Sandy Baldwin posted some interesting questions/comments regarding
the evolution of Harvard's forward lines; I'll
respond in order.
>1) While the list is aimed at selecting every other year, doubtless a
>reasonable way of doing things, this begs the question of the 93-94
>season when Harvard went to the final four, had its highest power play
>percentage _ever_ (correct me if I'm wrong, but I think it was higher
>than the record '87 season), and I'd speculate had a higher level of goal
>production spread across the forward lines (or at least it had
>two good lines in Farrell-Baird-Cohagen and Holmes-Martins-Gustafson).
Here's how the '93-'94 team stacks up
14 Baird - 19 Karmanos - 24 Farrell: 40 goals
6 Coughlin - 27 Martins - 16 Gustafson: 59 goals
11 Cohagen - 22 Nielsen - 21 Holmes: 14 goals
12 Swenson - 9 Craigen - 28 Kennish: 8 goals
plus Philpott
20 McLaughlin - 10 McCann
2 Maguire - 4 Longsinger
18 Halfknight - 15 Body
plus Ferrari
PP: 34%
Shots per game: 34.5
I don't think this team disproves my thesis; clearly Harvard had a
great power play (consisting of Farrell, Baird, Martins, Maguire &
McCann), but not much balance up front. The success of the power
play really skewed the offensive numbers -- arguably, this was
a team that revolved around three forwards; Baird, Farrell and
Martins. Career years by Couglin and Gustafson helped. And the
development of McCann gave Harvard its last versatile power play;
you really couldn't just focus on one person (as has been the
case the last two seasons). I would mark the '93-'94 season as
the point at which Harvard went from being a three-line team to a
two-line team on its way to becoming a one-line team in terms
of top caliber offensive forwards.
>2) It strikes me that one might make the argument that the defense has
>actually improved in the 90's. The '89 NCAA champs had to my mind a good,
>steady defense, but in no way like the Maguire-McCann-Body defense of
>92-93 and 93-94, nor even, I'd argue, the Sneddon led defense of 91-92.
>As Geoff notes, the present group is potentially the best of the '90's.
>However, to contradict what I've just written, defensive corps from
>earlier in the 80's (prior to '89) were excellent, especially 87-88
>(Sweeney and Pawlawski) and 86-87 (Benning, etc.).
No argument here. There is, of course, more pressure on the current
team to play defense because the offense isn't as potent as it used to
be. I would also point out that Sweeney didn't really come into his
own until his senior year, so his presence wasn't that big of a plus
until 87-88.
>3) I shouldn't nitpick Geoff's extensive presentation, but Sneddon played
>defense in 89; also its worth noting that these lines are not necessarily
>the way they ended up for most of the season, but rather the way the
>season began.
Oops. How could I miss Sneddon? The NCAA All-Tournament team selection
committee didn't. Yes, the lines did shuffle - my samples are actually
mid-season, for the most part.
Geoff
HOCKEY-L is for discussion of college ice hockey; send information to
[log in to unmask], The College Hockey Information List.
|
