RPI Hockey 2014-2015 Part II: Dedicated to Rich Curadi

[DrDemento]

Re: RPI Hockey 2014-2015 Part II: Dedicated to Rich Curadi

Well it is a matter of opinion as to what constitutes 'far more'. Supporting the Doc's observation is that in total this year we have had 108 powerplays vs. 166 penalty kills. In my book, that is consistently 'far more'. While not to that degree in the 3 playoff games, the disturbing trend is still there.

That was my reference. Thank you for the specific numbers. I find the officials have consistently creamed us this year. We can call it lack of discipline on our part or whatever we like, but it is hard to imagine how this can be in almost every game and under every situation(whether we are down by 3 goals or up by 3 goals or tied, we are getting called far more than other teams).

 

[DrDemento]

Re: RPI Hockey 2014-2015 Part II: Dedicated to Rich Curadi

58 more PPs out of 39 games (assuming you're not counting the exhibition), that's about 1.5 more on average. If you consider that "far more", that's your prerogative, but I would think "far more" would mean if it was up to 2.5 or 3 more on average.

FDude: You are splitting hairs. It is FAR MORE by any measurement. Go hunting if you wish through the entire list for every team in the nation and see how many get called for an average of 1.5 extra penalties over and above their opponents.

 

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: RPI Hockey 2014-2015 Part II: Dedicated to Rich Curadi

I read (and sometimes post) in both the Clarkson and Cornell forums. A significant percentage of both fan bases are calling for their coaches' heads.

Note to FD08, I am not defining "a significant percentage".

Just read the Round Table. Just... wow. Even I'm not THIS bad; at least get the system going first.

 

[DrDemento]

Re: RPI Hockey 2014-2015 Part II: Dedicated to Rich Curadi

Given it is an average, I could see where you're going with that. In conference play, we certainly have the least number of PPs (54), next highest is 13 away (the team we played last week). For PK, we're the highest (87), but only by one (ironically, the team we play this upcoming week).

Now you seem to be with it. We are short handed the most and have the extra man the least. I might understand this if there was one or two totally aberrant games that skewed the statistics. Say we got called for 12 penalties in one game and only had one power play. But that is not the case. We are routinely called more often than our opponents. Perhaps it is our style of play (i doubt it), perhaps it is just a bad streak of luck(I doubt it). It just seems far too suspicious to occur in so many games. Maybe i need to increase my antiparanoid medication-but this is not the first year of these kind of statistics but it perhaps the most easily noticed. Special teams have influenced or decided outright far too many games for us and you can certainly magnify that when we lose 65% of the faceoffs which i am also sure extends to the faceoffs when short handed and deep in our own zone.
SLU is not CCT. If we lose 65% of the faceoffs next week and get called for an extra 1.5 penalties per game, would you want to bet on the the outcome of the series? CCT was a team that won and lost close to the same numbers of games we did all season. SLU is not.

 

[lugnut92]

Re: RPI Hockey 2014-2015 Part II: Dedicated to Rich Curadi

With all this penalty talk, do I need to remake that graph I made last year?

 

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: RPI Hockey 2014-2015 Part II: Dedicated to Rich Curadi

Now you seem to be with it. We are short handed the most and have the extra man the least. I might understand this if there was one or two totally aberrant games that skewed the statistics. Say we got called for 12 penalties in one game and only had one power play. But that is not the case. We are routinely called more often than our opponents. Perhaps it is our style of play (i doubt it), perhaps it is just a bad streak of luck(I doubt it). It just seems far too suspicious to occur in so many games. Maybe i need to increase my antiparanoid medication-but this is not the first year of these kind of statistics but it perhaps the most easily noticed. Special teams have influenced or decided outright far too many games for us and you can certainly magnify that when we lose 65% of the faceoffs which i am also sure extends to the faceoffs when short handed and deep in our own zone.
SLU is not CCT. If we lose 65% of the faceoffs next week and get called for an extra 1.5 penalties per game, would you want to bet on the the outcome of the series? CCT was a team that won and lost close to the same numbers of games we did all season. SLU is not.

13-14: PP 74 (12th most), PK 94 (6th most).
12-13: PP 88 (6th most), PK 92 (8th most)
11-12: PP 86 (10th), PK 104 (T-3rd)
10-11: PP 114 (T-3rd), PK 114 (2nd)

 

[drshoen]

Re: RPI Hockey 2014-2015 Part II: Dedicated to Rich Curadi

Just read the Round Table. Just... wow. Even I'm not THIS bad; at least get the system going first.

The weird thing to me is that almost all of that talk came about in the last couple weeks; usually this level of angst takes a long time to build.

Good luck next weekend; I won't be rooting loud for either team, but what interest I do have will be on your side.

