Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Harvard 2022-23: What's Up?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by thirdtime's . . . View Post
    Until 19:55.6 of the 3rd period I was all set to go with the headline HARVARD BEATS COLGATE, 4-4.
    LOL, from the old Harvard/Yale football analogy. Fun movie!
    Minnesota Golden Gopher Hockey

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by thirdtime's . . . View Post
      Harvard 2 zip. F Nothing crazy or ugly about it.
      You can say that again. Count me as stunned. I did not see this coming. Credit to Harvard for adjusting their D structure to at least keep Cornell at bay until the final five minutes. And yes, I was gritting my teeth at the thought of another meltdown.

      A shame that Harvard couldn't come away with a weekend sweep. But perhaps the third period of the Colgate game (minus the meltdown) gave them some confidence that they can stay with the top teams in the conference. More evidence is needed but for now, it's a good start.

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by Skate79 View Post
        Count me as stunned.


        Is it too early to say that this Crimson team that had been nowheresville due to youth, etc., has now, thanks to Colgate and Cornell, become exciting? New line combos (introducing Lapp to KDR and Bloomer), D pairings (Arnone now with MacDonald), and what seems to be a seriously good goalie, now battle-tested/scarred through her first eight games. The upside is palpable, even if it doesn’t quickly translate to Ws. The series with UMD no longer looks cringe-worthy ----- scary, but not cringe-worthy.


        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by thirdtime's . . . View Post



          Is it too early to say that this Crimson team that had been nowheresville due to youth, etc., has now, thanks to Colgate and Cornell, become exciting? New line combos (introducing Lapp to KDR and Bloomer), D pairings (Arnone now with MacDonald), and what seems to be a seriously good goalie, now battle-tested/scarred through her first eight games. The upside is palpable, even if it doesn’t quickly translate to Ws. The series with UMD no longer looks cringe-worthy ----- scary, but not cringe-worthy.

          Well, the good news is that it's still early and anything is possible. Coach Stone needs to trust the younger players and look past their inevitable mistakes. It's the only way they'll grow into better players.

          Comment


          • #20


            Crowell pulled Soderberg at 19:58 of the first period for a face-off in the Harvard end. Repeat: Crowell pulled Soderberg at 19:58 of the first period for a face-off in the Harvard end. I understand . . . after all, it had been a whole 17 minutes since the early Bulldogs score that failed to open the door to a blowout. So, was this a tribute to Stone’s team for skating backward wind sprints to keep the score 1-0? Or was it a huge diss, student to mentor? Weird. Unprecedented? I don’t know. We don’t see this kind of blood lust much in the ECAC. Tell me I’m wrong.

            And why no replays of penalties, major or minor? Is this a conference thing? A BIG+ thing? A UMD thing?

            Btw, even Harvard can’t be expected to score on a 5 minute PP when its ace scorer has been boarded out of the game.

            I liked the “holy cow” guy because at the end of the game he seemed to be rooting for the Bulldogs to get six more shots on goal so Pellicci could top her season high of 54 saves. It was his way of paying tribute to a remarkable performance.






            Last edited by thirdtime's . . .; 11-19-2022, 12:14 AM.

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by thirdtime's . . . View Post

              Crowell pulled Soderberg at 19:58 of the first period for a face-off in the Harvard end. Repeat: Crowell pulled Soderberg at 19:58 of the first period for a face-off in the Harvard end. I understand . . . after all, it had been a whole 17 minutes since the early Bulldogs score that failed to open the door to a blowout. So, was this a tribute to Stone’s team for skating backward wind sprints to keep the score 1-0? Or was it a huge diss, student to mentor? Weird. Unprecedented? I don’t know. We don’t see this kind of blood lust much in the ECAC. Tell me I’m wrong.

              And why no replays of penalties, major or minor? Is this a conference thing? A BIG+ thing? A UMD thing?

              Btw, even Harvard can’t be expected to score on a 5 minute PP when its ace scorer has been boarded out of the game.

              I liked the “holy cow” guy because at the end of the game he seemed to be rooting for the Bulldogs to get six more shots on goal so Pellicci could top her season high of 54 saves. It was his way of paying tribute to a remarkable performance.





              I think that is just something that UMD's broadcast does although they did show a replay of a penalty on Harvard. Harvard goalie played well but the last two UMD goals in the third period were soft.
              At the outset, we could hang with the dude...

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by FiveHoleFrenzy View Post
                Harvard goalie played well but the last two UMD goals in the third period were soft.


                I’ll give Pellicci a soft goal or two after staring down a pack of Bulldogs for almost 50 minutes. Exhaustion has got to kick in at some point.
                (It’s funny how we never talk about a goalie being gassed.)

                No thoughts on the Soderberg pull?

                Btw, I thought all of Minnesota had a fan base. Amsoil last night was as empty as Bright, where the lights were out.





                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by thirdtime's . . . View Post
                  No thoughts on the Soderberg pull?

                  Btw, I thought all of Minnesota had a fan base. Amsoil last night was as empty as Bright, where the lights were out.
                  Bold move...Probably not intended as disrespect but maybe more of the influence of the muzzinator coaching at OSU.

                  If you have a top of the WCHA matchup with the Sinners, or Tunnelers, or Yuckeyes then there would be more in the building.

                  Yikes, with the 9-0 drubbing today, Harvard was outscored 13-0 on the weekend and outshot 106-29...

