Harvard Crimson 2014-15

[UCONN FAN]

Re: Harvard Crimson 2014-15

LOL funny how when Harvard plays poorly it's the club coach's fault but when they play well it's the college coach's excellent coaching. Wasn't it you that said Assabet is a product of the recruiting of the prep players that only play 1 or 2 seasons? Which is it? FYI Leary, Kent and Fields played for that SAME poor system and they seem to be doing ok.

 

[HockeyEast33]

Re: Harvard Crimson 2014-15

LOL funny how when Harvard plays poorly it's the club coach's fault but when they play well it's the college coach's excellent coaching. Wasn't it you that said Assabet is a product of the recruiting of the prep players that only play 1 or 2 seasons? Which is it? FYI Leary, Kent and Fields played for that SAME poor system and they seem to be doing ok.

Are you reacting to my posts or someone else's? If it's mine, I think you need to re-read my posts - I was actually disagreeing with the poster who said that Assabet doesn't play D or without the puck well (supportive of you and the other Assabet coaches).

 

[UCONN FAN]

Re: Harvard Crimson 2014-15

Are you reacting to my posts or someone else's? If it's mine, I think you need to re-read my posts - I was actually disagreeing with the poster who said that Assabet doesn't play D or without the puck well (supportive of you and the other Assabet coaches).

You're right. This should be directed at the former disgruntled Assabet parent "Call It".

 

[Skate79]

Re: Harvard Crimson 2014-15

Only on this thread would I continue this - because it is so relevant to a Harvard team that is almost 50% Assabet players, especially amongst the FR/SO. Totally disagree with "Assabet never had to play well without the puck or a solid D game". That program wins more 1-0 and 2-1 games than any program I can think of and always KNOWS they are going to win them. They did that through adherence to a puck possession and heavily D focused system that was well-ingrained in them by playing together for years as they grew up and being coached by the same group of coaches. If anything, their weakness was not on D but in finishing (except when they had a player like Phoebe Staenz on the roster or, to a much lesser extent, Sydney Daniels or Lexie Laing).

The problem in translating this system to the college level is that college kids don't play together year after year for 5-10 years. 25% of the team (roughly) is new every year. And the current Harvard team has more than 50% non-Assabet kids that likely have not played a similar system. So mixing the much-ingrained Assabet kids with a bunch of other kids from different systems leads to inevitable problems - the Assabet kids trying to adapt to whatever differences exist from what they played for a long time and the other kids trying to synch with the Assabet kids. Until it happens, you get a hot mess and a lot of confusion - which sounds like what is happening at Harvard.

For someone like myself who isn't privy to prep school programs or other programs for aspiring women hockey players, this is an informative post. And it makes a lot of sense when you look at this year's edition of the Crimson. My question is: why hasn't this shown up in previous seasons? Is Assabet recruiting only a recent trend over the past few years? Having watched Harvard women's hockey since the '99 season, I don't recall any year when this problem surfaced as it has this year. Are there other issues between the girls from Assabet and those who were recruited from other programs?

 

[HockeyEast33]

Re: Harvard Crimson 2014-15

For someone like myself who isn't privy to prep school programs or other programs for aspiring women hockey players, this is an informative post. And it makes a lot of sense when you look at this year's edition of the Crimson. My question is: why hasn't this shown up in previous seasons? Is Assabet recruiting only a recent trend over the past few years? Having watched Harvard women's hockey since the '99 season, I don't recall any year when this problem surfaced as it has this year. Are there other issues between the girls from Assabet and those who were recruited from other programs?

This season's Harvard team has a very high percentage of former Assabet players (which is a testament to their academic as well as athletic success). I doubt that Harvard (or any other program for that matter) has frequently had 40% or so of its every game skaters from one club program in the past. So it would be reasonable for it to be more impactful this season than in the past. The team will likely come together eventually but it may (and appears to be) take longer than if there is was a lower percentage of players from one program.

