clarksoncluck
New member
We deserve a thread. Trying to make a move on 1st this weekend! I know we're mostly Canadian, but we do supply the dirty oil for the US.
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.
Clarkson 2013 - 14
- Thread starter clarksoncluck
- Start date
Re: Clarkson 2013 - 14
Come join the Clarkson Roundtable. Need more fans inputs to the women.
http://www.letsgotech.com/roundtable/showthread.php?2201-Womens-2013-2014-Season&p=36470#post36470
Hope the gals do not overlook Colgate today. Read with interest your post on the Harvard thread. In order for Clarkson to get that ECAC title Jamie Lee Rattray is gonna need more help scoring. Carley Mercer has not had the goal scoring season I was expecting. She needs to get going as do the rest of the forwards. Defensively I think they are as good a team as there is in the ECAC. In goal, Erica Howe has been for the most part stellar in goal except she has uncharacteristicaly given up a soft goal in a number of the games (turned a win against Yale into a tie). She has to be spot on especially against Cornell and Harvard. Huge weekend for this team. Have to get 4 points. LGT LGT LGT
Come join the Clarkson Roundtable. Need more fans inputs to the women.
http://www.letsgotech.com/roundtable/showthread.php?2201-Womens-2013-2014-Season&p=36470#post36470
Hope the gals do not overlook Colgate today. Read with interest your post on the Harvard thread. In order for Clarkson to get that ECAC title Jamie Lee Rattray is gonna need more help scoring. Carley Mercer has not had the goal scoring season I was expecting. She needs to get going as do the rest of the forwards. Defensively I think they are as good a team as there is in the ECAC. In goal, Erica Howe has been for the most part stellar in goal except she has uncharacteristicaly given up a soft goal in a number of the games (turned a win against Yale into a tie). She has to be spot on especially against Cornell and Harvard. Huge weekend for this team. Have to get 4 points. LGT LGT LGT
Re: Clarkson 2013 - 14
yes, it's true but it's still her role as coaches gave her two playmaker on her line (Styner and Gagnon) since ten games. That said, she understood and responded well since because her production has definitely improved. Now that she has the players to get the puck out of the d zone, she can carry the puck at her full speed. And for that, she's amazing! Big w-e for the ladies knights!
yes, it's true but it's still her role as coaches gave her two playmaker on her line (Styner and Gagnon) since ten games. That said, she understood and responded well since because her production has definitely improved. Now that she has the players to get the puck out of the d zone, she can carry the puck at her full speed. And for that, she's amazing! Big w-e for the ladies knights!
Last edited:
Re: Clarkson 2013 - 14
For anyone interested in following the Knights today, the game will be on free video at www.rpitv.org, always good quality. They should have audio as well, but if not, you can tune in to www.wrpi.org. Should be a good game...hope the Engineers can give them a battle.
For anyone interested in following the Knights today, the game will be on free video at www.rpitv.org, always good quality. They should have audio as well, but if not, you can tune in to www.wrpi.org. Should be a good game...hope the Engineers can give them a battle.
Re: Clarkson 2013 - 14
? wrong thread -- should have been the HE predictions thread? But yes, HU/NU is game of the week for sure.
? wrong thread -- should have been the HE predictions thread? But yes, HU/NU is game of the week for sure.
OnMAA
Vort Doen.....Heija Heija Heija
Re: Clarkson 2013 - 14
Did not know BC and BU ran a short benches.? In their most recent games both teams dressed a fair sized line-up with 17 skaters.
Did not know BC and BU ran a short benches.? In their most recent games both teams dressed a fair sized line-up with 17 skaters.
Re: Clarkson 2013 - 14
OnMAA -- these are actually direct quotes from your current post on the Hockey East prediction thread. We seem to have an echo in here...
OnMAA -- these are actually direct quotes from your current post on the Hockey East prediction thread. We seem to have an echo in here...
OnMAA
Vort Doen.....Heija Heija Heija
Re: Clarkson 2013 - 14
I know what I said in the Prediction Thread, but that was in relation to two different teams (NU and HU). In this thread the reference, or echo as you call it, was made by another poster and referenced a different team. That posters reference, was to BC who are playing BU. Like the HU/NU match it has pairwise implications.
I know what I said in the Prediction Thread, but that was in relation to two different teams (NU and HU). In this thread the reference, or echo as you call it, was made by another poster and referenced a different team. That posters reference, was to BC who are playing BU. Like the HU/NU match it has pairwise implications.
