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 Umileated View Post
    Why are you pulling Lowell (6-6-0) before UNH and BU (each 6-5-1)?
    Originally posted by WoA
    As an aside, and I might be wrong, I'm ignoring ties.
    Hold on, I have another wall of text based off pts.

    Comment


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

      Due to size constraints in post size, here's one based off pts. I wasn't too happy with ignoring ties as well, but it highlights the still weaknesses in the stated tiebreaking procedure from HEA. How do ties affect the H2H ranking? Prepare for another wall of text.

      Please note that this is all predicated on the purely speculative results shown in post 113.


      RRRsBCUMLUNHPCMCBUPtsTotal
      BC 2-1-01-1-11-1-12-1-02-1-0188-5-2
      UML1-2-0 0-3-02-1-01-2-03-0-0147-8-0
      UNH1-1-13-0-0 0-2-11-2-02-1-0167-6-2
      PC1-1-11-2-02-0-1 1-1-10-2-1145-6-4
      MC1-2-02-1-02-1-01-1-1 0-3-0136-8-1
      BU1-2-00-3-01-2-02-0-13-0-0 157-7-1


      1 BC still wins this one so they get removed.
      1. BC


      RRRsUMLUNHPCMCBUPtsTotal
      UML 0-3-02-1-01-2-03-0-0126-6-0
      UNH3-0-0 0-2-11-2-02-1-0136-5-1
      PC1-2-02-0-1 1-1-10-2-1114-5-3
      MC2-1-02-1-01-1-1 0-3-0115-6-1
      BU0-3-01-2-02-0-13-0-0 136-5-1


      UNH and BU are tied at 13 points
      First Tiebreaker: H2H
      UNH was 2-1-0 against BU so UNH wins and is removed.
      2. UNH



      RRRsUMLPCMCBUPtsTotal
      UML 2-1-01-2-03-0-0126-3-0
      PC1-2-0 1-1-10-2-162-5-2
      MC2-1-01-1-1 0-3-073-5-1
      BU0-3-02-0-13-0-0 115-3-1


      UML wins this now and is removed.
      3. UML


      RRRsPCMCBUPtsTotal
      PC 1-1-10-2-141-3-2
      MC1-1-1 0-3-031-4-1
      BU2-0-13-0-0 115-0-1


      BU wins this one and is removed.
      4. BU




      RRRsPCMCPtsTotal
      PC 1-1-131-1-1
      MC1-1-1 31-1-1


      PC & MC season series is tied at 1-1-1
      League wins is next tie breaker

      PC ends with 13 wins
      MC ends with 14 wins
      MC wins.

      5. MC
      6. PC.


      1. BC.
      2. UNH
      3. UML
      4. BU
      5. MC
      6. PC
      7. UVM
      8. UMA

      Quarterfinal Matchups on points:

      8. UMA @ 1. BC
      7. UVM @ 2 UNH
      6. PC @ 3 UML
      5 MC @ 4. BU

      Quarterfinal matchups with ties ignored (last post - probably flawed):

      1 BC
      2 UML
      3 BU
      4 MC
      5 PC
      6 UNH
      7 UVM
      8 UMA


      8. UMA @ 1. BC
      7. UVM @ 2. UML
      6. UNH @ 3. BU
      5. PC @ 4 MC

      Much different, eh?
      Last edited by WrathOfAramark; 02-28-2013, 09:27 AM.

      Comment


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

        Originally posted by WrathOfAramark View Post
        Hold on, I have another wall of text based off pts.
        Ok, but even ignoing ties 6-5 is over .500 where 6-6 is .500. So UNH would still be 2 winning h2h with bu.

        Or

        Am I missing something?
        "Now Progress Takes Away What Forever Took To Find" Dave Matthews Band, The Dreaming Tree

        Comment


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

          After Fri 3/1:
          BC 3 @ PC 2
          MC 0 @ UML 4
          UMA 2 @ UNH 2
          UVM 1 @ BU 3
          NU 1 @ ME 3

          --- Home Lock - 34 (Top 5) ---
          BC 30 - 36 [1-6]
          UML 30 - 36 [1-6]
          UNH 29 - 35 [1-6]
          BU 28 - 34 [1-6]
          PC 28 - 34 [1-6]
          MC 27 - 33 [1-6]
          --- Home Eligible - 28 (BU/PC) ---
          --- In - 24 (ME/UMA) ---
          UVM 19 - 25 [7-9]
          UMA 18 - 24 [7-10]
          ME 18 - 24 [7-10]
          NU 13 - 19 [8-10]
          --- Out - 18 (UMA/ME) ---

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


          Shuffle the deck...

