PDA

View Full Version : RPI 2013/14: Sunny, with a slight chance of drivel



Pages : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 [57] 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69

FlagDUDE08
11-23-2013, 08:30 PM
OK, so we win a game. Big whoop. We didn't play 1/3 of the game, and were helplessly out-faceo******* (and I don't care if that isn't a word). Not to mention, gave up another major. We still have a lot to work on before we even think about considering ourselves to be tough to play against.

DrDemento
11-23-2013, 08:58 PM
The scores this weekend were deceptinve. We were not out of the game friday until the last 5 minutes and actually had a very strong first 30 minutes. The string of consecutive penalties may have caused some of our second and third period problems(even if we did not give up a PP goal). And tonight we were not all that great despite winning by the same 5-2 score. You had it right-faceoffs killed us-we just really never got control of many and those we did, we could not keep control. We again made some very bad defensive mistakes but only had one cause a goal against. We will have to up the game for the next series. QU despite losing tonight(and will be quite angry I am sure) is a very good team and deserving of a top 5 ranking. Princeton is just hard to figure. Some nights they look abyssmal-and at other times seem to give you all you can take. We need 2 good weeks of practice for these teams and we have to be ready to adapt to what we can get away with both times.

lugnut92
11-23-2013, 08:58 PM
out-faceo*******

Top score, USCHO censor.

Red Cloud
11-23-2013, 09:39 PM
I'm shocked we haven't heard Big Jim's thoughts on tonight's game yet.

turk181
11-23-2013, 09:44 PM
Lot of talk about faceoffs but the actual numbers weren't horrible. W34, L38 with Higgsy taking the majority (& losing the majority) W11, L17. Timing and where they were won or lost though could contribute to the belief they were one-sided......http://www.rpiathletics.com/boxscore.aspx?path=hockey&id=3878

ServinisScores
11-23-2013, 11:07 PM
Hi gang - busy year, not much to offer for this season other than have enjoyed watching Pirri play on the telly tonight. LGR!

DrDemento
11-24-2013, 06:52 AM
Lot of talk about faceoffs but the actual numbers weren't horrible. W34, L38 with Higgsy taking the majority (& losing the majority) W11, L17. Timing and where they were won or lost though could contribute to the belief they were one-sided......http://www.rpiathletics.com/boxscore.aspx?path=hockey&id=3878

Turk-exactly-most of the ones we did win were center ice and meaningless. Deep in our zone when short handed we were horrible. I relly wish they would break that stat downat times. There are face offs and there are face offs and those right in front of your goalie that are won cleanly to the point and shot immediately are just not the same as the ones at the red line. I watched both games-either we were terrible(and i don't think JL or Higgs were that bad) or Mercyhurst was just better when they counted. In other games this year-we have been better so i think it was just a case of running up against some match ups that they were better at. As I pointed out on the scores thread-there are a lot of sneaky little things that game stats never show and can't show. And with many games determined by one goal or one play-if you can't see the game live or televised-you would never have known.

FlagDUDE08
11-24-2013, 06:55 AM
Lot of talk about faceoffs but the actual numbers weren't horrible. W34, L38 with Higgsy taking the majority (& losing the majority) W11, L17. Timing and where they were won or lost though could contribute to the belief they were one-sided......http://www.rpiathletics.com/boxscore.aspx?path=hockey&id=3878

I don't think there's any discrepancy in the aggregate, but Doc and I were more referring to the specific. If you break them down by period, assuming what Kurt said was accurate (and there could be some wiggle room for what the scorer dude wrote down), we lost a majority of them in the second period, and probably made up for it in the first (the third sounded fairly even, as the second was when I started paying attention to it). I'm not asking for us to win every single one, but we should be able to be dominant for sixty minutes, not forty. We were lucky they only scored two goals; a good team would have about four or five in that stretch.

FlagDUDE08
11-24-2013, 06:56 AM
Turk-exactly-most of the ones we did win were center ice and meaningless. Deep in our zone when short handed we were horrible. I relly wish they would break that stat downat times. There are face offs and there are face offs and those right in front of your goalie that are won cleanly to the point and shot immediately are just not the same as the ones at the red line. I watched both games-either we were terrible(and i don't think JL or Higgs were that bad) or Mercyhurst was just better when they counted. In other games this year-we have been better so i think it was just a case of running up against some match ups that they were better at. As I pointed out on the scores thread-there are a lot of sneaky little things that game stats never show and can't show. And with many games determined by one goal or one play-if you can't see the game live or televised-you would never have known.

IIRC, Mercyhurst's first goal was something as a direct result of SA's emphasis: Corner battles.

FlagDUDE08
11-24-2013, 06:58 AM
The scores this weekend were deceptinve. We were not out of the game friday until the last 5 minutes and actually had a very strong first 30 minutes. The string of consecutive penalties may have caused some of our second and third period problems(even if we did not give up a PP goal). And tonight we were not all that great despite winning by the same 5-2 score. You had it right-faceoffs killed us-we just really never got control of many and those we did, we could not keep control. We again made some very bad defensive mistakes but only had one cause a goal against. We will have to up the game for the next series. QU despite losing tonight(and will be quite angry I am sure) is a very good team and deserving of a top 5 ranking. Princeton is just hard to figure. Some nights they look abyssmal-and at other times seem to give you all you can take. We need 2 good weeks of practice for these teams and we have to be ready to adapt to what we can get away with both times.

