Icers Use Unique Brand of Play

So how did the No. 2 Harvard women’s hockey team collect 25 regular season wins this year? Well, the squad played “Harvard hockey.” And how did the Crimson manage to stay near the top of the nation in nearly every statistical category? “Harvard hockey,” of course. And what has propelled the team to this weekend’s ECAC semifinals? That’s right, you guessed it—good old “Harvard hockey.”

Ask any Crimson player or coach what was behind the remarkable season now drawing to a close, and the answer—modest to a fault—is nearly always the same: it wasn’t one great player. No, it was “Harvard hockey.”

So just what is Harvard hockey? It’s pretty simple, really—you begin at the beginning.

“I think it all starts in recruiting,” said Harvard coach Katey Stone. “You recruit the right kind of kid—the kid with great character and attitude and strong work ethic.”

While the preliminary attraction of any player is, of course, her hockey ability, it takes more than individual talent to form a cohesive squad.

“What makes the difference of whether we really want [a player] as a part of our team,” said sophomore forward Julie Chu, “is the type of character she has, and her personality, and what kind of element she can bring to our team productively.

“And I think that’s the key,” she added. “It’s recruiting the player for her athletic abilities, but also, almost more importantly, for her character.”

Co-captain Lauren McAuliffe agrees.

“A lot of teams you can look at on paper,” McAuliffe said, “and you’re like, ‘wow, this team should be so dominant,’ but it just underachieves.

“I think we’ve overachieved a lot. It’s because when you like the kids you’re playing with and you’re really playing with your best friends, it’s just a whole new experience.”

So it seems unanimously agreed upon that the character of a team brings it to life. But it doesn’t hurt to have talent on your side, too. And Harvard has plenty. Chu and co-captain Angela Ruggiero, who average 1.39 and 1.00 assists per game, respectively, are both United States Olympians and National Team members. Junior forward Nicole Corriero, who has remained a driving offensive force all season long with 2.16 points and 1.29 goals per game, is a member of the Canadian under-22 National Team.

But the three aren’t the only weapons on the Crimson. There are 18 other players on the team, and each of them is dangerous in her own right.

“It’s great to have the Olympians, because they raise the level of play for everyone,” Stone said, “but it’s just too easy to shut one or two people down on the ice. You have to have a unit of six out on the ice all the time where there are threats all over the place.

“We’re trying to develop everyone, individually and collectively, so that at any point, if you leave one of our kids alone, she’s going to hurt you.”

And anybody on the Crimson can do some damage. Thus far, Harvard has garnered 348 points. The titanic total has come from the sticks of 17 different players, 10 of whom have double-digit point totals. Even if you removed all the players with more than 20 points—and there are six of them—the Crimson would still have tallied more points than its opponents have collected against Harvard. The squad plays four skaters with more than 30 points and three with more than 50.

“In terms of comparing us to other teams,” said sophomore forward Jennifer Raimondi, “our game plan works around our strengths.”

This depth is certainly one of those assets.

“Our third line is probably the best third line in the nation,” McAuliffe said. “They get on the ice, get the puck deep into the offensive zone and get off.

“Our fourth liners will play against our power plays in practice,” she added, “and are comparable to most penalty killers that we see in games.”

The Crimson also utilizes a crisp, quick game.

“We like to move the puck fast,” Ruggiero said. “[We employ] a lot of passing and try to generate a lot of shots on net.”

The squad has launched 1, 319 shots on goal over the course of the season—that’s an average of 42.5 per game—while the stellar Harvard defense has held opponents to only 532 shots, or an average of 17.2 per contest.

And as opposed to the NHL clutch-and-grab style of play seen in teams like ECAC rival Brown, the Crimson’s game has remained orderly, relying on accurate movement and finesse—much like powerhouse No. 1 Minnesota.

“We’re a very clean team,” Ruggiero said. “[We play] more [of] a European style of hockey. I think passing is a big part of our game, just moving the puck.”

Chu agreed, saying that “although we are not afraid to be physical with our opponents, our game really centers around having flow by moving the puck quickly and having quick changes.”

It is this game which has led the squad to another dominant season, one which produced only three losses, two of which were decided by just one goal.

The Crimson has averaged 4.48 goals per game and—backed by solid defense and an impenetrable wall of a goalie between the pipes—allowed only 1.16.

Sophomore netminder Ali Boe, who has seen the majority of the Crimson action this season, carries a dependable .927 save percentage. Meanwhile, freshman goaltender Emily Vitt has collected an impressive .954 save percentage of her own.

With such strong weapons at both ends of the ice, Harvard has had little trouble stringing together unbeaten streaks of 15, nine and currently, five games.

So in the end, what is this “Harvard hockey” which has put the team in sole possession of the best Division I win percentage of .887?

Well, it depends on whom you ask.

Stone: “it’s to outwork everybody...and to earn every bit of it.”

Corriero: “[it’s] not about individual accolades or glory.”

Ruggiero: “it’s a team game where we try to use everyone in the play, everyone on the ice.”

McAuliffe: “Wow. It’s kind of an intangible. The whole experience of Harvard hockey is not just playing hockey—it’s a lot of heart and a lot of hustle.”

So that’s “Harvard hockey.” Pretty simple, right?