Cornell at Union 2/28

[fastforward]

One thing that I don't think has been talked about much is that the injuries affect things well beyond who is dressed for a game. The injuries had a negative impact on how hard and with what lines the team could practice. I'm guessing the injuries also resulted in a lot of guys playing at 60 or 70%. I'm not suggesting the injuries were all that was responsible to the results thus far this season, but they really were a big part of it. Add in some bad luck and a goaltender having an off year, and here we are.

Add to that the amount of extra ice time for those that skated. This can render them less than effective, especially in back to back games

[Tom Lento]

Something I noticed that hasn't been talked about a ton is that a lot of our PP guys are also PK guys. Bancroft and Walsh for instance. That surprised me some.

Isn't that pretty normal on a college team, at least for the top shift guys?

[Tom Lento]

One thing that I don't think has been talked about much is that the injuries affect things well beyond who is dressed for a game. The injuries had a negative impact on how hard and with what lines the team could practice. I'm guessing the injuries also resulted in a lot of guys playing at 60 or 70%. I'm not suggesting the injuries were all that was responsible to the results thus far this season, but they really were a big part of it. Add in some bad luck and a goaltender having an off year, and here we are.

Yup. This is a big part of the reason I think the injuries explain most of the struggles. When you're preparing guys to play out of position, or to jump into a second line role from the fourth line or even the practice squad, or readjusting to changes in defensive pairings, you lose all that practice time that you might've spent on tightening up the lines or improving special teams. It gets hard to just tread water, much less improve.

For special teams specifically - they were never going to be good at the start of the year unless something unexpectedly good happened over the offseason. I don't think we expected the PP to be this bad, but at best mediocre over the course of the season was in line with past performance.  Improving the PP was going to have to be a priority, but it's very difficult to do that if your best practice PK lines are getting shuffled due to injuries.

[upprdeck]

The main issue with the PP is even when we have really good movement and generate tons of chances we still don't score. We win enough draws to think we would get the occasional draw shoot score goals as well.

[Trotsky]

The main issue with the PP is even when we have really good movement and generate tons of chances we still don't score. We win enough draws to think we would get the occasional draw shoot score goals as well.

Walsh, Bancroft, Castagna, and Major all seem to have a sense for the net.  We've hit around 25 posts this season.  I wonder if we could simply have suffered ridiculously bad luck?

[Dafatone]

The main issue with the PP is even when we have really good movement and generate tons of chances we still don't score. We win enough draws to think we would get the occasional draw shoot score goals as well.

Walsh, Bancroft, Castagna, and Major all seem to have a sense for the net.  We've hit around 25 posts this season.  I wonder if we could simply have suffered ridiculously bad luck?

I'll admit I tend towards naive optimism, but we have hit so many posts this year, which makes me think luck is a lot of it.

[upprdeck]

Nothing that 5 PP goals in the next 5 games wouldnt fix.

[Tom Lento]

The main issue with the PP is even when we have really good movement and generate tons of chances we still don't score. We win enough draws to think we would get the occasional draw shoot score goals as well.

Walsh, Bancroft, Castagna, and Major all seem to have a sense for the net.  We've hit around 25 posts this season.  I wonder if we could simply have suffered ridiculously bad luck?

I'll admit I tend towards naive optimism, but we have hit so many posts this year, which makes me think luck is a lot of it.

FWIW, assuming I didn't do something silly with the math, this year's team is scoring on about 7.5% of PP shot attempts while last year's team was closer to 15%.

I couldn't tell you if last year's team was getting better shots, getting luckier, hitting the net more, or some combination of all three, but if the shooting percentages were similar this year's power play would be more or less the same as last year's. Mediocre to poor, but not historically awful.

I couldn't tell you if it's luck, though. Shot percentages are pretty crude as a metric.

Also, FWIW, if you believe in their "high danger" and "expected goal" designations CHN's advanced goalie stats show two things pretty clearly - Shane is having a bad year (this is not news, but it gives me a bit more confidence in the metrics) and he's faced MUCH tougher shots, on average, than Koepple.

[Dafatone]

The main issue with the PP is even when we have really good movement and generate tons of chances we still don't score. We win enough draws to think we would get the occasional draw shoot score goals as well.

Walsh, Bancroft, Castagna, and Major all seem to have a sense for the net.  We've hit around 25 posts this season.  I wonder if we could simply have suffered ridiculously bad luck?

I'll admit I tend towards naive optimism, but we have hit so many posts this year, which makes me think luck is a lot of it.

