ELynah Forum

Quote from: BearLover on March 29, 2026, 11:20:28 PM

Quote from: Tom Lento on March 29, 2026, 11:14:19 PM

Quote from: BearLover on March 29, 2026, 01:55:24 PM

Quote from: Tom Lento on March 29, 2026, 01:47:10 PM

Quote from: BearLover on March 28, 2026, 10:03:58 AMHarvard/Dartmouth was their best weekend for sure, but it was also their only great weekend the entire season. This never felt like a top 10 team. That's how the computer rankings shook out, though. KRACH has us down at 12 but that's still really good. I don't believe our underlying metrics were that great even if our results (wins and losses, accounting for SOS) were very good.

I haven't looked since a few weeks before the end of the RS, but at least in aggregate Cornell's advanced metrics seemed to me to be in line with a solidly top 15 team. Top 10 in the ratings was maybe lucky, but not egregiously so.

If you've gone through the numbers a bit more it'd be interesting to get more detail there. I didn't get to watch the team much this season but I got the feeling from following along here and checking some xG/Corsi/Fenwick data that Cornell's play style results in more possession than it seems based on the eye test.

That may be because they've got a metrics-sound approach that doesn't yield enough sustained pressure (from what I understand Corsi and Fenwick, in particular, can suffer from this), or it may be because everybody around here got used to watching Schafer's endless cycle approach to puck possession, or it may just be noise.

If you're looking at the publicly available data on eg. CHN, those aren't adjusted for SOS. So top 15 possession metrics in the ECAC is in reality worse than top 15. I don't have access to anything better than what's publicly available, and even the CHN xG stat is not precise as it does not take into account type of shot, so I can't really comment with any greater degree of certainty.

Yeah that's a good point. I don't really know how to discount the stats accordingly so unless someone wants to do a more rigorous analysis this will all be on vibes.

My take after a quick look at today's Corsi/Fenwick numbers is still that Cornell (~12th on aggregate possession metrics) was a solid top 15 but probably not a top 10. That's not bad for a rebuilding year, and getting that big incoming class an up close look at a title contender is a real positive even if the game itself was pretty rough.

Cornell had a below average SOS. I think last I looked it was like 34th, but I can't seem to find it now on CHN. I'm not sure how you account for that exactly, but if a team that's eg. 16th in possession metrics has the 5th hardest SOS, they should be ahead of Cornell. @sezenack is an RPI fan who maintains a blog and I think he was tracking SOS-adjusted possession stats. @ursusminor, perhaps you can ping him? Would be interesting to see.

Would be interesting for sure. Just eyeballing it though I think Cornell is in a pretty fair rating band. You can definitely make the case for a few teams with good possession numbers vs tougher schedules, but Union and Bowling Green are ranked ahead of Cornell as is so i suspect it all comes out in the wash (in this case).

Quote from: BearLover on March 29, 2026, 01:55:24 PM

Quote from: Tom Lento on March 29, 2026, 01:47:10 PM

Quote from: BearLover on March 28, 2026, 10:03:58 AMHarvard/Dartmouth was their best weekend for sure, but it was also their only great weekend the entire season. This never felt like a top 10 team. That's how the computer rankings shook out, though. KRACH has us down at 12 but that's still really good. I don't believe our underlying metrics were that great even if our results (wins and losses, accounting for SOS) were very good.

I haven't looked since a few weeks before the end of the RS, but at least in aggregate Cornell's advanced metrics seemed to me to be in line with a solidly top 15 team. Top 10 in the ratings was maybe lucky, but not egregiously so.

If you've gone through the numbers a bit more it'd be interesting to get more detail there. I didn't get to watch the team much this season but I got the feeling from following along here and checking some xG/Corsi/Fenwick data that Cornell's play style results in more possession than it seems based on the eye test.

That may be because they've got a metrics-sound approach that doesn't yield enough sustained pressure (from what I understand Corsi and Fenwick, in particular, can suffer from this), or it may be because everybody around here got used to watching Schafer's endless cycle approach to puck possession, or it may just be noise.

If you're looking at the publicly available data on eg. CHN, those aren't adjusted for SOS. So top 15 possession metrics in the ECAC is in reality worse than top 15. I don't have access to anything better than what's publicly available, and even the CHN xG stat is not precise as it does not take into account type of shot, so I can't really comment with any greater degree of certainty.

Yeah that's a good point. I don't really know how to discount the stats accordingly so unless someone wants to do a more rigorous analysis this will all be on vibes.

My take after a quick look at today's Corsi/Fenwick numbers is still that Cornell (~12th on aggregate possession metrics) was a solid top 15 but probably not a top 10. That's not bad for a rebuilding year, and getting that big incoming class an up close look at a title contender is a real positive even if the game itself was pretty rough.

Quote from: BearLover on March 28, 2026, 10:03:58 AMHarvard/Dartmouth was their best weekend for sure, but it was also their only great weekend the entire season. This never felt like a top 10 team. That's how the computer rankings shook out, though. KRACH has us down at 12 but that's still really good. I don't believe our underlying metrics were that great even if our results (wins and losses, accounting for SOS) were very good.