                  At the outset, we could hang with the dude...

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by thirdtime's . . . View Post
                    No thoughts on the Soderberg pull?
                    I've seen it before, and not just in women's NCAA. The theory is that there isn't time to pull the puck back to a teammate for an almost 200-foot shot. As long as the offensive center doesn't allow the opposing center to shoot straight off the drop of the puck, two seconds shouldn't be long enough for the defending team to score into the empty net. They likely have used a stop watch in practice to see how long it takes for the puck to travel that far and understand the level of risk they are taking. A 60 MPH shot travels 88 feet per second, so about all the time available would be needed for the puck's travel, leaving nothing for winning the faceoff and getting a shot off.

                    "... And lose, and start again at your beginnings
                    And never breathe a word about your loss;" -- Rudyard Kipling

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by ARM View Post
                      The theory is . . .


                      I understand that there was zero risk for UMD. That’s exactly what made the move seem gratuitously aggressive. “OK Harvard. You think you can stymie this team for two more periods? I’m going 6-on-5 for two seconds!" Consider the situation at the end of the first period. Was Crowell surprised? Doubtless. Was she shaking in her boots? Doubtful. She had every reason to believe her team would overwhelm Harvard after 40 more minutes of that kind of play, but she also had every reason to acknowledge the determined play of her outgunned opponent. I’m not sure how a coach actually does that on the ice, but taking a knee with 2 seconds left would be a start. Save the analytics for a one goal game at the end of the third. Given the overall context, this came down to an old-fashioned sportsmanship issue for me.




                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by thirdtime's . . . View Post
                        Given the overall context, this came down to an old-fashioned sportsmanship issue for me.
                        After 20 minutes in a game where the outcome is still in doubt? I'd be surprised if Stone thought that was lacking sportsmanship any more than she would have been offended by Crowell sending out her top line for that faceoff. I would be more likely to question the sportsmanship in the situation that you suggest, if UMD pulled its goalie while up a goal with two seconds left in the game, a situation where it clearly doesn't need an additional goal.

                        "... And lose, and start again at your beginnings
                        And never breathe a word about your loss;" -- Rudyard Kipling

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          I don’t think it was unsportsmanlike. Practice at an offensive zone 6 on 5 faceoff maybe? Particularly as Harvard was coming off a win against Cornell right? And I’m not kidding, from my perspective there is a LOT of talk about how great the ECAC is this year. If that talk is real coaches are going to treat their opponent as such.

                          I once played a game against Brown where they started a forward in net despite having a healthy goalie on the bench. Was it unsportsmanlike or did the real goalie need to be disciplined? Don’t care, we won!

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            How about this one in the Clarkson - Quinny game on Friday.

                            Knights were down 3-0 and took IMHO some frustration cross checking and body checking penalties in the last half of the third. None were that egregious but they were called. When the 4th penalty was called with 12 sec remaining I guess the Quinny coaching staff had seen enough. They called timeout and then sent their top line out. Won the faceoff and eventually tick tack toed the puck around down low and scored with 2 sec left. Anyone want to comment on that one.
                            Fan of CLARKSON: 2014, 2017 & 2018 NC$$ WOMEN'S DIV 1 HOCKEY NATIONAL CHAMPIONS *******https://fanforum.uscho.com/core/images/smilies/smile.gi*********
                            And of 3 Patty Kaz recepients: Jamie Lee Rattray, Loren Gabel and Elizabeth Giguere
                            WHOOOOOOOOO WHOOOOOOOOO
                            If Union Can Do It So Can CCT (One of These Years) *******https://fanforum.uscho.com/core/images/smilies/smile.gi*********

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by vicb View Post
                              How about this one in the Clarkson - Quinny game on Friday.

                              Knights were down 3-0 and took IMHO some frustration cross checking and body checking penalties in the last half of the third. None were that egregious but they were called. When the 4th penalty was called with 12 sec remaining I guess the Quinny coaching staff had seen enough. They called timeout and then sent their top line out. Won the faceoff and eventually tick tack toed the puck around down low and scored with 2 sec left. Anyone want to comment on that one.
                              What a flex imo. Not to be messed with, those bobcats.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by ARM View Post
                                After 20 minutes in a game where the outcome is still in doubt? I'd be surprised if Stone thought that was lacking sportsmanship any more than she would have been offended by Crowell sending out her top line for that faceoff. I would be more likely to question the sportsmanship in the situation that you suggest, if UMD pulled its goalie while up a goal with two seconds left in the game, a situation where it clearly doesn't need an additional goal.
                                I certainly don't mind that thirdtime's... raised the question. Perfectly appropriate topic for this forum.

                                That said, I agree with ARM 100%. To be honest, I'm actually a little shocked by the allegation of poor sportsmanship.

                                Looking at the sport of hockey as a whole -- not limiting the conversation to Women's D-1 -- I've seen this move many times over the years. It just strikes me as a completely normal thing to do. As long as the outcome of the game is still in doubt, as ARM says.

                                In recent years, my observation is that we have seen less of this ploy. But not because it's poor sportsmanship; because it's so unlikely to be a net gain. If you're going to shoot right off the face-off, you don't need the 6th attacker anyhow. If you need two or more touches of the puck to score, two seconds is likely insufficient. Make it 5 seconds, and you've got some possibilities. But then the slight risk of a goal against kicks in.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X