Re: Clarkson 2013 - 14
(I'm not sure this is worth getting into, but) You're assuming that the poster was referring to BC/BU, but I don't think that's the only reading. His first sentence was a cut-and-paste of your HU/NU prediction. His second was a cut-and-paste of your BC/BU prediction. You're reading the whole two-sentence post as referring to BC/BU, but I think it's safer to read it as a random prank with no meaning at all. And with that I promise to leave this thread alone until I have something to say about Clarkson
(I'm not sure this is worth getting into, but) You're assuming that the poster was referring to BC/BU, but I don't think that's the only reading. His first sentence was a cut-and-paste of your HU/NU prediction. His second was a cut-and-paste of your BC/BU prediction. You're reading the whole two-sentence post as referring to BC/BU, but I think it's safer to read it as a random prank with no meaning at all. And with that I promise to leave this thread alone until I have something to say about Clarkson
Re: Clarkson 2013 - 14
Or maybe he/she in the first sentence was referring to the Quinnipiac at Clarkson game on Friday , although I doubt it as neither team has a short bench.
To get back to the topic of this thread, this should be an interesting game as it does have Pairwise Implications. Clarkson earlier in the season shut out Quinnipiac 3-0. If Clarkson can get by Quinny and Prinny, this sets up a showdown the following weekend at Hahvad. That is a game I would pay to see.
(I'm not sure this is worth getting into, but) You're assuming that the poster was referring to BC/BU, but I don't think that's the only reading. His first sentence was a cut-and-paste of your HU/NU prediction. His second was a cut-and-paste of your BC/BU prediction. You're reading the whole two-sentence post as referring to BC/BU, but I think it's safer to read it as a random prank with no meaning at all. And with that I promise to leave this thread alone until I have something to say about Clarkson
Or maybe he/she in the first sentence was referring to the Quinnipiac at Clarkson game on Friday
, although I doubt it as neither team has a short bench. To get back to the topic of this thread, this should be an interesting game as it does have Pairwise Implications. Clarkson earlier in the season shut out Quinnipiac 3-0. If Clarkson can get by Quinny and Prinny, this sets up a showdown the following weekend at Hahvad. That is a game I would pay to see.
Last edited:
OnMAA
Vort Doen.....Heija Heija Heija
Re: Clarkson 2013 - 14
And that is a huge game. If Clarkson can run the table, they will be the 1st seed.
If I'm not mistaken, even a tie with Quinnipiac a win over Harvard and running the table might get it done for them, although not sure who wins the HTH tie breaker between them and Cornell if they end up tied under that scenario.
Or maybe he/she in the first sentence was referring to the Quinnipiac at Clarkson game on Friday
And that is a huge game. If Clarkson can run the table, they will be the 1st seed.
If I'm not mistaken, even a tie with Quinnipiac a win over Harvard and running the table might get it done for them, although not sure who wins the HTH tie breaker between them and Cornell if they end up tied under that scenario.
Re: Clarkson 2013 - 14
Assuming Clarkson can run the table on all the other games, the Harvard game to me is going to come down to can Clarkson's offense solve Maschmayer in goal for Harvard. She shut them out at Cheel while turning away 36 shots. As much as I like Erica Howe and admire her career (she is the 2 Time ECAC Goaltender of the Year), this year Clarkson's offense and defense has made her life a walk in the park compared to the opposition goalie. It is a lot different facing 10-20 shots most weekends compared to 25 to 35 shots. I watch every game I can on the internet and while Howe has made some great saves and has had some great games, she has also given up a number of softies. As for Maschmayer, who I have only seen in the Clarkson game where she was lights out, she has played brilliantly facing many more shots but maybe she is beginning to wear down a bit (the 4 goals against Colgate and the 2 and 2 against Princeton and Quinnipiac). Not sure when the voting for the post season awards occurrs, but that game could decide this years ECAC Goalie of the Year winner.
