RPI 2013/14: Sunny, with a slight chance of drivel

[Red Cloud]

Re: RPI 2013/14: Sunny, with a slight chance of drivel

I don't know if this has been mentioned, but Jake Wood's game misconduct on Saturday is his third this year since he picked up two according to the box score of the Saturday night Union game, so he's likely to be suspended for the Quinnipiac game.

 

[hab]

Re: RPI 2013/14: Sunny, with a slight chance of drivel

Pulling the goalie can be very effective-see Cornell vs RPI this year and you may not have to look any further. However, when you do pull the goalie for the extra skater, you really ought to have your team well versed in how to keep the puck in the offensive zone to create at least one good chance if not more. Some teams are good at it, some are not. Even though we have had to do it fairly often in the past few years-we just do not seem to have the knack as yet. Union does it well, obviously Cornell did it to us and in the pros-the Devils for years had it down to a science. Much like protecting a 2 goal lead in the third period-it is something that necessitates changing strategy and if we are to be a very successful team-we are going to have to learn how to do better.

BTW-I know what the book says-and if you are down by 2 goals you really have to do it very early. But down by one goal-I am one of those that would wait until that last minute with a face off in the opponent's end and my top line rested.

There have been a number of attempts to analyze this statistically over the years, with varying conclusions but generally in line with your conclusions above. See this summary: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/spor...n-to-pull-the-goalie/article4318101/?page=all.

I think that most studies support the idea that coaches generally err on the side of being too cautious about pulling the goalie.

Apart from the rational, statistical side of things, I think that sometimes a coach pulls the goalie when they are down by 2 or more goals to send a 'message' to his players that he is not giving up and he doesn't expect them to either. I'm always a bit skeptical that this has the desired effect.

And then there are some bizarre situations, none more so than April 5, 1970, last game of the NHL season and Montreal pulled their goalie with 9 1/2 minutes left in the third period, trailing 5-2 to the Black Hawks. The Habs hadn't missed the playoffs in 22 years, a win or tie would put them in the playoffs but a loss would leave them tied for the final spot, with the tie-breaking criterion back then being total goals scored in the regular season (not goals for/against). They needed to score five to win the tie-breaker. So they could leave the goalie in and hope to score 3 more to tie the game, or pull the goalie to score 3 to win the tie-breaker (didn't matter if they lost the game 20-5). They pulled the goalie, but lost the game 10-2.

 

[DrDemento]

Re: RPI 2013/14: Sunny, with a slight chance of drivel

hab: Some of us remember the rather bizarre situation in March 1987 at Colgate where coach Addesa pulled the goalie in the playoff game when we were already losing badly with a slightly different intent. He knew we would have to play a mini game directly after that game and wanted to put as much pressure on the Colgate goalie that we could to 'tire' him and thh Colgate defense out. It must have had some effect as we went on to win the mini game 2-0.

 

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: RPI 2013/14: Sunny, with a slight chance of drivel

There have been a number of attempts to analyze this statistically over the years, with varying conclusions but generally in line with your conclusions above. See this summary: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/spor...n-to-pull-the-goalie/article4318101/?page=all.

I think that most studies support the idea that coaches generally err on the side of being too cautious about pulling the goalie.

Apart from the rational, statistical side of things, I think that sometimes a coach pulls the goalie when they are down by 2 or more goals to send a 'message' to his players that he is not giving up and he doesn't expect them to either. I'm always a bit skeptical that this has the desired effect.

And then there are some bizarre situations, none more so than April 5, 1970, last game of the NHL season and Montreal pulled their goalie with 9 1/2 minutes left in the third period, trailing 5-2 to the Black Hawks. The Habs hadn't missed the playoffs in 22 years, a win or tie would put them in the playoffs but a loss would leave them tied for the final spot, with the tie-breaking criterion back then being total goals scored in the regular season (not goals for/against). They needed to score five to win the tie-breaker. So they could leave the goalie in and hope to score 3 more to tie the game, or pull the goalie to score 3 to win the tie-breaker (didn't matter if they lost the game 20-5). They pulled the goalie, but lost the game 10-2.

