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 Hockey 2015 - 2016:: Six Flags Over the HFH

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: RPI Hockey 2015 - 2016:: Six Flags Over the HFH

AspyDad said:
15 votes for our beloved Engineers

http://www.uscho.com/rankings/d-i-mens-poll/2015-2016/poll,1012/october-12,-2015/
Click to expand...

It's amazing what winning can do!

I was unfortunately on a lab outing at Six Flags so I was following the game on twitter rather than watching at home, but it sounds like we played a "lunch pail" style of game or whatever you want to call it. Faced a lot of shots, blocked a lot of shots, relied on outstanding goaltending, and scored when we could. It's great when it works, but ask the 2013 Leafs and 13-14 Avs how things go when the goalie fades from outstanding to merely above average. I don't mean to dump on the team at all, and since I've only seen the goals, feel free to correct my assessment, but this type of game is dangerous to play. I hope we're able to carry it forward, start limiting shots (and shot attempts) against, limit the penalties, continue winning at least half of the faceoffs, and most importantly, keep winning.
 
Re: RPI Hockey 2015 - 2016:: Six Flags Over the HFH

engineerhockeyfan said:
I think that this is the first time I totally agree with everything Appert said after a game.
We played for sixty minutes and showed a lot more talent then we did in the previous two games.
Now I hope we can remember what we did and do the same thing for the rest of the season.
Click to expand...

I hope that coach SA does not tinker too much with what we did last night. Although we were not perfect by any means, the lines we put out there all contributed something. I also hope a lot of the flubbed shots were ice related as we had some really good looks and guys just missed getting anything on the shot. I liked the face off stats even more. From my perspective they were even better when you count only those deep in each zone. ET was a welcome addition and once we get a crew of linesmen who learn how to properly drop the puck we could be even better. Going back some, he reminded me a bit of St. Hillaire on faceoffs and I suspect it made a difference yesterday. BC is a very quick transition team and moves up ice like an express but the Nanne/Melanson line kept forcing them to just slow down a bit and that also helped but never shows up on the score sheet. The biggest thing though, without doubt, is Kasdorf when healthy. Just controls the tempo and seems to know exactly when to hold onto a puck or when to move it out of the way. Love seeing his contro on the ice and being healthy will be the key to our season.
 
Re: RPI Hockey 2015 - 2016:: Six Flags Over the HFH

AspyDad said:
15 votes for our beloved Engineers

http://www.uscho.com/rankings/d-i-mens-poll/2015-2016/poll,1012/october-12,-2015/
Click to expand...

Aspy: Ignore this poll for now. Two teams without a win (one with 2 losses and another with a loss and a tie) ranked highly? Teams who have not played ranked above teams that have quality wins? Still a popularity contest and voted upon by people who have not seen the teams that they are rating (and often times not even knowing the results of games). It will take about a month before anything on there has any meaning and even then, probably not much.
 
Re: RPI Hockey 2015 - 2016:: Six Flags Over the HFH

turk181 said:
......and PU with 19?????????? Really?
Click to expand...

Jenny and I have seen PU at practice. I am not saying they deserve a single vote yet (they haven't played) but I ranked them in the bottom 2 in Vic's contest before I saw them and although I cannot tell much from practice, I may be very sorry for listing them so low. They are pretty big and very fast on the Baker Rink ice and will be somewhat tough at least on home ice. We will be seeing them some before RPI comes down here on January 7th but for right now, I would be extremely satisfied if we get away from thee with a narrow win.
 
Re: RPI Hockey 2015 - 2016:: Six Flags Over the HFH

lugnut92 said:
It's amazing what winning can do!

I was unfortunately on a lab outing at Six Flags so I was following the game on twitter rather than watching at home, but it sounds like we played a "lunch pail" style of game or whatever you want to call it. Faced a lot of shots, blocked a lot of shots, relied on outstanding goaltending, and scored when we could. It's great when it works, but ask the 2013 Leafs and 13-14 Avs how things go when the goalie fades from outstanding to merely above average. I don't mean to dump on the team at all, and since I've only seen the goals, feel free to correct my assessment, but this type of game is dangerous to play. I hope we're able to carry it forward, start limiting shots (and shot attempts) against, limit the penalties, continue winning at least half of the faceoffs, and most importantly, keep winning.
Click to expand...

Of course this is only my opinion. Yes we relied on JK to save us in this game and why not? He is one of the best goalies I ever saw in college when healthy. But this was not a game where he did it all. Every line contributed. SA rolled the lines well and these groups should stay pretty much together until proven otherwise. BC is very good and we did a lot beside just let our goalie stop them. We blocked 41 shots, we disrupted their rushes and fought along the boards and at times had them on their heels. Sure they could have scored more if Kasdorf did not put in a phenomenal performance. But we had several good chances we created including a 3 on 1 rush and a few other great looks where we just flubbed a shot or went wide or they were able to block as we did. If we play like this for all 60 minutes of every game, most teams will have a lot of trouble against us. And remember, we did this with a bunch on the injury list and perhaps somewhat deflated after a poor showing on Friday night. If you can, watch the replay on RPI TV in a day or so and form your own opinion.
 
Re: RPI Hockey 2015 - 2016:: Six Flags Over the HFH

turk181 said:
......and PU with 19?????????? Really?
Click to expand...

