St. Lawrence at Cornell 2023-02-18

[Iceberg]

Have you noticed that we always seem to have small goalies?  Watching Shane, he just kind of shrinks into the net.  We don't need a 6'6" keeper like Clarkson, but 6'1" would be good.  They claim Shane is 6'0". Lol.

Don't get me started.

I know everyone (else) loved Andy Iles... But I saw Yale open him up like a bad can of tuna in Atlantic City his freshman year, and I think Schafer playing him for that championship game was one of the worst decisions I've ever seen him make as a coach. Should've played Garman, who was better statistically and was playing hotter down the stretch. Harvard did the same thing the next year. 2013 happened. And then in 2014, the Union juggernaut ended Iles's time as "the guy."

Yeah, Iles could steal a game every once in a while, but we are not the team for that kind of goalie. Give me a big brick any day. Like that Scrivens kid.

I was never keen on Andy Iles as a player. And I'm saying that as someone who shared a few classes with him for the better part of four years. Easily the least formidable of the goaltenders I've seen since following Cornell hockey

[ugarte]

It's 2023 and we're asking, once again, if Andy Iles is the answer.

[Scersk '97]

It's 2023 and we're asking, once again, if Andy Iles is the answer.

No, I don't think I'll ever get over Macho Grande.

[shafer]

...  Give me a big brick any day. Like that Scrivens kid.

For me Scrivens is the best Cornell goalie in the past 20 years.

[semsox]

Have you noticed that we always seem to have small goalies?  Watching Shane, he just kind of shrinks into the net.  We don't need a 6'6" keeper like Clarkson, but 6'1" would be good.  They claim Shane is 6'0". Lol.

Don't get me started.

I know everyone (else) loved Andy Iles... But I saw Yale open him up like a bad can of tuna in Atlantic City his freshman year, and I think Schafer playing him for that championship game was one of the worst decisions I've ever seen him make as a coach. Should've played Garman, who was better statistically and was playing hotter down the stretch. Harvard did the same thing the next year. 2013 happened. And then in 2014, the Union juggernaut ended Iles's time as "the guy."

Yeah, Iles could steal a game every once in a while, but we are not the team for that kind of goalie. Give me a big brick any day. Like that Scrivens kid.

I hope that's the prevailing wisdom now. Can probably dig up more than one thread here reliving the great Davenport/Scrivens debate.

[sah67]

...  Give me a big brick any day. Like that Scrivens kid.

For me Scrivens is the best Cornell goalie in the past 20 years.

He certainly knew how to have some fun in goal too.

[George64]

We tend to struggle with defensively sound teams that lack firepower more than we do with the most high-powered teams. Both opponents this weekend clogged passing lanes well and didn't give up many odd man rushes.

St Lawrence also clogged our offensive zone preventing really good looks and second chances.  Clarkson forechecked like crazy, reminding me of our Harkness-era teams.

[George64]

Don't get me started.

I know everyone (else) loved Andy Iles... But I saw Yale open him up like a bad can of tuna in Atlantic City his freshman year, and I think Schafer playing him for that championship game was one of the worst decisions I've ever seen him make as a coach. Should've played Garman, who was better statistically and was playing hotter down the stretch. Harvard did the same thing the next year. 2013 happened. And then in 2014, the Union juggernaut ended Iles's time as "the guy."

Yeah, Iles could steal a game every once in a while, but we are not the team for that kind of goalie. Give me a big brick any day. Like that Scrivens kid.

I was never keen on Andy Iles as a player. And I'm saying that as someone who shared a few classes with him for the better part of four years. Easily the least formidable of the goaltenders I've seen since following Cornell hockey

I often thought that Iles' Ithaca roots contributed to Mike's decision-making.

[redice]

Does anyone have a list (names) of the 1973 & 2003 players who returned this weekend?

God help me for expecting that they would be introduced, individually, by name... SMH!

[Dafatone]

...  Give me a big brick any day. Like that Scrivens kid.

For me Scrivens is the best Cornell goalie in the past 20 years.

I think I'd put Galadja at the top and Scrivens second, but I'm not certain.

Scrivens still holds the NHL record for saves in a shutout. Those Edmonton "defenses" didn't do him any favors.

[Trotsky]

1. Galajda
2. Scrivens
3. McKee

[marty]

Does anyone have a list (names) of the 1973 & 2003 players who returned this weekend?

God help me for expecting that they would be introduced, individually, by name... SMH!

Yes, but Arthur quite obviously introduced the Saturday crew from '03 The ESPN video didn't pick up anything but a muffle of his voice.

I assume the few that were there from the1973 team were introduced on Friday but that was even less clear as I watched it live.

[sah67]

Does anyone have a list (names) of the 1973 & 2003 players who returned this weekend?

God help me for expecting that they would be introduced, individually, by name... SMH!

Yes, but Arthur quite obviously introduced the Saturday crew from '03 The ESPN video didn't pick up anything but a muffle of his voice.

I assume the few that were there from the1973 team were introduced on Friday but that was even less clear as I watched it live.

The '03 team was not introduced individually either. Arthur just briefly mentioned Vesce as the leading scorer and Leneveu's goaltending accomplishments since both of them were there. I know Moulson and Murray definitely weren't there.

[abmarks]

Down to 15, yet still given 93% chance on chn.

They don't update that matrix in real time.   The current model now shows 50%

[BearLover]

Down to 15, yet still given 93% chance on chn.

They don't update that matrix in real time.   The current model now shows 50%

How does the matrix predict the likelihood of future outcomes? For example, let's say the 10th best team in KRACH plays the 25th best team. The 25th best team is at home. What odds does the model give the 25th best team to win? To my knowledge, there is no complete explanation of this anywhere. In past years, the model has yielded outcomes that are absurd. For example, a few years ago it gave each of several of the top seeds in the ECAC a >95% chance of winning their best-of-three quarterfinal series. That does not comport with the reality of hockey, which includes far too much randomness for the likelihood of a best-of-three series to be that certain. Several other similar absurdities led me to believe the model vastly overrates the likelihood of the higher ranked team winning. Which is to say, Cornell never had a 93% chance of making the NCAAs. That 93% chance was based on Cornell having an extremely high likelihood of beating Clarkson, StL, Yale, Brown, and their quarterfinal opponent.  

It is impossible to "disprove" a probabilistic model, but until the publishers of the model put forth a detailed explanation of how the predictions are calculated, I'm going to continue to believe it is unreliable.