Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Hockey East - Who's in, who's out, who's home: by the numbers - 2012-13 edition

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Re: Hockey East - Who's in, who's out, who's home: by the numbers - 2012-13 edition

    Originally posted by jjmc85 View Post
    As soon as the league appears to change a rule in the middle of a season (or actually, the end of the season) to benefit BC, I will call them out on it. To my knowledge, this hasn't happened. If it has and I missed it, you can let me know.

    However, to my knowledge, the league did appear to benefit BU with a rule change at the end of the season. There two other explanations I can think of:

    1) They were trying to screw UMass.
    2) They screwed up and forgot how they applied the tiebreaker the previous few seasons seasons.

    I don't think it's 1). Why would the league waste it's time screwing over a mediocre program? Trying to get low hanging fruit?

    I find 2) hard to believe as well. How do you all of a sudden forget when people like you and I knew what the tiebreaker was? If you are in charge of breaking the ties, and you forget how it's done, that incompetence at it's highest level.

    I know it's not a big deal to others. I'm one of the few (only?) UMass posters here. It is a huge deal to me though, just like it would have been a huge deal to others they switched the rules without notice and their team would have been left out.
    Short answer: #2, precisely. Well done.

    I had a conversation with him. You can see part of it in the retro links several posts ago. He stated multiple times that they hadn't changed anything. We've covered it multiple, multiple times here every season since it happened. They had no idea that they were doing anything differently. Period. End of story. This is not an Agatha Christie tale, nor a Dan Brown novel. There certainly aren't any Illuminati working on ties at the league office.

    If they were competent, yet up to something nefarious, as you suspect, there were a lot of other ways to handle it so as to remain undetected. Among the simplest of those was to say that they had made the decision to change the interpretation earlier in the season. Then there's no story. Denying it just made it more of an issue. Once it was clear that those of us contacting the league knew what we were talking about early on, there were other avenues to take as well - but they kept saying nothing had changed. If they knew what they were talking about, they would have seen that we did too, so denying the change would be pointless.

    Also, keep in mind that we're talking about what were moment-in-time tie-breakers with multiple games still to be played, and a press release over whether some team had clinched yet or would have to wait for another game's outcome. This wasn't the end of the season.

    Further, press releases aren't legally binding. If they had seen that they had made a mistake with a couple of games to play, they could have always issued a correction. "Oh, wait, our bad. Team X didn't clinch yet. They could still be knocked out on a 5-way tie-breaker with Teams A, B or L, Q, and R (but not if Z is involved), as long as Q and R have two ties instead of splitting 1-1-0. We missed that one. Thanks to the eagle-eyed readers of USCHO for pointing that out."

    Most importantly, it's not like they actually iced UMass out of the playoffs or down a seed on BU's (or anyone else's) behalf. They predictively broke hypothetical ties and inadvertently did the math wrong. Ultimately, when all the games were done, all the ties were broken and the results were exactly the same as they would have been in any other season. No one got screwed or benefited from anything.

    ----
    Could someone have benefited? Sure. In fact, had UVM/NU/UMA been in a tie for 7-9, the team that would have been screwed is NU and the team that would have benefited is UMass. As well-documented elsewhere many times, under the old Bottom-Up rules, UMA would be tossed and NU would end up 1st (well, 7th) over UVM. Switching to Top-Down, UVM would be promoted and UMA would take out NU H2H. Bottom-up, it's NU/UVM/UMA and UMA misses the playoffs. Switch to Top-Down and it becomes UVM/UMA/NU and the Huskies miss out.

    So UMass benefits from the very rule-interpretation change you're conspiracy-theorying about! How are they getting screwed again?

    Or is it that Toot was a BU alum (and he played under Parker... AHA!!!) and all coaches with BU ties have the league at their beck and call? I'm sure that Blaise's years as an assistant at BU had UML getting a bonus somewhere while he was there. Was McEachern an assistant at NU that year, or is the fact that they got "screwed" by this change the very reason they brought him in? Oh wait, he replaced Brendan Walsh - who played at BU before he was at Maine (Parker and Walsh!!!) - on the Husky staff, so that's a wash...

    ----
    Believe it or not, most of the world gets headaches thinking out the whole purpose of this thread, and they're really bad at it to boot - including, apparently, the person in charge of it at the time at the league office.

    Sadly, it probably won't be the last time in your life that you'll find that you're more knowledgeable about some topic than the person whose job it is to know about that topic.

    Hell, most singers get the words to the pre-game national anthem wrong and most broadcasters don't know how to say numbers over 100 or use the word "literally" correctly. Those (and more) are all true for an unfortunate majority of Americans, it seems, but it's more of an issue for me when it's dropping the ball on a responsibility of the job. If a carpenter doesn't know the words to a song, or a singer doesn't know how to drive a screw, I'm less bothered than when those are reversed.

    Don't get me started on the number of years that the same NESN broadcasters would state the same ridiculous and impossible statistics in their annual Beanpot coverage until I finally had to write the station (multiple times with documented proof, of course) to get it to stop.

