Thanks to the delay, we have extra time to turn to the Colgate game and root for Dartmouth.
Other finals:
Cornell 2 Vermont 1
Yale 6 UConn 2
Brown 5 Providence 1
RPI 4 Clarkson 3
In progress:
SLU 6 Union 3, 3rd
Dartmouth 2 Colgate 0, 1st
Dartmouth 2 Colgate 0, 1st late
Any media-savy folks know why the Cornell xmievents broadcast comes through at 369Kb/s whilst the Colgate broadcast is coming through at a paltry 32Kb/s.?
I am using Windows media player and I have set the preference to a T1 line.
Roy
Tech leading Minny again, 2-1 after two.
Harvard 6t, Colgate 6t, Cornell 8 in PWR with late precincts not reporting; CU passed BU.
Should Dartmouth pull it out against 'Gate, that'd flip our comparison with them and put us ahead of them, pending the effects that everything else has, of course.
3-0, Dartmouth. :-)
[Q]Al DeFlorio Wrote:
Harvard 6t, Colgate 6t, Cornell 8 in PWR with late precincts not reporting; CU passed BU.[/q]
Cornell was briefly tied for sixth with Harvard and Colgate because we were winning the comparison with Nebraska-Omaha. Then Massachusetts lost to Mass.-Lowell which knocked them from TUC status. That improved Nebraska-Omaha's record against TUCs as they lost to Massachusetts in December.
Gate scores, now 3-1 Green.
[Q]Greg Berge Wrote:
3-0, Dartmouth. [/q]
3-1 now
How teams ahead in the USCHO poll have done this weekend:
1 Colorado College: T-UMD, vs UMD
2 Boston College: W-Northeastern
3 Michigan: L-Ohio State, W-Ohio State
4 Minnesota: L-Michigan Tech, vs Michigan Tech
5 Wisconsin: W-Notre Dame, vs Notre Dame
6 Denver: W-St. Cloud, vs St. Cloud
7 New Hampshire: W-Merrimack
8 Colgate: W-Vermont, vs Dartmouth
In progress:
CC 1 UMD 1, 2nd
Michigan Tech 2 Minnesota 1, 3rd
Wisconsin 2 Notre Dame 0, 3rd
Denver 4 St. Cloud 1, 3rd
Dartmouth 3 Colgate 1, 2nd
Dartmouth 4 Colgate 1, late 2nd.
Michigan Tech 3 Minnesota 1, final. Tech, 3-17-1 coming into the weekend, sweeps Minnesota for the first time since 1971. The Gophers drop to 18-9-0. Cornell could very well overtake them in the polls.
1 Colorado College: T-UMD, vs UMD
2 Boston College: W-Northeastern
3 Michigan: LW-Ohio State
4 Minnesota: LL-Michigan Tech
5 Wisconsin: WW-Notre Dame
6 Denver: WW-St. Cloud
7 New Hampshire: W-Merrimack
8 Colgate: W-Vermont, vs Dartmouth
In progress:
UMD 4 CC 1, end of 2nd
Dartmouth 4 Colgate 1, in 3rd
Colgate cuts it to 4-2 on a major pp.
Yikes! The Colgate webcasts have replays. :-(
Colgate scores. 4-3, about 5 mins to go.
4-3 DC ... Colgate announcer is almost as big a homer as the Brown folks
5-3 Dartmouth.
DC goal! 5-3
1:52 left. Hang in there, Green!
With Silverthorn giving up 5 tonight, McKee will become the leading goaltender in the conference in GAA and Sv%.
6-3 Dartmouth on an eng.
And that's a final. The new standings, teams > .500:
.833 Colgate
.792 Cornell
.625 Harvard
.615 Vermont
.583 St. Lawrence
I believe that Green's win tonight is the first time this season that a visitor gets any points on the trip to central NY.
Oh yeah, and my old RA's daughter's boyfriend (Przepiorka - remember him?) gets his 2nd hat trick of the season.
