Harvard Crimson 2013-2014

[Trillium]

Re: Harvard Crimson 2013-2014

That's a great point in general about the women's game now compared to the start of the NCAA era. Back then, there were games that a team like Harvard knew it was going to win no matter what it did. Give a fourth line heavy minutes, rest a Kazmaier finalist -- no problem. Particularly with backup goaltenders, those were opportunities to give some spot starts to get some seasoning and get used to the stage. Now, if you start a backup and she flops, any team can make it hurt and as you say, the PairWise can be unforgiving.

A very well-respected coach who had developed many of the early greats, told me years ago that one of the reasons he warned players away from Harvard, was that as far back as when Botterill was there, Stone would continue to give her and her line mates heavy minutes even late in blowout games, rather than using these as opportunities to provide some ice time to third and fourth line players. The apparent rationale was to give those top players as much of an edge as possible statistically in Kazmaier voting, and therefore make her and the program look better still. With the number of Kaz awards over the years, I guess it worked. I've seen that occur more than you might expect in recent years also.

 

[OnMAA]

Re: Harvard Crimson 2013-2014

The apparent rationale was to give those top players as much of an edge as possible statistically in Kazmaier voting, and therefore make her and the program look better still. With the number of Kaz awards over the years, I guess it worked. I've seen that occur more than you might expect in recent years also.

I've witnessed that firsthand in a blow-out game a few years ago. This is a side affect of the rules, similar to blow-out games that happen at tournaments for goal differential purposes. As long as the Kaz award discussion seems to be centered around stats, this is going to continue to happen. Sad but true.

 

[dave1381]

Re: Harvard Crimson 2013-2014

A very well-respected coach who had developed many of the early greats, told me years ago that one of the reasons he warned players away from Harvard, was that as far back as when Botterill was there, Stone would continue to give her and her line mates heavy minutes even late in blowout games, rather than using these as opportunities to provide some ice time to third and fourth line players. The apparent rationale was to give those top players as much of an edge as possible statistically in Kazmaier voting, and therefore make her and the program look better still. With the number of Kaz awards over the years, I guess it worked. I've seen that occur more than you might expect in recent years also.

The logic was more about conditioning, and not changing what you do based on the opponent. Harvard did not win Kazmaiers by piling on points in blowouts. This is a fabrication. Kazmaier voters without question knew to disregard points against the likes of Union back in the day, otherwise Nicole Corriero would've made out much better in 2004. And when Botterill had 10 points in a 17-2 win over BC, even a 4th line player had a hat trick.

 

[dave1381]

Re: Harvard Crimson 2013-2014

I've witnessed that firsthand in a blow-out game a few years ago. This is a side affect of the rules, similar to blow-out games that happen at tournaments for goal differential purposes. As long as the Kaz award discussion seems to be centered around stats, this is going to continue to happen. Sad but true.

Kaz voters are very capable of seeing who is scoring GWG against top foes and who is just piling on points in blowouts. Thankfully the number of blowouts in the sport is way below what it was a decade ago.

 

[Skate79]

Re: Harvard Crimson 2013-2014

In regard to playing 8 F, an added wrinkle we've forgotten to emphasize is that MParker is the center on the second line. So while the third line center can certainly fill in at second line center, she's not the first candidate for playing 30 minutes a game as would be the case if you simply played two centers 30 minutes each as you might do if you had, say, Patrice Bergeron and David Kreji on your team. All the Hvd first line players, especially D'Oench, appeared to get extra minutes, but not just by playing extra minutes as a line, they appeared to be shifted in individually with second and third line players in some very complex fashion with Crugnale and EParker taking most of the draws on jumbled lines. I couldn't discern the pattern being followed. This obviously involves a sacrifice of line chemistry.

Thank you! Excellent points. How hard is it to comprehend this?

 

[Skate79]

Re: Harvard Crimson 2013-2014

The logic was more about conditioning, and not changing what you do based on the opponent. Harvard did not win Kazmaiers by piling on points in blowouts. This is a fabrication. Kazmaier voters without question knew to disregard points against the likes of Union back in the day, otherwise Nicole Corriero would've made out much better in 2004. And when Botterill had 10 points in a 17-2 win over BC, even a 4th line player had a hat trick.

