Harvard Crimson - 2015-2016

[Skate79]

Re: Harvard Crimson - 2015-2016

Honestly - Frazer and Mastel can play. I'm not sure Rachlin can. Watched her for several games this year and she seems like she doesn't get the speed or the intent of the game.

If I were the coach, I would move to a 5 D rotation (without Rachlin). Use Picard and Frazer every 2nd shift and then rotate Mastel, Zadie and Tse. Rachlin is not at the level, regardless of time on ice, experience, God, the weather, etc. She must be too deep into the heavy curriculum.

You would wear them out. Picard is already playing heavy minutes and if you start overplaying Mastel and Frazer, you risk injury and then you are in real trouble. And I don't get your line about 'heavy curriculum' unless it was sarcasm. The kids have a schedule that factors in their studies and they stick to it. That comes straight from the coach in case you're wondering.

 

[Skate79]

Re: Harvard Crimson - 2015-2016

I would not expect them to be as good this year. Mastel and Frazer dressed for all the games last year but were the 5th and 6th defenseman most of the time and sat long stretches and during critical parts of close games, including most of the third period. Rachlin sat in the stands half of the games last year and barely played when she dressed. Hard to get better or even stay at the same level when you are not playing a regular shift or at all. This is a foreseeable byproduct of all the returning players (injuries and Olympics) that made Harvard strong last season and also, coincidentally, why Erin O'Connor decided to go to Cornell instead of Harvard where she has turned out to be a very solid D, at least partly because she is playing (and even overplaying). It was a decision to go for broke last year at the expense of future years.

What choice did they have? You want to be the one to sit Edney, Gedman or Pucci (the second half as she sat out the first half) in favor of Rachlin or Robin White? They went for it because they had the talent to go for it. And they made it to the championship game. You play for the season in front of you, not for future seasons. The team is in transition and is struggling with inconsistency and a lack of chemistry. What happened last season has no bearing on what's going on now. We are far enough into the season that lack of playing time is a non-factor. Everyone is playing if they are healthy.

 

[HockeyEast33]

Re: Harvard Crimson - 2015-2016

What happened last season has no bearing on what's going on now. We are far enough into the season that lack of playing time is a non-factor. Everyone is playing if they are healthy.

Not saying they made the wrong decision last season, but they should have recognized it would have implications for the future. And your statement above is patent nonsense - of course what happened last season influences this season. A season of sitting defenseman in the stands or during games is lost development time that cannot be regained this season regardless of playing time. By sitting the players last year they stunted their development and the issues they are facing this year is a result.

Two BTWs - first, Rachlin had some serious injuries in the past few years that likely have impacted her play and that was compounded by sitting in the stands. Also, no one was advocating for White so I don't know where that came from - she had no place on a regular shift on a Harvard ice hockey team at any point and that's why she isn't on the roster anymore. Heckuva lacrosse player from what I hear, though.

 

[Skate79]

Re: Harvard Crimson - 2015-2016

Not saying they made the wrong decision last season, but they should have recognized it would have implications for the future. And your statement above is patent nonsense - of course what happened last season influences this season. A season of sitting defenseman in the stands or during games is lost development time that cannot be regained this season regardless of playing time. By sitting the players last year they stunted their development and the issues they are facing this year is a result.

Two BTWs - first, Rachlin had some serious injuries in the past few years that likely have impacted her play and that was compounded by sitting in the stands. Also, no one was advocating for White so I don't know where that came from - she had no place on a regular shift on a Harvard ice hockey team at any point and that's why she isn't on the roster anymore. Heckuva lacrosse player from what I hear, though.

Patent nonsense?? Okay, so I'll ask again. Who are you going to sit from last season to give these D their so called 'development' time? Edney? Gedman? Pucci? Hmm? Care to give an answer here? Your assertion is patently absurd. To play Rachlin or White or anyone else over the above three is simply stupid. And it's not like they didn't play. Katey rotated everyone last year because she realized she had the depth and skill to do it. Rachlin and Mastel saw major minutes as freshmen along with Frazer and to a lesser extent, White. The '13-'14 team was shorthanded and so they got plenty of 'development' time. Last season was one of those confluence of events where injured players and Olympians returned to give the team depth they ordinarily do not enjoy. Any coach would go with their best to win it all over any 'developmental' concerns and future seasons. You have to play for the season in front of you because you only have these players for four years. You play to win now. Otherwise your job is in jeopardy. Unless you coach for Union.

