The least disciplined team in the ECAC

Sometimes the monumentally whining RPI thread on USCHO comes up with something to think about. They listed penalty minutes in the ECAC with some minor discrepancies relating to box score sources. Cornell through last weekend leads in penalty minutes it seems mainly because we have so many major and misconduct penalties. One guy compared penalty minutes with these majors and misconducts backed out, and these were the top 4:

Cornell - 20.75mpg with, 12.33 without
Clarkson - 17.76mpg with, 14.23 without
Brown - 14.35mpg with, 11.41 without
RPI - 13.61 with, 12.77 without

See it here. Posts #763-765

It looks like we're pretty average for penalties without the majors and misconducts. What's going on with this year's Red?

It's been obvious to me for some time, that this is the most undisciplined team Mike Schafer has had during it time at Cornell..In the past, I used to brag how, when the scrums started, the Cornell players would drop their arms by their sides & skate away...Not this year's team!! And, I'm damned sorry to make these statements.

The statistics merely bear out reality..

redice
It's been obvious to me for some time, that this is the most undisciplined team Mike Schafer has had during it time at Cornell..In the past, I used to brag how, when the scrums started, the Cornell players would drop their arms by their sides & skate away...Not this year's team!! And, I'm damned sorry to make these statements.

The statistics merely bear out reality..

Interestingly, here's a quote from Mike in today's Daily Sun:

“Our team is very disciplined,” said head coach Mike Schafer ’86. “I think if you’re a team that’s undisciplined … then you have to worry about something [like the Harvard game]. We’ve been in very big emotional games already this year … and we’ve maintained our discipline.”

I'm pretty out of the loop on this team, but I did see the @Sucks game, and it did occur to me that we're pretty undisciplined. I think it was #4 specifically who caught my eye as a bit of a goon -- he took I think two really blatant, "I'm going to cross-check you cause I'm angry, grrrr!" penalties.

ftyuv
I'm pretty out of the loop on this team, but I did see the @Sucks game, and it did occur to me that we're pretty undisciplined. I think it was #4 specifically who caught my eye as a bit of a goon -- he took I think two really blatant, "I'm going to cross-check you cause I'm angry, grrrr!" penalties.

Clearly I remembered the wrong number -- #4 doesn't appear to show up on the penalty sheet at all. [cornellbigred.com]

From the IJ article on this weekend:

"It was almost like they were trying to be business-like, and they just can't," coach Mike Schafer said of Friday's debacle at Union. "This team can't be business-like. They've got to play with an edge. They've got to play excited, and they've got to play with enthusiasm."

So is that why? But anyway, getting on to this weekend, a few quotes:

"The Harvard weekend's always kind of an easy weekend to get kind of jacked up for with them being the main rivalry with us," co-captain Patrick Kennedy said. "Those games are always fun with the fish (tradition) and the fans. It's kind of the game of the year that everyone circles on the calendar."

and this:

"It's where we want to be. We couldn't ask for anything else," sophomore defenseman Nick D'Agostino said of Cornell's position. "We didn't get the start we wanted, but if you had told us at the beginning of the year when we were 0-3 that we'd be a few wins after from getting that home ice and possibly even third place in the standings, I think a lot of us would have taken that."

Here's hoping they play with enthusiasm and discipline.

Al DeFlorio

redice
It's been obvious to me for some time, that this is the most undisciplined team Mike Schafer has had during it time at Cornell..In the past, I used to brag how, when the scrums started, the Cornell players would drop their arms by their sides & skate away...Not this year's team!! And, I'm damned sorry to make these statements.

The statistics merely bear out reality..

Interestingly, here's a quote from Mike in today's Daily Sun:

“Our team is very disciplined,” said head coach Mike Schafer ’86. “I think if you’re a team that’s undisciplined … then you have to worry about something [like the Harvard game]. We’ve been in very big emotional games already this year … and we’ve maintained our discipline.”

Clearly the data does not support the contention that we are disciplined. I have been to 2 games this season and I agree I was surprised at the number of dumb penalties we have taken. At the risk of opening a can of worms, I think this is in part the changing nature of the game which is moving away from the Schafer style.

Towerroad

Al DeFlorio

redice
It's been obvious to me for some time, that this is the most undisciplined team Mike Schafer has had during it time at Cornell..In the past, I used to brag how, when the scrums started, the Cornell players would drop their arms by their sides & skate away...Not this year's team!! And, I'm damned sorry to make these statements.

The statistics merely bear out reality..

Interestingly, here's a quote from Mike in today's Daily Sun:

“Our team is very disciplined,” said head coach Mike Schafer ’86. “I think if you’re a team that’s undisciplined … then you have to worry about something [like the Harvard game]. We’ve been in very big emotional games already this year … and we’ve maintained our discipline.”

Clearly the data does not support the contention that we are disciplined. I have been to 2 games this season and I agree I was surprised at the number of dumb penalties we have taken. At the risk of opening a can of worms, I think this is in part the changing nature of the game which is moving away from the Schafer style.

I think Schafer is trying to maintain discipline, hence his benching of Nicholls during the SLU game. But let's face it, they're a young team. They going to play like it.

Jeff Hopkins '82

Towerroad

Al DeFlorio

redice
It's been obvious to me for some time, that this is the most undisciplined team Mike Schafer has had during it time at Cornell..In the past, I used to brag how, when the scrums started, the Cornell players would drop their arms by their sides & skate away...Not this year's team!! And, I'm damned sorry to make these statements.

The statistics merely bear out reality..

Interestingly, here's a quote from Mike in today's Daily Sun:

“Our team is very disciplined,” said head coach Mike Schafer ’86. “I think if you’re a team that’s undisciplined … then you have to worry about something [like the Harvard game]. We’ve been in very big emotional games already this year … and we’ve maintained our discipline.”

