Cornell 11 York 1

[imafrshmn]

[quote Jordan 04]Does our reportedly bad defensive play mean that the goalies were playing well to keep them off the board?  Or was York just not converting?[/quote]

I'd say it was moreso York's inability to capitalize and the fact that they didn't take a lot of quality shots.

[jy3]

wow, not a bad result
LGR!

[ithacat]

It's difficult to take too much from this game since York's about a D3 program comprised largely of 1st-years (18 out of 25). Cornell was literally skating circles around York at times. Still York was pretty gritty and physical, though they got frustrated and chippy (imagine) as the game wore on.

Some good: The freshmen were impressive. Both goalies made some nice saves. The pk got a lot of work. The passing was crisp and creative for the first real game.

Some bad: The defense looked iffy at times. Freshmen will be freshmen. The pk got a lot of work. Scali got hurt. Gallagher was in a suit.

Some ugly: It was 11-1...what can one say? Oh, the ice looked terrible. What's with all the rust stains and skid marks?

[redhair34]

[quote ithacat] Scali got hurt. quote]

Did you see it?  Also, anyone see if something happened to Carefoot?  I didn't see him after the 2nd period.

[ebilmes]

Yeah, the ice was pretty bad. They didn't do a great job of painting over the advertisements on the boards, either.

It was weird having to turn to H to look for opposing fans.

I question why any coach would leave a goalie in for 11 goals. Maybe you pull him at 9, just to save some dignity.

[Molgestron]

I think I saw Scali make an awkward hit in front of the bench and come away favoring his shoulder. No idea if anything happened to Carefoot.

Tough to take anything away from this. Another team would've taken advantage of defensive lapses. The offense showed real creativity tonight though, and it's great to see goals from 10 different players. It seems that they were taking better shots than last year, when it looked like they would just put the puck into the opposing goalie's chest. They hit a lot of corners and had some pretty passes. I can't really say whether we looked good or York just made us look good, but if this keeps up, it will be an exciting season to watch, one way or another.

[ithacat]

Scali collided with a Yorkie in front of Cornell's bench in the 2nd period. I was 10 rows up in C & could hear the pop -- I was hoping it was equipment. He immediately went to the bench and up the new tunnel, where he stayed for the rest of the period. At intermission he skated off holding his left elbow. About midway through the 3rd he was in street clothes at the west end and it looked like his elbow was in a sling. Hopefully it's not too serious. Fans are going to love Scali -- he's Hornbyesque...Hey, Scali...

[LynahFaithfulS]

a very fun game to watch :-)
it was kind of already asked, but does anyone know why carefoot left after the 6th goal? (or maybe just before it)  He didn't look hurt...my friend suggested that it's  because he's just too good...they kick him out once we're up by 6 :-P

[Trotsky]

[quote Molgestron]Tough to take anything away from this.[/quote]

3 things we can take away:

1) York isn't good.

2) Our freshmen aren't horrible.

3) Our goalies aren't horrible.

Not a lot, but more than we knew on Friday...

[CKinsland]

It seemed like there were a heck of a lot of penalties.  Showing off my lack of hockey stat finding ability, I'm going to ask: How many minutes of this game were played 5x5?  

Jeez, special teams got a massive workout.  It was kind of like the red white game (5x4s, 5x3s, 4x3, even, as noted earlier, a bit of 6x3, which is rather rare).  Lots and lots of non-5x5 and loads of 3 man penalty kill.  


CK

[dietlbomb]

[quote CKinsland]It seemed like there were a heck of a lot of penalties.  Showing off my lack of hockey stat finding ability, I'm going to ask: How many minutes of this game were played 5x5?  

Jeez, special teams got a massive workout.  It was kind of like the red white game (5x4s, 5x3s, 4x3, even, as noted earlier, a bit of 6x3, which is rather rare).  Lots and lots of non-5x5 and loads of 3 man penalty kill.  


CK[/quote]

Perhaps Schafer wanted to work on the PK. :-P

[Ken71]

[quote CKinsland]It seemed like there were a heck of a lot of penalties.  Showing off my lack of hockey stat finding ability, I'm going to ask: How many minutes of this game were played 5x5?  [/quote]

Using stats from:
http://www.collegehockeystats.net/0607/boxes/mcoryrk1.o21

I figure just under 25 minutes, which is more 5x5 time that I would have guessed.

 
Per 1      (elapsed)
00:00   01:02   01:02
03:02   03:54   00:52
05:54   06:46   00:52
08:46   09:58   01:12
12:09   14:38   02:29
18:28   19:01   00:33
Per 2      
03:37   08:05   04:28
10:05   11:51   01:46
15:57   16:26   00:29
17:09   18:15   01:06
Per 3      
00:15   02:42   02:27
04:46   06:25   01:39
08:56   11:46   02:50
15:56   16:53   00:57
18:02   18:31   00:29
19:07   20:00   00:53
      
Empty Net   00:49
      
TOTAL      24:53

Ken '71

[Cactus12]

I think a few things stood out, despite the slaughter (and it's my belief that you can take some things from these games).

Our offence was much quicker. Granted York's defence was not challenging us, but we were making nice, quick passes and better decisions with the puck in their zone. Our defence started off shakey, but seemed to tighten up as the game progressed. Goaltending was fine. I think Davenport is much more mechanically sound. Scrivens' very-wide open stance scares me a bit.
My first star, by far:
Raymond Sawada

I think this has the potential to be a very exciting season, though I doubt we'll see the Cornell style hockey (stellar defence) of recent years. The freshman are very energetic and there's no question they're thinking goals. We can expect to score many, but possibly surrender many (hopefully less than the former) - at least in my opinion.

[ftyuv]

From what I've read here, I think I agree with you, Cactus.  And maybe that's for the best.  If Schafer's tendency is towards defense, it could be better that we're starting off with a somewhat more offensive team this year.  Don't get me wrong, I love low-scoring, defensive games.  But killer defenses alone don't win games -- they lose in 3 overtimes (too soon?).  Our offense started weak last year and never really went anywhere;  I think under coach's guidance, our defense will get to where it needs to be, and it's good that now we'll have an offense with it.

I didn't see last night's game, so I can't judge as well as others.  But it's my thought that last year's team wouldn't have smashed a similar opponent as much.  We'd still have beaten them, but the score would have been closer to 5-1.  How is York compared to the U18 team?  We beat then 4-1 last year.

Also, let's not forget that it wasn't just the froshers who were scoring these goals.  I think one of our biggest lapses last year was that we could never follow through with offensive plays.  So many points in hockey aren't scored from just one shot -- they're scored off the rebound and chaos that comes after a shot.  We had a really, really hard time getting those points last year, but it sounds like this year we have the communication and positioning that may get us more of them.  If this means the non-freshman have come together more over the summer, that can only be good news.

[Cactus12]

My sentiment exactly. It's great to win a game 1-0. But a team needs to have that ability to win 6-5 sometimes. (esp. with tight officiating)

To answer your question, York was significantly worse than U18. Nevertheless, I don't think last year's team scores 11 goals on them.