IT'S A TRAP! Cornell vs Princeton

Cornell survives the out of town late games to remain 11 in both the CHN and USCHO PWR calculations.

The win is also the lead article on both CHN and USCHO.

Trotsky
Cornell survives the out of town late games to remain 11 in both the CHN and USCHO PWR calculations.

The win is also the lead article on both CHN and USCHO.

cornell-2-1126.jpg

Lead picture, not article.

Chn has this annoying habit of leading with a large picture and caption... but theres no article.

abmarks

Trotsky
Cornell survives the out of town late games to remain 11 in both the CHN and USCHO PWR calculations.

The win is also the lead article on both CHN and USCHO.

cornell-2-1126.jpg

Lead picture, not article.


Chn has this annoying habit of leading with a large picture and caption... but theres no article.

Sadly it seems the college hockey websites are running on such a shoestring that there’s very little actual game coverage. Even Cornell athletics’ site doesn’t appear to have returned to full strength, as it seems only the men’s hockey recaps include any coach’s quotes. Really sort of an embarrassment for a school with our resources.

scoop85
Sadly it seems the college hockey websites are running on such a shoestring that there’s very little actual game coverage. Even Cornell athletics’ site doesn’t appear to have returned to full strength, as it seems only the men’s hockey recaps include any coach’s quotes. Really sort of an embarrassment for a school with our resources.

This reminds me that this week is the first time this century that the smoldering remains of the Athletic Department aren't under the thumb of "The Person. The Numbers. The Legacy."

Huzzah.

Welcome and best wishes to Nicki Moore on her work ahead.

Watching Ben Tupker trying to put Union back into it down 2-4 to Clarkson late. He's really hustling and outworking his opponent but also, sadly, his linemates.

Ben also scored Union's first goal.

6:31, WHCU is still herpa-derp central.

And just like that, Omaha Beach.

1 Cor pp Gabriel Seger (Sam Malinski, Dalton Bancroft)

Cornell 1 Princeton 0

Princeton ties it late in the 1st.

Cornell not looking ready to play. Last night took too much out of them.

We are getting better chances this period. Just play our game, it will come.

Looks like we are starting to control the play now.

Sniper move by Donaldson on pp, 2-1 Cornell.

OK, let's kill this. Great period so far.

This team takes too many penalties. It's not the only reason this game is close but it doesn't help

Iceberg
This team takes too many penalties. It's not the only reason this game is close but it doesn't help

bad structure cost them on the tying goal. too much chasing without catching after a failed chip out of the zone. lucky to have not coughed up another in the last minute. still think they should pull it out in the third if they play like they did the last 10 minutes.

Win the third and have a nice, uncontroversial 6-point weekend.

Cornell pp coming with 14 to go in the third.

Boom. Bancroft. 3-2. Sam with 3 assists tonight. Big Red 3 ppg.

Cornell 3 Princeton 2
Colgate 3 Quinnipiac 2
Brown 3 Harvard 2

And both Sucks and Q lose, too.

A good night

Great last couple of minutes to preserve the 3-2 win.

Larry72
Great last couple of minutes to preserve the 3-2 win.

damn straight

Trotsky
Cornell 3 Princeton 2
Colgate 3 Quinnipiac 2
Brown 3 Harvard 2

...which flips us and Sucks, so we're now #10 in PWR.

Beeeej

Trotsky
Cornell 3 Princeton 2
Colgate 3 Quinnipiac 2
Brown 3 Harvard 2

...which flips us and Sucks, so we're now #10 in PWR.

And Quinny down to 4.

Am I correct that holding a top 10 spot in pairwise/rpi is nearly a guarantee at an at large bid if we don’t get in through lake placid?

Co

Dunc
Am I correct that holding a top 10 spot in pairwise/rpi is nearly a guarantee at an at large bid if we don’t get in through lake placid?

Yes.

And more likely 12 or 13 would be enough. The odds of all 5 major conferences being won by teams that aren't in the top 15 is close to zero.

Cornell was much better defensively in the latter two periods. All Big Red goals came on the power play, and all came from players who are in their first season with Cornell. Really good weekend for Shane too. Neither of the two goals did he have a chance on, and he saved Cornell in at least three separate Princeton breakaways or clear paths to the net. Two dumb penalties, one by O’Leary in the offensive zone and one by Bancroft retaliating after being pushed headfirst into the boards. If Bancroft stays down he maybe even draws five minutes there. Crazy that such a scary hit ended up in a 4x4.

