What's new
By:
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 Women's Hockey, '13-'14: Can we please have a title this time? Please?

Re: Boston College Women's Hockey, '13-'14: Can we please have a title this time? Ple

TonyTheTiger20 said:
We played like utter dog crap.
Click to expand...

I would disagree with that. They played well, but weren't given many second chances by a stingy goalie and pretty solid net front play by the D.
 
Re: Boston College Women's Hockey, '13-'14: Can we please have a title this time? Ple

wwhyte said:
Nice article in The Heights, although their line predictions are a bit out of whack (forgetting that Emily Field is a forward, getting some of the numbers mixed up, etc): http://www.bcheightssports.com/2013/10/10/the-heights-2013-hockey-preview/

I enjoyed the closing quote:

“We’re going to get revenge on Minnesota, BU, Northeastern,” Field said.
“We’re going to get revenge on everybody,” Boyles echoed.
“We’re going to get revenge on everyone,” Mangene confirmed.
Then, Fields sealed the deal with a promise.
“Watch out, we’re coming after you.”
Click to expand...


Hmmm....They must not have needed to get revenge on UNH.
 
Re: Boston College Women's Hockey, '13-'14: Can we please have a title this time? Ple

BTW, Arlan, thanks for the great article this morning. Skarupa's speed has always made her fun to watch, but she's clearly playing smarter these days too -- instead of just racking up the shots on goal, she's finding nice ways to get around the defensemen (hilariously so, in this goal against Maine). She'll need all those smarts to manage the extra attention she'll get this year. Based on last night, she'll also need teammates who can take a pass...
 
Re: Boston College Women's Hockey, '13-'14: Can we please have a title this time? Ple

Coach Crowley shuffled the lines a bit after the trainwreck of Wednesday night: instead of the previous one-freshman-per-line approach, we have the "We will score unexpectedly" line of Bizarri, Capizzano and Leary, the Michigan line of Wasylk, McLean and Anastos, and the "Yes, we have a first line" line of Skarupa, Field and Trivigno. (In fact, the lines weren't stable even in these configurations, but they were the ones I saw most of). The Grieves / Lemieux / Doherty line is still together and saw some ice time last night. Lauren Wedell, freshman D, was dressed for the game but I didn't notice her on the ice.

Better game than Wednesday, but fewer defensive breakdowns please.
 
Re: Boston College Women's Hockey, '13-'14: Can we please have a title this time? Ple

BC wins 7-2. Field leads the way with a pair of goals. Six Eagles scored and 11 recorded points. This was much better... BC really dominated after another slow start.

Recap at BCInterruption.
 
Re: Boston College Women's Hockey, '13-'14: Can we please have a title this time? Ple

Just watched the second period online... boy, some of those goals were soft. Bit of a flattering scoreline -- not that the result was wrong, but tighter goaltending on the Dartmouth end could have kept it a lot closer. But this was definitely the Eagles' best performance of the week, they were faster and more together by far. Capizzano's delighted reaction to her goal seemed to be the spur to everyone else kicking it up a gear. The rankings will be a much tougher call next week than they seemed a few days ago.

Taylor Wasylk has scored 7 points in half as many games as it took her last year, and three goals in less than half as many games. Looking good to make an impact this season commensurate with her talent.
 
Re: Boston College Women's Hockey, '13-'14: Can we please have a title this time? Ple

Obviously we didn't need to get our revenge on Syracuse either... Beaten by a team that doesn't even have their own thread on these boards, for crying out loud.
 
Re: Boston College Women's Hockey, '13-'14: Can we please have a title this time? Ple

It's not the defense, it's the goaltending.

BC shots on goal are slightly down from last season, shot % is slightly down too, but nothing scary. (You can argue that the start of this season had weaker opponents then last season taken as a whole, and that's true, but I don't think it's the main problem).

Opponents shots on goal are basically the same, but opponent shot % is up from .08 to .1.

Code: 
			BC							Opponent		
		SOG/Game	Goals/Game	SOG%		SOG/Game	Goals/Game	SOG%
12-13		38.14		4.30		0.11		25.16		2.00		0.08
13-14		35.44		3.89		0.11		25.22		2.56		0.10

The good thing is that it's mainly the goaltending, and if Boyles can get back up to her .927 from last season, or if Miller can get back up to her .905, then we're good. The bad thing is, what if they can't?

Obviously there's an issue of scoring consistency as well -- but even against Syracuse and UNH, there were plenty of shots on goal, just a lot of them got saved.
 
Re: Boston College Women's Hockey, '13-'14: Can we please have a title this time? Ple

wwhyte said:
It's not the defense, it's the goaltending.

