Cornell - Quinnipiac postgame

[Al DeFlorio]

[Q]Cactus12 Wrote:

 I sit in A and had a pretty good view... it was batted out of the air, but i think it bounced off mckees pads first and it wasn't redirected cleanly... just happened to bounce off his stick in the right direction[/q]
The game story at cornellbigred describes the goal like this:  "Cashman sent it back to Van Vliet in the right faceoff circle, where he fired a low shot that McKee appeared to save. He got his stick on the puck, which deflected it over his right shoulder. It hit the goal at the intersection of the cross bar and the left pipe and ricocheted in for the game's first goal."

[Jim Hyla]

The USCHO storyhttp://www.uscho.com/recaps/20052006/m/12/03/qu-cor.php again shows  what a class act Schafer is.[Q]“The first period was probably one of the worst periods of hockey that this town and university has seen in some time. It was embarrassing,” said Schaffer. “They out-competed us in the first period.
“Our alumni, our fans, our university, all they ask is that you come out ready to compete. We didn’t do that.”[/Q][Q]“The five-on-three was really disappointing. I take responsibility,” said Schaffer. “I should have called a timeout."[/Q]Even if they can't spell his name correctly.

[duffs4]

I agree with schafer on that.  I don't know who was counting shots in the first but I'm thinking quite a few more than 6 made it through to McKee.  Too many times in our defensive end I saw our guys running around from missed assignments, not something I'm used to from a schafer squad.  McKee deserves major credit because without him we wouldn't have survived the first.  

While watching the first I was thinking that Q looked a lot like cornell teams of the past, get it deep and FIGHT it out in the corners.  I was very impressed with how well they played their game, we were lucky to come out with a win.  

[billhoward]

[Q]Dpperk29 Wrote: isn't it a sign of a good team when they get outplayed but still manage to get the W?[/q]In any one game, it's probably more that's the odds falling your way this time. Over the course of the season, then the mark of a good team is that it wins the majority of the close wins. Or maybe I have it backwards: The team that wins the majority of its close games is a good team.

[duffs4]

[Q]Jim Hyla Wrote:

 The USCHO story again shows  what a class act Schafer is.[Q2]“The first period was probably one of the worst periods of hockey that this town and university has seen in some time. It was embarrassing,” said Schaffer. “They out-competed us in the first period.
“Our alumni, our fans, our university, all they ask is that you come out ready to compete. We didn’t do that.”[/Q]
[Q2]“The five-on-three was really disappointing. I take responsibility,” said Schaffer. “I should have called a timeout."[/Q]
Even if they can't spell his name correctly.[/q]

I agree with schafer on that.  I don't know who was counting shots in the first but I'm thinking quite a few more than 6 made it through to McKee.  Too many times in our defensive end I saw our guys running around from missed assignments, not something I'm used to from a schafer squad.  McKee deserves major credit because without him we wouldn't have survived the first.  

While watching the first I was thinking that Q looked a lot like cornell teams of the past, get it deep and FIGHT it out in the corners.  I was very impressed with how well they played their game, we were lucky to come out with a win.  

[WillR]

From where i was it looked like a Q guy was trying to cover the puck in front of the net without taking a delay penalty and that he ended up hand passing it into his own net or at least passing it back to where someone else put it in (i never saw McCutcheson touch it).  At the very least it looked like the Q guy deserved the unnoficial assist on it.  

Did anyone get a clear look of what happened and can someone give a quick play by play on it?

[Al DeFlorio]

[Q]WillR Wrote:

 From where i was it looked like a Q guy was trying to cover the puck in front of the net without taking a delay penalty and that he ended up hand passing it into his own net or at least passing it back to where someone else put it in (i never saw McCutcheson touch it).  At the very least it looked like the Q guy deserved the unnoficial assist on it.  

Did anyone get a clear look of what happened and can someone give a quick play by play on it?
[/q]
It's hard to tell from the angle used for the replay.  At times it does look to me like the defender tried to cover it and instead pushed it behind and under the goalie.  I really can't tell if McCutcheon hit it with his stick.  Perhaps his stick hit the defender's hand causing the hand to push the puck rather than just cover it.