Assuming the following:
1 Colorado College: TL-UMD
2 Boston College: W-Northeastern
3 Michigan: LW-Ohio State
4 Minnesota: LL-Michigan Tech
5 Wisconsin: WW-Notre Dame
6 Denver: WW-St. Cloud
7 New Hampshire: W-Merrimack
8 Colgate: W-Vermont, L-Dartmouth
the new poll (yeah, I know, it doesn't matter, blah blah blah) will be something like:
1 Boston College (15-3-3)
2 Colorado College (20-4-2)
3 Wisconsin (19-6-1)
4 Michigan (19-6-1)
5 Denver (16-6-1)
6 New Hampshire (16-5-2)
7 Cornell (13-4-2)
8 Minnesota (18-9-0)
[Q]Greg Berge Wrote:
the new poll (yeah, I know, it doesn't matter, blah blah blah) will be something like:
1 Boston College (15-3-3)
2 Colorado College (20-4-2)
3 Wisconsin (19-6-1)
4 Michigan (19-6-1)
5 Denver (16-6-1)
6 New Hampshire (16-5-2)
7 Cornell (13-4-2)
8 Minnesota (18-9-0)[/q]
Don't know that Minny will fall that far. Western bias. ;-)
Sans weather delay/postponements, here's how the ranked teams managed:
January 17, 2005
Team (First Place) Record Pts Last Week
1 Colorado College (40) 20-3-1 600 1 (T,L) Minnesota-Duluth
2 Boston College 14-3-3 546 2 (W,?) Northeastern
3 Michigan 18-5-1 507 3 (L,W) Ohio State
4 Minnesota 18-7-0 493 4 (L,L) Michigan Tech
5 Wisconsin 17-6-1 434 5 (W,W) Notre Dame
6 Denver 14-6-1 358 7 (W,W) St. Cloud
7 New Hampshire 15-5-2 353 6 (W,?) Merrimack
8 Colgate 17-5-0 291 10 (W,L) UVM, Dartmouth
9 Cornell 11-4-2 266 11 (W,W) Dartmouth, UVM
10 Ohio State 15-6-3 236 12 (W,L) Michigan
11 Boston University 13-9-0 197 8 (T,L) Maine
12 North Dakota 14-10-2 163 9 â€"Idle-
13 Harvard 10-5-2 122 14 â€"Idle-
14 Vermont 13-7-3 85 13 (L,L) Colgate, Cornell
15 Mass.-Lowell 13-5-2 64 NR (W) UMass
Others Receiving Votes: Maine 63 (T,W), Dartmouth 10 (L,W),
Nebraska-Omaha 5 (W,L), Bemidji State 3 (L), Northern Michigan 2 (W,W),
Bowling Green 1 (L,L), Holy Cross 1 (L)
also have to realize Minnesota had 493 points last week and would need to drop over 200 to get to a relative #8 ... now they did lose to Michigan Tech twice ::nut::
Good win for Cornell tonight. The teams were pretty even, but Cornell's powerplay was clearly better and it was obviously the difference in the game. My three stars tonight: 1. Scott 2. Pegoraro 3. Krantz
Weird... the Gate score is up the records are updated, but PWR doensn't seem to be yet. Gate needs another loss in their COP column. Does that take a bit longer? I thought it was immediate.
[Q]DeltaOne81 Wrote:
Weird... the Gate score is up the records are updated, but PWR doensn't seem to be yet. Gate needs another loss in their COP column. Does that take a bit longer? I thought it was immediate.[/q]
Click add bonus. As JTW pointed out yesterday, they don't update at the same time. Cornell now t6 in PWR with Harvard. Colgate fall to the bottom of a 4 way tie for 8th.
