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 Engineers 2017-2018

Re: RPI Engineers 2017-2018

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">A lot to look forward in the new year for these two. Congratulations to RPI alums Alexa and Jordan! <a href="https://t.co/2mtwkH4Ab9">pic.twitter.com/2mtwkH4Ab9</a></p>— RPI Women's Hockey (@RPI_WHockey) <a href="https://twitter.com/RPI_WHockey/status/946092108527603713?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">December 27, 2017</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
 
Re: RPI Engineers 2017-2018

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">.<a href="https://twitter.com/RPI_WHockey?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@RPI_WHockey</a> alum Sonja van der Blink displays great spirit between the pipes for <a href="https://twitter.com/TorontoCWHL?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@TorontoCWHL</a>. <a href="https://t.co/G3NU7vqDsZ">https://t.co/G3NU7vqDsZ</a> <a href="https://t.co/uO6wZZeEHs">pic.twitter.com/uO6wZZeEHs</a></p>— ECAC HOCKEY (@ECACHOCKEYMWD1) <a href="https://twitter.com/ECACHOCKEYMWD1/status/946034604909252608?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">December 27, 2017</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
 
Re: RPI Engineers 2017-2018

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Asiah Taylor-Walterz (Oakville Hornets MAA) commits to Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute for 2020-2021 <a href="https://twitter.com/OakHornetsMAA?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@OakHornetsMAA</a> <a href="https://twitter.com/RPI_WHockey?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@RPI_WHockey</a></p>— WHockey Commits (@WHockeyCommits) <a href="https://twitter.com/WHockeyCommits/status/950403778615881728?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 8, 2018</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>


Edit: It appears to actually be Taylor-Walters.
She has also played in 2 games for Oakville's Junior team.
 
Last edited:
Re: RPI Engineers 2017-2018

We have to get more than one point out of Harvard and Dartmouth at home. We're still in a decent position going forward, but it's going to be a tightrope walk. This week, we head to the North Country, where we'll be lucky to pick up a point.

RPI KRACH (RRWP): 59.46 (0.3942)

MCTs (Mean/Median/Mode/Range):
Points - 18.13 / 18 / 18 / 10 - 31
Rank - 7.97 / 8 / 8 / 2 - 12
Playoffs - 78.1%
Most likely opponent - at Colgate (41.8%)

Conference Rankings:
  1. Colgate
  2. Clarkson
  3. Cornell
  4. SLU
    —————
  5. Quinnipiac
  6. Harvard
  7. Princeton
  8. RPI
    —————
    —————
  9. Yale
  10. Union
  11. Dartmouth
  12. Brown

RPI Points vs. Position
Code: 
   |     1     2     3     4     5     6     7     8     9    10    11    12
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
10 |                                                   0.0   0.0   [B]0.1[/B]   0.0
11 |                                                   0.0   0.1   [B]0.2[/B]   0.0
12 |                                             0.0   0.1   [B]0.6[/B]   0.4   0.0
13 |                                             0.1   0.7   [B]1.2[/B]   0.3   0.0
14 |                                             0.8   [B]2.3[/B]   1.7   0.2     
15 |                                       0.0   2.8   [B]3.6[/B]   1.3   0.0     
16 |                                       0.1   [B]7.0[/B]   3.9   0.6   0.0     
17 |                                 0.0   0.4  [B]10.2[/B]   2.6   0.2   0.0     
18 |                                 0.0   1.4  [B]12.1[/B]   1.3   0.0           
19 |                           0.0   0.1   3.1   [B]9.8[/B]   0.4   0.0           
20 |                           0.0   0.4   4.5   [B]6.3[/B]   0.1   0.0           
21 |                           0.0   0.9   [B]4.4[/B]   2.7   0.0                 
22 |                     0.0   0.0   1.4   [B]3.1[/B]   0.8   0.0                 
23 |                     0.0   0.1   1.3   [B]1.4[/B]   0.2                       
24 |                     0.0   0.2   [B]0.9[/B]   0.4   0.0                       
25 |               0.0   0.0   0.2   [B]0.4[/B]   0.1   0.0                       
26 |               0.0   0.0   0.1   0.1   0.0                             
27 |               0.0   0.0   0.0   0.0   0.0                             
28 |               0.0   0.0   0.0   0.0                                   
29 |               0.0   0.0   0.0                                         
30 |         0.0   0.0   0.0   0.0                                         
31 |               0.0                                                     
32 |                                                                       
33 |                                                                       
34 |
 
Re: RPI Engineers 2017-2018

Should not have lost to Harvard or Dartmouth. OH well easy to say not to do.
 
