Opponents and Others 2023-24

[Scersk '97]

—In the past, BU would not have had a goalie this year. They have an extremely talented set of forwards and defensemen, but they would have had a big problem in goal. But they were able to poach Caron from Brown, so now instead of a major weakness they have a highly serviceable goalie.
—In the past, BC would have struggled with size and experience, despite the most talented freshman class in the country. Sure, they'd be bringing in an entire forward line of first round draft picks, including the 4th and 8th overall picks. But what about the PK, what about going up against a bigger, stronger, more experienced team? Well, now they can just add players from the portal like our own Jack Malone, a graduate transfer who plays on their PK/third line, to plug that hole.

Oh, you're super right about that, and I hope, as you've hoped elsewhere, that the end of the COVID extra eligibility will smooth this out a bit.

While I don't hold it against the guys, it's beyond frustrating to see our guys playing for other teams instead of finishing out four years on the Hill.

[BearLover]

Remember, if Cornell were to play in HE, or the ECAC were to be better, then Cornell's SOS would improve, but it's win% would go down. Its RPI, which, again, judges the "true" strength of Cornell, would be UNCHANGED. Therefore, being in a stronger conference would not benefit Cornell (or any team).

Basically, you're forgetting about the effects of small sample spaces. We can play lights out for the rest of the year, the kind of hockey that would put us just behind BU and BC, and it just doesn't matter. I think our absolute ceiling is a 2-seed. In this climate, that also means we have an infinitesimal margin for error, and any hiccup vs. a lower-ranked team really hurts.

We'd be better off in a better conference, particularly with our young team, because not every night is the season. Frankly, I think it would allow us to make further progress toward the freer but still defensively responsible kind of hockey we've been playing for the last ten years. So too would 36 games instead of 29, but I digress.

Just to be clear, I'm not suggesting that if you changed a bunch of variables (such as conference), RPI would literally be the exact same in a small sample. I'm making simplistic assumptions to demonstrate my point. But if you want me to edit my point to cover sample size, then I revise my point as follows (which has no effect on my ultimate conclusion):
If Cornell plays one million games in the ECAC, and Providence plays one million games in HE, and then they swapped conferences and each played one million more games, their RPI would be UNCHANGED.

The rest of your post is kind of beside the point. This is purely a discussion about RPI, not benefits of a stronger/weaker schedule outside of that context. Yeah, the experience of getting to play vs strong teams every night could benefit us. But that's not an RPI question. Also, your general premise is kind of invalidated by the success of Quinnipiac over the past decade. They've been wildly successful while playing the same (or an ever easier) schedule as us. We have also had the 1-seed multiple times over the past few years playing in an easy conference.

[chimpfood]

Just because RPI accounts for SOS doesn't mean that it does it accurately. Right now I think that winning percentage should hold more weight in the formula but I'm sure if cornell was having a 13-10 season in hockey east I would think otherwise.

[Scersk '97]

Just to be clear, I'm not suggesting that if you changed a bunch of variables (such as conference), RPI would literally be the exact same in a small sample. I'm making simplistic assumptions to demonstrate my point. But if you want me to edit my point to cover sample size, then I revise my point as follows (which has no effect on my ultimate conclusion):
If Cornell plays one million games in the ECAC, and Providence plays one million games in HE, and then they swapped conferences and each played one million more games, their RPI would be UNCHANGED.

Thanks? Believe me when I say the math isn't beyond me.

The quote of yours I have issue with is as above:

Remember, if Cornell were to play in HE, or the ECAC were to be better, then Cornell's SOS would improve, but it's win% would go down. Its RPI, which, again, judges the "true" strength of Cornell, would be UNCHANGED. Therefore, being in a stronger conference would not benefit Cornell (or any team).

I disagree, which has been my point, but perhaps we're talking past each other. This year, sure, our RPI is whatever it is, and it'd be the same in Hockey East. Yes, I get math.

Yet, over the long term, I'm not so sure. We've got a great coach who would find a way to succeed with us in whatever league we were in. I think having to live with the ECAC's general decrepitude in the early 2000s was detrimental to our development, and that situation only worked its way out over a ten-year swing into the 2010s. Our margin for error necessitates our play, whether our coach has the preference for sacrificing some offense for shutdown defense or not. (News bulletin, I think he does but he's light years ahead of where we used to be.) I contend that Yale, Union, and QU (why pick those?) benefitted from being able to have a bit more of a margin for error because the ECAC was better. I think we did too during that time, and continue to.

I weep for 2020, but I otherwise don't want to go down that hole. I like where we are, and if we can just fix the special teams we're going to be an exceedingly dangerous team, whether that's this year or next year.

[BearLover]

Just because RPI accounts for SOS doesn't mean that it does it accurately. Right now I think that winning percentage should hold more weight in the formula but I'm sure if cornell was having a 13-10 season in hockey east I would think otherwise.