[Q]DeltaOne81 Wrote:
Weird... the Gate score is up the records are updated, but PWR doensn't seem to be yet. Gate needs another loss in their COP column. Does that take a bit longer? I thought it was immediate.[/q]
my thougths exactly ... they're now 18-6
thanks :-)
[Q]Chris '03 Wrote:
[Q2]DeltaOne81 Wrote:
Weird... the Gate score is up the records are updated, but PWR doensn't seem to be yet. Gate needs another loss in their COP column. Does that take a bit longer? I thought it was immediate.[/Q]
Click add bonus. As JTW pointed out yesterday, they don't update at the same time. Cornell now t6 in PWR with Harvard. Colgate fall to the bottom of a 4 way tie for 8th. [/q]
Sorry I don't spend everyday on the board ;) Good to know though
Dare I say, that was one of the better officiated games I've seen in my 2+ years at Lynah. Crew was relatively invisible. They definitely let a lot of stuff go, but I think they allowed to players to play and the game to flow nicely. Either way, the Cornell brand of hockey was not hurt tonight, which was refreshing to see; several good hard checks from Sawada that went uncalled. Here's to more of the same for the stretch run.
Totally agree on the officiating.
Though alot depends on our Colgate weekend, wouldnt we have wanted Colgate to win, as we're 1-1 against Dartmouth, so it would be for the better that they somehow drop from TUC status?
great game, though a bit more scoring would have been fun, it was a hard fought eavenly matched game that was not a shut out on a fluke goal, as last night was. Topher Scott... great weekend for him. 4 points, 1 g3a. that line is realy clicking. chris abbot, great hustle good to see him playing like a firecracker. i'd like to see a bit more out of bitz. looking good going into next week.
[Q]French Rage Wrote:
Though alot depends on our Colgate weekend, wouldnt we have wanted Colgate to win, as we're 1-1 against Dartmouth, so it would be for the better that they somehow drop from TUC status?[/q]
There's a point at which its splitting hairs and we just want to win the conference. Besides, Dartmouth is talented enough that with 6 of 10 remaining games again Yale/Princeton, RPI/Union, and SLU/Clarkson, the chances of them leaving TUC status permanently isn't too likely. Of course, the other 4 are against Harvard/Brown, but Brown hasn't been too hot either.
Agreed. We shouldn't get too carried away with PWR machinations at this point int he season. There are too many other variables over the next six to nine weeks that will affect the standings (that is - hundreds of hockey games) more than whether Dartmouth wins or loses tonight against the ECAC leader. First order of business is finishing first in conference and Dartmouth helped us with that tonight.
The final at Hamilton really makes our defense look special. Cornell stopped a talented Dartmouth team who can really click when the D isn't up to the challenge. I saw the Dartmouth 9-1 over RIP game and some of the goals there look liked like scripted practice drills.
LGR!
Not a bad weekend at all for Cornell other than it was two more almost-shutout games for Cornell and McKee. Of games where we have a shutout entering the third period the last two years, the majority of time, it seems as if we blow the shutout (or against Vermont, the lead).
We're up to sixth in PWR and that's best of the ECACHL teams.
Thank you Dartmouth for knocking off Colgate and making Colgate's lead in the ECAC over Cornell just one point, 20-19, with Vermont and Harvard further back at 16 and 15, with eight games left over the next four weekends. Of course the home-and-home weekend is crucial because (geez, this never occurred to me before), since we're the ECAC partner with Colgate, down the stretch we play the same schedule as Colgate and we're more likely to have similar than different outcome in the games (except Dartmouth; thank you again, Big Green). That means we're master of our fate and don't have to be concerned about Colgate stumbling so we can back into the regular season championship.
The defense helped McKee's stats: He's down to 1.47 GAA, tops in Division 1, and fourth in save percentage. The Ivies have three of the five top statistical goalies in McKee, Brown's D'Alba, and Harvard's Grumet-Morris.