    So: is it possible that the league didn't realize that they had re-interpreted their tie-breaking rules, but a handful of people who use their valuable free time to participate in a thread (much of which is voluntarily written in the wee hours of the morning so people can read it with their morning coffee...) specifically about the multiple variations remaining in playoff seedings and hypothetical ties (most of which will never happen) spotted it first? I would kind of expect it. If you don't yet, you will at some point.

    Get used to it.


    Addendum:

    Here's another difference between how we look at it that should indicate which is the rational approach:

    The whole issue matters to me because I care about the principle. I don't care which teams move (note that I repeatedly use the NU example, which has nothing to do with BU). I care about what is fair. It doesn't matter what the rules are as long as everyone knows what they are going into the season. The shootout years were OK because teams could adjust their decisions during the regular season, knowing how the points would be counted. If you screw around with the tie-breaking rules as the season winds down, it steals the opportunity for teams to target their strategies appropriately - and to know when they have to rally-or-die vs hold on for dear life.

    I only recognized it initially because it favored BU. In fact, I contacted the league office to explicitly tell them that the team I follow most closely had not clinched yet.

    You, on the other hand, have explicitly stated that you are being a total homer. It's a "huge deal" to you because you think UMass was at risk of being screwed and "left out" - and you project that if other people were in your shoes that they would then care - implying that that's the only reason you do care, and if you were in their shoes, you wouldn't.

    So your entire argument is, by definition, clouded by emotion.

    I, however, was actually knowingly working against my own best interests because I though it was the right thing to do. After a lot of time and (rational) effort on my part, I determined that there was no "there" there. They f'ed up. Honest mistake.

    So, using Occam's Razor, which position wins out?

    The one that says:

    There was a huge league-office-wide conspiracy (because, years later, still no one has leaked it, so they must all be complicit) to turn years of precedent on its head and restructure the league's playoff-decision-making format for the foreseeable future for the sole purpose of giving Jack Parker's BU squad an edge in a hypothetical situation that might never (and did never) come about.
    All of the other teams were either co-conspirators or were completely bamboozled by the league's brilliant subterfuge.
    The league office would have gotten away with it, too - if it weren't for those meddling kids, er, USCHOers.

    - OR -

    Three-or-more way tiebreakers can be confusing and most people wouldn't bother to look very hard at them once they get too far out, too complicated, or until they actually mattered after all the games were played - and the person in charge of forecasting in press releases misremembered which arbitrary way - within a poorly-written rule - they had used in the past (and was too busy or lazy or self-assured to check) because the league had NEVER actually had a three-way tie before?
    Last edited by Todd; 03-03-2013, 04:56 AM. Reason: Addendum
    The reviews keep coming in about Todd's Posts:
    cambam - Now, that Todd. He is not a moron. Wow. Nice.
    smyler3 - It's starting to get buried in this ... silliness, but Todd makes a lot of good points in his post below.
    MAV - Todd... I followed this post all day long, and you're dead on with your thoughts on [this topic] and the whole discussion...
    Scarlet - What he said.
    brick royl - Wow, what a post. :eek
    TA Jen - As always Todd, you make a good point
    Puck Swami - Todd: Good post. I really hadn't thought about [what you said]... Learn something new every day on these boards...
    Bob Gray - Very well said Todd.
    Puck Swami - Todd, a fine post - as we've come to expect from you.
    David Manning of the Ridgefield Press - Todd's last post? I laughed, I cried, it was better than Cats!
    Gene Siskel of the Chicago Tribune - In my will, I bequeathed both of my thumbs to Todd's posts with rigor mortis locking them permanently in the "Up" position!

    Comment


    • Re: Hockey East - Who's in, who's out, who's home: by the numbers - 2012-13 edition

      After Sat 3/2:
      PC 5 @ BC 1
      UMA 0 @ UNH 4
      UVM 5 @ BU 2
      NU 4 @ ME 4 OT

      --- Home Lock - 33 (Top 4) ---
      UNH 31 - 35 [1-6]
      BC 30 - 34 [1-6]
      UML 30 - 36 [1-6]
      PC 30 - 34 [1-6]
      BU 28 - 32 [2-6]
      MC 27 - 33 [1-6]
      --- Home Eligible - 30 (BC/UML-PC loser) ---
      --- In - 22 (UMA) ---
      UVM 21 - 25 [7-9]
      ME 19 - 23 [7-9]
      UMA 18 - 22 [7-10]
      --- Out - 19 (ME) ---
      NU 14 - 18 [9-10]

      Remaining LEAGUE schedules:
      UNH - MEx2
      BC - @UVMx2
      UML - @MC, PC/@PC
      PC - @UML/UML
      BU - @NU/NU
      MC - UML, UMA/@UMA
      UVM - BCx2
      ME - @UNHx2
      UMA - @MC/MC
      NU - BU/@BU


      Reshuffle...