When BU was a club team and playing the Beanpot, Katy ordered her team to skate around and play puck possession. That was as generous a move by a D-1 coach as I have seen in a long time. She knew Harvard would win and if she unleashed the dogs so to speak, we would have won 30-0. That doesn't help anyone. And as far as playing the top players, the first and second lines took regular shifts in the first period of that game and then sat for most of the rest of the game. So this theory of running up the score to pad stats of Kaz finalists doesn't hold up. Further, when Botterill broke the scoring record, I emailed Katey to congratulate Jennifer on the accomplishment. Katey returned my email saying that it was more important that the team succeed vis a vie any one player. I've watched Harvard women's hockey since the '99 season and while the first two lines do get heavy minutes, in blowouts, other players get their share of ice time including the PP.

 

[ARM]

Kaz voters are very capable of seeing who is scoring GWG against top foes and who is just piling on points in blowouts.

GWG has always been a stat that can be rather deceptive, because it can't differentiate between the last-minute goal in a 1-0 win and the goal that made it 3-0 in a game that wound up 9-2. As the game has evolved, it is becoming even less meaningful. The stud players used to carry the puck the length of the ice, weave through the defense, and score a highlight goal. Now, so many goals are scored on rebounds or through screens and tips that it is often a product of team, rather than individual, effort. E.g. Meghan Lorence leads Minnesota and is second in the country in GWG, in large part because her job on a PP is to set up in front of the net, and sometimes, that winds up being the winning goal. Sarah Lefort leads the country and Louise Warren is fourth, not just because they produce at crunch time, but because they score most of the BU goals so the odds are good that one of them nets the game winner. It's harder to accomplish if your team is winning by five goals. Unless one can see the highlights along with the box score, it doesn't reveal all that much.

 

[OnMAA]

Re: Harvard Crimson 2013-2014

I know this is not really a Harvard discussion, but IMHO stats should be an initial guideline to get to say the top 10 or so, but after that, the detailed analysis of the awarding should be placed on viewing the player, or reports of such by the various experts. But no matter what the final outcome, since it is a "judged" award, there will always be a hefty discussion on the validity of the outcome. I mean on this board people can't even agree whether Canada won the Olympics on a lucky bounce, full merit or a fluky call or non-call by the refs.

 

[Watson Rink]

Re: Harvard Crimson 2013-2014

In regard to playing 8 F, an added wrinkle we've forgotten to emphasize is that MParker is the center on the second line. So while the third line center can certainly fill in at second line center, she's not the first candidate for playing 30 minutes a game as would be the case if you simply played two centers 30 minutes each as you might do if you had, say, Patrice Bergeron and David Kreji on your team. All the Hvd first line players, especially D'Oench, appeared to get extra minutes, but not just by playing extra minutes as a line, they appeared to be shifted in individually with second and third line players in some very complex fashion with Crugnale and EParker taking most of the draws on jumbled lines. I couldn't discern the pattern being followed. This obviously involves a sacrifice of line chemistry.

How can we discuss "lack of line chemistry" and not mention Don Cherry? There were a few years in the 'Seventies when, emboldened by the "team first" ethos of the CCCP national team, Cherry and Fred Shero abandoned set lines and required every winger to be able to play with any center at a moment's notice. Out the window went Line Chemistry in favor of The System. Cynics claimed that these coaches inaugurated this practice not only (1) to ensure that every forward played the coach's system slavishly (because otherwise, in the absence of understandings among linemates, they would be hopelessly out of position unless they played the coach's system) but also (2) so that the coach could discipline his players by augmenting or withholding their ice time on an instantaneous basis. Nothing like getting sat down through several shifts to realize that you'd ticked off the coach.

Thankfully, this approach petered out in the NHL after a few seasons.

 

[dave1381]

Re: Harvard Crimson 2013-2014

GWG has always been a stat that can be rather deceptive, because it can't differentiate between the last-minute goal in a 1-0 win and the goal that made it 3-0 in a game that wound up 9-2. As the game has evolved, it is becoming even less meaningful. The stud players used to carry the puck the length of the ice, weave through the defense, and score a highlight goal. Now, so many goals are scored on rebounds or through screens and tips that it is often a product of team, rather than individual, effort. E.g. Meghan Lorence leads Minnesota and is second in the country in GWG, in large part because her job on a PP is to set up in front of the net, and sometimes, that winds up being the winning goal. Sarah Lefort leads the country and Louise Warren is fourth, not just because they produce at crunch time, but because they score most of the BU goals so the odds are good that one of them nets the game winner. It's harder to accomplish if your team is winning by five goals. Unless one can see the highlights along with the box score, it doesn't reveal all that much.

