ECAC 2024 Discussion Thread

Out of town 10/13:

RPI 3 at Maine 6
Vermont 3 at St. Lawrence 1
(18) Penn State 4 at Clarkson 2
(5) Quinnipiac 3 at AIC 2 (ot)
Colgate 3 at Sacred Heart 2
Union 3 at Colorado College 7

2-4-0 15-24

Season:

5-8-1 35-44

Out of town 10/14:

AIC 0 at (5) Quinnipiac 8
Vermont 2 at Clarkson 3
(18) Penn State 4 at St. Lawrence 1
Colgate 6 at Sacred Heart 1

Union losing at CC, 2nd period

Out of town 10/20:

UConn 1 at Union 4
RPI 1 at #3 BC 6
#4 Quinnipiac 5 at UNH 2
Clarkson 1 at Merrimack 4
Lowell 4 at Colgate 2

UConn had 29 shots on Union goalie Kyle Chauvette in the first period today, and did not score.

Final was 5-0 UConn, with 66 shots.

Woof, we had an EZAC night:

UConn 5 at Union 0
RPI 2 at #10 Providence 4
#4 Quinnipiac 4 at UNH 5
Lowell 5 at Colgate 2

Unhelpful.

Trotsky
Woof, we had an EZAC night:

UConn 5 at Union 0
RPI 2 at #10 Providence 4
#4 Quinnipiac 4 at UNH 5
Lowell 5 at Colgate 2

Unhelpful.

At least our OOC opponents have done very well so far and should help our SOS.

"A gathering place for wanderers and a resting place for free spirits"

This appears to be the latest owner of the hotel on the steep hill (Saranac Ave) perpendicular to the main street in Lake Placid, just opposite Black Bear (at the far end of the drag from the rink). If it's the one I am thinking of, it has gone through several iterations over the last 30 years.

I noticed on C HN and USCHO there has been almost no discussion of ECAC at all.

I did see a story on Dart, but no previews

upprdeck
I noticed on C HN and USCHO there has been almost no discussion of ECAC at all.

I did see a story on Dart, but no previews

Here are the CHN capsule previews. They pick Cornell to finish second.

dbilmes

Here are the CHN capsule previews. They pick Cornell to finish second.

And the Cornell preview contains some fantastic writing.

College Hockey News
Weakness: Experience. Although is not unlike most other college hockey teams.

The last sentence there sound like someone asked ChatGPT to talk like a caveman.

Trotsky
"A gathering place for wanderers and a resting place for free spirits"
This appears to be the latest owner of the hotel on the steep hill (Saranac Ave) perpendicular to the main street in Lake Placid, just opposite Black Bear (at the far end of the drag from the rink). If it's the one I am thinking of, it has gone through several iterations over the last 30 years.

The Bluebird Lake Placid is the former Lake Placid Summit Hotel. It is on Main Street in Lake Placid, across the street from the HIgh Peaks Resort (Hilton in the Miracle on Ice Era). The facility feels as if it's been under renovation for 2 years. I believe, not sure, how much the exterior has been spiffed up because it previously had a motel feel. The hotel is at the opposite end of the main part of Main Street in LP, a 7-10 minute walk from the rinks.

The other renewed hotel to check out is the Grand Adirondack Hotel, also on Main Street, 3-4 minutes from the rink. It was a grand, a little aging, facility before as the Northwoods Inn. There was a disconnect between the raucous bar on the main floor and the rooms upstairs.

In flux is Airbnb-type short-term-rental lodging. LP like other resort towns believes if you renovate a house or half a house so it rents for $500 a night, it takes lodging away from hotel servers and bartenders, and ski resort workers who'd have trouble scaring up $500 a month for a shared bedroom. In downtown LP, there have been complaints about raucous lodgers in unhosted (no owner or manager on-site) facilities. See this story in the [adirondackexplorer.org]

Resort towns exist by monetizing alcoholism and sexual assault. I'm not sure what they expected.

Jeez, the SLU color guy is a major homer.

And now time for a pointless shootout, as they tie 2-2 with MTU.

Nice to see Q and Clarkson lose in OT, and Harvard tie lowly Dartmouth.

The Harvard-Dartmouth shootout was hilarious.

Trotsky
The Harvard-Dartmouth shootout was hilarious.

did they confiscate their sticks?

ugarte

Trotsky
The Harvard-Dartmouth shootout was hilarious.

did they confiscate their sticks?

18 guys shot for each team. They each had at most 19 non-goalies dressed. What happens if all the non-goalies had shot? Do they start over...take the pads off a goalie? Seriously...what's the rule?

watching it live when the announcers had no idea how many shots they had gone thru I was also wondering if they started over.. do they make the goalies shoot which would be more fitting way to end it.