Power play is back just above 25%. We are second on power player (.252), third on penalty kill (.887), first on team defense (1.53; not sure why this is higher than McKee's 1.47; probably if the stats count a game as a game, not as per 60 minutes), 12th on offense. Does anyone worry that outside of the PP, our offense is not particularly potent? A quick scan of January stats says 9 of our 16 goals came off the power play (32% effectiveness), meaning the even-strength offense is averaging 1.0 goals per game (plus that helpful man-short goal to beat Union in OT).
Some observers said the refs finally kept the whistle out of their mouths at Saturday's game and let Cornell play its style. Is that our POV because we got called for only three penalties to Vermont's six (and we were 2x5 on PP); is someone else going to complain the refs let down their vigilance? Note that Dartmouth again lost someone to a third-period DQ Saturday.
Sad for hockey when any team loses four players to suspension/dismissal, but if it has to happen, it's nice that it's our Friday opponent, Clarkson, and Clarkson now has no senior defensemen.
Interesting note posted elsewhere that this is the first time this year an ECAC opponent has come out of central-upstate New York with any points with Dartmouth's win at Colgate. Colgate has 2 other home losses, but those were NC games to Army (Army!) and in OT to Northeastern. So when you think about a team coming here thinking about the weekend, not just about Cornell, it's even tougher on them. Good!
I'd like to see the eLynah poll ask for Cornell's record in the final eight games. Could 7-1 be too much to ask for? We could dream about 8-0. [edit correction:] final ten games not eight.
[Q]billhoward Wrote:
I'd like to see the eLynah poll ask for Cornell's record in the final eight games. Could 7-1 be too much to ask for? We could dream about 8-0.
[/q]
Bill, I think we have ten more games.
[Q]The Rancor Wrote:
...i'd like to see a bit more out of bitz...
[/q]
I think Bitz needs a song. Maybe the students can tweak Supertramp's "Give a little Bit[z], give a little Bit[z] of your [blood for us]..."
[Q]first on team defense (1.53; not sure why this is higher than McKee's 1.47; probably if the stats count a game as a game, not as per 60 minutes)[/Q]
McKee's stats probably don't include ENG, while the team's stats do?
Edit: actually, I don't think we've given up enough ENGs to make that much of a difference. Your reasoning sounds better.
[q]first on team defense (1.53; not sure why this is higher than McKee's 1.47; probably if the stats count a game as a game, not as per 60 minutes)[/q]
McKee's stats only include time and goals scored when he's actually in the game. Time when he's pulled for an extra player is not included, nor are goals scored in those situations (empty-net goals). Team stats include all goals and all playing time: McKee's time, the empty-net time, plus the few minutes Davenport played against Army.
[Q]ithacat Wrote:
[Q2]The Rancor Wrote:
...i'd like to see a bit more out of bitz...
[/Q]
I think Bitz needs a song. Maybe the students can tweak Supertramp's "Give a little Bit, give a little Bit of your ..."
[/q]
Someone posted alternate lyrics to "Ballroom Blitz" last year which were not bad.
Of course, one can always just chant his name.
You must be right: It's the empty net goal McKee wasn't charged for that raises the team's GAA (less Davenport's ~10 shutout minutes vs. Army) to higher than McKee's GAA. Not that team GAA is for a game no matter how minutes of OT get played.
[Q]jtwcornell91 Wrote:
Someone posted alternate lyrics to "Ballroom Blitz" last year which were not bad.
Of course, one can always just chant his name.[/q]
I came up with the idea for "Ballroom Blitz". Someone else wrote the lyrics.
Bitz was better on the wing, but he still does not seem to be playing anywhere near his best. He has not scored since the Mercyhurst game of last season. I really have on clue as to why Schafer has him on the top line and the first powerplay. But again, he was much more effective on the wing than he was at center where I thought he was brutal. I'm thinking maybe he's playing hurt or something.
did he not break his ankle (or there about) prior to the season? anyone who has had a break such as this will tell you they are seldom the same as they were before the break. even when you have completely healed (in his case maybe rushed back too soon), you will always feel the ramifications of the break especially when the break is in or around a joint (e.g. knee, ankle, wrist). i'm no MD but i've been around enough to say this is probably 99% true.
is he playing hurt ...? we don't know. but i can guess he's definitely still feeling the ankle.
just my $.02 :-)
bitz scored a goal against canisius over thanksgiving.
