Harvard Women's Hockey 2011-2012: Taking the Next Step

[ARM]

Re: Harvard Women's Hockey 2011-2012: Taking the Next Step

Well, I think one could make a case that Pucci is an All-American caliber player. Oh, and then there is that kid named Dempsey. She is no slouch.

Both are roughly in the that point-a-game range. Dave's point is that Harvard used to always have the Vaillancourt, Chu, Ruggiero, Corriero, Botterill, Shewchuk, Mleczko type players that were two points per game or above. Pucci and Dempsey, good as they are, can't carry a team to the same extent.

 

[Hux]

Re: Harvard Women's Hockey 2011-2012: Taking the Next Step

Both are roughly in the that point-a-game range. Dave's point is that Harvard used to always have the Vaillancourt, Chu, Ruggiero, Corriero, Botterill, Shewchuk, Mleczko type players that were two points per game or above. Pucci and Dempsey, good as they are, can't carry a team to the same extent.

Well, one can also make the case that the competition is substantially better than it was during the first half of the last decade, and those two aren't surrounded by a host of Olympians.

 

[OnMAA]

Re: Harvard Women's Hockey 2011-2012: Taking the Next Step

Both are roughly in the that point-a-game range. Dave's point is that Harvard used to always have the Vaillancourt, Chu, Ruggiero, Corriero, Botterill, Shewchuk, Mleczko type players that were two points per game or above. Pucci and Dempsey, good as they are, can't carry a team to the same extent.

Interesting to note that Harvard used to stock a top flight Canuck along with the American Talent. Botterill, Kessler, Vaillancourt, Corriero are players that come to mind. In recent years that top flight Canuck talent heading to ivies, seems to be heading to Ithaca. Johnson, Jenner, Rougeau, Fortino are players that come to mind, and they have another good one coming in next year. Me thinks that has a lot to do with the shift in balance of power in the ECAC.

 

[ARM]

Re: Harvard Women's Hockey 2011-2012: Taking the Next Step

Well, one can also make the case that the competition is substantially better than it was during the first half of the last decade, and those two aren't surrounded by a host of Olympians.

Neither was Vaillancourt in 2008-09, and she still came close to that 2-PPG level. Dempsey ranks in the twenties nationally in scoring, which is a fine season, just not quite All-American caliber. Pucci -- maybe, but most All-American teams list four D and Fortino and Rougeau get most of the ECACH accolades. You're right, in that both are great players, but IMO, Dave's point still stands.

 

[dave1381]

Re: Harvard Women's Hockey 2011-2012: Taking the Next Step

Right. And I also want to make clear, I feel that Harvard's always done better than most programs based on the talent they've had. Lots of posters argued here circa 2003 that Harvard's success was solely about recruiting. They argued that as soon as Harvard failed to field a roster with 3 or 4 Olympians, the program would fade into irrelevancy. But you would be hard-pressed to find a Harvard team in Stone's tenure that fell wildly short of expectations. Probably the 08-09 team was the most underachieving: that team Sarah V's senior year lost in the ECAC semis and missed NCAAs, but still managed to win an ECAC regular season title. The 99-00 and 06-07 teams might fall into this category as well, but these teams were still positioned to be serious national title contenders even if they came up just short of the national semis/Frozen Four. Otherwise, I think Katey's record is pretty outstanding. I think they're still doing well to be a borderline NCAA team the last couple years with the talent they have, and Harvard has never suffered a total collapse or even a total off-year like some other top programs from the last decade. Katey had been so successful in the past that I thought maybe Harvard could still seriously contend with the likes of Cornell & Minnesota & healthy BU even with lesser talent these past 2 seasons, but it seems that was too much to hope for. I do think this team is capable of beating BC next Tuesday.

 

[dave1381]

Re: Harvard Women's Hockey 2011-2012: Taking the Next Step

Speaking of Harvard times past, the NCAA happens to run an article on Corriero's records: http://www.ncaa.com/news/icehockey-women/article/2012-01-27/corriero-holds-unbreakable-records

Still speaks to the level of standout individual talent of the era that she didn't make the Kazmaier final three. Today's players never have to compete against the likes of a 24-year old Wendell and 26-year old Ouellette. Corrierio still got to attend the Kazmaier dinner anyway because Harvard made the final, and being up for the ESPY was probably more fun anyway.

 

[ARM]

Re: Harvard Women's Hockey 2011-2012: Taking the Next Step

Today's players never have to compete against the likes of a 24-year old Wendell ...

