What's new
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 Hockey 2014-2015 Part II: Dedicated to Rich Curadi

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

Now this data tells a very different story. Princeton, RPI, SLU have roughly the same number of penalty kills, and so we are not nearly such an outlier during conference play on taking penalties (more than one standard deviation but less than two standard deviations, same as the other two).

However, we are really an extreme outlier when it comes to power play opportunities. We are the only team more than two standard deviations below the median when it comes to power play opportunities during conference play, the team with the second-least opportunities is within one standard deviation of the median. This is very striking.

For conference play only, we are not really too much of an outlier on how much we are penalized; we are very much an outlier on how little our opponents are penalized.

Given that they win something like 60%+ of faceoffs and also maintain more possession, it might indicate that we actually are doing a fairly decent job of avoiding penalties during conference play, given the disparity in possession that shows up in how infrequently opponents are penalized.

The data is probably not available to normalize penalties for / against relative to time of possession against / for.

And Union is about the same amount above the mean in power play opportunities as we are below. Interesting.
 
Re: RPI Hockey 2014-2015 Part II: Dedicated to Rich Curadi

Now this data tells a very different story. Princeton, RPI, SLU have roughly the same number of penalty kills, and so we are not nearly such an outlier during conference play on taking penalties (more than one standard deviation but less than two standard deviations, same as the other two).

However, we are really an extreme outlier when it comes to power play opportunities. We are the only team more than two standard deviations below the median when it comes to power play opportunities during conference play, the team with the second-least opportunities is within one standard deviation of the median. This is very striking.

For conference play only, we are not really too much of an outlier on how much we are penalized; we are very much an outlier on how little our opponents are penalized.

Given that they win something like 60%+ of faceoffs and also maintain more possession, it might indicate that we actually are doing a fairly decent job of avoiding penalties during conference play, given the disparity in possession that shows up in how infrequently opponents are penalized.

The data is probably not available to normalize penalties for / against relative to time of possession against / for.

It's probably available, but a bit difficult to get without a CHS.net API.
 
Re: RPI Hockey 2014-2015 Part II: Dedicated to Rich Curadi

I'd like to add some drivel to the PP discussion if I may...

Puck possession drives some of this. Since RPI is bad at face-offs, we spend a larger percentage of time trying to get the puck rather than trying to keep it. As we all know, players with the puck draw penalties and players without it tend to commit them. So there's some ammo for your face-off fixation Doc.

Secondly, reputation starts to come into play. Living in Boston, I cannot tell you how frustrating it is to be a Bruins fan and see the level of non-calls that we get vs. the opponents. Yes, I realize I'm a fan and there are likely others out there who will disagree with me (especially if you are a Canadian's fan), but I like to think I can be pretty sober in my analysis of replays. Part of this is embellishment - in both a positive and negative way. Brad Marchand has developed a rep for being a rat and an embellisher. Embellishing is really frowned upon by Boston management - which has at times put Brad at odds with Bruins management in the past. He has cleaned up that part of his game somewhat - but it's too late. He has the rep across the league and it will not be easy to shake it (if ever). As a result, he needs to get absolutely mugged in order to get a call. And of course his rat reputation remains. The net effect is maddening. There have been a number of occasions this year where Marchand got a penalty for something and later had the exact same thing happen to him at the other end... with no call. Drives Julien crazy... makes him complain... which makes the refs think he rides them too much.. making them they are less likely to call things in the future.

Lucic falls into this same category but only in that he has a rep for playing rough (not diving). He fights through things that other forwards in the league don't so doesn't draw penalties. When he hits someone and it is borderline, refs rarely look the other way.

Take a look at the Bruins PP stats and you'll see a case similar to RPI. They just don't get calls. In Boston's case, since they win face offs and control the puck, it's more likely reputation that is behind some of it. And foot speed might play into it as well. For RPI, it's probably a lack of puck possession and maybe reputation. All it takes are a couple of meat heads (Wood and Devito) and a coach that the refs don't like (this is speculation of course). And I'll throw foot speed in there for RPI too - not on O but on D. The good thing about our D is that they are big. The bad thing about them is that they are big. Big brings strength - but not always speed. The game is all about speed these days.

take it to the Bruins thread. Just kidding.
 