I remember a RPI vs. North Dakota women's game in which North Dakota was down I believe 4-0, and they played pretty much the ENTIRE third period with six skaters. I think we potted two ENGs, and they were shut out.

Also, in 2009-10, the women's team vs. Cornell (playoffs) pulled the goalie with about 8 minutes or so to play, and we scored about 3 EAGs. Unfortunately, we needed 4 to tie.

 

[LTsatch]

Re: RPI 2013/14: Sunny, with a slight chance of drivel

Many Yale fans think the weekend in 2009 that Yale knocked of Cornell for the first time in ten years and then shocked Colgate the next night was the turning point for a program that has never looked back since. The sweep only took place because of an unorthodox roll of the dice by Allain by pulling the netminder mid third period trailing 4-0 against Colgate.

By Chip Malafronte, Register Staff
POSTED: 01/30/09, 12:00 AM EST |
NEW HAVEN - The midway point of the third period approached last Saturday, and Yale men's hockey coach Keith Allain was about to pull a desperation move.

A night earlier, the Bulldogs stunned No. 3 Cornell for their first win in Ithaca, N.Y. in 10 years. Yet with just over 13 minutes remaining against struggling Colgate, Yale trailed 4-0 and was on the verge of spoiling a huge weekend.

So Allain, sensing his team was on the verge of erupting, pulled his goaltender for an extra attacker, giving Yale a 6-on-5 advantage. It took only 18 seconds to score. Defenseman Tom Dignard's goal opened the floodgates.

The Bulldogs added three more in the final 10:45 of regulation to send it to overtime. Freshman Kevin Limbert won it with a goal 1 minute into the extra session to deliver an improbable 5-4 victory.

"The team never stopped believing they could do it," Allain said. "It's nice to see them get rewarded for that effort. The way we're playing, there was just this feeling on the bench that it [pulling the goalie for an extra skater] could work. It was a real roll of the dice, but I really felt like letting the dice roll at that point. I've never done that before."

No. 18 Yale (13-5-1, 8-3-1), back in the national polls and in second place in the ECAC, returns to action this weekend bursting with confidence.

 

[hab]

Re: RPI 2013/14: Sunny, with a slight chance of drivel

Many Yale fans think the weekend in 2009 that Yale knocked of Cornell for the first time in ten years and then shocked Colgate the next night was the turning point for a program that has never looked back since. The sweep only took place because of an unorthodox roll of the dice by Allain by pulling the netminder mid third period trailing 4-0 against Colgate.

By Chip Malafronte, Register Staff
POSTED: 01/30/09, 12:00 AM EST |
NEW HAVEN - The midway point of the third period approached last Saturday, and Yale men's hockey coach Keith Allain was about to pull a desperation move.

A night earlier, the Bulldogs stunned No. 3 Cornell for their first win in Ithaca, N.Y. in 10 years. Yet with just over 13 minutes remaining against struggling Colgate, Yale trailed 4-0 and was on the verge of spoiling a huge weekend.

So Allain, sensing his team was on the verge of erupting, pulled his goaltender for an extra attacker, giving Yale a 6-on-5 advantage. It took only 18 seconds to score. Defenseman Tom Dignard's goal opened the floodgates.

The Bulldogs added three more in the final 10:45 of regulation to send it to overtime. Freshman Kevin Limbert won it with a goal 1 minute into the extra session to deliver an improbable 5-4 victory.

"The team never stopped believing they could do it," Allain said. "It's nice to see them get rewarded for that effort. The way we're playing, there was just this feeling on the bench that it [pulling the goalie for an extra skater] could work. It was a real roll of the dice, but I really felt like letting the dice roll at that point. I've never done that before."

No. 18 Yale (13-5-1, 8-3-1), back in the national polls and in second place in the ECAC, returns to action this weekend bursting with confidence.

Truly legendary! As someone who was closely following NCAA hockey during that period I am ashamed to admit that this game just didn't register for me. There should be a movie about it.