      UNH, up from 3 to 1, jumping over BC (loss) and UML (idle, plays Sun), into top seed.
      PC, up from 5 to 4 over BU (loss), into last Home Ice.
      ME, up from 9 to 8 ekes ahead of UMA (loss), into last seed.
      NU, over and Out.

      ----
      As noted yesterday, NU only had a point of wiggle room. A tie to Maine is two points "wiggled": one lost by NU, one gained by ME. NU's Max drops to 18, while ME now has 19 in the bank - moving the Out line with them and knocking NU out of the post-season. That leaves only a H2H tie w/ UMA at 18 to keep NU from isolation in the cellar.

      To the extent anyone cares, NU would win the tb 2-1-0, but as noted yesterday, I'm not sure that the league cares to break ties between teams outside the playoffs. I seem to remember that they don't. The letter of their rule says: "For playoff seeding purposes, the following tiebreakers will be used at the conclusion of the regular season". If two teams are tied for 9th, they're tied for 9th. There's no such thing, up to this point, as a 10th seed.

      ----
      This also means that it's the fourth year in a row that NU and BU have played to end one of their seasons. This is from the end of last year. If you read the linked article, note the correction in the comments, and due to time-slipping punchiness (I started writing on Fri PM and ended on early Sat AM), you'll have to decipher which day I mean by "tonight" in the article. Hint: Fri was at Matthews and Sat at Agganis.)

      ----
      Home Lock drops to 33. In drops to 22.

      Home Eligible moves up to 30, which could be the final total for both BC and a sweep loser of next weekend's PC/UML series (if UML were to also lose to MC Sunday). Either or both of BU/MC could jump past that total and join UNH and UML-PC winner in the Home Ice quartet.

      ----
      Any of the Top 6 could still lose out and drop all the way to 6th.

      For example:
      Current leader UNH @ 31.
      UNH craters out.
      BC/BU/MC win out.
      UML/PC split.
      UNH 6th.

      ----
      Any of the bottom three still in contention could still miss the playoffs by losing out and having the other two win.

      ----
      With three games left, MC's Max is still 33. They could still get to Top Seed by winning out, having UML/PC split, and having UNH and BC each lose. If MC hits 33, BU could not catch them as tonight's loss drops BU's Max to 32. At 32 (or anywhere else), BU would win a H2H tb w/ MC (3-0-0).

      If MC were to tie Sunday, their max drops to 32 and with UML going up to 31, either UML or PC would have to hit 33, meaning that MC couldn't get top seed. Obviously a loss would do the same and more. It would lock them behind UML and drop their Max to even with UNH's banked 31 points. MC has that tb.

      ----
      Since BU has only two games left, their Max is now 32. With UML/PC H2H next week and both already at 30, BU's only shot at top seed would be to win a RR at 32 that includes at least those two. Comparing the RRR of just those three, BU's 0-3-0 and 2-0-1 gives them 2 net wins, which is already behind UML's sweep of them, so BU would need help to come out atop a tie at 32. For completeness, here's the three-way grid as a starting point:

      RRRsBUUMLPCTotal
      BU: 0-3-0 2-0-1 2-3-1
      UML: 3-0-0 2-1-0 5-1-0
      PC: 0-2-1 1-2-0 1-4-1
      The Terriers would have to find a way to pick up at least 2.5 games of RRR on UML to have a shot at top seed. Is that even possible?

      Of the other teams in the top six, BU and UML both were 1-2-0 vs. BC, so no point in adding in the Eagles here. However, BU swept MC 3-0-0 and UML would be 1-2-0, so that's a two-game gain. Against UNH, BU is a lowly 1-2-0, but UML got swept, so BU picks up another game there. Whatever the rest of the numbers, it's possible that BU could surpass UML, so there's still a chance at the top seed.

      To do the math, we need to add in MC and UNH to the mix to make a 5-way RR at 32 (and have BC remain below, which puts the Eagles in 6th). Here's the new grid:

      RRRsBUUMLPCMCUNHTotal
      BU: 0-3-0 2-0-1 3-0-0 1-2-0 6-5-1
      UML: 3-0-0 2-1-0 1-2-0 0-3-0 6-6-0
      PC: 0-2-1 1-2-0 1-1-1 2-0-1 4-5-3
      MC: 0-3-0 2-1-0 1-1-1 2-1-0 5-6-1
      UNH: 2-1-0 3-0-0 0-2-1 1-2-0 6-5-1
      Completely unexpectedly (by me, anyway), especially once the initial math showed BU only a game over .500 at 6-5-1, no one has a better RRR within the group than BU. This entire group is all within a game of .500 plus-or-minus. Given that teams sweep, get swept, split 1-1-1, 2-1-0, and 2-0-1 - the results are all over the place - there's no way I would have assumed that they would all match up so evenly. I mean, the UNH portion of the conversation starts with a 5-1-0 record against BU/UML, but their two worst results in the league are against MC and PC, a collective 1-4-1.