Re: RPI Hockey 2014-2015 Part II: Dedicated to Rich Curadi

It's probably available, but a bit difficult to get without a CHS.net API.

As far as I know, time on ice and possession time aren't tracked at the College level -- they might be used internally by schools, but they're not submitted with the official stats.
 
Re: RPI Hockey 2014-2015 Part II: Dedicated to Rich Curadi

As far as I know, time on ice and possession time aren't tracked at the College level -- they might be used internally by schools, but they're not submitted with the official stats.

You can calculate the time on the PP or PK, though, as you just get the difference between the penalty and the next goal considered a PPG.

It's true that possession is not tracked; something where you'd have to go back through hours of video.
 
Re: RPI Hockey 2014-2015 Part II: Dedicated to Rich Curadi

I'd like to add some drivel to the PP discussion if I may...

Puck possession drives some of this. Since RPI is bad at face-offs, we spend a larger percentage of time trying to get the puck rather than trying to keep it. As we all know, players with the puck draw penalties and players without it tend to commit them. So there's some ammo for your face-off fixation Doc.

Secondly, reputation starts to come into play. Living in Boston, I cannot tell you how frustrating it is to be a Bruins fan and see the level of non-calls that we get vs. the opponents. Yes, I realize I'm a fan and there are likely others out there who will disagree with me (especially if you are a Canadian's fan), but I like to think I can be pretty sober in my analysis of replays. Part of this is embellishment - in both a positive and negative way. Brad Marchand has developed a rep for being a rat and an embellisher. Embellishing is really frowned upon by Boston management - which has at times put Brad at odds with Bruins management in the past. He has cleaned up that part of his game somewhat - but it's too late. He has the rep across the league and it will not be easy to shake it (if ever). As a result, he needs to get absolutely mugged in order to get a call. And of course his rat reputation remains. The net effect is maddening. There have been a number of occasions this year where Marchand got a penalty for something and later had the exact same thing happen to him at the other end... with no call. Drives Julien crazy... makes him complain... which makes the refs think he rides them too much.. making them they are less likely to call things in the future.

Lucic falls into this same category but only in that he has a rep for playing rough (not diving). He fights through things that other forwards in the league don't so doesn't draw penalties. When he hits someone and it is borderline, refs rarely look the other way.

Take a look at the Bruins PP stats and you'll see a case similar to RPI. They just don't get calls. In Boston's case, since they win face offs and control the puck, it's more likely reputation that is behind some of it. And foot speed might play into it as well. For RPI, it's probably a lack of puck possession and maybe reputation. All it takes are a couple of meat heads (Wood and Devito) and a coach that the refs don't like (this is speculation of course). And I'll throw foot speed in there for RPI too - not on O but on D. The good thing about our D is that they are big. The bad thing about them is that they are big. Big brings strength - but not always speed. The game is all about speed these days.

Well stated and I agree with almost everything said. This is sort of the discussion i was trying to instigate here on the thread. We have a week to kill and I just thouhgt our numbers were just so far off from other teams that we could talk a bit about it. You may be even more correct when it comes to the Bruins as i follow the NHL games carefully and see exactly what you are saying.
 
Re: RPI Hockey 2014-2015 Part II: Dedicated to Rich Curadi

Of course, this topic would not be complete without my take. As always I applaud my colleague and good friend DrD on his willingness and steadfastness in taking on the "officiating" in the ECAC. Go back and take a look at the Cornell/Colgate weekend at home where we played our best weekend IMO and took the play to those guys (puck possession) and we still got the screw on calls. A fish rots from the top and the problem is Paul Stewart. It is not a conspiracy theory to say that there is bias. It has been proven by the following http://www.troyrecord.com/general-n...-warranted-ecac-needs-more-consistency-on-ice Some will look for explanation and call me a conspiracy theorist. As you know I faced down the league office on many occasions, they actually sent a reporter out to discredit me http://www.dailygazette.com/weblogs/schott/2010/nov/22/college-hockey-slap-schotts-2010-11-week-7/

We get the screw whatever metrics you look at. Thank you DrD for having the courage to take this head on. My luv to Jenny. That is all.

