Parent
From: email@hidden (Women-in-Hockey Digest)
To: email@hidden
Subject: Women-in-Hockey Digest V1 #112
Reply-To: women-in-hockey
Sender: email@hidden
Errors-To: email@hidden
Precedence: bulk
Women-in-Hockey Digest Wednesday, January 28 1998 Volume 01 : Number 112
In this issue:
Calgary
Hayley
Re: Calgary game
SF Bay area leagues
Canada/USA Webcast
Calgary Game
Scoring for Team Canada
Re: Calgary Game
Re: What's Wrong with Canada?
Re: What's Wrong with Canada?
When to put baby on the ice
Re: What's Wrong with Canada?
USA/Canada Final Exhibition
=======================================================================
Unsubscribe:
Help:
or
=======================================================================
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 27 Jan 1998 22:00:34 -0800
From: "David O'Leary"
Subject: Calgary
If you have a girls team that is attending the tournament in Calgary
during the month of April can you drop me an e-mail.
Please send replies directly to me and not the whole list
thank you
dave oleary
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 28 Jan 1998 08:40:50 -0500
From: Cindy Goodman
Subject: Hayley
Just received my Time magazine yesterday and there is a really nice section devoted to some of the Olympic athletes from Canada. In particular the article on Hayley Wickenheiser was very good. Certainly nice to see the women ice hockey players getting the recognition they deserve.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 28 Jan 1998 09:40:43 -0500 (EST)
From: George Boccanfuso
Subject: Re: Calgary game
- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
George Boccanfuso Voice (519) 542 7751 ext 237
Professor, Industrial Hygiene Fax (519) 542 0991
Lambton College, Sarnia Ontario Canada
"and the only people I fear are those who never have any doubts" - Billy Joel
- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On Tue, 27 Jan 1998, HartWomyn wrote:
> What is wrong with Canada? They are by far the better team so why do they keep
> losing?They wouldn't of lost if Manon Rheaume was in net.
>
> CYNTHIA
>
Cynthia
What's wrong with you? Might the Americans have our number.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 28 Jan 1998 10:04:45 -0500
From: Molly Hovorka
Subject: SF Bay area leagues
Does anyone have information about Bay area leagues -- especially in the
Redwood City/Redwood Shores area?
Thanks-
Molly
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 28 Jan 1998 08:02:53 -0800
From: "Phil & Debbie Cottrell"
Subject: Canada/USA Webcast
Just to let everybody know that tonight's game will require the Microsoft
NetShow plug-in, not RealAudio. So, start downloading, I guess...
Phil, Victoria, BC
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 28 Jan 1998 09:06:00 -0700
From: "Hunter, Bill 464-8643"
Subject: Calgary Game
I wasn't at the game but I talked to a number of people the next morning
who were so this is hear-say....
The people I talked to felt that Canada was the more skilled team.
They felt the big difference was that Canada couldn't bring the puck out
of their own end very well. Canada didn't have an effective break-out
to the point where it they seemed to have been coached to carry the puck
out on their own. Opinion was that they were outcoached on play in the
defending zone and could use better practice on break-outs. Attacking
zone systems appeared weak as well and players were making up for it
with individual skill.
Speaking of individual skill, the other significant comment was that
Wickenheiser had several opportunities to head-man the puck to a wide
open player, even looked up as she crossed her own blueline and then put
her head down and kept going. Thats's another coaching issue........
Yes, I've been following the discussion regarding Miller's coaching.
Personally, I only seen the 3 nations game this year so it's tough to
comment but I won't let that stop me..... Comments on her
record....it's easy to have a winning record coaching the best players
in the world and playing weak competition. What's the record against
the USA this year? 6-6? I've seen a lot of comment that Canada still
has the best players but the USA has feistyness. We have the best
individuals but the USA has the best team......that's coaching.
