CU vs. Denver

[billhoward]

Nice that you have total penalty minutes and PIM per game to allow for shorter or longer careers and the freshmen-ineligible years. I see coach Schafer is #3 on the total PIM chart and one of about 14 players to manage 2 PIM or more per game. (Only two topped 3 PIM per game, both players from the Harkness era.) And nobody since Ryan O'Byrne in 2007 has been over 2 PIM (also over 200 total penalty minutes). Thanks.

[billhoward]

Thanks for the recap. Cornell has a history of poor Januarys and considerable improvement in February (except in injury-heavy years). So maybe there's a pony in there somewhere.

[Scersk '97]

+/- is a terrible way to judge. And by my calculations MacDonald has been one of our better defenders. Bench D'ags for a game, he's been lazy with the puck in our zone all season long and maybe benching a captain will send a message to the team.

Not trying to be flippant here, but what are your calculations?  I've never seen a better, commonly available quantitative stat than +/-, and yet everyone bemoans its supposed ridiculousness.  Is there a stat for defenders in hockey equivalent in value to On-base Percentage for batters in baseball, and, if so, do you have it calculated for this team?

[css228]

+/- is a terrible way to judge. And by my calculations MacDonald has been one of our better defenders. Bench D'ags for a game, he's been lazy with the puck in our zone all season long and maybe benching a captain will send a message to the team.

Not trying to be flippant here, but what are your calculations?  I've never seen a better, commonly available quantitative stat than +/-, and yet everyone bemoans its supposed ridiculousness.  Is there a stat for defenders in hockey equivalent in value to On-base Percentage for batters in baseball, and, if so, do you have it calculated for this team?

I haven't actually done any calculations, but if I had I'd be using more advanced stats like Corsi, Corsi Rel, Fenwick, and Zone Entries for the team. Unfortunately, when you don't have access to game film for every single game, its pretty difficult to calculate these stats for a player. That said, over at BSH Geoff Detwiler tracked every zone entry for the Flyers last season. A lot of his conclusions were printed over at NHL Numbers. For more info on stuff like Corsi, Corsi Rel, and other advanced stats that are far better measures of +/- check out  BSH one of the best hockey sites on the web. But in short, yes these advanced stats exist, and if someone had access to game film and was willing to put in the effort to track these kind of things, it could be done.

*Second advanced stats primer for people who want more in depth coverage of the topic

[Jim Hyla]

+/- is a terrible way to judge. And by my calculations MacDonald has been one of our better defenders. Bench D'ags for a game, he's been lazy with the puck in our zone all season long and maybe benching a captain will send a message to the team.

Not trying to be flippant here, but what are your calculations?  I've never seen a better, commonly available quantitative stat than +/-, and yet everyone bemoans its supposed ridiculousness.  Is there a stat for defenders in hockey equivalent in value to On-base Percentage for batters in baseball, and, if so, do you have it calculated for this team?

I haven't actually done any calculations, but if I had I'd be using more advanced stats like Corsi, Corsi Rel, Fenwick, and Zone Entries for the team. Unfortunately, when you don't have access to game film for every single game, its pretty difficult to calculate these stats for a player. That said, over at BSH Geoff Detwiler tracked every zone entry for the Flyers last season. A lot of his conclusions were printed over at NHL Numbers. For more info on stuff like Corsi, Corsi Rel, and other advanced stats that are far better measures of +/- check out  BSH one of the best hockey sites on the web. But in short, yes these advanced stats exist, and if someone had access to game film and was willing to put in the effort to track these kind of things, it could be done.

*Second advanced stats primer for people who want more in depth coverage of the topic

Then why did you say, "And by my calculations", if you hadn't done any calculations. Unfortunately it's misstatements like that that lead to arguments. I guess what you meant was, "I think". That has a whole different meaning.

[Scersk '97]

I haven't actually done any calculations, but if I had I'd be using more advanced stats like Corsi, Corsi Rel, Fenwick, and Zone Entries for the team. Unfortunately, when you don't have access to game film for every single game, its pretty difficult to calculate these stats for a player. That said, over at BSH Geoff Detwiler tracked every zone entry for the Flyers last season. A lot of his conclusions were printed over at NHL Numbers. For more info on stuff like Corsi, Corsi Rel, and other advanced stats that are far better measures of +/- check out  BSH one of the best hockey sites on the web. But in short, yes these advanced stats exist, and if someone had access to game film and was willing to put in the effort to track these kind of things, it could be done.