          Including tbs, we had:
          BC and UML move up from 3/4 to 1/2. BC wins the H2H tb, 2-0-1.
          UNH falls out of a tie for 1st, but only drops from 2 to 3.
          BU jumps up from 6 to 4, by virtue of a 2-0-1 tb over PC.
          PC holds still and drops from 1st seed to 5th and out of Home Ice.
          MC also stands pat, but since it started the night a point back of the top four, only loses one place from 5 to 6 when hurdled by BU.

          ----
          For BC/PC, BC now takes the season H2H tb, which it currently leads 1-0-1. Worst case for BC, PC would draw even tomorrow to make it 1-1-1, but with 2 games to go, PC couldn't be tied with BC and make up the gap in wins, which is the 2nd tb.

          That means that if BC wins Saturday, they will be four points ahead of PC, with the tb and two games to play. Depending on what else happens to impact possible RR options, BC might clinch a spot ahead of PC, making them no lower than 5th. If MC were also to lose or tie, BC would be four points up on MC with two to play and a 2-1-0 tb.

          Possible that BC could clinch Home Ice in the right scenario tomorrow.
          ----
          For UML/MC, the tb is 1-1-0 and the gap is three points. If either wins Saturday, they take the H2H tb. UML would be 5 up with 2 games to play, so that tb would be moot. If MC were to win, they'd be a point back with 2 games to play, so UML would have to take more points from PC next weekend then MC took from UMA, or they would fall behind (pending a RR tb).

          If they tie Saturday, the tb would be even 1-1-1, the spread would still be three and MC would have one extra tie. In that case, the only way that this tb would matter would be if MC swept UMA and UML got a single point from PC. H2H 1-1-1, identical 14-9-4 records. 3rd tb would depend on who the top teams were and in what order. Note: If MC got three and UML got zero, UML would take the tb on wins, as MC would have 5 ties to UML's 3 (therefore 1 fewer win to hit same point total - specifically 13-9-5 vs 14-10 -3).

          UML swept current 28-pointer BU, but still has two to play with PC to wrap up the RS, so even with a win tomorrow, UML cannot clinch in combination with PC and BU losses.

          ----
          BU's victory over UVM severs the last slender tie between the top six and the bottom four.

          ----
          UMA's tie-breaking goal with :65 to play seemed as if it would draw them even with UVM for 7th.

          UNH's EAG with :04 to go re-tied the game, leaving UMA in a tie with ME for the 8/9 pivot. As discussed, the possibilities for ties at this end don't bode well for ME, so they will need to pass either UMA or UVM to make the playoffs - and now the three are within a single point 19/18/18.

          ----
          That late UNH goal also may, at first glance, have kept NU's season alive by 4 seconds, but let's see what the numbers say.

          Had UMA won, that would have put UVM and UMA in a tie at 19, which is where NU's Max fell to after their loss to Maine.

          Best case for NU would have been a three-way tie at 19. In a RR tie with UVM/UMA/NU, we get 4-2-0/3-3-0/2-4-0, respectively. The primary impact is UVM's 3-0-0 sweep of NU, as opposed to 2-1-0 splits elsewhere.

          Now that we have the league verifying Top-Down RR breaks, that trio would resolve as UVM atop the three, then NU v UMA H2H. NU takes that 2-1-0, so would be ahead of UMA, but would have to await the ME results v UNH to see if that three-way RR is for 8-10 (in which case UVM takes the last slot and NU beats out UMA for the best team not to make the playoffs), or 7-9 (so NU would take the last seed)

          ----
          If we add ME to the mix at 19, the impact on these three adds 2-0-1/1-1-1/1-1-1 to the records above, so NU doesn't gain on the other two. ME would be the reciprocal of those records, so UVM/UMA/NU/ME goes 6-2-1/4-4-1/3-5-1/2-4-3. Interestingly, only one of the four, UVM, is above .500 within the group. UVM is four games over, while both NU and ME are two games under.

          Promote UVM to 7 and reset.