 

[HockeyEast33]

Re: Harvard Crimson - 2015-2016

Patent nonsense?? Okay, so I'll ask again. Who are you going to sit from last season to give these D their so called 'development' time? Edney? Gedman? Pucci? Hmm? Care to give an answer here? Your assertion is patently absurd. To play Rachlin or White or anyone else over the above three is simply stupid. And it's not like they didn't play. Katey rotated everyone last year because she realized she had the depth and skill to do it. Rachlin and Mastel saw major minutes as freshmen along with Frazer and to a lesser extent, White. The '13-'14 team was shorthanded and so they got plenty of 'development' time. Last season was one of those confluence of events where injured players and Olympians returned to give the team depth they ordinarily do not enjoy. Any coach would go with their best to win it all over any 'developmental' concerns and future seasons. You have to play for the season in front of you because you only have these players for four years. You play to win now. Otherwise your job is in jeopardy. Unless you coach for Union.

You didn't read what I wrote. The assertion you made that "what happened last season doesn't affect this season" is what I labeled as patent nonsense. The point is that sitting the three players - Rachlin, Mastel, and Frazier - last season has impacted this season - they didn't develop last season - team is weaker for it. Whether it was right or not to sit them last season is irrelevant to my comment which is why I didn't copy your whole response. And I'll follow on to say your assertion that sitting pretty much a whole season is irrelevant to how you play the next season is also patent nonsense. It matters.

Also, really good consistent programs like Minnesota and Wisconsin find a way to keep their younger developing players in the mix enough to not stunt their development so they are ready when they need them. That is part of running a program as opposed to coaching a team. Can you honestly tell me that last year's Harvard team would have been materially affected if the coaches had gone to a rotation where Picard, Edney, etc. sat 1 game out of every 7? I think not. In fact. they might have been better (but that is definitely debatable).

BTW - you keep dragging White in like she is relevant, which she isn't because she is not even on the roster this season.

 

[Skate79]

Re: Harvard Crimson - 2015-2016

You didn't read what I wrote. The assertion you made that "what happened last season doesn't affect this season" is what I labeled as patent nonsense. The point is that sitting the three players - Rachlin, Mastel, and Frazier - last season has impacted this season - they didn't develop last season - team is weaker for it. Whether it was right or not to sit them last season is irrelevant to my comment which is why I didn't copy your whole response. And I'll follow on to say your assertion that sitting pretty much a whole season is irrelevant to how you play the next season is also patent nonsense. It matters.

Also, really good consistent programs like Minnesota and Wisconsin find a way to keep their younger developing players in the mix enough to not stunt their development so they are ready when they need them. That is part of running a program as opposed to coaching a team. Can you honestly tell me that last year's Harvard team would have been materially affected if the coaches had gone to a rotation where Picard, Edney, etc. sat 1 game out of every 7? I think not. In fact. they might have been better (but that is definitely debatable).

BTW - you keep dragging White in like she is relevant, which she isn't because she is not even on the roster this season.

I did read what you wrote. You clearly didn't have an answer to my question because you know the answer wouldn't make sense. Rachlin, Mastel and White all played last season, albeit sparingly because of the depth we had on D. Same with Zaidie. I'm not making White out to be a great player; simply pointing out that she was not going to replace Gedman, Pucci or Edney even for one or more games. We're beating a dead horse here simply because we have different interpretations of last season and how it impacts this season. And if you want to use that argument, why have the sophomore forwards this year not improved markedly over last season when they all had regular shifts? Why so much trouble scoring goals? Bill Belichick will tell you that no two seasons are alike or have any bearing on each other. Care to argue his track record??

