ME-HOCKEY Archives

The Maine Hockey Discussion List

ME-HOCKEY@LISTS.MAINE.EDU

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Jeff Hill <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
The Maine Hockey Discussion List <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Sat, 19 Oct 2002 19:17:41 -0400
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (61 lines)
> Power play goals don't help.  When CC got their second goal, it was on their fourth power play.  Can't win games from the box.


> From: Deron Treadwell <[log in to unmask]>
> Date: 2002/10/19 Sat PM 06:35:51 EDT
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: CC/Maine
>
> > The comment *was* in reference to our strengths.  Specifically, Coach
> > thought we could beat the (large, young) LSSU defenders down low ...
> > and we did.  He thought we could beat the (fast transitioning) CC
> > forwards in that a focus of the team and practice was our speed and fast
> > (offensive) transition game.
>
> I would not say we lost the transition game, but we certainly didn't win it.
> Push.
>
> > Certainly "we" executed the LSSU plan very well.  I didn't get to listen
> > to the CC game much, but the first period seemed to have more Maine
> > chances than CC.  Did CC make great adjustments during the 1st
> > intermission, or Maine pay less attention to their snipers, or Maine
> > take (relatively) too many penalties, or what?
>
> CC dominated the second period from the start.  Maine closed the gap, but my
> best recollection has CC putting 8-10 shots on goal before Maine got one.
> They did appear to adjust during the first intermission better than Maine --
> though it is hard to tell on the radio.
>
> It was a close game, sans large portion of the second IHMO.  Maine had
> better of the play late in the game as they tried to score.
>
> > I'm sticking to my moronic predictions that for this team to excell, it
> > must focus on defense, for they (other than Shields) won't score many
> > goals, and Heisten must be more of an overall leader.  JMHO.
> >
> >    (Most people, I assume, would argue the large, experienced senior
> >    class provides all the leadership needed and will score goals at an
> >    unprecedented rate).
>
> I agree completely.  When Maine was successful last year their defense
> played well and they scored opportunistically.  The last couple years
> (especially last year) we seem to go through this same type of evolution
> where we think we are BC/UNH running up and down the ice when we are not.
> Maybe it is a case of the defense needing time to get it together (quite
> possible), but as talented as we are our forwards are still not world-class
> snipers (Shields may be an exception *wink*).  We have to play good team
> defense and counter-punch effectively.
>
> CC did not maul Maine, but they got some chances and made Maine pay.  Maine
> hit posts and crossbars.  Howard sounded like he did ok, we'll get a look at
> Frank Doyle tonight.
>
> Leadership is key.  Maine did not lose many players to graduation, but they
> must replace the leadership of Peter Metcalf, who wore his heart and soul on
> his Maine sleeve.  That has not happened yet.  Whatever Heisten did to get
> suspended, was not a good foot forward in the leaderhip department.  Kariya
> could step forward more as well.
>
> -Deron
>

ATOM RSS1 RSS2