HOCKEY-L Archives

- Hockey-L - The College Hockey Discussion List

Hockey-L@LISTS.MAINE.EDU

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Condense Mail Headers

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

Print Reply
Sender:
College Hockey discussion list <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:
From:
Date:
Tue, 9 Feb 1993 08:33:49 EST
Reply-To:
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (37 lines)
Echoing Mike M.'s earlier posting: THIS WAS A GREAT GAME.  BU didn't lose this
game--Harvard won it.  A couple of observations:
1. I was impressed by the way Harvard changed the pace of the game.  For the
first half of the first period BU simply plastered the Harvard forwards and
it seemed the whole period would be played in the Harvard end.  But subtly the
Harvard defense began to free up the puck off the wings and move through the
center zone, thereby allowing the faster Harvard forwards a chance to skate.
2. Goaltending for both teams was very good.  Tripp Treacy was magnificent.
Anyone randomly switching on Channel 38 would have thought they were watching
an NHL goalie out there.  Not only did he make big saves, his stick work was
excellent, especially the two big poke checks in front of the goal, the second
on Sacco which would have tied it at 3-3.  His overall confidence level was
overwhelming conveying an icy calm to the Harvard defense.  The Harvard defense
in turn did a nice job of moving the BU players out of the slot, and clearing
away what few rebounds Treacy didn't control.  BTW Cashman had the save of the
night in the first period, lunging to the right to stop the follow-up by a
(?) Harvard player cruising down the slot.
3. Martins is a very good player--and is very fast.  His first goal can only be
described as a blast.  I doubt that Cashman ever saw the puck, and his vision
was unimpeded.  Later in the third Martins' speed constantly kept the BU
defense off-guard, preventing them from organizing many rushes to get the tying
goal.
4. Cashman played a good goal.  His only bad goal was Harvard's fourth, where
he inexplicably failed to play the angle correctly.  I was surprised by the
amount of goal he left open to his left, especially considering the Harvard
shooter was a right hander gaining control of the puck in the left center area.
5. WSBK did a pretty good job of coverage with a slight Harvard bias.  But it
was probably difficult to remain biased as the game progressed with Treacy
putting on his goaltending clinic.
6. Was this the same Harvard team that lost to RPI?
                    _
            "NYS   // Hockey"
        Go 'Gate  //   Brian Morris
          Go RPI //      Albany, NY
          ______// [log in to unmask]
         (______/

ATOM RSS1 RSS2