UML Recruiting 2010 and beyond

[boblav1]

Re: UML Recruiting 2010 and beyond

From USHR: Ryan Fitzgerald, a freshman at Malden Catholic, and the son of former UML assistant coach Tom Fitzgerald, has committed to Boston College for the fall of '13. UNH, UMA & BU were the other schools mentioned as being involved.

[UMLFan]

Re: UML Recruiting 2010 and beyond

From USHR: Ryan Fitzgerald, a freshman at Malden Catholic, and the son of former UML assistant coach Tom Fitzgerald, has committed to Boston College for the fall of '13. UNH, UMA & BU were the other schools mentioned as being involved.

Fun ... not even mentioned!

[boblav1]

Re: UML Recruiting 2010 and beyond

Fun ... not even mentioned!

Exactly what I was thinking. I realize Lowell can't compete with most of the schools mentioned recruiting wise, but I wonder if the system Lowell plays has anything to do with it.
From USHR:

He's a smart player - an excellent playmaker who moves the puck really well, makes players around him better, skates well, and competes.

He sounds like a good get for BC. Would this type of player want to play dump and chase?

[Patman]

Re: UML Recruiting 2010 and beyond

He sounds like a good get for BC. Would this type of player want to play dump and chase?

Stupid question asked out loud. Has there been any visably successful teams that employ the dump and chase? D&C bothers me so much because it depends upon the ability to get the puck back once its dumped. So you cede control assuming you can force a turnover or that you may be able to force the opponents into giving you a high probability opportunity.

[UMLFan]

Re: UML Recruiting 2010 and beyond

Stupid question asked out loud. Has there been any visably successful teams that employ the dump and chase? D&C bothers me so much because it depends upon the ability to get the puck back once its dumped. So you cede control assuming you can force a turnover or that you may be able to force the opponents into giving you a high probability opportunity.

To me it's a cyclical argument. The better teams don't have to dump and chase because they've got the talent to be able to control the puck easily skating into the zone. The less talented teams have to dump and chase, otherwise they'll probably lose the puck causing an odd-man rush the other way.

[UMLFan]

Re: UML Recruiting 2010 and beyond

Newmarket lost game 2 of the CCHL finals 3-2 in 3 OTs last night. Julian Melchiori had no points.

[Patman]

Re: UML Recruiting 2010 and beyond

To me it's a cyclical argument. The better teams don't have to dump and chase because they've got the talent to be able to control the puck easily skating into the zone. The less talented teams have to dump and chase, otherwise they'll probably lose the puck causing an odd-man rush the other way.

You see this bothers me in that we seemed to have more skill than we've had in years past. If we're in a year where we're hitting our high water mark then we can't be relying on things like that. Otherwise, all we'll ever do is dump and chase.

we've had good defenses... for certain... but this seems to accept that we're limited in what we can do. You know, I can't get over some similarity to the focus on systems (as mentioned on the radio all season long) and some of the complaints Providence had about pooley... not so much the "dump and watch" but rather suffocating players by and with the system.

Honestly, I don't know enough to know... I just want to be doing better than what we have been.

[boblav1]

Re: UML Recruiting 2010 and beyond

Stupid question asked out loud. Has there been any visably successful teams that employ the dump and chase? D&C bothers me so much because it depends upon the ability to get the puck back once its dumped. So you cede control assuming you can force a turnover or that you may be able to force the opponents into giving you a high probability opportunity.

I was trying to be a little sarcastic with that question. I agree about the D&C. How are you going to attract top recruits while playing that system?

[UMLFan]

Re: UML Recruiting 2010 and beyond

We're never going to attract the top recruits. That just needs to be understood. As sad as that attitude is, that's fact.

Last night in the CJHL semis, Brockville won game 1 7-2. Shayne Thompson's 1-3-4 was good for the 1st star.

In the other semifinal series, Doug Carr made 39 saves, but Cornwall lost 5-1 in game 1.

[boblav1]

Re: UML Recruiting 2010 and beyond

but rather suffocating players by and with the system.

I guess this is where I'm coming from too, Vallorani is a play maker and should have the puck on his stick, not chasing the puck into the corners taking on guys twice his size.

[HawksSk860]

Re: UML Recruiting 2010 and beyond

I was trying to be a little sarcastic with that question. I agree about the D&C. How are you going to attract top recruits while playing that system?

These are my feelings on dump and chase... it CAN work, if used selectively. Blaisemust have no confidence the 'Hawks can get behind the D any other way, or have no ability to beat the trap. The problem isyou need size (which might be more important than speed in the D & C) and an opposing goalie who can't handle the puck.

To me, if you're abig guy with decent speed, you might be a fan of the D & C, especially if you can dish the puck. Now, howmany guys are out there like obtainable by UML??? I honestly can't say, I dont have enough knowledge re: that.

Anwyays, while I understand the current frustration with D & C, as a strategy its not universally stupid, as some seem to think

[Patronick]

Re: UML Recruiting 2010 and beyond

Coach is going to get the same kind of "Lowell" players in the door that we always do. We'll be strong defensively and in the net, with a group of forwards who are all basically interchangeable. The players that come to Lowell have good overall skill, are usually in the playmaker or grinder mold with the rare sniper thrown in every 4 years, a la Walter and Falite.

We're not changing the caliber of players that come to Lowell. We're not making a coaching change, hence there won't be a change in system. Why should anyone expect a change in results? If anyone can give me a single, intelligent response to that question, I'll buy them a beer at the season opener. I'll never stop supporting this team, but boy is going to be ugly for the next few years.

Edit: This probably should have gone in the off-season thread, but the discussion of system and players prompted my comments. Sorry for the hijack.

[UMLGoon]

Re: UML Recruiting 2010 and beyond

Coach is going to get the same kind of "Lowell" players in the door that we always do. We'll be strong defensively and in the net, with a group of forwards who are all basically interchangeable. The players that come to Lowell have good overall skill, are usually in the playmaker or grinder mold with the rare sniper thrown in every 4 years, a la Walter and Falite.

We're not changing the caliber of players that come to Lowell. We're not making a coaching change, hence there won't be a change in system. Why should anyone expect a change in results? If anyone can give me a single, intelligent response to that question, I'll buy them a beer at the season opener. I'll never stop supporting this team, but boy is going to be ugly for the next few years.

Edit: This probably should have gone in the off-season thread, but the discussion of system and players prompted my comments. Sorry for the hijack.

i think the caliber of players coming to lowell has improved drastically from, say, your mark roebothans and mike potaccos to scott campbell and kory falite and david vallorani. if you don't see that you're being intentionally obtuse.

[Patronick]

Re: UML Recruiting 2010 and beyond

i think the caliber of players coming to lowell has improved drastically from, say, your mark roebothans and mike potaccos to scott campbell and kory falite and david vallorani. if you don't see that you're being intentionally obtuse.

I disagree in how drastic this difference is. I might concede that it's deeper.

But your point begs the question: If there is such a drastic difference in talent, where are the results? In my mind that speaks volumes for the change the coach/system camp.

[UMLGoon]

Re: UML Recruiting 2010 and beyond

I disagree in how drastic this difference is. I might concede that it's deeper.

But your point begs the question: If there is such a drastic difference in talent, where are the results? In my mind that speaks volumes for the change the coach/system camp.

the state of the team today isn't better than 2005? the results are 39 wins in the last two seasons, which is more than any team since 2001. plus an average finish of fourth in the last two seasons, which is higher than any team since the mid-90s.

the results may not have been what we'd hoped for or what the team even deserved but if you're arguing that there are no points, you're demonstrably incorrect.