Cornell at Union 2/28

[BearLover]

Coulda shoulda woulda and all that, but I do wonder how different our record would be if the coaches tried a "rotation" with Shane and Keopple earlier in the season.

Agree

The coaching staff clearly thinks Shane is much better than Keopple. Otherwise Shane would have been benched long, long ago. So, I have a hard time believing a platoon would have been any better.

Schafer has been a great coach but I'm ready to move on. This season has been disgraceful.

Rayhill got 5 or 6 games and you still don't buy that the injury issues were a serious problem in terms of developing on ice chemistry and guys have regular roles etc etc?

If we knew in the pre season that rayhill was going to play that much would.anyone think we'd even finish top 4 in the league?

Yes, 100%. This team was predicted to be first in the ECAC and contend for the national title. If I knew Rayhill would dress as the extra skater a few times that would move the needle only a little.

What if you knew that the team would be playing guys out of position in nearly every game in the middle part of the season because 6 of their top 12 options up front were unavailable due to injury?

This was true for like 3 games the entire season, right? For most of the season Devlin+Wallace+1-3 other guys were out.

I don't think injuries explain even half of our struggles. Shane had a very tough year, the PP (most of which stayed healthy almost the entire year) was awful, and the team was overall quite unlucky. Those things aren't injury-related. This was a very disappointing year even accounting for the injuries.

I think everyone agrees with you that Shane had a bad year, the power play was a disaster and the team simply didn't score enough goals.

You have a very clear opinion that I'd call intractable but I don't mean it pejoratively: there was a failure of coaching. Tthat failure combined getting the guys game ready and/or motivated and making smarter/faster decisions on the starting goalie.  You aren't saying anything about the facts of the team's injuries that aren't generally agreed-upon, but your framing is dismissive. We had repeated injuries to players who were expected to get serious minutes, from the top to bottom lines. They were overlapping and recurring. We saw a lot of guys who weren't supposed to break a sweat out there skating real shifts. Obviously you don't think that it mattered much but obviously that is not a generally shared opinion on the forum.*

Isn't it a little exhausting repeating yourself like this? You don't have new evidence, you just keep saying it, which results in... CRAP LIKE THIS! JESUS! DO YOU THINK I ENJOY THIS? THIS IS A COMPULSION! STOP! FOR MY SAKE, PLEASE STOP!

* Me? I don't care either way. The injuries are what they are. I have no idea what other teams were going through and generally think that fans tend to overstate the impact of their own teams injuries while "them's the breaks" for the bad guys. We lost a lot of games. Imagine, this is the reaction of someone who mostly agrees with you about what a disappointment the season has been!

I do keep beating the same drum and some find that annoying, which is valid because I am annoying. But what's also annoying is the knee-jerk defense of the team and coaches on this forum. Every loss is excused. I've gone on and on about why injuries don't explain even half of our struggles this season, no need to repeat it. It's getting tiring though. I look to 2019 when the injury situation was arguably even worse. That team would have been ECAC champions if not for getting jobbed by the refs and won an NCAA tourney game despite Mallott and Galajda going down in the championship game. Injuries are an unfortunately reality and they do not themselves define a season. Seems they've given a lot of people a very convenient excuse though.

Can we make a deal that if Cornell doesn't advance past the quarterfinals despite only Devlin and Wallace being out, then injuries are not to blame for our bad season?

[upprdeck]

You can have your opinion.

I suspect the coaches have one that will differ from yours.

[BearLover]

You can have your opinion.

I suspect the coaches have one that will differ from yours.

If you look up my posts from the end of the 2019 season, you will see that I commended on the coaching staff on overcoming terrible injury luck and achieving a great season. Just for the record.

[RichH]

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.

Mike has rarely hesitated switching goalies mid-game. Usually it's with a fourth goal. If he sees a starter is off or not seeing the puck well, the hook will come. This has often served to send a jolt to the D to protect their less-experienced netminder.

[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.

Mike has rarely hesitated switching goalies mid-game. Usually it's with a fourth goal. If he sees a starter is off or not seeing the puck well, the hook will come. This has often served to send a jolt to the D to protect their less-experienced netminder.

Mid-game, sure, I agree. But absent illness or injury, I think Shane will start for whatever games are left this season.

[Tom Lento]

Can we make a deal that if Cornell doesn't advance past the quarterfinals despite only Devlin and Wallace being out, then injuries are not to blame for our bad season?

No, because you're once again discounting all of the knock-on effects of an injury run of the type Cornell has endured this season. Making up for a solid 15 weeks or whatever of busted up practice time in a 2 week span is asking an awful lot, especially with a game this weekend. It could happen, but I wouldn't bet on it.