Looking at the Pairwise, once you eliminate the Ivy teams only 4 teams left without a loss already.

some lines for the NC on ecac teams

Quin 12-1
Harv 25-1
Cornell 50-1
Everyone else 300-1 ot higher

After the conference carnage last night, here are our PWRs:

 2 Qpc
21 Cor
28 Drt
30 Hvd
32 Clk
42 Uni
46 Cgt
54 RPI
55 Brn
58 Prn
59 Yal
62 SLU

eeeeugggh

We'll see. Last year wasn't a good year for the ECAC either, but we somehow wound up with four teams in (well, three and an autobid).

That being said, holy crap that's awful.

A good thing we beat Minn Dul/BC and have Ariz St and UMass on the schedule so we a chance out of OC wins.

Super big weekend to get things back turned around.

upprdeck
A good thing we beat Minn Dul/BC and have Ariz St and UMass on the schedule so we a chance out of OC wins.

Super big weekend to get things back turned around.

Imagine! Beating BU and BC in a single weekend. FYP!

Hopefully this is the last night we can say this: it's December and we have no home conference wins.

It better be the last, since otherwise we'll be saying: it's January and we have no home conference wins. Which BTW Harvard will be saying through at least 1/18/24.

Quinnipiac currently annihilating another ECAC opponent, this time Union. Maybe they’ll get bored and leave for Hockey East and Cornell will be able to win the ECAC again. Or we can wait two more years for the fifth year eligibility rule to be gone so that we can be on a somewhat level playing field with them.

Holy smokes, this conference is a dumpster fire even by our usual standards. Pairwise rankings:
3
24
32
42
43
45
52
54
56
58
60
62

This conference sucks. Programs should be embarrassed by how much they have fallen since COVID. Yale, Princeton, Union and could go on, historically good programs who have just packed it in

Absolute joke

It's a down period, it oscillates. And we did produce the defending national champion.

Big Dingus
This conference sucks. Programs should be embarrassed by how much they have fallen since COVID. Yale, Princeton, Union and could go on, historically good programs who have just packed it in

Absolute joke

The conference sucked before COVID, too. As far as why things are currently particularly bad, i think the issue is the transfer portal. The Ivies basically can’t take transfers, so they are at a huge disadvantage compared to everyone else. A couple of additional reasons: RPI canceled the 20-21 season like the Ivies, and then continued banning fans from attending in 21-22 for some reason. Union fired their coach and their best players (including Seger) transferred out.

BearLover
and then continued banning fans from attending in 21-22 for some reason.

To keep them alive?

It is great that in the event that was probably an over reaction, but far better that than reigniting a public health emergency.

Trotsky

BearLover
and then continued banning fans from attending in 21-22 for some reason.

To keep them alive?

It is great that in the event that was probably an over reaction, but far better that than reigniting a public health emergency.

The vaccines had been widely available for months by that point. Banning fans from the games made no difference. Fans can make their own decisions whether to go to the grocery store, get on public transportation, attend any sporting event (RPI or otherwise). The administration banning them from choosing to attend a hockey game likely had zero effect on anything. By that logic, Lynah shouldn’t allow fans ever again.

No need to relitigate this. The point is that many at RPI took the administration’s decision to indicate that it didn’t care about athletics. I’m sure the decision hurt recruiting.

keeping them from games made the whole mask policy issue and the crowding of public spaces thing easier to deal with.

and you still have to staff those things in a time where many staff were told to stay home.

when 40% of the country was ignoring the issue and helping the spread playing sports was always a dumb thing, but money talks.

Hindsight is always 20/20 -- what I remember from those days is marveling at how little anyone actually knew about the virus and the consequences of group behavior. It was perfectly acceptable to me to go into isolation even when it was difficult to do and painful. Because the worst-case scenario was being dead, and I will take unhappy over dead any day of the week.

So looking back, a lot of things could have been done differently but at the time, decisionmakers had to work with what they had.

jesus christ can we not talk about this again? whatever the decision-making process was for public health, it's beside the point being made about the impact on hockey fandom.

28 days until the next Cornell game. Talk about anything you want.

The conference sucked before COVID? So you clearly didn't watch the ECAC before. Bearlover you have no idea what you’re talking about lol

Big Dingus
The conference sucked before COVID? So you clearly didn't watch the ECAC before. Bearlover you have no idea what you’re talking about lol

Ugh, I can’t keep getting tricked like this. Here I thought I’d been avidly following the ECAC (.409 interconference win% in 2019-20, .481 in 2018-19, .457 in 2017-18, very similar to the post-COVID numbers), when in fact I was confused and actually had been watching Atlantic Hockey the whole time!