[Q]I came up with the idea for "Ballroom Blitz".[/q]
Well... I'm willing to grant you independent credit. Which do you want to be, Newton or Leibniz?
(To be honest, I'm sure hundreds of us thought of it the first instant we heard his name.)
[Q]Greg Berge Wrote:
(To be honest, I'm sure hundreds [/B]of us thought of it the first instant we heard his name.)[/q]
ummmmmm ... sure greg, whatever you say ... ::whistle::
Dozens? B-]
I was being magnanimous; get offa my cloud... ;-)
[q]I'd like to see the eLynah poll ask for Cornell's record in the final eight games.[/q]Hey, shoot for the stars! I'm rooting for 18-0 from here on out myself...
"Ballroom Bitz"
That's clever, but tough to have the crowd sign along with that one. For me, it'll be tough to beat "hey, hey, Baby..."
Maybe, it could be "hey, hey, Bitzy..."
I thought of "Kibbles and Bitz" actually :-P
he's gotta "kill someone" then ... :-D
[Q]marty Wrote:
The final at Hamilton really makes our defense look special. Cornell stopped a talented Dartmouth team who can really click when the D isn't up to the challenge. I saw the Dartmouth 9-1 over RIP game and some of the goals there look liked like scripted practice drills.[/q]
In fairness to Dartmouth, they were without one of their top players due to a game misconduct the week before. I think the team that beat 'Gate last night was a very different team than the one we faced.
I agree with KenP. Dartmouth has a very good team, one similar to Cornell's in that they are big and physical and relatively deep (although that clearly took a hit when 3 guys left the team). Even withouth Jessiman, they have the most talent in the ECACHL. Their biggest question mark I think is in goal. This is a team that I do not wanna see in the playoffs.
[Q]KenP Wrote:
[Q2]marty Wrote:
The final at Hamilton really makes our defense look special. Cornell stopped a talented Dartmouth team who can really click when the D isn't up to the challenge. I saw the Dartmouth 9-1 over RIP game and some of the goals there look liked like scripted practice drills.[/Q]
In fairness to Dartmouth, they were without one of their top players due to a game misconduct the week before. I think the team that beat 'Gate last night was a very different team than the one we faced.
[/q]
Game disqualification.
[Q]ithacat Wrote:
"Ballroom Bitz"
That's clever, but tough to have the crowd sign along with that one. For me, it'll be tough to beat "hey, hey, Bâby..."
Maybe, it could be "hey, hey, Bitzy..."[/q]
Let's try to resist the temptation to recycle cheers/songs that happen to fit with a particular player's name after that player has graduated.
[Q]KenP Wrote:
[Q2]marty Wrote:
The final at Hamilton really makes our defense look special. Cornell stopped a talented Dartmouth team who can really click when the D isn't up to the challenge. I saw the Dartmouth 9-1 over RIP game and some of the goals there look liked like scripted practice drills.[/Q]
In fairness to Dartmouth, they were without one of their top players due to a game misconduct the week before. I think the team that beat 'Gate last night was a very different team than the one we faced.
[/q]
UVM played without Sifers last night. Cornell played without Moulson in Hanover. Stuff happens.
I'd rather face Dartmouth than Harvard in the tournament. Harvard knows how to win them (Grumet-Morris is two-out-of-three). Dartmouth's never won anything.
I'm confident Dartmouth would rather play Cornell than Harvard as well.
