>>> RIT Tigers 2018/2019 - Time For The Tigers to Roar <<<

[komey1]

Re: >>> RIT Tigers 2018/2019 - Time For The Tigers to Roar <<<

So Jim Dahl posted a PWR "what if" calculator type thing (see the article that he links to in the thread he started), so I was curious what type of season RIT would have had to had to get an at-large bid in a year where RIT played high quality non-conference opposition but where Atlantic Hockey also had somewhat of a down year.

It turns out being right about where I thought they would have to be. I gave them a 4-2 OOC record (splits vs. UMass and Arizona State, wins vs. NE and Colgate) and a 20-7-1 conference record, and that put them squarely on the bubble when combined with a 3 game series loss to Sacred Heart (granted, they would be playing weaker opposition in this round with that type of conference record, but they also would be more likely to win this round and lose in the semis or finals in this scenario if they needed an at-large bid). It placed them at #14.

Obviously all of this is slightly dependent on which teams they lost to and which teams they beat - I tried to split up the losses in a realistic way based on the league's standings. But it's evidence that an at-large bid is possible even in a down year of Atlantic Hockey, if your non-conference schedule is good enough (which, granted, comes down to a bit of luck that the teams you play end up being good). And for the record, since Atlantic Hockey went to a 28 game schedule 5 years ago, 3 different teams have reached the 41 point mark (Canisius and Air Force in 2016-17 and Robert Morris in 2014-15).

This is part of the reason Coach Wilson sets up the non-conference schedule the way he does. Win some of those games and it gives you a chance for an at large if the teams play up to as expected. I would be curious in your scenario where RIT loses both to A-State, but holds on to be Northeastern.
As an aside, nobody had a 20 win conference season this year for Atlantic Hockey.

[jflory81]

Re: >>> RIT Tigers 2018/2019 - Time For The Tigers to Roar <<<

This is part of the reason Coach Wilson sets up the non-conference schedule the way he does. Win some of those games and it gives you a chance for an at large if the teams play up to as expected. I would be curious in your scenario where RIT loses both to A-State, but holds on to be Northeastern.
As an aside, nobody had a 20 win conference season this year for Atlantic Hockey.

They had already beaten Northeastern in my scenario (4-2 non-conference with both 2 game series ending in splits, and wins in the two singleton games), but if they swept UMass Lowell and got swept by Arizona State they would be around the same (I don't remember exactly which conference games I had assigned as losses, so I can't exactly duplicate the scenario.) But it appears that being swept by Arizona State and sweeping UMass Lowell would have them one spot lower (15 instead of 14) than if they had split with both.

As to no one having a 20 win season this year, a couple things. (1)20 wins isn't neccessarily required, the 41 total points is really the important number. Switching a couple wins and a couple losses to ties to give RIT a 18-5-5 record results in the same pairwise ranking. In fact, all 3 teams that have reached that point total in Atlantic Hockey over the past 3 years have done so with less than 20 wins.

And (2), I don't believe that any Atlantic Hockey team this year deserves an at-large bid, so it's not really a surprise no one got to 41 points. I think it was a down year overall for the league, and given that the bottom of the league is considerably better than in the past, most of the decline is at the top of the conference. AIC won the conference and was outscored 31-10 in 6 non-conference games (admittedly against even better competition than we faced). The conference overall was about .060 of winning percentage worse this year than the last two years, which is about 5 wins difference. It wouldn't surprise me to see whoever comes out of the AHA playoffs to get shellacked by the #1 seed this year - even though most years the team that comes out of the league's tournament is both playing well enough and on enough of a roll to give the #1 seed a fight.

That's part of the reason this season was so frustrating - I firmly believe RIT had the most talented team in the conference this year, and that most of what's holding them back is mental (mainly a lack of a killer instinct and an inability to play a full 60 minute game). I think RIT could give the top seed a fight if they get themselves together, but at the same time having choked out of the playoffs the last two years (no other way to put losing to the bottom seed back to back years, sorry) doesn't fill me with too much confidence.

[Ed Trefzger]

Re: >>> RIT Tigers 2018/2019 - Time For The Tigers to Roar <<<

I think it was a down year overall for the league ...

