Alumni in the Pros - November 2009

[Jordan 04]

Moulson scores at 1:02 of the first period, after the Caps scored at 8 seconds in.

He's now leading the team in points. He's been quite a revelation for a team needed a boost. I don't think anyone (except perhaps the most optimistic CU fan) saw this coming. Good for him. It's great to see him succeed because he isn't a Ranger...

:-P

[Ronald '09]

Moulson misses in the fifth round of the shootout.  Still going on.  Is this the first time a Cornell player has participated in one?  Nieuwendyk must have gotten an opportunity or two the first year after the lockout or 15 games he played the next year.

On a side note, what a terrible way to decide a game.  Glad the ECAC hasn't implemented them yet.

EDIT: Just looked it up.  Nieuwendyk was 2-9 in his career.  That's a ton of attempts considering he didn't play much in the "shootout era."

[Trotsky]

On a side note, what a terrible way to decide a game.  Glad the ECAC hasn't implemented them yet.

Hopefully we can ride out this fad until it chokes on its own idiocy.  Yes, I am still saying the same thing about the DH rule.

[KeithK]

On a side note, what a terrible way to decide a game.  Glad the ECAC hasn't implemented them yet.

Hopefully we can ride out this fad until it chokes on its own idiocy.  Yes, I am still saying the same thing about the DH rule.

Hey, if someone as stubborn as I am can be convinced that the DH is horrible then there must be hope. (Then again, I'm a purist in almost everything sports related so it was probably inevitable.)

[ugarte]

On a side note, what a terrible way to decide a game.  Glad the ECAC hasn't implemented them yet.

Hopefully we can ride out this fad until it chokes on its own idiocy.  Yes, I am still saying the same thing about the DH rule.

Hey, if someone as stubborn as I am can be convinced that the DH is horrible then there must be hope. (Then again, I'm a purist in almost everything sports related so it was probably inevitable.)

Wait... you needed to be convinced? I thought that your opinions about sports were formed in the early 1900's and then stored in carbonite until you were born.

[Al DeFlorio]

On a side note, what a terrible way to decide a game.  Glad the ECAC hasn't implemented them yet.

Hopefully we can ride out this fad until it chokes on its own idiocy.  Yes, I am still saying the same thing about the DH rule.

Hey, if someone as stubborn as I am can be convinced that the DH is horrible then there must be hope. (Then again, I'm a purist in almost everything sports related so it was probably inevitable.)

Wait... you needed to be convinced? I thought that your opinions about sports were formed in the early 1900's and then stored in carbonite until you were born.

FYP**]

[jtwcornell91]

On a side note, what a terrible way to decide a game.  Glad the ECAC hasn't implemented them yet.

Hopefully we can ride out this fad until it chokes on its own idiocy.  Yes, I am still saying the same thing about the DH rule.

Hey, if someone as stubborn as I am can be convinced that the DH is horrible then there must be hope. (Then again, I'm a purist in almost everything sports related so it was probably inevitable.)

Wait... you needed to be convinced? I thought that your opinions about sports were formed in the early 1900's and then stored in carbonite until you were born.

I suspect Keith had the same experience I did of first learning about baseball by following the Yankees as a kid, after the AL had adopted the DH.  We didn't realize how dumb it was until we thought to question it.

[KeithK]

On a side note, what a terrible way to decide a game.  Glad the ECAC hasn't implemented them yet.

Hopefully we can ride out this fad until it chokes on its own idiocy.  Yes, I am still saying the same thing about the DH rule.

Hey, if someone as stubborn as I am can be convinced that the DH is horrible then there must be hope. (Then again, I'm a purist in almost everything sports related so it was probably inevitable.)

Wait... you needed to be convinced? I thought that your opinions about sports were formed in the early 1900's and then stored in carbonite until you were born.

I suspect Keith had the same experience I did of first learning about baseball by following the Yankees as a kid, after the AL had adopted the DH.  We didn't realize how dumb it was until we thought to question it.

Pretty much.

Though you're probably right about the carbonite. :-D

[Trotsky]

Actually, W G Sumner wrote in 1883... ::bolt::

Edit: Never mind, that's Kyle.

[Rosey]

On a side note, what a terrible way to decide a game.  Glad the ECAC hasn't implemented them yet.

Hopefully we can ride out this fad until it chokes on its own idiocy.  Yes, I am still saying the same thing about the DH rule.

Hey, if someone as stubborn as I am can be convinced that the DH is horrible then there must be hope. (Then again, I'm a purist in almost everything sports related so it was probably inevitable.)

Damn that forward pass!
3 points for a basket? What?!
Etc.

FWIW, I agree with you on the DH, but my opinion about the DH has nothing to do with purity (which I read as something like immutability; correct me if I'm wrong), but rather is the result of a philosophy about baseball lacking the special teams that exist in most other sports, as evidenced by the rules about substitutions.

[AnneDVM]

Moulson scores at 1:02 of the first period, after the Caps scored at 8 seconds in.

He's now leading the team in points. He's been quite a revelation for a team needed a boost. I don't think anyone (except perhaps the most optimistic CU fan) saw this coming. Good for him. It's great to see him succeed, even if he isn't a Ranger...

Well, perhaps I am the most optimistic CU fan, but having watched many of his games in Manchester, I definitely saw this coming.  Matt has good positional sense, great hands when the puck comes to him, and a strong sense of defensive responsibility.  He doesn't look fast, but he makes it to where he needs to be a lot of the time, and is able to capitalize when he gets a chance. All he needed was a chance with an NHL team that doesn't suck as badly as the Kings sucked last year and a coach who isn't looking to blame the team's failure on young players who aren't the real problem.  Of course, it helps to get off to a strong start so that you continue to get the icetime to continue your success...

[KeithK]

On a side note, what a terrible way to decide a game.  Glad the ECAC hasn't implemented them yet.

Hopefully we can ride out this fad until it chokes on its own idiocy.  Yes, I am still saying the same thing about the DH rule.

Hey, if someone as stubborn as I am can be convinced that the DH is horrible then there must be hope. (Then again, I'm a purist in almost everything sports related so it was probably inevitable.)

Damn that forward pass!
3 points for a basket? What?!
Etc.

FWIW, I agree with you on the DH, but my opinion about the DH has nothing to do with purity (which I read as something like immutability; correct me if I'm wrong), but rather is the result of a philosophy about baseball lacking the special teams that exist in most other sports, as evidenced by the rules about substitutions.

I am a purist - most evident with baseball but also with other sports - but that doesn't mean I want to roll back changes that occurred in what I consider a sport's "pre-history". I don't have any problem with the forward pass or the myriad of changes that occurred in baseball in the 1880's.

[Josh '99]

Douglas Murray was the third star in San Jose's 3-2 shootout loss to Dallas earlier tonight.  Ryan Vesce is back up with the Sharks but played only about five minutes and missed as San Jose's last player in the shootout.

[Jim Hyla]

ECAC site has link to interview with Nieuwendyk on NHL Live, but at present I can't get it to work.

[Rosey]

I am a purist - most evident with baseball but also with other sports - but that doesn't mean I want to roll back changes that occurred in what I consider a sport's "pre-history". I don't have any problem with the forward pass or the myriad of changes that occurred in baseball in the 1880's.

Then I was right that you are just arbitrarily choosing a date to regard as pre-modern/modern, and rejecting changes after that.  You are free to do that, but it doesn't make a convincing argument IMO.