FWIW, assuming I didn't do something silly with the math, this year's team is scoring on about 7.5% of PP shot attempts while last year's team was closer to 15%.

I couldn't tell you if last year's team was getting better shots, getting luckier, hitting the net more, or some combination of all three, but if the shooting percentages were similar this year's power play would be more or less the same as last year's. Mediocre to poor, but not historically awful.

I couldn't tell you if it's luck, though. Shot percentages are pretty crude as a metric.

Also, FWIW, if you believe in their "high danger" and "expected goal" designations CHN's advanced goalie stats show two things pretty clearly - Shane is having a bad year (this is not news, but it gives me a bit more confidence in the metrics) and he's faced MUCH tougher shots, on average, than Koepple.

I have a feeling we'll play Shane this weekend and Schafer won't want to go out benching a senior starter.

I could be wrong.

[Tom Lento]

The main issue with the PP is even when we have really good movement and generate tons of chances we still don't score. We win enough draws to think we would get the occasional draw shoot score goals as well.

Walsh, Bancroft, Castagna, and Major all seem to have a sense for the net.  We've hit around 25 posts this season.  I wonder if we could simply have suffered ridiculously bad luck?

I'll admit I tend towards naive optimism, but we have hit so many posts this year, which makes me think luck is a lot of it.

FWIW, assuming I didn't do something silly with the math, this year's team is scoring on about 7.5% of PP shot attempts while last year's team was closer to 15%.

I couldn't tell you if last year's team was getting better shots, getting luckier, hitting the net more, or some combination of all three, but if the shooting percentages were similar this year's power play would be more or less the same as last year's. Mediocre to poor, but not historically awful.

I couldn't tell you if it's luck, though. Shot percentages are pretty crude as a metric.

Also, FWIW, if you believe in their "high danger" and "expected goal" designations CHN's advanced goalie stats show two things pretty clearly - Shane is having a bad year (this is not news, but it gives me a bit more confidence in the metrics) and he's faced MUCH tougher shots, on average, than Koepple.

I have a feeling we'll play Shane this weekend and Schafer won't want to go out benching a senior starter.

I could be wrong.

Agreed, Shane is the likely starter for the duration of the playoffs. I think Schafer would go with Koepple if he was clearly better, but I don't think anything is clear there. Going with the guy who's played elimination games before - and is maybe better even in a down year - seems totally reasonable to me.

[Iceberg]

FWIW, assuming I didn't do something silly with the math, this year's team is scoring on about 7.5% of PP shot attempts while last year's team was closer to 15%.

I couldn't tell you if last year's team was getting better shots, getting luckier, hitting the net more, or some combination of all three, but if the shooting percentages were similar this year's power play would be more or less the same as last year's. Mediocre to poor, but not historically awful.

I couldn't tell you if it's luck, though. Shot percentages are pretty crude as a metric.

Also, FWIW, if you believe in their "high danger" and "expected goal" designations CHN's advanced goalie stats show two things pretty clearly - Shane is having a bad year (this is not news, but it gives me a bit more confidence in the metrics) and he's faced MUCH tougher shots, on average, than Koepple.

Shane has not been as good this year but a large problem is that the defense in front of him has created far too many high-quality scoring chances for the opposition. Think of the GWG at Dartmouth or even the very next night at Harvard where the only reason that game went to OT was because of Shane bailing out the defense multiple times.

[upprdeck]

Shane hasnt played as steady. But he still has way more upside.

[stereax]

Shane hasnt played as steady. But he still has way more upside.

Shane COULD steal you a game. Keopple plays more solidly, it feels, but at a B grade (which for Harvard is an A+). The question honestly is how tight Shane's leash will be - if we win, theoretically, 7-5 against Yale, do they trot him out the next game or switch him for Keopple?

[Will]

The question honestly is how tight Shane's leash will be - if we win, theoretically, 7-5 against Yale, do they trot him out the next game or switch him for Keopple?

As long as the team is blessed enough to have games to play, I think Shane gets the start no matter what, except possibly for illness or injury.  A win is a win, even if it's a 7-5 win.

[BearLover]

You play the goalie who will give up the fewest goals on average*. All this talk about consistency and steadiness—those qualities just get baked into the calculation of who will give up the fewest goals. Sounds reductive, but I think it's important to be clear about what we're trying to do here: pick the goalie who will give up the fewest goals on average. I don't know which goalie that is.

*and technically also taking into account smaller things like ability to move the puck