Bill
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 28 Jan 1998 11:57:05 -0500
From: "Marc J. Ouellette"
Subject: Scoring for Team Canada
Some people have been wondering where all the scoring for Team Canada has
gone, given that Jayna Hefford and Hayley Wickenheiser have been doing a
lot of the scoring (they lead the team in scoring with 28 and 27 points,
respectively.) From the games Team Canada have played since October,
here are the scoring leaders (give or take minor adding errors:-) for
the team selected to go to Japan.
No. Pos Name Game Goals Assists Points PIM
16 F Hefford, Jayna 24 22 6 28 12
22 F Wickenheiser,Hayley 24 10 17 27 44
15 F Goyette, Danielle 20 12 8 20 20
18 F Drolet, Nancy 23 6 14 20 16
91 D Heaney, Geraldine 23 6 13 19 24
89 F Nystrom, Karen 22 9 9 18 8
6 D Brisson, Therese 19 2 11 13 22
17 F Wilson, Stacy 20 7 5 12 6
9 D Smith, Fiona 24 1 10 11 14
14 F McCormack, Kathy 21 6 3 9 4
12 F Dupuis, Lori 23 4 5 9 35
61 F Sunohara, Vicky 20 5 3 8 6
27 F Schuler, Laura 19 3 4 7 14
4 D Kellar, Becky 23 2 5 7 8
7 F Botterill, Jennifer 22 3 3 6 0
3 F St-Louis, France 16 0 6 6 10
77 D Campbell, Cassie 19 0 4 4 16
21 D Diduck, Judy 21 0 4 4 10
(The biggest surprise up there is Cassie with only 4 points! I was going
to say Heaney being so high on the scoring list too, but that's not really
a surprise, given that she's been 7th, 7th, 6th, and 5th in scoring
on the team since 1990, and given her tremendous offensive skills!)
At first glance, it may appear that too much scoring is coming from
the top two players. But is that really true, say, compared to other
Team Canada in past WWCs? Here, in 5 columns, are the scoring for the
1990, 1992, 1994, 1997, and Olympic teams, (just the numbers, not the
names) both in points, and then converted to a percentage of the team's
scoring (i.e., add up all the points for one year, and divide by that)
Points Percentage of Scoring
90 92 94 97 98 1990 1992 1994 1997 1998
13 10 12 9 28 9.21 11.90 14.28 12.16 12.28
12 9 9 8 27 8.51 10.71 10.71 10.81 11.84
12 8 8 6 20 8.51 9.52 9.52 8.10 8.77
11 8 8 6 20 7.80 9.52 9.52 8.10 8.77
11 7 8 5 19 7.80 8.33 9.52 6.75 8.33
9 7 7 5 18 6.38 8.33 8.33 6.75 7.89
8 6 7 5 13 5.67 7.14 8.33 6.75 5.70
8 5 6 5 12 5.67 5.95 7.14 6.75 5.26
8 5 6 5 11 5.67 5.95 7.14 6.75 4.82
7 4 5 4 9 4.96 4.76 5.95 5.40 3.94
7 3 4 3 9 4.96 3.57 4.76 4.05 3.94
7 2 3 3 8 4.96 2.38 3.57 4.05 3.50
7 2 3 3 7 4.96 2.38 3.57 4.05 3.07
6 2 2 3 7 4.25 2.38 2.38 4.05 3.07
6 2 2 2 6 4.25 2.38 2.38 2.70 2.63
5 2 2 1 6 3.54 2.38 2.38 1.35 2.63
3 1 1 1 4 2.12 1.19 1.19 1.35 1.75
1 1 1 0 4 0.70 1.19 1.19 0.00 1.75
---------------- ----------------------------
Total 141 84 84 74 228 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
================ ============================
Statistically, 1998 is not much different than the other years. To get a
better idea of how the years compare, we can plot the percentage data.