Twenty-three. Never add on to a woman's age.

 

[Skate79]

Re: Harvard Women's Hockey 2011-2012: Taking the Next Step

Tough game tonight against the Bobcats. For the better part of two periods, Harvard just could not get their game together. Sloppy passing, indecision in their own zone and lack of a finishing touch around the Bobcat goalie led to a 2-0 deficit against a Quinnipiac team that had to be the worst, THE WORST, offensive squad I have seen in a long time. They rival Union for offensive ineptitude. Three power plays in the first period and zero shots during each. Harvard had better chances shorthanded.

The Crimson got it together late in the second when Lyndsey Fry made a nice individual move in front of the net, waited for the Bobcat goalie to go down and then lifted the puck over her and into the net. In the third, Harvard finally got a consistent attack going and helped by two power plays, grabbed the lead and the game. The Bobcats never really threatened because of their lack of offensive skill. I really have to wonder how they have won 10 games in the conference. Goaltending and defense only get you so far. Harvard wasn't much better in this game but their skill players (Dempsey and Pucci) got them going on the PP and the rest took care of itself.

Interesting to note that Coach Stone used only two lines for the second half of the third period. Not sure what that says for the third line but it will hurt Harvard in the long run if they can't roll three lines consistently. They will wear down and not have much left for the playoffs let alone tomorrow's game against Princeton. Speaks to the lack of depth and talent and that's a coaching issue that has to be resolved if Harvard is to be a threat for the Frozen Four in the future.

 

[Skate79]

Re: Harvard Women's Hockey 2011-2012: Taking the Next Step

I think ARM, Dave and others have made some salient points regarding Harvard's program. I admit that I am not really up on how rankings and Pairwise are computed (I'll keep them separate from now on) but all you have to do is look at the product on the ice to know that Harvard just isn't ready for prime time. As Dave pointed out, they haven't beaten any of the Top Eight this year. Talent and depth are big issues for this program. We don't have a Vaillancourt, Chu or Ruggiero and the current roster just doesn't have much in the way of top tier talent. I hesitate to put Pucci and Dempsey in a category with the aforementioned stars; both are very good players but are not Olympic caliber talent. Cornell has certainly benefited from strong recruiting classes and continues to attract talent. Is it academics, coaching, recruiting or something else that is preventing the Crimson from being a national player? Katey Stone has been a great coach for a long time. But are her assistants really good enough to enable Harvard to compete for top talent? I have my doubts.

I don't see any of this changing any time soon. The HE and WCHA schools have established themselves as perennial contenders and Mercyhurst is right there with them. Cornell doesn't look like they are going to drop any time soon so Harvard needs to do something to turn this around if they intend to be Frozen Four contenders. Otherwise, we're just playing to be someone's fodder for an occasional first round exit.

 

[dave1381]

Re: Harvard Women's Hockey 2011-2012: Taking the Next Step

Thanks for the recap. Babstock has been Qpac's offense the last two years, but Harvard must've done a good job of making her invisible.

You're critical of the current assistants in recruiting, but certainly most of the current depth problems stem from the almost nonexistent recruiting class four years ago. That's why you have one senior today and a team that's dressing nine forwards. Much better to have some competition among the forwards so you have an option other than sitting the third line, when that line is not playing well.

As for the problems in recruiting top talent -- well, even if the program is not the title contender it was a few years ago, it's still among Harvard's most successful competitors at the national level across all sports. If a down period for this program means a couple years where the team is still flirting with an NCAA berth, I'd happily take that, especially given the recent track record of some other once-vaunted women's hockey programs.

Another factor in terms of recruiting -- Harvard's decision to compete seriously in men's basketball cannot have occurred without having any effect on other sports. You have an average academic index floor that needs to be met. You can't let Tommy Amaker recruit players that previous coach Frank Sullivan could never touch without raising the academic standards required for everyone else. All that said, I would guess that the rise in competition within Harvard's typical recruiting pool has probably been a greater factor.

I know I am looking at the glass half-full with some wider perspective, while you're looking at it more half-empty. But I understand your frustration, knowing how successful this program has been in the past, and I'd probably feel more of that too if I were still watching this team every week.

 

[OnMAA]

Re: Harvard Women's Hockey 2011-2012: Taking the Next Step

Interesting to note that Coach Stone used only two lines for the second half of the third period.

Is that not par for the course in her case.? My recollection is that that is her standard MO when the chips are down.