[Q]billhoward Wrote:
Not a bad weekend at all for Cornell other than it was two more almost-shutout games for Cornell and McKee. Of games where we have a shutout entering the third period the last two years, the majority of time, it seems as if we blow the shutout (or against Vermont, the lead). [/q]
Holy glass-half-empty, Batman! Lenny spoiled you ... and he "lost" his share of shutouts in the third period also. Shutouts are rare and hard to come by; even the worst team in the ECAC will get a few prime opportunities to score in every game. Complaining about the goalie with the top GAA in the country getting "almost-shutouts" is a very strange complaint. How many fans routinely complain about their team consistently giving up one goal?
Don't focus on the exceptional games. Vermont 1.0 sticks out because it is so rare that this team loses a late lead.
[Q]ugarte Wrote:
[Q2]billhoward Wrote:
Not a bad weekend at all for Cornell other than it was two more almost-shutout games for Cornell and McKee. Of games where we have a shutout entering the third period the last two years, the majority of time, it seems as if we blow the shutout (or against Vermont, the lead). [/Q]
Holy glass-half-empty, Batman! Lenny spoiled you ... and he "lost" his share of shutouts in the third period also. Shutouts are rare and hard to come by; even the worst team in the ECAC will get a few prime opportunities to score in every game. Complaining about the goalie with the top GAA in the country getting "almost-shutouts" is a very strange complaint. How many fans routinely complain about their team consistently giving up one goal? Don't focus on the exceptional games. Vermont 1.0 sticks out because it is so rare that this team loses a late lead.[/q]
You're going to force me to look up all the box scores of the last two seasons. You are absolutely right that a shutout is a rare event and Leneveu (and the defense) spoiled us. However: It *feels* as if Cornell the last two years has lost a disproportionate amount of shutouts in the third period and in the last 10 minutes of the third period. If an opponent scores 1 goal against you, odds are 1 in 6 he'll do it in the last 10 minutes. I'm thinking more than than 1/6 of the X-to-1 score games of the last two years were X-to-0 with 10:00 to play.
We're all greedy. I'd love it if we led the nation in defense and shutouts both. There isn't a stat for this, but really what you want is for the team to be leader with the lowest standard deviation from the lowest goals allowed average. Better to allow 2 goals (exactly) in every game for a 2.0 GAA than 1.8GAA that includes a bunch of shutouts and a couple of 5 and 4 goals allowed games which are ones you couldn't always plan to win, especially if you're only averaging 3.5 goals a game.
The standard deviation for the first 19 games is 1.07. If we hadn't given up the ENG to BC it'd be about 0.96. Goals allowed by game ...
1
1
0
2
1
2
2
2
0
2
3
3
3
2
1
1
0
1
1
... three shutouts, seven one-goal games, six two-goal games, two three-goal games, and one four-goal game (BC and the ENG). I think it's pretty unusual to give up two goals less than you give up one goal. I'm sure we'll give up four goals at least once more this season. But still: nineteen games into the year and ten of them we gave up less than two goals.