 

[HockeyEast33]

Re: Harvard Crimson - 2015-2016

I did read what you wrote. You clearly didn't have an answer to my question because you know the answer wouldn't make sense. Rachlin, Mastel and White all played last season, albeit sparingly because of the depth we had on D. Same with Zaidie. I'm not making White out to be a great player; simply pointing out that she was not going to replace Gedman, Pucci or Edney even for one or more games. We're beating a dead horse here simply because we have different interpretations of last season and how it impacts this season. And if you want to use that argument, why have the sophomore forwards this year not improved markedly over last season when they all had regular shifts? Why so much trouble scoring goals? Bill Belichick will tell you that no two seasons are alike or have any bearing on each other. Care to argue his track record??

Just another note with new info. Mastel and Rachlin were both USA U-18 players (I believe for 2 years each but am too lazy to go check). What does it say for the Harvard coaching staff that you now think that they are not capable D1 defensemen? That they took two highly thought of talented players and "developed" them into sub par D1 defensemen? Huh - food for thought, eh?

But you're right - beating a dead horse and I still don't think you get what I'm saying (and continue to seem fixated on White even though it was pretty clear she was done after last season - why would they have played her?). Anyway, I don't have time for this anymore because I'm buying into your theory that previous seasons are irrelevant and I'm going back to college to play D1 hockey even though I haven't stepped on the ice in 10+ years - shouldn't be a problem, right? Gotta go work on applications....

 

[TonyTheTiger20]

Re: Harvard Crimson - 2015-2016

I don't mean to butt in here -- I'm only partially reading this meltdown because it is really quite the meltdown...

But am I correct in summarizing this as "someone thinks younger players should have gotten more ice time last season at the expense of playing the better/more experienced players and making a run for a national championship?"

My interpretation might be completely wrong, if so, I apologize.

 

[HockeyEast33]

Re: Harvard Crimson - 2015-2016

I don't mean to butt in here -- I'm only partially reading this meltdown because it is really quite the meltdown...

But am I correct in summarizing this as "someone thinks younger players should have gotten more ice time last season at the expense of playing the better/more experienced players and making a run for a national championship?"

My interpretation might be completely wrong, if so, I apologize.

That's what Skate79 THINKS I am saying. What I AM saying is that the fact that Rachlin, Mastel, et al sat on the bench/stands most of last season is impacting their performance negatively this season (regardless of why they sat). Skate is arguing that the fact that they barely played last season shouldn't be affecting their performance this season. I do think (and stated) that I doubt that going to a regular 7 player D rotation last season to get these 3 a little more playing time so that this fairly predictable outcome this year was mitigated would have had any meaningful impact on their season, but that is certainly debatable.

 

[Skate79]

Re: Harvard Crimson - 2015-2016

I don't mean to butt in here -- I'm only partially reading this meltdown because it is really quite the meltdown...

But am I correct in summarizing this as "someone thinks younger players should have gotten more ice time last season at the expense of playing the better/more experienced players and making a run for a national championship?"

My interpretation might be completely wrong, if so, I apologize.

Don't apologize. You summarized correctly. And for the record, I don't think HockeyEast's argument is invalid in any way. Rather what I was trying to communicate and obviously failed to do so until your summary is that playing Rachlin, Mastel et al over Edney, Gedman and Pucci or Picard would make no sense whatsoever when you are trying to win a championship. And it's not like they didn't get ice time last year. They did. Just not as much as the others for obvious reasons.

To use a BC framework, it would be like sitting Alex Carpenter or Haley Skarupa (sorry if I misspelled) to give some freshman or sophomore forward more ice time in anticipation of next season. Tony I ask you. Would Coach King sit either player for an up and coming forward just because she is worried about their development and next season's record??

 

[TonyTheTiger20]

Re: Harvard Crimson - 2015-2016

What I AM saying is that the fact that Rachlin, Mastel, et al sat on the bench/stands most of last season is impacting their performance negatively this season (regardless of why they sat).

Are you saying that there could have been some possible solution to this problem had they looked forward to this season, or just that it is what it is?

 

[clarksoncluck]

Re: Harvard Crimson - 2015-2016

Fun final day of the ECAC Regular season.