Yale is also starting to get a disproportionately high percentage of Assabet players similar to Harvard (like I said - academic as well as athletic success). They seem to be struggling similarly even though given their freshmen class they should be improved this season over a fairly decent season last year. Something to think about anyway...

You'd have to ask someone with knowledge of the player's relationships whether having so many Assabet kids is impacting team chemistry off the ice (I don't definitely don't have any insight). It's possible that even unintentionally they are banding together (only natural because they know each other so well) and causing cohesion issues - but like I said I really don't know.

 

[Ted Knight]

Re: Harvard Crimson 2014-15

This season's Harvard team has a very high percentage of former Assabet players (which is a testament to their academic as well as athletic success). I doubt that Harvard (or any other program for that matter) has frequently had 40% or so of its every game skaters from one club program in the past. So it would be reasonable for it to be more impactful this season than in the past. The team will likely come together eventually but it may (and appears to be) take longer than if there is was a lower percentage of players from one program.

Yale is also starting to get a disproportionately high percentage of Assabet players similar to Harvard (like I said - academic as well as athletic success). They seem to be struggling similarly even though given their freshmen class they should be improved this season over a fairly decent season last year. Something to think about anyway...

You'd have to ask someone with knowledge of the player's relationships whether having so many Assabet kids is impacting team chemistry off the ice (I don't definitely don't have any insight). It's possible that even unintentionally they are banding together (only natural because they know each other so well) and causing cohesion issues - but like I said I really don't know.

\\

Harvard - Dartmouth game on NESN tomorrow?

 

[Skate79]

Re: Harvard Crimson 2014-15

Tonight's game is on NESN. (http://www.gocrimson.com/sports/wice/2014-15/releases/20141201zeob9c)

 

[Skate79]

Re: Harvard Crimson 2014-15

Good game and a W. The second period was Harvard's best by far and Hilary Crowe's goal came off what seemed like an eternity in the Dartmouth zone with various Crimson players cycling and attacking the Dartmouth D. The Green were exhausted yet it still took a tenacious effort to score.

Harvard had problems with their breakout and some sloppy play in their own zone. Dartmouth isn't a great offensive team by any stretch yet in the first period, the Crimson were having issues with poor passes and positioning. They also aren't skating nearly as well as they can. At times they looked like they were slogging through mud.

We will need to be a whole lot better this weekend or else we could lose both games. Princeton always give us a problem here and at Hobey Baker and the Bobcats are undefeated. Time to dial it up a few notches.

 

[Trillium]

Re: Harvard Crimson 2014-15

Good game and a W. The second period was Harvard's best by far and Hilary Crowe's goal came off what seemed like an eternity in the Dartmouth zone with various Crimson players cycling and attacking the Dartmouth D. The Green were exhausted yet it still took a tenacious effort to score.

Harvard had problems with their breakout and some sloppy play in their own zone. Dartmouth isn't a great offensive team by any stretch yet in the first period, the Crimson were having issues with poor passes and positioning. They also aren't skating nearly as well as they can. At times they looked like they were slogging through mud.

We will need to be a whole lot better this weekend or else we could lose both games. Princeton always give us a problem here and at Hobey Baker and the Bobcats are undefeated. Time to dial it up a few notches.

Why do you typically have to make a disparaging comment about Harvard's opponent when talking about your own team?

Clearly Dartmouth didn't have their best game, but before last night, they had scored 22 goals in 7 games and had allowed 32 goals. In comparison, Harvard had also scored 22 goals in 7 games but had allowed 40 goals. Over the season to date Dartmouth also has had significantly more shots on goal, and twice as many power play goals as Harvard. And 5 of those 7 games were common opponents.

Ergo if Dartmouth "isn't a great offensive team by any stretch", you are actually saying the same about Harvard....despite far more talent. But you can say that without denigrating your opponent.