      So, that still leaves us with BU and UNH at 6-5-1. Here, I think the league would look H2H to split those, promote just UNH and then reset the remaining four. I suppose it's possible that they could call it a tie at Round 1 and move them to the 2nd tb, in which case BU would come out ahead on wins.

      Whichever way they do it, this is yet another reason that I think they should do AAO. As a group, this should clearly break out UML 3rd, with UNH and BU in some order at the top and MC and PC in some order at the bottom.

      For the sake of argument, take the case where BU gets promoted over UNH. Promote BU out of the stack and theoretical-2nd UNH loses two wins and 3rd place UML loses three. Meanwhile, the bottom pair of MC/PC drop records of 0-3-0 and 0-2-1, respectively. The whole grid gets inverted!

      (If we start by promoting UNH, leaders BU and UML just pull away from MC/PC.)

      Anyway, the point of this was to see if BU could still get the top seed. If UML gets points from MC Sunday, then BU can't catch one of the UML/PC pair, so that's a "no". Unless UML/PC start at 30 and split to both be at 32 - BU's Max, that's a "no". Starting with that 3-way RR, BU would be behind UML, so that's a "no". The only way for BU to get out from behind UML is this 5-way RR, but that has BU (likely) losing a tb at the top to UNH, so that's a "no". Adding in BC to make it a six-way tie at 32 (still possible!!!) wouldn't help BU as it would add a 1-2-0 to drag BU's RRR down to .500, and BC would be 3 games over for that configuration (8-5-2), so that's at least one team ahead of BU and that's a "no".

      All of those "no"s - including my assumption that the league would break the UNH/BU 6-5-1 tie atop the RR using H2H in UNH's favor - lead to me declare that BU can no longer get top seed.

      That said, they can clearly get 2nd if:
      BU wins out to hit Max 32.
      UML wins out, knocking MC's Max to 31 and trapping PC at 30.
      UNH gets swept and BC gets no more than 1 pt.

      ----
      Since either UML or PC could go beyond 32 or stay at 30, either could still end up 6th. It's just that BU can't pass the field at 32.

      ----
      Looking more closely at the comments above about MC and BU, if UML beats MC on Sunday, they are out of reach of MC, so can be no lower than 5th.

      They stay ahead of BU in all tbs at 32 until the 5-way RR. However, the whole point of getting to a 5-way was to see if BU could pass UML, so we had to add in both MC and UNH. Once we promote UNH (as we're assuming we do), then UML goes back to irrevocably being ahead of BU in the remaining RR tbs. Of course, if they beat MC, that 5-way is impossible anyway, because MCs Max is dropped to 31.

      That means that a UML win Sunday would wrap up Home Ice for the 'Hawks.

      With, you know, two whole games to play, someone would finally wrap up Home Ice. So...since it's 2013, should we just pencil in two points for Merrimack now?
      The reviews keep coming in about Todd's Posts:
      cambam - Now, that Todd. He is not a moron. Wow. Nice.
      smyler3 - It's starting to get buried in this ... silliness, but Todd makes a lot of good points in his post below.
      MAV - Todd... I followed this post all day long, and you're dead on with your thoughts on [this topic] and the whole discussion...
      Scarlet - What he said.
      brick royl - Wow, what a post. :eek
      TA Jen - As always Todd, you make a good point
      Puck Swami - Todd: Good post. I really hadn't thought about [what you said]... Learn something new every day on these boards...
      Bob Gray - Very well said Todd.
      Puck Swami - Todd, a fine post - as we've come to expect from you.
      David Manning of the Ridgefield Press - Todd's last post? I laughed, I cried, it was better than Cats!
      Gene Siskel of the Chicago Tribune - In my will, I bequeathed both of my thumbs to Todd's posts with rigor mortis locking them permanently in the "Up" position!

      Comment


      • Re: Hockey East - Who's in, who's out, who's home: by the numbers - 2012-13 edition

        Great job again Todd ... but...

        Originally posted by Todd View Post
        So...since it's 2013, should we just pencil in two points for Merrimack now?
        No thanks!
        Monty

        2011-2012 NCAA Tournament Participants
        2012-2013 Hockey East Regular Season Champions, Hockey East Tournament Champions, and Frozen Four Participants
        2013-2014 Hockey East Tournament Champions and NCAA Tournament Participants
        2015-2016 NCAA Tournament Participants
        2016-2017 Hockey East Regular Season Co-Champions, Hockey East Tournament Champions and NCAA Tournament Participants

        Comment


        • Re: Hockey East - Who's in, who's out, who's home: by the numbers - 2012-13 edition

          Originally posted by UMLFan View Post
          Great job again Todd ... but...

          No thanks!
          So you made it all the way to the end? That's one...

          Or did you just skip ahead to see how it turned out?

          (Spoiler alert:

          Despite losing by three goals three times in the RS, UML beats UNH in the HE final, en route to Pittsburgh.