Assuming Clarkson can run the table on all the other games, the Harvard game to me is going to come down to can Clarkson's offense solve Maschmayer in goal for Harvard. She shut them out at Cheel while turning away 36 shots. As much as I like Erica Howe and admire her career (she is the 2 Time ECAC Goaltender of the Year), this year Clarkson's offense and defense has made her life a walk in the park compared to the opposition goalie. It is a lot different facing 10-20 shots most weekends compared to 25 to 35 shots. I watch every game I can on the internet and while Howe has made some great saves and has had some great games, she has also given up a number of softies. As for Maschmayer, who I have only seen in the Clarkson game where she was lights out, she has played brilliantly facing many more shots but maybe she is beginning to wear down a bit (the 4 goals against Colgate and the 2 and 2 against Princeton and Quinnipiac). Not sure when the voting for the post season awards occurrs, but that game could decide this years ECAC Goalie of the Year winner.
Re: Clarkson 2013 - 14
Don't forget that when Harvard played Clarkson this season, Gagnon wasn't there. Since her return, JLR and Styner are in fire.
Don't forget that when Harvard played Clarkson this season, Gagnon wasn't there. Since her return, JLR and Styner are in fire.
Last edited:
Re: Clarkson 2013 - 14
The day after the Colgate game, she stoned Cornell in a 3-1 win at Lynah. I don't see how giving up two goals to either Princeton or Quinnipiac indicates that she is wearing down. Every goalie hits a rough patch now and then. Laing will play in a couple of more games this season - I expect her to play Friday night or possibly next Tuesday in the consolation game to give Mashmeyer some rest for the Clarkson game.
The day after the Colgate game, she stoned Cornell in a 3-1 win at Lynah. I don't see how giving up two goals to either Princeton or Quinnipiac indicates that she is wearing down. Every goalie hits a rough patch now and then. Laing will play in a couple of more games this season - I expect her to play Friday night or possibly next Tuesday in the consolation game to give Mashmeyer some rest for the Clarkson game.
clarksoncluck
New member
Re: Clarkson 2013 - 14
Shot Disparity Math:
Just some numbers on the disparity/game over the season -
Clarkson + 18.52
Quinnipiac + 12.76
Cornell + 8.08
RPI + 1.57
St. Lawrence - .52
Princeton - 1.38
Harvard - 2.08
Colgate - 2.76
Dartmouth - 3.00
Union - 9.86
Yale - 10.67
Brown - 15.88
Stand out observations:
Yale should be lower in standings
Harvard should be lower
Colgate should be higher
RPI should be higher
Clarckson should be dominating
Quinnipiac should be real close to Clarkson
But again just stats.
Shot Disparity Math:
Just some numbers on the disparity/game over the season -
Clarkson + 18.52
Quinnipiac + 12.76
Cornell + 8.08
RPI + 1.57
St. Lawrence - .52
Princeton - 1.38
Harvard - 2.08
Colgate - 2.76
Dartmouth - 3.00
Union - 9.86
Yale - 10.67
Brown - 15.88
Stand out observations:
Yale should be lower in standings
Harvard should be lower
Colgate should be higher
RPI should be higher
Clarckson should be dominating
Quinnipiac should be real close to Clarkson
But again just stats.
OnMAA
Vort Doen.....Heija Heija Heija
Re: Clarkson 2013 - 14
Couple of comments:
1 - Goaltending is part of what makes a team.
2 - Shot counts can be misleading (perimeter vs close in, some D are better at clearing rebounds etc ).
3 - A better stat often used in the NHL is quality chances.
Couple of comments:
1 - Goaltending is part of what makes a team.
2 - Shot counts can be misleading (perimeter vs close in, some D are better at clearing rebounds etc ).
3 - A better stat often used in the NHL is quality chances.
Re: Clarkson 2013 - 14
As always when I talk hockey stats, it comes with the caveat that all of the research done is at the NHL level and you can't necessarily draw conclusions for any other hockey league. However, one of the things that stands out from the analytical research is that to a first approximation shot differential is THE driver of success in hockey. In fact, at the NHL level there is a robust debate as to whether aggregate shot quality is an issue at all.* It's increasingly looking like it is but it's a much smaller effect than shots for/shots against.
Again, this is a first approximation and the task for hockey analytics now is to move beyond that observation and start refining to second approximations. But the overall data supports it strongly. One simple measure that shows this is just adding together a team's shooting percentage and its save percentage. Wherever it is at a given moment it has a strong tendency to regress towards 100. It isn't complete and some goalies will have higher save percentages than others and some players (though probably fewer than with goalies) will have higher shooting percentages than average. But a lot of the deviations from 100 are clearly driven by good fortune rather than actual skills.
