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.

RPI 2011-12 Part II: We Like to Post!

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: RPI 2011-12 Part II: We Like to Post!

FlagDUDE08 said:
http://www.uscho.com/ecac-blog/2011/10/31/five-ivies-and-a-premature-funeral/ OK, Sully...
Click to expand...

I'm assuming your "OK, Sully..." is a sarcastic statement. :)

I don't know, after reading what he wrote... I mostly agree with a lot of it, especially in terms of the numbers and facts of it. Granted, the title "...a premature funeral" was probably a bad choice on his part. However, it does seem quite odd that he took so much space to call out RPI, and yet nothing was mentioned of the woes of, say, SLU.
Seems like most of the media is in agreement with the general opinion: "RPI's record does not do their team justice in terms of quality of play."
 
Last edited:
Re: RPI 2011-12 Part II: We Like to Post!

FreshFish said:
It seemed to me that part of pulling the goalie earlier in these games might have been to get practice playing that way....and part of it, it seems to me, is to actually make it effective. If you are not scoring 5 x 5, then wouldn't it make sense to go to 6 x 5 earlier instead of later? Of course, if you are 2 for 40 on the power play, you probably first need to address that issue, you generally need to score more with an extra skater no matter what the actual ratio.
Click to expand...

Of course a loss is a loss by any amount of goals-but our power play has not proven to be able to even keep the puck in the opponent's end for a full minute with only 4 defenders aginast us, let alone a full 2 minutes with 5 defenders out there. I am of the opinion that pulling the goalie makes incredible sense-if you can take advantage by using the extra man to keep the puck in the other team's zone. As of yet-we have had lots of experience this year pulling the goalie at the end of the last 5 games-and we have not been able to exert much offensive pressure. That part has to be addressed. It has just seemed that pulling our goalie too early has just succeeded in padding the stats of the opponent.
 
Re: RPI 2011-12 Part II: We Like to Post!

ibanezist00 said:
However, it does seem quite odd that he took so much space to call out RPI, and yet nothing was mentioned of the woes of, say, SLU.
Click to expand...
Mainly because SLU hasn't played in two weeks.

The Monday entries are primarily used to reveal the writer's "epiphanies" from the past weekend's games. It would be difficult to make a commentary on the Saints based on that criteria.
 
Re: RPI 2011-12 Part II: We Like to Post!

FreshFish said:
In the conversation about when to pull the goalie, I wonder if it is something like the conversation in American football about going for it on 4th down? Perhaps the statistical evidence points to a different conclusion than 'conventional wisdom'?
Click to expand...

The conventional wisdom is what it is, because losing 2-1 or losing 3-1 is the same end result.

The option is there to give your team one skater more than the other, and given the fact that even teams that are slumping on the power play will tend to control the puck better with more skaters (therefore creating more opportunities to score), you take it. The analysis, thus, is somewhat irrelevant. You're either going to go for it, or you're going to turtle.

If you lose by two instead of losing by one, who gives a ****. You went for the tying goal and it didn't pan out. Move on.

Oh, ajt6954 gives a ****. I forgot.
 
Re: RPI 2011-12 Part II: We Like to Post!

Red Cloud said:
The conventional wisdom is what it is, because losing 2-1 or losing 3-1 is the same end result.

The option is there to give your team one skater more than the other, and given the fact that even teams that are slumping on the power play will tend to control the puck better with more skaters (therefore creating more opportunities to score), you take it. The analysis, thus, is somewhat irrelevant. You're either going to go for it, or you're going to turtle.

If you lose by two instead of losing by one, who gives a ****. You went for the tying goal and it didn't pan out. Move on.

Oh, ajt6954 gives a ****. I forgot.
Click to expand...

My givadam gets fixed when it comes to league play (albeit not by about February or so, and even then not much effort is placed into it), as goal differential is the 5th tie-break in playoff seeding. As of now, my givadam is still busted. ;)

For those with a working givadam, though, how do you feel about pulling the goalie in overtime when fighting for seeding, or even so, a bye? We have done that in our final game of the regular season for the past two years. In my opinion, a tie doesn't help (we needed the win in both cases), so why not go for it.
 
Re: RPI 2011-12 Part II: We Like to Post!

