RPI continued their season of shifting currents running their home record to
0 for 3 before breaking the skid against Harvard. A couple of observations
about how I saw the games, and the team at this point.
RPI vs. Brown Dec. 3, 1993
Neil Little was quoted in the Times-Union on Sunday as saying this was his
worst game all season. Funny I didn't leave with that impression, (IMO he
played better than the UNH and Merrimack games.)I also felt the team as a whole
played better than the Merrimack and UNH debacles, but I think I began to see a
couple of basic weaknesses which were reflected in all three games. The
Engineers have a real problem matching up with the slower, bigger, "clutch and
grab" teams,(and I'm using that characterization descriptively, not as a
slight to either of the three teams.) While Brown lacked the physical size of
Merrimack and UNH, they shared the good defensive stategy of depending on
strong center ice play to throw the fleet-skating RPI forwards out-of-synch.
RPI seems once again (remember Colgate in last year's playoffs) to be falling
prone to impatience with those teams who rely on slowing up the play, and
making the Engineers work for their goals. Quite simply the Engineers tried
to make too many perfect passes against Brown to speed the play through the
center zone. Instead of working the puck up-ice, relying on short passes and
setting picks to screen off the forecheckers, RPI constantly resorted to long
break-out attacks, which usually led to Brown counter-attacks or, worse, about
a zillion icing calls.
Geoff Finch played a very credible game, leading me to think his stock has
been under-valued in the ECAC. He seemed to be continuing his strong play in
last year's playoffs, stopping several point-blank shots and giving up few
rebounds. Couple with Brown's defensive presence at center ice, RPI found
themselves down 2-0 mid-way through the first period, goals by Chris Kaban, one
of Brown's most intelligent players, and Ryan Mulhearn. RPI managed to score
at 15:19 on a stirring short-handed effort by Ron Pasco, unassisted.
But the second period saw RPI having another of its typical second period home
performances. The Engineers seemed to stop skating, and stop influencing play.
At 10:54 Brown upped their lead to 3-1, off a Martino goal, and the rest of the
period saw RPI's play continue at the diminished level. Their power play at
11:58 consisted of skating in their own end. RPI has suffered lately in coming
up with an effective break-out play. IMO the Engineers need to come up with
some new attacks when skating the puck out from behind their own net.
The first half of the third period saw RPI make a spirited come-back. At 3:59
the Engineers climbed back into the game off of goals by Pasco and Majic.
But they were unable to keep up their level of play, and Brown scored the
winner at 13:25, with Trach burying a rebound which the RPI defensemen
neglected to clear.
RPI 4, Harvard 3 December 11, 1993
RPI (in an upset?) finally won at home against a Harvard team which seemsto be
weaker than last year's version. The differences: Neil Little, who waszoned,
and the style of Harvard's play. It is apparent that RPI can play verywell
against fast skating, offensive teams. The wins against Bowling Green,Maine
and Harvard all fall in this category. Rather than recap the scoring,
I'll relate a couple of impressions.
Once again, Neil Little was tremendous. Not only did he garner 30-something
saves, but many of them were high-caliber close-in stuff. RPI's defensemen
did help on many, keeping the screens to a minimum, and forcing most of the
Harvard shots to come in on the angle. Two Harvard players exemplified
Harvard's play: Steve Martins and Brian Farrell. Martins, despite a goal
and assist, didn't seem to be a dominant force. In fact he didn't seem to
play anywhere near as strong as last year, (remember the Beanpot final?)
He took several dumb penalties, which blunted the Harvard attack. Brian
Ferrell DID dominate (one power play goal). Ferrell's ill-timed penalty at
17:24 sealed the win for the Engineers. Farrell was simply unstoppable.
Repeatedly he managed to camp out in front of Little, with the RPI defensemen
incapable of moving him aside. If Farrell had been on-ice for the last 2:00
RPI might not have been able to close-out the game.
Unlike Brown, RPI was able to connect on a couple of BIG passes. The winning
goal was a replay special, with Pasco lofting the puck directly onto Pirrong's
stick, who was forced into an unlikely breakaway and score at 15:55. This
goal took on supreme importance as the Engineers adopted an ungainly defensive
stance for virtually the entire third period. However instead of adopting the
traditional "Johnny bar the door" strategy of stopping the rushing forwards at
the blue line, RPI allowed Harvard to skate the puck into their defensive zone
before applying pressure. Harvard seemed to spend most of the game in the RPI
zone, and virtually the entire final 2 minutes. When Farrell was there Harvard
could make the point shot and hope for a rebound. With Farrell out for the
ending, Harvard over-passed, and was forced to take more difficult shots to
avoid the shot-blocking RPI defensemen.
And speaking of defensemen, RPI's Cuthbert and Bartell played good games.
Bartell seemed to be on-ice for most of crunch time, and hopefully his knee
has healed sufficiently to allow him to exert his presence on the ice.
Finally, I am surprised that no one has made this comment yet: Harvard misses
Ted Drury. It seems he supplied more poise and energy than many gave him
credit for. Harvard at this point lacks the intelligent player who can turn a
game around through sheer self-effort, but then that's probably true of most
Division 1 schools. All in all you can lump RPI and Harvard somewhere in that
top 10, each an appropriate model of the parity/mediocrity/cookie cutter team
which inhabits college hockey this year.
_
"NYS // Hockey"
Go 'Gate // Brian Morris
Go RPI // Albany, NY
______// [log in to unmask]
(______/
|