*Second advanced stats primer for people who want more in depth coverage of the topic

Then why did you say, "And by my calculations", if you hadn't done any calculations. Unfortunately it's misstatements like that that lead to arguments. I guess what you meant was, "I think". That has a whole different meaning.

1)  css228, thanks a bunch for the reference, and I will definitely check out the site.  One assumes (hopes?) that our hockey staff calculates a number of these metrics and applies the insight gleaned as best they can; one might also assume that a statistically-sophisticated approach to hockey could help level the ice surface for us against other, more-talented programs.  Addendum:  Of course, the problem with advanced stats is that they require a robust data set to have any meaning.  I'm hoping that say, oh, 15 games or so is enough...  (Anyone want to calculate even-strength save percentage for NCAA goalies?  I think that would be really interesting, given that I have a hunch that Iles's somewhat mediocre looking performance so far from a statistical standpoint has everything to do with our crappy penalty kill.)

2)  Jim, exactly!  The calculations and data mining done to initiate, for example, the referee bias thread should precede any statement like "by my calculations."

[css228]

I haven't actually done any calculations, but if I had I'd be using more advanced stats like Corsi, Corsi Rel, Fenwick, and Zone Entries for the team. Unfortunately, when you don't have access to game film for every single game, its pretty difficult to calculate these stats for a player. That said, over at BSH Geoff Detwiler tracked every zone entry for the Flyers last season. A lot of his conclusions were printed over at NHL Numbers. For more info on stuff like Corsi, Corsi Rel, and other advanced stats that are far better measures of +/- check out  BSH one of the best hockey sites on the web. But in short, yes these advanced stats exist, and if someone had access to game film and was willing to put in the effort to track these kind of things, it could be done.

*Second advanced stats primer for people who want more in depth coverage of the topic

Then why did you say, "And by my calculations", if you hadn't done any calculations. Unfortunately it's misstatements like that that lead to arguments. I guess what you meant was, "I think". That has a whole different meaning.

1)  css228, thanks a bunch for the reference, and I will definitely check out the site.  One assumes (hopes?) that our hockey staff calculates a number of these metrics and applies the insight gleaned as best they can; one might also assume that a statistically-sophisticated approach to hockey could help level the ice surface for us against other, more-talented programs.  Addendum:  Of course, the problem with advanced stats is that they require a robust data set to have any meaning.  I'm hoping that say, oh, 15 games or so is enough...  (Anyone want to calculate even-strength save percentage for NCAA goalies?  I think that would be really interesting, given that I have a hunch that Iles's somewhat mediocre looking performance so far from a statistical standpoint has everything to do with our crappy penalty kill.)

2)  Jim, exactly!  The calculations and data mining done to initiate, for example, the referee bias thread should precede any statement like "by my calculations."

Unfortunately 15 games isn't really enough to draw any conclusions with these stats, and we play such short seasons, that these are the kind of stats that probably need two of season's worth of data to be worthwhile. Though some stats obviously stabilize faster than others. I would think something like Corsi (Team shots while on ice - Opponent shots while on ice) might stabilize pretty fast. The nice thing about Corsi Rel is it gives you a direct comparison to the teammates. As for your hunch, since a full 40% of our goals against have been on the kill, I suspect you're right, even if those stats haven't stabilized yet. And yes, I definitely should have said something like from my observations.

[BearLover]

I have mostly just seen the home Lynah games.  It is hard to notice everything, but I have seen MacDonald make a number of very good defensive plays.  He also seems to jump up too far on the play less than D'agostino and Ryan.  I am unsure why his +/- is so low.  D'agostino has indeed been careless with the puck, but I think he is too talented to bench.  Birch has been very solid and dependable defensively, as always.  Gotovets I have not noticed a ton; perhaps that is a good thing?  He is skilled enough that he should probably have more points, though.  Wilcox has looked smart and steady.  