 

[DeepRed72]

Re: RPI 2013/14: Sunny, with a slight chance of drivel

Originally Posted by hab

"And then there are some bizarre situations, none more so than April 5, 1970, last game of the NHL season and Montreal pulled their goalie with 9 1/2 minutes left in the third period, trailing 5-2 to the Black Hawks. The Habs hadn't missed the playoffs in 22 years, a win or tie would put them in the playoffs but a loss would leave them tied for the final spot, with the tie-breaking criterion back then being total goals scored in the regular season (not goals for/against). They needed to score five to win the tie-breaker. So they could leave the goalie in and hope to score 3 more to tie the game, or pull the goalie to score 3 to win the tie-breaker (didn't matter if they lost the game 20-5). They pulled the goalie, but lost the game 10-2."

Ah but that was only half the story. On the last day of the 1970 season, the Rangers needed a win and a Montreal loss to tie the Habs on points for the fourth and final playoff spot. The first tie-break was goals scored and the Habs were up by +5 going into that final day. The Rangers poured it on and put 62 shots on Roger Crozier and took a 9-2 lead. Since they had a matinee and Montreal was playing later that evening, they threw caution to the wind and pulled Eddie Giacomin. It didn't work though as Detroit scored a few ENGs for a final 9-5 score. So now the Rangers had a +4 goal lead. That meant Montreal knew they needed 5 goals in a loss to beat out the Rangers or needed to simply win or tie Chicago. But Montreal trailed 5-2 in the third and never did get their additional goals (Luckily for the Rangers, the Black Hawks needed the win to sew up for first place). I seem to recall that goals against may have been the next tie-break, a truly odd system. That failure of Montreal to make the playoffs was the only time they would do so between 1949 and 1995!

 

[LTsatch]

Re: RPI 2013/14: Sunny, with a slight chance of drivel

More detail. http://www.yalebulldogs.com/sports/m-hockey/recaps/012409aab.html

 

[Ralph Baer]

Re: RPI 2013/14: Sunny, with a slight chance of drivel

Originally Posted by hab

"And then there are some bizarre situations, none more so than April 5, 1970, last game of the NHL season and Montreal pulled their goalie with 9 1/2 minutes left in the third period, trailing 5-2 to the Black Hawks. The Habs hadn't missed the playoffs in 22 years, a win or tie would put them in the playoffs but a loss would leave them tied for the final spot, with the tie-breaking criterion back then being total goals scored in the regular season (not goals for/against). They needed to score five to win the tie-breaker. So they could leave the goalie in and hope to score 3 more to tie the game, or pull the goalie to score 3 to win the tie-breaker (didn't matter if they lost the game 20-5). They pulled the goalie, but lost the game 10-2."

Ah but that was only half the story. On the last day of the 1970 season, the Rangers needed a win and a Montreal loss to tie the Habs on points for the fourth and final playoff spot. The first tie-break was goals scored and the Habs were up by +5 going into that final day. The Rangers poured it on and put 62 shots on Roger Crozier and took a 9-2 lead. Since they had a matinee and Montreal was playing later that evening, they threw caution to the wind and pulled Eddie Giacomin. It didn't work though as Detroit scored a few ENGs for a final 9-5 score. So now the Rangers had a +4 goal lead. That meant Montreal knew they needed 5 goals in a loss to beat out the Rangers or needed to simply win or tie Chicago. But Montreal trailed 5-2 in the third and never did get their additional goals (Luckily for the Rangers, the Black Hawks needed the win to sew up for first place). I seem to recall that goals against may have been the next tie-break, a truly odd system. That failure of Montreal to make the playoffs was the only time they would do so between 1949 and 1995!

I remember listening to that Rangers' game although the exact details I had forgotten.

 

[FreshFish]

Re: RPI 2013/14: Sunny, with a slight chance of drivel

When it comes to pulling the goalie, I am very glad that the Blackhawks did not wait until the final minute to pull their goalie in game 6 of last year's Stanley Cup final!

That is the only game i've ever seen in which both teams pulled their goalie.

 

[Red Cloud]

Re: RPI 2013/14: Sunny, with a slight chance of drivel

We seem to have this discussion every year. Not really certain what it accomplishes. Just because we don't score a goal every time we pull the goaltender, and sometimes give up an empty-netter (or, to the extreme shock of many, two), doesn't mean it's not a sound policy. Coaches at every level of the game employ it, we are not special and we are not going to find some kind of magic bullet that makes us better at it than everyone else in the world.

