Wow! Okay. Was not aware of the change. So it really negates home ice for Harvard especially having to play in Ithaca.
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.
ECAC Playoff 2012 thread
- Thread starter PrincetonFan
- Start date
Wow! Okay. Was not aware of the change. So it really negates home ice for Harvard especially having to play in Ithaca.
Watson Rink
Registered User
Re: ECAC Playoff 2012 thread
A USCHO columnist recently speculated as to which Harvard team would show up in the quarterfinals-- the one that Princeton shut out for four consecutive periods or the one that scored ten goals on Princeton in two periods. The answer was both, in the first game, and neither, in the second game.
The first game consisted of several games-within-games, seesawing wildly. Starting the first period, for many minutes Harvard's forecheck smothered all Princeton attempts to break out of its own end. Starting the third period, for many minutes Princeton achieved total puck control dominance to bottle Harvard in its own end. In between, the momentum swung wildly. Today, neither team was dominant for long stretches and ultimately it seemed Harvard had more stamina, enabling it to go after the puck more aggressively.
What a memorable series! What scriptwriter would dare to dream up Harvard killing 1:34 of 5-on-3 capped by Dempsey's brilliant shorthander, or Princeton's coming from behind to send the game into overtime with one minute left? Seems that the Harvard-Princeton women's hockey rivalry is generating thrilling squeakers to match the men's basketball rivalry, in which Harvard came from well behind last night to knot this year's series, following on the heels of last year's donneybrooks that culminated in the H-P co-champions playoff game which Princeton won with a buzzerbeater! These are the sorts of games that make all the hard work worthwhile.
A USCHO columnist recently speculated as to which Harvard team would show up in the quarterfinals-- the one that Princeton shut out for four consecutive periods or the one that scored ten goals on Princeton in two periods. The answer was both, in the first game, and neither, in the second game.
The first game consisted of several games-within-games, seesawing wildly. Starting the first period, for many minutes Harvard's forecheck smothered all Princeton attempts to break out of its own end. Starting the third period, for many minutes Princeton achieved total puck control dominance to bottle Harvard in its own end. In between, the momentum swung wildly. Today, neither team was dominant for long stretches and ultimately it seemed Harvard had more stamina, enabling it to go after the puck more aggressively.
What a memorable series! What scriptwriter would dare to dream up Harvard killing 1:34 of 5-on-3 capped by Dempsey's brilliant shorthander, or Princeton's coming from behind to send the game into overtime with one minute left? Seems that the Harvard-Princeton women's hockey rivalry is generating thrilling squeakers to match the men's basketball rivalry, in which Harvard came from well behind last night to knot this year's series, following on the heels of last year's donneybrooks that culminated in the H-P co-champions playoff game which Princeton won with a buzzerbeater! These are the sorts of games that make all the hard work worthwhile.
OnMAA
Vort Doen.....Heija Heija Heija
Re: ECAC Playoff 2012 thread
I heard about that today at the rink. Like others was under the impression it would be like last year with the second remaining seed hosting one of the semi's. Now they reverted back to the way it used to be. When was that change announced ?.
I heard about that today at the rink. Like others was under the impression it would be like last year with the second remaining seed hosting one of the semi's. Now they reverted back to the way it used to be. When was that change announced ?.
Read the Cornell release on their winning the quarters (last sentence).
http://cornellbigred.com/news/2012/2/25/WICE_0225125345.aspx
Watson Rink
Registered User
Re: ECAC Playoff 2012 thread
Interesting trade-off for the #2 seed in the semi's/finals. No home ice advantage for the semi's but less of a travel disadvantage for the final, assuming the #2 seed makes the final (obviously advantageous for the #3 seed to play #2 on neutral ice and no difference for the #1 and #4 seeds who were going to play at #1 anyway). Might be advantageous for the #2 seed in the usual case for an ECAC team that needs to win it all when you look at what are often thought to be the components of home ice advantage, because in women's collegiate hockey, and particularly in the far-flung ECAC, I suspect that the potentially Yalta-like effects of travel on the visitors greatly exceed any effects of a miniscule friends-and-family home crowd supporting the home team and (allegedly) subliminally affecting the officials' impartiality. (Conversely, travel fatigue would be a negligible factor in a HE tourney involving BC, BU and NE, unless one team got lost trying to change their Green Line connection at Copley, and crowd support would be more of a factor with those 500-piece marching bands dressed like bumblebees or whatever chanting "you're not a black hole, you just _____"). But travelling by bus to Ithaca!! Where the visitor-side stands at the football stadium consist of two rows of bleachers! Where a Yalie friend playing soccer was told they were to shower at the fieldhouse and then sleep on the floor of the fieldhouse....but I digress. The point is that avoiding a six-hour bus ride to Cornell in between the semi's and the final may be a real blessing. If I were the Harvard AD, I would book a block of rooms starting Monday night to let the players get some sleep, get used to the local water, etc.
