UML Riverhawks @ UVM Catamounts: Because Monty said so...

[UVM Cat in Texas]

Re: UML Riverhawks @ UVM Catamounts: Because Monty said so...

Well here are the keys to the game...

Pop in an early goal against Boyle. He'll start to question whether he is as good as his numbers or if playing the cupcakes have them overinflated.
Then score again shortly there after.
Next don't let UML score. Considering they have put up an average of 2.4 goals on the bottom of the barrel teams averaging 2.7 GAA they will get easily frustrated.
For Vermont the key will to be demonstrate that the numbers obtained from playing cupcakes are overinflated.


The key for Lowell is to prove those numbers are real and that their lackluster opponents to date aren't the reason behind their success.


I think Lowell comes in with a bit of a fat head from their easy schedule so far and their recently garnered poll ranking and get knocked down a peg by a team that likely just got reamed out by their coach for managing only 3 HE points on the weekend. Lowell responds the following night after the embarrassing loss.

Split.

UVM 4-2
UML 3-2

Question for you: have you been impressed with the quality of Lowell's opponents this year?

[jcarter7669]

Re: UML Riverhawks @ UVM Catamounts: Because Monty said so...

Question for you: have you been impressed with the quality of Lowell's opponents this year?

Well those two ties against MC ... most impressive.

[ScottK]

Re: UML Riverhawks @ UVM Catamounts: Because Monty said so...

Thoughts on playing the game at a neutral site to give UVM a better shot?

The last time these two teams met was at a neutral site. It didn't go so well for UVM: http://www.hockeyeastonline.com/men/...p?mumlver1.m20

[ScottK]

Re: UML Riverhawks @ UVM Catamounts: Because Monty said so...

Apparently jcarter doesn't realize that Lowell has played 2 games this past weekend, on the road, against a higher ranked team, and ended up with a split that was punctuated by a 6-3 win on the 2nd night. He keeps harping on the lack of scoring and less-than-stellar quality of opponents Lowell has had, by conveniently ignoring those games.

[Fishhawk]

Re: UML Riverhawks @ UVM Catamounts: Because Monty said so...

Are red, white and blue bird jokes the best you can do?

It’s hard for us UML fans, who are used to Hockey East championship games and NCAA tournaments, to muster up some good sports hate prior to a series with a team whose players will probably be floating in a vomit-laced cheap Daytona motel pool in March instead of competing for a spot in Tampa. Ho hum, ok I’ll give it a try. The Lowell-Vermont rivalry just isn’t what it once was because UML has elevated it’s program to elite status while Vermont has remained a pesky also-ran. I can sympathize with VT fans ongoing pain as UML used to be that team who played everyone tough and worked so hard but always came up short in the end. I also have huge respect for the folks on the Vermont board who stay loyal to their team through thick and thin, or uh, thin and thinner. I must admit these two teams have had some hard fought battles over the last 5 seasons but the end result has been 10-4-3 in Lowell’s favor including 2 season-ending eliminations from the Hockey East Tournament. Dayum that must be frustrating. Even in UML’s aberration year 2010-2011 when they managed only 10 Hockey East points, 3 were against UVM for a series split. Now that I’ve bothered to go back that far I wonder when was the last time VT actually won a season series with Lowell? WOW 2007-2008!?! Could that be right? OUCH! 7 seasons of not quite good enough to beat Lowell.

I guess I answered my own original question. Red, white and blue bird jokes ARE the best you can do. 

[ScottK]

Re: UML Riverhawks @ UVM Catamounts: Because Monty said so...

One more point for jcarter to chew on:

Strength of schedule rank using KRACH:

UML 16
UVM 41

Strength of schedule rank using RPI:

UML 3
UVM 49

But Lowell's the one that's been playing cupcakes.

[Go-UML]

Re: UML Riverhawks @ UVM Catamounts: Because Monty said so...

Apparently jcarter doesn't realize that Lowell has played 2 games this past weekend, on the road, against a higher ranked team, and ended up with a split that was punctuated by a 6-3 win on the 2nd night. He keeps harping on the lack of scoring and less-than-stellar quality of opponents Lowell has had, by conveniently ignoring those games.

Please tell me the last time jcarter concerned himself with facts. Hint, the year doesn't start with the number '2'

[UML Puck Hawk]

Please tell me the last time jcarter concerned himself with facts. Hint, the year doesn't start with the number '2'

I don't know, last year he cited a legit SOS stat as some reason UVM would win. For some reason he's no longer embracing that stat as law this year.

