Burgy back up with Sens.
Burgy back up with Sens.
Brandon Pirri: Turk would give it to Jagr. That's awesome! Jagr's untouchable. And he would give it to Jagr.
Got a question for you? Out side of goal camera goals and potential 5 minute majors, what are the parameters for the refs to go to the monitors to look at a review/replay. Flashback last night! BG scores an apparent goal with no whistles but then Cornell calls timeout to challenge and in so doing the refs goes back to the monitors and overturns the apparent goal due to a BG offsides (right call by the way). Then Cornell scores an apparent goal with a high stick with no whistles but because BG had already used their timeout, they could not challenged so it never even went to refs/monitor and Cornell goal stands. Thx!
The refs could have reviewed Cornell's apparent goal if they wanted to, but probably felt, after what I assume to have involved a quick discussion (didn't see the game since I'm 106 miles to Chicago, albeit the tank's only half full and I don't smoke ), that they made the correct call on the ice, so they didn't bother. You didn't mention how much time was left on the clock for Dartmouth's apparent goal, so I couldn't tell you if they had to challenge it or not. Sounds like a bit of an unlucky break there.
Takeaways from the weekend series - we got outscored 9-1 (with one empty net goal). We played better than i expected and took more shots than I had felt we could. But the facts are the facts. We lose far too many important face offs (sure we win the ones in center ice but we lose them when we need to win them deep in our zone when short handed and deep in the offensive zone when we are on the power play). We delay far too long to decide how to move the puck. We still cannot get the puck out of our zone past the defensemen at the points even to just get a partial line change. We do not keep the puck in the offensive zone well enough at the point (too often the puck skips past our defensemen). When we do get an odd man rush into the offensive zone (which is not all that often) we do not seem to know where the open man is at the right time to get him the puck. None of this is really new as these have been the problems for the past few years.
The good news though is that we have some talent on this team. Reilly is a very good rushing offensive defenseman. We have some solid forwards and the top line does generate chances and excitement. Having watched for so many years I just do not think we are that far off from being a competitive team. But if we are not able to address the first list of deficiencies, we will be constantly seeing games like we just had. Frustration after frustration as we fail at some of the basic fundamentals. This team has more potential than last year but we face some of the same old problems we have had for quite some time.
Goaltending? After the last few games i would start Savory or Perry until they both have shown they need to be replaced. They may not be perfect but at least they do not appear to be awkward out there handling the puck. Marshall has talent and perhaps a big upside potential but he has just look so uncomfortable out there that something has to be done. JMHO.
Take the shortest distance to the puck and arrive in ill humor
Well said Doc. From what I could catch these last 2 weekends, we do have some talent, and can compete fairly well. We do have moments where our hockey IQ/metal toughness seems to disappear and trigger breakdowns and on to goals against. I think experience and playing together will develop this over time.
I disagree re: fundamentals. This team seems miles ahead in terms of accomplishing basic hockey plays from as recently as 3 seasons ago. I like all of the subtractions coach Smith has made - this team does not have a lot of quit and they have ability to play in a structure.
Class of '93
16 years at Section 9, Row D, Seats 1-4
First off would have been nice to steal one in ND. No hockey gods on our side this weekend and you kind of had to figure that. With that being said, we just need to score on our chances. We had plenty but how do we run into two hot goalies back to back? Burgess has no puck luck right now, Friday gets absolutely robbed, Saturday gets stopped on a breakaway. Ott gets hooked/slashed on Friday semi breakaway no call. In the slot earlier on PP and puck hops on him last minute and winds up shaking it and the story goes on. I think split the top line and put either one of the guys second or third line for some more balance. Some of our D hold puck too long and get smothered. Its gotta move quicker, gets those lanes open. Savory is #1 Perry is #2. With all that.....I still see this team as a 7 or 8 seed possibly 6 at end of year.
Just my opinion feel free to rip apart.
In no particular position, Colgate, Brown, St. Lawrence and either Yale or Dartmouth. If I had to pick between the two I think Dartmouth. Streaky and if you contain the first line you should be able to get the win.
RPI Pep Band
GO GO GO YOU RED RED RED!!! and I guess Yale?
🎶🎺🎺🎺 LET'S GO BLUES!
2017-2018 RPI Pick to Click – Champion
2013-2016 RPI Pick to Click – Back-to-Back-to-Back Runner-Up
2014-2015 ECAC Pick the Standings – Last Place
Guess our result against Princeton scared me off on them, but I could agree with you on them. Harvard I'm not sure of.
I hope that the three players coming in will give us some offensive punch.
Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.
The harder I practice, the luckier I get.
Speaking of the transfers, where do you slot them in and who sits? Burke right now seems to be the odd forward out and Harris on D.
I've yet to see the other three play so I don't know, but it'll certainly be some tough competition.
Thankfully NBCSN had Curling Night in America on directly after the first game, so the weekend wasn't a total loss.
There are currently 3 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 3 guests)