 

[PuckRush]

Re: Harvard Crimson 2014-15

Why do you typically have to make a disparaging comment about Harvard's opponent when talking about your own team?

Clearly Dartmouth didn't have their best game, but before last night, they had scored 22 goals in 7 games and had allowed 32 goals. In comparison, Harvard had also scored 22 goals in 7 games but had allowed 40 goals. Over the season to date Dartmouth also has had significantly more shots on goal, and twice as many power play goals as Harvard. And 5 of those 7 games were common opponents.

Ergo if Dartmouth "isn't a great offensive team by any stretch", you are actually saying the same about Harvard....despite far more talent. But you can say that without denigrating your opponent.

The Big Green's Laura Stacey and Lindsay Allen would be top scorers on any team.

 

[UCONN FAN]

Re: Harvard Crimson 2014-15

Assabet players had 5 points last.

 

[Skate79]

Re: Harvard Crimson 2014-15

Why do you typically have to make a disparaging comment about Harvard's opponent when talking about your own team?

Clearly Dartmouth didn't have their best game, but before last night, they had scored 22 goals in 7 games and had allowed 32 goals. In comparison, Harvard had also scored 22 goals in 7 games but had allowed 40 goals. Over the season to date Dartmouth also has had significantly more shots on goal, and twice as many power play goals as Harvard. And 5 of those 7 games were common opponents.

Ergo if Dartmouth "isn't a great offensive team by any stretch", you are actually saying the same about Harvard....despite far more talent. But you can say that without denigrating your opponent.

So am I not allowed to comment on the game? Jesus, what is your problem? Are all posts to be run through you before posting from now on. Did you see the game? What about Dartmouth's attack led you to believe they were better than average offensively? I'm commenting on what I saw, not on a body of work that I DID NOT SEE. Is that okay by you? In fact, you reinforced my point because despite Harvard's slow start, they actually showed signs of life offensively especially in the second period. By your logic, Dartmouth is average offensively if they have trouble generating an attack against a foe that has had the same number of goals. And if you read my post, I said that in the first period, Harvard still had problems with their breakouts and sloppy play. Some of that was due to Dartmouth's hustle and forecheck but it didn't necessarily result in offensive pressure or chances.

And if you are going by goals for and against, then how do you account for the BC game vs the whole body of work? Is that representative or an aberration? Your numbers are skewed by that one game but I guess that doesn't matter because you'll find a way to make it work to prove a point. Whatever that is. Yeesh.

 

[Trillium]

So am I not allowed to comment on the game? Jesus, what is your problem? Are all posts to be run through you before posting from now on. Did you see the game? What about Dartmouth's attack led you to believe they were better than average offensively? I'm commenting on what I saw, not on a body of work that I DID NOT SEE. Is that okay by you? In fact, you reinforced my point because despite Harvard's slow start, they actually showed signs of life offensively especially in the second period. By your logic, Dartmouth is average offensively if they have trouble generating an attack against a foe that has had the same number of goals. And if you read my post, I said that in the first period, Harvard still had problems with their breakouts and sloppy play. Some of that was due to Dartmouth's hustle and forecheck but it didn't necessarily result in offensive pressure or chances.

And if you are going by goals for and against, then how do you account for the BC game vs the whole body of work? Is that representative or an aberration? Your numbers are skewed by that one game but I guess that doesn't matter because you'll find a way to make it work to prove a point. Whatever that is. Yeesh.

As a matter of fact I did see the game. I have no problem whatsoever with your assessment of the game as far as Harvard goes, or with the fact that Dartmouth had trouble in stretches getting the puck out of the zone.

The problem is your tendency in your assessments to make a point to disparage whoever Harvards opponent is, as I said. Especially when you don't care to look at the facts about the team based on their whole body of work, rather than that one single game.