          Oh, and...

          the Rs in redrum are backwards,
          she's a dude,
          he's dead already,
          the boat sinks,
          Rosebud is a sled.)
          The reviews keep coming in about Todd's Posts:
          cambam - Now, that Todd. He is not a moron. Wow. Nice.
          smyler3 - It's starting to get buried in this ... silliness, but Todd makes a lot of good points in his post below.
          MAV - Todd... I followed this post all day long, and you're dead on with your thoughts on [this topic] and the whole discussion...
          Scarlet - What he said.
          brick royl - Wow, what a post. :eek
          TA Jen - As always Todd, you make a good point
          Puck Swami - Todd: Good post. I really hadn't thought about [what you said]... Learn something new every day on these boards...
          Bob Gray - Very well said Todd.
          Puck Swami - Todd, a fine post - as we've come to expect from you.
          David Manning of the Ridgefield Press - Todd's last post? I laughed, I cried, it was better than Cats!
          Gene Siskel of the Chicago Tribune - In my will, I bequeathed both of my thumbs to Todd's posts with rigor mortis locking them permanently in the "Up" position!

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Todd View Post
            So you made it all the way to the end? That's one...

            Or did you just skip ahead to see how it turned out?

            (Spoiler alert:

            Despite losing by three goals three times in the RS, UML beats UNH in the HE final, en route to Pittsburgh.
            Also read to the end. I like this ending too. Here's hoping it works out that way!
            Gary

            www.umlhockey.com
            Unofficial Home of Lowell Hockey

            182nd member to 2,000 posts
            "It's like putting lipstick on a pig." Chris MacKenzie says, speaking of the fresh paint on the visiting locker room at Alfond.
            KnowItAll: "I have little respect for the imagination and creativity of a person who can only think of ONE way to spell a word."

            Comment


            • Re: Hockey East - Who's in, who's out, who's home: by the numbers - 2012-13 edition

              Am I under the correct assumption that BU can no longer lock up the top spot with a UML win this afternoon?
              UNH Wildcats

              1985 Women's Lacrosse Division I National Champions

              So much for empty trophy cases

              Comment


              • Re: Hockey East - Who's in, who's out, who's home: by the numbers - 2012-13 edition

                Looks like UML will be the Thursday series:

                @RiverHawkNation
                Did you know River Hawks clinched home ice for the @hockey_east playoffs. Will host series beginning Thur. 3-14

                Comment


                • Re: Hockey East - Who's in, who's out, who's home: by the numbers - 2012-13 edition

                  Originally posted by claver2010 View Post
                  Looks like UML will be the Thursday series:

                  @RiverHawkNation
                  Did you know River Hawks clinched home ice for the @hockey_east playoffs. Will host series beginning Thur. 3-14
                  Lowell's series will be Thursday, Friday, Sunday (if necessary). There is a scheduled event on Saturday.

                  Comment


                  • Re: Hockey East - Who's in, who's out, who's home: by the numbers - 2012-13 edition

                    After Sun 3/3:
                    UML 3 @ MC 1

                    UML 32 - 36 [1-4]
                    --- Home Lock - 32 w/ BU tb / 33 w/o (Top 4) ---
                    UNH 31 - 35 [1-6]
                    BC 30 - 34 [1-6]
                    PC 30 - 34 [1-6]
                    BU 28 - 32 [2-6]
                    MC 27 - 31 [2-6]
                    --- Home Eligible - 30 (BC/PC) ---
                    --- In - 22 (UMA) ---
                    UVM 21 - 25 [7-9]
                    ME 19 - 23 [7-9]
                    UMA 18 - 22 [7-10]
                    --- Out - 19 (ME) ---
                    NU 14 - 18 [9-10]

                    Remaining LEAGUE schedules:
                    UML - PC/@PC
                    UNH - MEx2
                    BC - @UVMx2
                    PC - @UML/UML
                    BU - @NU/NU
                    MC - UMA/@UMA
                    UVM - BCx2
                    ME - @UNHx2
                    UMA - @MC/MC
                    NU - BU/@BU


                    "My fellow Americans, our long national nightmare is over."
                    - Gerald R. Ford

                    Finally.

                    With their win today, UML becomes the first team to clinch Home Ice. As noted... Sunday morning, now that they have 32 points in the bank, they can only be caught by four other teams and one of those (BU) can't pass them because they come in behind UML in every tb configuration at 32. That puts UML no lower than 4th, which grants them Home Ice.

                    Crank up the Tsongas ticket office.

                    ----
                    MC can no longer be first, but they can still be second if, say, everyone but UML loses, as MC wins the H2H tb w/ UNH, who is already at MC's new Max of 31.

                    ----
                    BU is also hoping for help from UML, since they are out of reach. They got a little help today by UML keeping MC behind the Terriers. BU has the MC tb H2H, so MC has to pass BU or hope for RR tb help. BU also has the H2H tb w/ PC, so if UML sweeps PC, BU could sneak into the last Home Ice spot on UML's coat tails if BU can get two points from NU and MC doesn't sweep a UMA team that is fighting for their season.

                    Of course, if BU sweeps NU, despite the Saponari Curse, then they may only need UML to split with PC for BU to take 4th.

