Cornell vs Vermont Postgame Thread

[calgARI '07]

I agree with KenP.  Dartmouth has a very good team, one similar to Cornell's in that they are big and physical and relatively deep (although that clearly took a hit when 3 guys left the team).  Even withouth Jessiman, they have the most talent in the ECACHL.  Their biggest question mark I think is in goal.  This is a team that I do not wanna see in the playoffs.

[Avash]

[Q]KenP Wrote:

 [Q2]marty Wrote:

 The final at Hamilton really makes our defense look special.  Cornell stopped a talented Dartmouth team who can really click when the D isn't up to the challenge.  I saw the Dartmouth 9-1 over RIP game and some of the goals there look liked like scripted practice drills.[/Q]
In fairness to Dartmouth, they were without one of their top players due to a game misconduct the week before.  I think the team that beat 'Gate last night was a very different team than the one we faced.
[/q]

Game disqualification.

[jtwcornell91]

[Q]ithacat Wrote:

 "Ballroom Bitz"

That's clever, but tough to have the crowd sign along with that one. For me, it'll be tough to beat "hey, hey, Bâby..."

Maybe, it could be "hey, hey, Bitzy..."[/q]

Let's try to resist the temptation to recycle cheers/songs that happen to fit with a particular player's name after that player has graduated.

[Al DeFlorio]

[Q]KenP Wrote:

 [Q2]marty Wrote:

 The final at Hamilton really makes our defense look special.  Cornell stopped a talented Dartmouth team who can really click when the D isn't up to the challenge.  I saw the Dartmouth 9-1 over RIP game and some of the goals there look liked like scripted practice drills.[/Q]
In fairness to Dartmouth, they were without one of their top players due to a game misconduct the week before.  I think the team that beat 'Gate last night was a very different team than the one we faced.
[/q]
UVM played without Sifers last night.  Cornell played without Moulson in Hanover.  Stuff happens.

I'd rather face Dartmouth than Harvard in the tournament.  Harvard knows how to win them (Grumet-Morris is two-out-of-three).  Dartmouth's never won anything.

[Dart~Ben]

I'm confident Dartmouth would rather play Cornell than Harvard as well.

[ugarte]

[Q]billhoward Wrote:

 Not a bad weekend at all for Cornell other than it was two more almost-shutout games for Cornell and McKee. Of games where we have a shutout entering the third period the last two years, the majority of time, it seems as if we blow the shutout (or against Vermont, the lead). [/q]

Holy glass-half-empty, Batman! Lenny spoiled you ... and he "lost" his share of shutouts in the third period also. Shutouts are rare and hard to come by; even the worst team in the ECAC will get a few prime opportunities to score in every game. Complaining about the goalie with the top GAA in the country getting "almost-shutouts" is a very strange complaint. How many fans routinely complain about their team consistently giving up one goal?

Don't focus on the exceptional games. Vermont 1.0 sticks out because it is so rare that this team loses a late lead.

[billhoward]

[Q]ugarte Wrote:

 [Q2]billhoward Wrote:

 Not a bad weekend at all for Cornell other than it was two more almost-shutout games for Cornell and McKee. Of games where we have a shutout entering the third period the last two years, the majority of time, it seems as if we blow the shutout (or against Vermont, the lead). [/Q]
Holy glass-half-empty, Batman! Lenny spoiled you ... and he "lost" his share of shutouts in the third period also. Shutouts are rare and hard to come by; even the worst team in the ECAC will get a few prime opportunities to score in every game. Complaining about the goalie with the top GAA in the country getting "almost-shutouts" is a very strange complaint. How many fans routinely complain about their team consistently giving up one goal? Don't focus on the exceptional games. Vermont 1.0 sticks out because it is so rare that this team loses a late lead.[/q]

You're going to force me to look up all the box scores of the last two seasons. You are absolutely right that a shutout is a rare event and Leneveu (and the defense) spoiled us. However: It *feels* as if Cornell the last two years has lost a disproportionate amount of shutouts in the third period and in the last 10 minutes of the third period. If an opponent scores 1 goal against you, odds are 1 in 6 he'll do it in the last 10 minutes. I'm thinking more than than 1/6 of the X-to-1 score games of the last two years were X-to-0 with 10:00 to play.

