The Hockey Season

Talking about the Cornell hockey team after they lose, which is what happened on Saturday, usually divides people into two camps. There are those who shrug off the loss as a minor bump in the road, as a rare blemish in an otherwise solid season. And there are others who view the loss as a coming of the apocalypse and are ready to throw in the towel.

I exaggerate a bit, but it's not too far from the truth.

Personally, I think I'm somewhere in the middle. I haven't been "sold" on this year's team, and I don't think I will ever be. But I don't think we're a bad team.

I don't want to play down some of our good results this season. The victories over UNH and UND were legitimate, and we've played some great games against other ECAC Hockey teams.

But don't for one second think that this team is anywhere close to a top 10 team nationally, as it has been in the polls for the last few weeks.

Take the North Dakota weekend. NoDak completely outplayed Cornell over that weekend, and it took an amazing performance by Ben Scrivens to steal a win that first night. Just like a hot pitcher in baseball can steal a game against a better team, a great goaltending performance can steal a victory against a superior hockey team. It was great to win, but there should be no doubt in our minds that North Dakota is a better hockey team.

But what of North Dakota? They're 8-9-3 in the WCHA. In the ECAC, they'd be at least 16-2-2 by this point. Their road trip to Cornell was bookended by weekend sweeps at the hands of Minnesota and Denver.

Imagine playing in a conference in which a team like North Dakota is routinely swept by other teams in the conference. Compared to the ECAC, the talent differential is striking.

Cornell can certainly beat a WCHA team in the NCAA tournament. Look at that 1-0 victory this season, or the games in 2005 and 2006 in which strong defense and goaltending came oh-so-close to earning the 'W' for the Big Red. But Cornell would certainly be the underdog in that match-up.

The UNH win was a great game for the Red, but keep in mind that UNH had yet to win an out-of-conference game at that point. The Big Red had just been humiliated down in Florida, so they certainly were fired up for the UNH game. Without that added spark, I'm not sure we would have looked so good.

As I've written previously, Cornell blew major chances to make a statement against Yale, Quinnipiac (in November), Boston University, and Colorado College. 0-3-1 in those games, with the tie coming after blowing a two-goal lead in the third period.

I'll take the Cornell team which toppled New Hampshire and match them up against any team in the country. But that's not the team we tend to see every night. Recall the 2006-7 team which beat UNH 5-2 over Winter Break and ended the season during the ECAC Quarterfinal Round.

If I could describe this year's team in a paragraph...

We're a top-four ECAC team which relies on superb goaltending to remain in games. We shut down weak teams in the third period to preserve small leads. Our powerplay was phenomenal early in the season, but has since turned into an embarrassing display of telegraphed passes and poor shot selection. Offensively, no one is having a particularly bad year, but no one has stepped up to be the difference-maker in key games. Defensively, we take too many dumb penalties and allow too many odd-man rushes to win big games.

Cornell will make the final weekend in Albany, and I think they'll make the NCAA tournament. (Although the Pairwise is crazy these days, with Cornell going from 8th (2 seed) to 15th (out of the tournament) after Saturday's game...) Maybe Scrivens will bail them out and they'll make the Frozen Four. Or maybe we'll sit at home this spring, wondering what might have happened if Riley Nash played to his potential. Or if we'd showed up to play in Florida. Or if our powerplay hadn't tanked halfway through the season. Or if we'd been more disciplined. Or if...