Whos hot and whos not...

[billhoward]

Who did we-all think the top freshman were last year and was it proved out? Who thought McKee would grab the starting job? Was Bitz a pleasant surprise or were there ultra-high expectations that he didn't quite meet?

[CU Fan]

well, McCutcheon was supposed to be one of the top 2 recruits, and that certainly didn't pan ouit.

[billhoward]

There probably is a hope against hope that the offspring will be as talented as the father. John Hughes' kid turned out to be a pretty good skater, but not much of a hockey player.

Let's hope Dave Peace's ('75) boy won't turn into a superstar at RPI.

[jtwcornell91]

[Q]billhoward Wrote:

John Hughes' kid turned out to be a pretty good skater, but not much of a hockey player.[/q]

I didn't realize she'd played hockey. :-D

[KyleLL]

For sure this freshmen class has very expectations...

[CUlater 89]

I'm sorry but drawing a conclusion after just one season as to whether recruits have panned out is ridiculous.    Other than McKee, I don't think any of the freshmen were being counted on to lead the team at their positions.

[ugarte]

[Q]CUlater 89 Wrote:

 I'm sorry but drawing a conclusion after just one season as to whether recruits have panned out is ridiculous.    Other than McKee, I don't think any of the freshmen were being counted on to lead the team at their positions.
[/q]
Hear, hear.  I was thinking the exact same thing.  I wasn't counting on McCutcheon to save the program his first year.  Wait until the rotation is set before counting out anyone.

[Steve M]

For those following the team and the recruits closely, what do you think our chances of returning to the NCAA tourney  next year are?  

[Robb]

Forget the team and the recruits.  One look at our non-conference schedule and you can tell that it's going to be iffy again this year.  Last year, we finished 2nd in the league with 29 points.  That's unlikely to go up by a significant amount, and the ECAC's RPI (the ratings index, not the school) will be crappy as usual.  Our 7 non-conference games are Army, Sacred Heart, Michigan State (twice), Canisius, and two of SCSU, BC, and Maine.  Best case scenario (with BC & Maine), those teams went 140-102-27 (.571) last year.  Worst case (BC & SCSU) it was 125-110-28 (.528).    Realistically, we need to play and beat both BC and Maine to flip as many HEA comparisons our way as possible on the common opponents criteria.  Even a split would probably help - most HEA teams won't go .500 against those two next year.  Same can be said for the MSU games - a must-split at the very least, and probably a must-sweep to have a shot at the NCAAs.  Pretty tall order - our first road games and only our 5th and 6th regular season games of the year.  Those games will be MSU's 9th and 10th games - only 4 more games, but nearly twice what we'll have played.  On the other hand, they play Michigan twice the next weekend, so maybe they'll look past us - we can hope...

Bascially, we'll know by New Year's if we have to win the conference tournament or not.  Hope the freshmen are ready to contribute in the first half of the year...

[Greg Berge]

A team strong enough to qualify for the NCAA on their own is also one that should win in Albany.  So I wouldn't worry unduly about NC schedule strength.

[Robb]

Sad but true.  I wish the ECAC had enough strong teams that we could say, "We'll be strong enough to qualify for an NCAA bid, but probably won't win in Albany," instead (like the 4-6 place WCHA teams say today).

[Steve M]

Last year we didn't have a very good NC schedule and we didn't play well in the NC games except the Everblades and still came close to getting an at large bid.  This year's NC schedule looks a bit worse, but not too much worse than last year so it seems that if we put up a good record in NC games, say 5-2, by beating all the weaker teams and splitting with the better ones, we should qualify for an at large bid with a normally good finish in the ECAC RS,  I agree that if we're good enough to get an at large bid we should be able to win the ECAC tourney, but anything can happen in a one and done playoff (see 02-03) or even in the QFs.  Who would have predicted a loss to Clarkson at Lynah in a best of 3 series?  So answering my own question, I think we can get an NCAA bid if were somewhat better than last year and really focus on winning the NC games.

My real question, then, is will this team be better than last year?  Will the extra year of experience of the young players plus the contribution of the incoming freshmen be enough to compensate for the loss of Vesce and the other senior or two.  I'd like to think the answer is yes, but would like to know what those closer to the program think.

[billhoward]

Vesce was the team's MVP so he's a hard guy to replace, but he also was hurt whether he played or not. So, without being cruel to someone who was one of the best Cornell players of the past decade on a pound for pound basis, if Vesce was a factor in the second half, it was in some part psychological.

Thus, if the incoming freshmen halfway live up to the hype (some of which we may be generating ourselves), it seems as if Cornell is adding more talent than it loses, factoring in the improvements in the three returning classes.

Cornell could go all the way this year. To Albany, at least.

But as others on this thread pointed out, one-loss-and-you're-out playoffs determine champions, not necessarily best teams. Otherwise the title game two years ago would have been Cornell and Colorado College, this past year North Dakota and, hmm, maybe BC or Maine or ... .

[CUlater 89]

Whether we can get an at-large bid will also be subject to how other teams perform.  For example, if we finish second in the league and lose in the ECAC semis, and the first place team, with a superior out of conference schedule/record also doesn't win the ECAC playoffs, that'll be one less at-large spot for which we might be eligible.  The same rule applies to upsets in other conference tournaments.  

As for the '04-'05 season, one of the biggest concerns is the loss of Vesce's faceoff skills.  We suffered greatly while he was hurt, and without McRae to back him up, we had no one who could win faceoffs consistently.  That's the situation we'll have coming into this season, although there is some hope that Topher Scott will be able to assume faceoff responsibilities.  Still, he's only one guy.

As for the freshman, where is the hype coming from (other than some of the members of this board)?  Have there been any rankings of freshmen classes around the country?  For myself, I hear Davenport is very good, but if the best skater is Sawada, I'm a little concerned, since he seems more like a banger than a scorer (although he had 52 points in 54 games last season, the year before he was 7-17-24 in 36 games, with 155 penalty minutes; and even Hornby had 51 points in 58 games (with 154 penalty minutes) the year before he came to Cornell).  The fact that he was drafted high I think is more of a reflection of his size and potential to play the NHL game.

For the team to be successful on a national level, goalscoring must come from Moulson, Hynes, Bitz, and someone else, on a fairly consistent basis.  It could be one of the Abbotts, although I hear Schafer thinks of them as third-liners; it could be Knoepfli; or it could be one of the other sophomores.

[Bengy]

And where do the defense jump into play in all this.... freshmen or not...