Boston College Hockey, Part II

[FiveHole12]

Re: Boston College Hockey, Part II

Just a reminder.
Tonight's UML at BC game starts at 5:00 pm.
5:00 PM Start

[theprofromdover]

Re: Boston College Hockey, Part II

Their best D is Sneep
Hands down

This may be the most ignorant post ever on this board.

[brightonjohn]

Re: Boston College Hockey, Part II

Just a reminder.
Tonight's UML at BC game starts at 5:00 pm.
5:00 PM Start

Thanks SO MUCH, Dude. I just saw this and would have missed the whole game!
Whew, what a save!

[brightonjohn]

Re: Boston College Hockey, Part II

Their best D is Sneep
Hands down

This may be the most ignorant post ever on this board.

Hokydad is right - Sneep is BC's best D-man, with Samuelson right behind him I say. For theprofromdover to actually rebut this with such an over-the-top statement is ridiculous. Anyone who watches all the games at least knows how good & effective Sneep is at his position, even if disagreeing with him being BC's #1.

Some other posts reference the +/- totals thus far, which show Sneep way behind Dumoulin's +14. I agree with the posters who responded by mentioning the eyeball test, which refers to understanding who's the best on D by watching all the games, and Sneep passes this test without a doubt as #1. He's a great puck-mover and is very efficient at breaking up plays in his area, even 2 on 1's for that matter. Very rarely does he ever get burned. And these are merely his defensive qualities - he's fantastic at the point on offense as well, not only with his puck-moving ability, but with his awesome shot.

Plus/minus stats don't tell the whole story. Remember, Petrecki was really high in this stat last year, and as much as I liked him as a player, I still say he could sometimes be a liability with all the times he put us on the penalty kill. Just one example.

[Zudnic]

Re: Boston College Hockey, Part II

Historically +/- in HE has been pointless since it wasn't tracked accurately by the league. Has that changed?

[joegrav]

Re: Boston College Hockey, Part II

PHEW.

Let's just be happy with the two points this weekend against a very tough team! I'm glad to see this series end because as much as I respect Lowell's D, they're boring as all hell to watch.

They gutted out a few good chances in the third despite being stymied over and over again; it was nice to see their efforts rewarded with a late goal.

I thought Milner played pretty well, the goal he gave up was a tough rebound on a Lowell PP.

Time to salt and burn Northeastern next week.

[tomwarns]

Re: Boston College Hockey, Part II

I'm so glad pulled out a win at home and salvaged the weekend. I wasn't there but from what I heard it was pretty dramatic

[joegrav]

Re: Boston College Hockey, Part II

I'm so glad pulled out a win at home and salvaged the weekend. I wasn't there but from what I heard it was pretty dramatic

It was a really, really tight game - not a lot of room to move out there. Lowell makes very few mistakes and they did a very good job of slowing down our breakout for the entire game. Whenever it looked like BC would be able to sneak around the D for an odd-man rush, one of the D-men was able to break it up. And when they did get clear shots off, Hutton came up big.

It wasn't the most aesthetically pleasing game to watch (pretty boring and a very quiet crowd), but it's really good to see them pull out the W.

[joegrav]

Re: Boston College Hockey, Part II

Forgot to mention, Patches O'Houlihan did an admirable job filling in on the wing of Matt Lombardi in place of the absent Matt Price.

Surprised to see Patch instead of T. Atkinson, but it worked out fairly well.

[J.D.]

Re: Boston College Hockey, Part II

Hokydad is right - Sneep is BC's best D-man, with Samuelson right behind him I say. For theprofromdover to actually rebut this with such an over-the-top statement is ridiculous. Anyone who watches all the games at least knows how good & effective Sneep is at his position, even if disagreeing with him being BC's #1.

Some other posts reference the +/- totals thus far, which show Sneep way behind Dumoulin's +14. I agree with the posters who responded by mentioning the eyeball test, which refers to understanding who's the best on D by watching all the games, and Sneep passes this test without a doubt as #1. He's a great puck-mover and is very efficient at breaking up plays in his area, even 2 on 1's for that matter. Very rarely does he ever get burned. And these are merely his defensive qualities - he's fantastic at the point on offense as well, not only with his puck-moving ability, but with his awesome shot.

Plus/minus stats don't tell the whole story. Remember, Petrecki was really high in this stat last year, and as much as I liked him as a player, I still say he could sometimes be a liability with all the times he put us on the penalty kill. Just one example.

We are talking about Carl Sneep, right? He's having a career year offensively, but his being way behind Dumoulin in +/- is a direct result of Dumoulin being much, much, much more dependable in his own end.

Forgot to mention, Patches O'Houlihan did an admirable job filling in on the wing of Ben Smith in place of the absent Matt Price.

Surprised to see Patch instead of T. Atkinson, but it worked out fairly well.

Nitpicking here, but it was:

Kreider-Smith-Hayes
Almeida-Lombardi-Alber

I'll take the split and move on. 17-9-2 (12-7-2) and currently tied for 4th in PWR. That was a hectic week. Time to get a good week of practice in before the NU series. Milner may have wanted the lone goal back he let in (and I was surprised he started), but he was very solid. Not a very sharp performance for BC, but of all the things that have happened against UML the last couple years, killing off that penalty and then scoring was fantastic. Pretty sure York went down the bench to yell at Shea for taking that one...

Who was the d in the 3rd that let a guy walk right around him and in on Milner alone?

[FiveHole12]

Re: Boston College Hockey, Part II

Let's just be happy with the two points this weekend against a very tough team! I'm glad to see this series end because as much as I respect Lowell's D, they're boring as all hell to watch.

You can say that again! Dang, that was a snoozer.
I was happy as a pig in poop with the game winner though. Lowell was playing for the tie the entire third period, and we finally burned 'em.

[joegrav]

Re: Boston College Hockey, Part II

Nitpicking here, but it was:

Kreider-Smith-Hayes
Almeida-Lombardi-Alber

\

Yeah, my bad... that's what I meant to say.

I forgot about how big that late penalty kill was. Took a penalty with 2:50 left. How many god**** times has BC had to kill a penalty in the late minutes of a close game?

But the PK came up big. Lowell never even really got it set up.

[SteveF]

Re: Boston College Hockey, Part II

samuelson and wey dont strike me as a sturdy pair. for as soft as shea is, that was not the time to start needlessly elbowing people.

good win otherwise. hutton was insane.

[Carmine Scarpaglia]

Re: Boston College Hockey, Part II

Hokydad is right - Sneep is BC's best D-man, with Samuelson right behind him I say.

Pass the bong over here. Seriously, no offense, but watching this team for several months, Samuelsson is not even close to the 2nd best Dman. Wey looks better by a little bit. Cross is far superior. Dumoulin is in another stratosphere. It's debatable for the top player, but Dumoulin looked fantastic again tonight, brilliant pinch on the GWG. Samuelsson struggled at times again. Sneep dominates when he is on, but when he isn't it is ugly. Sneep did pretty well tonight.

So Samuelsson is probably BC's 5th best Dman. Maybe 4th if you put him over Wey, which is iffy at best.

Is it true, was Ulfie in the stands tonight?

[Carmine Scarpaglia]

Re: Boston College Hockey, Part II

Honestly, I thought Lowell played as perfect of a game as they can play against us. With that, you have to give BC serious props for getting Lowell's A+ game and still getting the W.

Nice to see some late heroics. Don't get that too often at Conte.