On offense, I love the games of Bardreau, McCarron, and Mowrey, who play with an edge yet are also offensively skilled.  They all take too many penalties, though, especially M and M, and many of these are unnecessary.  Ferlin has looked great, even if it has not translated onto the stat sheet.  Lowry too, except he's actually producing.  Espo is very talented and the best goal scorer, but he seems out of place at times on this big, physical, defensive-minded team.  Miller won best defensive forward last year (I think), but I don't know if that was the result of his high +/- or because the voters actually watched him play.  I haven't really noticed his superb defense (I have noticed his superb offense).  The other guys are mostly role players.  Unfortunately, that's a lot of role players.  The 3rd and 4th lines have not looked great offensively, and I believe they have also given up the majority of goals defensively.  I'm not sure if it's possible for Schafer to play the top lines more...but if it is, he probably should.  

Iles overall has been good.  He'll always take chances, and they'll usually pay off.  He hasn't been as quick from side to side and has not seemed to read shots that well and he seemed to in the past (although the sample size is very small), and has let some in that he is capable of stopping.

I don't know what the problem is, but it's not a lack of effort.  The guys have been playing extremely hard and have looked bigger and stronger than their opponents, winning the far majority of physical battles, even in the games they've lost (at least at home).  It's just hard to win when your 2nd line takes too many penalties and doesn't play consistent D and your 3rd and 4th lines can't create offensive chances.

[css228]

I have mostly just seen the home Lynah games.  It is hard to notice everything, but I have seen MacDonald make a number of very good defensive plays.  He also seems to jump up too far on the play less than D'agostino and Ryan.  I am unsure why his +/- is so low.  D'agostino has indeed been careless with the puck, but I think he is too talented to bench.  Birch has been very solid and dependable defensively, as always.  Gotovets I have not noticed a ton; perhaps that is a good thing?  He is skilled enough that he should probably have more points, though.  Wilcox has looked smart and steady.  

On offense, I love the games of Bardreau, McCarron, and Mowrey, who play with an edge yet are also offensively skilled.  They all take too many penalties, though, especially M and M, and many of these are unnecessary.  Ferlin has looked great, even if it has not translated onto the stat sheet.  Lowry too, except he's actually producing.  Espo is very talented and the best goal scorer, but he seems out of place at times on this big, physical, defensive-minded team.  Miller won best defensive forward last year (I think), but I don't know if that was the result of his high +/- or because the voters actually watched him play.  I haven't really noticed his superb defense (I have noticed his superb offense).  The other guys are mostly role players.  Unfortunately, that's a lot of role players.  The 3rd and 4th lines have not looked great offensively, and I believe they have also given up the majority of goals defensively.  I'm not sure if it's possible for Schafer to play the top lines more...but if it is, he probably should.  

Iles overall has been good.  He'll always take chances, and they'll usually pay off.  He hasn't been as quick from side to side and has not seemed to read shots that well and he seemed to in the past (although the sample size is very small), and has let some in that he is capable of stopping.

I don't know what the problem is, but it's not a lack of effort.  The guys have been playing extremely hard and have looked bigger and stronger than their opponents, winning the far majority of physical battles, even in the games they've lost (at least at home).  It's just hard to win when your 2nd line takes too many penalties and doesn't play consistent D and your 3rd and 4th lines can't create offensive chances.

Faceoff percentage probably needs to be better than .522. Penalties need to stop happening or the kill needs to get better, or both. Special teams in general is pretty atrocious.

It's interesting to note that opponents shooting percentage is so high (.157) on the power play. That just screams a bad penalty kill. Shooting percentages should be higher on a power play than they are in 5 v 5 because you're getting better opportunities, but not 6% higher (in comparison ours only goes up 2%, not that our power play is any good).Interesting to note as well that our opponents have been penalized more than we have, but when we get penalized, our penalties are more serious (7 majors to our opponents 2). Despite having 3 fewer penalties this season we have 30 more penalty minutes than our oppenents.
We have played significantly worse hockey away from home than we have at home, with our only road win being a game we really did not deserve. I'm not sure Iles is to blame, but he has not been as stellar as last year for sure. Against Maine we were just flat out beat after the 1st ten minutes. Couldn't get to a puck first.

I think our biggest problem is we are too hesitant to shoot, and by the time we do, we're taking shots from the point into closed lanes, which never get to the net as a result. We're not being outshot by much overall, but if someone could find 5 v 5 shot stats I'm sure we would see the problem. We generally rely on scoring with a very poor power play, and don't generate too much offense 5 v 5. I generally preach patience with shooting, but at some point you just need to get pucks to net.

[KeithK]

Game 2:  CU fans were more lively, and the game was more evenly played.

I suppose I could be reading too much into this, but when Denver has 16 second period shots to Cornell's 2, it does not give the indication of being "evenly played."

