Recruiting

[hypotenuse]

I noticed on the Inside College Hockey site the other day that the NHL had ranked incomning college players and not one of the Cornell group made the top 50. I understand we are doing well (although we don't score much) but it is a little disconcerting. Thoughts?

[Robb]

[quote hypotenuse]I noticed on the Inside College Hockey site the other day that the NHL had ranked incomning college players and not one of the Cornell group made the top 50. I understand we are doing well (although we don't score much) but it is a little disconcerting. Thoughts?[/quote]My thoughts are:

1) Winning is winning, and I'm enjoying that without worrying about anyone's draft status.

2) Having said that, I'd *rather* win with a group of hard-working, lunch-pail guys who play their roles and execute a complete team game as opposed to a bunch of flashy, possibly selfish prima donnas who will be gone after one or two seasons.  Just much more satisfying to me, but that's a personal preference that not everyone will agree with.  (sorry for the preposition - too much work to fix)

3) See #1.

[KeithK]

[quote Robb]I'd *rather* win with a group of hard-working, lunch-pail guys who play their roles and execute a complete team game as opposed to a bunch of flashy, possibly selfish prima donnas who will be gone after one or two seasons.[/quote]
I agree.  But I'd rather win with some flashy prima donnas who will be gone after one or two seasons than lose with a group of hard-working, lunch-pail guys.  Winning is more likely of you have some high end talent to go with your work ethic. Maybe the ideal would be to have most of your team be late draft picks. Indicator of talent but less likely to leave early.

I don't have any substantive comment about this year's ranking though.

[pfibiger]

Two defensemen in our 2009 class are already drafted (Nick D'Agostino and Braden Birch), both are playing superbly in the OJHL and look to be solid D1 material. Obviously they can't be drafted again

The forward class is a bit of an unknown, Moulson and Mihalek have had so-so years in the BCHL. Erik Axell is a big guy and may take a while to adjust to the college game. Esposito is a scorer, but he's small, so I'm not stunned he was passed over. I think he's young enough that he could be drafted in his second year of eligibility, his freshman year. Rodger Craig (2010) was ranked in the CSB's preliminary rankings, so I wouldn't be stunned if he were picked come draft day.

A lot of our high profile recruits aren't yet eligible for the draft, they will be in 2010 or beyond. I think we'll see Mathieu Brisson, Andy Iles, and Ben Thomson all drafted pretty high up.

[dragonfan]

Thats whats so great about shafers style of game,especially in the Ivy's cause it is hard to get the top end talent and with his style you really dont need it.

[Robb]

[quote KeithK]I agree.  But I'd rather win with some flashy prima donnas who will be gone after one or two seasons than lose with a group of hard-working, lunch-pail guys.[/quote]
But of course - my second point was just about which style of winning is preferable.  Losing doesn't even enter the picture.

[cbuckser]

[quote pfibiger]Two defensemen in our 2009 class are already drafted (Nick D'Agostino and Braden Birch), both are playing superbly in the OJHL and look to be solid D1 material. Obviously they can't be drafted again

The forward class is a bit of an unknown, Moulson and Mihalek have had so-so years in the BCHL. Erik Axell is a big guy and may take a while to adjust to the college game. Esposito is a scorer, but he's small, so I'm not stunned he was passed over. I think he's young enough that he could be drafted in his second year of eligibility, his freshman year. Rodger Craig (2010) was ranked in the CSB's preliminary rankings, so I wouldn't be stunned if he were picked come draft day.

A lot of our high profile recruits aren't yet eligible for the draft, they will be in 2010 or beyond. I think we'll see Mathieu Brisson, Andy Iles, and Ben Thomson all drafted pretty high up.[/quote]

Only Rodger Craig and Kevin Cole are NHL-draft-eligible for the first time in 2009.  Esposito was born in October 1991, so he'll have to wait until 2010.

I have been extraordinarily pleased with the quality of recruits that committed to Cornell this fall.  Concededly, some recruits who commit young will not develop as well as we hope or expect; that's the disadvantage to recruiting 15 and 16 year olds.  Nevertheless, Cornell is bringing in more than enough talent to stay strong over the long haul.

