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.

Harvard Crimson Women 2012-2013

Re: Harvard Crimson Women 2012-2013

Skate79 said:
I wasn't at today's game but judging by the final score, we had all kinds of trouble finishing. It is somewhat shocking to only win 1-0 at home. I'd even go so far as to say it was a mild upset and surely, it will cost us in the national standings. This weekend won't go down as one to remember.
Click to expand...

It was a very strange game to watch. The official stats say 35 shots to 7 but I know whoever was keeping shots on the scoreboard missed as few Harvard SoG's so it should be something like Harvard 40 shots, Union 7. Harvard's passing seemed off today for some reason and Union did a decent job intercepting a few passes. There were a number of occasions when a Harvard woman was just in not quite the right place for a rebound that could have scored.
 
Re: Harvard Crimson Women 2012-2013

Yesterday's game was a throwback to the Vaillancourt/Brine/Buesser/Ryabkina era when smart opponents (like BU and NU, then still in their amazingly quick development from JV quality to to the elite level) minimized the potential for a blowout by not trying to skate with the Flying Frenchwoman and her successors but instead turtling up and clogging the slot. Instead of scoring on shots off of transition, Harvard would set up like a power play in the opponents' zone for extended periods....only to find an "extra" skater thwarting their power play instincts. As long as opponents are content with a tie on the road and are willing to work hard on the unglamorous business of team defense, especially shot blocking, it can be an effective strategy against Harvard. Even if they lose, giving up a single goal while being outshot 35 to 7 certainly helps a team by demonstrating their discipline and guts.
 
Re: Harvard Crimson Women 2012-2013

True, but in the polls it may make a difference.

Fortunately, in the ECAC standings it counts as a win and will help towards getting a #1 seed, which means facing not more than one of Cornell and Clarkson whereas the #2 and #3 seeds will have a tough semi against each other
 
Re: Harvard Crimson Women 2012-2013

ARM said:
In any of the rankings such as PairWise, RPI, KRACH, or Rutter, a win is a win. It doesn't matter by how much or how little.
Click to expand...
Skate79 said:
Even against a lower tier opponent such as Union?
Click to expand...
Eeyore said:
Yep. Margin of victory is never a factor in the computer rankings.
Click to expand...

Are you sure?. Supposedly, Some games get thrown out in the pairwise RPI calculations:

"*Team's RPI has been adjusted to remove negative effect from defeating weak opponent."

Read more: http://www.uscho.com/rankings/pairwise-rankings/d-i-women/

Anyone know how that works. ?
 
Last edited:
Re: Harvard Crimson Women 2012-2013

Watson Rink said:
True, but in the polls it may make a difference.
Click to expand...
Yes, it could matter with humans. Given the voters didn't punish Clarkson for losing to Colgate, I doubt that they'll look too harshly on a narrow win. Most of the voters are coaches and understand that Union today isn't like Union back in the days when Julie Chu played for Harvard.

OnMAA said:
Not 100% correct. Some games get thrown out in the pairwise RPI calculations:
Click to expand...
True, but that has nothing to do with margin of victory, only the screwball nature of RPI such that a win (even one of 20-0) could somehow hurt a team.
 
Re: Harvard Crimson Women 2012-2013

OnMAA said:
Are you sure?. Supposedly, Some games get thrown out in the pairwise RPI calculations:
Click to expand...

If a win would lower your RPI then it is dropped from the calculation. It's a rule that stems from a year in the mid 1990s when Colorado College failed to make the NCAA tournament because a game they won against Air Force lowered their RPI to the point that they were no longer one of the top 12.

RPI is badly, badly flawed from a mathematical perspective. There's this flaw and it also does a very poor job of accounting for strength of schedule. Over the years there have been a variety of ad hoc adjustments, such as dropping some games, to deal with some of the more ridiculous breakdowns, but the NCAA doesn't have any interest in actually fixing the problems.
 
Re: Harvard Crimson Women 2012-2013

Did you check for FCS Atlantic? They are the regional FCS network that will be covering the game in New England. Comcast carries it if you can make it to an establishment that has the Sports Package.
 
whoop87 said:
Did you check for FCS Atlantic? They are the regional FCS network that will be covering the game in New England. Comcast carries it if you can make it to an establishment that has the Sports Package.
Click to expand...