Here's a good old ascii plot, with the top scorer being the left-most
end of the graph, and the bottom scorer being the right-most end of the
graph. The first thing to notice is how difficult it is to tell the
five different plots apart! Apart from the 1990 team (which had the most
balanced scoring), the percentage scoring curves are very similar, which
means that so far, the scoring balance is not much different now than it's
been over the last 6 years. For a colour version of this graph, see:
http://www.dgp.toronto.edu/people/vv1/scoring.ps
Percentage of Scoring by Year
16 ++------+------+-------+------+-------+------+-------+------+------++
+ + + + + + + + + +
| WWC90 **** |
P | WWC92 #### |
e | WWC94 $$$$ |
r | $ WWC97 %%%% |
c 14 ++ $ OLY98 @@@@++
e | $ |
n | $ |
t | $ |
a | @@$ |
g 12 ++ % $@ ++
e | ## $@ |
| ##@ |
o | %$@ |
f | #@ |
| %#@ |
T 10 ++ %# ++
e | %@#####$$$$ |
a | *** %@ # $ |
m | * %@@@@@@# $ |
| ****** # $ |
C 8 ++ %%%*% #####$$$$ ++
a | ***** @# $$ |
n | % * @# |
a | % * @ ## $$$$$$ |
d | %%%*%%%%%##%%%%% $$ |
a | *** % |
' 6 ++ @ ##### % $ ++
s | ***********% $ |
| @@@@ #*% $ |
S | @@ #************** |
c | @@##% $ * |
o | ## $ ******* |
r 4 ++ @@@@%%$%%%%%%%%%% ++
i | # $$$$$$ %% * |
n | # @@$$@@@ * |
g | # @% * |
| ################@@* |
2 ++ % # @* ++
| % # @*@@@
| %%%#% * |
| ###*#
| % *
+ + + + + + + + + %+
0 ++------+------+-------+------+-------+------+-------+------+------+%
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18
Scoring rank : From 1st to 18th -->
Back to the thesis... :-)
Marc
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 28 Jan 1998 13:03:51 -0500
From: Cindy Goodman
Subject: Re: Calgary Game
I have to agree about the coaching situation. She has consistently been outcoached since the last Worlds which they won by luck. USA was all over them in that game, if it wasn't for the goaltending and a great individual effort by Drolet it was game over.
I'm not really that surprised that the bad coaching is showing up now. It's more under a microscope now than before. Getting way more attention than it ever did before because of the Olympics. But the mistakes were always there, only the diehards noticed them.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 28 Jan 1998 13:38:42 EST
From: HockySkate
Subject: Re: What's Wrong with Canada?
Saw the US/Canada game in San Jose and feel that the US has really improved,
plus they are hungry!
The Canadians are noticeably faster, but it appears that they are assuming
that the game is theirs just· because. The tying goal in the San Jose game,
with 7.9 seconds left, couldn't have been more obvious if they had run it
first on the scoreboard! It appeared that the Northern sisters just thought
they had it in the bag, instead of playing good defense.
Reggie Winner
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 28 Jan 1998 11:40:47 -0800
From: Anne Paulson
Subject: Re: What's Wrong with Canada?
> Saw the US/Canada game in San Jose and feel that the US has really improved,
> plus they are hungry!
> The Canadians are noticeably faster, but it appears that they are assuming
> that the game is theirs just because. The tying goal in the San Jose game,
> with 7.9 seconds left, couldn't have been more obvious if they had run it
> first on the scoreboard!
I agree that it was obvious what the US strategy would be- heck, my
seven-year-old was saying "OK, just get the puck to the point, fire a
slapshot and go to the net" (and was he excited when they used his
strategy and it worked!). Obvious doesn't mean easy to defend against,
though. That was a great shot, right in the top corner.
Of course, the penalty that led to the goal was a bad one, but I don't see
that taking stupid penalties is a sign of complacency.
- -- Anne Paulson
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 28 Jan 1998 18:33:46 -0500
From: susan appleyard
Subject: When to put baby on the ice
Hi
I was just reading the advice about when to put
your kids on the ice and wanted to add a comment
on the helmet issue. When I was about three years
old I fell on the ice and my sister skated into my
head with the picks of her skates. In total I
think it took about 10 stitches to close the gash
her pick left. I guess it was pretty traumatic
for me because I can still remember getting the
stitches. This would not have happened if I had
been wearing a helmet.
