USCHO Fan Forum
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.
Boston College Hockey 2009-2010
- Thread starter vellnueve
- Start date
- Status
FiveHole12
Registered User
Re: Boston College Hockey 2009-2010
No... it means VT is far superior to both BC AND BU, even if they did lose to the Mack.Wow, they beat ND. Didn't see that coming!
If BC beat ND, and ND beat BU, does that mean we beat BU by extension?? That'd be doubly sweet.
Re: Boston College Hockey 2009-2010
So, Merrimack must be the undisputed king of college hockey. Thus, the world has come to an end and no one noticed.
No... it means VT is far superior to both BC AND BU, even if they did lose to the Mack.
So, Merrimack must be the undisputed king of college hockey. Thus, the world has come to an end and no one noticed.
FiveHole12
Registered User
Re: Boston College Hockey 2009-2010
But actually... the Mack has some players and no one noticed.
But actually... the Mack has some players and no one noticed.
Re: Boston College Hockey 2009-2010
Looks like Joey Whitney has some jump in his step this year. Remember the team results the last time he had a big scoring year? You have to love to see the production from the upperclassmen, because once the frosh get some experience and confidence, this will be a national contending team.
That's a big win on the road early in the season.
Looks like Joey Whitney has some jump in his step this year. Remember the team results the last time he had a big scoring year? You have to love to see the production from the upperclassmen, because once the frosh get some experience and confidence, this will be a national contending team.
That's a big win on the road early in the season.
IrishHockeyFan
Still outranks his daughter
Re: Boston College Hockey 2009-2010
Congrats to the Eagles on the win last night. What were you folks expecting out of Pat Mullane? I thought his time on the ice was pretty exciting. BC always has a player like him. He looked quick and smart and anticipated plays exceptionally well, I thought. Skated a fourth line last night, I think, but this guy looks like he could help shut down anyone's top couple of lines if need be.
Congrats to the Eagles on the win last night. What were you folks expecting out of Pat Mullane? I thought his time on the ice was pretty exciting. BC always has a player like him. He looked quick and smart and anticipated plays exceptionally well, I thought. Skated a fourth line last night, I think, but this guy looks like he could help shut down anyone's top couple of lines if need be.
SteveF
* * * * *
Re: Boston College Hockey 2009-2010
Might not seem like it, but that was a huge win. Notre Dame has played well against BC and it's always nice beating them, especially in their building. Nice to win whatever trophy they play for
BC hasn't started 0-2 since dropping a weekend series at Bowling Green way back in 1996...wow.
We don't have much to go by, so I'm gonna include the exhibitions:
St. Francis Xavier: 16 SA; 5-6 on the PK
USNTDP: 24 SA; 7-8 on PK
Vermont: 20 SA; 5-6 on PK
Notre Dame: 22 SA; 8-8 on PK
To me, this season is about getting back to some basics. Solid goaltending, effective special teams, limiting opportunities/blocking shots, staying out of the box, protecting the lead...
How many times did BC lose a late lead last season? That's one reason why hanging on to win Friday is encouraging.
Certainly not perfect thru two games, but consider the opponents and venues. I know I would have taken 1-1 before the season started...
Hopefully we see some improvement with the PP and Muse against Merrimack. I think the Warriors have gotten York's attention with their win over Vermont. Latest non-exhibition home opener since '98.
Might not seem like it, but that was a huge win. Notre Dame has played well against BC and it's always nice beating them, especially in their building. Nice to win whatever trophy they play for
BC hasn't started 0-2 since dropping a weekend series at Bowling Green way back in 1996...wow.
We don't have much to go by, so I'm gonna include the exhibitions:
St. Francis Xavier: 16 SA; 5-6 on the PK
USNTDP: 24 SA; 7-8 on PK
Vermont: 20 SA; 5-6 on PK
Notre Dame: 22 SA; 8-8 on PK
To me, this season is about getting back to some basics. Solid goaltending, effective special teams, limiting opportunities/blocking shots, staying out of the box, protecting the lead...
How many times did BC lose a late lead last season? That's one reason why hanging on to win Friday is encouraging.
Certainly not perfect thru two games, but consider the opponents and venues. I know I would have taken 1-1 before the season started...
Hopefully we see some improvement with the PP and Muse against Merrimack. I think the Warriors have gotten York's attention with their win over Vermont. Latest non-exhibition home opener since '98.