Clearly the data does not support the contention that we are disciplined. I have been to 2 games this season and I agree I was surprised at the number of dumb penalties we have taken. At the risk of opening a can of worms, I think this is in part the changing nature of the game which is moving away from the Schafer style.

I think Schafer is trying to maintain discipline, hence his benching of Nicholls during the SLU game. But let's face it, they're a young team. They going to play like it.

I agree but this quote, if accurate, seems out of touch with the facts. The coach might be trying to instill discipline and the relative inexperience, as you suggest, might be the reason for our lack of discipline. All the stats bear this out. We do not have a disciplined team when it comes to penalties. We are giving, on average, 2+ mins of power plays to the other teams over the season.

Benching Nicholls didn't help too much. Didn't he go right out against Union and get an early penalty which put us in a hole early?

It would be interesting to see ECAC teams compared on "PIM drawn." I guess the number of power plays in league games is a fair indicator.

Power Play:                    Totals    SHA       PCT
  1   Yale                     24/102      2      23.5
  2   Union                    16/ 72      3      22.2
  3   Princeton                21/ 99      2      21.2
  4   Dartmouth                14/ 67      1      20.9
  5   Rensselaer               19/ 93      0      20.4
  6   Harvard                  12/ 66      0      18.2
  7   Cornell                  13/ 72      0      18.1
  8   St. Lawrence             14/ 80      1      17.5
  9   Clarkson                 11/ 69      2      15.9
 10   Quinnipiac               11/ 75      3      14.7
 11   Brown                     9/ 70      2      12.9
 12   Colgate                   8/ 98      5       8.2

Note our number of penalty kills in league games is average:

Penalty Kill:                  Totals    SHF       PCT
  1   St. Lawrence             73/ 83      0      88.0
  2   Dartmouth                65/ 75      5      86.7
  3   Cornell                  71/ 82      2      86.6
  4   Rensselaer               84/ 98      2      85.7
  5   Yale                     65/ 79      1      82.3
  6   Harvard                  55/ 67      2      82.1
  7   Union                    59/ 72      0      81.9
  8   Clarkson                 86/105      0      81.9
  9   Quinnipiac               48/ 60      0      80.0
 10   Brown                    61/ 78      4      78.2
 11   Princeton                60/ 79      5      75.9
 12   Colgate                  64/ 85      0      75.3

All of which seems to correlate with speed: Yale fast, gets pulled down a lot; Clarkson slow, gets behind the play a lot.

Also: Colgate is dangerously close to getting outscored while on powerplay.

And the least disciplined fans.

Reading this thread for the first time after having returned home from the game I would have sworn it was entirely written post game.

Up 1-0, Nicholls takes a penalty 7 minutes into the game...tied 1-1.
Tied 1-1 with a 5:00 PP coming up, Mowrey takes a penalty after the whistle...Harvard takes a 2-1 lead.
Two more PP goals by Harvard and a very winnable game turns into a loss.

ithacat
Reading this thread for the first time after having returned home from the game I would have sworn it was entirely written post game.

Up 1-0, Nicholls takes a penalty 7 minutes into the game...tied 1-1.
Tied 1-1 with a 5:00 PP coming up, Mowrey takes a penalty after the whistle...Harvard takes a 2-1 lead.
Two more PP goals by Harvard and a very winnable game turns into a loss.

Except for Nicholls penalty, which I didn't see, and the fans penalty (I've said it before, it's time to quit the fish. It just doesn't add anything, but), I have nothing to complain about the penalties. Many, if not most players would do what Mowrey did. It certainly didn't seem like a major hit by him, and sometimes would be let go. Our problem wasn't the penalties, it was the undisciplined PK. 3 for 4 shouldn't happen.

Psychologically, the fish penalty really deflated the team. It's tough enough to win on the ice; a team doesn't need to have their fans helping the opposing team.

From Donnie Webb's column at Syracuse.com before the game:

Cornell head coach Mike Schafer said the Harvard rivalry and the tradition of throwing fish at the Crimson is the kind of event that is special to college athletics. He said he understands how football games in the Southeastern Conference have their own special place in sports. But so does the Cornell-Harvard game. “There’s electricity in the building,” Shafer said. “It just doesn’t get any better.”

----------------------------------------

From the Ithaca Journal after the game:

The annual tradition of showering the Crimson with aquatic life is permitted in pre-game festivities, but a warning was issued after it continued following a Big Red goal in the second period. Referees Bob Ritchie and Kevin Graber stuck to their guns in the third, putting Cornell shorthanded to sack the hosts of any momentum they had built after equalizing a game with their most heated rival.

"The fans, they hurt us," Schafer said. "They wanted the tradition to live, but it absolutely killed us."

BigRedHockeyFan
From Donnie Webb's column at Syracuse.com before the game:

Cornell head coach Mike Schafer said the Harvard rivalry and the tradition of throwing fish at the Crimson is the kind of event that is special to college athletics. He said he understands how football games in the Southeastern Conference have their own special place in sports. But so does the Cornell-Harvard game. “There’s electricity in the building,” Shafer said. “It just doesn’t get any better.”

----------------------------------------

From the Ithaca Journal after the game:

The annual tradition of showering the Crimson with aquatic life is permitted in pre-game festivities, but a warning was issued after it continued following a Big Red goal in the second period. Referees Bob Ritchie and Kevin Graber stuck to their guns in the third, putting Cornell shorthanded to sack the hosts of any momentum they had built after equalizing a game with their most heated rival.

"The fans, they hurt us," Schafer said. "They wanted the tradition to live, but it absolutely killed us."

