Michigan already assuming victoy over Cornell

[gjk22]

Michigan's premier sports blog (over 1.5M visitors per month) already has a preview up for assumed Michigan vs. Denver match-up.

http://mgoblog.com/content/puck-preview-denver

In case people are curious, here is their preview for Cornell-Michigan.

http://mgoblog.com/content/puck-preview-cornell

[css228]

Michigan's premier sports blog (over 1.5M visitors per month) already has a preview up for assumed Michigan vs. Denver match-up.

http://mgoblog.com/content/puck-preview-denver

In case people are curious, here is their preview for Cornell-Michigan.

http://mgoblog.com/content/puck-preview-cornell

That's bad karma

[Rita]

Michigan's premier sports blog (over 1.5M visitors per month) already has a preview up for assumed Michigan vs. Denver match-up.

http://mgoblog.com/content/puck-preview-denver

In case people are curious, here is their preview for Cornell-Michigan.

http://mgoblog.com/content/puck-preview-cornell

What if Denver loses the opening game like they did in 2010? ::woot::

[Beeeej]

In case people are curious, here is their preview for Cornell-Michigan.

http://mgoblog.com/content/puck-preview-cornell

I've gotta say, that's some really thorough research and analysis.

And I didn't have the impression that they posted a Denver preview because they think they have the Cornell game sewn up - I had the impression they posted it because people are interested in knowing who they might be playing in the second game if they get there.  After all, the Denver preview leads off with:

Ah, hell, let's do the whole regional.

I wouldn't be at all surprised to see one for Ferris State in a few hours.

[Trotsky]

I didn't have the impression that they posted a Denver preview because they think they have the Cornell game sewn up - I had the impression they posted it because people are interested in knowing who they might be playing in the second game if they get there.

Shhh.  Hurtful slight requires violent reprisal!

[jtn27]

They used Aaron's video in the Cornell preview. :-)

[css228]

I've gotta say, that's some really thorough research and analysis.

Yeah, a few things which I'll gladly not correct them on.
1) They underestimate Iles. The .918 SV% really doesn't speak to how good he's been the majority of this year.
2) Dutchmen weren't a dominant #1 in the ECAC this year. It bothers me when Union fans say it and it bothers me when Michigan fans say it. Union only got 1 point from us this season, we outplayed them both times we played them, and heading into the last day of the season we had the inside track at the #1 seed. Not that I particularly care about the regular season results, but there was clearly a time where Cornell was running away with the league, and we squandered that lead by blowing leads in numerous games. If you assume we hold all games of 2+ goal lead entering the third, like we usually do, we run away with the league. I know I'm using counter-factual history, but if Union were really a dominant #1 in the league all of my "If only's" would be resulting in Cornell maybe having a shot at the one seed, not Cornell running away with it like they clearly could have.
3) Unrelated to the actual preview, but isn't CHN's suggestion to use KRACH to replace the RPI criteria of the PWR, not PWR altogether? To me that makes more sense then when blogs like this talk about replacing PWR with KRACH, because they aren't attempting to measure the same thing, while RPI and KRACH do.
4) Cornell has no real top line per say. In terms of production it has to be the Miller line, but the Collins line is first on the depth chart.
5) Once again, Iles and Hunwick isn't really a good comparison. Hunwick was a walk on. Iles was the hottest goalie recruit in the country.
6) You think it would be unwise for them to do most of their analysis of Cornell based on their worst game all season, the BU game, and two games at altitude, but they do.
7) "Drawing an ECAC team is usually good news" ...unless its Cornell. We all know this. Michigan fans seem not to.
Overall, am I optimistic about us winning, no, but I think we could beat Michigan 3-4 times our of 10. So I'd put my money on Michigan, but I'm not going to be shocked if we win. We have a young, but very talented hockey team that a lot of the country seems to be overlooking. PWR mean very little to me, as changing one result could have made us a 1 seed instead of a 4. For fans of a team that just lost to the 14th ranked team in the PWR they just seem overconfident to me. I see that they admit that they could lose, but it was more along the lines of a, if Cornell wins it will be a lucky win type thing. Truth is we could lose 6-1 again, but we could also come out and just outclass them off the ice. These are two relatively evenly matched teams, not Denver-Huntsville (and even there...). I seriously doubt Red will let his team be unprepared, but if they are, it could be a great Friday night in GB.

[snert1288]

I believe they also say that the ECAC has only won 3 national championships ever.  While the ECAC is not taking the championship often we do have more than 3.  I believe 4 were won by current members of the ECAC while in the ECAC.  In addition to that RPI has one from the 1950's and BU won a few while in the ECAC.

[Robb]

I believe they also say that the ECAC has only won 3 national championships ever.  While the ECAC is not taking the championship often we do have more than 3.  I believe 4 were won by current members of the ECAC while in the ECAC.  In addition to that RPI has one from the 1950's and BU won a few while in the ECAC.

5 - 2 each for Cornell and RPI, one for Sucks.

[billhoward]

The Michigan blogger was prepared; does he go to class? They think they're going to win but they just don't know for sure. There's also uncertainty on how Michigan will fare in OT ... and on the game time. You'd think living one lake over from Wisconsin they'd have it figured out: 8 o'clock in Green Bay is 9 o'clock in Michigan. Some

Pray. Here it comes. Drawing an ECAC team is usually good news. Still... pucks bounce.