 

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: RPI Hockey 2014-2015 Part II: Dedicated to Rich Curadi

With all this penalty talk, do I need to remake that graph I made last year?

Do it. You know you want to.

 

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: RPI Hockey 2014-2015 Part II: Dedicated to Rich Curadi

The weird thing to me is that almost all of that talk came about in the last couple weeks; usually this level of angst takes a long time to build.

Good luck next weekend; I won't be rooting loud for either team, but what interest I do have will be on your side.

Something similar built up for us in the 08-09 season. I was not part of the Fiar Appart crowd, as there wasn't a system in yet, what was inherited was pretty bad, so we'll give him a shot.

Fast forward a few years later, it's apparent that the talent is there, but problems exist with playing as a team, and bench coaching is just plain awful. And the sad part is, whenever one good season occurs, the administration gives him a huge extension. I hate to think what will happen if we happen to win this upcoming series...

 

[RedWrister]

Re: RPI Hockey 2014-2015 Part II: Dedicated to Rich Curadi

Now you seem to be with it. We are short handed the most and have the extra man the least. I might understand this if there was one or two totally aberrant games that skewed the statistics. Say we got called for 12 penalties in one game and only had one power play. But that is not the case. We are routinely called more often than our opponents. Perhaps it is our style of play (i doubt it), perhaps it is just a bad streak of luck(I doubt it). It just seems far too suspicious to occur in so many games. Maybe i need to increase my antiparanoid medication-but this is not the first year of these kind of statistics but it perhaps the most easily noticed. Special teams have influenced or decided outright far too many games for us and you can certainly magnify that when we lose 65% of the faceoffs which i am also sure extends to the faceoffs when short handed and deep in our own zone.
SLU is not CCT. If we lose 65% of the faceoffs next week and get called for an extra 1.5 penalties per game, would you want to bet on the the outcome of the series? CCT was a team that won and lost close to the same numbers of games we did all season. SLU is not.

There are many possible root causes for being in the box more than the opponent. I think for us, the most likely "cause" is that we have been a young team for a number of years. It seems like most other teams in the league have more seasoned players although I can't say I've studied the average age of the various rosters. I looked in some detail a few years ago and were were definitely younger than other ECAC programs. Also, we seem to play our younger players a lot such that our average on-ice age is probably even lower than the average roster-age.

This may explain the face-off issues to some degree as well.

 

[DeepRed72]

Re: RPI Hockey 2014-2015 Part II: Dedicated to Rich Curadi

I would say more than 1.5 is far more, but it is semantics.

It is not semantics, it is mathematics. Look at it this way, if one assumes that any penalty has a 50-50 chance of going for or against you, then it is akin to flipping a coin. If one flipped a coin 274 times how often would one expect to have no more than 108 successes? Well it so happens that we can use the cumulative binomial tables, the tool provided by url stattrek.com/on-line-calculator/binomial.aspx allows us to get an exact answer. The probability is 0.00027, less than 3/100ths of a percent (almost 4-sigma territory). This indeed surpasses the 'far more' criteria. One may ask then what would be the true chance of having a penalty called your way that would produce an expectancy of 50% cumulative probability given 108 successes out of 274 trials. That answer is 39.6% according to the stattrek calculator. So according to the empirical data, it would tell us that every time a penalty is called, there is a 60% chance it is on us.

 

[ServinisScores]

Re: RPI Hockey 2014-2015 Part II: Dedicated to Rich Curadi

Well it is a matter of opinion as to what constitutes 'far more'. Supporting the Doc's observation is that in total this year we have had 108 powerplays vs. 166 penalty kills. In my book, that is consistently 'far more'. While not to that degree in the 3 playoff games, the disturbing trend is still there.

Can you show how does 108 and 166 stackup vs.rest of league?. Lack of PP opps are usually NOT attributed to a league-supported vendetta, but a poor-skating/uncreative offense. As for the number of kills, it has been noticed that Wood/Devito and Bourbonnais to some extent, have been very undisciplined in penalty taking this year...

 

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: RPI Hockey 2014-2015 Part II: Dedicated to Rich Curadi

Can you show how does 108 and 166 stackup vs.rest of league?. Lack of PP opps are usually NOT attributed to a league-supported vendetta, but a poor-skating/uncreative offense. As for the number of kills, it has been noticed that Wood/Devito and Bourbonnais to some extent, have been very undisciplined in penalty taking this year...

Also, we must take into account that this is an overall statistic (I provided a conference only one, 54 and 87 respectively). Remember that we played two extra games this year due to the icebreaker, and we play five more games than the ivy league.