[Q]DeltaOne81 Wrote:
[Q2]Chris '03 Wrote:
[Q2]DeltaOne81 Wrote:
Weird... the Gate score is up the records are updated, but PWR doensn't seem to be yet. Gate needs another loss in their COP column. Does that take a bit longer? I thought it was immediate.[/Q]
Click add bonus. As JTW pointed out yesterday, they don't update at the same time. Cornell now t6 in PWR with Harvard. Colgate fall to the bottom of a 4 way tie for 8th. [/Q]
Sorry I don't spend everyday on the board Good to know though[/q]
It wasn't always that way, Fred! ;-) B-]
[Q]If an opponent scores 1 goal against you, odds are 1 in 6 he'll do it in the last 10 minutes.[/Q]
Oh well, what the hell. Here they are, the periods and times of all only goals against us in the last 3 seasons:
2002-03
1 08:58 OSU pp
2 12:48 BU pp
3 08:47 BU sh
2 10:19 WMU
1 15:40 OSU (0-1 loss)
3 18:18 Col
3 11:50 Drt
3 16:09 Ver pp
1 18:56 UC
2 17:27 Prn pp
2 08:00 BC
2003-04
1 01:26 SLU
1 01:35 BG pp (1-1 tie)
1 07:11 UC (1-1 tie)
3 04:25 Prn
2 05:13 Yal
3 07:41 RPI
1 14:43 SLU
2 12:52 Clk pp
3 16:18 Clk pp
2004-05
3 00:32 Arm
2 17:57 Sac
1 5:54 MSU pp (1-1 tie)
3 04:54 Hvd (0-1 loss)
1 19:57 UC
3 12:18 Drt pp
3 12:39 Ver
Breakdown
Year 1 2 3 (Final 10 of 3)
-------------------------------
2003 3 4 4 (3)
2004 4 2 3 (1)
2005 2 1 4 (2)
[Q]billhoward Wrote:
You're going to force me to look up all the box scores of the last two seasons. You are absolutely right that a shutout is a rare event and Leneveu (and the defense) spoiled us. However: It *feels* as if Cornell the last two years has lost a disproportionate amount of shutouts in the third period and in the last 10 minutes of the third period. If an opponent scores 1 goal against you, odds are 1 in 6 he'll do it in the last 10 minutes. I'm thinking more than than 1/6 of the X-to-1 score games of the last two years were X-to-0 with 10:00 to play.
We're all greedy. I'd love it if we led the nation in defense and shutouts both. There isn't a stat for this, but really what you want is for the team to be leader with the lowest standard deviation from the lowest goals allowed average. Better to allow 2 goals (exactly) in every game for a 2.0 GAA than 1.8GAA that includes a bunch of shutouts and a couple of 5 and 4 goals allowed games which are ones you couldn't always plan to win, especially if you're only averaging 3.5 goals a game.
The standard deviation for the first 19 games is 1.07. If we hadn't given up the ENG to BC it'd be about 0.96. Goals allowed by game ...
... three shutouts, seven one-goal games, six two-goal games, two three-goal games, and one four-goal game (BC and the ENG). I think it's pretty unusual to give up two goals less than you give up one goal. I'm sure we'll give up four goals at least once more this season. But still: nineteen games into the year and ten of them we gave up less than two goals.
[/q]
During the '03 season I can tell you i/we watched more "should-be, could-be, might-have" been games I think i/we could stand.
Stats for that season looked like this (W-L-T): 9-shutouts (9-0-0), 11-One goal games (10-1-0), 12-Two goal games (10-1-1), 3-Three goal games(1-2-0), and 1-Five goal game (0-1-0).
truth-be-told it sucked to watch the close games not be shutouts but i'll take that season over and over and over again. i think there are porbably a few people here and elsewhere that might agree ... well, maybe a slightly different ending would be nice. B-]
Thanks for doing the legwork. My recollection that Cornell has given up a disproportionate amount of third-period and last-10-minutes goals to lose a shutout is wrong, wrong, wrong. But this year, it's right on target. The average should be .33 per period of giving up the 1 goal, and .17 of giving it it up in the last 10:00.
What period Cornell gave up the 1 goal in X-to-1 games:
YEAR 1st 2nd 3rd Last 10:00
2003 3 4 4 3
2004 4 2 3 1
2005 2 1 4 2
2003 0.27 0.36 0.36 0.27
2004 0.44 0.22 0.33 0.11
2005 0.29 0.14 0.57 0.29
I think part of it was also how the shutouts were broken: an offsides play by Dartmouth and a rainbow deflection by Vermont.
McKee deserves better.
[Q]billhoward Wrote:
The average should be .33 per period of giving up the 1 goal, and .17 of giving it it up in the last 10:00.
[/q]
You are really looking at a statistical blip and trying to derive meaning. Cornell has given up a last-ten-minute goal twice. Twice! It would have been nice to get shutouts in those games, but I really just have to shrug at the insignificance of it.
I still maintain that complaining about the lack of shutouts given McKee's profile this year is like lamenting the taxes when you win Powerball.