                    Lots of possibilities for us to have an old-school BU/PC QF showdown. There was a period where they played each other regularly. In the first 20 years of HE, I recall that BU and PC had played 20 playoff games H2H. Something like that. I believe that PC is the 3rd-most-faced opponent of BU, behind BC and NU. Considering the Beanpot and the proximity of the first two schools (going back to the early days of pre-league scheduling), it's pretty remarkable that PC would be third on the list. Anyway, lots of memories there. Good times, good times...

                    ----
                    Regarding the first Home Ice spot:

                    Part of me (the part that would like to get to sleep earlier) would like to say that it will be a long time until we have to wait until this late in the season before we see such a spectacle - where NO ONE has clinched anything beyond some teams being sure to be in the playoffs somewhere. No one was eliminated and no one clinched Home Ice until the final 24 hours of the penultimate weekend. In fact, since this is Sunday and everyone plays Fri-Sat next weekend, technically, no one clinched Home Ice until the last week of the regular season. That's nuts.

                    There's another part of me that likes everyone being in play. I certainly am not cruel enough to get my schadenfreude on when teams get knocked out without a chance to have a post-season - well, maybe in one instance I could be convinced... . Even in that case though, I'm an empathetic human being (on behalf of the players) and a fan of athletic endeavor for its own sake. Regardless of what colors or logos someone might wear, or the words on their sweater, I feel bad every season for those that don't get to "die with their skates on".

                    Still a third part of me looks around the league and thinks that this isn't an anomaly, it's a trend. I think the days of the Big Four are done, and, if so, I'm glad for it. It's boring.

                    More to the point, there is enough talent in the league that is spread among the programs that instead of there being four Haves and six Have-Nots, there are becoming ten How-Much-Do-You-Have-This-Years. Add to that that a lot of the teams - especially teams rising in recent years like UML, MC, and PC - have some young players and newer coaches that are just having the opportunity to get their recruits and their systems in place.

                    Plus we add Notre Dame next year, and UConn the year after that. The former will probably be competitive at the top of the standings from Jump Street. The latter...? Time will tell.

                    ----
                    Say what you will, pro or con, about Blaise MacDonald, he was always a solid recruiter - whether an assistant at BU, building Niagara from the ground up to a 30-win season (and an at-large bid and 1st round NCAA victory coming out of the CHA) in four years, or taking over at UML (How does the French Olympic team derail one of the best UML teams in a decade? Recruiting.). On the ice, one bad season finished him at UML, but Bazin still had a good foundation to start his tenure and has come out of the gate with consecutive 20-win seasons. There haven't been consecutive 20-win seasons at UML in almost 20 years (92-93, 93-94). For perspective, they had Dwayne Roloson in net and Bruce Crowder behind the bench when they did it. [Ben Stein]Crowder...? Crowder...?[/Ben Stein]. Paul Tsongas was still alive and the building with his name on it wasn't built yet, let alone named for him. In fact, the team had only become UMass Lowell, and the River Hawks, the year before that pair of seasons (in '91). It's been a while is what I'm saying. But UML is on a roll and may be playing the best hockey in the conference, not just because they have the most points as of this snapshot, but they got there by digging out of a hole. You've seen the run they've been on since Hannukkah, right? A festival of lighting the lamp, predominantly on the end of the ice they're facing.

                    I know that MC's Dennehy has been around for 8 years now, but he took over an imploding program. Honestly, what wasn't going wrong around the team in North Andover when he got there? In the years before his arrival, they were almost perennially the dead-last pre-season pick and still rarely failed to disappoint. In his first four years, the Warriors managed 30 wins, combined. Two years ago, they had 25 in one season. When that team lost in the NCAAs, many saw it as an upset. Merrimack upset in the NCAAs? Has that happened since they jumped from D-II? Even the thought of that happening? So even though they've skidded a little in the last couple of games, they seem to be on the right track as a program.

                    Nate Leaman took a moribund Union program and, in his final season before coming over to PC, earned a RS ECAC title on the strength of a 25-7-4 run to the post-season. (Bit of an unexpected halt in the playoffs, both league and NCAA, but that could be chalked up to a lot of factors.) He took over a PC squad that hadn't won their first (non-exhibition) game of calendar year 2011 until the final game of their 2010-11 season and had roughly a 1:2:1 win-loss-tie ratio overall. In the league, a woeful 4-16-7 and missed the playoffs. After his first year (2011-12), they rose to a more respectable 10-14-3 (an eight-point jump) in the league, and became the first 7-seed to ever beat a 2 in the history of Hockey East. I guess he was new and didn't know that that behavior is simply is not done in these parts. This year, PC is already 12-7-6, banking 30 points (a further seven-point jump) with two more games to play. That's at least a fifteen-point improvement in his first two seasons. So that seems like a good hire...

                    UVM has been to the Frozen Four, and to the Garden enough times that the Big Four is on the verge of being the Big Five.