Here's where it was really down: goaltending. Chris Lerch tweeted this information out recently. These are awful numbers:

Team save percentages in #atlantichockey:
1. Air Force .906
2. RIT .903
T3. Bentley .900
T3. Sacred Heart .900
5. Mercyhurst .897
6. Holy Cross .892
T7. Niagara .891
T7. Robert Morris .891
9. Army WP .887
10. Canisius .885
11. AIC .876

Not what I expected.

— Chris Lerch (@chrislerch) March 1, 2019

[Ed Trefzger]

Re: >>> RIT Tigers 2018/2019 - Time For The Tigers to Roar <<<

These are awful numbers

However, RIT improved from .872 to .903 from last season (actually .904 as of today) and a GAA improvement of about a half a goal per game.

[jflory81]

Re: >>> RIT Tigers 2018/2019 - Time For The Tigers to Roar <<<

Here's where it was really down: goaltending. Chris Lerch tweeted this information out recently. These are awful numbers:

Team save percentages in #atlantichockey:
1. Air Force .906
2. RIT .903
T3. Bentley .900
T3. Sacred Heart .900
5. Mercyhurst .897
6. Holy Cross .892
T7. Niagara .891
T7. Robert Morris .891
9. Army WP .887
10. Canisius .885
11. AIC .876

Not what I expected.

— Chris Lerch (@chrislerch) March 1, 2019

Woof. No kidding. For those wondering (because I have that kind of time today at work), other Atlantic Hockey goaltenders had a .908 save% against RIT.

I would say that a little bit of caution is needed in saying that these numbers are solely down to goaltending - I suspect the relative styles of AIC and Air Force play into their respective save %'s, and shoddy play in front of the netminder can have just as big of an effect on save % numbers than the actual quality of the goaltender. I do think these numbers show that there was a lot less of the old shell style of play in the conference that used to give RIT fits around 5 years ago or so...that strategy would be death with numbers like these.

[Russell Jaslow]

Re: >>> RIT Tigers 2018/2019 - Time For The Tigers to Roar <<<

Here's where it was really down: goaltending. Chris Lerch tweeted this information out recently. These are awful numbers:

Team save percentages in #atlantichockey:
1. Air Force .906
2. RIT .903
T3. Bentley .900
T3. Sacred Heart .900
5. Mercyhurst .897
6. Holy Cross .892
T7. Niagara .891
T7. Robert Morris .891
9. Army WP .887
10. Canisius .885
11. AIC .876

Not what I expected.

— Chris Lerch (@chrislerch) March 1, 2019

Every time I see those numbers, it blows my mind that AIC is last. And with a horrible number.

[jflory81]

Re: >>> RIT Tigers 2018/2019 - Time For The Tigers to Roar <<<

Every time I see those numbers, it blows my mind that AIC is last. And with a horrible number.

Those numbers include non-conference games. AIC gave up more than 6 goals a game non-conference. That will put a hurting on your number. Their non-conference save % was .838, while their main goalie carried an .898 over 23 conference games. Which isn't great, but it's good enough to win with when your team is scoring more than 3 and a half per game.

[komey1]

Re: >>> RIT Tigers 2018/2019 - Time For The Tigers to Roar <<<

So goals will be at a premium in the RIT/Sacred Heart games.

I think the real issue lately is that the only lines RIT seems to be able to get scoring from lately are the top line (though getting Valenzuela back would be huge) and the freshman line lately. Caverely and Walker have put up nice numbers for rookies and their improvement will be important in upcoming years.

[komey1]

Re: >>> RIT Tigers 2018/2019 - Time For The Tigers to Roar <<<

Looking at conference numbers further and assuming RIT starts Drackett and SHU starts Benson, Drackett faces on average over 6 more shots per game than Benson. So while Benson has the better GAA, Drackett has the better save percentage.

[TigerFan86-87]

Re: >>> RIT Tigers 2018/2019 - Time For The Tigers to Roar <<<

Woof. No kidding. For those wondering (because I have that kind of time today at work), other Atlantic Hockey goaltenders had a .908 save% against RIT.

Hard evidence of the Tigers' lack of finishing ability right there.

[CornwallAce]

Re: >>> RIT Tigers 2018/2019 - Time For The Tigers to Roar <<<

Whoa. I went to check what games were on TV tonight, and I scrolled too far. USCHO is listing Game #1 between RIT and SH as Wednesday.

