Cornell-Bemidji NCAA regionals postgame

cnunlist · March 30, 2009, 01:00:12 AM

I just finished watching the game on TiVo, and it is painfully obvious that Cornell needs a better goalie if they are going to win ECACs or compete for a national title. The style they play does not allow for soft goals or mistakes, and having been in Albany and watched tonight's game I can say that in every game I've seen Scrivens play in he has let in at least one softie... and never makes the BIG save that past goalies like Elliot, Pelletier, and LeNeveau used to make for us.

Overall, a very disappointing loss... certainly the team had a good season, and perhaps a healthier team would have won the game, but the biggest factor holding this team back is inconsistent/shaky goaltending, and unless we switch styles and try to win 5-4 type games (very unlikely) we will need to address that.

Also, some ability to make pretty passing plays and score goals that aren't the result of scrums in front of the net would lead to more consistent scoring, which would also make the team a more consistent winner.

cnunlist

Rosey · March 30, 2009, 01:03:41 AM

[quote cnunlist]that in every game I've seen Scrivens play in he has let in at least one softie..[/quote]
I don't know about every game, but certainly the second BSU goal was crap: Scrivens needs to stop those kinds of wrist shots from the top of the circle with no screen.

FWIW, that's where I started to lose hope.

cnunlist · March 30, 2009, 01:27:50 AM

[quote Kyle Rose][quote cnunlist]that in every game I've seen Scrivens play in he has let in at least one softie..[/quote]
I don't know about every game, but certainly the second BSU goal was crap: Scrivens needs to stop those kinds of wrist shots from the top of the circle with no screen.

FWIW, that's where I started to lose hope.[/quote]

I haven't seen him play that many games... so I'm sure it doesn't happen every game. But it sure seems like teams get 3-4 quality scoring chances on Cornell and score 2-3 goals, which is not good. And I HAVE seen a number of losing box scores where Cornell substantially outshot the other team and lost. Teams that play trapping, defensive styles need to have opportunistic scoring (think Kyle Knopp or the other really small guy we had on our Frozen Four team) and great goaltending. We had neither this season, which is why things ended up the way they did.

Also, one other thing that bothered me. As soon as we scored I was thinking "please don't give up a goal on the inevitable Cornell post-goal letdown". That is also not a good thing. It seems every time we score we relax a little bit while the other team turns up the intensity.

lynah80 · March 30, 2009, 01:47:23 AM

[quote Dafatone]Last I counted, there are 66 D1 teams. So 39th/66 is somewhere around 40%. I'm too lazy to do the math.

Normally, I think we get too lazy with the puck up top on the PP, and don't try to force it down low enough. Today, we did the opposite. I kept yelling at the TV "cycle it up top!" We kept forcing the puck down low and losing it on the PP.

Oh well.[/quote]

58 D1 teams. 1-39/58 = 33%

Josh '99 · March 30, 2009, 02:02:25 AM

[quote Kyle Rose][quote cnunlist]that in every game I've seen Scrivens play in he has let in at least one softie..[/quote]
I don't know about every game, but certainly the second BSU goal was crap: Scrivens needs to stop those kinds of wrist shots from the top of the circle with no screen.

FWIW, that's where I started to lose hope.[/quote]It was a good shot to the long side, so credit the shooter for putting the puck where he wanted, but yes, Scrivens has to stop that. And the third one too. :`-(

We really are spoiled in terms of what we expect from Cornell goalies, aren't we?

French Rage · March 30, 2009, 02:05:25 AM

[quote Josh '99][quote Kyle Rose][quote cnunlist]that in every game I've seen Scrivens play in he has let in at least one softie..[/quote]
I don't know about every game, but certainly the second BSU goal was crap: Scrivens needs to stop those kinds of wrist shots from the top of the circle with no screen.

FWIW, that's where I started to lose hope.[/quote]It was a good shot to the long side, so credit the shooter for putting the puck where he wanted, but yes, Scrivens has to stop that. And the third one too. :`-(

We really are spoiled in terms of what we expect from Cornell goalies, aren't we?[/quote]

And the defender missed blocking that shot by like a half second...

lynah80 · March 30, 2009, 03:38:55 AM

[quote Jim Hyla]
Fourth, I'd like to second whoever wrote about how difficult it is to compete with the scholarship schools. Yale and Princeton have turned around with good coaches, but I have to wonder how important the easy tuition issue is.[/quote]

Hopefully, the university itself is part of the appeal when a hockey player picks a school. In that regard, I think everyone would agree that Cornell has a lot to offer. I personally would not want to attend many of the schools with big hockey programs, even if they promised a lot of money. Sorry if that sounds snobby. Don't most (possibly all) Cornell players receive a fair amount of financial aid?

jtwcornell91 · March 30, 2009, 06:01:59 AM

[quote French Rage][quote Josh '99][quote Kyle Rose][quote cnunlist]that in every game I've seen Scrivens play in he has let in at least one softie..[/quote]
I don't know about every game, but certainly the second BSU goal was crap: Scrivens needs to stop those kinds of wrist shots from the top of the circle with no screen.