And remember, those numbers include Cornell—for our purposes (judging the quality of our opposition), those win% are actually considerably lower!

Just do a pairwise comparison pre covid to now... Its not even close

Clarkson
Union
Princeton
Yale

Were all strong solid teams, now they are low every year in pairwise post covid

Big Dingus
Just do a pairwise comparison pre covid to now... Its not even close

Clarkson
Union
Princeton
Yale

Were all strong solid teams, now they are low every year in pairwise post covid

By overall record:

Clarkson: bad 2009-2013, good 2016-2022
Union: bad 1998-2007, good 2008-2019, bad 2020-
Princeton: bad 2012-2023 except 2018
Yale: bad 1999-2007, good 2008-2016, mediocre 2017-2020, bad 2022-

This reminds me to do final PWR position for all ECAC team for as many years as we have history. Anybody who wants to, I would appreciate it. Otherwise, I'll do it tonight.

All yours Bearlover

ECAC Final PWR by Year, since 2001

0-5 OOC night for the ECAC.

ECAC teams in the PWR bands:

 1-16: 1
17-32: 3
33-48: 3
49-64: 5

For comparison, HE:

 1-16: 6
17-32: 4
33-48: 1
49-64: 0

The only good thing about the ECAC being so mediocore this year is that with the exception of games involving Q, there is a lot of parity in the league. Friday night, for example, Yale gave up the tying goal late to RPI in the third period only to respond with the winning goal just 40 seconds later. Brown, meanwhile, tied Union on an extra-attacker goal with just 26 seconds remaining and then won the game in OT.
It wasn't an ECAC game, but if Cornell ends up sneaking into the NCAAs by a few hundredths of a point in the PWR, that might be because UConn somehow failed to score on a 2-on-0 breakaway against UMass in OT. Although UConn won the ensuing shootout, that won't have an effect on the PWR. UMass didn't get the win, but at least it didn't get a loss either.

dbilmes
The only good thing about the ECAC being so mediocore this year is that with the exception of games involving Q, there is a lot of parity in the league. Friday night, for example, Yale gave up the tying goal late in the third period only to respond with the winning goal just 40 seconds later. Brown, meanwhile, tied RPI on an extra-attacker goal with just 26 seconds remaining and then won the game in OT.
It wasn't an ECAC game, but if Cornell ends up sneaking into the NCAAs by a few hundredths of a point in the PWR, that might be because UConn somehow failed to score on a 2-on-0 breakaway against UMass in OT. Although UConn won the ensuing shootout, that won't have an effect on the PWR. UMass didn't get the win, but at least it didn't get a loss either.

Yes, except Brown did that to Union and Yale had RPI.

If the PWR is doing its job, i.e. accurately ranking teams, then how good or bad the ECAC is should not affect Cornell’s odds of an at-large bid. This is because, if the ECAC is bad, Cornell should have a better record in-conference (and vice versa). Obviously, holding constant Cornell’s odds of beating (for example) Union, we’d rather Union perform well out of conference to bolster Cornell’s RPI. But if Union were better, then Cornell would be less likely to beat them.

The ECAC being weak actually helps Cornell overall, because Cornell thereby has a better shot of winning the ECAC tournament. (On the other hand, you could argue that the ECAC being good helps Cornell’s recruiting. It doesn’t seem to me that this has been true in practice, but the point has been argued about on here enough times that it’s not worth relitigating.)

BearLover
If the PWR is doing its job, i.e. accurately ranking teams, then how good or bad the ECAC is should not affect Cornell’s odds of an at-large bid. This is because, if the ECAC is bad, Cornell should have a better record in-conference (and vice versa). Obviously, holding constant Cornell’s odds of beating (for example) Union, we’d rather Union perform well out of conference to bolster Cornell’s RPI. But if Union were better, then Cornell would be less likely to beat them.

The ECAC being weak actually helps Cornell overall, because Cornell thereby has a better shot of winning the ECAC tournament. (On the other hand, you could argue that the ECAC being good helps Cornell’s recruiting. It doesn’t seem to me that this has been true in practice, but the point has been argued about on here enough times that it’s not worth relitigating.)

That's a good point about doing better in a weaker conference, but I think with in-conference coaches knowing each other better, you get a little more parity in in-conference games. Kind of like how divisional NFL games always seem more random than non-divisional.

Point taken, though. We are having a real weird one where we are doing very well out of conference and kinda badly so far in conference.

Because this is always such a popular feature, Cornell currently has a 15% chance of winning the title in Lake Placid, and a 23% chance of making the NC$$ tournament, according to PlayoffStatus.com.