Where was I? Oh yes, the above paragraph was about the normal case where winning the whole shebang is the sole object. Whether playing both games in Ithaca will prove to be worthwhile for this particular #2 in this particular year is problematical, inasmuch as (1) the odds of beating Cornell in the final are formidable at best (and the odds of beating SLU aren't easy either) while (2) there is this curious consolation prize of an NCAA berth that may (in some but by no means all cases) be attached to being assured of winning just the semi's, in which case home ice in the semi's might have been preferable (assuming the opponent has to travel from Potsdam and not from Greater Hartford....the uncertainties are endless!)
Interesting trade-off for the #2 seed in the semi's/finals. No home ice advantage for the semi's but less of a travel disadvantage for the final, assuming the #2 seed makes the final (obviously advantageous for the #3 seed to play #2 on neutral ice and no difference for the #1 and #4 seeds who were going to play at #1 anyway). Might be advantageous for the #2 seed in the usual case for an ECAC team that needs to win it all when you look at what are often thought to be the components of home ice advantage, because in women's collegiate hockey, and particularly in the far-flung ECAC, I suspect that the potentially Yalta-like effects of travel on the visitors greatly exceed any effects of a miniscule friends-and-family home crowd supporting the home team and (allegedly) subliminally affecting the officials' impartiality. (Conversely, travel fatigue would be a negligible factor in a HE tourney involving BC, BU and NE, unless one team got lost trying to change their Green Line connection at Copley, and crowd support would be more of a factor with those 500-piece marching bands dressed like bumblebees or whatever chanting "you're not a black hole, you just _____"). But travelling by bus to Ithaca!! Where the visitor-side stands at the football stadium consist of two rows of bleachers! Where a Yalie friend playing soccer was told they were to shower at the fieldhouse and then sleep on the floor of the fieldhouse....but I digress. The point is that avoiding a six-hour bus ride to Cornell in between the semi's and the final may be a real blessing. If I were the Harvard AD, I would book a block of rooms starting Monday night to let the players get some sleep, get used to the local water, etc.
Where was I? Oh yes, the above paragraph was about the normal case where winning the whole shebang is the sole object. Whether playing both games in Ithaca will prove to be worthwhile for this particular #2 in this particular year is problematical, inasmuch as (1) the odds of beating Cornell in the final are formidable at best (and the odds of beating SLU aren't easy either) while (2) there is this curious consolation prize of an NCAA berth that may (in some but by no means all cases) be attached to being assured of winning just the semi's, in which case home ice in the semi's might have been preferable (assuming the opponent has to travel from Potsdam and not from Greater Hartford....the uncertainties are endless!)
Watson Rink
Registered User
Re: ECAC Playoff 2012 thread
Which opponent, Clarkson or Q, benefits H in the NCAA quest?
Which opponent, Clarkson or Q, benefits H in the NCAA quest?
ARM
Fan of chipmunk-like mascots.
Re: ECAC Playoff 2012 thread
If Q wins, then you'll play SLU in the semis. Cornell gets the lowest remaining seed.