I think a comparison might be instructive here - consider Cornell and Quinnipiac. Pre-season projections for both teams were very similar - consensus top 2 in the league with strong potential for an at large bid to the NCAAs. Personally, I'd say Cornell had more upside and fewer unknowns than Q at the start of the season, so I'd have put Cornell at 1 and Q at 2.

Now, Quinnipiac played to the upper end of their expectation range, first in the league and in strong position for an at large going into the conference playoffs. Cornell, while not as disappointing as maybe some of us feared, still had a monumentally disappointing RS by any reasonable evaluation.

From what little I know of their season it appears Q improved over the course of the year in the way you'd expect a well-coached team to improve. Cornell, by contrast, sputtered along, improving in some ways (the PP is less inept, at least, and the PK appears to have gotten back on track) but running in place in others.

Both teams have coaches with a strong track record and both teams have decent depth of talent. What they don't have is a comparable injury record.

Quinnipiac's top 9 scoring forwards in terms of points per game missed a combined total of 0 games this year. Their top 5 scoring defensemen in terms of points per game missed a combined total of 5 games. Their top 15 skaters in terms of appearances - 10 forwards and 5 D - missed a combined total of 5 games.

Among Cornell's top 9 scoring forwards by points per game, 2 missed more games than Q's top 14 scoring players combined (Psenicka missed 6, Major missed . Mack and Castagna missed 4 games each as well. I didn't mention Kyle Penney and his 11 missed games, at least 9 of which were due to injury, because he isn't one of Cornell's top 9 point per game forwards this year. Yes, these numbers include the suspensions but if you remove those the overall point remains - Cornell's top scoring lineups have been busted up for much of the season.

Cornell's D corps has seen some more consistency in terms of games played - among their top 5 scoring defensemen only Fegaras has missed any games. Of course, he also missed more games (6) than Q's top 5 defensemen combined.

Your contention is that this disruption only accounts for half of the team's struggles this year. I just don't agree. I think it accounts for the dominant majority of the gap between reasonable pre-season expectations and RS performance. A big part of the reason I feel this way is this year's team is one without a dominant top line - they rely on depth to generate offense through sustained pressure, and they haven't had any depth due to the injuries.

I do think there is some leftover variance on the downside. The PP wasn't likely to be great without the injuries and their impact on practice times and so forth, but even with the injuries historically awful is a bit much to take. They also could've won 3-4 more games this year even with the injuries. To my mind this is in the range of normal "shit happens" badness, though. The really big difference-maker is the injury disruption.

The reason I think Q is instructive is because they had a ton of stability and improved and performed near the top of their expected range. I doubt that would've been the case if they'd had Cornell's injury season. In all likelihood they would've been in the same 4-6 range hoping to make some noise in the playoffs as they finally start to get healthy.

It's fine for you to disagree with my analysis, but I submit that maybe you should be a little more accepting of fans willing to take the Occam's razor explanation that the continuous rash of injuries over the course of the season explains the drop off from last year.

[Tom Lento]

For those understandably unwilling to read that wall of text, here's the summary:

Quinnipiac's top 9 scoring forwards by points per game missed a combined total of 0 games. Their top 5 D missed a combined total of 5.

Cornell's top 9 forwards missed 24 total games, with meaningful absences from Psenicka (, Major (6), Mack (4), and Castagna (4). Cornell's top 5 D were more stable, with Fegaras (6) the only player to miss any games.

I didn't forget Kyle Penney, at 0.28 points per game he's not one of Cornell's top 9 scoring forwards this year.

[RichH]

Can we make a deal that if Cornell doesn't advance past the quarterfinals despite only Devlin and Wallace being out, then injuries are not to blame for our bad season?

No, because you're once again discounting all of the knock-on effects of an injury run of the type Cornell has endured this season. Making up for a solid 15 weeks or whatever of busted up practice time in a 2 week span is asking an awful lot, especially with a game this weekend. It could happen, but I wouldn't bet on it.

I think a comparison might be instructive here - consider Cornell and Quinnipiac. Pre-season projections for both teams were very similar - consensus top 2 in the league with strong potential for an at large bid to the NCAAs. Personally, I'd say Cornell had more upside and fewer unknowns than Q at the start of the season, so I'd have put Cornell at 1 and Q at 2.

Now, Quinnipiac played to the upper end of their expectation range, first in the league and in strong position for an at large going into the conference playoffs. Cornell, while not as disappointing as maybe some of us feared, still had a monumentally disappointing RS by any reasonable evaluation.

From what little I know of their season it appears Q improved over the course of the year in the way you'd expect a well-coached team to improve. Cornell, by contrast, sputtered along, improving in some ways (the PP is less inept, at least, and the PK appears to have gotten back on track) but running in place in others.

Both teams have coaches with a strong track record and both teams have decent depth of talent. What they don't have is a comparable injury record.