BC shots on goal are slightly down from last season, shot % is slightly down too, but nothing scary. (You can argue that the start of this season had weaker opponents then last season taken as a whole, and that's true, but I don't think it's the main problem).

Opponents shots on goal are basically the same, but opponent shot % is up from .08 to .1.

Code: 
			BC							Opponent		
		SOG/Game	Goals/Game	SOG%		SOG/Game	Goals/Game	SOG%
12-13		38.14		4.30		0.11		25.16		2.00		0.08
13-14		35.44		3.89		0.11		25.22		2.56		0.10

The good thing is that it's mainly the goaltending, and if Boyles can get back up to her .927 from last season, or if Miller can get back up to her .905, then we're good. The bad thing is, what if they can't?

Obviously there's an issue of scoring consistency as well -- but even against Syracuse and UNH, there were plenty of shots on goal, just a lot of them got saved.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't put too much stock in the shot count for games at BC, as they seem to lack an understanding of what is, and isn't, a shot on goal. Re: They credited Roxanne Douville with some 70+ shots a few seasons ago. My count was 43 actual shots on net. Conversely, they tend to low ball the shots on their own netminders. Re: Molly Schaus' sophomore year there was some hand wringing that her save % wasn't what it was the year before. I kept track of shots in over a half dozen trips to Conte and the BC folks averaged five shots a game fewer than what were actually on net. (anything out of the offensive zone wasn't counted, and often the second or third whacks at pucks in a crease scrum.)
 
Re: Boston College Women's Hockey, '13-'14: Can we please have a title this time? Ple

Hux said:
I wouldn't put too much stock in the shot count for games at BC, as they seem to lack an understanding of what is, and isn't, a shot on goal. Re: They credited Roxanne Douville with some 70+ shots a few seasons ago. My count was 43 actual shots on net. Conversely, they tend to low ball the shots on their own netminders. Re: Molly Schaus' sophomore year there was some hand wringing that her save % wasn't what it was the year before. I kept track of shots in over a half dozen trips to Conte and the BC folks averaged five shots a game fewer than what were actually on net. (anything out of the offensive zone wasn't counted, and often the second or third whacks at pucks in a crease scrum.)
Click to expand...

That's totally fair enough, and I've heard that before. But so long as they undercount or overcount it consistently from season to season, it should be possible to make season-to-season comparisons, and that's what I'm trying to do here. Does that make sense or am I missing something?
 
Re: Boston College Women's Hockey, '13-'14: Can we please have a title this time? Ple

wwhyte said:
That's totally fair enough, and I've heard that before. But so long as they undercount or overcount it consistently from season to season, it should be possible to make season-to-season comparisons, and that's what I'm trying to do here. Does that make sense or am I missing something?
Click to expand...

It adds a layer of uncertainty, because "being inconsistent in the same way they have been in the past" does add an additional assumption beyond "remains consistent" because it means that the official scorer probably isn't working from a well defined concept of what a SOG is. So it may work out just fine but it's hard to tell.

That said, and without having actually seen BC play, my guess is that you have probably half identified the underlying problem correctly. If we accept the above data as both valid and comprehensive it still doesn't answer the whole issue. A decrease in save percentage from 92% to 90% would be one goal every 50 shots, or somewhere around a half a goal a game. I don't intend to run the numbers but I suspect that the variance in your goalie performance is way up. For a team in BC's position, with a great offense and averagish goal prevention, that's not a good trend. In general, the better your goalie is relative to the rest of the team the more variance will help you because it increases the number of times she'll steal a game that your offense couldn't have won on its own.

In BC's case, they'd be better off if they got a .900-.910 save percentage every single night rather than having the same aggregate number of goals allowed but one game every other week when the goalie melts down.
 
Re: Boston College Women's Hockey, '13-'14: Can we please have a title this time? Ple

wwhyte said:
It's not the defense, it's the goaltending.
Click to expand...
From the times I've seen BC this year, I don't know that you can conclude that. There have definitely been specific plays where it wasn't the goaltending, it was the defense that was not at last season's level. When you remove a couple players like Bolden and Burns from the depth chart, it means that everybody else gets promoted, and it is normal for one or two to struggle with that ascension.
 
Re: Boston College Women's Hockey, '13-'14: Can we please have a title this time? Ple

Weekend recap where I kind of touch on the 7-2-0 "rough stretch"

http://www.bcinterruption.com/bosto...llege-womens-hockey-sweeps-providence-college

I really think BC's problems are 1) a cold streak in goaltending, 2) the mid-pack teams being really decent this year (or at least the ceiling of the top teams being brought down a bit) because of the Olympics, and 3) BC playing down to opponents, having now played a single really "good" team yet.

I'm curious to see what we do against Quinnipiac, both to get my head around how good we are and to get my head around how good QU is.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top