Yeah, whether the RPI is an accurate measurement is a different topic. Obviously, nobody really knows. We can see how teams from weak conferences perform in the NCAA tournament, but that is a tiny and noisy sample size. I think most HE/NCHC/Big 10 fans would say the current formula benefits teams like Cornell.

[BearLover]

Just to be clear, I'm not suggesting that if you changed a bunch of variables (such as conference), RPI would literally be the exact same in a small sample. I'm making simplistic assumptions to demonstrate my point. But if you want me to edit my point to cover sample size, then I revise my point as follows (which has no effect on my ultimate conclusion):
If Cornell plays one million games in the ECAC, and Providence plays one million games in HE, and then they swapped conferences and each played one million more games, their RPI would be UNCHANGED.

Thanks? Believe me when I say the math isn't beyond me.

The quote of yours I have issue with is as above:

Remember, if Cornell were to play in HE, or the ECAC were to be better, then Cornell's SOS would improve, but it's win% would go down. Its RPI, which, again, judges the "true" strength of Cornell, would be UNCHANGED. Therefore, being in a stronger conference would not benefit Cornell (or any team).

I disagree, which has been my point, but perhaps we're talking past each other. This year, sure, our RPI is whatever it is, and it'd be the same in Hockey East. Yes, I get math.

Yet, over the long term, I'm not so sure. We've got a great coach who would find a way to succeed with us in whatever league we were in. I think having to live with the ECAC's general decrepitude in the early 2000s was detrimental to our development, and that situation only worked its way out over a ten-year swing into the 2010s. Our margin for error necessitates our play, whether our coach has the preference for sacrificing some offense for shutdown defense or not. (News bulletin, I think he does but he's light years ahead of where we used to be.) I contend that Yale, Union, and QU (why pick those?) benefitted from being able to have a bit more of a margin for error because the ECAC was better. I think we did too during that time, and continue to.

I weep for 2020, but I otherwise don't want to go down that hole. I like where we are, and if we can just fix the special teams we're going to be an exceedingly dangerous team, whether that's this year or next year.

Yeah, I think we're talking past each other. It sounds like we are in agreement that, purely from the perspective of our RPI in a given season, it doesn't matter how good our conference is. Your point is that our weak league has hindered our development across seasons, whether due to recruiting or style of play or something else. I honestly don't know, but I think that's a different topic.

I do think that, while Schafer is a great coach, we will never have the resources/freedom to do what the very top programs do. I see no reason to believe that the peak we're capable of reaching in the ECAC would be higher if we played in a different conference. Frankly, we've reached really impressive heights under our current situation.

[upprdeck]

well sometime in the next 2-10 yrs we will have to find out what a diff coach can..  I doubt he will be here when he is 70 so the window is probably even smaller.

[RichH]

Well if Whelan isn't going to login here, I'll be that guy:

Can we just use KRACH already?

[adamw]

well sometime in the next 2-10 yrs we will have to find out what a diff coach can..  I doubt he will be here when he is 70 so the window is probably even smaller.

I'm going to go out on a really short limb and say that the odds of finding another coach that does as good a job, are about 5%.

[upprdeck]

The limitations to the program by the athletic dept are staggering..

[scoop85]

well sometime in the next 2-10 yrs we will have to find out what a diff coach can..  I doubt he will be here when he is 70 so the window is probably even smaller.

I'm going to go out on a really short limb and say that the odds of finding another coach that does as good a job, are about 5%.

And that may be generous

[BearLover]

well sometime in the next 2-10 yrs we will have to find out what a diff coach can..  I doubt he will be here when he is 70 so the window is probably even smaller.

I'm going to go out on a really short limb and say that the odds of finding another coach that does as good a job, are about 5%.

Umm, considering it's probably going to be Syer, it will be much higher than 5%.

[Trotsky]

Well if Whelan isn't going to login here, I'll be that guy:

Can we just use KRACH already?

Cornell ranks in NC$$, per CHN:

Code Select Expand


PWR      13
RPI      13
KRACH    12
Record    7
SoS      28


[marty]

well sometime in the next 2-10 yrs we will have to find out what a diff coach can..  I doubt he will be here when he is 70 so the window is probably even smaller.

I'm going to go out on a really short limb and say that the odds of finding another coach that does as good a job, are about 5%.

Umm, considering it's probably going to be Syer, it will be much higher than 5%.

We can hope but Mike is a one off. He loves Cornell hockey as much as anyone can. His ability to change and his love of his players is something we have to hope that Ben can duplicate.

[pfibiger]

well sometime in the next 2-10 yrs we will have to find out what a diff coach can..  I doubt he will be here when he is 70 so the window is probably even smaller.

I'm going to go out on a really short limb and say that the odds of finding another coach that does as good a job, are about 5%.

Umm, considering it's probably going to be Syer, it will be much higher than 5%.

I hope it's not for a long time but also wondered if topher would come back behind the bench for the job.