2024-11-09 Brown

[BearLover]

Four point weekend anyone?

If I were them I would take the first eight seconds vs Yale and the last minute against Brown and then burn everything in between.

We dominaated that game in every category and in possession time.  Goals and wins aren't always going to go our way.

Unless as a team and as a fan base we have decided to move the goal posts on what being dominant is, there wasn't a single facet out of four games so far that would fit the Schafer era standard for domination.  This weekend there was no offensive zone cycle.  No forcheck.  Little to no physicality save for a stretch during the second period tonight.  No breakout.  No cohesiveness in any zone.  Not much to speak of on the power play.  They have had end results winning three out of four games but there is so much that remains to be desired about the right way to play and what we know it will take to win in late March and hopefully early April.  Last year they successfully blended a ton of freshman into a pretty young lineup and it was exciting and there was a methodology to how they played.  This year so far a team of nearly all returning players is struggling to find similar footing.  Sure there are injuries but there is plenty of experience in this current lineup to be able to re-establish their identity.  Yes it's early but I was really caught off guard this weekend by how much they struggled to execute in the areas that don't require excessive skill.  Robertson to Bancroft saved this from being a lost weekend.  Hopefully the first road trip of the season will help them rediscover the process.

Totally agree. You said it way better than I could have. Cornell has not looked good so far this season. There's no cohesion at all. I'll add one more thing to your list of problems: even the line changes feel discombobulated and ill-timed. Several times this weekend Cornell had a good rush that would have led to a grade-A scoring chance, but the backup was in the midst of a change. Tonight Charlie Major danced towards the goal but there were zero teammates in the offensive zone to pick up a rebound. Multiple times this weekend a rushing player could have found a trailing player with a lane to the net, but the trailer was still on the bench.

Even though we beat NoDak last weekend, we weren't gelling at all. If you go back and watch our goals from that weekend, they were the product of lucky bounces and bad goaltending more so than anything we ourselves did. I chalked it up to it being the first two games of the season, but now we're four games in and I'm concerned. This was an ugly weekend against two weak teams.

[VIEWfromK]

Totally agree. You said it way better than I could have. Cornell has not looked good so far this season. There's no cohesion at all. I'll add one more thing to your list of problems: even the line changes feel discombobulated and ill-timed. Several times this weekend Cornell had a good rush that would have led to a grade-A scoring chance, but the backup was in the midst of a change. Tonight Charlie Major danced towards the goal but there were zero teammates in the offensive zone to pick up a rebound. Multiple times this weekend a rushing player could have found a trailing player with a lane to the net, but the trailer was still on the bench.

Since they couldn't sustain anything in the offensive zone those shifts were spent chasing the puck back down to the other end.  Too many one and dones.  Too many battles lost.  Too much sitting back and giving Brown easy exits and easy entries instead of using the body to stop advancements.

[upprdeck]

While I think we have a long way to go as a team

the last 2 periods of those 2 games SOG were 28-7 and 24-10.  
We must have had some bit of control of the puck to do that

[Scersk '97]

While I think we have a long way to go as a team

the last 2 periods of those 2 games SOG were 28-7 and 24-10.  
We must have had some bit of control of the puck to do that

This is the important stat. Outside of the third of both games, we were playing down to the competition. When we decide to impose our will, we're fine. Which is why Schafer called out the leadership as he did.

My one truly heterodox comment is sent toward those who have complained above about our breakouts. If you're complaining, you have no idea what bad breakouts are. We were more than fine.

Strong zone clearing when given the opportunity, however, was as lackadaisical as it often seems early in the season. Easy thing--perhaps the first thing--to fix. When you clear, be strong with the puck; don't baby a clear. Period.

And then the power play... We started to get the idea on the last two power plays vs. Brown, but this has been an issue for a while. In general, I think we need to fling the puck from all angles (preferably along the ice so as to create rebounds) far more often when there is support in front of the net. Don't crush it. Just get it through. This is true 5-on-5, and it's doubly true on the power play. As long as someone is set up in front, get it on net and clean up the garbage.

[Trotsky]

The Doomers have a lot to feast on.  Ignore them.  They are a broken clock.  They are only happy when we lose.

[BearLover]

While I think we have a long way to go as a team

the last 2 periods of those 2 games SOG were 28-7 and 24-10.  
We must have had some bit of control of the puck to do that

This is the important stat. Outside of the third of both games, we were playing down to the competition. When we decide to impose our will, we're fine. Which is why Schafer called out the leadership as he did.

My one truly heterodox comment is sent toward those who have complained above about our breakouts. If you're complaining, you have no idea what bad breakouts are. We were more than fine.

Strong zone clearing when given the opportunity, however, was as lackadaisical as it often seems early in the season. Easy thing--perhaps the first thing--to fix. When you clear, be strong with the puck; don't baby a clear. Period.

And then the power play... We started to get the idea on the last two power plays vs. Brown, but this has been an issue for a while. In general, I think we need to fling the puck from all angles (preferably along the ice so as to create rebounds) far more often when there is support in front of the net. Don't crush it. Just get it through. This is true 5-on-5, and it's doubly true on the power play. As long as someone is set up in front, get it on net and clean up the garbage.

I agree the breakouts were better than what ViewfromK said (though I agree with the rest of his/her post) but I don't agree with isolating specific periods when evaluating a team. No need to make tiny samples even tinier. It's easy to cherry pick any small period of any game to argue whatever point you're trying to make. In any case, while it's true we did impose our will towards the end of these games, there was still no cohesion. We had some opportunities in close against Yale but they were all jam plays. Repeatedly whacking the goalie's pads with our sticks and pushing him into the net was the only scoring opportunities we created. No nice passing plays, no cycling, no sustained zone time.