 

[Skate79]

Re: Harvard Women's Hockey 2011-2012: Taking the Next Step

Is that not par for the course in her case.? My recollection is that that is her standard MO when the chips are down.

Very true. What made last night unusual however was that once Harvard got the lead, she should have gone back to three lines. The Bobcats were not seriously threatening the Crimson getting very weak shots (when they were able to shoot on goal) so there was really no reason not to play the third line. Especially when you consider that they will play Princeton today less than 24 hours after last night's game. If this pattern continues, the team will feel it come playoff time.

 

[Skate79]

Re: Harvard Women's Hockey 2011-2012: Taking the Next Step

Thanks for the recap. Babstock has been Qpac's offense the last two years, but Harvard must've done a good job of making her invisible.

You're critical of the current assistants in recruiting, but certainly most of the current depth problems stem from the almost nonexistent recruiting class four years ago. That's why you have one senior today and a team that's dressing nine forwards. Much better to have some competition among the forwards so you have an option other than sitting the third line, when that line is not playing well.

As for the problems in recruiting top talent -- well, even if the program is not the title contender it was a few years ago, it's still among Harvard's most successful competitors at the national level across all sports. If a down period for this program means a couple years where the team is still flirting with an NCAA berth, I'd happily take that, especially given the recent track record of some other once-vaunted women's hockey programs.

Another factor in terms of recruiting -- Harvard's decision to compete seriously in men's basketball cannot have occurred without having any effect on other sports. You have an average academic index floor that needs to be met. You can't let Tommy Amaker recruit players that previous coach Frank Sullivan could never touch without raising the academic standards required for everyone else. All that said, I would guess that the rise in competition within Harvard's typical recruiting pool has probably been a greater factor.

I know I am looking at the glass half-full with some wider perspective, while you're looking at it more half-empty. But I understand your frustration, knowing how successful this program has been in the past, and I'd probably feel more of that too if I were still watching this team every week.

Certainly the men's basketball program has gotten everyone's attention inside and outside the University and perhaps at the expense of the men's and women's hockey programs. No doubt that this year's senior class is one reason why the Crimson are not a national contender. And yes, I am looking at it from the glass half empty perspective having been spoiled by their run of success from 2000 - '08. At the same time, you can't ignore that even a junior class that has Dempsey and Pucci is still not as strong as prior classes. Coach Stone has had numerous assistants come and go; I can't tell you why this is so and I don't want to hazard a guess without really knowing why. But it is hard to ignore that we haven't been able to land high caliber players and are no longer able to compete with programs like Minnesota, BC and to some extent Cornell.

Dave, I agree that if you look at Dartmouth, Princeton and Brown, Harvard has definitely had more success despite not being a true Frozen Four contender. Brown has had numerous issues but seems to be righting the ship. What I'm wondering is if recruiting has really become a 'war' for talent, does Harvard have the right mix to compete for that talent? Or is it just a case of having a "down" period that will reverse course in the next few years? The men's program hasn't been to a Frozen Four since '94. I don't see an appearance any time soon and I'm wondering if the same will hold true for the women.

One more note on the men's basketball program. Tommy Amaker is getting help from a source that would never have helped Frank Sullivan. Coach K. Amaker gets leads on players that Coach K does not want to see in the ACC. I have this from a very reliable source inside the University. That kind of help would never have been available to Sullivan and is one reason why Harvard basketball is doing so well.

 

[pakidnyc]

I won't comment on the current team, what's gone on there, etc because I honestly don't have the history of watching college hockey as long many of you do. But, I am very familiar with many of the girls coming up now, and it appears Katey Stone is doing very well on the recruiting front for the next two years.

For 2012 you have Doensch who is small but feisty and tenacious, one of the reasons the NJ Rockets have been so successful the past few years. Then you have a reunion of Assabet girls starting with Mary Parker (younger sister of Elizabeth) this year as well. You will be more than pleasantly surprised with Mary. Many people were baffled that she never made u18s when she was consistently one of the top performers at USAH National Camp. I think she'll come in and have a rookie season on par with what Emiy Field has been able todo at BC.

The Canadian goalie listed is the one who stoned the US under-18s this year at worlds.

Then in 2013 you have Daniels, Rachlin and Mastel, all off the u18s. Daniels is a strong gritty player and Rachlin and Mastel clearly two of the top D in the US in their graduating class.

