have seen less.

Edit: I'll add that I think the SOG totals are deceiving (read: not indicative of high quality scoring chances)... the VAST majority of Harvard's shots were from the perimeter.

[Al DeFlorio]

[quote redhair34]Great effort and an exciting game.

-We lost the game in the 2nd period.  I think it was our best period of the year--We outworked and outplayed them, but came away with nothing.

-We didn't respond well after the 2nd Harvard goal--lackluster PP, poor PK.

-That fourth line didn't see much ice time and I wish they could have seen less.

Edit: I'll add that I think the SOG totals are deceiving (read: not indicative of high quality scoring chances)... the VAST majority of Harvard's shots were from the perimeter.[/quote]
Agree on all counts.  Team looked good much of first period and almost all of second.  Good effort against a quality team, I thought.  For a bunch of "roll" players and grinders::innocent:: they held their own against this supposed wonder team.

[Rita]

[quote Al DeFlorio][quote redhair34]Great effort and an exciting game.

-We lost the game in the 2nd period.  I think it was our best period of the year--We outworked and outplayed them, but came away with nothing.

-We didn't respond well after the 2nd Harvard goal--lackluster PP, poor PK.

-That fourth line didn't see much ice time and I wish they could have seen less.

Edit: I'll add that I think the SOG totals are deceiving (read: not indicative of high quality scoring chances)... the VAST majority of Harvard's shots were from the perimeter.[/quote]
Agree on all counts.  Team looked good much of first period and almost all of second.  Good effort against a quality team, I thought.  For a bunch of "roll" players and grinders::innocent:: they held their own against this supposed wonder team.[/quote]

Unfortunately the loss is disappointing, like a day-old tuna grinder, which, by some accounts, might qualify as a good meal in Hanover. ::yark::

Here's hoping they can put together as good an effort tomorrow and come away with two points.

LGR!

[redhair34]

[quote Rita]
Here's hoping they can put together as good an effort tomorrow and come away with two points.
[/quote]

I'd like to be at Thompson for a Cornell win at least once before I wither away.  I just hope that day is tomorrow (the win, not the withering).

[RedintheGreen]

Not about Harvard postgame, but didn't feel like starting a new thread.

I saw the dartmouth v. colgate tonight. Dekanich kept 'gate in the game with 42 saves.  Devine looked so-so...nothing spectacular from him.  Both defenses were below average, but Dartmouth's offense was very fast and that led to more scoring chances for them.  The ref (i think it was Dell) swallowed his whistle after the first period, but it wasn't a very physical game anyway.  The dartmouth team is young and got flustered early on when they were behind. If Cornell can get on them early and keep it physical, I think this might be the year they take one at Thompson.

[nr53]

[quote Rita]
Here's hoping they can put together as good an effort tomorrow and come away with two points.

LGR![/quote]

According to the front page of USCHO, we've managed to steal two points tonight with a win over Yale... I know we won last weekend but I didn't think it was so good a win that they would see fit to give us two more points for it :-}

[Anne 85]

[quote redhair34]I'd like to be at Thompson for a Cornell win at least once before I wither away.  I just hope that day is tomorrow (the win, not the withering).[/quote](Trotsky posting from Anne's account):I am 8-1 at Thompson and I'll be there tonight.

If Kennedy's (?) second-period post-ringer had been an inch to the right, we might have won.  OTOH, Scrivens got VERY lucky several times... we could easily have lost 4-1.

A win tonight and they solidify an early-season position in the top half -- tending towards the top four.  If Clarkson and Harvard are the top two but Cornell can play with anybody else in the league, no complaints.

[Jim Hyla]

[quote Anne 85](Trotsky posting from Anne's account)
A win tonight and they solidify an early-season position in the top half -- tending towards the top four.  If Clarkson and Harvard are the top two but Cornell can play with anybody else in the league, no complaints.[/quote]

Actuaaly, I thought we showed that we could play with Harvard. Considering how Harvard played with Clarkson, and how Yale did with them, I'm optimistic that we can play with anyone. We certainly were not out skated and kept up with their speed last night. It was a loss, but you have to come away with a positive outlook.

And what's the problem, you don't want to give Anne the credit for your heady remarks.:-}

[billhoward]

We're 3-3 now. For those who've seen the losses in person, or who paid close attention on the video feeds: How many of those games could we have won or tied? All of them? So we could be 6-0? 4-0-2? 4-1-1?

