Brown Game Thread

[ugarte]

We have to get the power play going, but otherwise we were the better team and deserved the win.

too much four corners not enough cutting or screening imo

[arugula]

Can anyone explain how we win a game and drop from 18 to 23 in Pairwise and Sucks doesn't play and moves up a spot.  I know I know it's complicated but jeez.

[ugarte]

Can anyone explain how we win a game and drop from 18 to 23 in Pairwise and Sucks doesn't play and moves up a spot.  I know I know it's complicated but jeez.

brown sucks and we had to go to overtime to beat them, so it's only barely better than a tie against a weak team

[Trotsky]

Can anyone explain how we win a game and drop from 18 to 23 in Pairwise and Sucks doesn't play and moves up a spot.  I know I know it's complicated but jeez.

It's not that complicated, it's strength of schedule -- Brown is 53 in PWR.  It will be even more fun tomorrow when we play Yale -- dead last at 59.

The bad news is three teams in the ECAC are 50 or worse (Union is 50).  The good news is after tomorrow we will have played once against them all.  The bad news is we play them again, and Dartmouth isn't much better at 43.  

What do they all have in common?  They took a year off.  So we should be pretty damn pleased right now.  Bad SOS and a good record is a First World Problem.

[arugula]

Why doesn't this effect (affect?) Harvard? Is it really better to lose to a good team (Northeastern, Clarkson) than beat a bad one?

[Dafatone]

A lot of it is how early in the year we are. Every game is a big swing.

[marty]

Why doesn't this effect (affect?) Harvard? Is it really better to lose to a good team (Northeastern, Clarkson) than beat a bad one?

From what was mentioned here a few weeks ago we only get credit for 55% of a win when the win occurs in overtime.  3 of Cornell's wins are discounted in this way in the national computer ranking.

How about QPutz tonight?  As they won a shootout is that worth the same or less than the Cornell win (assuming they were both vs a common opponent for example)?

This year's math makes me feel like an SEC athlete and then there's the 3 points per game thing.

[ursusminor]

Why doesn't this effect (affect?) Harvard? Is it really better to lose to a good team (Northeastern, Clarkson) than beat a bad one?

From what was mentioned here a few weeks ago we only get credit for 55% of a win when the win occurs in overtime.  3 of Cornell's wins are discounted in this way in the national computer ranking.

How about QPutz tonight?  As they won a shootout is that worth the same or less than the Cornell win (assuming they were both vs a common opponent for example)?

This year's math makes me feel like an SEC athlete and then there's the 3 points per game thing.

For the ECAC, OT and SO wins are both worth 2 out of 3 points. For the NCAA's PWR calculation, an OT win is worth 55% of a win, while a SO win is worth 50% of a win. I.e. the SO is ignored.

Thus, for the ECAC they are the same, but for the NCAA they are not.

[upprdeck]

once we went on the PP and the next 25 Min included 5 and the major our fore check stalled out and Brown got back in the game but Brown really didnt do much  except mucked it around as much as possible.   On the major we had 3 high quality chances.  our PP  just needs to speed it up a bit. MacDonald played well and the Brown kid made several nice saves but also lost the puck more  times then I recall any goalie in one game.

[CU2007]

It's annoyingly complicated on the RPI/PWR side of things. "Just win, baby" has basically become "Just win in regulation, baby"

[Dafatone]

It's annoyingly complicated on the RPI/PWR side of things. "Just win, baby" has basically become "Just win in regulation, baby"

If you think of OT games as basically ties for RPI purposes, it makes things simpler.

[Al DeFlorio]

It's annoyingly complicated on the RPI/PWR side of things. "Just win, baby" has basically become "Just win in regulation, baby"

If you think of OT games as basically ties for RPI purposes, it makes things simpler.

So...now we endure unnatural hockey (3 on 3; shootouts) because you just can't abide having a tie, and simply must have a winner, but the resulting RPI/PWR outcome is doomed to be...essentially...a tie.

[Dafatone]

It's annoyingly complicated on the RPI/PWR side of things. "Just win, baby" has basically become "Just win in regulation, baby"

If you think of OT games as basically ties for RPI purposes, it makes things simpler.

So...now we endure unnatural hockey (3 on 3; shootouts) because you just can't abide having a tie, and simply must have a winner, but the resulting RPI/PWR outcome is doomed to be...essentially...a tie.

Pretty much. I think I liked it better the old way. 3 on 3 hockey is fun, but it shouldn't count for anything, which means ties at end of regulation.

[Jeff Hopkins '82]

It's annoyingly complicated on the RPI/PWR side of things. "Just win, baby" has basically become "Just win in regulation, baby"

If you think of OT games as basically ties for RPI purposes, it makes things simpler.

So...now we endure unnatural hockey (3 on 3; shootouts) because you just can't abide having a tie, and simply must have a winner, but the resulting RPI/PWR outcome is doomed to be...essentially...a tie.

Pretty much. I think I liked it better the old way. 3 on 3 hockey is fun, but it shouldn't count for anything, which means ties at end of regulation.

+1

[ugarte]

our PP  just needs to speed it up a bit.

and mix it up with cutting and crashing. the passing on the umbrella just hasn't been crisp and it seems like every time the pass is designed to set up a slapshot always comes in too tight and the cycle has to restart. if you pass for 45 seconds and keep possession but don't even get a shot off that's a huge failure.