Sorry but this last quote is, pardon my French, BS. This season we have taken 100 more minutes of penalties than Yale, and 150 more than Union. That is the equivalent of playing 1.5 to 2.5 games a man down. Yeah, the fool that threw the bottle/fish caused a penalty but lack of discipline caused the loss. It is one thing to blame the refs but when the coach starts blaming the fans something is really wrong. I think you can just as easily blame yesterdays loss on the stupid hit after the 5 min major. Was that smart? Defending your team mate? A 5 min powerplay is the best way to avenge thuggish behavior.

I'm sure nobody is more frustrated than the players about last night. They outplayed Harvard for large stretches, hit a crossbar and a post, and had a weak goalie seemingly at their mercy time and time again, but three different times they had to dig out of a hole, and the third time was just a bridge too far.

At the end of the day, if they win tonight they will be tied for third. In the words of Annie Savoy, "it's a long season and you gotta trust it."

Towerroad
Sorry but this last quote is, pardon my French, BS. This season we have taken 100 more minutes of penalties than Yale, and 150 more than Union. That is the equivalent of playing 1.5 to 2.5 games a man down. Yeah, the fool that threw the bottle/fish caused a penalty but lack of discipline caused the loss. It is one thing to blame the refs but when the coach starts blaming the fans something is really wrong. I think you can just as easily blame yesterdays loss on the stupid hit after the 5 min major. Was that smart? Defending your team mate? A 5 min powerplay is the best way to avenge thuggish behavior.

In past years, when we've had an effective power play, we could find some agreement on those points...The 10-11 PP has been so abysmal that I often wish we could decline the other team's penalties (ala football)....When we fail to capitalize on a PP, it often gives momentum to the other team...The concept that we have a 5-minute major & can score more than one goal just isn't a consideration this season...For you 'stat-hounds' out there, have we even scored one goal on a 5-minute major penalty this season? I'm not recalling any...

Yes, the child who threw an object on the ice and & drew that penalty for CU, should be identified & barred from Lynah until he/she grows up...And yes, I realize that that will not happen!!

Trotsky
I'm sure nobody is more frustrated than the players about last night. They outplayed Harvard for large stretches, hit a crossbar and a post, and had a weak goalie seemingly at their mercy time and time again, but three different times they had to dig out of a hole, and the third time was just a bridge too far.

At the end of the day, if they win tonight they will be tied for third. In the words of Annie Savoy, "it's a long season and you gotta trust it."

I think there is a lot of frustration going around. It looks to me like something is broken and the question is what will we do about it.

Towerroad

BigRedHockeyFan
From Donnie Webb's column at Syracuse.com before the game:

Cornell head coach Mike Schafer said the Harvard rivalry and the tradition of throwing fish at the Crimson is the kind of event that is special to college athletics. He said he understands how football games in the Southeastern Conference have their own special place in sports. But so does the Cornell-Harvard game. “There’s electricity in the building,” Shafer said. “It just doesn’t get any better.”

----------------------------------------

From the Ithaca Journal after the game:

The annual tradition of showering the Crimson with aquatic life is permitted in pre-game festivities, but a warning was issued after it continued following a Big Red goal in the second period. Referees Bob Ritchie and Kevin Graber stuck to their guns in the third, putting Cornell shorthanded to sack the hosts of any momentum they had built after equalizing a game with their most heated rival.

"The fans, they hurt us," Schafer said. "They wanted the tradition to live, but it absolutely killed us."

Sorry but this last quote is, pardon my French, BS. This season we have taken 100 more minutes of penalties than Yale, and 150 more than Union. That is the equivalent of playing 1.5 to 2.5 games a man down. Yeah, the fool that threw the bottle/fish caused a penalty but lack of discipline caused the loss. It is one thing to blame the refs but when the coach starts blaming the fans something is really wrong. I think you can just as easily blame yesterdays loss on the stupid hit after the 5 min major. Was that smart? Defending your team mate? A 5 min powerplay is the best way to avenge thuggish behavior.

Actually your math doesn't add up. 10 min penalties don't give PPs, just minutes. Here's the full IJ article. It shows that the team is in the middle third of the ECAC in terms of SH situations. I fully endorse him blaming the fans for hurting the team. The fans did hurt the team. It's happened before and will happen again, unless we stop the fish nonsense.

Jim Hyla

Towerroad

BigRedHockeyFan
From Donnie Webb's column at Syracuse.com before the game:

Cornell head coach Mike Schafer said the Harvard rivalry and the tradition of throwing fish at the Crimson is the kind of event that is special to college athletics. He said he understands how football games in the Southeastern Conference have their own special place in sports. But so does the Cornell-Harvard game. “There’s electricity in the building,” Shafer said. “It just doesn’t get any better.”

----------------------------------------

From the Ithaca Journal after the game:

The annual tradition of showering the Crimson with aquatic life is permitted in pre-game festivities, but a warning was issued after it continued following a Big Red goal in the second period. Referees Bob Ritchie and Kevin Graber stuck to their guns in the third, putting Cornell shorthanded to sack the hosts of any momentum they had built after equalizing a game with their most heated rival.

"The fans, they hurt us," Schafer said. "They wanted the tradition to live, but it absolutely killed us."

Sorry but this last quote is, pardon my French, BS. This season we have taken 100 more minutes of penalties than Yale, and 150 more than Union. That is the equivalent of playing 1.5 to 2.5 games a man down. Yeah, the fool that threw the bottle/fish caused a penalty but lack of discipline caused the loss. It is one thing to blame the refs but when the coach starts blaming the fans something is really wrong. I think you can just as easily blame yesterdays loss on the stupid hit after the 5 min major. Was that smart? Defending your team mate? A 5 min powerplay is the best way to avenge thuggish behavior.

