Strong Power Play Caps M. Hockey's Energetic 50-Minute Effort

Harvard’s power-play goal 9:27 into the third period Friday night against Rensselaer proved to be one of the game’s key moments—for the Engineers. At the time, the goal broke a 1-1 tie and gave the Crimson its first lead of the night. It also seemed destined, by its nature—a dominant power play goal where the Harvard forwards simply wore down the RPI defense—to dictate the tone and tempo of the game.

And in a way it did, just not in the manner the Crimson anticipated.

The man-advantage began almost eight minutes into the third, when the Engineers’ Tommy Green was called for slashing. It was Harvard’s second power play of the game, and proved to be an impressive one. Over the course of one minute and 36 seconds—from 7:51 to 9:27—the Crimson almost knocked the Engineers off their skates.

Junior center Tom Cavanagh won the initial draw in the face-off circle immediately to RPI goalie Nathan Marsters’ left; a quick shot, a save and a cover by Marsters again led to a face-off, this time on his right.

Another face-off would follow. All told, Harvard forced three face-offs near the Engineers net and kept all of them inside the blue line, using sustained pressure to pepper Marsters with six shots over the next 1:36. Following the third faceoff in the RPI’s zone, the Crimson’s top power-play unit kept up the pressure without allowing a stoppage in play, rotating the puck along the low boards and working it back-and-forth at the blue line.

Following a hard shot by senior forward Tim Pettit, Cavanagh scooped up the loose puck, worked it down along the low boards and found assistant captain Tyler Kolarik in front for an easy power-play goal.

“We had the puck in there the full duration of a minute-thirty before we scored,” Mazzoleni said. “We had some great chances; it was great goaltending [by Marsters].”

“I thought our movement with the puck and away from the puck was strong,” he said. “We generated numerous scoring opportunities [in the game].”

But those opportunities weren’t enough, even with the impressive power play goal. Marsters turned aside 16 of the 17 shots he faced in the final frame, and served as a rallying point for the Engineers, which was a key factor according to RPI coach Dan Fridgen.

“I liked the way we really didn’t get rattled when [Harvard] went up 2-1 on the power play goal,” he said.

LEAMAN RETURNS

Spectators at Saturday night’s game witnessed the homecoming of first-year Union head coach Nate Leaman, who served as an assistant on Mazzoleni’s staff from 1999-2003.

Every current Harvard player either played for or was recruited by Leaman. Though it was not the Crimson’s first game against Leaman this season—that was a 3-2 win against the Dutchmen in Schenectady, NY on Jan. 2—it was Leaman’s first game at Bright Hockey Center since his departure.

“It’s a lot different being on this side,” said Leaman of his return to the Harvard rink. “Obviously, there’s a lot of familiar people. It was good to see [Dick Emerson] the trainer, and Jamie Weir [Harvard’s assistant director of athletic communications], and people like that. [Because] I think the people around here are just really good people. They’re solid, solid people.”

Leaman had a hard time masking disappointment with losing to his old team after the game. With the Harvard band playing “Ten Thousand Men of Harvard” after the final horn, Leaman said, half-jokingly, that he didn’t like “that song.”

“It’s not a good song when you’re the visiting team,” he said.

JUMP

Leaman shortened the Union bench to three lines, hoping to battle Harvard’s team speed by going with his fastest players. “[Last time] they had so much speed against us by stretching us out,” he said.

But after the game, Leaman said he thought the plan had backfired, as his players became fatigued late in the third period—just as they began to get better man-advantage chances.

“When we were getting the power play at the end, there, I thought the guys just didn’t have a lot of jump,” Leaman said. “They were tired.”

Harvard’s penalty kill for the night was perfect, as the Crimson foiled power play attempts in the second and third periods, and stopped a 6-on-5 at the end of the game.

“As far as their penalty kill, I thought they just outworked us,” Leaman said. “It wasn’t so much in their defensive zone. It was in the neutral ice and on their forecheck. We just didn’t have the jump to really get up the ice and go against them.”

—Staff writer Timothy M. McDonald can be reached at tmcdonal@fas.harvard.edu.

—Staff writer Alex McPhillips can be reached at rmcphill@fas.harvard.edu.