Out Hit?!
Posted by Harrier
Out Hit?!
Posted by: Harrier (209.150.239.---)
Date: February 22, 2005 03:04PM
Hey critics of Obyrne - anyone notice that this was the first home weekend where the Big Red did not decidedly out hit both opponents?? That led to the up and down the ice pace, many of the uncommon defensive miscues, and more chances against McKee. Aside form the Bitz Molson Hynes Combination there was no physical dominance from the other lines and without OB and Pokoluk the traffic around McKee is getting closer.
We need Obyrne (Penalties and all) and Cam Abbott back in the lineup ASAP!
We need Obyrne (Penalties and all) and Cam Abbott back in the lineup ASAP!
Re: Out Hit?!
Posted by: Pace (209.2.88.---)
Date: February 22, 2005 03:08PM
If I may posit an explanation, I think it's because of Murphy. We all know Murphy sucks. He loves giving out penalties, most of the time without good reason. I'm sure Coach told O'Byrne and Cam to be more careful. Added up and down traffic may be bad, but being a man (or two) down is much worse.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/22/2005 03:09PM by Pace.
Re: Out Hit?!
Posted by: billhoward (---.union01.nj.comcast.net)
Date: February 22, 2005 03:08PM
Without the enforcers, we outscored the opponents 10-1 and in the first game allowed the opponent zero power play chances. Maybe there are multiple ways to win in hockey. That said, probably better O'Byrne was out this past weekend and back (?) for Clarkson and St. Lawrence on the road than vice versa. They probably pour lead shot into their sticks.
Re: Out Hit?!
Posted by: KeithK (---.external.lmco.com)
Date: February 22, 2005 03:14PM
John Murphy was the ref this weekend, who I've generally thought was a good ref through the years. From what I remember he tended to let the teams play and not call the game very tight, contrary to your assertion that he loves giving out penalties. Friday's game was relatively light on penalties, anyway. Maybe Mr. Murphy has changed his style lately.
Re: Out Hit?!
Posted by: Harrier (209.150.239.---)
Date: February 22, 2005 03:23PM
we outscored RPI and Union 10-1 - not teams we will see in the playoffs
Re: Out Hit?!
Posted by: billhoward (---.union01.nj.comcast.net)
Date: February 22, 2005 03:45PM
We may be second in the nation in penalty kill percentage at 88%, but when someone from Cornell goes off, I get nervous more than 12% of the time. We have allowed the fewest power play opportunities (though most other teams also played more games) but what if we became more disciplined and allowed one less PP per game than we do now?
Actually, looking at the team stats really does show the dominance of special teams:
1 in power play % (too bad we don't get more chances)
2 (tie) in penalty kill
7 (shorthand goals)
1 team defense
15 team offense
I'm coming around to Schafer's style of play. (It's hard not to with this kind of win streak.) The only fly in ointment, well, two actually:
1. If good teams can shut down Cornell's power play we better hope McKee stops everything
2. In low scoring games decided by a single goal, 1-0 or 2-1, one bad bounce of the puck hurts you more than a 5-3 or 4-2 game.
Actually, looking at the team stats really does show the dominance of special teams:
1 in power play % (too bad we don't get more chances)
2 (tie) in penalty kill
7 (shorthand goals)
1 team defense
15 team offense
I'm coming around to Schafer's style of play. (It's hard not to with this kind of win streak.) The only fly in ointment, well, two actually:
1. If good teams can shut down Cornell's power play we better hope McKee stops everything
2. In low scoring games decided by a single goal, 1-0 or 2-1, one bad bounce of the puck hurts you more than a 5-3 or 4-2 game.
Re: Out Hit?!
Posted by: Trotsky (---.frdrmd.adelphia.net)
Date: February 22, 2005 03:52PM
They really aren't *that* anemic on offense. This is a far cry from the 2.0 GFA / 2.0 GAA days of '01.
Here are Cornell's GFA in ECAC RS play: [www.tbrw.info]
This year the team is at 3.1 GFA with 2 to play.
Here are Cornell's GAA in ECAC RS play: [www.tbrw.info]
This year the team is at 1.2 GAA with 2 to play.
Here are Cornell's GFA in ECAC RS play: [www.tbrw.info]
This year the team is at 3.1 GFA with 2 to play.
Here are Cornell's GAA in ECAC RS play: [www.tbrw.info]
This year the team is at 1.2 GAA with 2 to play.
Re: Out Hit?!
Posted by: KeithK (---.external.lmco.com)
Date: February 22, 2005 04:07PM
A more useful metric than straight GF/GA might be GF/(League Avg). That would help in comparing teams across eras. Not sure if the league average data is available for very far into the past, however.
Re: Out Hit?!
Posted by: Trotsky (---.frdrmd.adelphia.net)
Date: February 22, 2005 04:12PM
[Q]KeithK Wrote:
A more useful metric than straight GF/GA might be GF/(League Avg). That would help in comparing teams across eras. Not sure if the league average data is available for very far into the past, however.[/q]
Oh believe me, it is.