I know other Ivy's have also recruited some of these girls and based on discussions/observations, I think many of the top US girls who want Ivy seem to favor Harvard. (Just like many who dont want Ivy tend to favor BC, Wisco or Minn). Not always the case because there is a certain "attitude" at Harvard which some girls dont go for, but it still has the allure of being Harvard......of course some top players who really want to go there have a hard time getting into Harvard (one in recent memory seems to be doing just fine across the Charles).

Also, I think Hux still has Taylor Marchin mentioned as a Harvard commit who is a solid D. My understanding she is not going to Harvard, but Yale in 2013 after a PG year at Choate.

 

[OnMAA]

Re: Harvard Women's Hockey 2011-2012: Taking the Next Step

I won't comment on the current team, what's gone on there, etc because I honestly don't have the history of watching college hockey as long many of you do. But, I am very familiar with many of the girls coming up now, and it appears Katey Stone is doing very well on the recruiting front for the next two years.

For 2012 you have Doensch who is small but feisty and tenacious, one of the reasons the NJ Rockets have been so successful the past few years. Then you have a reunion of Assabet girls starting with Mary Parker (younger sister of Elizabeth) this year as well. You will be more than pleasantly surprised with Mary. Many people were baffled that she never made u18s when she was consistently one of the top performers at USAH National Camp. I think she'll come in and have a rookie season on par with what Emiy Field has been able todo at BC.

The Canadian goalie listed is the one who stoned the US under-18s this year at worlds.

Then in 2013 you have Daniels, Rachlin and Mastel, all off the u18s. Daniels is a strong gritty player and Rachlin and Mastel clearly two of the top D in the US in their graduating class.

I know other Ivy's have also recruited some of these girls and based on discussions/observations, I think many of the top US girls who want Ivy seem to favor Harvard. (Just like many who dont want Ivy tend to favor BC, Wisco or Minn). Not always the case because there is a certain "attitude" at Harvard which some girls dont go for, but it still has the allure of being Harvard......of course some top players who really want to go there have a hard time getting into Harvard (one in recent memory seems to be doing just fine across the Charles).

Also, I think Hux still has Taylor Marchin mentioned as a Harvard commit who is a solid D. My understanding she is not going to Harvard, but Yale in 2013 after a PG year at Choate.

Everyone in he Boston area would love to go to "Haah-vard". Therefore the pipeline of good Assabet players into the program is no surprise. However the top Canadian kids no longer seem to go there. For the 2012-13 recruit year, the top canuck forward going into ivy is heading to Dartmouth and the top D to Cornell.

 

[dave1381]

Re: Harvard Women's Hockey 2011-2012: Taking the Next Step

At the same time, you can't ignore that even a junior class that has Dempsey and Pucci is still not as strong as prior classes.

True, but I think four classes like that would be enough to contend for a Frozen Four berth. Some of the great UNH teams four years ago didn't have Kaz contenders but they had a lot of very good players.

Coach Stone has had numerous assistants come and go; I can't tell you why this is so and I don't want to hazard a guess without really knowing why.

Well one reason is head coaching offers, e.g. Asano@Union & Flygh@Yale. Otherwise I'm not sure how much more turnover Katey's had there than average.

With the current staff, it looks to me like she clearly intended to hire someone with head coaching experience, and she hired that assistant's former assistant. I'd imagine Katey is likely to be coaching the 2014 Olympic team, and she'd want things to be smooth in the interim.

But it is hard to ignore that we haven't been able to land high caliber players and are no longer able to compete with programs like Minnesota, BC and to some extent Cornell.

I'd have written this as Minnesota, Cornell, BU and to some extent BC. Sure, BC obviously had a great 06-07 class, and destroyed Harvard with Schaus and Stack in a post-Olympic year, but otherwise I don't see BC as being in a different league from Harvard. BC's much closer to Harvard then they are to Cornell or BU (when BU is playing to its full potential like this past week). I expect Tuesday's game to be very competitive. BC has certainly lost to teams worse than Harvard this season.

The men's program hasn't been to a Frozen Four since '94. I don't see an appearance any time soon and I'm wondering if the same will hold true for the women.

I think the team has a great coach with a great track record for making the most of her talent, and don't see any kind of decline as long as she's there.

One more note on the men's basketball program. Tommy Amaker is getting help from a source that would never have helped Frank Sullivan. Coach K. Amaker gets leads on players that Coach K does not want to see in the ACC. I have this from a very reliable source inside the University. That kind of help would never have been available to Sullivan and is one reason why Harvard basketball is doing so well.