PlayoffStatus.com: because that aneurism isn't going to trigger itself.

If you hate Union like, oh I dunno, this friend of mine, you enjoyed this weekend.

BearLover
If the PWR is doing its job, i.e. accurately ranking teams, then how good or bad the ECAC is should not affect Cornell’s odds of an at-large bid. This is because, if the ECAC is bad, Cornell should have a better record in-conference (and vice versa). Obviously, holding constant Cornell’s odds of beating (for example) Union, we’d rather Union perform well out of conference to bolster Cornell’s RPI. But if Union were better, then Cornell would be less likely to beat them.

The ECAC being weak actually helps Cornell overall, because Cornell thereby has a better shot of winning the ECAC tournament. (On the other hand, you could argue that the ECAC being good helps Cornell’s recruiting. It doesn’t seem to me that this has been true in practice, but the point has been argued about on here enough times that it’s not worth relitigating.)

I think that the pairwise does accurately rank how good teams are (to an extent) but I think it doesn’t realize how hard it is to play and beat bad teams week after week, especially ones that are familiar with your play style.

chimpfood

BearLover
If the PWR is doing its job, i.e. accurately ranking teams, then how good or bad the ECAC is should not affect Cornell’s odds of an at-large bid. This is because, if the ECAC is bad, Cornell should have a better record in-conference (and vice versa). Obviously, holding constant Cornell’s odds of beating (for example) Union, we’d rather Union perform well out of conference to bolster Cornell’s RPI. But if Union were better, then Cornell would be less likely to beat them.

The ECAC being weak actually helps Cornell overall, because Cornell thereby has a better shot of winning the ECAC tournament. (On the other hand, you could argue that the ECAC being good helps Cornell’s recruiting. It doesn’t seem to me that this has been true in practice, but the point has been argued about on here enough times that it’s not worth relitigating.)

I think that the pairwise does accurately rank how good teams are (to an extent) but I think it doesn’t realize how hard it is to play and beat bad teams week after week, especially ones that are familiar with your play style.

That should go both ways though, right? The best teams also know how to play against the bad teams. Cornell, Harvard, and especially Quinnipiac have had multiple seasons in recent history where they nearly went undefeated over the full ECAC season.

BearLover

chimpfood

BearLover
If the PWR is doing its job, i.e. accurately ranking teams, then how good or bad the ECAC is should not affect Cornell’s odds of an at-large bid. This is because, if the ECAC is bad, Cornell should have a better record in-conference (and vice versa). Obviously, holding constant Cornell’s odds of beating (for example) Union, we’d rather Union perform well out of conference to bolster Cornell’s RPI. But if Union were better, then Cornell would be less likely to beat them.

The ECAC being weak actually helps Cornell overall, because Cornell thereby has a better shot of winning the ECAC tournament. (On the other hand, you could argue that the ECAC being good helps Cornell’s recruiting. It doesn’t seem to me that this has been true in practice, but the point has been argued about on here enough times that it’s not worth relitigating.)

I think that the pairwise does accurately rank how good teams are (to an extent) but I think it doesn’t realize how hard it is to play and beat bad teams week after week, especially ones that are familiar with your play style.

That should go both ways though, right? The best teams also know how to play against the bad teams. Cornell, Harvard, and especially Quinnipiac have had multiple seasons in recent history where they nearly went undefeated over the full ECAC season.

yeah good point, I don’t really know what I’m saying, I’m just biased toward whatever will help Cornell.

BearLover

chimpfood

BearLover
If the PWR is doing its job, i.e. accurately ranking teams, then how good or bad the ECAC is should not affect Cornell’s odds of an at-large bid. This is because, if the ECAC is bad, Cornell should have a better record in-conference (and vice versa). Obviously, holding constant Cornell’s odds of beating (for example) Union, we’d rather Union perform well out of conference to bolster Cornell’s RPI. But if Union were better, then Cornell would be less likely to beat them.

The ECAC being weak actually helps Cornell overall, because Cornell thereby has a better shot of winning the ECAC tournament. (On the other hand, you could argue that the ECAC being good helps Cornell’s recruiting. It doesn’t seem to me that this has been true in practice, but the point has been argued about on here enough times that it’s not worth relitigating.)

I think that the pairwise does accurately rank how good teams are (to an extent) but I think it doesn’t realize how hard it is to play and beat bad teams week after week, especially ones that are familiar with your play style.

That should go both ways though, right? The best teams also know how to play against the bad teams. Cornell, Harvard, and especially Quinnipiac have had multiple seasons in recent history where they nearly went undefeated over the full ECAC season.

