Cornell @ Umass 10/31

[David Harding]

Jane's take on the game

[chimpfood]

Jane's take on the game

I like it when you can tell articles are written by people who actually care about the team and know the sport.

[ugarte]

Losing that game might be worth more to us than winning it would.

It's bad for the pairwise, equally bad as winning would have been good. I'm trying to doom less this season but come on. We played well enough to win, we deserved to get rewarded. The team is certainly very frustrated when they should be celebrating a win.

come on man, you know what he meant

[Dafatone]

I'll say the same thing I've said just about every year since we rebounded from a mid 2010s lull: our new big skilled guys are gonna have to learn to outmuscle their opponents down low and clear space.

That being said, we looked very good for our first game against a good team. And UMass is huge, too.

I still think Keopple doesn't come far enough out of the net to challenge shooters and stayed buried in the crease, but he had a solid enough game.

Wasn't particularly impressed by either penalty call on Fegaras, but I'm watching on my phone so my opinion on that is iffy at best.

[Trotsky]

Losing that game might be worth more to us than winning it would.

It's bad for the pairwise, equally bad as winning would have been good. I'm trying to doom less this season but come on. We played well enough to win, we deserved to get rewarded. The team is certainly very frustrated when they should be celebrating a win.

It is bad in every way except hopefully every player has it etched in his memory all season.  I never believe in "win by losing," but if you are going to do that that was the game to do it in.

The 56-minute effort does tell us we don't suck, though.   I expect a rough month or two but I am very pleased by what I saw tonight.

[BearLover]

Losing that game might be worth more to us than winning it would.

It's bad for the pairwise, equally bad as winning would have been good. I'm trying to doom less this season but come on. We played well enough to win, we deserved to get rewarded. The team is certainly very frustrated when they should be celebrating a win.

come on man, you know what he meant

I know what he meant but I think it's just entirely wrong to spin the fact we lost in a positive light. The positive thing is that we played well. Which is good. But it's bad that we lost. It would be better, both for the pairwise, and for overall trajectory, if we had won.

[Trotsky]

Losing that game might be worth more to us than winning it would.

It's bad for the pairwise, equally bad as winning would have been good. I'm trying to doom less this season but come on. We played well enough to win, we deserved to get rewarded. The team is certainly very frustrated when they should be celebrating a win.

come on man, you know what he meant

Thank you, but I took it as him acknowledging it.  Likewise, I acknowledge his unsaid (and valid) "You are what your record says you are."  -- Lao Tzu.

Losing is always suboptimal and obviously there will be moments we kick ourselves for the result, but on the whole we strongly outplayed an excellent team with 7 games behind them in their barn.

[Trotsky]

Losing that game might be worth more to us than winning it would.

It's bad for the pairwise, equally bad as winning would have been good. I'm trying to doom less this season but come on. We played well enough to win, we deserved to get rewarded. The team is certainly very frustrated when they should be celebrating a win.

come on man, you know what he meant

I know what he meant but I think it's just entirely wrong to spin the fact we lost in a positive light. The positive thing is that we played well. Which is good. But it's bad that we lost. It would be better, both for the pairwise, and for overall trajectory, if we had won.

I'm not saying it's better that we lost (obviously).  I am saying a loss is easier to bear if it delivers the message that prevents 2 or more losses later.

Also, copium feels good and I am out of more potent drugs.

[Trotsky]

Jane's take on the game

I like it when you can tell articles are written by people who actually care about the team and know the sport.

Jane is a pleasure to read.  If there has ever been a genuinely great hockey writer I haven't read them.  (To be fair, there have only ever been like 3 great sports writers of any type, and one was Hemingway who more than ruined it in other ways.)  Jane is original and interesting and singularly for the genre she avoids all the smothering derp (lookin at you Bob Ryan) the craft inevitably leans on even if your name is Red Smith.  I'd hope she goes pro but TBH I hope she has a better life than that.

[andyw2100]

Jane's take on the game

I too think McNally does a great job. But I believe she get this totally wrong:

"The lethal Massachusetts power play — ranking top-10 in the country and operating at a 26.9 percent clip — made no mistakes. A point shot by the Minutemen was deflected just over the shoulder of senior goaltender Remington Keopple to give Massachusetts an early 1-0 lead just 1:43 into the game."