Actually your math doesn't add up. 10 min penalties don't give PPs, just minutes. Here's the full IJ article. It shows that the team is in the middle third of the ECAC in terms of SH situations. I fully endorse him blaming the fans for hurting the team. The fans did hurt the team. It's happened before and will happen again, unless we stop the fish nonsense.

I am not sure it showed that at all it merely stated it as if it were a fact without data. The comparison I made was between the 2 best teams in the ECAC this year and Cornell. I merely note that there is a big gap between in PIM between these 2 teams and Cornell, a really big gap.

Towerroad

Jim Hyla

Towerroad

BigRedHockeyFan
From Donnie Webb's column at Syracuse.com before the game:

Cornell head coach Mike Schafer said the Harvard rivalry and the tradition of throwing fish at the Crimson is the kind of event that is special to college athletics. He said he understands how football games in the Southeastern Conference have their own special place in sports. But so does the Cornell-Harvard game. “There’s electricity in the building,” Shafer said. “It just doesn’t get any better.”

----------------------------------------

From the Ithaca Journal after the game:

The annual tradition of showering the Crimson with aquatic life is permitted in pre-game festivities, but a warning was issued after it continued following a Big Red goal in the second period. Referees Bob Ritchie and Kevin Graber stuck to their guns in the third, putting Cornell shorthanded to sack the hosts of any momentum they had built after equalizing a game with their most heated rival.

"The fans, they hurt us," Schafer said. "They wanted the tradition to live, but it absolutely killed us."

Sorry but this last quote is, pardon my French, BS. This season we have taken 100 more minutes of penalties than Yale, and 150 more than Union. That is the equivalent of playing 1.5 to 2.5 games a man down. Yeah, the fool that threw the bottle/fish caused a penalty but lack of discipline caused the loss. It is one thing to blame the refs but when the coach starts blaming the fans something is really wrong. I think you can just as easily blame yesterdays loss on the stupid hit after the 5 min major. Was that smart? Defending your team mate? A 5 min powerplay is the best way to avenge thuggish behavior.

Actually your math doesn't add up. 10 min penalties don't give PPs, just minutes. Here's the full IJ article. It shows that the team is in the middle third of the ECAC in terms of SH situations. I fully endorse him blaming the fans for hurting the team. The fans did hurt the team. It's happened before and will happen again, unless we stop the fish nonsense.

I am not sure it showed that at all it merely stated it as if it were a fact without data. The comparison I made was between the 2 best teams in the ECAC this year and Cornell. I merely note that there is a big gap between in PIM between these 2 teams and Cornell, a really big gap.

So you don't believe Brandon's research? Well I do, so I guess we differ on that one. And you did say we had the equivalent of 1.5 to 2.5 games a man down compared to Yale and Union. That is just not true. Unfortunately whenever I try to get the Team Stats for 2010-11, the ECAC site gives me the 2009-10 stats, so I can't give you the actual number of PP differences, but I'll believe Brandon, Thank You.

To add my two cents, I find it refreshing to see the team play with "an edge"—reminds me of the good ol' days of Stevie Wilson and Dan Dufresne. Indeed, I've heard that there were folks in even earlier years—Olds, the Fergusons—who were not exactly Lady Byng candidates. I prefer a couple of stupid penalties every once in a while to a team that seemingly has no get up and go. At least this year's team seems to be able to turn it on when it needs to, and that might not be said of other (2006) teams.

That being said, the penalties I can't abide are those in which Mowrey and Nicholls seem to be specializing, the egregiously obvious retaliation penalties that negate or reduce a power play. For the life of me, I can't understand why Mowrey hasn't sat more than he has. Kid's a freshman; kid needs to learn. And Nicholls? Nicholls... As far as I'm concerned, he's a liability—penalty-wise and skating-wise. Last night's third goal notwithstanding, putting him on a line with Espo and Collins wastes Espo and Collins. We looked fine at RPI... I rest my case.

See, what those two need to learn is what Steve Wilson was so good at—how to go over, get involved in a little pushing, and get the other guy to retaliate stupidly. And then skate away with a smile.

Brandon's discussion in the IJ is pretty well on: we're picking up lots of minutes but only giving away about .5 chances per game. But that number sticks in my craw. Granted, last year's number was much the same, but this year's power play is not as good as last year's. I just don't think we're good enough to play that game. There's only one other year in recent memory ('05—I blame Hynes, who should have known better) besides these last two where we've been out-power-play-chanced. Being out-power-play-chanced is a big part of why we've been being outshot, and that's also highly disturbing.

So, the boys need to put away their egos and win. Or Schafer needs to bench Mowrey and Nicholls. I don't care which.

Towerroad

Trotsky
I'm sure nobody is more frustrated than the players about last night. They outplayed Harvard for large stretches, hit a crossbar and a post, and had a weak goalie seemingly at their mercy time and time again, but three different times they had to dig out of a hole, and the third time was just a bridge too far.

At the end of the day, if they win tonight they will be tied for third. In the words of Annie Savoy, "it's a long season and you gotta trust it."

I think there is a lot of frustration going around. It looks to me like something is broken and the question is what will we do about it.

Fair point.

Dartmouth is coming off an equally bad loss to Colgate. This could be a stressful night for all.

The bench minor penalty appeared to come only after Dolt #3 / #4 tossed a newspaper and bottle on the ice. The refs seemed to ignore the 2 baby fish esp. when the Cornell players scooped them off the ice ... while the refs were at center ice pretending to believe there was no gambling at Rick's ... and only when the bottle came sailing down did they call the penalty. That's how I say it.

Schafer is saying, IMO: Hey, fish on the ice are a neat part of fan hijinks before the game and it's kind of a tradition. But once the game starts, back off.

Once funny, twice stupid.

I got the PIM number off each of the teams web sites. I may have misinterpreted the numbers but if I did please show me the errors of my way.