[ursusminor]

[quote hypotenuse]I noticed on the Inside College Hockey site the other day that the NHL had ranked incomning college players and not one of the Cornell group made the top 50. I understand we are doing well (although we don't score much) but it is a little disconcerting. Thoughts?[/quote] Are you referring to the 2008 recruits, it.e., this year's freshmen? I don't think that they have ranked the recruis for next fall yet.

[pfibiger]

[quote ursusminor][quote hypotenuse]I noticed on the Inside College Hockey site the other day that the NHL had ranked incomning college players and not one of the Cornell group made the top 50. I understand we are doing well (although we don't score much) but it is a little disconcerting. Thoughts?[/quote] Are you referring to the 2008 recruits, it.e., this year's freshmen? I don't think that they have ranked the recruis for next fall yet.[/quote]

I think he's just talking about INCH reposting the CSB's list of college and college-bound players on the mid-term rankings.

[Josh '99]

[quote Robb][quote KeithK]I agree.  But I'd rather win with some flashy prima donnas who will be gone after one or two seasons than lose with a group of hard-working, lunch-pail guys.[/quote]
But of course - my second point was just about which style of winning is preferable.  Losing doesn't even enter the picture.[/quote]Sure, but you can hardly presuppose winning.

Edit:  I mean, sure, in discussions of how you'd rather win you certainly can, but in deciding which players to recruit of course you can't.  :-}

[Trotsky]

It's not a terrible thing to have a Nieuwendyk every twenty years or so to keep the Cornell name in the news at the NHL level.

What I would dearly love to have, though, is another Dryden.  Given the amazing numbers put up by Cornell goalies over nearly the last decade, a guy going on and becoming a Vezina contender might assure that Cornell gets the top college-bound goaltending prospect in perpetuity.

[Rita]

[quote Trotsky]It's not a terrible thing to have a Nieuwendyk every twenty years or so to keep the Cornell name in the news at the NHL level.

What I would dearly love to have, though, is another Dryden.  Given the amazing numbers put up by Cornell goalies over nearly the last decade, a guy going on and becoming a Vezina contender might assure that Cornell gets the top college-bound goaltending prospect in perpetuity.[/quote]

Agreed, but do you think our goalies (now and in the future) will look at what has happened to McKee and Lenny (and even JMP) and realize that they might be better off staying in school for four years, rather than leaving after 2-3 years?

From a hockey fan's perspective (and never playing or wanting to play the position), it seems like goalie is a position where it takes longer to reach "maturity" and that "maturity" comes from spending a lot of time working on positioning and seeing a lot of rubber in all sorts of situations (both in games and through practice time). Granted games and practice time is limited in the college game, but depending on the situation, the quality of that practice time might be better at a school known for developing goalies.

It just seems to me that raw talent alone won't carry a goalie as far as say a forward just seems to put every puck in the back of the net.  

I guess I will always wonder if Lenny would have done better in the NHL if he hadn't left early (and if he wasn't in Phoenix).

[KeithK]

[quote Rita]Agreed, but do you think our goalies (now and in the future) will look at what has happened to McKee and Lenny (and even JMP) and realize that they might be better off staying in school for four years, rather than leaving after 2-3 years? [/quote]
I'm not sure that McKee and LeNeveu clearly show that a goalie prospect should stay in school.  Reaching the NHL as a goaltender is very difficult. An extra year in college might not be a difference maker in this regard. On the other hand, both McKee and LeNeveu left when their stock was highest, coming off of stellar college seasons. A rational anaysis might say that since the likelihood of making it at the top level is so low it's best financially to leave when your college value is highest.

(Then again, I can't remember what the NHL rules about rookie contracts are so I may be completely wrong about the financial analysis.)

As a Cornell fan I certainly hope that Rita is right and future players decide that staying in school for four yearsis the right thing to do.

[Drew]

We (Clarkson) have 8 draft picks and 3 wins......Wanna know my thoughts?::pissed::

[Al DeFlorio]

[quote Drew]We (Clarkson) have 8 draft picks and 3 wins......Wanna know my thoughts?::pissed::[/quote]
Harvard must have a few, too.  [But don't count 'em out till March 21.::uhoh::]