I haven't looked since a few weeks before the end of the RS, but at least in aggregate Cornell's advanced metrics seemed to me to be in line with a solidly top 15 team. Top 10 in the ratings was maybe lucky, but not egregiously so.

If you've gone through the numbers a bit more it'd be interesting to get more detail there. I didn't get to watch the team much this season but I got the feeling from following along here and checking some xG/Corsi/Fenwick data that Cornell's play style results in more possession than it seems based on the eye test.

That may be because they've got a metrics-sound approach that doesn't yield enough sustained pressure (from what I understand Corsi and Fenwick, in particular, can suffer from this), or it may be because everybody around here got used to watching Schafer's endless cycle approach to puck possession, or it may just be noise.

Quote from: BearLover on March 28, 2026, 08:45:26 PMLike I said, Casey deserves a lot of the credit and also some of the blame. Doesn't mean he's a bad coach or that these problems will repeat themselves. It was a good year overall. But when the entire team plateaued or even regressed down the stretch, the buck stops with him. I don't expect that to happen next season.

I'm optimistic that won't happen again next year.

I was pretty worried about the schedule this year. My impression is first year players hit a wall sometime in February. The solution is usually to rest them a bit, but with 10+ regular rotation guys and four straight road weekends there isn't a good way to do that.

Worth noting - four consecutive weekends of travel and competition in the spring semester is brutal due to the way Cornell's class schedule lines up. I'm not surprised they never really found their legs after that.

Next year there are three things that should help - the schedule probably won't be so lopsided, they aren't going to be running 10+ first year college hockey players, and (hopefully) Casey and his staff can manage their workloads and time that peak better.

Quote from: stereax on March 27, 2026, 07:53:40 PM

Quote from: Tom Lento on March 27, 2026, 07:49:25 PMHaven't gotten to watch much this season but based on the snippets I've seen of this game I'll say the following:

1. XV is really fucking good.
2. This team ended up on the good end of what we thought they could be - young, talented, competitive in conference with top 10 potential but not at all a frozen four team (except for a massive fluke run).
3. They play pretty good hockey. Denver is on a different level right now, we're watching a solid top 15 team against a Frozen Four contender and the game is going as expected. Cornell is maybe a little unlucky to be down 3-0 after 2, but only a little.

I mean Courns barely had the chance to save the first two.

It is what it is, I guess. Honestly wasn't expecting the team to win this one just based on Denver being a lot better lmao.

We had a good run of it. Would've preferred more than an Ivy Champs + NCAA tournament banner, but the team did pretty well. It was supposed to be a rebuilding year, after all.

Now if they could blast open Hicks's top corners and make this fun again, I'd be really appreciative.

Yeah this has been one hell of a rebuilding year.

Here's hoping for a longer season! 4-0 third periods are a thing there, boys.

Quote from: Dafatone on March 27, 2026, 07:51:01 PMBetter period. Results not there. We are in rough shape, but stranger things have happened.

Indeed! I think Denver's too good, they look disciplined, but you never know. A shorthanded goal and a couple of bounces during the rest of the third ties it up.

Haven't gotten to watch much this season but based on the snippets I've seen of this game I'll say the following:

1. XV is really fucking good.
2. This team ended up on the good end of what we thought they could be - young, talented, competitive in conference with top 10 potential but not at all a frozen four team (except for a massive fluke run).
3. They play pretty good hockey. Denver is on a different level right now, we're watching a solid top 15 team against a Frozen Four contender and the game is going as expected. Cornell is maybe a little unlucky to be down 3-0 after 2, but only a little.

Quote from: adamw on March 25, 2026, 12:33:50 PMFYI heard today that Cornell got in Monday to give themselves extra time to acclimate. Not sure how much difference it will make - but at least they're doing all they can.

Totally anecdotal, but when I was young and fit and ended up competing at elevation I found every day and every workout mattered, and especially the first full day and first real physical test. I suspect getting there a couple days early will be huge for them.

Now when I go to the mountains I'm exhausted walking up a flight of stairs and it takes like 4 days to get back to feeling even mostly normal.

Quote from: adamw on March 25, 2026, 10:33:01 AMJust going to point out that Part I of my 3-part series about "The Landcape" of college hockey was posted today. For all the Bear Lovers out there who are interested.

https://www.collegehockeynews.com/news/2026/03/24_CHN-Special-Report-Part-.php

I'd also recommend reading our version of the Yale story. For one, it confirms Fox's and wasn't just Fox being Fox. For two, it has a nugget or two they didn't have. And yes I want more clicks.

I'm enjoying the article but as always the ad overlays on mobile are extreme.

Is there a way for me to give CHN money so I never see an ad again? I know I can install some third party ad blocker but I don't want to do that - they're only bothersome to me on CHN and I'd rather you all get some compensation.

If this seems like something you can just fix so it's less intrusive, I can send you a screenshot next time I hit one that covers 1/3 of the screen and can't be dismissed without flipping to landscape or whatever.

Edit - found the CHN ad-free subscription, so I'm buying that! Adam, if the overlay ads aren't supposed to misbehave this way I'd be happy to stay logged out for a bit to get more info for you.