Towerroad
I got the PIM number off each of the teams web sites. I may have misinterpreted the numbers but if I did please show me the errors of my way.

The point is that PIMs include 10-minute misconducts, which don't actually put your team down a man. Of course, they hurt you in the sense that the player is not available during those 10 minutes, but you don't necessarily play shorthanded. If a team commits 20 2+10 penalties, that really doesn't hurt them that much more than committing 20 2-minute minors, so PIMs is not the right statistic to look at. The right thing to look at is the number of times you're shorthanded, or better still, the total amount of time that you spend shorthanded.

Dig in to the numbers for Yale and Union.

Robb

Towerroad
I got the PIM number off each of the teams web sites. I may have misinterpreted the numbers but if I did please show me the errors of my way.

The point is that PIMs include 10-minute misconducts, which don't actually put your team down a man. Of course, they hurt you in the sense that the player is not available during those 10 minutes, but you don't necessarily play shorthanded. If a team commits 20 2+10 penalties, that really doesn't hurt them that much more than committing 20 2-minute minors, so PIMs is not the right statistic to look at. The right thing to look at is the number of times you're shorthanded, or better still, the total amount of time that you spend shorthanded.

The whole system is broken! It's also stupid to represent your PK's success based on the number of PKs you beat, since a 5-second PK counts the same as a full 2 minutes. It should really be a stat like number of minutes of PK before you let in a goal. Similarly on PP.

ftyuv

Robb

Towerroad
I got the PIM number off each of the teams web sites. I may have misinterpreted the numbers but if I did please show me the errors of my way.

The point is that PIMs include 10-minute misconducts, which don't actually put your team down a man. Of course, they hurt you in the sense that the player is not available during those 10 minutes, but you don't necessarily play shorthanded. If a team commits 20 2+10 penalties, that really doesn't hurt them that much more than committing 20 2-minute minors, so PIMs is not the right statistic to look at. The right thing to look at is the number of times you're shorthanded, or better still, the total amount of time that you spend shorthanded.

The whole system is broken! It's also stupid to represent your PK's success based on the number of PKs you beat, since a 5-second PK counts the same as a full 2 minutes. It should really be a stat like number of minutes of PK before you let in a goal. Similarly on PP.

I believe I've seen that stat collected or at least calculable when playing time is divided betweem strength permutations (5-5, 5-4, etc)

Trotsky

ftyuv

Robb

Towerroad
I got the PIM number off each of the teams web sites. I may have misinterpreted the numbers but if I did please show me the errors of my way.

The point is that PIMs include 10-minute misconducts, which don't actually put your team down a man. Of course, they hurt you in the sense that the player is not available during those 10 minutes, but you don't necessarily play shorthanded. If a team commits 20 2+10 penalties, that really doesn't hurt them that much more than committing 20 2-minute minors, so PIMs is not the right statistic to look at. The right thing to look at is the number of times you're shorthanded, or better still, the total amount of time that you spend shorthanded.

The whole system is broken! It's also stupid to represent your PK's success based on the number of PKs you beat, since a 5-second PK counts the same as a full 2 minutes. It should really be a stat like number of minutes of PK before you let in a goal. Similarly on PP.

I believe I've seen that stat collected or at least calculable when playing time is divided betweem strength permutations (5-5, 5-4, etc)

Measuring average minutes between PP goals is a measure of the effectiveness of your penalty kill. But I think the topic here is about our propensity to incur more penalties than other teams.

Some have suggested that we control for 10 min misconduct penalties. Here is what I found, comparing us to the 2 best teams in our league. Unfortunately I could not come up with data for a clean comparison but it is instructive (at least to me).

1. This season Cornell has had 453 PIM's of which 80 are 10 min misconduct yielding a net of 373 "regular" penalty minutes. (source, CU Hockey Web Page)
2. Yale has had a total of 371 PIM's but no record I could find of the breakdown by type (Source, Yale Hockey Web Page)
3. Union has a total of 373 PIM but no record I could find of the breakdown by type (Source, Union Hockey Web Page)

So, our "regular" penalty minutes are roughly the same as Yale and Union's total penalty minutes. Even if you assume that Yale and Union incurred no 10 min penalties, the net disadvantage would be our team playing a short a player for 4 periods.

I specifically made the comparison between us and Yale and Union to help explain one dimension of differentiation with respect to the top teams in the league.

Towerroad

Trotsky

ftyuv

Robb

Towerroad
I got the PIM number off each of the teams web sites. I may have misinterpreted the numbers but if I did please show me the errors of my way.

The point is that PIMs include 10-minute misconducts, which don't actually put your team down a man. Of course, they hurt you in the sense that the player is not available during those 10 minutes, but you don't necessarily play shorthanded. If a team commits 20 2+10 penalties, that really doesn't hurt them that much more than committing 20 2-minute minors, so PIMs is not the right statistic to look at. The right thing to look at is the number of times you're shorthanded, or better still, the total amount of time that you spend shorthanded.

The whole system is broken! It's also stupid to represent your PK's success based on the number of PKs you beat, since a 5-second PK counts the same as a full 2 minutes. It should really be a stat like number of minutes of PK before you let in a goal. Similarly on PP.

I believe I've seen that stat collected or at least calculable when playing time is divided betweem strength permutations (5-5, 5-4, etc)

Measuring average minutes between PP goals is a measure of the effectiveness of your penalty kill. But I think the topic here is about our propensity to incur more penalties than other teams.

Some have suggested that we control for 10 min misconduct penalties. Here is what I found, comparing us to the 2 best teams in our league. Unfortunately I could not come up with data for a clean comparison but it is instructive (at least to me).