          UMA/NU/ME = 2-3-1/3-2-1/2-2-2 ME split both series 1-1-1, so it is the 2-1-0 NU over UMA series that is the deciding factor. NU is 8th.

          UMA and ME are 1-1-1, but - to the extent it matters - UMA would take the pride of 9th on league wins (do we know if the league bothers to break ties for 9/10, since these are playoff tbs and 9/10 is not for the playoffs?).

          ---
          With UVM/NU H2H and UMA/ME stuck at 18, obviously NU makes the playoffs, but it is as 8 seed as UVM has the 3-0-0 sweep.

          NU is down to its point of wiggle room.

          In ties with UMA (NU won 2-1-0) or ME (1-1-1, NU has more wins) or both (UMA/ME split 1-1-1), NU should come out ahead.

          So its Max could fall to 18, if UMA and ME stay put, or it can handle UMA and/or ME rising to its current Max of 19, as long as it runs the table to reach that Max. It can't handle both dropping a point and having either UMA or ME rise.

          ---
          So: NU could still squeak in at 8 even with three or four at 19, but cannot rise above UVM for 7 (which also means that UVM cannot fall to 10). Whether they get to reach 8 depends not only on NU winning out, but on ME and UMA getting no more than 1 pt each.

          Since NU cannot pass UVM, and UVM is the first promotion out of any tb within the bottom four that includes NU, it doesn't matter whether UVM loses out or not, from NU's perspective. UVM's 19 points might as well be 39, for all the difference it makes to NU's post season at this stage.

          Interestingly, if NU does win out and UVM and UMA are at 19, whether Maine stays at 18 or gains a point to 19, the end result is the same. The bottom four would finish UVM/NU/UMA/ME.

          ----
          None of the benchmarks move, only some of the indicators change.

          ----
          After all these years of HE taking a little bit of pride in actually having the RS decide something other than seeding for every team in the playoffs, it's odd to think that this is the last year that the RS will eliminate any teams. I believe the plan next year is for all 11 to make the playoffs.

          Since reducing 11 to 8 (for normal 2^n playoff formatting) requires eliminating three teams, I expect (not sure if they have announced) that they would have the bottom six play (6-7-8 host 11-10-9), while the top five await opponents. The top four would still get Home Ice, but for Round Two. The 5th seed would get a bye, but be on the road to 4 for the 2nd round. 6/7/8 would get to host in the first round. That would give us the odd situation where lower seeded teams (6-8) get to host games, while a higher seeded team (5), does not.
          Last edited by Todd; 03-02-2013, 12:55 AM.
          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

            http://www.westerncollegehockeyblog....e-northeastern
            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 Priceless View Post
              Hockey East just tweeted this:



              Does that jive with what they've said before?
              Based on the thread posted by Todd above (and you can see my comments in that thread) I'm 100% convinced Hockey East does whatever it takes to make Jack Parker happy, including when it comes to tiebreakers. For years they had the tiebreaker so that 5 way tie would have BU out and UMass in. Then the weekend going into the series, all of a sudden it switches to BU in and UMass out? I call BS. Of course, it didn't happen. But it could have, and I tend to hold grudges when people try to screw my favorite team over, whether or not they are successful.
              #NewMass

              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
                For those of you scoring along at home...

                Originally posted by Todd View Post
                ... I detailed last weekend an unusual "3-goal" streak involving BU.
                That's seven of the ten games with three-goal leads or responses - or both. In fact, seven 3-plus-goal leads and three 3-plus-goal answers in ten games gives about even odds that you'll see one or the other.
                Well... Harvard scored four straight on Monday to take a 6-3 lead en route to a 7-4 final, then Maine trailed by two before ripping three straight on the PP before the BU equalizer for Friday's 3-3 result, so add two more to that skein.
                So that makes 8 three-goal leads and 4 three-goal responses in 12 BU games since Denver through the BU/ME tie last Friday.

                On Saturday, BU trailed ME 1-0 before ripping four-in-a-row (Three-goal-lead? Check!), only to give up three straight (Three-goal-comeback? Check!) in regulation before the last-rush OT win. That's 9 leads and 5 responses in 13 games.

                BU's freakish streak continued into UML's 3-0 win Friday. Saturday's game was 3-1, but it was 2-0, not 3-0, when BU got a SHG to avoid the shutout.