Right, I agree the GWG stat can be misleading. But I do think box scores can generally reveal who is contributing more in key situations vs blowouts.

 

[Veritas]

Re: Harvard Crimson 2013-2014

Does anyone know if Saturdays game will be televised??
Looking at the WHRB program guide it appears that there will be no local radio coverage.

 

[robertearle]

Re: Harvard Crimson 2013-2014

Does anyone know if Saturdays game will be televised??
Looking at the WHRB program guide it appears that there will be no local radio coverage.

There's a link for a video stream at the UW web site (I don't know about $$), and a link for a local Madison radio station doing the game, through iheart radio.

http://www.uwbadgers.com/sports/w-hockey/This-Week-in-W-Hockey.html

 

[dave1381]

Re: Harvard Crimson 2013-2014

No one can charge for streams of NCAA tournament games.

 

[driventoit]

Re: Harvard Crimson 2013-2014

Pretty quiet all across the board today, both eastern and western fronts. The calm before the storm.

 

[DC78-82]

Re: Harvard Crimson 2013-2014

Pretty quiet all across the board today, both eastern and western fronts. The calm before the storm.

More like the storm before the games:

From WMUR in Manchester, NH: Snow slows commute, piles high on slopes
More than foot of snow falls in some places


Read more: http://www.wmur.com/weather/stormwa...e-piles-high-on-slopes/24957110#ixzz2vrZQBy7c

 

[OnMAA]

Re: Harvard Crimson 2013-2014

Pretty quiet all across the board today, both eastern and western fronts. The calm before the storm.

Up here the storm (snow) was yesterday and last night. Now it is bitterly cold.

 

[OnMAA]

Re: Harvard Crimson 2013-2014

More like the storm before the games:

From WMUR in Manchester, NH: Snow slows commute, piles high on slopes
More than foot of snow falls in some places


Read more: http://www.wmur.com/weather/stormwa...e-piles-high-on-slopes/24957110#ixzz2vrZQBy7c

Lake Placid got 20 inches : http://www.adirondackdailyenterpris...il/id/541884/Tri-Lakers-dig-out.html?nav=5008

Further north in the North Country snowfalls ranged from 8 to 12 inches. The snow was powdery and it got cold and windy, so that made driving last night interesting to say the least.

Forecast is for cold today, warming trend tomorrow. Travel should be fine by tommorow.

 

[DC78-82]

Re: Harvard Crimson 2013-2014

Lake Placid got 20 inches : http://www.adirondackdailyenterpris...il/id/541884/Tri-Lakers-dig-out.html?nav=5008

Further north in the North Country snowfalls ranged from 8 to 12 inches. The snow was powdery and it got cold and windy, so that made driving last night interesting to say the least.

Forecast is for cold today, warming trend tomorrow. Travel should be fine by tommorow.

We started with rain all day, then an abrupt 20°F temp drop, then snow. So a pretty thick ice foundation with snow, and drifting snow on top.

 

[alslammerz]

Re: Harvard Crimson 2013-2014

Does anyone know if Saturdays game will be televised??
Looking at the WHRB program guide it appears that there will be no local radio coverage.

Even if it wasn't in Wisconsin and thus, triple the department's budget for 1 game, it wouldn't have been in the PG. No playoff games ever are because they are TBD.

 

[NMH]

Re: Harvard Crimson 2013-2014

Even if it wasn't in Wisconsin and thus, triple the department's budget for 1 game, it wouldn't have been in the PG. No playoff games ever are because they are TBD.

Presumably the in-house Wisconsin feed will be used for wherever the feed is available and as far as those go for women's hockey, it's pretty good. I paid for two months of the UW/CBSSports feeds this season and there are some god awful angles and camera folk around the country. The press box at LaBahn has good sight lines and you don't lose too much (the worst was Ohio State, where the camera felt like it was in another building, I saw more spectators heads than anything and the camera guy was unfamiliar with the zoom button).