I would suspect that the goals scored
difference might be due at least in part to the particular teams that we played
and who was in goal for teams that we played as well as how their defense
played, etc etc. Coach may have made the goalie decision depending upon how our
offense matched up against the other teams’ defense, etc. I really
doubt that our team played THAT significantly different because of whom we had
in goal.
Also, I just wanted to say how impressed I
was with our guys in the BC game. I thought that we looked great
especially on defense. Except for a couple of lucky BC goals we played
the number one team in the country pretty much even I thought. I
wasn’t surprised by the 3-0 UNH score at all. IMHO BC is a far
superior team than the No Hardware team.
Also, I have a rule question: Can a
player proceed the puck over the blue-line if he has control of the puck?
I heard a commentator say that in that situation the player was not offside.
From: james acheson
[mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Tuesday, November 09, 2004
9:56 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Maine-BC
it was not long ago that BC played in national championship
games in 2 of 2 years (without a great goalie) and won.
do me a favor and explain away last years stat that in Jim games Maine scored 2.2 goals and
gave up 1.7 goals a game and in Frank games is was 4.5 for and 2.2
against. and frank had a much better win record.
this was over 20 games for each goalie... and the only diffence was mid
season with Jimmy
out and the end of the year with Jimmy not playing. and I
seem to remember Jimmy
being pulled in a Harvard game in order to generate more offense... and it
worked.
... I know I sound bad saying all this.... I just do not get what is
going on.
this is like when Gretzky played with the Rangers and triple shifted...
he got lots and lots of points, but his plus-minus was horrible.
Tim Whitehead coaches a defensive-first system. That's not going to
change
no matter who is in goal.
I would argue that the pyschology of having an All-American goalie in net
would be MORE condusive to scoring goals than a freshman goalie. I would
think a team would want to play MORE defensive and try harder to protect the
freshman.
I hardly doubt the team sits around the lockerroom and says, "Let's go out
and get Jimmy
a shutout".
With all due respect, Maine
has played for the NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIP in 2 of
the last 3 years. I don't think BC is an example of anything except how to
have great natural talent that tends to underachieve.
-Deron
----- Original Message -----
From: "james acheson"
<[log in to unmask]>To:
<[log in to unmask]>Sent: Monday, November 08, 2004 10:12 AM
Subject: Re: Maine-BC
>I AM NOT POINTING A FINGER AT JIMMY!!! I am pointing a finger at how the
>team plays in front of him. I do not know what the problem is, but the
>result is a consistent lack of offense in front of him. 2 years in a row
>now, our boys cannot score more than 2 goals a game with Jimmy in net... as
>I said, I would rather see a 6-5 win than a a garunteed shutout by one
>goalie... but a crapshoot as to which goalie gets the shutout.
> Jimmy
was involved in 10 shutouts last season in what 21 games? 6 were on
> his side. FRANK won games, best in the country, but Jimmy had the goalie
> stats.
>
> with a great offensive team, it is never a problem when a goalie coughs up
> a goal (! or 2)...Clemmenson and Kalieinen have been proving that point
for
> 7 years.
>
> and I know that one goal was an empty netter, but our boys scored 2 goals
> with Lundin "in net" and one with Ji! mmy. (and before you say
that the
> sample size is too small to consider... that this was Lundin's only empty
> net opportunity of the season, realized that Maine
has no empty net goals
> with Jimmy
getting pulled stringing back to the Denver
game. I think
> that there is no offensive intensity when Jimmy plays. (this is
> analogous to how Pedro often gets no run support, the sox just assume that
> tehy can win 2-1 with pedro in.)
> Snow and Dunham were the same, you wanted offense (and a win) Snow had to
! > play. you wanted stifling defense and not so much offense, Dunham.
>
> Wayne T Smith <[log in to unmask]>wrote:
> Come on. Implying the goalie lost the BC game is like worrying about
> nosebleed when the patient has an artery gushing blood. Yes, the 3rd
> goal was a gift (Howard gets the puck out in the corner and does a
> corner-to-corner pass, interrupted by the back of his goal; BC scoops up
> ! the loose puck and tucks it in the open net), but one goal was
> deflected right in front of him, and the other goal was nice snap shot
> between the faceoff dots. Howard was going down in the butterfly, but
> the puck was perfectly in the five hole and just quick enough to get
> through.
>
> Now, where is the offense going to come from? It hasn't been there
> against the better teams, IMHO.
>
> Having your goalie & defense to hold the opposition to 0 or 1 goals
may
> be a "goal",! but it's going to be tough to have a winning
record that way.
>
> I don't know how you add scoring to the mix, but Maine
seems to have
> some good new players, so maybe it will be possible?
>
> cheers, wayne
>
> james acheson wrote:
>
>> so... you stick Lundin in net, the boys play offense in front of him
>> and stop worrying about the gaa and save percentage and win 6-5. I
&g! t;> mean, jeez the d was only responsible for 1 goal in this game,
and
>> Jimmy
gave away 2. It is clear to me, and I know a few others that
>> tandem goalies is the way to go... make them conpete against each
>> other and they both get better. at the very least Lundin would not
>> have done any better in a league points-wise ana! lysis against BC and
>> BU, and I am sure against Merrimack.
Lundin could have lost those 2
>> games too, but at least we would have 2 goalies competing against one
>> another.
>>
>>
>>
>> */Bob Woodbury /* wrote:
>>
>> BC wins 3-1. Maine
not showing enough to beat UNH tomorrow, either.
>>
>>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Do you Yahoo!?
>> Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------
! > Do you Yahoo!?
> Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com