                Tally through this weekend... 10 three-goal leads and 5 three-goal responses (by either team) in the 15 BU games since 12/30/12.
                When we last left off, it was 10 and 5 over 15 through the UML/BU series.

                Continuing the 3-goal streak in BU games, we pick up with BU going up 5-0 on MC (Three-goal-lead? Check!) Tuesday night, but they stopped the MC response at only two goals. Friday night UVM took a 1-0 lead before BU - well, Matt Nieto - scored three straight (Three-goal-comeback? Check!).

                So: 11 three-goal leads and 6 three-goal responses (by either team) in the 17 BU games since 12/30/12. Still averaging out to 1 per game (and that doesn't double count things like having more than one three goal lead by the same team in the same game, otherwise the total would be higher).

                ----
                Compare that to games like the UML/ME OT contest from Feb 3, that I noted a while back, where it was a 4-3 final, but the two teams were only not tied for 6:24, and 5:30 of that was in one chunk. The two other one-goal leads were :14 and :40 long, plus the OT goal (:00 lead time).

                ----
                As it happens, that was the most recent loss for UML (a month ago) - and that weekend, where UML lost to both MC (Fri) and ME (Sun) on the road, were the only losses by UML since consecutive 5-2 losses to UNH back on Nov 30 / Dec 1. 16-2-1 in their last 19 games. If "Last 20" or "Last 16" were still a PWR criterion, you have to think that UML would be picking up a couple more pairs, even though they're already up to a tie for 7th (seeded 8th) in the PWR as of now.

                ----
                In another odd streak, UML has only lost when also not winning an adjacent game. UML has nine losses this season so far. Eight of those were in four back-to-back pairs. The odd loss in their season's second game followed a tie in their season opener.

                UML has also been oddly consistent when it comes to the outcomes of their games vs particular opponents.

                Not only did they lose to UNH 5-2 on consecutive nights, but their other UNH game was also a three-goal loss, 3-0. They have lost to Maine twice by a 4-3 score (winning the other 2-1). They have gone to overtime with NU twice tied at 4, once ending 4-4 and winning the other 5-4. Last weekend, UML would likely have beaten BU by identical 3-0 scores, if not for a heads-up effort for a steal and SHG to get BU's lone goal on the weekend.

                If the RS is any indicator, UML's success in the conference tourney may depend upon the matchups, perhaps more than any other team in HE.
                Last edited by Todd; 03-02-2013, 03:18 AM.
                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 jjmc85 View Post
                  Based on the thread posted by Todd above (and you can see my comments in that thread) I'm 100% convinced Hockey East does whatever it takes to make Jack Parker happy, including when it comes to tiebreakers. For years they had the tiebreaker so that 5 way tie would have BU out and UMass in. Then the weekend going into the series, all of a sudden it switches to BU in and UMass out? I call BS. Of course, it didn't happen. But it could have, and I tend to hold grudges when people try to screw my favorite team over, whether or not they are successful.
                  Well:

                  A) As has been discussed here many times, the guy in the league office that handles the tbs had no idea what all of us that were contacting him were talking about (changing the methodology) until it was spelled out in painstaking detail. Then he just went away. Don't know if he was embarrassed, or still didn't get it and was too frustrated to continue the conversation(s). Either way, hardly the stuff of conspiracy theory.

                  B) Let me continue by saying that I don't often get to the end of a game and focus on how good or bad the officiating was. In fact, I will defend officials during the game when I think fans are being ridiculous. If a game sticks out to me for officiating, it's got to be pretty egregious. Further, I would hope by now that people would see me as fairly objective - in fact, I was also as concerned as you were about BU having "clinched" when they wouldn't have by past precedent. That's what started the delving into the new tb interpretation, going so far as to contact the league office directly for clarification. So take the following comment in that context, as I would say the same thing if I noticed it about Umile or Whitehead or Bazin or ... , but I am addressing your comment about the league's relationship with Parker specifically.

                  You should watch tape of the BU games after Parker makes a comment in the press about how particular penalties are being called. If he makes a comment about how the refs [call/don't call], say, diving, all of a sudden BU will get a rash of diving calls where they weren't called at all before, or certainly not anywhere near as much. Pretty obvious that the refs are - at least sub-consciously, if not intentionally - responding with an "Oh yeah? You want us to call that? Be careful what you ask for..." Refs are human beings. Comments get stuck in their heads, too. Still, early in the season, BU was one of the lowest penalized teams. Once Parker made a comment about officiating after one game, and then another soon after that, the parade to the box for the Terriers began and their PM went through the roof.