 

[DeepRed72]

Re: RPI Hockey 2014-2015 Part II: Dedicated to Rich Curadi

Can you show how does 108 and 166 stackup vs.rest of league?. Lack of PP opps are usually NOT attributed to a league-supported vendetta, but a poor-skating/uncreative offense. As for the number of kills, it has been noticed that Wood/Devito and Bourbonnais to some extent, have been very undisciplined in penalty taking this year...

I offer no rationale for the why or how we compare to other teams, just the facts that show the penalty distribution in RPI games this season cannot be the result of pure randomness. As for the bias, I leave that to others to discern the reasons.

 

[FreshFish]

Re: RPI Hockey 2014-2015 Part II: Dedicated to Rich Curadi

I offer no rationale for the why or how we compare to other teams, just the facts that show the penalty distribution in RPI games this season cannot be the result of pure randomness.

one plausible explanation, in general, is that if a team generally is slower and less-skilled relative to the majority of its opponents, it likely will have fewer power plays and more penalty kills than its opponents. No bias necessary under that explanation. a 60% - 40% disparity would easily make sense.[SUP]1[/SUP]

Now, one might argue whether that explanation fits this team or not.....



[SUP]1[/SUP] Similar to basketball: the team that primarily takes outside jump shots typically is fouled less often than the team that drives the lane more often and crashes the boards.

 

[lugnut92]

Re: RPI Hockey 2014-2015 Part II: Dedicated to Rich Curadi

<img href="http://imgur.com/gavkN9v"><img src="http://i.imgur.com/gavkN9v.png" title="source: imgur.com" /></img>

Graph shows median and interquartile range.

RPI ties for 3rd in median PIM per game at 10. RPI's games fall in a very tight distribution, with the second lowest upper quartile at 12 PIM, but the highest lower quartile at 8. RPI took between 6 and 12 PIMs in 29 of 39 games.

Fun notes:

• SLU is the only team to have two penalty-free games, but also the highest single game PIM total at 107 PIM.
• Yale is again by far the cleanest team in the ECAC, with double-digit PIMs in only 5 out of 29 games.
• Ivies appear to take fewer penalties, with five of the bottom six penalty-taking teams being members of the conference.

 

[DrDemento]

Re: RPI Hockey 2014-2015 Part II: Dedicated to Rich Curadi

I am by no means any sort of statistician. All i would like to see is not which team gets the most penalty minutes or which team gets the least. That is not helpful to me or my point. I would like to see a listing or graph that shows which team has the most net penalties(or minutes) called per game or which teams have the least net penalties(or minutes) called per game. But the minutes get distorted by misconducts which do not leave you short handed, so i would like those to not be counted in the totals. For me that kind of listing would be most instructive and/or convincing. I guess what I am asking is a listing of the ECAC teams by net minutes on the power play and net minutes defending short handed. These are hard numbers to get since some penalties that are called overlap by so much that although we get credited with a power play chance, it might only be for a few seconds and similarly for opponents.
Don't mind me today, just bored and passing time until friday.

Edit; Also please remember that some officials have this knack of evening up the calls on the overall stat sheet by calling penalties with 1 second left in the third period. Those calls although registering as a penalty of 2 minutes, do not make a team short handed.

 

[ServinisScores]

Re: RPI Hockey 2014-2015 Part II: Dedicated to Rich Curadi

RPI does not not look remarkable by that data in any stretch of the imagination....

 

[lugnut92]

Re: RPI Hockey 2014-2015 Part II: Dedicated to Rich Curadi

DrD, I might get back to you on that later tonight. What you want is time on the PP vs. time shorthanded, thus ignoring matching/coincidental minors, 10:00 and game misconducts, and fighting majors, (of which I imagine there were none)? I'll probably only look at league games to limit this to 132 tilts.

 

[burgie12]

Re: RPI Hockey 2014-2015 Part II: Dedicated to Rich Curadi

DrD, I might get back to you on that later tonight. What you want is time on the PP vs. time shorthanded, thus ignoring matching/coincidental minors, 10:00 and game misconducts, and fighting majors, (of which I imagine there were none)? I'll probably only look at league games to limit this to 132 tilts.

Something that I would also appreciate being included in that data set is "assigned" PP time / shorthanded time. It has some issues, though.

For an example, let's go with the last game of the regular season.

Time    Event   Team
32:00   Penalty SLU
32:38   Goal    RPI
33:11   Penalty RPI

In the latter half of the second period, RPI had 38 seconds of PP and 120 seconds of penalty kill. If RPI doesn't score on the power-play, there's 71 seconds of non-overlapping power play for each team. Does the penalty get committed if the teams are not at even strength?

So, what's the correct value to put for this situation? Over a long sampling time, the decision of how these are dealt with should cancel out, but on the short term (such as only 22 games), a more or less proficient power-play unit can greatly skew these numbers.