Great to hear from you Aspy. Jen is not in a very loving mood right now. Just returned from the periodontist who implanted both bone and a bunch of dental implants today. Even i know to stay away from her under these circumstances. The cats are in hiding since she got home. My best approach is to keep her well medicated for the next 24 hours.
I was not really sure what i was looking for by opening up this discussion but my senses tell me that something is just out of whack. It probably would make little difference but i would love to see the penalties compared not in numbers of penalties, but in actual minutes of extra man time versus actual minutes of short handed time. That would necessitate taking out a bunch of last minute third period calls that officials sometimes make to have the final stat sheet show that the penalty calls were more even. Calling 12 minutes on a team in the first 59 minutes of play and then evening the count by calling the other team for 4 minutes with seconds left to play does not show up on most radar but it does not make things equal.
 
Re: RPI Hockey 2014-2015 Part II: Dedicated to Rich Curadi

from collegehockeystats.com...

PP Rank SH Rank
Brown 97 (11) 101 (11)
Clarkson 114 (5) 122 (6)
Colgate 133 (3) 127 (4)
Cornell 106 (8) 111 (8)
Dartmouth 103 (9) 109 (9)
Harvard 109 (6) 105 (10)
Princeton 101 (10) 121 (7)
Quinnipiac 136 (2) 124 (5)
Rensselaer 108 (7) 166 (1)
St. Lawrence 132 (4) 143 (2)
Union 170 (1) 128 (3)
Yale 95 (12) 78 (12)

RPI is middle of road in getting PP opps, but first in committing penalties, again, which aligns with their lack of discipline.

The average age of the RPI roster is 21.9 years. Union is 22.2, Quinnipiac is 21.9, Clarkson is 21.2, Yale is 22.1, Harvard is 21.5 and SLU is 21.4. I didn't compute the rest of the league. Yale seems to draw the fewest penalties against and they have a few months on us. Union draws the most penalties for and they also have a few months on us. Comparisons by age seem to be a mixed-bag. Maybe just enough to safely assume it's one of several major factors. I included the goalies in the calculation but maybe I shouldn't have since they don't contribute too directly to penalty time.

I didn't try to correct for on-ice average age because I don't have on-ice time by player. Since Curadi, Laliberte and McGowan are our older players and they log a lot of ice-time, average on-ice age may not be much different than the rest of the league.

One other observation, RPI's roster size on collegehockeynews.com is 25 players. Harvard has 31 players listed, Yale has 28, Union has 26, and SLU has 27. Depth can factor into fatigue and this could also contribute to penalty issues. I know there are limits on how many can dress for a given game but having more players in standby can keep a team fresher over the season.

Anyway, more statistics mixed-in with flat-out conjecture.
 
Last edited:
Re: RPI Hockey 2014-2015 Part II: Dedicated to Rich Curadi

The average age of the RPI roster is 21.9 years. Union is 22.2, Quinnipiac is 21.9, Clarkson is 21.2, Yale is 22.1, Harvard is 21.5 and SLU is 21.4. I didn't compute the rest of the league. Yale seems to draw the fewest penalties against and they have a few months on us. Union draws the most penalties for and they also have a few months on us. Comparisons by age seem to be a mixed-bag. Maybe just enough to safely assume it's one of several major factors. I included the goalies in the calculation but maybe I shouldn't have since they don't contribute too directly to penalty time.

I didn't try to correct for on-ice average age because I don't have on-ice time by player. Since Curadi, Laliberte and McGowan are our older players and they log a lot of ice-time, average on-ice age may not be much different than the rest of the league.

One other observation, RPI's roster size on collegehockeynews.com is 25 players. Harvard has 31 players listed, Yale has 28, Union has 26, and SLU has 27. Depth can factor into fatigue and this could also contribute to penalty issues. I know there are limits on how many can dress for a given game but having more players in standby can keep a team fresher over the season.

Anyway, more statistics mixed-in with flat-out conjecture.