Re: Boston College Hockey 2009-2010
Might be a tough opponent to improve on, at least in the area of special teams. (Of course, now that I've said this the game will probably end up making me eat my words, but here goes anyway.)
Through six games (two against ND and one each against Holy Cross, Army, Vermont and Uconn) Merrimack's power play is at 8/32 with one shorthanded goal against for 25%. BC's penalty kill through two games is 25/30 for 83%. It is worth noting that not all of MC's powerplay goals were against the weaker teams. They went 2 for 6 against Vermont in last week's win, which was 33%, higher than their average.
Merrimack's penalty kill has also been decent, killing 30/33 for a 90.9% mark. BC's powerplay is only 1/12 through two games, for 8.3%. BC went 0 for 8 against Vermont in their 4-1 loss.
So MC's PK so far has been pretty good, while BC's powerplay has not been particularly effective. If both of those trends continue, BC may struggle on the powerplay against Merrimack.
Merrimack's powerplay has been decent, but BC's kill has also been quite good. However, even if BC holds Merrimack to a lower conversion rate than average it could mean a powerplay goal for the Warriors.
So there's not much overlap in the efficiencies of the two school's special teams. MC is already killing penalties at a better rate than BC is converting powerplay chances, and MC is scoring slightly more often on the powerplay than BC's opponents to date. If all those trends were to continue, you'd expect Merrimack to fare better than the Eagles on special teams this weekend. Of course, that's a big if.
(Note: I'm taking BC's kills stats from your table above but the PP stats from the HE page, which I think does not include the two exhibition contests. Merrimack played no exhibition contests this season; one was scheduled but not played when the opponent had logistical problems arranging the trip.)
BC took the series last season 2-0-1. The first game was a 4-1 win, the second was a 4-3 OT win, and the last was a 5-5 tie. You could consider those games virtually decided by special teams play.
In the 4-1 win by BC, BC's powerplay was 2/9 while Merrimack's was 0/3.
In the 4-3 win by BC, BC's powerplay was 3/7 while Merrimack's was 0/2. Merrimack was actually leading after 2 periods. BC tied it up in the third-- on the powerplay.
In the 5-5 tie, BC's powerplay was 3/9 and Merrimack's was 2/6. Being able to get opportunities and convert was the difference between a loss and a tie. Merrimack's game-tying goal in that game was... yup, on the powerplay.
Admittedly it's so early that it's not hard to throw out statistics completely, but special teams are important, and since you brought them up...
Might not seem like it, but that was a huge win. Notre Dame has played well against BC and it's always nice beating them, especially in their building. Nice to win whatever trophy they play for
BC hasn't started 0-2 since dropping a weekend series at Bowling Green way back in 1996...wow.
We don't have much to go by, so I'm gonna include the exhibitions:
St. Francis Xavier: 16 SA; 5-6 on the PK
USNTDP: 24 SA; 7-8 on PK
Vermont: 20 SA; 5-6 on PK
Notre Dame: 22 SA; 8-8 on PK
[snip]
Hopefully we see some improvement with the PP and Muse against Merrimack. I think the Warriors have gotten York's attention with their win over Vermont. Latest non-exhibition home opener since '98.
Might be a tough opponent to improve on, at least in the area of special teams. (Of course, now that I've said this the game will probably end up making me eat my words, but here goes anyway.)
Through six games (two against ND and one each against Holy Cross, Army, Vermont and Uconn) Merrimack's power play is at 8/32 with one shorthanded goal against for 25%. BC's penalty kill through two games is 25/30 for 83%. It is worth noting that not all of MC's powerplay goals were against the weaker teams. They went 2 for 6 against Vermont in last week's win, which was 33%, higher than their average.
Merrimack's penalty kill has also been decent, killing 30/33 for a 90.9% mark. BC's powerplay is only 1/12 through two games, for 8.3%. BC went 0 for 8 against Vermont in their 4-1 loss.
So MC's PK so far has been pretty good, while BC's powerplay has not been particularly effective. If both of those trends continue, BC may struggle on the powerplay against Merrimack.
Merrimack's powerplay has been decent, but BC's kill has also been quite good. However, even if BC holds Merrimack to a lower conversion rate than average it could mean a powerplay goal for the Warriors.