Dunc
Am I correct that holding a top 10 spot in pairwise/rpi is nearly a guarantee at an at large bid if we don’t get in through lake placid?

Not in January.

BearLover
Two dumb penalties, one by O’Leary in the offensive zone and one by Bancroft retaliating after being pushed headfirst into the boards. If Bancroft stays down he maybe even draws five minutes there. Crazy that such a scary hit ended up in a 4x4.

The way those penalties were announced, and the way they appear, for now, in the box score, is cross-checking on Bancroft and embellishment on the other guy. There's not indication of the original hit on Bancroft.

We thought that the refs may have just messed them up, and intended to call cross-checking on the Princeton player, as the initial penalty, and then embellishment on Bancroft. Still wondering if that is what was intended.

BearLover
Two dumb penalties, one by O’Leary in the offensive zone and one by Bancroft retaliating after being pushed headfirst into the boards. If Bancroft stays down he maybe even draws five minutes there. Crazy that such a scary hit ended up in a 4x4.

The way those penalties were announced, and the way they appear, for now, in the box score, is cross-checking on Bancroft and embellishment on the other guy. There's not indication of the original hit on Bancroft.

We thought that the refs may have just messed them up, and intended to call cross-checking on the Princeton player, as the initial penalty, and then embellishment on Bancroft. Still wondering if that is what was intended.

Trotsky

Dunc
Am I correct that holding a top 10 spot in pairwise/rpi is nearly a guarantee at an at large bid if we don’t get in through lake placid?

Not in January.

Hence “holding”

I was wondering if the referees had called embellishment and my suspicion was confirmed. The call seemed odd, though, considering that Bancroft was actually in a vulnerable position and if anything, he lost his balance rather than trying to embellish. I initially thought nothing was going to be called when I was watching the game since the contact appeared to be soft, but who knows what has been going through officials' heads with some of the penalty decisions this season.

On the replay it sure didn't look like embellishment to me.

Trotsky
Cornell 3 Princeton 2
Colgate 3 Quinnipiac 2
Brown 3 Harvard 2

In the ECAC, Cornell is now only one point behind Harvard for second place, although having played two fewer games.

Trotsky
On the replay it sure didn't look like embellishment to me.

eh i didn't think he got hit that hard. i wouldn't say it was embellishment but i also wouldn't have called it malicious or even negligent. it looked more like he pulled up than plowed into him. i don't think that's a 5 after review.

George64

Trotsky
Cornell 3 Princeton 2
Colgate 3 Quinnipiac 2
Brown 3 Harvard 2

In the ECAC, Cornell is now only one point behind Harvard for second place, although having played two fewer games.

Another way to put this is the percentage of the 3-points received for each game (I won't call it winning percentage because hockey has apparently now evolved beyond such quotidian concepts).

.857 Qpc
.778 Cor
.694 Cgt
.690 Hvd
.500 Clk
.500 SLU
.444 Prn
.381 Brn
.333 RPI
.333 Uni
.308 Drt
.238 Yal

Cornell is now closer to 1st than to 3rd.

Let's appreciate what we have. Cornell's record after 12 ECAC games, last 5 seasons:

18 10-1-1
19  8-3-1
20  9-1-2
22  8-2-2
23  9-3-0

Trotsky

George64

Trotsky
Cornell 3 Princeton 2
Colgate 3 Quinnipiac 2
Brown 3 Harvard 2

In the ECAC, Cornell is now only one point behind Harvard for second place, although having played two fewer games.

Another way to put this is the percentage of the 3-oints received for each game (I won't call it inning percentage because hockey has apparently now evolved beyond such quotidian concepts).

.857 Qpc
.778 Cor
.694 Cgt
.690 Hvd
.500 Clk
.500 SLU
.444 Prn
.381 Brn
.333 RPI
.333 Uni
.308 Drt
.238 Yal

Cornell is now closer to 1st than to 3rd.

Without jinxing anything, that’s a fairly substantial cushion over 5th for the all-important bye and home ice quarterfinal

Trotsky
Let's appreciate what we have. Cornell's record after 12 ECAC games, last 5 seasons:

18 10-1-1
19  8-3-1
20  9-1-2
22  8-2-2
23  9-3-0

I think we need to differentiate between regulation wins vs. 3x3 OT wins, and between regulation losses vs. 3x3 OT losses. Otherwise these are apples-to-oranges comparisons.