Re: RPI Engineers 2017-2018

No point weekend *sigh sigh sighsighsigh*. Not that it wasn't expected, but getting nothing out of a weekend in the North Country except for moral victories kind of sucks. Next, we get to travel to Central NY and probably achieve the same results. Whoopee. Our playoff chances dropped by 10%, but really we still just need to aim to hit 16-18 points at minimum. If we look at our upcoming schedule, we can get by with a sweep against Union and a win against Dartmouth. Princeton, Quinnipiac, and Harvard will be stretches, but we will probably need to take at least one of them to be safe.

RPI KRACH (RRWP): 56.39 (0.3839)

MCTs (Mean/Median/Mode/Range):
Points - 17.21 / 17 / 18 / 10 - 29
Rank - 8.25 / 8 / 8 / 3 - 12
Playoffs - 68.1%
Most likely opponent - at Colgate (39.8%)

Conference Rankings:
  1. Colgate
  2. Clarkson
  3. Cornell
  4. SLU
    —————
  5. Quinnipiac
  6. Princeton
  7. Harvard
  8. RPI
    —————
    —————
  9. Yale
  10. Union
  11. Dartmouth
  12. Brown

RPI Points vs. Position
Code: 
   |     1     2     3     4     5     6     7     8     9    10    11    12
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
10 |                                                         0.0   [B]0.1[/B]   0.0
11 |                                                   0.0   0.2   [B]0.3[/B]   0.0
12 |                                             0.0   0.2   [B]1.2[/B]   0.6   0.0
13 |                                             0.1   1.0   [B]2.2[/B]   0.3      
14 |                                             1.2   [B]3.7[/B]   2.8   0.1      
15 |                                       0.0   3.7   [B]5.3[/B]   1.7   0.0      
16 |                                       0.0   [B]8.7[/B]   5.7   0.7   0.0      
17 |                                 0.0   0.2  [B]11.4[/B]   3.5   0.2            
18 |                                 0.0   1.0  [B]12.6[/B]   1.6   0.0            
19 |                           0.0   0.1   2.2   [B]8.9[/B]   0.5   0.0            
20 |                           0.0   0.5   3.1   [B]4.8[/B]   0.1                  
21 |                           0.0   0.9   [B]2.4[/B]   1.6   0.0                  
22 |                     0.0   0.1   1.1   [B]1.2[/B]   0.3   0.0                  
23 |                     0.0   0.1   [B]0.7[/B]   0.3   0.0                        
24 |                     0.0   0.1   [B]0.3[/B]   0.0   0.0                        
25 |                     0.0   [B]0.1   0.1[/B]   0.0                              
26 |               0.0   0.0   0.0   0.0                                    
27 |               0.0   0.0   0.0   0.0                                    
28 |               0.0   0.0   0.0                                          
29 |               0.0   0.0                                                
30 |
 
Re: RPI Engineers 2017-2018

First game so close, were easily on par. Injuries have taken their toll you can see it in the 3rd period.
 
Re: RPI Engineers 2017-2018

giwan said:
First game so close, were easily on par. Injuries have taken their toll you can see it in the 3rd period.
Click to expand...

Good effort against Clarkson but the SLU game was not encouraging. Hemmed in our own end for most of the game, partly because SLU forechecks well but we made huge number of unforced errors coming out of our own end. Disappointing to see that RPI, once again, is in a position of defining its success as squeaking into the playoffs. But, it is way too early to judge a new coach, so I'm still hopeful.
 
hab said:
Good effort against Clarkson but the SLU game was not encouraging. Hemmed in our own end for most of the game, partly because SLU forechecks well but we made huge number of unforced errors coming out of our own end. Disappointing to see that RPI, once again, is in a position of defining its success as squeaking into the playoffs. But, it is way too early to judge a new coach, so I'm still hopeful.
Click to expand...