That was fun. Here's some more:
1999-2000
2 12:02 UC
2 13:52 Brn
2 09:07 WMU
2 06:58 Yal
2000-01
3 08:00 Hvd (1-1 tie)
3 10:50 Mai (1-1 tie)
3 17:10 Clk
1 07:11 Brn
4 02:14 Yal pp (ouch)
3 06:02 Drt
2 17:30 UC
2 10:15 Prn
2001-02
1 03:08 UAH
1 19:43 RPI
1 16:17 Brn pp
1 08:40 Yal pp (1-1 tie)
2 13:20 Nia
2 14:50 Col
3 00:17 SLU
4 03:59 Drt (ouch again)
1 03:10 RPI pp
3 06:34 UC
1 02:44 Yal
3 15:23 Qpc
Breakdown
Year 1 2 3 4 (> 3 09:59)
-------------------------------
2000 0 4 0 0 (0)
2001 1 2 4 1 (3)
2002 6 2 3 1 (2)
2003 3 4 4 0 (3)
2004 4 2 3 0 (1)
2005 2 1 4 0 (2)
51 16 15 18 2 (11)
You are absolutely right that it's a statistical blip and all too often we get hung up on minor on minor trajectories such as "two-game winning streaks." (I rail it against this stuff except when I'm violating the rule.) What got me thinking was that in this month, we gave up third-period goals that broke McKee's shutouts. As George's stats show, the previous two years it was almost 1/3 1/3 1/3 for the period when the shutout was broken in a game where the other guy finished with one goal.
Mckee's shutout record would be better and Cornell's WLT record would be worse if half those one-goal games became shutouts and half became two-goal games. So we should be happy with what we've got.
[Q]billhoward Wrote:
So we should be happy with what we've got. [/q]
glad you've come to this earth shattering realization ... ::nut::
[Q]ben03 Wrote:
[Q2]billhoward Wrote:
So we should be happy with what we've got. [/Q]
glad you've come to this earth shattering realization ....[/q]
Wisdom comes to all Cornellians just, as in my case, sometimes later not sooner. For instance when it dawned on me today that in the stretch run, once non-conference games are done, Colgate and Cornell have a pretty much equally tough schedule.
I was also going to poke fun at you for having to having to edit one additional time an eight-word, one-emoticon msg. Although you will note this actually edited and updated twice. First time, my kid shot a rubber band at me and I flinched when the mouse was hovering over the Update button, the second time when I saw I wrote "me" as "my".
Kettle, pot, black.
[Q]billhoward Wrote:
Wisdom comes to all Cornellians just, as in my case, sometimes later not sooner. For instance when it dawned on me today that in the stretch run, once non-conference games are done, Colgate and Cornell have a pretty much equally tough schedule.
I was also going to poke fun at you for having to having to edit one additional time an eight-word, one-emoticon msg. Although you will note this actually edited and updated twice. First time, my kid shot a rubber band at me and I flinched when the mouse was hovering over the Update button, the second time when I saw I wrote "me" as "my".
Kettle, pot, black.
Edited 2 times. Last edit at 01/23/05 09:56PM by billhoward.[/q]
Aren't you some sort of editor? :-P ;-)
bill, i edited my eight word message so as not to be too much of an ::asshole::
As long as we're throwing numbers around, in ECAC games this season:
1. 22 of 39 (56%) Cornell goals were scored in the second period.
2. 9 of 17 (53%) goals allowed by Cornell came in the third period or OT (Perhaps this is why billhoward feels as he does.).
3. 15 of the 27 (57%) goals against Harvard have come in the third period.
4. With 6 third-period goals and 1 OT goal, Cornell is dead last in scoring after the second period (RPI and Clarkson have 9 each).
5. Cornell has outscored ECAC opponents 10-4 in the first period, 22-4(!) in the second, been outscored 8-6 in the third, and split in OT, 1-1.