Found it! Channel 300 on FiOS. Thanks
 
Re: Harvard Crimson Women 2012-2013

Some thoughts while cleaning out my desk which has become seriously disorganized:

1. I'm a bit concerned about the lack of scoring punch lately from the team. I was only kidding when I posted earlier that they could afford to score two goals a game and still win because of their D. Against Clarkson this weekend, that wasn't enough. They have scored five goals in three games and a lack of a finishing touch may come back to haunt them. This is something I've harped on for the last several years. Yes I know they have the best goals-for, goals-against differential in the league. It just seems like it is either feast or famine with this team and that concerns me.

2. I'd like to see more production from the second line. Mary Parker finally scored last night after a drought. She and her linemates need to pick it up if Harvard is to succeed in the playoffs because you know that Jillian Dempsey and her line will get extra attention. On a brighter note, Sam Reber's line especially Miye D'Oench is playing well and getting chances.

3. The league is starting to round into form. No surprises at the top and Quinnipiac and SLU are running neck and neck for the final home ice spot. I don't think it will matter much who finishes fourth because either school is capable of winning in the other team's building.

4. We'll learn a lot more about the Crimson after the Beanpot. Within the conference, Cornell and Clarkson are measuring sticks and so far the Crimson are 1-1. Outside the conference, Harvard lost to BU earlier this year and beat Northeastern and Providence. I want to see how they do against BC. I've always felt that you learn nothing by beating up on the weak sisters of the conference; you learn a lot by watching a team go toe to toe with top competition. Harvard needs that badly and the month of February will include BC, the BU-Northeastern winner or loser, Cornell in Ithaca and Clarkson to close out the regular season. Good way to prep for the grind of the playoffs.
 
Re: Harvard Crimson Women 2012-2013

I'm glad that Northeastern beat BU, giving Harvard another shot at BU in the Beanpot consolation. Harvard's now 0-7 against BU (0-3) & BC (0-4) over the past three seasons. Props to the players for breaking the 0-6-1 drought against Cornell this year, but they need to get over the BU/BC hump too to be nationally relevant again.
 
Re: Harvard Crimson Women 2012-2013

dave1381 said:
I'm glad that Northeastern beat BU, giving Harvard another shot at BU in the Beanpot consolation. Harvard's now 0-7 against BU (0-3) & BC (0-4) over the past three seasons. Props to the players for breaking the 0-6-1 drought against Cornell this year, but they need to get over the BU/BC hump too to be nationally relevant again.
Click to expand...

Agree. I was hoping to break that BU/BC stranglehold from the past few seasons Tuesday night. I'm not sure how much beating BU next week will mean to the national standings at this point in the season. Would have mean't more I think in November? We'll have to beat Cornell and/or Clarkson to stay relevant because the rest of our games are against unranked teams.
 
Re: Harvard Crimson Women 2012-2013

To be clearer, I meant "national relevant" mainly in the sense of Harvard's prospects of making it back to the Frozen Four in the first time in five years. I'm relatively indifferent about whether Harvard misses NCAAs or makes NCAAs and loses meekly.

My sense is there's a good chance Harvard visits BU or BC in the NCAA quarterfinals. If Harvard were to go to the NCAA quarters with a four-game losing streak against each of them, then it's going to be much, much harder for Harvard to believe it can win that game. So I care more about this BU game than any one game for the rest of the season.

(Now in terms of the difference between ranked vs. unranked teams, what actually matters for NCAA selections/seeding is record vs. the top 12 RPI, and right now SLU is hanging on at No. 12. Quinnipiac or Dartmouth could also creep into the top 12. Or a 5th WCHA team could creep into the top 12 and knock out the 4th ECAC team, which would probably be bad for Harvard.)
 
Re: Harvard Crimson Women 2012-2013

I'm guessing that despite the impending storm, the games will go on. Not sure how Brown is going to make it to Cambridge given that the worst part of the storm will be overnight into Saturday morning. Perhaps Brown and Yale will wind up playing on Sunday in Cambridge and Hanover.

There is a cruel irony to tomorrow night's game - the theme being "White the Bright" in an attempt to get a full house or close to it. The only white that the Bright will be seeing will be happening outside and I'm afraid it will detract from what might have been a really good turnout. We'll see...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top