Quinnipiac's top 9 scoring forwards in terms of points per game missed a combined total of 0 games this year. Their top 5 scoring defensemen in terms of points per game missed a combined total of 5 games. Their top 15 skaters in terms of appearances - 10 forwards and 5 D - missed a combined total of 5 games.

Among Cornell's top 9 scoring forwards by points per game, 2 missed more games than Q's top 14 scoring players combined (Psenicka missed 6, Major missed . Mack and Castagna missed 4 games each as well. I didn't mention Kyle Penney and his 11 missed games, at least 9 of which were due to injury, because he isn't one of Cornell's top 9 point per game forwards this year. Yes, these numbers include the suspensions but if you remove those the overall point remains - Cornell's top scoring lineups have been busted up for much of the season.

Cornell's D corps has seen some more consistency in terms of games played - among their top 5 scoring defensemen only Fegaras has missed any games. Of course, he also missed more games (6) than Q's top 5 defensemen combined.

Your contention is that this disruption only accounts for half of the team's struggles this year. I just don't agree. I think it accounts for the dominant majority of the gap between reasonable pre-season expectations and RS performance. A big part of the reason I feel this way is this year's team is one without a dominant top line - they rely on depth to generate offense through sustained pressure, and they haven't had any depth due to the injuries.

I do think there is some leftover variance on the downside. The PP wasn't likely to be great without the injuries and their impact on practice times and so forth, but even with the injuries historically awful is a bit much to take. They also could've won 3-4 more games this year even with the injuries. To my mind this is in the range of normal "shit happens" badness, though. The really big difference-maker is the injury disruption.

The reason I think Q is instructive is because they had a ton of stability and improved and performed near the top of their expected range. I doubt that would've been the case if they'd had Cornell's injury season. In all likelihood they would've been in the same 4-6 range hoping to make some noise in the playoffs as they finally start to get healthy.

It's fine for you to disagree with my analysis, but I submit that maybe you should be a little more accepting of fans willing to take the Occam's razor explanation that the continuous rash of injuries over the course of the season explains the drop off from last year.

There you go again, Kneejerk McGullicuddy

[Tom Lento]

There you go again, Kneejerk McGullicuddy

I know, I know, but I really can't help myself.

[marty]

Can we make a deal that if Cornell doesn't advance past the quarterfinals despite only Devlin and Wallace being out, then injuries are not to blame for our bad season?

OK, you're on - we will give you a shot Brian - but please tell us if you are planning on just coaching or doing the player-coach thing?

[BearLover]

For those understandably unwilling to read that wall of text, here's the summary:

Quinnipiac's top 9 scoring forwards by points per game missed a combined total of 0 games. Their top 5 D missed a combined total of 5.

Cornell's top 9 forwards missed 24 total games, with meaningful absences from Psenicka (, Major (6), Mack (4), and Castagna (4). Cornell's top 5 D were more stable, with Fegaras (6) the only player to miss any games.

I didn't forget Kyle Penney, at 0.28 points per game he's not one of Cornell's top 9 scoring forwards this year.

I mentioned in the game thread the last time Cornell played Quinnipiac that they appear to have had almost no injuries the entire season. So, yeah, if you compare the team with the ~best injury luck in all of D-1 hockey agains a team with very bad injury luck, you're going to see some differences. But I don't think Cornell's injury luck is uniquely bad. By the time NoDak came into Lynah this season, they couldn't even put out a full lineup, and that was only a few weeks into their season. Harvard has been decimated by injuries. These are just some examples off the top of my head.

The best argument that injuries don't explain even half of Cornell's struggles is: the two weakest points of this team, by far, have been goaltending and PP. Shane has apparently been healthy the entire season. The PP was also very healthy for the first half of the season, by which time it was already among the absolute worst in the country. It did see injuries to players like Major and Castagna later on, but it has actually improved since then.

On the other hand, our 5x5 metrics are actually quite good. Our possession numbers are strong. If injuries were having a major effect on depth and practice bodies, then it seems to me that we'd see the effects of this on team-wide metrics rather than on goaltending and PP numbers whose units have been largely (or entirely) healthy.

[Trotsky]

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.

This.

[cth95]

Thank you for looking up all of the missed games.  I think your description of Q this year could be taken a step farther by applying it to our team last year.  We had a decent season going with a young team before we took off at the end to win the ECAC's, beat Maine, and take the soon-to-be national champ right to the wire.  If I remember correctly, we had very few injuries thus letting the team develop and gel.

[Iceberg]

Speaking of goalies, I imagine we see Stark for Yale on Saturday. Not sure why he wasn't even dressed the last time the two teams met but he did play last weekend

[adamw]

I finally agree with BL on one thing -- I don't believe injuries are the *main* reason for this year's (relative) struggles.