Princeton isn't that hard to figure. They play the exact same way Cornell does (at least in terms of concept; the level of execution changes). I would find Quinnipiac to be harder to figure simply because we seem to have this streak going on (at least when we play there), and it's a cosine wave.

engineerhockeyfan
11-24-2013, 08:23 AM
Could not be here for the game last night, but it was good to get a win. And the team did exactly what I was expecting them to do on Friday night, and that was dominate the third period. (at least in shots on goal),
From reading the posts, it sounds like we took the second period off again. There has to be a way to fix that, what are these guys doing between the first and second periods?
No more easy games on the schedule, so we better get ready in the next two weeks.
I still really like this teams talent and believe we can go far, but only if we play hard for sixty minutes every game.
My other concern is the goaltending. What can Soffer give us? He has not seen the ice in a game, so even if he were to be competitive, he will be so nervous when he goes in that his first shot could finish him for the year. Scott had better stay healthy.

fr joe
11-24-2013, 08:57 AM
No more easy games on the schedule, so we better get ready in the next two weeks.
I still really like this teams talent and believe we can go far, but only if we play hard for sixty minutes every game.
My other concern is the goaltending. What can Soffer give us? He has not seen the ice in a game, so even if he were to be competitive, he will be so nervous when he goes in that his first shot could finish him for the year. Scott had better stay healthy.

I was wondering myself when Diebold could get a break (Would he say he didn't need one? Maybe. But given his workload, a break would be good.) We've got a week off, then two weekends at home, and a home Saturday against the Under-18 team. I wonder if Soffer will play in that exhibition? It would be good to get him some game experience.
After the exhibition, we're off until January 3/4.

johnk
11-24-2013, 09:12 AM
I was wondering myself when Diebold could get a break (Would he say he didn't need one? Maybe. But given his workload, a break would be good.) We've got a week off, then two weekends at home, and a home Saturday against the Under-18 team. I wonder if Soffer will play in that exhibition? It would be good to get him some game experience.
After the exhibition, we're off until January 3/4.

They actually play Sunday against Under 18 teal after 2 with Denver on Friday and Saturday. No way Diebold plays 3 straight and I would expect Soffer to play Sunday.

troyboy
11-24-2013, 09:35 AM
Okay there are some in this world who choose to have opinions based upon hearsay. Others look at facts before forming a theory. I choose the latter method.

If you go to the CHN site they have Kratch Rankings and PWR posted albeit based upon last year's model which includes the now defunct TUC criterion. Nonetheless these are measures that can still be applied for the sake of comparisons.

Rensselaer is 25th in pairwise and 29th in Kratch. Meanwhile the Kratch standings of teams that RPI has beaten are: UNH (10), Colgate (20), BU (24), Sacred Heart (54) and Dartmouth (59). So only one team that is 'currently' an NCAA bubble team. Note that Harvard is 36th and Mercyhurst is 42nd. Clearly after more than 1/3 of the season completed, enough to be statistically significant, this team is average at best. The faux anger they displayed after the second Union game did not translate to hustle or desperation against Mercyhurst as 'WAP' suggested it might. Once again RPI got outshot and outskated after the first period. Are they not conditioned to play 60 minutes? Do they just not care? I doubt that. The only sensible conclusion I can come to is that they are not as good as originally advertised. You are what your record says you are. That is not based on 'lack of hockey knowledge', it is based upon empirical evidence. Boston College lost to Maine last night 5-1 it appears BC is not what we thought they were and it appears Jerry York has lost control of the locker room and the team ! I'm sure you agree DeepRed72 !

DeepRed72
11-24-2013, 09:47 AM
It is about time the team won although the effort was still uneven. Still will need much better against the Q. I have a question about Friday's strategy by Appert. Why pull the goalie with 2 minutes left? General practice is to wait near the last minute. Did Appert think we would never get back into Mercyhurst's end?

Ralph Baer
11-24-2013, 10:12 AM
It is about time the team won although the effort was still uneven. Still will need much better against the Q. I have a question about Friday's strategy by Appert. Why pull the goalie with 2 minutes left? General practice is to wait near the last minute. Did Appert think we would never get back into Mercyhurst's end?

He has had a tendency to pull goalies relatively early. It seems to be his philosophy.

lugnut92
11-24-2013, 10:20 AM
It is about time the team won although the effort was still uneven. Still will need much better against the Q. I have a question about Friday's strategy by Appert. Why pull the goalie with 2 minutes left? General practice is to wait near the last minute. Did Appert think we would never get back into Mercyhurst's end?

Appert likes to pull his goalies. It's a long standing practice for him. There's a scholarly paper (that I won't dig up) that someone wrote talking about when the best time to pull a goalie is (specific to the NHL), and the authors found that being aggressive and pulling the goalie earlier is more likely to yield the results you want. Obviously the NHL isn't the same as the NCAA (no loser point for us), but forcing overtime is better than losing in regulation.
Funnily enough, Appert isn't nearly as aggressive as the paper says he should be.

EDIT: Ralph (partially) beat me to it.

RPI fan 4 life
11-24-2013, 11:30 AM
What I would like to know is when was the last time that SA pulled the goalie and we actually scored? Getting tired of having ENG's scored against us.

Red Cloud
11-24-2013, 11:36 AM
What I would like to know is when was the last time that SA pulled the goalie and we actually scored? Getting tired of having ENG's scored against us.

What does it matter? Keep the goalie in and lose by one, or pull him and potentially lose by two but have a better chance at scoring the tying goal? Who cares?

lugnut92
11-24-2013, 11:37 AM
What I would like to know is when was the last time that SA pulled the goalie and we actually scored? Getting tired of having ENG's scored against us.

Looks like the second Minnesota St. game last year (Box Score (http://www.collegehockeystats.net/1213/boxes/mmnsren1.o20)). Unfortunately, we lost in OT. I know we got one against Harvard (http://www.collegehockeystats.net/1112/boxes/mharren1.f10) two years ago as well.