Grading the Terriers: 10/30 vs. UMass-Lowell

By Arielle Aronson/DFP Staff

Offense: C
Throughout two and a half periods, the Terriers seemed to have forgotten about offense. UMass-Lowell has struggled on defense this season, giving up an average of five goals per game against Hockey East opponents. BU failed to score Saturday night until 16:17 in the third period. They attempted 71 shots and had 30 on target. Warsofsky was the biggest spark on offense, and he is a defenseman. In the last four minutes of the game, however, when BU really needed to score, they were able to do so.

Defense: B+
The Terriers took a big hit on defense six minutes into the game when Max Nicastro was charged with a five-minute major and game misconduct for hitting from behind. BU was forced to cycle through five defensemen for the majority of the night, but for most of the game, it did not show. After the first period, the defense held UML to just 11 total shots, including only four in the third period. UML did not have many Grade-A scoring chances, but in the third period, they scored on their only Grade-A chance.

Goaltending: A-
Grant Rollheiser had a solid start in net tonight after three weeks without seeing game action. He extended BU’s streak of shutouts through the first two periods tonight and very rarely gave up juicy rebounds. Rollheiser did not see many shots through the last two periods, however, and UML’s scoring chances were severely limited, as they did not get many good shots on him. Regardless, tonight’s game certainly earned him more playing time even with Kieran Millan on top of his game.

Special Teams: B
BU’s penalty kill has now killed off 30 of its last 31 penalty kills cleanly. They came up big in the first period when killing off Nicastro’s major, allowing only one shot in almost four minutes of a man-advantage before UML evened play to four-on-four with a too many men penalty. The power play had nine shots on five power plays, but failed to score each time. The Terriers’ first goal, however, came on a delayed penalty while the Terriers had the extra attacker on the ice.

X-Factor: Will to win
BU certainly did not play well through the first two and a half periods, and Parker noted in his press conference that if there was any justice, BU would have either lost or tied. Once UML took the lead halfway through the third, however, BU seemed to wake up. In the last four minutes, the Terriers looked hungry for the win for the first time in the game, and they got it.

4 thoughts on “Grading the Terriers: 10/30 vs. UMass-Lowell”

  1. BU plays better when shorthanded vs. on the power play. It would be great if they could refuse to accept the man advantage! They become too pass happy on the power play. As they say, you can’t score unless you shot the puck.

  2. Arielle, could you explain how Warso was the offensive spark in the game? Fom what I saw, I thought he as pretty awful and actually underperformed compared to what we usually see out of him.

  3. Warsofsky certainly didn’t have his best game, but he was responsible for creating both goals. So I’d say calling him the biggest offensive spark is accurate. From the last paragraph of my sidebar above:

    “I don’t think he played extremely well tonight,” Parker said of Warsofsky. “But he has been a Lowell killer … and he was one of the guys that turned it up a notch when he had to in the third period. And we expect that from him.”

Comments are closed.