[komey1]

Re: >>> RIT Tigers 2018/2019 - Time For The Tigers to Roar <<<

Whoa. I went to check what games were on TV tonight, and I scrolled too far. USCHO is listing Game #1 between RIT and SH as Wednesday.

That is correct. It is Wednesday-Friday.

[TigerFan86-87]

Re: >>> RIT Tigers 2018/2019 - Time For The Tigers to Roar <<<

So after seeing RIT be slapped with a 5:00 major (and game misconduct) for Interference (???) against RMU a couple weeks ago, I thought I had seen it all. I didn't even know it was possible that interference could be made into a 5:00 major. In well over 35 years of watching hockey, I literally can't remember having seen that before. I just figured our favorite AHA refs are just that bad, however... In yesterday's Amerks vs Binghamton game, they called a 5:00 major for Interference on a very similar kind of hit. Sure, the guy was shaken up, but if you can't identify anything illegal in the "intent to injure" or "risk of injury" category, how is that a major penalty? In both cases, the hits themselves appeared to be legal, except for the fact that the player was not in possession of the puck, which should make it simply a 2:00 interference penalty. if their rationale is that the player being hit didn't see it coming, you would think they would make it a 5:00 major for hitting from behind, or charging instead. Is this some new crackdown on interference I hadn't heard about?

[jflory81]

Re: >>> RIT Tigers 2018/2019 - Time For The Tigers to Roar <<<

So after seeing RIT be slapped with a 5:00 major (and game misconduct) for Interference (???) against RMU a couple weeks ago, I thought I had seen it all. I didn't even know it was possible that interference could be made into a 5:00 major. In well over 35 years of watching hockey, I literally had never seen that before. I just figured our favorite AHA refs are just that bad, however... In yesterday's Amerks vs Binghamton game, they called a 5:00 major for Interference on a very similar kind of hit. Sure, the guy was shaken up, but if you can't identify anything illegal in the "intent to injure" or "risk of injury" category, how is that a major penalty? In both cases, the hits themselves appeared to be legal, except for the fact that the player was not in possession of the puck, which should make it simply a 2:00 interference penalty. if their rationale is that the player being hit didn't see it coming, you would think they would make it a 5:00 major for hitting from behind, or charging instead. Is this some new crackdown on interference I hadn't heard about?

As long as I can remember officials have had the discretion to make interference a major - generally for blind side hits where the guy who got hit doesn't see it coming. It's certainly not the first time I've seen it. It's interference because the guy doesn't have the puck.

From the NCAA rulebook: Interference with Significant Contact - The Referee, at his discretion, may assess the following penalty based on the severity of the contact to a player guilty of interfering with an opponent. PENALTY – Major. A game misconduct or disqualification may be assessed at the discretion of the referee. A player delivering a check to an unsuspecting and vulnerable player puts themselves in jeopardy of being penalized under this rule. Officials are to pay particular attention to these examples when applying this rule. These are intended as guidance and include, but are not limited to, the following:• A player that is reckless;• A player that has just released a shot or pass;• A player that is about to receive a pass; or• A player that delivers a late hit.

[Russell Jaslow]

Re: >>> RIT Tigers 2018/2019 - Time For The Tigers to Roar <<<

So after seeing RIT be slapped with a 5:00 major (and game misconduct) for Interference (???) against RMU a couple weeks ago, I thought I had seen it all. I didn't even know it was possible that interference could be made into a 5:00 major. In well over 35 years of watching hockey, I literally had never seen that before. I just figured our favorite AHA refs are just that bad, however... In yesterday's Amerks vs Binghamton game, they called a 5:00 major for Interference on a very similar kind of hit. Sure, the guy was shaken up, but if you can't identify anything illegal in the "intent to injure" or "risk of injury" category, how is that a major penalty? In both cases, the hits themselves appeared to be legal, except for the fact that the player was not in possession of the puck, which should make it simply a 2:00 interference penalty. if their rationale is that the player being hit didn't see it coming, you would think they would make it a 5:00 major for hitting from behind, or charging instead. Is this some new crackdown on interference I hadn't heard about?

I've seen it plenty of times over many years. I don't find it odd at all.