Your last sentence is the key. It is far too early to judge or be disappointed. You have to wait til he has a chance to clean house and bring in a team full of his own recruits first. There's still a lot of dead weight on this team...players that probably would have been better suited for high-end D3 programs because they are just too slow to play D1 hockey, but how can ya pass up an RPI education when the former coach recruits you?! You can't, so none of this is the fault of the current players. The blame rests fully on the shoulders of the previous head coach.
 
Re: RPI Engineers 2017-2018

shelfit said:
Your last sentence is the key. It is far too early to judge or be disappointed. You have to wait til he has a chance to clean house and bring in a team full of his own recruits first. There's still a lot of dead weight on this team...players that probably would have been better suited for high-end D3 programs because they are just too slow to play D1 hockey, but how can ya pass up an RPI education when the former coach recruits you?! You can't, so none of this is the fault of the current players. The blame rests fully on the shoulders of the previous head coach.
Click to expand...

As much as I agree far to early to judge I do not believe be needs to have all HIS recruits in place to win.
 
giwan said:
As much as I agree far to early to judge I do not believe be needs to have all HIS recruits in place to win.
Click to expand...

But he does need more of his own recruits (defined as more than half the team of his own recruits vs the former coach's players) to win MORE OFTEN. Still too much dead weight and slow feet on this team from the previous coach.
 
Last edited:
Re: RPI Engineers 2017-2018

shelfit said:
But he does need more of his own recruits (defined as more than half the team of his own recruits vs the former coach's players) to win MORE OFTEN. Still too much dead weight and slow feet on this team from the previous coach.
Click to expand...

I agree that there are players on the roster who could be classified as dead weight, but if they are recruited walkons or only receiving small partial scholarships, they could be making contribution equivalent to their cost. With 18 scholarships available, not everyone is getting a full ride.

Also even many of the better teams typically seem to play mainly two lines.

Do coach Vines' recruits in the pipeline look to be an improvement to you?
 
Ralph Baer said:
I agree that there are players on the roster who could be classified as dead weight, but if they are recruited walkons or only receiving small partial scholarships, they could be making contribution equivalent to their cost. With 18 scholarships available, not everyone is getting a full ride.

Also even many of the better teams typically seem to play mainly two lines.

Do coach Vines' recruits in the pipeline look to be an improvement to you?
Click to expand...

Predicting how well recruits will do once they get to the next level is a very hard thing to do accurately. Sometimes players that look very good at the U19 level end up being very average once they reach D1. Does that mean they should have gone D3 instead? That's also a very hard question to answer. To accurately predict any of that while they're still playing U19 hockey is what differentiates good recruiting ability from average to poor recruiting ability. It's not uncommon for a good U19 player to not be coached well while playing at that level, which means she's not being properly prepared to play at the next level. Why? A lot of times the U19 coaches didn't necessarily achieve Great Heights in hockey themselves and so they don't know any better... they don't understand that a forward who is all about offense but not defense or a defenseman who wanders all over the ice without regard to team play because she's very offensively minded aren't players that are necessarily ready to play college hockey. You need to be more well-rounded, more of a two-way player to be successful at the next level. Just my opinion.
 
And Yale moves 2 points ahead of RPI and into 8th place in the ECAC, dropping RPI into 9th place. Wrong direction.
 
Re: RPI Engineers 2017-2018

What if we earned a point. That would be pretty cool. Despite falling out of the top 8 in the actual real standings, we currently hold a 0.03 point lead over Yale and maintain our grip on the playoffs (yeah, no, 0.03 is a tie that could be a little bigger or smaller in subsequent runs). We've had a tough schedule lately, so coming out with nothing wasn't fatal, but we must be better this weekend. The total possible swing in our playoff chances is nearly 66%. If we lose even one of the games, we'll slip even further down the standings, and losing two would be a disaster. Further, it looks like 16 points will no longer be good enough; we need 17 or 18.