In this case the facts suggest that Dartmouth's game vs Harvard is no more typical than Harvard's game vs BC. To conclude that Dartmouth is a weak team offensively simply because they scored only once that game (as you stated) is as flawed as saying Harvard has weak goaltending because BC scored 10 in one game. That's all I'm trying to say.

 

[driventoit]

Re: Harvard Crimson 2014-15

A big, not to say 'uge, weekend coming up for Harvard. They need to beat a team they are "supposed to" beat (P), and then they need to beat a team they "have to" beat (Q) in order to get back into the conversation. No ties allowed!

 

[PuckRush]

Re: Harvard Crimson 2014-15

A big, not to say 'uge, weekend coming up for Harvard. They need to beat a team they are "supposed to" beat (P), and then they need to beat a team they "have to" beat (Q) in order to get back into the conversation. No ties allowed!

You are right. Hopefully can handle P. But if not... ugh. The Q game should be a good game to watch. I think whoever gets to 3 goals wins.

 

[bc6696]

Re: Harvard Crimson 2014-15

You are right. Hopefully can handle P. But if not... ugh. The Q game should be a good game to watch. I think whoever gets to 3 goals wins.

I have been telling my D's youth hockey coach that if you can score three (or more) goals you almost never lose (Her team has a perfect record this season when doing so). I was wondering if that translated to the college game...

201 times so far this season (D1, non exhibition) a team has scored 3 or more goals in a game, with a combined record of 174-20-7

Since Q has not allowed 3g yet this season, I agree that if either team scores three that team will win. I'm looking forward to that game - could give Harvard a big bump back into the conversation.

 

[D2D]

Re: Harvard Crimson 2014-15

Since Q has not allowed 3g yet this season, I agree that if either team scores three that team will win. I'm looking forward to that game - could give Harvard a big bump back into the conversation.

Game notes: http://www.gocrimson.com/sports/wice/2014-15/releases/20141204jwvl7c

 

[HockeyEast33]

Re: Harvard Crimson 2014-15

I have been telling my D's youth hockey coach that if you can score three (or more) goals you almost never lose (Her team has a perfect record this season when doing so). I was wondering if that translated to the college game...

201 times so far this season (D1, non exhibition) a team has scored 3 or more goals in a game, with a combined record of 174-20-7

Since Q has not allowed 3g yet this season, I agree that if either team scores three that team will win. I'm looking forward to that game - could give Harvard a big bump back into the conversation.

I was always taught and coached in men's hockey that you needed to score 4 goals a game on average to be sure to be a winning team - because the other team should be expected to score once a game on a nice play by them, a mistake by you, and a power play. If you score 4 on average, you win on average. Maybe in women's hockey the power play goals are less plentiful because there are fewer penalties and/or less effective power plays. Or maybe I'm just old and out of date .

 

[Eeyore]

Re: Harvard Crimson 2014-15

I was always taught and coached in men's hockey that you needed to score 4 goals a game on average to be sure to be a winning team - because the other team should be expected to score once a game on a nice play by them, a mistake by you, and a power play. If you score 4 on average, you win on average. Maybe in women's hockey the power play goals are less plentiful because there are fewer penalties and/or less effective power plays. Or maybe I'm just old and out of date .

Some might suggest rounding errors.

 

[dave1381]

Re: Harvard Crimson 2014-15

Some quick on stats on Harvard goals allowed:

2012-13:
Games allowing fewer than 3 goals: 30 of 34 (24-3-3 record)
Goals allowed in other 4 games: 3, 3, 3, 3 (0-4 record)

2013-14:
Games allowing fewer than 3 goals: 28 of 34 (22-4-2 record)
Goals allowed in the other 6 games: 3 (T), 4 (W), 4 (L), 3 (T), 3 (2 OT L), 6 (L), (1-3-2 record)

2014-15
Games allowing fewer than 3 goals: 5 of 8 (3-0-2 record)
Goals allowed in other 3 games: 5 (L), 10 (L), 3 (W) (1-2 record)