                  If Hockey East was doing whatever they could to make him happy, that wouldn't happen.

                  It's not the only example, but it's one of them.

                  C) Look, these legends about leagues having favorite coaches or teams or players - valid or not - happen in every sport at every level.

                  I'm pretty sure Jordan got away with moves that other players wouldn't because he was Michael Jordan (tm). It has been demonstrated over time that officials tend to call games ever so slightly in favor of the teams that they think are going to win, or players with better reputations for talent. Michael Irvin could push off and get away with it and Deion Sanders could bump a little more than other DBs while the ball was in the air. It probably took a lot less of a touch to get called for interference defending Gretzky than it would covering some grinding fourth-liner trying to spring a counter-attack.

                  Without spinning this off into a doctoral thesis - and I think there are pages of discussion to be had on this topic - what you'll notice is central to this premise is that these fan legends always surround successful teams/players/coaches. No one complains that the three-win team at the bottom of the league is getting all the calls.

                  I will put to you that perhaps this mindset you have about the league office being in the tank for Parker filters down from the '90s when BU and Maine were arguably the two most successful programs in the league and led by two coaches that drew a lot of attention by their dynamic personalities. Walsh drew a lot of negative press after the recruiting scandal, so opposing fans would dismiss him as a Cheater, regardless of all of the good things he did not only for his team, but for the league. In Parker's case, since he was vocal, opposing fans always think he's somehow swaying something by arguing this or working that.

                  (It's pretty childish of them, but, hey, what are you going to do? If you're a fan and your team keeps losing, the other coach as to be evil, right? If you have tape or data, show it - which is something that Walsh was excellent at doing - see "Gionta Rule". Otherwise, if you are hypothesizing a fantasy, that's just yet another story.)

                  Now, however, people talk about the Big Four like it's an established thing because UNH has become about as successful in the league on a multi-year basis as BU and Maine (yes, I know, no NCAA titles for UNH yet), and BC has been among the most successful teams in the nation for around a decade (some would claim best outright, and three of the last five NCAA titles certainly helps that argument), along with winning six of the last eight league tourneys (with BU taking the other two).

                  So riddle me this, Batman: If you were to look at this objectively - say you were to create a conspiracy theory anew - given the recent successes of all the teams in the league, do you think it's more likely that the league would be in Jack Parker's pocket... or Jerry York's?

                  I'm not saying that it's either - but I am suggesting it's time to get a new roll of Reynolds Wrap for your hat. The one you have is a little worn.
                  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

                    Todd's last 3 posts:
                    1:47 a.m.
                    2:48 a.m.
                    4:12 a.m.

                    Todd, I'm sticking to what I said last week about your caffeine intake. :-)

                    Excellent continued analyses, and well-reasoned/written.
                    We are usually convinced more easily by reasons we have found ourselves than by those which have occurred to others.
                    ---Blaise Pascal

                    When two opposite points of view are expressed with equal intensity, the truth does not necessarily lie exactly halfway between them. It is possible for one side to be simply wrong.
                    --Richard Dawkins

                    UNH Wildcats: Winners, 20XX NCAA Men's Hockey National Championship

                    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
                      Possible that BC could clinch Home Ice in the right scenario tomorrow.
                      ----
                      Any simple scenarios? Thanks

                      Comment


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

                        Originally posted by goblue View Post
                        Todd's last 3 posts:
                        1:47 a.m.
                        2:48 a.m.
                        4:12 a.m.

                        Todd, I'm sticking to what I said last week about your caffeine intake. :-)

                        Excellent continued analyses, and well-reasoned/written.
                        or he has sleeping issues like some of us
                        *****

                        Comment


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

                          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.
                          #NewMass

                          Comment


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

                            Originally posted by jjmc85 View Post
                            the league did appear to benefit BU with a rule change at the end of the season.
                            Bertanga makes another on my #KeepParker campaign! You guys better jump on before there's no room

                            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
                              Bertanga makes another on my #KeepParker campaign! You guys better jump on before there's no room
                              hahhahahhaha!! i love it!
                              *****

                              Comment


                              • 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.
                                Win more games and you won't have to visit the grassy knoll
                                UNH Hockey: From "Why Not Us' to "Woe is Us"

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X