RPI KRACH (RRWP): 55.10 (0.3806)

MCTs (Mean/Median/Mode/Range):
Points - 16.63 / 17 / 16 / 10 - 26
Rank - 8.48 / 8 / 8 / 4 - 12
Playoffs - 53.8%
Most likely opponent - at Colgate (29.6%)

Conference Rankings:
  1. Colgate
  2. Clarkson
  3. SLU
  4. Cornell
    —————
  5. Quinnipiac
  6. Princeton
  7. Harvard
  8. RPI
    —————
    —————
  9. Yale
  10. Union
  11. Dartmouth
  12. Brown

This Weekend's Implications:
Code: 
Record|Playoffs
---------------
 2-0-0|   77.4%
 1-0-1|   64.2%
 1-1-0|   46.2%   
 0-0-2|   45.7%
 0-1-1|   26.3%
 0-2-0|   11.6%

RPI Points vs. Position:
Code: 
   |     1     2     3     4     5     6     7     8     9    10    11    12
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
10 |                                                         0.1   [B]0.2[/B]   0.0
11 |                                                         0.3   [B]0.4[/B]      
12 |                                             0.0   0.1   [B]2.1[/B]   0.7      
13 |                                             0.0   0.7   [B]3.6[/B]   0.4      
14 |                                             0.7   4.5   [B]5.0[/B]   0.1      
15 |                                       0.0   2.4   [B]6.7[/B]   3.2   0.0      
16 |                                       0.1   7.5   [B]8.5[/B]   1.4   0.0      
17 |                                 0.0   0.4   [B]9.6[/B]   5.0   0.3            
18 |                                 0.0   1.9  [B]10.7[/B]   2.3   0.0            
19 |                           0.0   0.3   2.8   [B]5.9[/B]   0.5   0.0            
20 |                           0.0   0.9   [B]3.3[/B]   2.4   0.1                  
21 |                           0.0   1.0   [B]1.4[/B]   0.4   0.0                  
22 |                           0.1   [B]0.9[/B]   0.4   0.0   0.0                  
23 |                     0.0   0.1   [B]0.3[/B]   0.0   0.0                        
24 |                     0.0   0.0   [B]0.1[/B]   0.0                              
25 |                     0.0   0.0   0.0                                    
26 |                     0.0   0.0   0.0
 
lugnut92 said:
What if we earned a point. That would be pretty cool. Despite falling out of the top 8 in the actual real standings, we currently hold a 0.03 point lead over Yale and maintain our grip on the playoffs (yeah, no, 0.03 is a tie that could be a little bigger or smaller in subsequent runs). We've had a tough schedule lately, so coming out with nothing wasn't fatal, but we must be better this weekend. The total possible swing in our playoff chances is nearly 66%. If we lose even one of the games, we'll slip even further down the standings, and losing two would be a disaster. Further, it looks like 16 points will no longer be good enough; we need 17 or 18.

RPI KRACH (RRWP): 55.10 (0.3806)

MCTs (Mean/Median/Mode/Range):
Points - 16.63 / 17 / 16 / 10 - 26
Rank - 8.48 / 8 / 8 / 4 - 12
Playoffs - 53.8%
Most likely opponent - at Colgate (29.6%)

Conference Rankings:
  1. Colgate
  2. Clarkson
  3. SLU
  4. Cornell
    —————
  5. Quinnipiac
  6. Princeton
  7. Harvard
  8. RPI
    —————
    —————
  9. Yale
  10. Union
  11. Dartmouth
  12. Brown

This Weekend's Implications:
Code: 
Record|Playoffs
---------------
 2-0-0|   77.4%
 1-0-1|   64.2%
 1-1-0|   46.2%   
 0-0-2|   45.7%
 0-1-1|   26.3%
 0-2-0|   11.6%
| 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Click to expand...


With everyone making the playoffs, I'd say the chances of them making it are 100%. :D. Or is this the chances of a home series?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top