BearLover

Trotsky
Let's appreciate what we have. Cornell's record after 12 ECAC games, last 5 seasons:

18 10-1-1
19  8-3-1
20  9-1-2
22  8-2-2
23  9-3-0

I think we need to differentiate between regulation wins vs. 3x3 OT wins, and between regulation losses vs. 3x3 OT losses. Otherwise these are apples-to-oranges comparisons.

in a way yes but in another way, that's what the regular standings already do

BearLover

Trotsky
Let's appreciate what we have. Cornell's record after 12 ECAC games, last 5 seasons:

18 10-1-1
19  8-3-1
20  9-1-2
22  8-2-2
23  9-3-0

I think we need to differentiate between regulation wins vs. 3x3 OT wins, and between regulation losses vs. 3x3 OT losses. Otherwise these are apples-to-oranges comparisons.

No. Apples and oranges would be lumping shootout wins and losses in with real wins and losses. Overtime wins and losses didn't change between the Old and New Testament. Only the derp points did, and fuck the derp points.

Trotsky

BearLover

Trotsky
Let's appreciate what we have. Cornell's record after 12 ECAC games, last 5 seasons:

18 10-1-1
19  8-3-1
20  9-1-2
22  8-2-2
23  9-3-0

I think we need to differentiate between regulation wins vs. 3x3 OT wins, and between regulation losses vs. 3x3 OT losses. Otherwise these are apples-to-oranges comparisons.

No. Apples and oranges would be lumping shootout wins and losses in with real wins and losses. Overtime wins and losses didn't change between the Old and New Testament. Only the derp points did, and fuck the derp points.

OT wins and losses did change following the switch to 3x3. OT wins/losses used to be worth the same as regulation wins/losses in both the standings and the pairwise. Now, a regulation win is worth 3 points and full PWR credit, while an OT win is worth 2 points and 67% PWR credit. Moreover, in evaluating how good a team is, it is important to differentiate between games that end in regulation versus OT. 3x3 is not representative of a normal hockey game and not worth putting much stake into. Last year’s team won four OT games early in the season, which led a lot of people to overrate how good they were. Meanwhile, this year’s Harvard game was evenly played, and giving Harvard full credit (and Cornell zero credit) for Harvard’s 3x3 OT win does not comport with the standings, the PWR, or how the game played out.

Four of last year’s wins were closer to a tie. One of this year’s losses was closer to a tie. That’s why this year’s team looks better and is in a better position than last year’s team. You wouldn’t know that from equating OT outcomes with regulation outcomes, though.

BearLover

Trotsky

BearLover

Trotsky
Let's appreciate what we have. Cornell's record after 12 ECAC games, last 5 seasons:

18 10-1-1
19  8-3-1
20  9-1-2
22  8-2-2
23  9-3-0

I think we need to differentiate between regulation wins vs. 3x3 OT wins, and between regulation losses vs. 3x3 OT losses. Otherwise these are apples-to-oranges comparisons.

No. Apples and oranges would be lumping shootout wins and losses in with real wins and losses. Overtime wins and losses didn't change between the Old and New Testament. Only the derp points did, and fuck the derp points.

OT wins and losses did change following the switch to 3x3. OT wins/losses used to be worth the same as regulation wins/losses in both the standings and the pairwise. Now, a regulation win is worth 3 points and full PWR credit, while an OT win is worth 2 points and 67% PWR credit. Moreover, in evaluating how good a team is, it is important to differentiate between games that end in regulation versus OT. 3x3 is not representative of a normal hockey game and not worth putting much stake into. Last year’s team won four OT games early in the season, which led a lot of people to overrate how good they were. Meanwhile, this year’s Harvard game was evenly played, and giving Harvard full credit (and Cornell zero credit) for Harvard’s 3x3 OT win does not comport with the standings, the PWR, or how the game played out.

Four of last year’s wins were closer to a tie. One of this year’s losses was closer to a tie. That’s why this year’s team looks better and is in a better position than last year’s team. You wouldn’t know that from equating OT outcomes with regulation outcomes, though.

Trotsky wasn't making comparisons. He was saying and showing that we've had excellent records at this juncture in each of the last seasons.

Why am I not surprised that Bearlover couldn't even take this to heart and instead turns it into a whine about the relative import of close wins and losses or 3x3 vs. 5x5 OT.

What part of "Let's appreciate what we have" did you not understand?