No! The good teams don't "adjust" to play bad teams. Sure, you prepare for specific opponents but to the extent that bad teams adjust to good teams in hockey, the idea is to make the game a slog, maybe a violent one. You can't really "adjust" to that so much as endure it. The good teams usually win anyway because ... they are the good teams.

ugarte

BearLover

chimpfood

BearLover
If the PWR is doing its job, i.e. accurately ranking teams, then how good or bad the ECAC is should not affect Cornell’s odds of an at-large bid. This is because, if the ECAC is bad, Cornell should have a better record in-conference (and vice versa). Obviously, holding constant Cornell’s odds of beating (for example) Union, we’d rather Union perform well out of conference to bolster Cornell’s RPI. But if Union were better, then Cornell would be less likely to beat them.

The ECAC being weak actually helps Cornell overall, because Cornell thereby has a better shot of winning the ECAC tournament. (On the other hand, you could argue that the ECAC being good helps Cornell’s recruiting. It doesn’t seem to me that this has been true in practice, but the point has been argued about on here enough times that it’s not worth relitigating.)

I think that the pairwise does accurately rank how good teams are (to an extent) but I think it doesn’t realize how hard it is to play and beat bad teams week after week, especially ones that are familiar with your play style.

That should go both ways though, right? The best teams also know how to play against the bad teams. Cornell, Harvard, and especially Quinnipiac have had multiple seasons in recent history where they nearly went undefeated over the full ECAC season.

No! The good teams don't "adjust" to play bad teams. Sure, you prepare for specific opponents but to the extent that bad teams adjust to good teams in hockey, the idea is to make the game a slog, maybe a violent one. You can't really "adjust" to that so much as endure it. The good teams usually win anyway because ... they are the good teams.

That may be easier said than done. Cornell probably would have liked to make their game against BU this year a slog, but they couldn’t, because BU is too fast and skilled. So BU ended up getting like 12 grade-A chances and a ton of O-zone time (luckily only one goal went in).

It seems like almost every year, it’s easy for the best ECAC team to dominate the weaker teams. For example, this season Quinnipiac is 7-0-1 in the ECAC, outscoring its opponents 43-14.

so far cornell has played Quin/Mass/Ariz st/Bu and only 1 game did they really lose control

Lets see what happens again vs ASU.

BearLover

ugarte

BearLover

chimpfood

BearLover
If the PWR is doing its job, i.e. accurately ranking teams, then how good or bad the ECAC is should not affect Cornell’s odds of an at-large bid. This is because, if the ECAC is bad, Cornell should have a better record in-conference (and vice versa). Obviously, holding constant Cornell’s odds of beating (for example) Union, we’d rather Union perform well out of conference to bolster Cornell’s RPI. But if Union were better, then Cornell would be less likely to beat them.

The ECAC being weak actually helps Cornell overall, because Cornell thereby has a better shot of winning the ECAC tournament. (On the other hand, you could argue that the ECAC being good helps Cornell’s recruiting. It doesn’t seem to me that this has been true in practice, but the point has been argued about on here enough times that it’s not worth relitigating.)

I think that the pairwise does accurately rank how good teams are (to an extent) but I think it doesn’t realize how hard it is to play and beat bad teams week after week, especially ones that are familiar with your play style.

That should go both ways though, right? The best teams also know how to play against the bad teams. Cornell, Harvard, and especially Quinnipiac have had multiple seasons in recent history where they nearly went undefeated over the full ECAC season.

No! The good teams don't "adjust" to play bad teams. Sure, you prepare for specific opponents but to the extent that bad teams adjust to good teams in hockey, the idea is to make the game a slog, maybe a violent one. You can't really "adjust" to that so much as endure it. The good teams usually win anyway because ... they are the good teams.

That may be easier said than done. Cornell probably would have liked to make their game against BU this year a slog, but they couldn’t, because BU is too fast and skilled. So BU ended up getting like 12 grade-A chances and a ton of O-zone time (luckily only one goal went in).

It seems like almost every year, it’s easy for the best ECAC team to dominate the weaker teams. For example, this season Quinnipiac is 7-0-1 in the ECAC, outscoring its opponents 43-14.

If the BU announcers were to be believed, the size, grit, and defensive effort of BU was up against the firepower of Cornell.

chimpfood

BearLover

chimpfood

BearLover
If the PWR is doing its job, i.e. accurately ranking teams, then how good or bad the ECAC is should not affect Cornell’s odds of an at-large bid. This is because, if the ECAC is bad, Cornell should have a better record in-conference (and vice versa). Obviously, holding constant Cornell’s odds of beating (for example) Union, we’d rather Union perform well out of conference to bolster Cornell’s RPI. But if Union were better, then Cornell would be less likely to beat them.