Watson Rink
Registered User
Re: ECAC Playoff 2012 thread
If playing Clarkson or SLU is, in itself, pretty much a toss-up, what are the ramifications in terms of TUC's if Clarkson were to lose in the quarters instead of advancing? Would Clarkson (a favorable comparison for H (IIRC)) drop out and BU (unfavorable) move up? And are there TUC ramifications if H meets Clarkson or SLU in the semis rather than vice versa? I'm obsessing about the weird consolation prize of possibly making the NCAAs even if failing to win the ECACs
If playing Clarkson or SLU is, in itself, pretty much a toss-up, what are the ramifications in terms of TUC's if Clarkson were to lose in the quarters instead of advancing? Would Clarkson (a favorable comparison for H (IIRC)) drop out and BU (unfavorable) move up? And are there TUC ramifications if H meets Clarkson or SLU in the semis rather than vice versa? I'm obsessing about the weird consolation prize of possibly making the NCAAs even if failing to win the ECACs
I really don't see any clear rooting interest in this game from a Harvard perspective. It ties into the question of whether you want to see Cornell upset in the semis. Tradeoff is the upset increases the autobid chances but decreases the at-large chances with the autobid. A Clarkson win means SLU plays Cornell and that upset is probably more likely. That tradeoff I think dominates any specifics of the pairwise system.
As for the RPI top 12, it's over. BU is in. Dartmouth is out. Clarkson is not falling behind Dartmouth with a loss today. Nothing to worry about there.
As for the RPI top 12, it's over. BU is in. Dartmouth is out. Clarkson is not falling behind Dartmouth with a loss today. Nothing to worry about there.
Last edited:
Watson Rink
Registered User
Re: ECAC Playoff 2012 thread
Trying to quantify the trade-off, assuming that there's little difference between playing Clarkson or SLU, and assuming further that despite the favorable November results these are now roughly 50-50 propositions for H, then an upset of Cornell means that if H prevails in its semi, it would have a 50% chance of the autobid versus something like a 10% chance against Cornell.
On the other side of the trade-off, assuming H wins its semi, losing (a 50% chance) to the team that upsets Cornell would send that team and Cornell to the NCAAs and eliminate H from the NCAAs, whereas a loss to Cornell in the finals would produce a somewhat indeterminate chance (dependent upon many games outside H's control) of H's still making the NCAAs. Call this indeterminate chance the X factor.
On these assumptions, then, a Cornell victory in the semis would result in odds of 10% plus X of H's making the NCAAs whereas a Cornell loss would result in odds of 50%.
My questions are (1) is the above analysis correct and (2) what is X?
Trying to quantify the trade-off, assuming that there's little difference between playing Clarkson or SLU, and assuming further that despite the favorable November results these are now roughly 50-50 propositions for H, then an upset of Cornell means that if H prevails in its semi, it would have a 50% chance of the autobid versus something like a 10% chance against Cornell.
On the other side of the trade-off, assuming H wins its semi, losing (a 50% chance) to the team that upsets Cornell would send that team and Cornell to the NCAAs and eliminate H from the NCAAs, whereas a loss to Cornell in the finals would produce a somewhat indeterminate chance (dependent upon many games outside H's control) of H's still making the NCAAs. Call this indeterminate chance the X factor.
On these assumptions, then, a Cornell victory in the semis would result in odds of 10% plus X of H's making the NCAAs whereas a Cornell loss would result in odds of 50%.
My questions are (1) is the above analysis correct and (2) what is X?
Re: ECAC Playoff 2012 thread
I would guess X is greater than 40%. So you need BU/Providence/UMD to fail. Even if you give BU a 60% chance of winning each game, that's a 36% chance, and let's give Providence has a 4% chance so that's a 40% chance of a Hockey East autobid upset. And let's give UMD a 20% chance of winning the WCHA -- again probably too high, but maybe not too far since they're at home and have the strongest incentive. Even with these estimates, X is 60%*80% = 48%, and again that's a lower bound for X.
Now KRACH says Harvard's probability of beating Cornell is 26% and probability of beating Quinnipiac is 73%. Probably both are lower since Cornell has home ice and Quinnipiac has probably improved. But the difference in those numbers is 47%, about my upper bound for X. So rooting for Cornell is probably the right choice. Moreover, I think playing a playoff game at a hostile Lynah environment would be good prep for an NCAA road quarterfinal.