When I looked up at the shot counter late in the second or early in the third on Saturday I was shocked at the discrepency.  The shot count did not at all reflect how even the game was.

The two majors oskewed shot totals a bit. Denver also did a good job of blocking shots. We also hit iron three times in the game.  If you counted quality offensive chances I bet you'd come up with a pretty even total.

It's hard for me to judge the first major penalty since it occurred on the otehr side of the ice (as captens1 noted the Cornell section was behind one of the goals). The second major call was an absolutely horrible cell. Axell was completing a check and got kicked out for it.

Cornell kind of got embarrassed on the ice on Friday night (though the first half of the game wasnt bad). Saturday was a hard fought tight game. Having two guys tossed on weak calls certainly had a significant affect on how the game was played in the third period and may have unfairly decided the outcome.

[marty]

http://www.collegehockeynews.com/news/2013/01/06_schafer_wants_neutral_officials.php
Article concerning this weekend.

[Jim Hyla]

http://www.collegehockeynews.com/news/2013/01/06_schafer_wants_neutral_officials.php
Article concerning this weekend.

And the Big Red will of course do so without McCarron, whose controversial game disqualification handed out at the end of Saturday's game against Denver carries an automatic one-game suspension.

As mentioned before, this was his second DQ of the year, first was leaving the bench in Clarkson game, so now 2 game sit-down. I don't know if he can or will even travel to the Capital District. Does anyone know if he can go with the team?

[captens1]

I agree with Keith.  DU's shots in game 2 were just not the in-close, quality shots of game 1, they were often outside the faceoff circles.  So the SOGs were very misleading.

My wife, who was seeing her first-ever hockey game on Saturday, did think that Cornell lacked the skills of the players on the DU team.  It's nice to get a perspective of someone who isn't hopelessly biased.

Eventually my wife got into the game enough to join me on "Let's go Red!"  She couldn't quite work herself up to ["Denver returns to full strength"] ..."they still suck."

Tom

Game 2:  CU fans were more lively, and the game was more evenly played.

I suppose I could be reading too much into this, but when Denver has 16 second period shots to Cornell's 2, it does not give the indication of being "evenly played."

When I looked up at the shot counter late in the second or early in the third on Saturday I was shocked at the discrepency.  The shot count did not at all reflect how even the game was.

The two majors oskewed shot totals a bit. Denver also did a good job of blocking shots. We also hit iron three times in the game.  If you counted quality offensive chances I bet you'd come up with a pretty even total.

It's hard for me to judge the first major penalty since it occurred on the otehr side of the ice (as captens1 noted the Cornell section was behind one of the goals). The second major call was an absolutely horrible cell. Axell was completing a check and got kicked out for it.

Cornell kind of got embarrassed on the ice on Friday night (though the first half of the game wasnt bad). Saturday was a hard fought tight game. Having two guys tossed on weak calls certainly had a significant affect on how the game was played in the third period and may have unfairly decided the outcome.

[cbuckser]

http://www.collegehockeynews.com/news/2013/01/06_schafer_wants_neutral_officials.php
Article concerning this weekend.

And the Big Red will of course do so without McCarron, whose controversial game disqualification handed out at the end of Saturday's game against Denver carries an automatic one-game suspension.

As mentioned before, this was his second DQ of the year, first was leaving the bench in Clarkson game, so now 2 game sit-down. I don't know if he can or will even travel to the Capital District. Does anyone know if he can go with the team?

If I recall correctly, the ECAC limits the number of players who could travel with the team in the regular season. I think it's 23 players. I don't think McCarron would be banned from traveling, but if he did make the trip, it would limit Cornell's depth if guys get hurt or DQ'd during the game at Union.

I'm too lazy to look up the rules and confirm this. If anyone has the info or the time to retrieve it, don't hesitate to verify or disprove this.

[ursusminor]

If I recall correctly, the ECAC limits the number of players who could travel with the team in the regular season. I think it's 23 players. I don't think McCarron would be banned from traveling, but if he did make the trip, it would limit Cornell's depth if guys get hurt or DQ'd during the game at Union.

I'm too lazy to look up the rules and confirm this. If anyone has the info or the time to retrieve it, don't hesitate to verify or disprove this.

This has come up before on USCHO and no one found a rule book, but the limit is apparently only for league games. The Ivy League may however have its own rule in addition.