The ECAC being weak actually helps Cornell overall, because Cornell thereby has a better shot of winning the ECAC tournament. (On the other hand, you could argue that the ECAC being good helps Cornell’s recruiting. It doesn’t seem to me that this has been true in practice, but the point has been argued about on here enough times that it’s not worth relitigating.)

I think that the pairwise does accurately rank how good teams are (to an extent) but I think it doesn’t realize how hard it is to play and beat bad teams week after week, especially ones that are familiar with your play style.

That should go both ways though, right? The best teams also know how to play against the bad teams. Cornell, Harvard, and especially Quinnipiac have had multiple seasons in recent history where they nearly went undefeated over the full ECAC season.

yeah good point, I don’t really know what I’m saying, I’m just biased toward whatever will help Cornell.

Bear eats Chimp

BearLover

ugarte

BearLover

chimpfood

BearLover
If the PWR is doing its job, i.e. accurately ranking teams, then how good or bad the ECAC is should not affect Cornell’s odds of an at-large bid. This is because, if the ECAC is bad, Cornell should have a better record in-conference (and vice versa). Obviously, holding constant Cornell’s odds of beating (for example) Union, we’d rather Union perform well out of conference to bolster Cornell’s RPI. But if Union were better, then Cornell would be less likely to beat them.

The ECAC being weak actually helps Cornell overall, because Cornell thereby has a better shot of winning the ECAC tournament. (On the other hand, you could argue that the ECAC being good helps Cornell’s recruiting. It doesn’t seem to me that this has been true in practice, but the point has been argued about on here enough times that it’s not worth relitigating.)

I think that the pairwise does accurately rank how good teams are (to an extent) but I think it doesn’t realize how hard it is to play and beat bad teams week after week, especially ones that are familiar with your play style.

That should go both ways though, right? The best teams also know how to play against the bad teams. Cornell, Harvard, and especially Quinnipiac have had multiple seasons in recent history where they nearly went undefeated over the full ECAC season.

No! The good teams don't "adjust" to play bad teams. Sure, you prepare for specific opponents but to the extent that bad teams adjust to good teams in hockey, the idea is to make the game a slog, maybe a violent one. You can't really "adjust" to that so much as endure it. The good teams usually win anyway because ... they are the good teams.

That may be easier said than done. Cornell probably would have liked to make their game against BU this year a slog, but they couldn’t, because BU is too fast and skilled. So BU ended up getting like 12 grade-A chances and a ton of O-zone time (luckily only one goal went in).

That's MY point! They don't "know how to play against the bad teams," they are "better at hockey than the bad teams."

First weekend with all 12 ECAC teams playing each other in quite a while.

There's 14 games to go, we got a full tank of gas, half a pack of cigarettes, it's dark, and we're wearing sunglasses.

Cornell is the CHN Team of the Week.

That was, unexpectedly, a good article. Bravo CHN.

It was written by Jane, the Cornell student who reached out to eLynah about the hockey coverage. Kudos to her.

She’s also on the field hockey team. Props to anyone who can balance classes, a varsity sport and the Sun.

Trotsky
There's 14 games to go, we got a full tank of gas, half a pack of cigarettes, it's dark, and we're wearing sunglasses.

Hit it!

this 3 losses are really the killers to the season.

just winning 2 and we are top 10 in PWR and 2nd in the league with games in hand

upprdeck
this 3 losses are really the killers to the season.

just winning 2 and we are top 10 in PWR and 2nd in the league with games in hand

Against Harvard and Princeton we had the better of the play, so us not winning was as much bad luck as anything. On the other hand, by far the most inexcusable game this season was the Colgate game at home. Colgate, a poor team in the first place, was so banged up they could only dress 4 defensemen. And yet, play was even. It was the last game before break, in our rink, and we laid an egg. Awful.

upprdeck
this 3 losses are really the killers to the season.

just winning 2 and we are top 10 in PWR and 2nd in the league with games in hand

Its not really fair for us to turn around the results of those games without at least getting rid of the BU win. Sure we outplayed Princeton and harvard pretty significantly but the same can be said for BU vs us.

i didnt think BU outplayed us in a big way.. They out shot us for sure in the 3rd period.

upprdeck
i didnt think BU outplayed us in a big way.. They out shot us for sure in the 3rd period.

I remember someone posted the expected goals for each team on the game thread and it was rough.

upprdeck
this 3 losses are really the killers to the season.

just winning 2 and we are top 10 in PWR and 2nd in the league with games in hand

One problem with having a lot of bad teams in conference is it increases the likelihood of a stinker severely punishing us in PWR.

