The Big Sheet

[Adam]

Ok, ok...I know that we address this issue almost every year around this time on this Forum...BUT:

How do you think the "big sheet" at Placid will impact this year's team, if at all?  Are there certain teams in this year's tourament who have a style of play that is suited to the wide open rink?

Any thoughts would be appreciated.

[Beeeej]

Sure; the Big Red will be able to flatten opposing players much more easily without risk of getting called for Boarding.  :-D

Beeeej

[jason]

Well, everyone and their uncle likes to state that the big sheet hurts Cornell more than other teams, with Cornell's relatively slower team speed as the reason given. Whether there is any truth to that claim I'll leave to others to speculate, but I would offer that some of Cornell's relative strengths --good positioning and efficient powerplay-- will benefit from the larger sheet. (I think more space makes it easier to exploit teams less disciplined about positioning and easier to run the pp, especially against an aggressive pk which seems to be more troublesome to Cornell than a pk that stays in the box and tries to take away the inside option).

[Greg Berge]

Schafer may have been blowing smoke last year, but I found his reasoning that the bigger sheet would *help* Cornell somewhat believable.  The argument was that the extra space served as a multiplier for Cornell's size advantage, because the ability to control physical play translates into much bigger territorial advantage.

A big sheet is definitely going to bring out our speed disadvantage, but you can't accelerate when you've got a guy in front of you checking you off the puck.  Also, Cornell actually *does* have skilled forwards.  While they don't come in waves like run and gun teams, they can set things up and move the puck.  And it's going to be fun when the first power play unit has all that open ice to play with, with Doug waiting with his howitzer.

[Al DeFlorio]

Can anyone document a real speed "disadvantage" top-to-bottom on the roster?  I, for one, don't buy it.

[Richard Stott]

I think Cornell's record at Lake Placid pretty much refutes the notion that the larger surface puts us at a disadvantage.  I agree with Al.  In the past  we have been pretty slow, but this year I don't think most other schools have a significant edge.  The  NMU coach specifically said they were caught by surprise by Cornell's speed.  We seem more comfortable skating with other teams now, tho it's clear Schafer still prefers grinding away in the corners.

[tml5]

Cornell is faster this year than last, and last year was faster than the year before that.  The thing about Cornell is that the skaters are in good position and don't have as far to go, so you don't see so much of the wild power skating.  Also, big people look slower than they really are, and fast people look smaller than they really are.  Figure that one out, and why it's important, and you'll be way ahead of me.  :-)

The thing is that Cornell's faster skaters are the less visible ones.  Guys like Palahicky and Hornby move pretty well, but they're checking line forwards that use their speed to hit everything in the wrong color jersey and play defense.  Harvard and Yale, on the other hand, have all of their speed up front trying to set up nice goals.

Personally, I believe Schafer's ideas about the surface at Placid.  Cornell plays physical, position defense, which is less likely to break down on the big sheet than a system that more or less relies on team speed to make up for minor flaws.

I think the biggest adjustment will be playing the angles.  For the skaters it may not be as big of a deal, but for the goalies this could be crucial.  I think Cornell has the best netminders in the league, and Underhill has played at Placid before, so if anything I think the big surface will favor Cornell slightly.  In the end, all 5 teams have to make the same basic adjustments, and I doubt there'll be much of a difference in the way they respond beyond a couple of misplayed pucks around the boards.

Man, Hornby's going to love that reduced chance of boarding. . . :-))

[Greg Berge]

> Can anyone document a real speed "disadvantage" top-to-bottom on the roster? I, for one, don't buy it.

It's hardly conclusive, but every opposing fan who evaluated Cornell says three things:  (1) they're good, (2) they're big, and (3) they're slow.

[Al DeFlorio]

That'll hold up in court.  It's an easy thing to say:  They're big; they must be slow.  Like Eric Heiden.

Baloney.

[RichS]

Well, He did have HUGE thighs!!

:-D

[RichS]

Since none of the other teams have much experience on the big surface either...in fact, probably LESS than cornell does...I'd say the "adjustment" factor is in cornell's favor.

[jason]

Well, I wouldn't argue it in front of a judge either, but short of getting out the speed gun, we don't have anything much better to rely on than the consensus of those who have seen the Red skate. And, it may not necessarily be the case that folks are saying "they're big, therefore they must be slow" but rather "they're both big and slow", which begs the question, are people deceived into believing that Cornell is slower by some sort of optical illusion caused by their large size.

(Answers to other questions: Yes, this post really didn't contribute much to the discussion, and, yes, I'm dying waiting for Friday evening to get here.)

[jtwcornell91]

Tom Lento wrote:

Man, Hornby's going to love that reduced chance of boarding. . . :-))

Unless it turns into an increased chance of charging...  ::uhoh::

[PapaBear]

The perception and to some degree, the reality, is that with much of the focus directed at Murray and Baby and to a lesser degree, McMeekin, due to their physical stature, some see them and therefore us, as slow.   While these three may not be the fastest players on the ice...or on our team, they make up for that deficit with size, reach, linemate pairings, and most of the time, positioning.  Note that Murray and McMeeking are paired with faster d-men and Baby with faster o-men.   Beyond these three, our team is well represented in the speed/quality skating category and a couple of our taller men, Christoff W. and M. Iggulden, are two of our better skaters, while a couple of our shorter players, Hornby and Palahicky, are two or our best hitters.   This is a well-balanced, talented team that is well-coached, using its assets to advantage during particular parts of each game.   Too much of a good thing is not necessarily good, whether it is size, speed, physical play, etc. unless that trait is accompanied by a full set of the remaining traits recognized as necessary for a complete player, and God knows, there are very few complete players.   I recently spoke to a well-respected NHL scout and commented that if Cornell had a couple real snipers, we could win the NCAA's.  His response, without hesitation, was that there are virtually no snipers today, not as the game is presently played.   Given that assessment, we can win the NCAA's just as easily as any of the other 11 teams that will make the march (seems we're poised to go as well as anyone).   And I doubt that we will see many, if any, teams that have players the size of Murray, Baby and McMeekin, who are also among the fastest, best-skating, headiest players on the ice.  If we do, look for them leaving early for the NHL.

[littleredfan]

I dont know, but for all the praise that Baby gets, I just squirm a little when I watch him skate, hit and play in general.  Sometimes he seems just a little TOO tall and kind of misses where he intends to hit. He also sometimes just seems like an awkward skater, but I feel like he compensates for it nicely with his long reach and power.