                    Northeastern's 08-09 team stood toe-to-toe with the All-Everything BU squad of the same season, whether on the ice (back-to-back ties in February), in the standings (BU chased NU all season until passing them on the final Sunday, which was only possible when - on the heels of NU's Friday-night last-:30 EAG, then OT GWG - BC helped out, keeping NU within reach by beating them Saturday night), or on the post-season awards podium (see HE awards and Hobey Hat Trick).

                    Finally, as much these five of the six "Have Not" teams have all been improving, they have all missed the playoffs at least once in the last four years. You know who hasn't? The other "Have Not", UMass. In fact, UMass hasn't missed the playoffs in ten years, last doing so in 01-02. (Is it a conspiracy that they keep winning the tie-breakers?) It harkens back to the days of the mid-90's, when UML made it to the Semis six years in a row. Not BU, BC, Maine, PC, ... UML - and they did it coming from the 4, 2, 5, 2, 6, and 5 seeds. Never best. Never worst. Always there.

                    Fun fact 1: In the first 14 years of HE, UML made the Semis more than any other team, 10 times. They have never been RS champ. In fact, only the Big 4 have.

                    Fun fact 2: The year that UMA joined the league, HE expanded from the playoff-friendly 8 to what-do-we-do-now 9 teams. So in that first season, HE instituted a play-in game (9 @ 8). Even though UMA trailed BC by "30" points in the standings, they won. (Conspiracy to get UMA into the playoffs?) IIRC, that is the only year that BC did not make the quarterfinals. It was definitely the only year of the play-in. (Conspiracy no longer needed, or was the league in then BC Coach Len Ceglarski's pocket and abolished the play-in so BC didn't risk missing out again?)
                    Last edited by Todd; 03-03-2013, 11:50 PM.
                    The reviews keep coming in about Todd's Posts:
                    cambam - Now, that Todd. He is not a moron. Wow. Nice.
                    smyler3 - It's starting to get buried in this ... silliness, but Todd makes a lot of good points in his post below.
                    MAV - Todd... I followed this post all day long, and you're dead on with your thoughts on [this topic] and the whole discussion...
                    Scarlet - What he said.
                    brick royl - Wow, what a post. :eek
                    TA Jen - As always Todd, you make a good point
                    Puck Swami - Todd: Good post. I really hadn't thought about [what you said]... Learn something new every day on these boards...
                    Bob Gray - Very well said Todd.
                    Puck Swami - Todd, a fine post - as we've come to expect from you.
                    David Manning of the Ridgefield Press - Todd's last post? I laughed, I cried, it was better than Cats!
                    Gene Siskel of the Chicago Tribune - In my will, I bequeathed both of my thumbs to Todd's posts with rigor mortis locking them permanently in the "Up" position!

                    Comment


                    • Re: Hockey East - Who's in, who's out, who's home: by the numbers - 2012-13 edition

                      Originally posted by UNH09 View Post
                      Am I under the correct assumption that BU can no longer lock up the top spot with a UML win this afternoon?
                      Actually, according to the exhaustive (and exhausting) early Sunday morning thread, BU could already not get top seed after Saturday's results.

                      You can read the section with the three-color grids to see why.

                      After UML's win Sunday, that remains true.
                      The reviews keep coming in about Todd's Posts:
                      cambam - Now, that Todd. He is not a moron. Wow. Nice.
                      smyler3 - It's starting to get buried in this ... silliness, but Todd makes a lot of good points in his post below.
                      MAV - Todd... I followed this post all day long, and you're dead on with your thoughts on [this topic] and the whole discussion...
                      Scarlet - What he said.
                      brick royl - Wow, what a post. :eek
                      TA Jen - As always Todd, you make a good point
                      Puck Swami - Todd: Good post. I really hadn't thought about [what you said]... Learn something new every day on these boards...
                      Bob Gray - Very well said Todd.
                      Puck Swami - Todd, a fine post - as we've come to expect from you.
                      David Manning of the Ridgefield Press - Todd's last post? I laughed, I cried, it was better than Cats!
                      Gene Siskel of the Chicago Tribune - In my will, I bequeathed both of my thumbs to Todd's posts with rigor mortis locking them permanently in the "Up" position!

                      Comment


                      • Re: Hockey East - Who's in, who's out, who's home: by the numbers - 2012-13 edition

                        For those of you following along with the BU 3-goal weirdness:

                        We left off after the first UVM game this weekend with 11 three-goal leads and 6 three-goal responses (by either team) in the 17 BU games since 12/30/12.

                        On Saturday, UVM got two quick ones on their first three shots, but BU got their first before UVM got their third. However, with under 2:00 to go in a tight 3-2 game, BU started to pull the goalie when UVM got possession in their own end. BU's Maguire raced back to the crease, but before he could really get set, UVM went five-hole. 4-2. With Maguire on the bench as the clock ticked down, BU held UVM away from the front of the net with the puck, but UVM's Chris McCarthy got a wraparound ENG to make it 5-2 with under :10 left. (Three-goal-lead? Check!). Not the most traditional "empty" net goals you'll see, but they do count on the scoresheet.