Three teams have a shot at 3rd. Princeton, Harvard and Colgate (with 28, 27, 27 points respectively). Most likely Princeton who plays Union tonight. Harvard and Colgate both play a tough draw, with Harvard playing the Big Red and the Big Red still have not secured a playoff spot. Colgate gets Big Green today (Dartmouth is eliminated but will play for pride and the Seniors will not want to go out with a loss (Stacey and Allen, etc.))

4 teams are fighting for the 6 - 8 spots with one ending up with the unfortunate #9 finish.

RPI, St. Lawrence, Cornell and Yale all have 21, 21, 20, 20 points respectively. RPI has a tough draw vs Q today, SLU plays Brown at home, Cornell draws Harvard, and Yale play the Golden Knights on the road. In looking at this the most likely scenario is SLU take 2 points, RPI is in tough vs Q on the road, same with Yale in Potsdam, and Cornell will be in a battle with their long time rival but are playing at home.

With further inspection, this is one of those days RPI will be rooting for Harvard and Clarkson.

It's a very cool day when spots 3 - 9 in the ECAC will all be determined on the final day of Regular season play.

Predictions???

Mine is:

3. Princeton
4. Harvard
5. Colgate
6. SLU
7. RPI
8. Cornell
9. Yale

Good Luck to all, and it'll be fun watching teams play desperately today.

 

[Skate79]

Re: Harvard Crimson - 2015-2016

As Clarkson mentioned in his post, this is one heck of a final day of the regular season. A number of playoff spots up for grabs and Harvard fighting for home ice in the first round.

I agree that it will be a tough game today for the Crimson. I'm really hoping they can pull it out to avoid having to make their third road trip in three weeks (and their second straight to Hamilton, NY). IMHO, Maschmeyer will have to be at her best for Harvard to win today. Can't count on the the offense to produce even though they looked decent last night against Colgate.

Go Big Green!

 

[vicb]

Re: Harvard Crimson - 2015-2016

As Clarkson mentioned in his post, this is one heck of a final day of the regular season. A number of playoff spots up for grabs and Harvard fighting for home ice in the first round.

I agree that it will be a tough game today for the Crimson. I'm really hoping they can pull it out to avoid having to make their third road trip in three weeks (and their second straight to Hamilton, NY). IMHO, Maschmeyer will have to be at her best for Harvard to win today. Can't count on the the offense to produce even though they looked decent last night against Colgate.

Go Big Green!

Tough loss for Harvard. Back to Colgate next week and then if they somehow win they get Quinny on their home ice (Sorry RPI ).

 

[Skate79]

Re: Harvard Crimson - 2015-2016

Tough loss for Harvard. Back to Colgate next week and then if they somehow win they get Quinny on their home ice (Sorry RPI ).

If it weren't for Lent, I would be swearing up a storm right about now. The most frustrating season as a Harvard fan since '08-09. Team just couldn't finish or play D this year. I don't expect that they will advance next weekend.

 

[Skate79]

Re: Harvard Crimson - 2015-2016

Not much to say about today's game. Totally outplayed by the Raiders. You could see this coming. Harvard just doesn't have it this year. And it may get a lot worse next year because we have only five recruits coming in and two of them are goalies.

 

[Skate79]

Re: Harvard Crimson - 2015-2016

Well, it was a win with a price. Grace Zarzecki got hurt in the second period and if she can't play tomorrow, we're down to 11 forwards not counting Kate Hallett who is a D. The team is playing on fumes as the first line and first D pairing are seeing ridiculous minutes. Not sure what we'll have left for tomorrow. Colgate looked like the fresher team in the third.

 

[Skate79]

Re: Harvard Crimson - 2015-2016

And that as they say is that. Season over. One of our worst showings in years. You'd have to go back to 1997-98 to find a Harvard women's hockey team that was this inconsistent and lacked finish. Not to mention some very poor D zone coverage and giveaways on a nightly basis. This isn't going to go down as one of Katey Stone's best coaching jobs. It's really a team failure but it starts at the top.

