Penalty Kill Woes

[Scersk '97]

So, I don't think we're talking about a small sample size here anymore. We're 75% on the season and 60% over our last ten. We block a ton of shots, play great five-on-five defense, have competent centers for face-offs, and have a goalie that I'm comfortable saying is "on" this season.

Traditionally, our penalty kill has been one of our strengths. One would think that penalty killing is very teachable; this team seems the teachable sort. It would sure be nice to be able to play a little less close to the vest.

What gives?

[andyw2100]

I have no data to support the following, as it's just a feeling based on having watched the games, but it seems to me that there have been a lot fewer overlapping penalties than normal. The result of that is that our kill percentage is not being inflated as it usually is by successfully killing a twenty or thirty second penalty.

And of course there are the recent five minute major penalties as well.

I'd be interested, if the data is easily available, in seeing how our kill is functioning this year as compared to other years on a goals-allowed vs. short-handed minutes basis instead of on just a penalty killed basis.

[Swampy]

When I've seen us give up goals on the PK, they often seem to result from lapses on our part.

I haven't kept track of anything, but could our reliance on frosh defenders have something to do with it?

[billhoward]

Cornell took two-too-many five-minute majors in Las Vegas. The Forum doubts they were major penalties. The referees thought otherwise. Cornell needs to adapt to the prevailing definition. Were it not for our first 6x5 goal since 2016, the PP goal off Saturday's major would have given Cornell its second loss.

[Scersk '97]

I would think the frosh D have something to do with it, although I haven't tracked how often they're out on the PK. Looking back through our stats, the only season we've been under 80% recently was that awful 2013 season. We're normally in the mid- to high-80s. The PK in 2003 was 90%, high-80s in conference.

[Swampy]

I would think the frosh D have something to do with it, although I haven't tracked how often they're out on the PK. Looking back through our stats, the only season we've been under 80% recently was that awful 2013 season. We're normally in the mid- to high-80s. The PK in 2003 was 90%, high-80s in conference.

Even if the frosh don't play much on the PK, if Schafer is weighting 5 v 5 playing time in favor of upperclassmen, then they're likely to be less sharp on the PK.

[Tom Lento]

When I've seen us give up goals on the PK, they often seem to result from lapses on our part.

I haven't kept track of anything, but could our reliance on frosh defenders have something to do with it?

I agree on the lapses. I haven't watched many games but even on the successful PKs I've seen the kill looked disorganized - positioning and communication just wasn't sharp, and several of the goals and near misses I saw were the direct result of positional errors involving two players taking away the same space away from the puck, setting up an effective 4-2 on the rest of the ice. I've seen almost no 4 on 4 but the one or two minutes I did see featured a bunch of positional lapses there as well. This year's team looks so solid with 5 skaters and so discombobulated with 4, the distinction is pretty jarring even on the video feed.

I went looking for penalty minute stats to see where Cornell ranks. I didn't find such a list on CHN, but I did find the amusing stat that two guys on Northern Michigan have combined for 134 penalty minutes to date, which is about 20 more than Cornell's entire roster. Another silly stat - Cornell is 4th lowest in the nation on PP shot attempts against. Clarkson - with a stellar PK rate of ~93% - is more in the middle of the pack in terms of shot attempts allowed. It's too much effort for me to get rate breakdowns of shot attempts per kill (or per minute of PK time), but this is at least in part due to the number of PK attempts Cornell has had to date.

And that's probably the most relevant statistical point - with only 45 PK attempts it is still possible Cornell has been a bit unlucky, as the difference between 75.6% and a much more respectable 84% is just 4 goals.

[Trotsky]

From CHN's metrics page for the game, shots attempted:

Even strength: Cornell 46 Providence 36

Cornell power play: Cornell 3 Providence 0

Providence power play: Cornell 3 Providence 19

[Trotsky]

I went looking for penalty minute stats to see where Cornell ranks. I didn't find such a list on CHN,

Here (near the bottom)

Cornell ranks 49th of 60 with 9.1 PIM/game. IIRC, coming into the weekend they were around 54th.

NMU is 3rd with 16.3.

Harvard is 60th.

[RichH]

This week's "Off the Crossbar" addresses this and claims there was a "fresh start" on the PK after the tie at Union.

https://cornellbigred.com/news/2020/1/23/mens-ice-hockey-off-the-crossbar-mens-hockeys-perfect-penalty-kill.aspx

[Scersk '97]

That's one way of changing things.

My sarcasm aside, I'm happier lately. Clears are certainly being made with authority now. Even Kaldis. And Topher referred to that concept quite a few times tonight, chastising Dartmouth for its clearing, so one wonders if those words have been in the air around Lynah lately.

I was also encouraged tonight to see us make some shorthanded rushes, something that had also been missing before the "reset."

[Tom Lento]

That's one way of changing things.

My sarcasm aside, I'm happier lately. Clears are certainly being made with authority now. Even Kaldis. And Topher referred to that concept quite a few times tonight, chastising Dartmouth for its clearing, so one wonders if those words have been in the air around Lynah lately.

I was also encouraged tonight to see us make some shorthanded rushes, something that had also been missing before the "reset."

The kill looks better in general, and they've also gotten a bit more luck. Earlier in the season it seemed like every time they started scrambling the puck ended up in the net. Tonight there were a few scrambling sequences that opened up the net and easily could've been goals, but the puck either never got within reach of the weak side forward or else it got blocked by some flailing player.