NCAA Semifinal -- #2 BC vs. #3 Harvard: Oh, hello.

[Eeyore]

Re: NCAA Semifinal -- #2 BC vs. #3 Harvard: Oh, hello.

Had BC made it through they were clearly the better team than Minnesota: they play a similar game, but BC are crisper, faster, and more highly skilled.

On the other hand, I just wasn't very impressed with BC tonight. They had chances, but until they were down by two goals I didn't think they played with much intensity. I wasn't all that impressed with Minnesota today, either, outside of Leveille but I'd have been more than willing to take my chances against BC on Sunday.

 

[goaliedad35]

Re: NCAA Semifinal -- #2 BC vs. #3 Harvard: Oh, hello.

wwhyte Its all about the coaching complete and utter fail

 

[Eeyore]

Re: NCAA Semifinal -- #2 BC vs. #3 Harvard: Oh, hello.

I think part of my reaction is that, until its last 30 seconds on the ice, the BC power play was putrid, and that was 8 1/2 minutes of game time right there that BC just tossed out the window. BC did have a lot more time of possession and territorial advantage but they just didn't seem to do much with it. For all the shots they had they just didn't seem that threatening.

I think another part of it is that they couldn't beat a team that kept falling over. I've never seen as many blown tires as Harvard had tonight.

 

[wwhyte]

Re: NCAA Semifinal -- #2 BC vs. #3 Harvard: Oh, hello.

I think part of my reaction is that, until its last 30 seconds on the ice, the BC power play was putrid, and that was 8 1/2 minutes of game time right there that BC just tossed out the window. BC did have a lot more time of possession and territorial advantage but they just didn't seem to do much with it. For all the shots they had they just didn't seem that threatening.

I think another part of it is that they couldn't beat a team that kept falling over. I've never seen as many blown tires as Harvard had tonight.

Yes, the power play was terrible. Terrible, terrible, terrible.

 

[ManBehindTheCurtain]

Re: NCAA Semifinal -- #2 BC vs. #3 Harvard: Oh, hello.

I was struck by the play of the BC All America D on the 5 minute major.

She had lots and lots of possession on the top of the 1-2-2 that BC ran and each and every time she had possession she passed the puck. She had not a single shot during the major.

Later on during the frenzied attempt to rally late in the 3rd she demonstrated that she has a shot. It leaves me wondering why she never took one during the major penalty.

 

[Call It]

Re: NCAA Semifinal -- #2 BC vs. #3 Harvard: Oh, hello.

In fairness, I wonder if it surprised her that Armstrong's soft flip towards the net ever got past two of her D who seemed to have Armstrong completely cut off; and the soft flip may have been knuckling. Parker deserves a lot of credit for outskating the D on her shorty, getting position on the D to drive to the net and then follow the puck into the crease and whack at the loose puck all alone with the goalie getting no assistance from her D.

In fairness? Yes, I feel for the goalie BUT... In Fairness, that was a Beach ball in a National Semi Final game 3rd period with the score at 0-0. I for one think her experience/ age came to play in this one. She didn't get much run support in this game. Carp was... well she didn't score.

Now in all fairness, how about BC #14 getting smoked on the rush to give up the second goal? That was just as bad.

MN will pound Harvard if hey play like they did vs BC

 

[Timothy A]

Re: NCAA Semifinal -- #2 BC vs. #3 Harvard: Oh, hello.

ugh

I'd love to see the 3rd place game, I wish they still had that. That's the matchup I wanted to see this weekend.

 

[ne7minder]

Re: NCAA Semifinal -- #2 BC vs. #3 Harvard: Oh, hello.

I was struck by the play of the BC All America D on the 5 minute major.

She had lots and lots of possession on the top of the 1-2-2 that BC ran and each and every time she had possession she passed the puck. She had not a single shot during the major.

Later on during the frenzied attempt to rally late in the 3rd she demonstrated that she has a shot. It leaves me wondering why she never took one during the major penalty.

I thought that whole PP looked odd. The constantly feed the puck up high but never took a slapper from there. They fed the puck low to the sides and then . . . nothing. It seems you either have to take that shot high or pass across low (mixed with taking a few shots low). I kept thinking that maybe they felt with 5 minutes they had all the time in the world I would just keep looking for a perfect chance while passing up many OK ones.