                        New tally: 12 three-goal leads and 6 three-goal responses (by either team) in the 18 BU games since 12/30/12.

                        I don't know what, if anything, it means. Is it a sad thing? A funny thing? It is at least a thing - and that thing won't... stop... happening.

                        Chinese water torture is also a "thing", right?
                        The reviews keep coming in about Todd's Posts:
                        cambam - Now, that Todd. He is not a moron. Wow. Nice.
                        smyler3 - It's starting to get buried in this ... silliness, but Todd makes a lot of good points in his post below.
                        MAV - Todd... I followed this post all day long, and you're dead on with your thoughts on [this topic] and the whole discussion...
                        Scarlet - What he said.
                        brick royl - Wow, what a post. :eek
                        TA Jen - As always Todd, you make a good point
                        Puck Swami - Todd: Good post. I really hadn't thought about [what you said]... Learn something new every day on these boards...
                        Bob Gray - Very well said Todd.
                        Puck Swami - Todd, a fine post - as we've come to expect from you.
                        David Manning of the Ridgefield Press - Todd's last post? I laughed, I cried, it was better than Cats!
                        Gene Siskel of the Chicago Tribune - In my will, I bequeathed both of my thumbs to Todd's posts with rigor mortis locking them permanently in the "Up" position!

                        Comment


                        • Re: Hockey East - Who's in, who's out, who's home: by the numbers - 2012-13 edition

                          Originally posted by Todd View Post
                          Regarding the first Home Ice spot:

                          Part of me (the part that would like to get to sleep earlier) would like to say that it will be a long time until we have to wait until this late in the season before we see such a spectacle - where NO ONE has clinched anything beyond some teams being sure to be in the playoffs somewhere. No one was eliminated and no one clinched Home Ice until the final 24 hours of the penultimate weekend. In fact, since this is Sunday and everyone plays Fri-Sat next weekend, technically, no one clinched Home Ice until the last week of the regular season. That's nuts.

                          There's another part of me that likes everyone being in play. I certainly am not cruel enough to get my schadenfreude on when teams get knocked out without a chance to have a post-season - well, maybe in one instance I could be convinced... . Even in that case though, I'm an empathetic human being (on behalf of the players) and a fan of athletic endeavor for its own sake. Regardless of what colors or logos someone might wear, or the words on their sweater, I feel bad every season for those that don't get to "die with their skates on".

                          Still a third part of me looks around the league and thinks that this isn't an anomaly, it's a trend. I think the days of the Big Four are done, and, if so, I'm glad for it. It's boring.

                          More to the point, there is enough talent in the league that is spread among the programs that instead of there being four Haves and six Have-Nots, there are becoming ten How-Much-Do-You-Have-This-Years. Add to that that a lot of the teams - especially teams rising in recent years like UML, MC, and PC - have some young players and newer coaches that are just having the opportunity to get their recruits and their systems in place.

                          Plus we add Notre Dame next year, and UConn the year after that. The former will probably be competitive at the top of the standings from Jump Street. The latter...? Time will tell.
                          Don't think we see this again for a while, and you hit on the reason why in the last paragraph.

                          With the addition of teams (and thus changing formats) more teams will get home ice which means lower requirements for home ice and thus earlier clinching.

                          It was weird going to the BC ticket office LAST weekend and buying my HE QF tickets and only getting a receipt and not actual tickets (cue: BC spoiled fans response, and you'd be right).

                          Comment


                          • Re: Hockey East - Who's in, who's out, who's home: by the numbers - 2012-13 edition

                            Originally posted by Todd View Post
                            So you made it all the way to the end? That's one...
                            I actually read through!
                            Monty

                            2011-2012 NCAA Tournament Participants
                            2012-2013 Hockey East Regular Season Champions, Hockey East Tournament Champions, and Frozen Four Participants
                            2013-2014 Hockey East Tournament Champions and NCAA Tournament Participants
                            2015-2016 NCAA Tournament Participants
                            2016-2017 Hockey East Regular Season Co-Champions, Hockey East Tournament Champions and NCAA Tournament Participants

                            Comment


                            • Re: Hockey East - Who's in, who's out, who's home: by the numbers - 2012-13 edition

                              Todd does a great job of working with the numbers, but here's another look with some of the same info, some other info, analysis here at http://www.westerncollegehockeyblog....ton-university
                              Last edited by CollegeHockeyRinkReport; 03-04-2013, 01:08 PM. Reason: Fixed to correct link
                              https://www.hockeyjournal.com/author/jeffcox/
                              Follow on twitter @JeffCoxSports

                              Comment


                              • Re: Hockey East - Who's in, who's out, who's home: by the numbers - 2012-13 edition

                                Originally posted by CollegeHockeyRinkReport View Post
                                Todd does a great job of working with the numbers, but here's another look with some of the same info, some other info, analysis here at http://sbn.to/15***OY.
                                need all the letters .

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X