RPI @ CU 2/15/14

[Towerroad]

I don't believe in luck. I don't believe in a "hot goaltender" and any of that other BS that people use for excuses.

It's all very well to not believe in "luck" as a supernatural pattern emerging out random variation.  I don't believe in that either; it's magical thinking.  But a "hot" goaltender just expresses the fact that the players are not Strat cards and some days they are more on their game, for whatever permutation of body and brain chemistry.  That's absolutely real.

I think we sometimes fall into the trap of assuming our team dictates the result of a game and the opponent is a stable background condition.  This is untrue: it is possible to play poorly and win (UNO) and play well and lose (RPI).  If we could just will ourselves into scoring position and goals Topher Scott would be the all-time NCAA scoring leader.

I don't believe in luck either. Players can have good nights and bad nights for all sorts of reasons. I don't think there is much carry over from one night to another, eventually they regress to their means +/- some trend for general improvement.

You can wish for "Hot Goaltending" all you want but you should not expect it nor should you castigate Iles for not playing better than his average. By the way, there are 5 guys standing in front of him that are supposed to help make him look good.

I do have a real problem with the whining about the referees when we lose. Like Baseball, you hope they get 90%+ of the calls right and that is about as good as you can expect. If it is the ref's fault when we lose then it must be the ref's fault when we win unless you buy into the theory that they meet in some dark place to decide "How can we screw Cornell this week."

[Trotsky]

I do have a real problem with the whining about the referees when we lose. Like Baseball, you hope they get 90%+ of the calls right and that is about as good as you can expect. If it is the ref's fault when we lose then it must be the ref's fault when we win unless you buy into the theory that they meet in some dark place to decide "How can we screw Cornell this week."

You should never, ever read the threads on USCHO.  ;-)

We have no business bitching about officiating this year.  A lot of questionable stuff has gone in our favor, and they essentially handed us the Brown game.  It evens out over time, though of course by selective perception we greatly overvalue the times when bad calls go against us and think that on balance we are "getting screwed" (the Got 6 Effect).

[marty]

Mowry and Hilbrich seemed to have an influence this weekend from where I sat in L , (thank you for the caramel popcorn, too).

[jtwcornell91]

Sad results this weekend, especially last night.  The good news is that Clarkson also lost two games this weekend when they probably expected to win two.

I don't think we control our fate anymore as far as getting a bye: If we and Clarkson win the rest of our games, they win the tiebreaker, since they would have 3 wins against the top 4, while we would have 2 wins and a tie.  However, their schedule is definitely harder in the last two weeks (1 game against U and Q)

As of a few years ago the second tiebreaker in the ECAC (after head-to-head) is total wins, so record vs the top four doesn't even enter into our tiebreaker with Clarkson unless we go 2-2-0 and they go 0-0-4 in the last four games.

[ursusminor]

Don't forget that RPI was rated 1 and 2 in the preseason polls. The question should be why RPI has been playing like crap most of the year, not Cornell this weekend. Remember that comeback that Cornell had in Troy early this year? -- that is more typical of RPI.

[marty]

Don't forget that RPI was rated 1 and 2 in the preseason polls. The question should be why RPI has been playing like crap most of the year, not Cornell this weekend. Remember that comeback that Cornell had in Troy early this year? -- that is more typical of RPI.

More to the point on this forum is why RPI's defense looks better against Cornell than it does against other decent teams. But, yes, why is RPI so mediocre?

[MattS]

I don't believe in luck. I don't believe in a "hot goaltender" and any of that other BS that people use for excuses.

It's all very well to not believe in "luck" as a supernatural pattern emerging out random variation.  I don't believe in that either; it's magical thinking.  But a "hot" goaltender just expresses the fact that the players are not Strat cards and some days they are more on their game, for whatever permutation of body and brain chemistry.  That's absolutely real.

I think we sometimes fall into the trap of assuming our team dictates the result of a game and the opponent is a stable background condition.  This is untrue: it is possible to play poorly and win (UNO) and play well and lose (RPI).  If we could just will ourselves into scoring position and goals Topher Scott would be the all-time NCAA scoring leader.

True, players do have games or even streaks of games, where they can play above their average performance. I was just trying to convey that I don't think it is wise to use said performance as an excuse for losing a game.

I agree with you in that I (we) cannot think of a game's outcome in a vacuum and I did not mean to imply that. Any team has it within their power to dictate the result of a game. Now, the opposing team has just as much power to dictate the result also. It's a battle. It all comes down to skill, coaching, and performing to the best of one's ability and the game plan. I just don't believe in using excuses for losses.

[Jim Hyla]

Mowry and Hilbrich seemed to have an influence this weekend from where I sat in L , (thank you for the caramel popcorn, too).