I think that WaP figured it out

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Theory: one voter meant to vote Providence - the actual #2 - as 2nd on their ballot, and picked Princeton by mistake, giving PU 19 points.</p>— Without a Peer (@without_a_peer) <a href="https://twitter.com/without_a_peer/status/653618641896898560">October 12, 2015</a></blockquote> <script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
 
Re: RPI Hockey 2015 - 2016:: Six Flags Over the HFH

DrDemento said:
If you can, watch the replay on RPI TV in a day or so and form your own opinion.
Click to expand...

I'll try to do that, but with the NLDS and Blues games, I dunno when I'll have 2 hours to watch a game that already happened. I don't know what you guys know about so-called fancy stats (namely, Corsi), but blocking 41 shots, while admirable, is not a good thing. Boston College attempted 67 shots at even strength to our 32. That's pretty much the opposite of good, and is in fact bad. It is a repeatable skill to be able to avoid getting your shots blocked, and the Fenwick numbers are kinder to us (39-26), but still not good. A team that gets 60% of the unblocked shots toward the net should score ~60% of the goals. Instead, they scored no goals at even strength. Obviously these things happen in single game samples, but over the course of the season, things tend to regress toward the mean.

I would love for our success yesterday to carry forward for the next 40 games as we go 40-0 and continue the 31-year cycle, but there's enough to give me pause before planning the parade.
 
Re: RPI Hockey 2015 - 2016:: Six Flags Over the HFH

lugnut92 said:
It's amazing what winning can do!

I was unfortunately on a lab outing at Six Flags so I was following the game on twitter rather than watching at home, but it sounds like we played a "lunch pail" style of game or whatever you want to call it. Faced a lot of shots, blocked a lot of shots, relied on outstanding goaltending, and scored when we could. It's great when it works, but ask the 2013 Leafs and 13-14 Avs how things go when the goalie fades from outstanding to merely above average. I don't mean to dump on the team at all, and since I've only seen the goals, feel free to correct my assessment, but this type of game is dangerous to play. I hope we're able to carry it forward, start limiting shots (and shot attempts) against, limit the penalties, continue winning at least half of the faceoffs, and most importantly, keep winning.
Click to expand...
I take it that you were at a different Six Flags, not Six Flags Over the HFH. :)
 
Re: RPI Hockey 2015 - 2016:: Six Flags Over the HFH

lugnut92 said:
I'll try to do that, but with the NLDS and Blues games, I dunno when I'll have 2 hours to watch a game that already happened. I don't know what you guys know about so-called fancy stats (namely, Corsi), but blocking 41 shots, while admirable, is not a good thing. Boston College attempted 67 shots at even strength to our 32. That's pretty much the opposite of good, and is in fact bad. It is a repeatable skill to be able to avoid getting your shots blocked, and the Fenwick numbers are kinder to us (39-26), but still not good. A team that gets 60% of the unblocked shots toward the net should score ~60% of the goals. Instead, they scored no goals at even strength. Obviously these things happen in single game samples, but over the course of the season, things tend to regress toward the mean.

I would love for our success yesterday to carry forward for the next 40 games as we go 40-0 and continue the 31-year cycle, but there's enough to give me pause before planning the parade.
Click to expand...

Never thought the game was played on a calculator. Remember, I am an old time hockey guy. I love to look at all these numbers but the only stat that ever matters is the final one RPI 2 and BC 1.
 
Re: RPI Hockey 2015 - 2016:: Six Flags Over the HFH

Ralph Baer said:
I think that WaP figured it out

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Theory: one voter meant to vote Providence - the actual #2 - as 2nd on their ballot, and picked Princeton by mistake, giving PU 19 points.</p>— Without a Peer (@without_a_peer) <a href="https://twitter.com/without_a_peer/status/653618641896898560">October 12, 2015</a></blockquote> <script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Click to expand...

Schottsie was so exited to vote for Union that he also wanted give luv (bias) to former coach but got mixed up. Just a theory.
 
Last edited:
Re: RPI Hockey 2015 - 2016:: Six Flags Over the HFH

AspyDad said:
Schottsie was so exited to vote for Union that he also wanted give luv (bias) to former coach but got mixed up.
Click to expand...

Does Ed Weaver have a vote? I wouldn't put it past him to mix things up. :)
 
Re: RPI Hockey 2015 - 2016:: Six Flags Over the HFH

DrDemento said:
Never thought the game was played on a calculator. Remember, I am an old time hockey guy. I love to look at all these numbers but the only stat that ever matters is the final one RPI 2 and BC 1.
Click to expand...

I know that the game is played on the ice, but if you have to block 45 shots, that means the other team had the puck and the opportunity to attempt 45 shots. That's a lot.
 
Re: RPI Hockey 2015 - 2016:: Six Flags Over the HFH

lugnut92 said:
I know that the game is played on the ice, but if you have to block 45 shots, that means the other team had the puck and the opportunity to attempt 45 shots. That's a lot.
Click to expand...

I would be worried about the number of blocked shots also, but the team defense kept the puck on the perimeter and did not allow a lot of shots from the slot.
It was more team defense than shot blocking that made this a very good game for the engineers. The Eagles shot every chance they got, but rather than let the shots get through to Kasdorf, be stood our ground.
I was most impressed by the team play for a full sixty minutes. Some of the penalty kills were amazing.
The problem with RPI hockey, is, what team shows up Friday night? :eek:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top