I wonder if the depth is intentional, along with the younger age. Consider this: The "eh?" team, as WaP put it in 2010 (i.e. Polacek, Brutlag, Foss), consisted of three players that came essentially directly out of high school. The same could be said for D'Amigo and Haggerty, although we'll leave them out of the equation because the USA U-18 is a fairly special exception. Why would they, along with Parker Reno and a few of the other Minnesota recruits, come directly from high school? Are the coaches using "first team" or "key player" status in bringing these players to RPI and not have them defect to one of the larger midwestern schools? Could that be why Koudys left, because he may have been promised first team, got put essentially on rotation, and left due to dissatisfaction there?

Obviously we're not going to get the same total caliber the larger midwestern schools (or the Boston schools for that matter) see, and maybe that's why we've started to see more players from the NAHL and some of the not-quite-as-prominent Canadian leagues. Is the staff finally understanding that these all-star teams just don't work, and the rotational players can really provide the support roles that help the first team players?
 
Re: RPI Hockey 2014-2015 Part II: Dedicated to Rich Curadi

“Stewie’s” kid would fit right in with RPI’s favorite response......Well, except for my boy. When he heard his name, he automatically responded, "sucks!" http://www.hockeybuzz.com/blog/Paul-Stewart/Everyones-Favorite-Sport-Blaming-the-Officials/196/67019

It amazes me how cavalier the overseers of referees (Stewie is not alone in this but is a perfect example) are about bad or missed calls or inconsistency of officiating. To say it is just part of the game and accept it is why it doesn't improve. The inability to take criticism and the secrecy surrounding any punitive action handed down to zebras is why there is a continuing problem. Deflecting the blame is a childish reaction, we should expect better from the officials.
 
Re: RPI Hockey 2014-2015 Part II: Dedicated to Rich Curadi

.....as far as Koudys, it was a question of what type of Dman would get him to the NHL. SA wanted him to be offensive while Dad wanted him to be defensive. We know who won that debate.
 
Re: RPI Hockey 2014-2015 Part II: Dedicated to Rich Curadi

The average age of the RPI roster is 21.9 years. Union is 22.2, Quinnipiac is 21.9, Clarkson is 21.2, Yale is 22.1, Harvard is 21.5 and SLU is 21.4. I didn't compute the rest of the league. Yale seems to draw the fewest penalties against and they have a few months on us. Union draws the most penalties for and they also have a few months on us. Comparisons by age seem to be a mixed-bag. Maybe just enough to safely assume it's one of several major factors. I included the goalies in the calculation but maybe I shouldn't have since they don't contribute too directly to penalty time.

I didn't try to correct for on-ice average age because I don't have on-ice time by player. Since Curadi, Laliberte and McGowan are our older players and they log a lot of ice-time, average on-ice age may not be much different than the rest of the league.

One other observation, RPI's roster size on collegehockeynews.com is 25 players. Harvard has 31 players listed, Yale has 28, Union has 26, and SLU has 27. Depth can factor into fatigue and this could also contribute to penalty issues. I know there are limits on how many can dress for a given game but having more players in standby can keep a team fresher over the season.

Anyway, more statistics mixed-in with flat-out conjecture.

We have 26 on the roster. I assume that Goodman is not there. There were 27 before Soffer left.
 
Re: RPI Hockey 2014-2015 Part II: Dedicated to Rich Curadi

I was not really sure what i was looking for by opening up this discussion but my senses tell me that something is just out of whack. It probably would make little difference but i would love to see the penalties compared not in numbers of penalties, but in actual minutes of extra man time versus actual minutes of short handed time. That would necessitate taking out a bunch of last minute third period calls that officials sometimes make to have the final stat sheet show that the penalty calls were more even. Calling 12 minutes on a team in the first 59 minutes of play and then evening the count by calling the other team for 4 minutes with seconds left to play does not show up on most radar but it does not make things equal.

Assuming that the data posted earlier about conference play was accurate, the problem appeared to be not quite so much in the penalties called against us (we were in a virtual tie with two other teams, still leading the league in that dubious category); the problem was far more striking on how few penalties were called against our opponents, way way way out of line relative to any other ECAC team.

The additional adjustment you mention would make the latter even more egregious. :(
 
Back
Top