Sue
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 28 Jan 1998 19:39:53 -0800
From: "A.V. Chernin"
Subject: Re: What's Wrong with Canada?
Hello all you hockey fans!!
I have just joined this list and find it both insightful and interesting.
Unfortunately I have missed all the discussion up to this point.
I just recently witnessed the Team Canada/USA game at GM Place in
Vancouver. The US seemed to be the dominant team, Canada coming up with
the victory due to the outstanding play of Leslie Reddon. Tara Mounsey
just made a beautiful play with 10 seconds left in the game that almost
tied the game. It was so good my MOM yelled out "what a play!!" - and
that folks is a first.
I attended the World Championships in Kitchener and have watched the
Canadian Team many times. I just recently made a video tape for a friend
in the US and watched the gold medal game on tape from the worlds and the
Finals of the 3 nations cup in December 1996 for the first time when
dubbing them. I decided to take special notice of Angela James to see if
I could spot errors in the fundamentals of her game.
Now I am no world class coach but I do coach and play hockey and I do know
a bit and this is the conclusion I came to. James played well against the
US at the 3 nations. She also flattened someone who had to be helped of
the ice. It was a 1-0 victory for Canada and James did not seem to make
low percentage plays in that game. James was also the Captain. In the
gold medal game in Kitchener I would say she was good but didn't stand out
alot other than scoring 1 high skill deflection goal (the only other player
besides Drolet to score for Canada) and winning the majority of faceoffs.
She didn't make bonehead plays from what I could see. There were poor
percentage plays made by both teams during the game but I won't single
anyone out.The real standouts in that game for Canada I thought were Drolet
of course, Wilson, St.Louis and Diduck and Reddon. Both teams played very
well. James certainly did not have a poor game in my opinion. I did find
it interesting that when the gold was on the line the old workhorses
Diduck, Wilson, St. Louis played their strongest.
These women are tremendous leaders.
You know it is impossible for me to say this player is better that player
at this level as these are the best players in the world and they are all
great, highly skilled players but I have to wonder if Angela james being
cut will hurt Canada's chances. Especially now with Schuler possibly being
injured. Although Luce letendre could be on this Team and is a wonderful
character player with speed and one of my personal favorites but she does
not bring to the Team what James can (center, scoring touch, experience).
I caught up to Ben Smith after the US practice at the All Star weekend and
he seems like a really good guy. During games he seems quite the jerk. But
he really loves his team and gave them very high praise even though they
had lost the night before. I think the Canadian Team needs more of that.
I sometimes see an interview with Shannon Miller and she comes across as
having the personality of a lead balloon. That doesn't mean she is a bad
coach, Scotty Bowman has a similar way about him. But from what I have seen
so far anyway, Ben Smith is a superior bench boss.
If Canada wins I can guarantee you that it will be the play of the 4
original work horses that will make the difference - Wilson, St.Louis,
Diduck and Heaney that will win this thing for Canada.
The fact that we are having discussions about this stuff is great for
women's hockey. People care now. The Candian and US Teams carry
themselves so well off the ice too. I am thrilled to see the recognition
they are finally getting for the great athletes they are.
A.V. Chernin
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 28 Jan 1998 20:59:36 -0800
From: "Phil & Debbie Cottrell"
Subject: USA/Canada Final Exhibition
Only caught the third period on USA Hockey:
Canada 4, USA 2 before 4,112 in Colorado Springs. Rheaume in goal for
Canada, DeCosta for the USA.
Goyette opened up the scoring for Canada early in the first period, King
tied it for USA before the end of the period. In the second, goals by
Botterill and McCormick put Canada up by two at the intermission. USA got
one back via Looney about five minutes into the third. USA withstood a two
person disadvantage, then Canada fought off a powerplay with about 3 minutes
to play. DeCosta was pulled and Wickenheiser scored an empty-netter with 8
seconds to go.
Three stars according to the Colorado radio station:
1. DeCosta (34 shots against)
2. McCormick
3. Nystrom
Phil, Victoria, BC
------------------------------
End of Women-in-Hockey Digest V1 #112
*************************************