Sure, that wouldn't surprise me at all. A lower academic index floor is but one reason why Amaker has been more successful than Sullivan, but I only mentioned that because it's the one that has spillover effects to the other programs.

And at the same time, in the longer run, it's very possible that a successful men's basketball program will raise the overall profile and attractiveness of the university for athletic recruits in other sports. At least I'd guess that's how the reallocation of academic index quotas was sold to the other Harvard sports. That effect probably matters less for a sport like hockey though where Harvard has a proud tradition in its own right and a large share of recruits are Canadian.

 

[dave1381]

Re: Harvard Women's Hockey 2011-2012: Taking the Next Step

Ok, so looking at assistants in recent history, aside from Asano & Flygh who ended up with ECAC head coaching jobs, you've had:

Jamie Hagerman, 04-05 (1 season), left for her first and only Olympic team, now Groton's head coach

Michelle McAteer, 05-07 (2 seasons), went back to coach at her alma mater UMD, and is now Augsburg's head coach. (She was replaced by Flygh, who had been at UMD)

Melanie Ruzzi, 07-11 (4 seasons). Left coaching. Her linkedin says she's looking to transition to athletic admin but is presently working as a recruiter for a financial firm.

So I don't see any glaring problem there in terms of assistant coaching turnover. Some coaches have successfully been able to move on to opportunities they can't turn down. The one who didn't, Ruzzi, was there for four seasons.

 

[Skate79]

Re: Harvard Women's Hockey 2011-2012: Taking the Next Step

Everyone in he Boston area would love to go to "Haah-vard". Therefore the pipeline of good Assabet players into the program is no surprise. However the top Canadian kids no longer seem to go there. For the 2012-13 recruit year, the top canuck forward going into ivy is heading to Dartmouth and the top D to Cornell.

Very important point. Harvard in the past was able to recruit from Canada with regularity. Doesn't seem to be the case anymore and it certainly has had an impact on the program. Not to diss American kids because they can more than hold their own (see Hilary Knight) but the Canadian kids do make an impact almost immediately.

 

[dave1381]

Pretty impressive period 2 for Harvard today and another disastrous blowout loss for BC. You have to think BC will finally receive a long overdue demotion in the polls, and Harvard will have all the momentum for Tue consolation - absolutely huge game for NCAAs since BC has beaten other bubble teams like UMD and NU. Great opportunity for Harvard.

 

[Skate79]

Re: Harvard Women's Hockey 2011-2012: Taking the Next Step

I'm sure that people who follow the ECAC are looking at the score from today's Princeton-Harvard game and are saying "What the heck?? What happened?" Well, that is something close to what Harvard fans were saying to each other after the second period. It was a blowout that doesn't come close to telling the whole story. It was liking watching a D-1 team take apart a D-3 team with no mercy.

After a good first period in which they took a 1-0 lead courtesy of a Pucci turnover, Princeton entered the second period looking confident. That confidence started to evaporate once Jillian Dempsey and her teammates got their wheels going. From Dempsey's first goal (a gorgeous wrister over Weber's shoulder) to her fourth, it was Harvard coming at Princeton in waves. The Tigers had no answer. Dempsey's shorthanded goal was simply sick. She headfaked Weber out of her skates and stuffed a forehand under her arm that Weber is still looking for. The rout was on and not even a timeout by Kampersal, the Princeton coach, could stem the tide. The Crimson kept up the attack with crisp passing, fast skating and a transition game that if you blinked, you either missed a goal or something close to it. It was that intense and dominant.

One had to feel for Weber. Kampersal pulled her for the start of the third period but it didn't matter. Princeton simply could not stay with Harvard. Here is how ridiculously easy this was for the Crimson. With less than two minutes to go, Coach Stone put the first line out there and after some tic tack toe passing, Jo Pucci took a shot from the point that was aimed at Jillian Dempsey and with a turn of the wrist, she deflected the puck past the Princeton goalie who never saw it. You had to see it to believe it.

Where Princeton goes from here is anyone's guess. This kind of loss can be deflating. Even the refs felt sorry for them calling three straight penalties on Harvard to try and get some semblance of respect. No deal. Harvard had better chances shorthanded.

So much for my bashing the Crimson for not being able to finish around the net. The glass is definitely full tonight!

Also great to see former Crimson players Randi Griffin and Christina Kessler at the game. Apparently this year is the 40th anniversary of Title IX passing. How time flies when you are having fun.