1. This season Cornell has had 453 PIM's of which 80 are 10 min misconduct yielding a net of 373 "regular" penalty minutes. (source, CU Hockey Web Page)
2. Yale has had a total of 371 PIM's but no record I could find of the breakdown by type (Source, Yale Hockey Web Page)
3. Union has a total of 373 PIM but no record I could find of the breakdown by type (Source, Union Hockey Web Page)

So, our "regular" penalty minutes are roughly the same as Yale and Union's total penalty minutes. Even if you assume that Yale and Union incurred no 10 min penalties, the net disadvantage would be our team playing a short a player for 4 periods.

I specifically made the comparison between us and Yale and Union to help explain one dimension of differentiation with respect to the top teams in the league.

So, making your assumptions of Y and U with no 10 min penalties, we have a net of 373 min, Union has 373, and Yale has 371. That means we're all equal, correct? So, where do you get 4 periods of SH? It seems you used our PIM including the 10 min ones.

Jim Hyla

Towerroad

Trotsky

ftyuv

Robb

Towerroad
I got the PIM number off each of the teams web sites. I may have misinterpreted the numbers but if I did please show me the errors of my way.

The point is that PIMs include 10-minute misconducts, which don't actually put your team down a man. Of course, they hurt you in the sense that the player is not available during those 10 minutes, but you don't necessarily play shorthanded. If a team commits 20 2+10 penalties, that really doesn't hurt them that much more than committing 20 2-minute minors, so PIMs is not the right statistic to look at. The right thing to look at is the number of times you're shorthanded, or better still, the total amount of time that you spend shorthanded.

The whole system is broken! It's also stupid to represent your PK's success based on the number of PKs you beat, since a 5-second PK counts the same as a full 2 minutes. It should really be a stat like number of minutes of PK before you let in a goal. Similarly on PP.

I believe I've seen that stat collected or at least calculable when playing time is divided betweem strength permutations (5-5, 5-4, etc)

Measuring average minutes between PP goals is a measure of the effectiveness of your penalty kill. But I think the topic here is about our propensity to incur more penalties than other teams.

Some have suggested that we control for 10 min misconduct penalties. Here is what I found, comparing us to the 2 best teams in our league. Unfortunately I could not come up with data for a clean comparison but it is instructive (at least to me).

1. This season Cornell has had 453 PIM's of which 80 are 10 min misconduct yielding a net of 373 "regular" penalty minutes. (source, CU Hockey Web Page)
2. Yale has had a total of 371 PIM's but no record I could find of the breakdown by type (Source, Yale Hockey Web Page)
3. Union has a total of 373 PIM but no record I could find of the breakdown by type (Source, Union Hockey Web Page)

So, our "regular" penalty minutes are roughly the same as Yale and Union's total penalty minutes. Even if you assume that Yale and Union incurred no 10 min penalties, the net disadvantage would be our team playing a short a player for 4 periods.

I specifically made the comparison between us and Yale and Union to help explain one dimension of differentiation with respect to the top teams in the league.

So, making your assumptions of Y and U with no 10 min penalties, we have a net of 373 min, Union has 373, and Yale has 371. That means we're all equal, correct? So, where do you get 4 periods of SH? It seems you used our PIM including the 10 min ones.

I did not say we were short a player on the ice, I said the team was down a player. I assume that, this translates into a disadvantage as lines get broken up and the other players have to pick up the slack. I also doubt that either Union or Yale went the entire season with out a 10 min penalty but I am willing to conjecture that the incurred fewer.

Towerroad

Jim Hyla

Towerroad

Trotsky

ftyuv

Robb

Towerroad
I got the PIM number off each of the teams web sites. I may have misinterpreted the numbers but if I did please show me the errors of my way.

The point is that PIMs include 10-minute misconducts, which don't actually put your team down a man. Of course, they hurt you in the sense that the player is not available during those 10 minutes, but you don't necessarily play shorthanded. If a team commits 20 2+10 penalties, that really doesn't hurt them that much more than committing 20 2-minute minors, so PIMs is not the right statistic to look at. The right thing to look at is the number of times you're shorthanded, or better still, the total amount of time that you spend shorthanded.

The whole system is broken! It's also stupid to represent your PK's success based on the number of PKs you beat, since a 5-second PK counts the same as a full 2 minutes. It should really be a stat like number of minutes of PK before you let in a goal. Similarly on PP.

I believe I've seen that stat collected or at least calculable when playing time is divided betweem strength permutations (5-5, 5-4, etc)

Measuring average minutes between PP goals is a measure of the effectiveness of your penalty kill. But I think the topic here is about our propensity to incur more penalties than other teams.

Some have suggested that we control for 10 min misconduct penalties. Here is what I found, comparing us to the 2 best teams in our league. Unfortunately I could not come up with data for a clean comparison but it is instructive (at least to me).

1. This season Cornell has had 453 PIM's of which 80 are 10 min misconduct yielding a net of 373 "regular" penalty minutes. (source, CU Hockey Web Page)
2. Yale has had a total of 371 PIM's but no record I could find of the breakdown by type (Source, Yale Hockey Web Page)
3. Union has a total of 373 PIM but no record I could find of the breakdown by type (Source, Union Hockey Web Page)

So, our "regular" penalty minutes are roughly the same as Yale and Union's total penalty minutes. Even if you assume that Yale and Union incurred no 10 min penalties, the net disadvantage would be our team playing a short a player for 4 periods.

I specifically made the comparison between us and Yale and Union to help explain one dimension of differentiation with respect to the top teams in the league.

So, making your assumptions of Y and U with no 10 min penalties, we have a net of 373 min, Union has 373, and Yale has 371. That means we're all equal, correct? So, where do you get 4 periods of SH? It seems you used our PIM including the 10 min ones.

