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.

UAA `16-17 Let's end this thing with a BANG

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: UAA `16-17 Let's end this thing with a BANG

Suze said:
If they keep playing like this, they might still make the playoffs. And again, this is going to be one of those teams that nobody wants to play.
Click to expand...
Agreed Suze.
Tonight was a good result against a very good hockey club.
Came out of the weekend with 3 points.
A good weekend after a long trip.
It's a great day to be a Seawolf!
 
Re: UAA `16-17 Let's end this thing with a BANG

Seawolf Fan said:
Let's try that one again.
I could care less what someone does on their own time, on their own computer, posting to their own blog.
I have not and did not visit HIS blog.
I do read this thread which happens to be a UAA thread in case you haven't noticed.
When someone associated with another WCHA team takes HIS blog and wants to come on this thread and diss OUR team it's called trolling.
You appear very loose with your labels.
Click to expand...

How in the ever-loving hell am I trolling? I am not here to incite debate, and I care about the conversation. You know what? I spent four hours overnight (the ISS was quiet) figuring out if I'd made a mistake with the model or had some assumptions wrong. Thankfully I really didn't. What UAA did this weekend was really great! Improbable things happen.

If you think I'm trolling, you and I aren't on the same Internet, sir.

GFM
 
Re: UAA `16-17 Let's end this thing with a BANG

Alaska Hockey said:
I will keep the sully vs. a smaller arena, thanks you. The sully is not that appalling, and if you think it is you need to road trip some of the shacks that the wcha and CCHA leftovers play in. The Sully no park benches unlike most of the new WCHA.
Click to expand...

Just to clarify ... I don't find the Sully appalling, but it seems like most of the teams in the nWCHA play in smaller barns. Given the crowds that UAA has drawn for the past 10 years I think the atmosphere would be so much better in a smaller arena, like the Carlson. Even though I personally hate the Carlson and think it is a dump, (certainly not worthy of DI) it is the right size.
 
Re: UAA `16-17 Let's end this thing with a BANG

gfmorris said:
How in the ever-loving hell am I trolling? I am not here to incite debate, and I care about the conversation. You know what? I spent four hours overnight (the ISS was quiet) figuring out if I'd made a mistake with the model or had some assumptions wrong. Thankfully I really didn't. What UAA did this weekend was really great! Improbable things happen.

If you think I'm trolling, you and I aren't on the same Internet, sir.

GFM
Click to expand...

In Internet slang, a troll (/ˈtroʊl/, /ˈtrɒl/) is a person who sows discord on the Internet by starting arguments or upsetting people, by posting inflammatory,[1] extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community (such as a newsgroup, forum, chat room, or blog) with the intent of provoking readers into an emotional response[2] or of otherwise disrupting normal, on-topic discussion,[3] often for the troll's amusement.
Click to expand...

You started off your post with "I don't give you much of a shot". Maybe that's what got under Seawolf Fan's skin. You could have posted your link and said something much less inflammatory that wouldn't invoke an emotional response.

The problem with your calculations is that you take the human element out of it. Have you not heard that "hard work beats talent when talent doesn't work hard"? Or "will can beat skill"?
 
Last edited:
Re: UAA `16-17 Let's end this thing with a BANG

gfmorris said:
How in the ever-loving hell am I trolling? I am not here to incite debate, and I care about the conversation. You know what? I spent four hours overnight (the ISS was quiet) figuring out if I'd made a mistake with the model or had some assumptions wrong. Thankfully I really didn't. What UAA did this weekend was really great! Improbable things happen.

If you think I'm trolling, you and I aren't on the same Internet, sir.

GFM
Click to expand...
Maybe read Suze response.
Then read the final sentence in the above quote.
You're trolling.
 
Re: UAA `16-17 Let's end this thing with a BANG

Suze said:
You started off your post with "I don't give you much of a shot". Maybe that's what got under Seawolf Fan's skin. You could have posted your link and said something much less inflammatory that wouldn't invoke an emotional response.

The problem with your calculations is that you take the human element out of it. Have you not heard that "hard work beats talent when talent doesn't work hard"? Or "will can beat skill"?
Click to expand...

I can see where he said that, but given my body of work, I find the accusation insulting.

As far as the math goes —*no, it takes that into account. BELOW is an estimate, and estimates change based on how well a team is playing. UAA's rating is up fairly strongly over the last few weeks, given that they've been winning.

Seawolf Fan said:
Maybe read Suze response.
Then read the final sentence in the above quote.
You're trolling.
Click to expand...

If I wasn't responding in good faith, I'd be very much inclined to agree with you.

GFM
 
Re: UAA `16-17 Let's end this thing with a BANG

"If you think I'm trolling, you and I aren't on the same Internet, sir."
This is the last sentence I was referring to.
You're trolling
That sentence adds nothing to the conversation
You're trying to evoke an emotional response
 
Re: UAA `16-17 Let's end this thing with a BANG

The teams compete level is going up. Coming out of the corners with more pucks.
The passes are looking better.
Louis has the defense looking much better then past years. He's done it in about a year and a half. It should be fun to see the product when this years freshmen have had a full 4 years of work with him.
The guys took a few more shots on the PP then they have before.
Rasmus looked terrific last weekend. Matt may have a hard time going back to Olivier but my guess is he will.
Chris is out recruiting which got hurt bad earlier this season with the financial turmoil and the teams slow start to the season.
All in all things are looking up.
It's a great day to be a Seawolf!
 
