Never one to go quietly, I compiled the following information
to rebut Richard Hungerford's assertion that the current Harvard
team has as much talent as teams of the recent past (mid 80s
to early 90s). I focused on the forward lines and defensive pairings
from four seasons, beginning with the obviously gifted national
champions.
 
88-89  30-3, National Champs
90-91  14-12-3, ECAC semis (Ronn Tomassoni's first year)
92-93  22-6-3, NCAA quarters
95-96  6-9-1 thus far
 
Forwards
 
88-89 MacDonald (sr)-Bourbeau (sr) -Young (jr): 75 goals
90-91 Breistroff (fr) -Vukonich (sr) -Donato (sr): 54
92-93 Farrell (jr) -Drury (jr) -Baird (jr): 44
95-96 Holmes (sr) -Konik (sr) - Nielsen (sr): 46 (pro rated)
 
88-89 Vukonich (so) -Ciavaglia (so) -Weisbrod (so): 48
90-91 Baird (fr) -Ciavaglia (sr) -Weisbrod (sr): 27
92-93 Holmes (fr) -Flomenhoft (sr) -Mallgrave (sr): 44
95-96 Karmanos (sr) - Higdon (so) - Philpott (so): 16 (pro rated)
 
88-89 Donato (so) -Hartje (jr) -Krayer (jr): 40
90-91 Farrell (fr)-Drury (so)-Mallgrave (so): 26
92-93 Coughlin (so)-Martins (so)-Nielsen (fr): 18
95-96 Bent (fr) - MacDonald (fr) - Adams (fr): 20 (pro rated)
 
88-89 Howley (sr) -Murphy- (jr) -Presz (sr): 24
90-91 Burke (jr)-Flomenhoft (so)-Barringer (sr): 29
92-93 Karmanos (fr)-Cohagen (so)-Gustafson (so): 17
95-96 Swenson (jr) - Craigen (jr) - Marett (sr): 10 (pro rated)
 
plus
88-89 Taucher, Burke
90-91 Gardner, Miskovich
92-93 McLean
95-96 Rogers
 
Defense
 
88-89 Carone (jr)-Caplan (sr)
90-91 McCann (fr)-Sneddon (jr)
92-93 McCann (jr)-Maguire (jr)
95-96 Halfknight (jr)-McCarthy (so)
 
88-89 Melrose (jr)-Farden (sr)
90-91 Body (fr)-Maguire (fr)
92-93 Body (jr)-Lonsinger (so)
95-96 Storey (fr)-McLauglin (sr)
 
88-89 S.McCormack (sr)-B.McCormack (fr)
90-91 B.McCormack (jr)-Defreitas (sr)
92-93 McLaughlin (fr)-Breistroff (jr)
95-96 Oberman (fr)-Hyland (so)
 
plus
88-89 Popiel
90-91 Hess
92-93 Marett
95-96 Famigletti, Ferrari
 
Shots on goal per game
 
88-89 36.02
90-91 32.9
92-93 33.9
95-96 27.9
 
Power Play Pct.
 
88-89 26.0%
90-91 30.8%
92-93 26.5%
95-96 15.7%
 
My summary: Looking at the above, I still come to the same conclusion.
Harvard is simply not as skilled up front as it has been in the recent
past. The decline in production of the fourth line is particularly
obvious, but the projected output of the current second line is
also noteworthy. Although I'm sure Harvard would like the Higdon
line to score more, I don't see the three forwards being able to
increase their production this season. Philpott and Higdon might
make a step forward next year, and the BAM line certainly will, but
I don't see either of these units reaching the skill level of the '90-'91
Baird-Ciavaglia-Weisbrod line (keep in mind that Weisbrod only
played five games due to injury).
 
Of course, the decline in shots on net and goals could be a chicken-or-the
egg issue; is it because Harvard is less skilled or because Tomassoni
is restricting the creativity of his players? I say the former, and I
think the drastic dip in power play percentage bears me out (the
94-95 stats lend support as they are fairly similar to this year). The
six most skilled forwards usually drive the two power play units.
 
It is interesting to see that the talent and depth of the defense
has been a constant on all these teams - you can throw in goaltending,
too, but I didn't bother making the comparison because I think it is
self-evident (Chuckie Hughes/Allain Roy/Tripp Tracy/Aaron Israel).
 
Other than the general level of talent, I think Richard and I agree on
many things. I don't think even coach Tomassoni would attempt to
compare his success with that of coach Cleary, nor should he. It is
a different era, for one thing, with many more teams competing for
a talent pool that is only marginally bigger. The cost of education
is also driving players towards scholarship schools. The standard
response to Cleary's old "We play hockey the way it was meant to be
played" was "I would, too, if I had your players." I wonder if coach
Tomassoni is tempted to say the same thing to the writers at the
Harvard Crimson and the fans, like Richard, who are dissatisfied with
the recent performance of the team.
 
That's it for my Crimson anaylsis -- maybe I'll get to Brown tomorrow
(hey, I can compare penalty minutes, power plays for and against,
and average size and weight of the players from 1991 to the present...)
 
Geoff Howell
Drop the Puck Magazine
 
HOCKEY-L is for discussion of college ice hockey;  send information to
[log in to unmask], The College Hockey Information List.