 

[Ralph Baer]

Re: RPI 2013/14: Sunny, with a slight chance of drivel

We seem to have this discussion every year. Not really certain what it accomplishes. Just because we don't score a goal every time we pull the goaltender, and sometimes give up an empty-netter (or, to the extreme shock of many, two), doesn't mean it's not a sound policy. Coaches at every level of the game employ it, we are not special and we are not going to find some kind of magic bullet that makes us better at it than everyone else in the world.

We have had discussion several times before. Certainly coaches at every level pull their goalie, but where they differ is at what point they pull him.

 

[FreshFish]

Re: RPI 2013/14: Sunny, with a slight chance of drivel

We seem to have this discussion every year.

That doesn't make it any less interesting for the repetition...

It also speaks to a larger conundrum: you have evidence that doing something counter-intuitive actually makes sense. Do you trust the evidence and suspect that your intuition, in this case at least, might lead you astray? or do you stick by your intuition anyway despite the evidence?

There is a similar situation in football: statistically speaking, coaches should go for it on fourth down far more often than they do. There is a high school coach somewhere who nearly always goes for it on fourth down, and his success rate bears out the statistical analysis.

One of the greatest known and well-studied problems of our intuition is that we over-generalize from too small a sample size. So one or two times pulling a goalie becomes a basis for extrapolation for all times. One success or one failure is given far, far, far too much weight.

What I find most interesting about these discussions is not so much the content as the context, and the different ways different people respond. It's sort of a real-life experiment in observing how different people think and use data (or not).

 

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: RPI 2013/14: Sunny, with a slight chance of drivel

When it comes to pulling the goalie, I am very glad that the Blackhawks did not wait until the final minute to pull their goalie in game 6 of last year's Stanley Cup final!

That is the only game i've ever seen in which both teams pulled their goalie.

Only times I've ever seen that is through delayed penalties. One where the EA jumped off the bench a little too early (or at least the ref originally thought so, but the skater actually didn't, that was vs. Cornell in 2009-10 men's in overtime), and once was a Crunch game when one goalie started to skate off until realizing it was his team that committed the penalty, so the other goalie started to go off, and the Crunch scored from their own blue line.

 

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: RPI 2013/14: Sunny, with a slight chance of drivel

We seem to have this discussion every year. Not really certain what it accomplishes. Just because we don't score a goal every time we pull the goaltender, and sometimes give up an empty-netter (or, to the extreme shock of many, two), doesn't mean it's not a sound policy. Coaches at every level of the game employ it, we are not special and we are not going to find some kind of magic bullet that makes us better at it than everyone else in the world.

Hey cancer, if you don't like what's being discussed, go to another message board. I seem to remember that you wanted to create one at one point because you thought you were too good for USCHO.

 

[FreshFish]

Re: RPI 2013/14: Sunny, with a slight chance of drivel

Even though the board doesn't cap thread post count at 1,000 any more, I'm still game for a new thread title anyway.

RPI 2013/2014 2.0: Insert Catchy Title Here.


Ralph, we defer to you....

 

[LTsatch]

Re: RPI 2013/14: Sunny, with a slight chance of drivel

Even though the board doesn't cap thread post count at 1,000 any more, I'm still game for a new thread title anyway.

RPI 2013/2014 2.0: Insert Catchy Title Here.


Ralph, we defer to you....

Don't do it!!! I think you guys have alot of drivel left.

 

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: RPI 2013/14: Sunny, with a slight chance of drivel

Don't do it!!! I think you guys have alot of drivel left.

Not to mention, we've already used that thread title.

 

[FreshFish]

Re: RPI 2013/14: Sunny, with a slight chance of drivel

don't do it!!! I think us guys have alot of drivel left.

fyp...

 

[Ralph Baer]

Re: RPI 2013/14: Sunny, with a slight chance of drivel

Not to mention, we've already used that thread title.

Yes we have used it or something very similar. As to starting a new thread,I am pretty here since this one will end at the end of the season anyway. If others want a new thread, I am fine fine with it also.