Re: UAA `16-17 Let's end this thing with a BANG

Boy has the league got it in for Mason.
Of course I don't remember the play and not sure if it was on the TV.
No call on the play so is the league reviewing entire games? Or what's the deal?
Big "hit" to the team that's for sure.
 
Last edited:
Re: UAA `16-17 Let's end this thing with a BANG

Seawolf Fan said:
Boy has the league got it in for Mason.
Of course I don't remember the play and not sure if it was on the TV.
No call on the play so is the league reviewing entire games? Or what's the deal?
Big "hit" to the team that's for sure.
Click to expand...

I was thinking the same thing, is the league watching all the games to see if an infraction was "let go". Because I can think of a few times when the league could step in and suspend a player or two who against teams playing UAA. Starting with the goon who ran Mantha. This is so ridiculous. If it's not called on the ice, I don't see how they can take action after the fact. I imagine Pearson spear headed this one.

I talked with someone who saw the video of the hit, and they said it was a clean shoulder to shoulder hit. Sigh.
 
Last edited:
Re: UAA `16-17 Let's end this thing with a BANG

Suze said:
If it's not called on the ice, I don't see how they can take action after the fact. I imagine Pearson spear headed this one.

I talked with someone who saw the video of the hit, and they said it was a clean shoulder to shoulder hit. Sigh.
Click to expand...

OK, so here's the hit in question:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B1zFczrqHzLxazN6S0QtTEI1ODQ/view?usp=sharing

It's clear that Mitchell has no intent to play the puck, so this is by no means incidental. He takes four strides just from the blue line, so by definition this is a charge at best. But when he makes contact with L'Esperance he's just finishing the act of shooting so L'Esperance is a defenseless player. In the old days (even 10 years ago) you might be able to just say he got caught in the trolley tracks. But you can't do that in today's college hockey, it's viewed as intent to injure. The puck is gone and he doesn't have any other reason to throw the hit.

And probably best that you throw out your conspiracy theories on this one, and not use secondhand information to make your call on it. You're better than that.
 
Re: UAA `16-17 Let's end this thing with a BANG

John J. MacInnes said:
OK, so here's the hit in question:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B1zFczrqHzLxazN6S0QtTEI1ODQ/view?usp=sharing

It's clear that Mitchell has no intent to play the puck, so this is by no means incidental. He takes four strides just from the blue line, so by definition this is a charge at best. But when he makes contact with L'Esperance he's just finishing the act of shooting so L'Esperance is a defenseless player. In the old days (even 10 years ago) you might be able to just say he got caught in the trolley tracks. But you can't do that in today's college hockey, it's viewed as intent to injure. The puck is gone and he doesn't have any other reason to throw the hit.

And probably best that you throw out your conspiracy theories on this one, and not use secondhand information to make your call on it. You're better than that.
Click to expand...
Thanks for the link.
Replayed it many times.
Not sure I agree with all you said.
Being four strides past the blue line to me is irrelevant. He was skating towards the guy with the puck.
Did he have time to pull up after the puck was gone? Evidently the "League" thought so. So it is what it is.


I'm not saying there is any "conspiracy" on the part of the League. I do think when a guy has more then one "hit" called on him he gets a reputation. A player is responsible for his own reputation. The "League" is maybe not as forgiving of a guy with a "reputation" as it would be with a first timer. So that also is what it is.

Thanks again for the link and your thoughts on the play.
 
Re: UAA `16-17 Let's end this thing with a BANG

Seawolf Fan said:
Thanks for the link.
Replayed it many times.
Not sure I agree with all you said.
Being four strides past the blue line to me is irrelevant. He was skating towards the guy with the puck.
Did he have time to pull up after the puck was gone? Evidently the "League" thought so. So it is what it is.


I'm not saying there is any "conspiracy" on the part of the League. I do think when a guy has more then one "hit" called on him he gets a reputation. A player is responsible for his own reputation. The "League" is maybe not as forgiving of a guy with a "reputation" as it would be with a first timer. So that also is what it is.

Thanks again for the link and your thoughts on the play.
Click to expand...

The blue line part was just to acknowledge that this clip picks up as Mitchell is already moving at speed, and from the blue line he takes an additional four strides. The line was just a mark so you could see that he took those strides in a short space. If you take that many strides anywhere on the ice it's a uniform ruling.

Rule 607. Charging. (a) A minor plus a misconduct or a major plus a game misconduct penalty shall be assessed to any player who runs or jumps into an opponent or who takes more than two fast strides in delivering a body check (charging).
 
Seawolf Fan said:
Boy has the league got it in for Mason.
Of course I don't remember the play and not sure if it was on the TV.
No call on the play so is the league reviewing entire games? Or what's the deal?
Big "hit" to the team that's for sure.
Click to expand...
The league doesn't have it in for Mason, Mason is just a dumbs*** at times. How many times has he taken a stupid penalty at a bad time?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top