 

[ARM]

Re: NCAA Semifinal -- #2 BC vs. #3 Harvard: Oh, hello.

I'd love to see the 3rd place game, I wish they still had that. That's the matchup I wanted to see this weekend.

The trouble was that you never did get to see it. The teams are just shells of their former selves, playing in a game nobody wants to play in.

 

[Skate79]

Re: NCAA Semifinal -- #2 BC vs. #3 Harvard: Oh, hello.

On the other hand, I just wasn't very impressed with BC tonight. They had chances, but until they were down by two goals I didn't think they played with much intensity. I wasn't all that impressed with Minnesota today, either, outside of Leveille but I'd have been more than willing to take my chances against BC on Sunday.

I don't agree and I'm a Harvard fan. They came at us in waves starting with that bogus five minute major (and how does she get tossed from the game? Jesus, Mi'ye isn't big enough to knock over a pilon). They had the better chances and dominated zone time. They were hesitant on the PP, that I will grant you and Kalley Armstrong's goal should never have happened but you can't say BC didn't play hard. It was a hard fought game on both sides. But I thought after the five minute major, Harvard had problems matching BC stride for stride. Maschmeyer stole this one with her brilliant play. She is in a zone right now.

 

[Skate79]

Re: NCAA Semifinal -- #2 BC vs. #3 Harvard: Oh, hello.

I don't think so... but I still wonder if they can't get it out of their heads that they beat this Harvard team 10-2, and can't understand how on Emerance & her D were going to be to prevent that from ever happening again. But unfortunately for BC, they don't get the Beanpot title and NCAA final berth based on a 13-7 season series goal aggregate. I feel for them.

I don't. The November game was an aberration despite what some people felt at the time was a wide disparity in talent level between the two teams. Maschmeyer has clearly taken her game to another level and after the Beanpot, BC should have realized that you can't take anything for granted in this sport. The HE tournament should have further cemented that notion. They played hard and had their chances. Look, in '03 Harvard had a ton of chances to beat UMD but couldn't find the back of the net in OT. That's the way it goes. It doesn't diminish the fact that BC is a great team. It just reinforces the fact that what happens in November has no bearing in March. Too much can happen in between.

 

[FiveHoleFrenzy]

Re: NCAA Semifinal -- #2 BC vs. #3 Harvard: Oh, hello.

Grant and Joe are out listening to jazz (nice!) and my family are asleep so I have some space to collect my thoughts.

What a frustrating game for BC fans. It felt like BC dominated possession and zone time for the first two and a half periods and weren't able to get the puck in the net. Maschmeyer was good but the finishing wasn't there: the crisp passes that got the puck up the ice didn't manage to find targets once we were in the zone. Harvard did a great job getting skaters back to cover the net and we didn't find a way around them. We didn't cover the Harvard breakaways as well.

It was a quality, skilled game. Both teams executed on their gameplan. During the Minny/Wisco semi I said to Joe and Grant that I was more scared of Harvard than either of the WCHA teams, and obviously that was correct in a trivial sense, but I stand by it. Had BC made it through they were clearly the better team than Minnesota: they play a similar game, but BC are crisper, faster, and more highly skilled. I'll be interested to see if Harvard's game plan works against Minnesota the way it worked against BC. Minnesota seem better set up to cope with grinders than this BC team.

I liked that the fourth line saw ice time (though I didn't understand why Meghan Grieves was on in the last minute with Burt pulled -- she's great but for a possession in the zone game I would have thought you wanted Kate Leary or Trivigno). I liked that Emily Field scored one of her classic potentially momentum-changing goals in her last game as an Eagle (I will miss Emily Field). I hated our power play and the sense that we didn't know what to do with an opponent who was active in their zone. I don't understand how a team full of people who are used to winning in other contexts can blow three big games in a row. I don't understand it.

The "clearly" thing is a bit, right?

bc's offensive capabilities are really impressive...When they play teams that use the pylon defense i.e. the first Havard game.

Defensively...ummm, not so much.

 

[vicb]

Re: NCAA Semifinal -- #2 BC vs. #3 Harvard: Oh, hello.

....They came at us in waves starting with that bogus five minute major (and how does she get tossed from the game? Jesus, Mi'ye isn't big enough to knock over a pilon). .....