One caveat here that could conceivably change this but probably won't is variation among official scorers. The analytics community is just now starting to send its own people to games to collect data, such as shots on goal, in a systematic and well defined way as opposed to just relying on official scorers, who can be extremely idiosyncratic when it comes to deciding what is and isn't a SOG. As that project gets going it may produce some interesting revelations but it probably won't overturn the basic finding.
As I've said before, the test case in the NHL right now is Toronto. The Leafs get killed on puck possession and shot differential metrics and have for a couple of years now. Whether they can stay in the playoff chase without improving will be interesting to watch. Of course, they're also overperforming based on goal differential, too, so they may just be an outlier. Stay tuned.
Having said all of that, my suspicion is that the first approximation is less accurate in NCAA women's hockey than it is at the NHL level. Part of it is that I would expect something like shot differential to have less predictive power in a league with a lower skill level and a greater disparity between teams. The other part of it is observational; I just have the impression watching that some teams really do gear their game more towards getting the puck in close and have more chances that don't result in shots relative to others than is true in the NHL. And those two factors play off of each other; by the time defensemen have made it to the NHL level you've weeded out far more of them who can't cover someone in the slot than you have in NCAA women's hockey.
So make of all of that what you will, but there is probably something to what clarksoncluck said. Not everything, but something.
*I emphasize "aggregate" here; clearly some shots are of a higher quality than others. What is questioned is whether some individuals or teams are consistently able to create higher quality shots than others.
As always when I talk hockey stats, it comes with the caveat that all of the research done is at the NHL level and you can't necessarily draw conclusions for any other hockey league. However, one of the things that stands out from the analytical research is that to a first approximation shot differential is THE driver of success in hockey. In fact, at the NHL level there is a robust debate as to whether aggregate shot quality is an issue at all.* It's increasingly looking like it is but it's a much smaller effect than shots for/shots against.
Again, this is a first approximation and the task for hockey analytics now is to move beyond that observation and start refining to second approximations. But the overall data supports it strongly. One simple measure that shows this is just adding together a team's shooting percentage and its save percentage. Wherever it is at a given moment it has a strong tendency to regress towards 100. It isn't complete and some goalies will have higher save percentages than others and some players (though probably fewer than with goalies) will have higher shooting percentages than average. But a lot of the deviations from 100 are clearly driven by good fortune rather than actual skills.
One caveat here that could conceivably change this but probably won't is variation among official scorers. The analytics community is just now starting to send its own people to games to collect data, such as shots on goal, in a systematic and well defined way as opposed to just relying on official scorers, who can be extremely idiosyncratic when it comes to deciding what is and isn't a SOG. As that project gets going it may produce some interesting revelations but it probably won't overturn the basic finding.
As I've said before, the test case in the NHL right now is Toronto. The Leafs get killed on puck possession and shot differential metrics and have for a couple of years now. Whether they can stay in the playoff chase without improving will be interesting to watch. Of course, they're also overperforming based on goal differential, too, so they may just be an outlier. Stay tuned.
Having said all of that, my suspicion is that the first approximation is less accurate in NCAA women's hockey than it is at the NHL level. Part of it is that I would expect something like shot differential to have less predictive power in a league with a lower skill level and a greater disparity between teams. The other part of it is observational; I just have the impression watching that some teams really do gear their game more towards getting the puck in close and have more chances that don't result in shots relative to others than is true in the NHL. And those two factors play off of each other; by the time defensemen have made it to the NHL level you've weeded out far more of them who can't cover someone in the slot than you have in NCAA women's hockey.
So make of all of that what you will, but there is probably something to what clarksoncluck said. Not everything, but something.
*I emphasize "aggregate" here; clearly some shots are of a higher quality than others. What is questioned is whether some individuals or teams are consistently able to create higher quality shots than others.
Re: Clarkson 2013 - 14
Shots are an unreliable guide. Haley Skarupa is one of the best players in the NCAA and her modus operandi is to take a crazy number of shots and clear up the rebounds. Andie Anastos takes way fewer shots, but they're quality, and she has almost as many goals as Skarupa on less than half the number of shots. It's a good measure of how exciting a game is, but less reliable for how much a team should be winning.
Shots are an unreliable guide. Haley Skarupa is one of the best players in the NCAA and her modus operandi is to take a crazy number of shots and clear up the rebounds. Andie Anastos takes way fewer shots, but they're quality, and she has almost as many goals as Skarupa on less than half the number of shots. It's a good measure of how exciting a game is, but less reliable for how much a team should be winning.