God help us all if any games go into OT...

[ugarte]

In case people are curious, here is their preview for Cornell-Michigan.

http://mgoblog.com/content/puck-preview-cornell

I've gotta say, that's some really thorough research and analysis.

And I didn't have the impression that they posted a Denver preview because they think they have the Cornell game sewn up - I had the impression they posted it because people are interested in knowing who they might be playing in the second game if they get there.  After all, the Denver preview leads off with:

Ah, hell, let's do the whole regional.

I wouldn't be at all surprised to see one for Ferris State in a few hours.

The last line of the Cornell preview was "I'll have briefer capsules on Ferris State and Denver later in the week."

[Josh '99]

5) Once again, Iles and Hunwick isn't really a good comparison. Hunwick was a walk on. Iles was the hottest goalie recruit in the country.

Hunwick is a senior and was pretty clearly one of the 10 best goalies in the NCAA this season.  Does it matter that he was a walk-on four years ago?  The comparison was drawn because they're both small workhorse goalies (Hunwick lists at 5'7", 166).  Seems apt to me.

[css228]

5) Once again, Iles and Hunwick isn't really a good comparison. Hunwick was a walk on. Iles was the hottest goalie recruit in the country.

Hunwick is a senior and was pretty clearly one of the 10 best goalies in the NCAA this season.  Does it matter that he was a walk-on four years ago?  The comparison was drawn because they're both small workhorse goalies (Hunwick lists at 5'7", 166).  Seems apt to me.

They also aren't remotely similar in terms of style.Iles flops a lot more than Hunwick. Hunwick, as they noted, is a far more aggressive goaltender, probably due to the fact that he is a bit smaller (isn't Iles 5'9, not the 5'8 the preview lists him as?). Hunwick also handles the puck much better than Iles. Furthermore, Iles is a classic streak goalie who'll steal games for you one night, but eventually have a brutal night here or there. Hunwick seems a lot more of a consistent goalie to me. I always think he'll give up 1-2 goals per game I just think the comparison was a bit lazy because it purely relies on size and minutes played, nothing about style and approach.Those are important differences, and they're not just dopplegangers, no matter what their height sheet tells you. I think of Iles more as a Hasek style goalie with tremendous athleticism ad instincts who happens to be a bit small. I look at Hunwick and I see a fantastic goalie who relies less on instinct and reactions and more on positioning and aggressively cutting off angles> I could be wrong, as I've only seen Hunwick play twice, but it doesn't strike me at all that he's a similar goalie to Iles beyond the height factor.

[Josh '99]

5) Once again, Iles and Hunwick isn't really a good comparison. Hunwick was a walk on. Iles was the hottest goalie recruit in the country.

Hunwick is a senior and was pretty clearly one of the 10 best goalies in the NCAA this season.  Does it matter that he was a walk-on four years ago?  The comparison was drawn because they're both small workhorse goalies (Hunwick lists at 5'7", 166).  Seems apt to me.

They also aren't remotely similar in terms of style.Iles flops a lot more than Hunwick. Hunwick, as they noted, is a far more aggressive goaltender, probably due to the fact that he is a bit smaller (isn't Iles 5'9, not the 5'8 the preview lists him as?). Hunwick also handles the puck much better than Iles. Furthermore, Iles is a classic streak goalie who'll steal games for you one night, but eventually have a brutal night here or there. Hunwick seems a lot more of a consistent goalie to me. I always think he'll give up 1-2 goals per game I just think the comparison was a bit lazy because it purely relies on size and minutes played, nothing about style and approach.Those are important differences, and they're not just dopplegangers, no matter what their height sheet tells you. I think of Iles more as a Hasek style goalie with tremendous athleticism ad instincts who happens to be a bit small. I look at Hunwick and I see a fantastic goalie who relies less on instinct and reactions and more on positioning and aggressively cutting off angles> I could be wrong, as I've only seen Hunwick play twice, but it doesn't strike me at all that he's a similar goalie to Iles beyond the height factor.

Fair enough - I've never seen Hunwick play, so I really have no idea what to expect.  You may very well be right that they're not at all comparable, but I maintain that the fact that Hunwick was a walk-on isn't really relevant to the comparison.  :-}

[kingpin248]

3) Unrelated to the actual preview, but isn't CHN's suggestion to use KRACH to replace the RPI criteria of the PWR, not PWR altogether? To me that makes more sense then when blogs like this talk about replacing PWR with KRACH, because they aren't attempting to measure the same thing, while RPI and KRACH do.

CHN's position is that the PWR should be simply replaced with KRACH:

Q: What about all of the other PairWise components besides RPI? Are they still needed?

A: You could theoretically take each PairWise component -- record in Last 16 games, record vs. common opponents, head-to-head record, record vs. other Teams Under Consideration -- and "KRACH-ify" them. In other words, use KRACH's strength of schedule method to modify those criteria.

But straight KRACH is much simpler -- a simple list of all the teams, ranked in order. This has the effect of eliminating some ambiguities in the comparison system, which is not transitive. For example, if Team A beats Team B in a head-to-head comparison, and Team B beats Team C ... that does not necessarily mean Team A beats Team C. This kind of issue leads to complications.

As a result, straight KRACH is preferred.

Emphasis mine. Source.