We're all greedy. I'd love it if we led the nation in defense and shutouts both. There isn't a stat for this, but really what you want is for the team to be leader with the lowest standard deviation from the lowest goals allowed average. Better to allow 2 goals (exactly) in every game for a 2.0 GAA than 1.8GAA that includes a bunch of shutouts and a couple of 5 and 4 goals allowed games which are ones you couldn't always plan to win, especially if you're only averaging 3.5 goals a game.

The standard deviation for the first 19 games is 1.07. If we hadn't given up the ENG to BC it'd be about 0.96. Goals allowed by game ...
1
1
0
2
1
2
2
2
0
2
3
3
3
2
1
1
0
1
1

... three shutouts, seven one-goal games, six two-goal games, two three-goal games, and one four-goal game (BC and the ENG). I think it's pretty unusual to give up two goals less than you give up one goal. I'm sure we'll give up four goals at least once more this season. But still: nineteen games into the year and ten of them we gave up less than two goals.

[atb9]

[Q]DeltaOne81 Wrote:

 [Q2]Chris '03 Wrote:

 [Q2]DeltaOne81 Wrote:

 Weird... the Gate score is up the records are updated, but PWR doensn't seem to be yet. Gate needs another loss in their COP column. Does that take a bit longer? I thought it was immediate.[/Q]
Click add bonus. As JTW pointed out yesterday, they don't update at the same time. Cornell now t6 in PWR with Harvard. Colgate fall to the bottom of a 4 way tie for 8th.  [/Q]
Sorry I don't spend everyday on the board  Good to know though[/q]

It wasn't always that way, Fred!  ;-)  B-]

[Greg Berge]

[Q]If an opponent scores 1 goal against you, odds are 1 in 6 he'll do it in the last 10 minutes.[/Q]

Oh well, what the hell.  Here they are, the periods and times of all only goals against us in the last 3 seasons:

2002-03

1 08:58 OSU pp
2 12:48 BU pp
3 08:47 BU sh
2 10:19 WMU
1 15:40 OSU (0-1 loss)
3 18:18 Col
3 11:50 Drt
3 16:09 Ver pp
1 18:56 UC
2 17:27 Prn pp
2  08:00 BC

2003-04

1  01:26 SLU
1  01:35 BG  pp (1-1 tie)
1  07:11 UC (1-1 tie)
3  04:25 Prn
2  05:13 Yal
3  07:41 RPI
1 14:43 SLU
2 12:52 Clk pp
3 16:18 Clk pp

2004-05

3 00:32 Arm
2 17:57 Sac
1  5:54 MSU pp (1-1 tie)
3  04:54 Hvd (0-1 loss)
1 19:57 UC
3 12:18 Drt pp   
3 12:39 Ver


Breakdown

Year 1 2 3 (Final 10 of 3)
-------------------------------
2003 3 4 4 (3)
2004 4 2 3 (1)
2005 2 1 4 (2)

[ben03]

[Q]billhoward Wrote:
You're going to force me to look up all the box scores of the last two seasons. You are absolutely right that a shutout is a rare event and Leneveu (and the defense) spoiled us. However: It *feels* as if Cornell the last two years has lost a disproportionate amount of shutouts in the third period and in the last 10 minutes of the third period. If an opponent scores 1 goal against you, odds are 1 in 6 he'll do it in the last 10 minutes. I'm thinking more than than 1/6 of the X-to-1 score games of the last two years were X-to-0 with 10:00 to play.

We're all greedy. I'd love it if we led the nation in defense and shutouts both. There isn't a stat for this, but really what you want is for the team to be leader with the lowest standard deviation from the lowest goals allowed average. Better to allow 2 goals (exactly) in every game for a 2.0 GAA than 1.8GAA that includes a bunch of shutouts and a couple of 5 and 4 goals allowed games which are ones you couldn't always plan to win, especially if you're only averaging 3.5 goals a game.