Also just wanted to point out, Harvard can still lose to SLU and back into NCAAs. Losing in the semis isn't much worse than losing in the final in the at-large race. Main downside from losing from a pure probability perspective is that it denies Harvard a chance to win the ECAC autobid and increases the chance SLU or Quinnipiac win the ECAC. Harvard is still in good shape with the SLU comparison even with a loss.
I would guess X is greater than 40%. So you need BU/Providence/UMD to fail. Even if you give BU a 60% chance of winning each game, that's a 36% chance, and let's give Providence has a 4% chance so that's a 40% chance of a Hockey East autobid upset. And let's give UMD a 20% chance of winning the WCHA -- again probably too high, but maybe not too far since they're at home and have the strongest incentive. Even with these estimates, X is 60%*80% = 48%, and again that's a lower bound for X.
Now KRACH says Harvard's probability of beating Cornell is 26% and probability of beating Quinnipiac is 73%. Probably both are lower since Cornell has home ice and Quinnipiac has probably improved. But the difference in those numbers is 47%, about my upper bound for X. So rooting for Cornell is probably the right choice. Moreover, I think playing a playoff game at a hostile Lynah environment would be good prep for an NCAA road quarterfinal.
Also just wanted to point out, Harvard can still lose to SLU and back into NCAAs. Losing in the semis isn't much worse than losing in the final in the at-large race. Main downside from losing from a pure probability perspective is that it denies Harvard a chance to win the ECAC autobid and increases the chance SLU or Quinnipiac win the ECAC. Harvard is still in good shape with the SLU comparison even with a loss.
Last edited:
papulaisle
Registered User
Re: ECAC Playoff 2012 thread
Last Sentence: "The Big Red will play in the first of Friday's semifinals at Lynah Rink. The second is scheduled to begin at 7 p.m. The championship will be played at 4 p.m. Saturday, March 3 at Lynah Rink."
Last Sentence: "The Big Red will play in the first of Friday's semifinals at Lynah Rink. The second is scheduled to begin at 7 p.m. The championship will be played at 4 p.m. Saturday, March 3 at Lynah Rink."
Last edited:
Watson Rink
Registered User
Re: ECAC Playoff 2012 thread
I'm guessing Lynah would be hostile to H primarily because H's opponent would draw more of its own fans from the North Country than H would draw from the Hub of the Universe. As to who Cornell fans would root for while enjoying the nightcap game after the Cornell game, Cornell doesn't have the fiendishly complicated NCAA considerations that H does, so they would presumably favor the easier opponent for Cornell: but at this juncture, which team is that? Seems to be a toss-up at this stage of the season.
I'm guessing Lynah would be hostile to H primarily because H's opponent would draw more of its own fans from the North Country than H would draw from the Hub of the Universe. As to who Cornell fans would root for while enjoying the nightcap game after the Cornell game, Cornell doesn't have the fiendishly complicated NCAA considerations that H does, so they would presumably favor the easier opponent for Cornell: but at this juncture, which team is that? Seems to be a toss-up at this stage of the season.
papulaisle
Registered User
ECAC Playoff 2012 thread
Surely Quinnipiac most impressive currently of remaining teams in contention. Go into Potsdam (in a snowstorm, I believe) and take two (including TWO nights winter overing), from favored Clarkson- yielding three goals while scoring seven.
Congratulations!
Congratulations as well to SLU who's strong play (all season) has impressed me.
Perhaps going back a half dozen years both Clarkson AND Saint Lawrence seemed not to sustain as season matured. Not so for Larries this year!
Yes, yes- don't at all like to see my Green lose as some of you (might suspect) predicted; MANY, even, predicted it might be said, (and I have all your names...)
Saint Lawrence prevailing not a surprise (as per tournament speculations/guesstimates on this site and elsewhere as to who would win and who was most suspect of not winning.)
---------------------------------------------------------------
Somehow I object to remaining games being played in Ithaca.
Weren't we all, including players, expecting something different?
Seems such as this-change-needs to be sorted well before playoff weekends. Then again, I AM an Ivy League graduate myself...waiting... and perhaps can deduce reasoning for waiting/changing/upsetting Pap.
To wit: save some gas and get all teams in one locale as would otherwise (old routine ) find dozens of vans filled with dozens of women- with great piles of gear, traveling in many different directions all over the Northeast to complete their ECAC Tournament commitments!