P.s. Hey Trotsky, you let him get you off your own point and sucked into the Bearlover statistical vortex. What's up with that?

Trotsky (standing atop a large hill overlooking a lake amidst a densely forested landscape). Speaking to no one in particular he smiles and says:

"What a wonderful view. It's often so lovely this time of year. Yeah, some years it's been more bleak and gross-looking...but for the last five years or so it's been gorgeous every year."

"We should all be appreciative of what we have".


Out of thin air arrives a strange beast, the demon Bearlover, alongside Trotsky

Bearlover: "But the species mix has changed! Tree census counting guidelines definitions have changed! Maple trees aren't just maple trees anymore, there are different types!"

"BUT THE TREES!!" he roars, incredulously.


Nearby a man is seem smacking his head and grumbling after overhearing the exchange.

"That demon is a bleeping ingrate. Can't see the fo....."

abmarks

BearLover

Trotsky

BearLover

Trotsky
Let's appreciate what we have. Cornell's record after 12 ECAC games, last 5 seasons:

18 10-1-1
19  8-3-1
20  9-1-2
22  8-2-2
23  9-3-0

I think we need to differentiate between regulation wins vs. 3x3 OT wins, and between regulation losses vs. 3x3 OT losses. Otherwise these are apples-to-oranges comparisons.

No. Apples and oranges would be lumping shootout wins and losses in with real wins and losses. Overtime wins and losses didn't change between the Old and New Testament. Only the derp points did, and fuck the derp points.

OT wins and losses did change following the switch to 3x3. OT wins/losses used to be worth the same as regulation wins/losses in both the standings and the pairwise. Now, a regulation win is worth 3 points and full PWR credit, while an OT win is worth 2 points and 67% PWR credit. Moreover, in evaluating how good a team is, it is important to differentiate between games that end in regulation versus OT. 3x3 is not representative of a normal hockey game and not worth putting much stake into. Last year’s team won four OT games early in the season, which led a lot of people to overrate how good they were. Meanwhile, this year’s Harvard game was evenly played, and giving Harvard full credit (and Cornell zero credit) for Harvard’s 3x3 OT win does not comport with the standings, the PWR, or how the game played out.

Four of last year’s wins were closer to a tie. One of this year’s losses was closer to a tie. That’s why this year’s team looks better and is in a better position than last year’s team. You wouldn’t know that from equating OT outcomes with regulation outcomes, though.

Trotsky wasn't making comparisons. He was saying and showing that we've had excellent records at this juncture in each of the last seasons.

Why am I not surprised that Bearlover couldn't even take this to heart and instead turns it into a whine about the relative import of close wins and losses or 3x3 vs. 5x5 OT.

What part of "Let's appreciate what we have" did you not understand?

P.s. Hey Trotsky, you let him get you off your own point and sucked into the Bearlover statistical vortex. What's up with that?

You’ve been weirdly obsessed with me for at least three years now

Is this site about Cornell Hockey or about Cornell hockey fans? A website can not serve two masters.

I also hadn’t even realized that was the intent of Trotsky’s post. Anyway, I think the real take-away is that Cornell was an elite program in the four years until Covid hit, then 20-21 got canceled, then in 21-22 Cornell suffered as a result, and now in 22-23 Cornell appears to be back. The other takeaway is that abmarks hasn’t added anything of substance to this forum in recent memory.

Zaphod's just this guy, you know?

Trotsky

BearLover

Trotsky
Let's appreciate what we have. Cornell's record after 12 ECAC games, last 5 seasons:

18 10-1-1
19  8-3-1
20  9-1-2
22  8-2-2
23  9-3-0

I think we need to differentiate between regulation wins vs. 3x3 OT wins, and between regulation losses vs. 3x3 OT losses. Otherwise these are apples-to-oranges comparisons.

No. Apples and oranges would be lumping shootout wins and losses in with real wins and losses. Overtime wins and losses didn't change between the Old and New Testament. Only the derp points did, and fuck the derp points.

I sympathize with the moral high ground of ignoring the shootouts, but having watched 3x3 OT, I can't completely ignore the absence of four players on the ice. I wish we were doing 5x5 OT in the RS, but given that we're not, it's not completely unreasonable to consider OT wins as slightly less worthy than regulation wins. They should certainly be worth more than shootout wins, though. (Yes, this is another argument for the 5-4-3-2-1-0 point system, which I guess counts as 3-2-2-1-1-0 derp points in Trotsky's accounting.)