A more useful metric than straight GF/GA might be GF/(League Avg). That would help in comparing teams across eras. Not sure if the league average data is available for very far into the past, however.[/q]
Oh believe me, it is.
Re: Out Hit?!
Posted by: jtwcornell91 (---.loyno.edu)
Date: February 22, 2005 04:14PM
[Q]KeithK Wrote:
John Murphy was the ref this weekend, who I've generally thought was a good ref through the years. From what I remember he tended to let the teams play and not call the game very tight, contrary to your assertion that he loves giving out penalties. Friday's game was relatively light on penalties, anyway. Maybe Mr. Murphy has changed his style lately.[/q]
Kotyra's the only ECAC ref I would call "good". J. Murphy is in the second-tier category with Hansen and Dell, refs who are sometimes annoying, but you know where they're coming from, and they don't totally suck. (The third tier includes D. Murphy and DuPree.)
John Murphy was the ref this weekend, who I've generally thought was a good ref through the years. From what I remember he tended to let the teams play and not call the game very tight, contrary to your assertion that he loves giving out penalties. Friday's game was relatively light on penalties, anyway. Maybe Mr. Murphy has changed his style lately.[/q]
Kotyra's the only ECAC ref I would call "good". J. Murphy is in the second-tier category with Hansen and Dell, refs who are sometimes annoying, but you know where they're coming from, and they don't totally suck. (The third tier includes D. Murphy and DuPree.)
Re: Out Hit?!
Posted by: Facetimer (---.toddweld.com)
Date: February 22, 2005 04:15PM
[Q]billhoward Wrote:
2. In low scoring games decided by a single goal, 1-0 or 2-1 [/q]
Thanks Bill for explaining what "games decided by a single goal" means.
2. In low scoring games decided by a single goal, 1-0 or 2-1 [/q]
Thanks Bill for explaining what "games decided by a single goal" means.
Re: Out Hit?!
Posted by: Jacob '06 (---.chem.cornell.edu)
Date: February 22, 2005 04:16PM
I didn't particularly enjoy his style. In the beginning of Saturdays game, I could hear him yelling all kinds of stuff to the players about not using their sticks on bodies down in the corner, but thats as far as it got. If you are going to yell at the players for stuff, you need to call a penalty for it if they keep doing it. I feel that he didn't call enough this weekend.
Re: Out Hit?!
Posted by: ursusminor (---.ipt.aol.com)
Date: February 22, 2005 04:54PM
[Q]Harrier Wrote:
we outscored RPI and Union 10-1 - not teams we will see in the playoffs[/q]
Base 7?
we outscored RPI and Union 10-1 - not teams we will see in the playoffs[/q]
Base 7?
Re: Out Hit?!
Posted by: KeithK (---.external.lmco.com)
Date: February 22, 2005 05:03PM
[q] we outscored RPI and Union 10-1 [sic] - not teams we will see in the playoffs[/q]Who's to say we won't play either RPI or Union in the playoffs? Yes both teams would be on the road in the first round if the season ended today (and RPI is likely to stay there). But, if we finish first we play whichever team is lowest ranked after the first round. It's not too hard to imagine Union getting it together and beating Clarkson (their opponent at the moment). As for RPI, the Engineers took 3 of 4 points from Brown this season so that's not inconceivable either.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/22/2005 06:11PM by KeithK.
Re: Out Hit?!
Posted by: DeltaOne81 (---.raytheon.com)
Date: February 22, 2005 05:26PM
NVM
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/22/2005 05:34PM by DeltaOne81.
Re: Out Hit?!
Posted by: Josh '99 (---.yw.yu.edu)
Date: February 22, 2005 05:46PM
[Q]jtwcornell91 Wrote:
Kotyra's the only ECAC ref I would call "good". J. Murphy is in the second-tier category with Hansen and Dell, refs who are sometimes annoying, but you know where they're coming from, and they don't totally suck. (The third tier includes D. Murphy and DuPree.)[/q]
I disagree. Dell is terrible.
Kotyra's the only ECAC ref I would call "good". J. Murphy is in the second-tier category with Hansen and Dell, refs who are sometimes annoying, but you know where they're coming from, and they don't totally suck. (The third tier includes D. Murphy and DuPree.)[/q]
I disagree. Dell is terrible.
Re: Out Hit?!
Posted by: jtwcornell91 (---.loyno.edu)
Date: February 22, 2005 06:10PM
[Q]KeithK Wrote:
But we play whichever team is lowest ranked after the first round.[/q]
Unless Hahvahd runs the table and we get swept in the North Country. Now go outside, turn around three times, and spit!
Re: Out Hit?!
Posted by: KeithK (---.external.lmco.com)
Date: February 22, 2005 06:12PM
I said "if we finish first". Honest. That's what I wrote in the first place. Please ignore the "Edited' tag - that was to fix a typo. That's my story and I'm sticking to it.
Re: Out Hit?!