I haven't gone back to watch the replay, but my recollection is that Koepple blocked the initial shot, leaving a rebound that was roofed over his shoulder from almost no angle.

Edit: Looks like I also didn't have it quite right, but more right than McNally. From the recap on the Cornell site:

"UMass (6-2-0) had set the tone from the opening faceoff, drawing a penalty just 13 seconds into the game. The Minutemen capitalized immediately when Larry Keenan's shot from the point deflected off junior defenseman Hoyt Stanley's left skate, allowing Lukáš Klečka to roof a backhanded shot at the left post at 1:43."

[arugula]

Jane's take on the game

I too think McNally does a great job. But I believe she get this totally wrong:

"The lethal Massachusetts power play — ranking top-10 in the country and operating at a 26.9 percent clip — made no mistakes. A point shot by the Minutemen was deflected just over the shoulder of senior goaltender Remington Keopple to give Massachusetts an early 1-0 lead just 1:43 into the game."

I haven't gone back to watch the replay, but my recollection is that Koepple blocked the initial shot, leaving a rebound that was roofed over his shoulder from almost no angle.

Edit: Looks like I also didn't have it quite right, but more right than McNally. From the recap on the Cornell site:

"UMass (6-2-0) had set the tone from the opening faceoff, drawing a penalty just 13 seconds into the game. The Minutemen capitalized immediately when Larry Keenan's shot from the point deflected off junior defenseman Hoyt Stanley's left skate, allowing Lukáš Klečka to roof a backhanded shot at the left post at 1:43."

You are correct sir. If I recall, backhand roof. Deadly shot. Hard to blame RK.

[upprdeck]

huge stretch of the game they dominated in a large way.  have to not miss on the PP when they had good setups.  Once they got PP in the zone it moved the puck well.

SHowed some grit.  some speed, got into good shooting areas a ton.

Really solid first game other than the score, which is hockey most of the time

[VIEWfromK]

It could have been from having to kill a penalty to start the game but I thought they were running around a lot of the first period before settling things down. That's a pattern a lot like some of the better teams of the early 2000s.  Survive the first and then get to work.  They were hitting everything in site.  They were looking to shoot first in most cases.  I too wish there had been a replay of the Charlie Major steal and chance.  Again he had no room to make a play yet he made a play.  I'd like the three on one back.  By the time Ryan got the pass back there wasn't much room to shoot.  On the winning goal Cornell won the face-off and Kraft had it on his stick but didn't get enough on the backhand clearing attempt.  I wish he had skated to some open ice before trying to get rid of it instead of being hasty in that crowd.  Of course that's just hindsight.  That was a very well played game.  They are laying a nice foundation for a young team.

I don't see the games on TV like I do in the stands but I really only noticed Walsh during that second period power play where they worked it down to him a couple of times.  I know he was out there for faceoffs but did he have the puck on his stick much the rest of the game?

[andyw2100]

I too wish there had been a replay of the Charlie Major steal and chance.

The announcers said that the refs did review the play after the period ended, since it was the next stoppage, and that the no-goal call was correct.

[scoop85]

It could have been from having to kill a penalty to start the game but I thought they were running around a lot of the first period before settling things down. That's a pattern a lot like some of the better teams of the early 2000s.  Survive the first and then get to work.  They were hitting everything in site.  They were looking to shoot first in most cases.  I too wish there had been a replay of the Charlie Major steal and chance.  Again he had no room to make a play yet he made a play.  I'd like the three on one back.  By the time Ryan got the pass back there wasn't much room to shoot.  On the winning goal Cornell won the face-off and Kraft had it on his stick but didn't get enough on the backhand clearing attempt.  I wish he had skated to some open ice before trying to get rid of it instead of being hasty in that crowd.  Of course that's just hindsight.  That was a very well played game.  They are laying a nice foundation for a young team.

I don't see the games on TV like I do in the stands but I really only noticed Walsh during that second period power play where they worked it down to him a couple of times.  I know he was out there for faceoffs but did he have the puck on his stick much the rest of the game?

One aspect we didn't handle well was managing our odd man rushes, particularly the 3 on 1 you mentioned.