I did not say we were short a player on the ice, I said the team was down a player. I assume that, this translates into a disadvantage as lines get broken up and the other players have to pick up the slack. I also doubt that either Union or Yale went the entire season with out a 10 min penalty but I am willing to conjecture that the incurred fewer.

I really do not think the issue is with the amount of penalty minutes we're getting or the discipline with the them (although both could definitely be improved). With the exception of the Union games, we've been pretty close in scoring when we've lost.

I think the real issue is connecting on passes, moving the puck to the offensive zone and avoiding stupid turnovers. If we gave away less PPs, things might have been different for a few games. However, if our players are able to communicate better on the ice and organize more successful attacks, we would be a much better team.

Towerroad

Trotsky
I'm sure nobody is more frustrated than the players about last night. They outplayed Harvard for large stretches, hit a crossbar and a post, and had a weak goalie seemingly at their mercy time and time again, but three different times they had to dig out of a hole, and the third time was just a bridge too far.

At the end of the day, if they win tonight they will be tied for third. In the words of Annie Savoy, "it's a long season and you gotta trust it."

I think there is a lot of frustration going around. It looks to me like something is broken and the question is what will we do about it.

The thing that bugs me is that they are making the same stupid mistakes that they did at the beginning of the season, and they still struggle on the breakout. It's not exactly giving me hope.

Here is Rev 2. (I am an old number cruncher from way back). I went through the Yale and Union box scores to tease out the 10 min penalties. I will also control for Union playing 34 games to date as opposed to 27 for Cornell and Yale:

1. This season Cornell has had 453 PIM's of which 80 are 10 min misconduct yielding a net of 373 "regular" penalty minutes. (source, CU Hockey Web Page)
2. Yale has had a total of 371 PIM's (Source, Yale Hockey Web Page) and 70 of 10 min misconduct (Source, uscho box scores) for a net regular penalty minutes of 301.
3. Union has a total of 373 PIM (Source, Union Hockey Web Page) and 40 of 10 min misconduct (Source, uscho box scores) for a net regular penalty minutes of 333. Adjusted for the greater number of games (27/34) the adjusted regular penalty minutes are 264.

Two things stand out. Yes, we are being penalized more than the top teams in the league. Union has a very disciplined team (half their misconducts came in a single game which I shall not mention)

I'm done.

Kyle Rose
The thing that bugs me is that they are making the same stupid mistakes that they did at the beginning of the season, and they still struggle on the breakout. It's not exactly giving me hope.

While they still make mistakes, their overall play has improved dramatically from the beginning of the season. I'd say this team has shown the most in-season improvement of any I have seen in (oy!) 30 years. Union completely outclassed them much in the way Yale did 2 seasons ago. Yale themselves, well, we'll see this weekend -- we've lost 6 in a row to them, usually being badly outplayed, but Yale has shown flaws lately. But other than those two teams this really is arguably the 3rd-best team in conference right now.

For the first time this year I can see this team playing well enough to get to Atlantic City without a miracle. Given how much they lost in the off-season, I think this is one of Schafer's best coaching performances. Also, look how far the Seniors have come! They had to assume leadership roles and pick up their game to fill the huge shoes of the 2010 class and they've done a very good job of it since New Year's. Joe's hot month and Tyler's clutch performance last night typify that.

Instead of the dreadful rebuilding year it could have (should have?) been (ask Colgate and Harvard) it's been a lot of fun with some memorable performances. I actually am quite hopeful.

Trotsky

Kyle Rose
The thing that bugs me is that they are making the same stupid mistakes that they did at the beginning of the season, and they still struggle on the breakout. It's not exactly giving me hope.

While they still make mistakes, their overall play has improved dramatically from the beginning of the season. I'd say this team has shown the most in-season improvement of any I have seen in (oy!) 30 years. Union completely outclassed them much in the way Yale did 2 seasons ago. Yale themselves, well, we'll see this weekend -- we've lost 6 in a row to them, usually being badly outplayed, but Yale has shown flaws lately. But other than those two teams this really is arguably the 3rd-best team in conference right now.

For the first time this year I can see this team playing well enough to get to Atlantic City without a miracle. Given how much they lost in the off-season, I think this is one of Schafer's best coaching performances. Also, look how far the Seniors have come! They had to assume leadership roles and pick up their game to fill the huge shoes of the 2010 class and they've done a very good job of it since New Year's. Joe's hot month and Tyler's clutch performance last night typify that.

Instead of the dreadful rebuilding year it could have (should have?) been (ask Colgate and Harvard) it's been a lot of fun with some memorable performances. I actually am quite hopeful.

I totally agree. At the beginning of the season almost everyone felt this was a rebuilding year. To refresh my memory, I'd like to see Age's poll about where we thought they would finish. (Maybe there's a way to find it, but I don't know it.) I think they are doing better than most thought, and yet all we can post is complaint followed by complaint. (Yes, I know that's not literally true.)

I think, like Trotsky, we should be talking about how amazing their growth has been, how incredible it is to be fighting for third place, and what a great job the coaches have done. I still hate our PP and that we cannot figure out how to solve a two man deep forecheck, but damn we can finish third and have a good chance to get to Atlantic City.

Again, as Trotsky has said, look at what these seniors have done. Compare this class to last years leaving class. Look at what we lost and yet we could be a top 4 team. I'll take this rebuilding year any year. We all complain about not being Yale or Union, but the fact is, there are always a group of top teams in the league, by that I mean fighting for home ice teams. Over the years the top teams have varied, but they almost always include Cornell. Maybe in 10 years we will all be complaining that Union and Yale are always winning and there's no room for the rest of us. But for now we are still part of the big gorilla in the house. The parts that make up the rest of the gorilla change over time, but we're always in there.

Hope to see all of you in AC.

And also the incoming class looks very good (chart based on Big Red Puckhead -- some may defer or move up).