I watched the play 4 or 5 times. Mi'ye and the Minny player were going behind the net and Mi'ye definitely gave a shove to the back of the Minny player at the same time the Minny player seemed to slighty lose her balance. Result she ended up going into the boards with her shoulder/head. I thought the ref had to give her a 5 min major.

 

[TicTacToe]

It all comes down to goaltending doesn't it......
Oh and maybe some coaching thrown in there for good measure

Goaltending is important, however, my belief is matchup!! I've watched teams beat teams that have been beaten teams they lost too badly? Also it's women's hockey "on any day"
Last night, Harvard's goalie was there for her team "I thought Harvard looked off until the third" and BC' goalie "a young freshmen" may have succumbed to stage fright. Additionally, all the spin throughout the season about how spectacular a goalie has done can create a false sense of strength. I believe the mistake in this area is attributable to not giving enough credit to the Defense, fore and back check. Could be all wrong but I haven't seen many goalie of the week/month writeups also mention all the blocked shots and aforementioned. I'm sure the netminders thank the teammate but it still isn't celebrated the same. Also, not all leagues celebrate the D

 

[TicTacToe]

Watching it live I thought BC completely lacked intensity until after Harvard scored their second goal. Had it kept going, BC would eventually have tied it up but seven minutes just didn't leave them enough time. Prior to that, BC had some chances but they really let Harvard dictate the pace of the game. And though the shots were lopsided, I didn't think Maschmeyer had to make anything like the number of great saves that Leveille did in the first game.

The key play of the game came late in the first period. The puck slid to Trevigno off to Maschmeyer's right and she had almost the whole net to shoot at. Maschmeyer got across but if Trevigno gets any elevation at all that's a goal. I said at the time she needed to bury that puck but she just slid it on the ice right into Maschmeyer's pads. It was a hell of a play for Maschmeyer to get even that much coverage but BC should have been up 1-0 at that point and it's a whole different game.

Total agree!

 

[TicTacToe]

I don't agree and I'm a Harvard fan. They came at us in waves starting with that bogus five minute major (and how does she get tossed from the game? Jesus, Mi'ye isn't big enough to knock over a pilon). They had the better chances and dominated zone time. They were hesitant on the PP, that I will grant you and Kalley Armstrong's goal should never have happened but you can't say BC didn't play hard. It was a hard fought game on both sides. But I thought after the five minute major, Harvard had problems matching BC stride for stride. Maschmeyer stole this one with her brilliant play. She is in a zone right now.

Didn't see any real pressure? Lots of shots and some missed chances but that was it. She was there for her team.

 

[TonyTheTiger20]

Re: NCAA Semifinal -- #2 BC vs. #3 Harvard: Oh, hello.

Here's my recap, no GIFs because I'm using my mobile hotpot for internet but frankly writing about it was bad enough without having to visually relive it.

http://www.bcinterruption.com/ncaa-...womens-hockey-falls-to-harvard-in-frozen-four

 

[TonyTheTiger20]

Re: NCAA Semifinal -- #2 BC vs. #3 Harvard: Oh, hello.

And the D'Oench hit looked pretty bad to us live, idk. It was about 1,000x worse than Carpenter's "hit" in the Beanpot that's for sure.

 

[Eeyore]

Re: NCAA Semifinal -- #2 BC vs. #3 Harvard: Oh, hello.

I watched the play 4 or 5 times. Mi'ye and the Minny player were going behind the net and Mi'ye definitely gave a shove to the back of the Minny player at the same time the Minny player seemed to slighty lose her balance. Result she ended up going into the boards with her shoulder/head. I thought the ref had to give her a 5 min major.

I couldn't see it well from my end of the rink; if it was a push in the back rather than a full-on check, that would explain it.

Also of note, Skarupa drilled a Harvard player into the boards well after the final horn, almost setting off a melee. Is she related to Sam LaShomb?

 

[D2D]

Re: NCAA Semifinal -- #2 BC vs. #3 Harvard: Oh, hello.

I watched the play 4 or 5 times. Mi'ye and the Minny player were going behind the net and Mi'ye definitely gave a shove to the back of the Minny player at the same time the Minny player seemed to slighty lose her balance. Result she ended up going into the boards with her shoulder/head. I thought the ref had to give her a 5 min major.

Who was this "Minny player" of whom you speak?