[ScottK]

Re: UML Riverhawks @ UVM Catamounts: Because Monty said so...

I don't know, last year he cited a legit SOS stat as some reason UVM would win. For some reason he's no longer embracing that stat as law this year.

He'll dismiss it as small sample size.

[jcarter7669]

Re: UML Riverhawks @ UVM Catamounts: Because Monty said so...

Apparently jcarter doesn't realize that Lowell has played 2 games this past weekend, on the road, against a higher ranked team, and ended up with a split that was punctuated by a 6-3 win on the 2nd night. He keeps harping on the lack of scoring and less-than-stellar quality of opponents Lowell has had, by conveniently ignoring those games.

No, I'm just not impressed with one game.

[jcarter7669]

Re: UML Riverhawks @ UVM Catamounts: Because Monty said so...

He'll dismiss it as small sample size.

Ive already addressed it. I do realize you have a hard time with reading and research, but I'm sure you can find it. Here's a hint, check the Lowell season thread...

Still can't figure it out? Fine.

Yes sample size. Anyone with a brain (I can see where you are confused) can see that a team that has played #9, #2,#2, #1,#1, NR. NR. has had a tougher schedule then a team that has played NR, NR, NR, #19, #19, #6, #6.

Yes, polls aren't statistics but just look at some of them. You have teams with a losing record that have a higher RPI then an undefeated team for crying out loud. In fact you have winless teams (CC at 0-8-0) that is ranked higher then undefeated Harvard. That's why I ain't bringing it up.

And last year as noted I was trotting out the SOS at the END of the season.... when it was actually accurate.

Now, On a positive note a win for Vermont would have some tremendous affects with Lowell plummeting and Vermont skyrocketing by beating an over rated #4.

[ScottK]

Re: UML Riverhawks @ UVM Catamounts: Because Monty said so...

Ive already addressed it. I do realize you have a hard time with reading and research, but I'm sure you can find it. Here's a hint, check the Lowell season thread...

Still can't figure it out? Fine.

Yes sample size. Anyone with a brain (I can see where you are confused) can see that a team that has played #9, #2,#2, #1,#1, NR. NR. has had a tougher schedule then a team that has played NR, NR, NR, #19, #19, #6, #6.

Yes, polls aren't statistics but just look at some of them. You have teams with a losing record that have a higher RPI then an undefeated team for crying out loud. In fact you have winless teams (CC at 0-8-0) that is ranked higher then undefeated Harvard. That's why I ain't bringing it up.

And last year as noted I was trotting out the SOS at the END of the season.... when it was actually accurate.

Now, On a positive note a win for Vermont would have some tremendous affects with Lowell plummeting and Vermont skyrocketing by beating an over rated #4.

So you put more belief in subjective numbers that are basically a popularity contest instead of statistics?

"undefeated Harvard" - now that made me chuckle. They've played 2 games.

[jcarter7669]

Re: UML Riverhawks @ UVM Catamounts: Because Monty said so...

So you put more belief in subjective numbers that are basically a popularity contest instead of statistics?

Nope but I don't put much belief in statistics when they aren't accurate either due to extreme fluctuations and small sample size. Actually year what you said. When statistics are clearly wonky I believe subjective numbers more. You know the UML famous eyeball test.

"undefeated Harvard" - now that made me chuckle. They've played 2 games.

See what I mean when I say I don't put much faith in statistics when the sample size is low. You get 0-8-0 CC having a higher RPI then 2-0-0 Harvard. When situations like this occur you have to use the old eyeball test.

[ScottK]

Re: UML Riverhawks @ UVM Catamounts: Because Monty said so...

Nope but I don't put much belief in statistics when they aren't accurate either due to extreme fluctuations and small sample size. Actually year what you said. When statistics are clearly wonky I believe subjective numbers more. You know the UML famous eyeball test.

Translation: "I use statistics that only fit my argument. When they don't, then obviously there's something wrong with the numbers."

[jcarter7669]

Re: UML Riverhawks @ UVM Catamounts: Because Monty said so...

Translation: "I use statistics that only fit my argument. When they don't, then obviously there's something wrong with the numbers."

Not always...

For example, you don't here me say 4 out of 5 Lowell Fans are crackheads and therefore don't listen to anything they say. See, sometimes I leave out useful statistics.