2022-23 Predictions

[BearLover]

Still feeling pretty good about my prediction of
Harvard/Quinnipiac
—big gap—
Cornell/Clarkson
—big gap—
everyone else

Not that this was a particularly difficult prediction to make. Harvard (insane talent) and Q (bunch of 24-year-olds) have things no one else in the league can match.

[BearLover]

Cornell has dug themselves a hole. In particular, starting the season at Minn-Duluth is killing them. The Red really need to win a high percentage of their remaining games to compete for an at-large bid. It's possible—Cornell has been playing pretty well lately—but I think it's unlikely at this point.

There is no strategic or intelligent discussion in the above paragraph. But with a break in the season, I thought it would be worth taking stock of where things are.

Notably, Cornell is approximately where they were in the PWR at this time last year. I think this year's team is better, though last year's team did not end up coming close to an at-large bid.

[Dafatone]

Cornell has dug themselves a hole. In particular, starting the season at Minn-Duluth is killing them. The Red really need to win a high percentage of their remaining games to compete for an at-large bid. It's possible—Cornell has been playing pretty well lately—but I think it's unlikely at this point.

There is no strategic or intelligent discussion in the above paragraph. But with a break in the season, I thought it would be worth taking stock of where things are.

Notably, Cornell is approximately where they were in the PWR at this time last year. I think this year's team is better, though last year's team did not end up coming close to an at-large bid.

I think it's a little circular. We finished nowhere near a bid last year, but had we swept Colgate and won a game in Lake Placid, I bet we would've been close.

No, I'm not going to try to crunch any numbers on that.

This year, if we get a top-4 finish and get to Lake Placid, I bet we wind up close to an at-large.

[ugarte]

imo we have a young team that had a rocky start to the year (partially because UMD was too early in our prep but tbh UMD's subsequent performance is killing us as much as the games against them is). i don't know if we can come back from that start well enough to survive in the postseason without winning the conference title. that said, it's definitely a squad that shows promise for the next couple of years; the upperclassmen have been the problem, not the kids imo.

[BearLover]

imo we have a young team that had a rocky start to the year (partially because UMD was too early in our prep but tbh UMD's subsequent performance is killing us as much as the games against them is). i don't know if we can come back from that start well enough to survive in the postseason without winning the conference title. that said, it's definitely a squad that shows promise for the next couple of years; the upperclassmen have been the problem, not the kids imo.

Also, Quinnipiac's fifth-year seniors will finally be forced to do something else with their lives next year.

[CU2007]

Cornell has dug themselves a hole. In particular, starting the season at Minn-Duluth is killing them. The Red really need to win a high percentage of their remaining games to compete for an at-large bid. It's possible—Cornell has been playing pretty well lately—but I think it's unlikely at this point.

There is no strategic or intelligent discussion in the above paragraph. But with a break in the season, I thought it would be worth taking stock of where things are.

Notably, Cornell is approximately where they were in the PWR at this time last year. I think this year's team is better, though last year's team did not end up coming close to an at-large bid.

I think it's a little circular. We finished nowhere near a bid last year, but had we swept Colgate and won a game in Lake Placid, I bet we would've been close.

No, I'm not going to try to crunch any numbers on that.

This year, if we get a top-4 finish and get to Lake Placid, I bet we wind up close to an at-large.

Maybe. Beating BU and AIC would go a long way. It's tough that the bad teams in the ECAC now seem to be the bad teams nationally. I don't have any data but I think the bad ECAC teams used to be way better than the Canisius and Mercyhurts of the world - doesn't seem to be the case anymore.

[upprdeck]

if you win those first 2 instead of losing we are just about top 5 in PWR right now.  

even winning 1 game puts us in the top 15

or winning the harvard game which was there to be had. put us in top 15

I mean we are right around 20 whose to say the 4-5 teams above us dont play worse either.

RIT is gonna get dragged down the by the league as well.
omaha is 8-6 maybe they dont stay over .500
WMU is 10-8 ditto
Mass Lowell 9-6-1
Mass 7-5-3

if we win the games against the bottom teams we could jump up without even beating the b-u/quin/harv teams

Taken in a vacuum IF BU was the only game played tomorrow and we won we would jump up to 15,

[upprdeck]

I mean starting the season who had us at #1 right now in GA/G at 1.8?

[osorojo]

Harvard has 15 or 16 hockey players who currently have contracts with NHL teams. How many current C.U. hockey players have  contracts with NHL teams, and who are these professional prospects?

[Swampy]

Harvard has 15 or 16 hockey players who currently have contracts with NHL teams. How many current C.U. hockey players have  contracts with NHL teams, and who are these professional prospects?

Contracts? Do draft picks have contracts while they're still in college?

I always thought contracts involve some compensation, and I haven't been following the rules on NIL. So, maybe they do have contracts. Please enlighten.

[CU2007]

Harvard has 15 or 16 hockey players who currently have contracts with NHL teams. How many current C.U. hockey players have  contracts with NHL teams, and who are these professional prospects?

Contracts? Do draft picks have contracts while they're still in college?

I always thought contracts involve some compensation, and I haven't been following the rules on NIL. So, maybe they do have contracts. Please enlighten.

They do not have contracts. Many never will.

[ugarte]

i think he means former harvard players in NHL team systems. i'm not going to check but at least give his ramblings a not-completely-stupid interpretation if you are going to engage with them.

[Dunc]

i think he means former harvard players in NHL team systems. i'm not going to check but at least give his ramblings a not-completely-stupid interpretation if you are going to engage with them.

It would be interesting to compare the percent of Harvard draft picks that end up with lasting ahl/nhl contracts compared to us and the rest of the league (This could maybe point to how good programs are at prepping players for higher level of play)

Of course we'd have to define what "lasting" contract means

[Trotsky]

It would be interesting to compare the percent of Harvard draft picks that end up with lasting ahl/nhl contracts compared to us and the rest of the league (This could maybe point to how good programs are at prepping players for higher level of play)

Of course we'd have to define what "lasting" contract means

That would be interesting.  I would look at two things: (1) the net NHL GP of each school's alumni going back over various intervals and (2) that against some predictive measure of how like draft picks are expected to produce.

It's probably just selective perception but I would swear that Boston area teams' players are hyped more and pushed into higher draft slots than their subsequent NHL production justifies, and of these Harvard is the chief beneficiary/offender.

[Trotsky]

I mean starting the season who had us at #1 right now in GA/G at 1.8?

I thought somebody was under 1.0?  Maybe that was just a single goalie.