The bad news gets worse when you consider that our recruiting hasn't really paid dividends in years. Last year was an anomaly. We haven't been able to recruit blue chip players consistently and next years' class features two goalies, two D and one forward. So far. I get that we need goalies but we'll have four next year and have some serious issues up front. This doesn't bode well for a top four finish in the ECAC. Just don't see it happening for us for the next few years. It may be something the Ivies face as tuition and the number of scholarship schools who offer D-1 programs is going up.

I really hope I'm wrong but nothing I've seen tells me otherwise. And when you look at Minnesota, Wisconsin, BC, Colgate and Quinnipiac, you see programs that are loading up for a run for the next few seasons. We'll have trouble winning in our own conference let alone outside the conference.

Hats off to Maschmeyer, D'Oench, and Picard who gave it all they could but it wasn't nearly enough. Wish them well along with Mary Parker (too bad the Ivies don't allow medical redshirts - she deserves one).

 

[HockeyEast33]

Re: Harvard Crimson - 2015-2016

The bad news gets worse when you consider that our recruiting hasn't really paid dividends in years. Last year was an anomaly. We haven't been able to recruit blue chip players consistently and next years' class features two goalies, two D and one forward. So far. I get that we need goalies but we'll have four next year and have some serious issues up front. This doesn't bode well for a top four finish in the ECAC. Just don't see it happening for us for the next few years. It may be something the Ivies face as tuition and the number of scholarship schools who offer D-1 programs is going up.

I'm not sure it's as bleak as you paint, but it won't be what is was last season. The Assabet connection that produced many talented Harvard players the last few years is pretty much a done deal now (as the Assabet program declines finally). Still think Harvard can attract players and be successful but it will have to be a different approach for them. Be interesting if Stone can make it work in the new world.

Also, Laing is back in goal but the other two goalies are graduating. So aren't there only 3 goalies if they have 2 coming in? Seems like they had to use the 2 spots for goalies for next season - no choice.

 

[clarksoncluck]

Re: Harvard Crimson - 2015-2016

And that as they say is that. Season over. One of our worst showings in years. You'd have to go back to 1997-98 to find a Harvard women's hockey team that was this inconsistent and lacked finish. Not to mention some very poor D zone coverage and giveaways on a nightly basis. This isn't going to go down as one of Katey Stone's best coaching jobs. It's really a team failure but it starts at the top.

Skate79, I can feel you where your heart on your sleeve when it comes to Harvard.

I watched the Colgate/Harvard game since I as it turns out the winner would play Clarkson. I feel for Harvard this year as they were touted to be a top of the League team and maybe could have been, but upon inspection their injury games played a big part in their demise. Injuries affect every team but for Harvard it probably took the biggest toll,

Mary Parker (played 5 games) in the middle of the season, and she was one of their 3 top forwards.
H Mullens (top 6/7 forward) missed a bunch of games early and could not finish the season.
A Frazer has (top 3 D) missed last 2 weekends of the season/playoffs.
S Daniels (top 2 Forwards) got injured after 1 period in the final game and didn't come back.
Others who didn't play yesterday D Krytiaczk (spelling for sure?)

New supporting coaching staff, others off to UMD

Unfortunate incident which happened to D Laing, how does that affect Lexie and Breanna Laing, and the rest of the team.

I think for Harvard it was a perfect hockey storm, and it looks to me that the team could never gets it's footing. That doesn't mean that the others couldn't pick up the puck and skate with it, but to me Harvard's troubles lie with injuries/turnover of coaches and players who graduated an incoming/and an unfortunate off team incident.

Skate79, I think the rest of your post is accurate though and that Harvard will be in for a few rebuild years. So as tough as it was this year for Harvard, I agree next year could and likely will be more difficult.

As for Colgate, watched them several times this year and they are legit. I will not be surprised if they finish top 4 for the next 2 years. They are big, offensive, coached, driven, a little nasty and get a new barn next year.

As for the Golden Knights, this is a big year for the team. We have some big skates to fill after this season. We have some good returning players but tough to replace MacCauley, Ambrose, Howe and Fast. Mercer has spent 4 years here but i think her 1st year was a red shirt, so hope to get her back. This year the rubber hits the road.