All we can do is play our game the next 14. As Schafer says in the article: play a faceless opponent. Take care of what we can control and que sera sera.

chimpfood

upprdeck
i didnt think BU outplayed us in a big way.. They out shot us for sure in the 3rd period.

I remember someone posted the expected goals for each team on the game thread and it was rough.

I bet if you did that for the ASU game we scored about half the expected goals.. Breakaways and off man rushes and high quality shots are not our strength.

The other reality is that we have really only given up goals a couple games so may expected goals allowed vs us is lower and our expected goals for is lower because we cant shoot.

chimpfood

upprdeck
i didnt think BU outplayed us in a big way.. They out shot us for sure in the 3rd period.

I remember someone posted the expected goals for each team on the game thread and it was rough.

That was me. It was like 5 for BU to 2 for Cornell, and tbh I thought that was pretty evident from watching the game.

Trotsky
That was, unexpectedly, a good article. Bravo CHN.

no one accepts kudos, when you preface with "unexpectedly"

adamw

Trotsky
That was, unexpectedly, a good article. Bravo CHN.

no one accepts kudos, when you preface with "unexpectedly"

In retrospect, it being by Jane, I am not surprised at all. She is a fine writer which, in sports journalism, may make her the first ever.

I didn't want to start another thread, but feel free to move if in the wrong space:

NCAA Hockey Regionals to Home Sites

The Rancor
I didn't want to start another thread, but feel free to move if in the wrong space:

NCAA Hockey Regionals to Home Sites

It started with a game between Minnesota State and Harvard in Albany, N.Y. The crowd was sparse enough to count by hand — in a venue that seats more than 10,000. Pandemic-restricted crowds were larger.

But this was a Covid restricted event. We had to show proof of a negative Covid test to get in. The mask police were out in force and we had to sit with space between "parties".

(I do agree the regional games do not draw well and I'd be OK with college venues.)

The Rancor
I didn't want to start another thread, but feel free to move if in the wrong space:

NCAA Hockey Regionals to Home Sites

I agree in theory, but as the only person rooting for us to get placed in Sioux Falls, I'm not sure I agree in practice.

The Rancor
I didn't want to start another thread, but feel free to move if in the wrong space:

NCAA Hockey Regionals to Home Sites

Moved to 2024 NCAAs thread.

Pct in conference (by Derp Points) after tonight:

 1. Qpc .806
 2. Clk .667
 3. Cgt .600
 4. Cor .567
------------
 5. Uni .556
 6. SLU .533
 7. Brn .487
 8. Drt .394
------------
 9. Hvd .389
10. Yal .385
11. Prn .359
12. RPI .333

ECAC Pct after 1/26:

 1. Qpc .821
 2. Clk .697
 3. Cor .606
    Cgt .606
------------
 5. Uni .556
 6. Brn .487
 7. SLU .485
 8. Drt .389
------------
 9. Hvd .359
    Prn .359
11. Yal .357
12. RPI .333

Despite the disappointment tonight, if we take 6 points next weekend we will be alone in 2nd.

Let's go Red!

we now control our own destiny. Thats about all you can ask..

I'm feeling good about Cornell's chances in the ECAC tournament: the ability to have a first-round bye, then home ice at Lynah for the quarterfinals March 15-17, then second or third seeding in the semifinals (and 7:30 not 4 pm faceoff in Lake Placid March 22 to make it easier to drive up Friday).

Quinnipiac would need a historic meltdown to not be seeded first. Woe unto whoever comes into LP with the low seed and plays them. There's not much difference being the second vs. third seed in LP; for either, Quinnipiac is not a problem until Saturday, and there's always the chance of an upset by the #4 team. Q has been beaten by Colgate, by Cornell (OT) and by Dartmouth (OT shootout).

We (and Colgate) are done playing Q, have both the home and away Clarkson and St. Lawrence games remaining, ditto RPI and Union; plus singles with Brown and Yale. Union and Clarkson both have their second Quinnipiac game to play, as does St. Lawrence.

Q in ECAC has lost only to Cornell (OT), Colgate 2-1, and Dartmouth (OT shootout).

We battle Clarkson, Colgate, Union, and St. Lawrence for 2nd through 6th, with 6 of those 8 games still to play. By NC record, we and Clarkson are the lead pair.