My sense from the dimly lit Harvard video (it's called Bright Arena to teach Cantabs the meaning of irony?) is that this was a game either team could have won and as others said pointedly, we lost the game in the second period when we didn't score once or even twice. It feels as if this game should have been a 2-2 tie; given how slugglishly we played to open the third, we deserved to give up the goal we gave up.

Forums such as eLynah are great places for coulda, woulda, shoulda discussions. Cheaper than psychiatry, safer over the long haul than Xanax.

[Jim Hyla]

[quote billhoward]We're 3-3 now. For those who've seen the losses in person, or who paid close attention on the video feeds: How many of those games could we have won or tied? All of them? So we could be 6-0? 4-0-2? 4-1-1?

My sense from the dimly lit Harvard video (it's called Bright Arena to teach Cantabs the meaning of irony?) is that this was a game either team could have won and as others said pointedly, we lost the game in the second period when we didn't score once or even twice. It feels as if this game should have been a 2-2 tie; given how slugglishly we played to open the third, we deserved to give up the goal we gave up.

Forums such as eLynah are great places for coulda, woulda, shoulda discussions. Cheaper than psychiatry, safer over the long haul than Xanax.[/quote]

Well, from my perspective of having seen all losses, we have gotten better with each weekend. This was certainly our "best' loss. After RIT I was hopeful we could improve to get good playoff position. After the P/Q weekend we at least knew we could play. Last weekend showed we could beat some OK teams. I think this loss shows we can play with the "best'. Now I'm hopeful for home ice, after a bye. So, we have a young team and we seem to be improving each week.

Talking with Al before the game he made the comment that if Harvard was that fast they should try and forecheck us like crazy and rely upon their speed to get back on defense. Yes they can forecheck, but we showed we can keep up with their speed. I think we were even with them, except I still don't feel that comfortable with Scrivens, especially when he starts skating to the puck. Considering our youth you've got to feel the best is yet to come.

[WillCMJr]

[quote Jim Hyla] I still don't feel that comfortable with Scrivens, especially when he starts skating to the puck. Considering our youth you've got to feel the best is yet to come.[/quote]

You're right, it's a bad habit, and I'd be surprised if Schafer isn't getting on him about it.  But look at these numbers: .930  2.02  3- 2- 0

We haven't seen these numbers, even briefly in the past two seasons.  And for all the numbers McKee, Leneveu, etc. put up, they had solid defenses and outshot the opponent.  Cornell is consistently getting outshot, and some the few goals Ben has let in have been shots where he was hung out to dry by the defense.

With consistently solid defense, his numbers could be over .950 to this point.  We could not ask for him to be playing any better at this point!

[CowbellGuy]

Most of the time he's making the right play charging the puck. If you can beat the player skating in, that's always preferable to basically giving the other team a breakaway chance. The problem with Scrivens is how he handles the puck when he gets to it. The safe play is to dump it out of the zone, but he usually tries to handle it or feed it to a teammate, fumbles it and escapes disaster by the skin of his teeth. Good fundamentals, bad execution. I don't care what his numbers are. He never looks comfortable, goes down too early, is often caught way out of position, and it feels to me he's only achieved those stats through sheer luck. Davenport at least usually has good positioning and more composure. He puts himself in a position to make every save. Just lets a lot of soft ones through.

[kaelistus]

My own comments one the one game that I've seen this year compared to the same one game I saw last year:

I like our D. Last year I thought we were untypically Cornellian - too much offense too little Defense. It wasn't the team I'm used to and I figured I wouldn't turn up well. This year the D was much more solid, which gives me more hope.

With the exception of the beginning of the third period where they broke down. There were a few mistakes one after another before that second goal. And on that one, or defender (I couldn't see the name) totally left the goalie out to dry.

Hopefully Schafer will clean these rough spots as the season progresses.

On another note: The crowd was horrible. The place had a lot of empty seats. I was really surprised how ineffective Cornell was in filling up their arena compared to years past.

[Tub(a)]

[quote kaelistus]On another note: The crowd was horrible. The place had a lot of empty seats. I was really surprised how ineffective Cornell was in filling up their arena compared to years past.[/quote]

I'm pretty sure those empty seats were season ticket holders who decided to go to New Haven instead and didn't/couldn't sell their seats.