Posted by: jtwcornell91 (---.loyno.edu)
Date: February 22, 2005 06:15PM
[Q]jmh30 Wrote:
I disagree. Dell is terrible.[/q]
I threw Dell into the second category because he distinguished himself by calling tight games the weekend after Schafer earned the suspension for cursing out Dupree for not calling anything on injury-risking hits. Basically the league suspended Schafer and then acknowledged his complaint by giving us a ref who would call everything. So maybe it's just that he's the kind of terrible we needed at that point.
I disagree. Dell is terrible.[/q]
I threw Dell into the second category because he distinguished himself by calling tight games the weekend after Schafer earned the suspension for cursing out Dupree for not calling anything on injury-risking hits. Basically the league suspended Schafer and then acknowledged his complaint by giving us a ref who would call everything. So maybe it's just that he's the kind of terrible we needed at that point.
Re: Out Hit?!
Posted by: Trotsky (---.frdrmd.adelphia.net)
Date: February 22, 2005 07:25PM
I'm going to create the TBRW tables for GF/GP and GA/GP as a ratio of the league means of those statistics. However, I have a question before proceeding. Does it have greater statistical integrity and meaning to include the Cornell GA and GF totals in the league totals, or to exclude them (and exclude the Cornell games in the other teams' total, of course)? Maybe a card-carrying math genius like John Whelan or somebody who uses stats all the time in their work like John Hayes has an opinion/answer?
Re: Out Hit?!
Posted by: billhoward (---.union01.nj.comcast.net)
Date: February 22, 2005 08:54PM
[Q]Trotsky Wrote: I'm going to create the TBRW tables for GF/GP and GA/GP as a ratio of the league means of those statistics. However, I have a question before proceeding. Does it have greater statistical integrity and meaning to include the Cornell GA and GF totals in the league totals, or to exclude them (and exclude the Cornell games in the other teams' total, of course)? Maybe a card-carrying math genius like John Whelan or somebody who uses stats all the time in their work like John Hayes has an opinion/answer?[/q]
You mean if the other teams average 4 goals for and 3.5 against , or 4.5 goals for and 3.0 againtst in games not played against Cornell, and Cornell averages 5 for and 1 against, do you omit Cornell's averages, and then also omit the games the others played against Cornell?
If you're trying to see how the rest of the league compares to Cornell -- you want the snapshot to be from Cornell's point of view -- then I think you have to omit the Cornell-involved games because Cornell can't play itself. You want to see how many goals Brown, Colgate, Harvard, Dartmouth, RPI, etc. average against Brown, Colgate, Harvard, Dartmouth, RPI, etcetera.
OTOH Cornell is only 1/12 of the league so the impact on the averages may be not that great. If we (Cornell) allow 1 goal in the ECAC average and the others average 3 goals against, the average would be the average of (1 team * 1 GA avg) + (11 teams * 3GA avg) or (1+33)/12 = 2.83. 2.83:1 vs. 3.0:1, either way, it's pretty clear.
You mean if the other teams average 4 goals for and 3.5 against , or 4.5 goals for and 3.0 againtst in games not played against Cornell, and Cornell averages 5 for and 1 against, do you omit Cornell's averages, and then also omit the games the others played against Cornell?
If you're trying to see how the rest of the league compares to Cornell -- you want the snapshot to be from Cornell's point of view -- then I think you have to omit the Cornell-involved games because Cornell can't play itself. You want to see how many goals Brown, Colgate, Harvard, Dartmouth, RPI, etc. average against Brown, Colgate, Harvard, Dartmouth, RPI, etcetera.
OTOH Cornell is only 1/12 of the league so the impact on the averages may be not that great. If we (Cornell) allow 1 goal in the ECAC average and the others average 3 goals against, the average would be the average of (1 team * 1 GA avg) + (11 teams * 3GA avg) or (1+33)/12 = 2.83. 2.83:1 vs. 3.0:1, either way, it's pretty clear.
Re: Out Hit?!
Posted by: DeltaOne81 (---.bos.east.verizon.net)
Date: February 22, 2005 09:37PM
From a statistical perspective it doesn't make a different. Using what *should* be the completely valid assumption that Cornell consist of 1/2*x of the average (because Cornell is one half of 1/x of the games), then you can completely calculate one from the other ( x = number of teams that year).
So if you know the average and the Cornell averages, you can calculate the averages w/o Cornell (and averages w/o Cornell & their opponent). And if you give the #s without Cornell, you could calculate the overall. So statistically, none is more 'valid', its just a different perspective.
Now, which is more interesting? Thats up to you, but it seems that taking out Cornell's #s would only be an attempt to make Cornell look only that much better. So I'd be more 'honest' and just do the overall. Or hell, do both!
So if you know the average and the Cornell averages, you can calculate the averages w/o Cornell (and averages w/o Cornell & their opponent). And if you give the #s without Cornell, you could calculate the overall. So statistically, none is more 'valid', its just a different perspective.
Now, which is more interesting? Thats up to you, but it seems that taking out Cornell's #s would only be an attempt to make Cornell look only that much better. So I'd be more 'honest' and just do the overall. Or hell, do both!
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.