Make that happen:
(1) win the games we should (cough, like at Dartmouth)
(2) beat Clarkson in Lake Placid
(3) beat Quinnipiac in Lake Placid

ECAC Hockey Tournament Probabilities

      SF    F   Title
Qpc  .96  .74  .45
Cor  .91  .65  .35
Cgt  .59  .18  .06
Clk  .41  .13  .05

Trotsky
ECAC Hockey Tournament Probabilities

      SF    F   Title
Qpc  .96  .74  .45
Cor  .91  .65  .35
Cgt  .59  .18  .06
Clk  .41  .13  .05

I wonder what chance Colgate had of winning the tournament a year ago at this time.

dbilmes
I wonder what chance Colgate had of winning the tournament a year ago at this time.

We should be wary. After all, just two years ago they came into Lynah for the QF and knocked us out.

Trotsky
ECAC Hockey Tournament Probabilities

      SF    F   Title
Qpc  .96  .74  .45
Cor  .91  .65  .35
Cgt  .59  .18  .06
Clk  .41  .13  .05

This season I will not say a word about how these “predictions” have zero predictive value because they are entirely derived from a ranking which is not predictive. I will stay silent about the fact these rankings are not backtested at all to improve accuracy but instead use the same rudimentary formula every year with no attempt to improve them. And I will certainly keep quiet about how these “predictions” dupe so many well meaning fans into citing them. I have resigned myself to the fact that people just love “trash in, trash out” predictions of things, no matter how useless they are. As such, I will avoid this topic entirely this year.

BearLover

Trotsky
ECAC Hockey Tournament Probabilities

      SF    F   Title
Qpc  .96  .74  .45
Cor  .91  .65  .35
Cgt  .59  .18  .06
Clk  .41  .13  .05

This season I will not say a word about how these “predictions” have zero predictive value because they are entirely derived from a ranking which is not predictive. I will stay silent about the fact these rankings are not backtested at all to improve accuracy but instead use the same rudimentary formula every year with no attempt to improve them. And I will certainly keep quiet about how these “predictions” dupe so many well meaning fans into citing them. I have resigned myself to the fact that people just love “trash in, trash out” predictions of things, no matter how useless they are. As such, I will avoid this topic entirely this year.

That would be too good to be true...sadly.

BearLover

Trotsky
ECAC Hockey Tournament Probabilities

      SF    F   Title
Qpc  .96  .74  .45
Cor  .91  .65  .35
Cgt  .59  .18  .06
Clk  .41  .13  .05

This season I will not say a word about how these “predictions” have zero predictive value because they are entirely derived from a ranking which is not predictive. I will stay silent about the fact these rankings are not backtested at all to improve accuracy but instead use the same rudimentary formula every year with no attempt to improve them. And I will certainly keep quiet about how these “predictions” dupe so many well meaning fans into citing them. I have resigned myself to the fact that people just love “trash in, trash out” predictions of things, no matter how useless they are. As such, I will avoid this topic entirely this year.

Think of them as pointing backwards, not forwards.

If the top teams are as good as their records, here are the odds. Are they as good as their records? Stay tuned to find out.

They're fun. Sports is entertainment.

Article about our tournament chances on USCHO today

[www.uscho.com]

If we peak at the right time...

Mr. Niss
Article about our tournament chances on USCHO today

[www.uscho.com]

It also pts out the issue of RPI having so much power in the rankings.

upprdeck

Mr. Niss
Article about our tournament chances on USCHO today

[www.uscho.com]

It also pts out the issue of RPI having so much power in the rankings.

After Friday, you will know that RPI doesn't have much power, and the penalty kill is at the bottom of the NCAA.

ursusminor
After Friday, you will know that RPI doesn't have much power, and the penalty kill is at the bottom of the NCAA.

In other words, exactly the kind of team that Cornell fans should be worried about at this point.

Give My Regards

ursusminor
After Friday, you will know that RPI doesn't have much power, and the penalty kill is at the bottom of the NCAA.

In other words, exactly the kind of team that Cornell fans should be worried about at this point.

RPI is due to upset someone. The only real upset so far this year was beating Clarkson in Potsdam, but RPI doesn't have the talent it had on 12/4/68 (or even 12/1/70), and nowhere near the fan support it had then.

ursusminor

Give My Regards

ursusminor
After Friday, you will know that RPI doesn't have much power, and the penalty kill is at the bottom of the NCAA.

In other words, exactly the kind of team that Cornell fans should be worried about at this point.

RPI is due to upset someone. The only real upset so far this year was beating Clarkson in Potsdam, but RPI doesn't have the talent it had on 12/4/68 (or even 12/1/70), and nowhere near the fan support it had then.

I remember reading this in the Troy Record in 1968.

Uh oh. They're multiplying.

Speaking of, does anybody know if ChiefAlbanyBear (?) is still around? I loved that guy, and now that we score goals he must be happy.