[BearLover]

The Doomers have a lot to feast on.  Ignore them.  They are a broken clock.  They are only happy when we lose.

Wrong. Actually, I was very unhappy watching these games *because* we were losing/tied vs bad teams. If we had dominated I would have been happy. We were 50 second away from going to OT *at home* against *both Brown and Yale* in a season in which we are expected to compete for the *national championship.* I'm getting bad vibes from this team so far. They have an excuse, which is injuries, so maybe things will improve as players come back, but this has not been pretty to watch.

[scoop85]

While I think we have a long way to go as a team

the last 2 periods of those 2 games SOG were 28-7 and 24-10.  
We must have had some bit of control of the puck to do that

This is the important stat. Outside of the third of both games, we were playing down to the competition. When we decide to impose our will, we're fine. Which is why Schafer called out the leadership as he did.

My one truly heterodox comment is sent toward those who have complained above about our breakouts. If you're complaining, you have no idea what bad breakouts are. We were more than fine.

Strong zone clearing when given the opportunity, however, was as lackadaisical as it often seems early in the season. Easy thing--perhaps the first thing--to fix. When you clear, be strong with the puck; don't baby a clear. Period.

And then the power play... We started to get the idea on the last two power plays vs. Brown, but this has been an issue for a while. In general, I think we need to fling the puck from all angles (preferably along the ice so as to create rebounds) far more often when there is support in front of the net. Don't crush it. Just get it through. This is true 5-on-5, and it's doubly true on the power play. As long as someone is set up in front, get it on net and clean up the garbage.

I agree the breakouts were better than what ViewfromK said (though I agree with the rest of his/her post) but I don't agree with isolating specific periods when evaluating a team. No need to make tiny samples even tinier. It's easy to cherry pick any small period of any game to argue whatever point you're trying to make. In any case, while it's true we did impose our will towards the end of these games, there was still no cohesion. We had some opportunities in close against Yale but they were all jam plays. Repeatedly whacking the goalie's pads with our sticks and pushing him into the net was the only scoring opportunities we created. No nice passing plays, no cycling, no sustained zone time.

I have no issue with the breakouts, but rather with the lack of an effective and sustained forecheck. That's our historical identity, and while our style has evolved, our ultimate success will rest on doing a better job keeping the puck in the offensive zone for extended period. But if there's one thing we know about Schafer after 30 years is that he'll work on what the team needs to do to get better throughout the season.

[stereax]

The Doomers have a lot to feast on.  Ignore them.  They are a broken clock.  They are only happy when we lose.

I'll be real, through four games and the exhibition vs Toronto, this team has looked better than many an NHL game I watched last year. Y'all will find everything to complain about, I swear HAHAHA. Sure, there are things to work on (hated how we let Brown walk into our zone, please throw the body some more defending entries) but the team is fine. We'll get there. I don't care how the goals are scored so long as they go in. Felt like vs Yale we were trying too much for the "perfect" shot despite dominating the game. (Probably would have been a DTWometer win if that were tracked at NCAA level.) Liked Brown more where we just slung the puck on net and worked for rebounds. Bancroft thank you. They don't ask how, they ask how many. Also good nobody got hurt from Cornell last night...

[Dafatone]

Over the last few years, we have gotten much more offensively skilled without sacrificing size or defensive discipline. What we have sacrificed is the ability to outmuscle teams, because our big skilled guys probably could dominate with skill alone at the lower levels.

This means that we look great against offensively skilled teams where we play better defense than they do while having room to attack. But we struggle against lumbering defensive teams that clog the goal front on defense and push us around.

We'll keep improving at that as the year goes on. No Psenicka is noticeable. Hopefully he's back soon.

[Scersk '97]

We had some opportunities in close against Yale but they were all jam plays. Repeatedly whacking the goalie's pads with our sticks and pushing him into the net was the only scoring opportunities we created. No nice passing plays, no cycling, no sustained zone time.

Those kinds of plays are fine, in my opinion; indeed, I'd like us to learn how to score dirty goals early. That's been lacking a bit the last few years.

I'll agree, however, that he lack of cycling is bugging me too, but that could have a lot to do with what Dafatone identified upthread: we're having more trouble vs. big lumbering teams than in the past. Our own 2003 team would be a bear for us to play against now, for example, and would probably push us all over the ice. But the game has changed, and one wonders how many penalties the 2003 team would draw these days.

Which brings us back to the power play... Growing an effective one is how we can open up ice for ourselves.

[Trotsky]

Puer eternis.

[marty]

The Doomers have a lot to feast on.  Ignore them.  They are a broken clock.  They are only happy when we lose.respond to them as if they weren't brainless.

FYP

[fastforward]

The Bancroft-Walsh-Kraft line almost scored on their first shift(second line out) yesterday, after scoring in 8 seconds vs Yale. Seems to be a line that can only get better in time, hopefully at least
The battles in the corners seemed to be greater yesterday than vs Yale, or was that just my imagination

[Trotsky]

The battles in the corners seemed to be greater yesterday than vs Yale, or was that just my imagination

To my ancient eyes, Brown was winning those battles the first half of the game and we were wining them the second half.

I do think if we play those games 10x each we win 8 of them each.