Trotsky
And also the incoming class looks very good (chart based on Big Red Puckhead -- some may defer or move up).

I hope you and Jim are right. If you are then we should expect a much more mature skilled team next year. I am a skeptic but hope springs eternal. I think next year will be important for the coach.

Trotsky
And also the incoming class looks very good (chart based on Big Red Puckhead -- some may defer or move up).

Interesting that 8 out of the 11 recruits are U.S. born.

scoop85

Trotsky
And also the incoming class looks very good (chart based on Big Red Puckhead -- some may defer or move up).

Interesting that 8 out of the 11 recruits are U.S. born.

And some upstate NY kids. It hurts to see some Roch, Syr, and Buf kids go to other IVYs.

Jim Hyla
To refresh my memory, I'd like to see Age's poll about where we thought they would finish. (Maybe there's a way to find it, but I don't know it.)

Sorry, the link was broken, but I've fixed it now. In the "Links" section to the right, "Poll Results" now works.

CowbellGuy

Jim Hyla
To refresh my memory, I'd like to see Age's poll about where we thought they would finish. (Maybe there's a way to find it, but I don't know it.)

Sorry, the link was broken, but I've fixed it now. In the "Links" section to the right, "Poll Results" now works.

Thanks. So, overwhelmingly they were picked 1-6, about 50/50 1-3 and 4-6. We're ending up right where we thought we'd be. However, I'd like to talk to those who picked 1-3. Were you smoking or drinking something?

Trotsky

Kyle Rose
The thing that bugs me is that they are making the same stupid mistakes that they did at the beginning of the season, and they still struggle on the breakout. It's not exactly giving me hope.

While they still make mistakes, their overall play has improved dramatically from the beginning of the season. I'd say this team has shown the most in-season improvement of any I have seen in (oy!) 30 years. Union completely outclassed them much in the way Yale did 2 seasons ago. Yale themselves, well, we'll see this weekend -- we've lost 6 in a row to them, usually being badly outplayed, but Yale has shown flaws lately. But other than those two teams this really is arguably the 3rd-best team in conference right now.

For the first time this year I can see this team playing well enough to get to Atlantic City without a miracle. Given how much they lost in the off-season, I think this is one of Schafer's best coaching performances. Also, look how far the Seniors have come! They had to assume leadership roles and pick up their game to fill the huge shoes of the 2010 class and they've done a very good job of it since New Year's. Joe's hot month and Tyler's clutch performance last night typify that.

Instead of the dreadful rebuilding year it could have (should have?) been (ask Colgate and Harvard) it's been a lot of fun with some memorable performances. I actually am quite hopeful.

This. Much of what Greg said is exactly what's been going through my head for the past month. First of all, they no longer look as tired as they did early in the season for 3rd periods, so that strange habit of getting steamrolled by opponents late in games seems to have passed. Several players have turned the corner in terms of living up to their potential(or maybe just my expectations), and Roeszler & Joe Devin in particular are showing an Evan Barlow-esque blossoming offensively. Not only that, but since the 3rd period at RPI, I've noticed a lot more touch & drop passes happening in transition than I've ever seen from a Schafer squad. The PP still needs a lot of work, as does the breakout, but there's a little bit more that's "clicking" at other times than I thought I'd see. Given my expectations for this year, I'm quite pleased right now, and this team is showing me something.

Given the obvious gap between the top 2 teams and parity of the middle-tier this season, I don't think anyone can really give CU significant odds to snatch the Whitelaw this season, but hey, why not make a run and see what shakes out? At the very least, this can be a really good experience down the road for this young team.

RichH

Trotsky

Kyle Rose
The thing that bugs me is that they are making the same stupid mistakes that they did at the beginning of the season, and they still struggle on the breakout. It's not exactly giving me hope.

While they still make mistakes, their overall play has improved dramatically from the beginning of the season. I'd say this team has shown the most in-season improvement of any I have seen in (oy!) 30 years. Union completely outclassed them much in the way Yale did 2 seasons ago. Yale themselves, well, we'll see this weekend -- we've lost 6 in a row to them, usually being badly outplayed, but Yale has shown flaws lately. But other than those two teams this really is arguably the 3rd-best team in conference right now.

For the first time this year I can see this team playing well enough to get to Atlantic City without a miracle. Given how much they lost in the off-season, I think this is one of Schafer's best coaching performances. Also, look how far the Seniors have come! They had to assume leadership roles and pick up their game to fill the huge shoes of the 2010 class and they've done a very good job of it since New Year's. Joe's hot month and Tyler's clutch performance last night typify that.

Instead of the dreadful rebuilding year it could have (should have?) been (ask Colgate and Harvard) it's been a lot of fun with some memorable performances. I actually am quite hopeful.

This. Much of what Greg said is exactly what's been going through my head for the past month. First of all, they no longer look as tired as they did early in the season for 3rd periods, so that strange habit of getting steamrolled by opponents late in games seems to have passed. Several players have turned the corner in terms of living up to their potential(or maybe just my expectations), and Roeszler & Joe Devin in particular are showing an Evan Barlow-esque blossoming offensively. Not only that, but since the 3rd period at RPI, I've noticed a lot more touch & drop passes happening in transition than I've ever seen from a Schafer squad. The PP still needs a lot of work, as does the breakout, but there's a little bit more that's "clicking" at other times than I thought I'd see. Given my expectations for this year, I'm quite pleased right now, and this team is showing me something.

Given the obvious gap between the top 2 teams and parity of the middle-tier this season, I don't think anyone can really give CU significant odds to snatch the Whitelaw this season, but hey, why not make a run and see what shakes out? At the very least, this can be a really good experience down the road for this young team.

I'd say, as Brandon Thomas says in his IJ article they are 4-0-2 in last 6 OT games.