So there's not much overlap in the efficiencies of the two school's special teams. MC is already killing penalties at a better rate than BC is converting powerplay chances, and MC is scoring slightly more often on the powerplay than BC's opponents to date. If all those trends were to continue, you'd expect Merrimack to fare better than the Eagles on special teams this weekend. Of course, that's a big if.
(Note: I'm taking BC's kills stats from your table above but the PP stats from the HE page, which I think does not include the two exhibition contests. Merrimack played no exhibition contests this season; one was scheduled but not played when the opponent had logistical problems arranging the trip.)
BC took the series last season 2-0-1. The first game was a 4-1 win, the second was a 4-3 OT win, and the last was a 5-5 tie. You could consider those games virtually decided by special teams play.
In the 4-1 win by BC, BC's powerplay was 2/9 while Merrimack's was 0/3.
In the 4-3 win by BC, BC's powerplay was 3/7 while Merrimack's was 0/2. Merrimack was actually leading after 2 periods. BC tied it up in the third-- on the powerplay.
In the 5-5 tie, BC's powerplay was 3/9 and Merrimack's was 2/6. Being able to get opportunities and convert was the difference between a loss and a tie. Merrimack's game-tying goal in that game was... yup, on the powerplay.
Admittedly it's so early that it's not hard to throw out statistics completely, but special teams are important, and since you brought them up...
Last edited:
FiveHole12
Registered User
Re: Boston College Hockey 2009-2010
Didn't check the rest of the stats, but I thought that one was off. The PK has been very good.
Edit: Oh... I see. Those stats include the exhibitions on JD's post. Those don't mean squat.
BC's penalty kill is 13/14 for 92.9%.
Didn't check the rest of the stats, but I thought that one was off. The PK has been very good.
Edit: Oh... I see. Those stats include the exhibitions on JD's post. Those don't mean squat.
Last edited:
theprofromdover
The Original Dope Detector
Re: Boston College Hockey 2009-2010
This is like asking what time it is and getting the history of clockmaking in Switzerland.
Might be a tough opponent to improve on, at least in the area of special teams. (Of course, now that I've said this the game will probably end up making me eat my words, but here goes anyway.)
Through six games (two against ND and one each against Holy Cross, Army, Vermont and Uconn) Merrimack's power play is at 8/32 with one shorthanded goal against for 25%. BC's penalty kill through two games is 25/30 for 83%. It is worth noting that not all of MC's powerplay goals were against the weaker teams. They went 2 for 6 against Vermont in last week's win, which was 33%, higher than their average.
Merrimack's penalty kill has also been decent, killing 30/33 for a 90.9% mark. BC's powerplay is only 1/12 through two games, for 8.3%. BC went 0 for 8 against Vermont in their 4-1 loss.
So MC's PK so far has been pretty good, while BC's powerplay has not been particularly effective. If both of those trends continue, BC may struggle on the powerplay against Merrimack.
Merrimack's powerplay has been decent, but BC's kill has also been quite good. However, even if BC holds Merrimack to a lower conversion rate than average it could mean a powerplay goal for the Warriors.
So there's not much overlap in the efficiencies of the two school's special teams. MC is already killing penalties at a better rate than BC is converting powerplay chances, and MC is scoring slightly more often on the powerplay than BC's opponents to date. If all those trends were to continue, you'd expect Merrimack to fare better than the Eagles on special teams this weekend. Of course, that's a big if.
(Note: I'm taking BC's kills stats from your table above but the PP stats from the HE page, which I think does not include the two exhibition contests. Merrimack played no exhibition contests this season; one was scheduled but not played when the opponent had logistical problems arranging the trip.)
BC took the series last season 2-0-1. The first game was a 4-1 win, the second was a 4-3 OT win, and the last was a 5-5 tie. You could consider those games virtually decided by special teams play.
In the 4-1 win by BC, BC's powerplay was 2/9 while Merrimack's was 0/3.
In the 4-3 win by BC, BC's powerplay was 3/7 while Merrimack's was 0/2. Merrimack was actually leading after 2 periods. BC tied it up in the third-- on the powerplay.
In the 5-5 tie, BC's powerplay was 3/9 and Merrimack's was 2/6. Being able to get opportunities and convert was the difference between a loss and a tie. Merrimack's game-tying goal in that game was... yup, on the powerplay.