Agree about missing those two. It completely rearrainged the lines, and we essentially had no second PP unit. Yes, I know you can argue we don't have a first unit either. People have complained about Bardreau and faceoffs, but who gets it when Mowery is out? Assumning Ryan is healthy, and if they maintain the same aggressiveness, I expect the team will be a lot better next weekend.

Speaking of Mowery and Ryan, when is the league going to really crack down, especially hits like on Ryan. Why only a game misconduct, and not a DQ, even for more than 1 game. Much like how easily Union got off, at least until all the uproar, getting 15 min at the end of a game is meaningless. Here we could lose, arguably, our best player for the rest of the year. And no, I don't know anything about his injury, but it could have put him out.

(And you're very welcome.)

[Trotsky]

I just don't believe in using excuses for losses.

One man's excuse is another man's explanation.  There's a bias against citing deleterious conditions in sports because of the macho "excuses are for losers" mentality which may (or may not) be good training for young athletes.  But we're not the ones performing, so it's OK for us to try to weigh all the factors rationally.

[Dafatone]

Mowry and Hilbrich seemed to have an influence this weekend from where I sat in L , (thank you for the caramel popcorn, too).

Agree about missing those two. It completely rearrainged the lines, and we essentially had no second PP unit. Yes, I know you can argue we don't have a first unit either. People have complained about Bardreau and faceoffs, but who gets it when Mowery is out? Assumning Ryan is healthy, and if they maintain the same aggressiveness, I expect the team will be a lot better next weekend.

Speaking of Mowery and Ryan, when is the league going to really crack down, especially hits like on Ryan. Why only a game misconduct, and not a DQ, even for more than 1 game. Much like how easily Union got off, at least until all the uproar, getting 15 min at the end of a game is meaningless. Here we could lose, arguably, our best player for the rest of the year. And no, I don't know anything about his injury, but it could have put him out.

(And you're very welcome.)

Something has to be done about last minute cheap shots.  There's almost no drawback to taking them.

Also, as long as I'm whining about the rules.  How is trying to sneak guys off the ice after an icing not a penalty?

[marty]

Mowrey and Hilbrich seemed to have an influence this weekend from where I sat in L , (thank you for the caramel popcorn, too).

Speaking of Mowrey and Ryan, when is the league going to really crack down, especially hits like on Ryan. Why only a game misconduct, and not a DQ, even for more than 1 game. Much like how easily Union got off, at least until all the uproar, getting 15 min at the end of a game is meaningless. Here we could lose, arguably, our best player for the rest of the year. And no, I don't know anything about his injury, but it could have put him out.

When seated in front of recruit Hunter Racine's parents we learned a bit about their take on the college game as compared to the Canadian juniors.  First off his mom thought that there would have been a brawl with all the hooking and such that she saw on the ice during the game against Union.  This may explain why some of the players take a while to mature in division one.

But here is the kicker - she said that late in the game (I remember her saying in the last five minutes) that if a player is tossed for fighting (or a major penalty?) there is an automatic DQ issued.  I think this could be the answer to the goons that seem to have sprouted in the last year or so.  I don't see a downside to this in the NCAA.  It is unthinkable that we might lose Mowrey, Hilbrich and Ryan for the season but also consider that these players could have permanent brain damage from this sort of play.::deadhorse::

[Trotsky]

How is trying to sneak guys off the ice after an icing not a penalty?

If you do it enough the ref could give you a delay of game.  That's probably the only way to stop it.

[Dafatone]

How is trying to sneak guys off the ice after an icing not a penalty?

If you do it enough the ref could give you a delay of game.  That's probably the only way to stop it.

Why enough, though?  It's breaking the rules, and whenever teams do it, it's referred to the announcers as sneaking or something like that.  It's not like there's much of a question as to whether or not the team is trying to get away with something.

[David Harding]

How is trying to sneak guys off the ice after an icing not a penalty?

If you do it enough the ref could give you a delay of game.  That's probably the only way to stop it.

Why enough, though?  It's breaking the rules, and whenever teams do it, it's referred to the announcers as sneaking or something like that.  It's not like there's much of a question as to whether or not the team is trying to get away with something.

Any attempt by the either team to make a change after the referee's
signal, attempt to place too many men on the ice for the subsequent
line change, or attempt to make additional personnel changes, shall not
be permitted and the referee will send the players who have attempted
to change back to their players' bench. The referee will then issue a
warning to the offending team (through the coach) indicating that any
subsequent violations during the rest of the game (including overtime),
shall result in a bench minor penalty for delaying the game.

[Trotsky]

Boy is that a rule that's ignored.  It seems like every coach tries it on every other icing.