[Robb]

McCutcheon certainly made the motion of shooting, but I agree that it is very hard to tell if he actually makes contact with the puck.  

[ugarte]

Instead of a lot of posts, and to the consternation of the threaded view fans, here are a bunch of responses at once.
[Q]Al DeFlorio Wrote:
The game story at cornellbigred describes the goal like this:  "Cashman sent it back to Van Vliet in the right faceoff circle, where he fired a low shot that McKee appeared to save. He got his stick on the puck, which deflected it over his right shoulder. It hit the goal at the intersection of the cross bar and the left pipe and ricocheted in for the game's first goal."[/q]
That is exactly right. The other Q player swiped at where the puck would have been if it wasn't already going in. It led to a lot of confusion in the booth. Not that NESN would have gotten the graphic right anyway.

[Q]andyw2100 Wrote:

 [Q2]billhoward Wrote:  Replay of the first goal appeared to show a beautiful deflection or redirection by Moulson.  [/Q]
Granted my view from Section C, almost on the aisle with D, was not great, but from where I sat it looked like Scott made a beautiful pass from behind the goal line to Moulson right at the goal mouth, and Moulson just tapped it home. Is that really not what happened?[/q]
Andy: You and Bill are using different terminology to say the same thing. Moulson redirected Scott's pass. In other words, he didn't wind up and shoot or flick a wrister. He just put his stick on the ice and slid it between Fisher's pads.


[Q]Al DeFlorio Wrote:Watching the replay of the save on Cam Abbott's shorthanded attempt late in the third, it appears his shot was stopped by Fisher, but Cam then centered it back out in front and McCutcheon then lifted it over Fisher. It looks to me like a Quinnipiac defenseman, wearing #2, batted the puck away with his stick just as it was going in, with the puck about 18" above the ice. Pretty amazing "save" if that's what really happened. [/q]  I didn't see that. I didn't think that McC didn't lift it over Fisher. If it was batted by a d-man, wouldn't the play have continued? I don't know how the d-man would have batted it to Fisher, who had his back to the goal line. It was a flurry of excellent goaltending and unlucky shooting.

[Q]Robb Wrote:
 McCutcheon certainly made the motion of shooting, but I agree that it is very hard to tell if he actually makes contact with the puck.  [/q]I dunno. It looked clear to me that he poked it and it started accelerating. If the defender was trying to slide the puck to a goalie that wasn't looking in the direction of an otherwise empty net it ranks among the worst plays in hockey history.
[Q]“The five-on-three was really disappointing. I take responsibility,” said Schaffer. “I should have called a timeout."[/q]Amusing. Right before the 5-on-3 you can read Schafer's lips as he says to the referee "No. No, I don't want a time out."

[Q]calgARI '07 Wrote: That Quinnipiac team REALLY impressed me.  Very little talent after Cashman but they really beat Cornell in every facet of the game in the first forty minutes.  [/q]I'm not sure how the boldface part fits in with what you think and what I saw. Marshall was a playmaker, and Walsh had some playmaker in him too. Henningson, Sorteberg and Barnych were great at keeping the puck along the boards and breaking up plays. There is more talent at Q than you are crediting them for.

[Liz '05]

[Q]duffs4 Wrote:
While watching the first I was thinking that Q looked a lot like cornell teams of the past, get it deep and FIGHT it out in the corners.  I was very impressed with how well they played their game, we were lucky to come out with a win.  

[/q]

That was our comment too while watching the game.  They were playing our game, and better than we were, in the first period at least.

[Rosey]

[Q]That was our comment too while watching the game.  They were playing our game, and better than we were, in the first period at least.[/q]

I said the same thing in chat.  They were grinding us along the boards in their defensive zone just like I remember our guys being able to do.

