Cornells last offensive player

[JS \'93]

We don't need one pure sniper (although that would always be a nice gift), just consistent scoring depth.  Obviously, last year would be the blueprint for winning Cornell hockey.  The goalie and defense seem to be in place for another NCAA run.  Offensive depth is what is needed.  Hopefully, the FR/SO class will help step up the production beyond Moulson and Bitz.  

Last season--8 players scored 20+ points
This season--4 players on pace for 20+ points

I took a quick look at Colgate.  Most of their sudden success has come because of solid defense/goaltending and just a little more offensive punch, especially from two SO who jumped their point production from 3 and 6 points as FR to 37 and 30 this season.  

Minus the Princeton games, Cornell has scored just 56 goals in 25 games. :-/  Come NCAA time (I'm being positive), you need to be able to score 4 goals/game to make a big run.  Even 3 goals/game with stellar defense/goaltending may not cut it.  This team could make noise again with some offensive depth.  Three players with (Moulson/Bitz like) offensive talent would help far more than one sniper.  Hopefully, we have two FR like Colgate did this year to step it up to 20+ points and Sawada will be the third.  Anything that happens this year is gravy, although it would be great with Vesce still around.

[Jim Hyla]

[Q]RichS wrote:

I agree with a lot of what's been said in this thread but am not quite sure what the "IVY approach" is...and why it precludes nabbing a more skilled scorer, or sniper? Is it the "IVY approach" or the coach's style that dictates the kind of player brought in...I think it's the latter.[/Q]
[Q]I had written:

If we had the ability to bring in players like the other 3 main leagues can, then we should go for it. However, since we want to maintain an IVY approach we are never going to get the breadth of talent that they have.

Coach Schafer will try and get those players, like Higgins, but there aren't that many around.[/Q]My point was that we can get a player or two who might be a sniper, but we can't get a teamfull like BC or Mich., since there arn't that many with the grades to get into an IVY school. Hence the "approach" referred to admissions, and not approach to playing hockey. Sorry for the misunderstanding.

And I agree, Higgins would have been a star on our team, and likely gotten us to the finals.

[CUlater 89]

You also need more than just one player who can play that style.  Most of the successful snipers in the ECAC have had linemates able to play that game.  One example for Cornell was when McCutcheon moved Ryan Hughes to center the first line with Doug Derraugh and Trent Andison in '90-'91 -- despite the overall defensive style of the team, Derraugh had a 30-36-66 year.

[Keith K \'93]

[Q]Hence the "approach" referred to admissions, and not approach to playing hockey.[/Q]Blue chip snipers also get a free ride at BC or Mich, while they may have to pay quite a bit at an Ivy if their parents are well off.  (No, I'm not trying to start another discussion of financial need vs. scholarships, just adding to the point about getting kids into an Ivy school vs. the hockey approach.)