FlagDUDE08 said:
My givadam gets fixed when it comes to league play (albeit not by about February or so, and even then not much effort is placed into it), as goal differential is the 5th tie-break in playoff seeding. As of now, my givadam is still busted. ;)

For those with a working givadam, though, how do you feel about pulling the goalie in overtime when fighting for seeding, or even so, a bye? We have done that in our final game of the regular season for the past two years. In my opinion, a tie doesn't help (we needed the win in both cases), so why not go for it.
Click to expand...

There are special cases where pulling the goalie is also a good idea. Someone (DrD?) brought up the 1987 series vs. Colgate recently. After winning the first game in a rout and being behind in the second game, RPI played the latter part of that game without a goalie to tire out Colgate's goalie. It worked since RPI won the minigame played immediately thereafter.
 
Re: RPI 2011-12 Part II: We Like to Post!

not to interject too much but statistically it is never a good idea as the winning team generally gets another goal, but desperate times bring desperate measures.
I think gwoz was indeed making an example and the second nite the students began a chant..." pull the goalie.. clap clap... clap clap clap."
 
Re: RPI 2011-12 Part II: We Like to Post!

Red Cloud said:
The conventional wisdom is what it is, because losing 2-1 or losing 3-1 is the same end result.
Click to expand...
I think FreshFish was commenting on the "conventional wisdom" of pulling the goalie with one minute remaining on the clock while statistical analyses have shown that pulling the goalie with three minutes remaining is more advantageous.

And, he's fairly accurate.
 
Re: RPI 2011-12 Part II: We Like to Post!

Ralph Baer said:
There are special cases where pulling the goalie is also a good idea. Someone (DrD?) brought up the 1987 series vs. Colgate recently. After winning the first game in a rout and being behind in the second game, RPI played the latter part of that game without a goalie to tire out Colgate's goalie. It worked since RPI won the minigame played immediately thereafter.
Click to expand...

Yup was me. Thought at the time it was a masterful job by our coach. We were not the better team that night but we sure were in the mini game. There are special circumstances and you have to roll the dice when they come up.
 
Re: RPI 2011-12 Part II: We Like to Post!

burgie12 said:
I think FreshFish was commenting on the "conventional wisdom" of pulling the goalie with one minute remaining on the clock while statistical analyses have shown that pulling the goalie with three minutes remaining is more advantageous.

And, he's fairly accurate.
Click to expand...

Perhaps we should deal with the simpleton's questioning the wisdom of doing it at all before we tackle when to do it - which I put entirely at the coach's discretion.
 
Re: RPI 2011-12 Part II: We Like to Post!

Red Cloud said:
Perhaps we should deal with the simpleton's questioning the wisdom of doing it at all before we tackle when to do it - which I put entirely at the coach's discretion.
Click to expand...

USSR didn't pull the goalie in 1980 vs. USA when down 4-3. They lost.
 
Re: RPI 2011-12 Part II: We Like to Post!

Red Cloud said:
Perhaps we should deal with the simpleton's questioning the wisdom of doing it at all before we tackle when to do it - which I put entirely at the coach's discretion.
Click to expand...
I'm with you, I just want to make sure that we're all discussing the same points and not just talking past one another.
 
Re: RPI 2011-12 Part II: We Like to Post!

FlagDUDE08 said:
USSR didn't pull the goalie in 1980 vs. USA when down 4-3. They lost.
Click to expand...

It was mentioned at the time that the Soviet team was so often leading in games that they had not faced a situation where pulling the goalie came up much and actually were not prepared to do it. That is kind of a nice situation to be in-never trailing late in a game.;)
 
Re: RPI 2011-12 Part II: We Like to Post!

I'm way late in following up on the weekend...but after seeing Diebold in net again, I can't help but think he will put a strong push for consistent playing time. His rebound control was excellent and the kid is extremely quick. My two cents.
 
Re: RPI 2011-12 Part II: We Like to Post!

Did anyone see the Ottawa/Boston game tonight? Did they notice when the goalie was pulled?
 
Re: RPI 2011-12 Part II: We Like to Post!

Pull the goalie! Why wouldn't you pull the goalie? This is stupid.
 
Re: RPI 2011-12 Part II: We Like to Post!

Friday's game vs. CC is now on rpitv.org, and the new HD looks really sharp! Thanks to you and your crew for all your hard work, RHamilton!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top