Kyle

[DeltaOne81]

[Q]Jacob '06 Wrote:

 [Q2]DeltaOne81 Wrote:

 [Q2]andyw2100 Wrote:

 How was that Mike Legg goal not a high-stick?
                           Andy W.[/Q]
High stick = above the cross bar

Of course, it's now illegal, but it wasn't then.[/Q]
What is the rule that makes it illegal? Did they add something like you can't carry the puck on your stick off the ground?[/q]

Assuming no one answered this yet... yeah, pretty much. 'No carrying the puck on your stick'

[profudge]

Adam - from N row 7  w/ good view, Topher made a great pass right onto Moulson's stick who snapped it home -  Q. D were trying to tie up everyone in red zone all night and were pretty good on doing it  this time Mouslon was strong and quick!  
edit:  maybe snap is wrong verb - redirected would be more accurate ...  

[DeltaOne81]

Alright, I pulled up my TiVo for some reviews of the goals.

I definitely agree with the recap's version of the Q goal. The save came off McKee's pad, deflected up, and hit 0.1 inches inside the far post. There was a Q stick right there trying to wack it home, but he missed and it wasn't needed anyway. Honestly, watching that, it looks soft to me. Deflecting pucks away in the right direction is one of the more basic goalie skills. Now McKee had a good night and made a number of good saves... and anyone can make mistakes sometimes... but it still makes it soft.

If anyone has it recored, watched the All Access archive, or catches it on NESN, the angel from behind show it best.

Not at all to take away from the fact that Q outplayed us for pretty much all of the first and probably most of the game. But maybe McKee is really getting back to form, other than that one slip up.


Frist Cornell goal: I think the term 'redirection' is usually reserved for a 'shot' being redirected. Topher's pass was clearly a pass, since it game from the back wall just off from the goal. However, I also see that it wasn't so much a 'shot' from Moulson, as a 'tapper', which could also be called a redirection... so, whatever . Scott passed it from the  back boards into the crease and Moulson tapped/redirected it through the goalies legs.

Btw, shows my it maybe to have more moves on the PP than just the old pass and shoot from the point.

Heh, in fact, even Rich Coppola (color guy) called it a redirection, so whatever :-P


Abbott's SH attempt: Holy hell, I think you're right, although you can't tell for sure.

Great deke by Abbott, but Fisher gets his glove it on for a great save. The puck comes behind the net briefly as Abbott is going there, he centers it back out front, ends up on McCutcheons stick who DEFINITELY lifts it over Fisher. And then it... yeah... it definitely comes back down into Fisher's gloves as he's laying on his stomach facing backwards, but there was a distinct redirection in the air. Which could ENTIRELY be from the D's stick, or from the post, or both. Either way, we had who incredibly chances on that sequence, not just one.

And the more I watch it, the more I think it was the D's stick. I repeat, holy hell.

[profudge]

In general  I thought we did not play real badly except for being asleep and not moving our feet so Q (who came out flying) just totally outplayed us in 1st.  
We picked it up in second and played really well in third....  But I felt lucky on the scramble and goal, McCutcheon deserved it  He hustled and played really well all night.    I like that several times when Q was threatening to have 3-2 or 4-2  breakouts,  it was players like Moulson or Carefoot or Pegoraro who hustled and got back on defense to help out.  Shot's were even over the whole game and what suprised me the most was how dangerous the Q powerplay could be once they set up in zone - -   often switching to a box and one with one centerman in very high slot in middle and points a bit wider apart  -   Our p-k guys  seemed to deal with it rather well but I do recall at leaast one maybe two Q' whiffs on half open sides of the net!  

Salmela and Seminoff looked good on D.   O'Byrne was pretty good also!   We definitely miss Gleed and Glover in both size and steadying  influence - as  Q came with a fast aggressive fore-check.      Very impressed by Reid Cashman good head and good hands accurate quick passes really played a lot of minutes for them.    Topher hustled and did a great job with the puck low in the zone - We did come very close on several plays where we didn't quite get puck in the net but so did  Q....    A very even game,  could have gone either way.  

Q is for real and think they will be a mid-pack to home playoff contender for this and next couple of years.