Quote from: chimpfood on March 24, 2026, 10:19:53 AM

Quote from: stereax on March 24, 2026, 10:12:17 AM

Quote from: BearLover on March 24, 2026, 10:11:40 AM

Quote from: stereax on March 24, 2026, 08:44:56 AM

Quote from: Trotsky on March 24, 2026, 04:23:48 AMCongratulations to Dartmouth, winners of as many ECAC championships as Northeastern, UNH, and Quinnipiac.

Man, Rand Pecknold is such a choker.

Choker in the ECAC, yet consistently meets or exceeds expectations in the NCAA. Three finals appearances in a 10-year span is incredible for an ECAC school.

Could be a sample size thing, could be that teams who have already locked up an NCAA birth don't play with the same edge in their conference tournament.

But Rand's choking is specific to the ECAC tournament. Which makes it even stranger.

Inverse Schafer.

We had a very long stretch of not winning the ECAC before 24

I dunno, I don't consider it choking when the team isn't the favorite to win.

Quinnipiac's history of conference tournament underperformance is just astounding. Reminds me of Clarkson from the 90s (although those great Clarkson teams weren't good in the NCAAs, either). Maybe it's the green uniforms.

Quote from: JasonN95 on February 27, 2026, 06:39:06 PM

Quote from: stereax on February 27, 2026, 06:20:41 PMVideo!

In case you missed that goal!... well, you still missed it. 

Doesn't include the set up but the CU women's FB page has a great slo-mo of the goal up.

Quote from: VIEWfromK on February 14, 2026, 12:54:34 PMThis has definitely started to feel like the dog days of the season.  Is it the inexperienced team?  The unbalanced home and away schedule?  Or is it just the typical ECAC gauntlet?

It hasn't been pretty the past couple of games but they are still earning points which is a terrific characteristic.

They have previously been able to ride a different hot hand for their scoring.  Right now they need someone to step back up.

That will probably be the best game RPI plays all season.  The Cornell home game is circled on so many calendars that they always face the other team's best effort.

Hopefully tonight when they get their golden opportunities they burry them.

Someone who has actual stats on this (Adam, maybe?) should correct me if I'm wrong but my impression is February is when first year players struggle a bit. Add in the unbalanced home/road schedule and I'm not surprised they're struggling.

I suspect this team will be closer to what we thought they'd be in December than what they looked like at the end of January, but that's still pretty good.

It all depends on if they can get it together for the last couple of weeks and then take advantage of a bye round in the playoffs.

Quote from: Weder on February 05, 2026, 09:09:38 AM

Quote from: billhoward on February 05, 2026, 07:54:35 AMCass Park built 1972 provided overflow off-hours ice time for students for years when Lynah fans / intramural duffers were in thrall with a Cornell team that had gone unbeaten, we all thought with just a little more ice time we were the next Dan Lodboa '70 (three straight goals in the third period of the NCAA title game to lift Cornell to that unbeaten season). Lynah Rink cost $30 an hour to rent, $235 in today's money, Cass was cheaper, I recall. Plus available. Certainly after midnight. Gad, it was cold. I got my girlfriend to come twice. I think her sorority sisters dared her to do it. But twice?

The non-enclosed part of the original Cass Rink is because there were federal outdoor recreation funds available but in the case of rinks the outdoor part meant it had to be exposed to the elements. Roof, yes, walls all the way to the ground, no. The rest of Cass Park is gorgeous, lots of soccer fields, the lake and inlet, and walking trails. One of the reasons why Ithaca is a great place to live. Except right now 8am, Olympics opening day (for hockey), Ithaca is 3 degrees F vs. about 25 in metro NY.

Cass Park has been fully enclosed for a few years now.

No kidding? Playing beer league games at Cass Park at night when the temps dropped into the low teens was quite the experience. Driving to Lansing was a pain in the ass but it was the preferable venue.

Quote from: adamw on January 17, 2026, 12:53:48 PMFWIW - I just ran some other super secret numbers - and my rudimentary analysis of those shows some things like ...

Quinnipiac is top 10 in the country in things like "defending opponent controlled entries" and "contested loose puck win %" and "o-zone controlled entries leading to scoring chances"

Cornell is middle of the pack in all three on that.

Make of that what you will.

That lines up with what I saw in tonight's game. Quinnipiac just looked more controlled through the neutral zone and on zone entries than Cornell pretty much throughout.

I thought Cornell was a little better on the forecheck and Quinnipiac was maybe a little sloppier in the defensive zone, but the differences there were not as stark.

Quote from: BearLover on December 07, 2025, 11:46:21 PM

Quote from: tml5 on September 04, 2002, 02:40:54 AMWell this sucks.  Someone tell me why they always do this on a tournament weekend?  Ah, for it to be last fall when I was too gimpy. . . no, wait, I take that back.  (Relatively) non-gimpy is good.  Think I can get top of section G if I go in on Monday morning?

There was a time not that long ago when students were hopeful they could get season tickets at the top of section G...

LOL that was me. 😂

I wonder where I ended up getting tickets... wherever they were, I'm sure I had a great time at the games.