FWIW, that's where I started to lose hope.[/quote]It was a good shot to the long side, so credit the shooter for putting the puck where he wanted, but yes, Scrivens has to stop that. And the third one too. :`-(

We really are spoiled in terms of what we expect from Cornell goalies, aren't we?[/quote]

And the defender missed blocking that shot by like a half second...[/quote]

And the whole rush up ice started when Barlow lost an edge in front of the Bemidji goal and ended up on the ice behind the net...

jnachod · March 30, 2009, 06:56:17 AM

[quote cnunlist][quote Kyle Rose][quote cnunlist]that in every game I've seen Scrivens play in he has let in at least one softie..[/quote]
I don't know about every game, but certainly the second BSU goal was crap: Scrivens needs to stop those kinds of wrist shots from the top of the circle with no screen.

FWIW, that's where I started to lose hope.[/quote]

I haven't seen him play that many games... so I'm sure it doesn't happen every game. But it sure seems like teams get 3-4 quality scoring chances on Cornell and score 2-3 goals, which is not good. And I HAVE seen a number of losing box scores where Cornell substantially outshot the other team and lost. Teams that play trapping, defensive styles need to have opportunistic scoring (think Kyle Knopp or the other really small guy we had on our Frozen Four team) and great goaltending. We had neither this season, which is why things ended up the way they did.

Also, one other thing that bothered me. As soon as we scored I was thinking "please don't give up a goal on the inevitable Cornell post-goal letdown". That is also not a good thing. It seems every time we score we relax a little bit while the other team turns up the intensity.[/quote]

This definitely seems true to me. I don't think the major problem with Cornell's team is related to physical strength or hockey skills such as passing and shooting. There has to be some psychological component involved ... I am recalling the dreaded New Hampshire game in Buffalo from the Frozen Four and how the team looked like a squashed pound puppy for a few minutes after UNH scored the first goal.

Maybe in the off-season and in the early practices for the 2009-2010 season they will work on that all-important psychological skill of positive self-talk ... the ability to tell yourself that you are able to do what you're doing and that you have the ability to win. If this is already part of the team's work, great! It should just be re-emphasized then.

In any case, this was still a great, enjoyable season and I'm proud of the work the Big Red accomplished. Let's Go RED !

DeltaOne81 · March 30, 2009, 07:12:24 AM

[quote CUontheslopes]Let's not forget how good our special teams were. It seems to me the biggest problem is our PP. We were something like 39th in the country. You can get away with being a great defensive team if you score 2-3 pp goals a game. When you don't...you struggle. I'm sorry, but the 03 team would be a beast no matter who they played. Of course, had a puck bounced our way in 05 or 06 we'd probably think Schafer was a genius and the system was great...[/quote]

Yes, the one thing I picture about the 03 team - after the stifling defense that wore everyone down - is Murray's beast of a shot from the point on the powerplay. And overall a strikingly effective special teams in general.

You can get away with 1 5x5 goal a game if you regularly bury 2 PP goals.

We were 0x5 yesterday, including 3 ones before our goal. I believe the stats showed we managed *one* shot on those 3.

Al DeFlorio · March 30, 2009, 07:15:50 AM

[quote abmarks]
Gee Al, ignoring all of the people who happen to concur with me that we're playing the wrong style?

I never said it didn't hurt. It does (mostly because I have FF tickets this one rare year

)
[/quote]
My point had nothing to do with "style." It had nothing to do with how much you "hurt" because you have FF tickets. It was--as was the point of all of those I listed--that this year presented an opportunity like could never be expected and it was disappointing we were unable to take advantage of it.::bang::

scoop85 · March 30, 2009, 07:20:09 AM

[quote abmarks][quote Lowell '99]

QuoteLowell, you missed the boat- that was Tims point.

He and I are both saying you can't live with no offense.

2) I'm sure Schafer would love to have tons of talented scorers, and in fact, has brought in a few (Moulson, Knopp, Vesce, and Moynihan come to mind). What I'm not sure of is if your critique is of the type of players brought in or the style he prefers.