Yeah.
Very well said, by the way!
Surely Quinnipiac most impressive currently of remaining teams in contention. Go into Potsdam (in a snowstorm, I believe) and take two (including TWO nights winter overing), from favored Clarkson- yielding three goals while scoring seven.
Congratulations!
Congratulations as well to SLU who's strong play (all season) has impressed me.
Perhaps going back a half dozen years both Clarkson AND Saint Lawrence seemed not to sustain as season matured. Not so for Larries this year!
Yes, yes- don't at all like to see my Green lose as some of you (might suspect) predicted; MANY, even, predicted it might be said, (and I have all your names...)
Saint Lawrence prevailing not a surprise (as per tournament speculations/guesstimates on this site and elsewhere as to who would win and who was most suspect of not winning.)
---------------------------------------------------------------
Somehow I object to remaining games being played in Ithaca.
Weren't we all, including players, expecting something different?
Seems such as this-change-needs to be sorted well before playoff weekends. Then again, I AM an Ivy League graduate myself...waiting... and perhaps can deduce reasoning for waiting/changing/upsetting Pap.
To wit: save some gas and get all teams in one locale as would otherwise (old routine ) find dozens of vans filled with dozens of women- with great piles of gear, traveling in many different directions all over the Northeast to complete their ECAC Tournament commitments!
Yeah.
Very well said, by the way!
Last edited:
Watson Rink
Registered User
Re: ECAC Playoff 2012 thread
Any word as yet on VIDEO coverage for the tournament? For those of us who don't plan on careening over the Northeast to attend in person. As I recall, Cornell has pretty decent video coverage; just hope they broadcast both semis.
Any word as yet on VIDEO coverage for the tournament? For those of us who don't plan on careening over the Northeast to attend in person. As I recall, Cornell has pretty decent video coverage; just hope they broadcast both semis.
Redcast
Does anyone find it backwards that the # 1 seed plays at 2 and the #2 seed plays at 7? Would've thought the home team would get the "premiere" ice time slot in the evening? More fans are able to attend, etc? Wonder how that's assigned?
Re: ECAC Quarterfinal Playoff 2012 thread Which May be the, 'Semi's'?
Re: ECAC Quarterfinal Playoff 2012 thread Which May be the, 'Semi's'?
It's probably more typical to let the top seed play first to allow for more rest, in these tournament situations where there is a 1-day turnaround. I agree it's probably going to be costly for attendance. I'm not sure why ECAC & WCHA went Fri-Sat instead of Sat-Sun.
Re: ECAC Quarterfinal Playoff 2012 thread Which May be the, 'Semi's'?
It's probably more typical to let the top seed play first to allow for more rest, in these tournament situations where there is a 1-day turnaround. I agree it's probably going to be costly for attendance. I'm not sure why ECAC & WCHA went Fri-Sat instead of Sat-Sun.
ARM
Fan of chipmunk-like mascots.
Re: ECAC Quarterfinal Playoff 2012 thread Which May be the, 'Semi's'?
Re: ECAC Quarterfinal Playoff 2012 thread Which May be the, 'Semi's'?
Re: ECAC Quarterfinal Playoff 2012 thread Which May be the, 'Semi's'?
When Minnesota has been the #1 seed and the host, they've always played the late game, but UMD took the early slot when they were in that situation.
I prefer Fri-Sat, because the Sun games have traditionally been so early that they are poorly attended. It does make it tough to draw on Friday if the host decides to play early while a lot of people are still at work. One of the reasons that our sport doesn't draw well is that so many decisions that are made are bad from a marketing standpoint, such as this.
OnMAA
Vort Doen.....Heija Heija Heija
Re: ECAC Quarterfinal Playoff 2012 thread Which May be the, 'Semi's'?
Re: ECAC Quarterfinal Playoff 2012 thread Which May be the, 'Semi's'?
It is my understanding, from talking to a Cornell parent and player, that host Cornell had the option to choose which time slot they preferred.
Re: ECAC Quarterfinal Playoff 2012 thread Which May be the, 'Semi's'?
It is my understanding, from talking to a Cornell parent and player, that host Cornell had the option to choose which time slot they preferred.