Admittedly it's so early that it's not hard to throw out statistics completely, but special teams are important, and since you brought them up...
This is like asking what time it is and getting the history of clockmaking in Switzerland.
Zudnic
Clear Eyes, Full Hearts, Can't Lose
Re: Boston College Hockey 2009-2010
I thought the post was great. How often do we get cohesive, fact-based arguments around here? You'd prefer mudslinging?
Kudos to dmjossel for an informed post.
I thought the post was great. How often do we get cohesive, fact-based arguments around here? You'd prefer mudslinging?
Kudos to dmjossel for an informed post.
Re: Boston College Hockey 2009-2010
I think the comments referrenced above are all interesting and will probably have some bearing on the outcomes of this weekends games. The things that have me excited about this team are...speed up front, which has and will continue to put significant pressure on most teams the Eagles play if they continue to transition strongly out of their own end. The forwards look eager to go but willing to support in their own end! The defense looks better then age of group would suggest after only two contests...Sneep and Dumoulin, Cross and Wey, Shea and Samuellson, seem to be very "comfortable" on the ice and the staff seems to be equally "comfortable" with them in most situations. Special teams: PK looks strong so far as players have been willing to work hard and sacrifice coupled with strong goaltending. PP needs to improve and will as time goes on. Quicker and smoother distribution at the top along with more action in front of the net will get this group going. Our defense is "big" and they seem to move quite well with and without the puck. The willingness to defend physically will pay dividends as the season goes on. As with all teams at this level consistent goaltending is a most for overall team success and Muse seems to be seeing the puck very well and moving laterally very well. Most of all these kids seem to like one another and the integration of a lot of young talent has seemed seamless so far which is a real testimony of the quality of this coaching staff. Disgesting so many new players into key roles while retaining the chemistry of the club is very hard to do! They not only have maintained the chemistry but they might have enhanced it! If this club contiues to play "selfless" hockey they may develop into something very, very special down the road at just the right time. For now, let's just continue to support their success and appreciate their setbacks as part of their youth and maturation. This is a special group from where I sit!
I think the comments referrenced above are all interesting and will probably have some bearing on the outcomes of this weekends games. The things that have me excited about this team are...speed up front, which has and will continue to put significant pressure on most teams the Eagles play if they continue to transition strongly out of their own end. The forwards look eager to go but willing to support in their own end! The defense looks better then age of group would suggest after only two contests...Sneep and Dumoulin, Cross and Wey, Shea and Samuellson, seem to be very "comfortable" on the ice and the staff seems to be equally "comfortable" with them in most situations. Special teams: PK looks strong so far as players have been willing to work hard and sacrifice coupled with strong goaltending. PP needs to improve and will as time goes on. Quicker and smoother distribution at the top along with more action in front of the net will get this group going. Our defense is "big" and they seem to move quite well with and without the puck. The willingness to defend physically will pay dividends as the season goes on. As with all teams at this level consistent goaltending is a most for overall team success and Muse seems to be seeing the puck very well and moving laterally very well. Most of all these kids seem to like one another and the integration of a lot of young talent has seemed seamless so far which is a real testimony of the quality of this coaching staff. Disgesting so many new players into key roles while retaining the chemistry of the club is very hard to do! They not only have maintained the chemistry but they might have enhanced it! If this club contiues to play "selfless" hockey they may develop into something very, very special down the road at just the right time. For now, let's just continue to support their success and appreciate their setbacks as part of their youth and maturation. This is a special group from where I sit!
Re: Boston College Hockey 2009-2010
Always nice to see new posters. One piece of advice...use paragraphs
Going back to the seasons USCHO has on file, Merrimack is 0-14-2 at Conte. Looking at the BC media guide, that extends to 0-15-2 since Halloween night way back in 1997.
Always nice to see new posters. One piece of advice...use paragraphs
Going back to the seasons USCHO has on file, Merrimack is 0-14-2 at Conte. Looking at the BC media guide, that extends to 0-15-2 since Halloween night way back in 1997.
theprofromdover
The Original Dope Detector
Re: Boston College Hockey 2009-2010
This is straight out of Hockey For Nerds. I can understand your fascination.
This is straight out of Hockey For Nerds. I can understand your fascination.
- Status