[/quote]

Just did a quick look at the database. As an arbitrary number I counted all the players woth 10 or more points on the 2002-2003 team vs this year. 0203- had 15 players at 10 or more point. THis year it was an abysmal 8. So we obviously scored more and it was spread out much deeper that year, which I think was our best team of the Schafer years.

I don't know wheteher our system has evolved (devolved), the breadth of the recruiting classes is not as good as it could be, or if we're doing the same things we have been doing but the world has changed around us.

All I know is my eyeballs tell me that we don't look skilled out there and I see guys go flying by us.

Yes winning means outscoring the opponent. But you need a margin for error- so that when the defense isn't working, you can shift gears.

Without a potent powerplay we haven't had more than one gear. I can't say what the solution is like I said, I just know that with rare exceptions like 02-03, we haven't done things right in order to deserve to be at or near the top of the heap.[/quote]

Agreed with the lack of scoring depth. We got essentially ZERO offense from the fourth line all season, and not enough offense from the third line (although they were on the ice for the lone goal this evening). And, you never got any confidence that our PP was going to score a big goal -- that, to me, was the killer last night.

Looking ahead, I think Jillson should be expected to significantly boost his production, and Collins will surely score more. Many of us believe Whitney has a nice future, and I think he'll be a fixture on the Power Play. It will also be nice getting the Devins back in the lineup. As I mentioned previously, the Junior stats of our incoming forwards doesn't indicate any high-end scorers among the group, and it is unlikely they will make-up for the production of Barlow and M. Kennedy anytime soon. Birch and D'Agostino look like solid D-men, however, so our blue line should be in good shape. Scrivens will be reliable, but you will get the inevitable softie now and then.

As long as we have no defections, we'll again be competitive in the ever-improving ECAC, but a return to the NCAA's (or even Albany for that matter) is no sure thing. That's what makes this type of defeat so galling. i agree with Jim that Bemedji was not in Yale's class, and this one was for the taking. I thought getting that first goal would have made all the difference, but giving it right back seemed to deflate us more than it should have.

Beeeej · March 30, 2009, 07:29:20 AM

I disagree that giving back the first goal deflated us more than it should have - I think it gave Bemidji State an emotional boost that was unfortunate for us, but that's not the same thing. Either way, we have to be able to play in a way that takes away our opponent's feeling that they might be able to beat us, and the 2008-09 team just didn't have that arrow in its quiver.

Al DeFlorio · March 30, 2009, 07:29:27 AM

[quote lynah80]
Don't most (possibly all) Cornell players receive a fair amount of financial aid?[/quote]
Who among us can know? I can tell you McKee got nothing. One thing we are clearly unable to do with financial aid is buy off a blue chip scorer (a Gionta, a Vanek, a Parise, a Kessel) by giving him mucho bucks when his family doesn't qualify based on need.

On the topic of "soft goals," UHN's GWG in Buffalo was about as soft as they come, and it wasn't Scrivens.

billhoward · March 30, 2009, 08:21:51 AM

[quote French Rage][quote Josh '99][quote Kyle Rose][quote cnunlist]that in every game I've seen Scrivens play in he has let in at least one softie..[/quote]
I don't know about every game, but certainly the second BSU goal was crap: Scrivens needs to stop those kinds of wrist shots from the top of the circle with no screen.
FWIW, that's where I started to lose hope.[/quote]It was a good shot to the long side, so credit the shooter for putting the puck where he wanted, but yes, Scrivens has to stop that. And the third one too. :`-(
We really are spoiled in terms of what we expect from Cornell goalies, aren't we?[/quote]
And the defender missed blocking that shot by like a half second...[/quote]
I sat behind the opposing goal for seven of the right periods in Albany, first or second row, and it was a reminder of how many colda-woulda-shoulda situations come and never get cashed in. A Cornell forward comes within a whisker of putting the puck between Kalemba and the net. The pass comes a fraction of a second too late or too early or the shooter's stick is off-angle for the pass when it arrives. Of course, you don't see the almost-goals at the other end for the other team. The two glitches we saw last night were more obvious, the long shot that Scrivens wasn't positioned for, and the rebound where Davenport was so quick he go past the puck that squirted free.

Regarding another part of the thread, yes, we are spoiled when we have an All-Ivy goalie but not the All-East or player of the year goalie.

I feel sorry for us fans and our yo-yo emotions. I feel sorrier for Mugford and the other seniors who might have had an amazing final act, knowing that everyone else thought the 2009-10 would be a more likely year. Give or take the early departures, which is grist for another thread, and let's see who feels the needs to start it how soon.