The standard deviation for the first 19 games is 1.07. If we hadn't given up the ENG to BC it'd be about 0.96. Goals allowed by game ...

... three shutouts, seven one-goal games, six two-goal games, two three-goal games, and one four-goal game (BC and the ENG). I think it's pretty unusual to give up two goals less than you give up one goal. I'm sure we'll give up four goals at least once more this season. But still: nineteen games into the year and ten of them we gave up less than two goals.
[/q]
During the '03 season I can tell you i/we watched more "should-be, could-be, might-have" been games I think i/we could stand.
Stats for that season looked like this (W-L-T): 9-shutouts (9-0-0), 11-One goal games (10-1-0), 12-Two goal games (10-1-1), 3-Three goal games(1-2-0), and 1-Five goal game (0-1-0).

truth-be-told it sucked to watch the close games not be shutouts but i'll take that season over and over and over again. i think there are porbably a few people here and elsewhere that might agree ... well, maybe a slightly different ending would be nice. B-]

[billhoward]

Thanks for doing the legwork. My recollection that Cornell has given up a disproportionate amount of third-period and last-10-minutes goals to lose a shutout is wrong, wrong, wrong. But this year, it's right on target. The average should be .33 per period of giving up the 1 goal, and .17 of giving it it up in the last 10:00.

What period Cornell gave up the 1 goal in X-to-1 games:
YEAR   1st   2nd   3rd   Last 10:00
2003   3   4   4   3
2004   4   2   3   1
2005   2   1   4   2

2003   0.27   0.36   0.36   0.27
2004   0.44   0.22   0.33   0.11
2005   0.29   0.14   0.57   0.29

[Jeff Hopkins '82]

I think part of it was also how the shutouts were broken:  an offsides play by Dartmouth and a rainbow deflection by Vermont.

McKee deserves better.

[ugarte]

[Q]billhoward Wrote:
The average should be .33 per period of giving up the 1 goal, and .17 of giving it it up in the last 10:00.
[/q]
You are really looking at a statistical blip and trying to derive meaning. Cornell has given up a last-ten-minute goal twice.  Twice! It would have been nice to get shutouts in those games, but I really just have to shrug at the insignificance of it.

I still maintain that complaining about the lack of shutouts given McKee's profile this year is like lamenting the taxes when you win Powerball.

[Greg Berge]

That was fun.  Here's some more:

1999-2000

2 12:02 UC
2 13:52 Brn
2 09:07 WMU
2 06:58 Yal

2000-01

3 08:00 Hvd (1-1 tie)
3 10:50 Mai (1-1 tie)
3 17:10 Clk
1 07:11 Brn
4 02:14 Yal pp (ouch)
3 06:02 Drt
2 17:30 UC
2 10:15 Prn


2001-02

1  03:08 UAH
1 19:43 RPI
1 16:17 Brn pp
1  08:40 Yal pp (1-1 tie)
2 13:20 Nia
2 14:50 Col
3  00:17 SLU
4  03:59 Drt (ouch again)
1  03:10 RPI pp
3  06:34 UC
1  02:44 Yal
3 15:23 Qpc

Breakdown

Year 1 2 3 4 (> 3 09:59)
-------------------------------
2000 0 4 0 0 (0)
2001 1 2 4 1 (3)
2002 6 2 3 1 (2)
2003 3 4 4 0 (3)
2004 4 2 3 0 (1)
2005 2 1 4 0 (2)

51 16 15 18 2 (11)

[billhoward]

You are absolutely right that it's a statistical blip and all too often we get hung up on minor on minor trajectories such as "two-game winning streaks." (I rail it against this stuff except when I'm violating the rule.) What got me thinking was that in this month, we gave up third-period goals that broke McKee's shutouts. As George's stats show, the previous two years it was almost 1/3 1/3 1/3 for the period when the shutout was broken in a game where the other guy finished with one goal.

Mckee's shutout record would be better and Cornell's WLT record would be worse if half those one-goal games became shutouts and half became two-goal games. So we should be happy with what we've got.