Re: UNH Wildcats 2013-14 Season Thread
Good confidence-boosting win for the 'Cats last night, and a good bounce-back weekend with two conference wins. Also very good to see the scoring spread out among so many different players. Must have made the long ride back from Amherst last night a lot more tolerable. Only saw bits and pieces of Friday night's game, but the biggest difference I saw out there from some of the previous games is that the overall team defense was a lot more focused and effective. Like the best stretches of last season, players being defensively responsible up and down the ice, and not leaving it solely up to the defensive pairing to take care of business in their own half, makes a difference.
This week, with Brown visiting on Tuesday night, and the home-and-home Northeastern series over the weekend, it's a good opportunity to continue these good habits, build some momentum, and then hit the next (projected) challenging section of the schedule - hopefully with better results than those from Minnesota/Michigan/RPI/Lowell stretch.
Looks like we're all on board with the idea of a UNH team that plays better, more competitive hockey after the calendar turns over to 2014.
-----------
Now, for the whole SOG discussion ... last night there was a very interesting contrast in two HE games, where SOG totals were fairly similar. UNH @ UMA and NU @ UML ... in both games, the SOG's were either even or very close after the first period (7-7 in Amherst, and 10-9 in Lowell), but in both games, the road team emerged with the lead at the end of the first period (UNH 3-0 and NU 2-1).
Over the balance of the game (2nd and 3rd periods combined), SOG's in Amherst moved to a 10 shot advantage for UNH (26-16), which pulled away and won 9-0. However, in Lowell, while the Riverhawks outshot the Huskies 24-14, they were unable to overcome NU's early lead - UML did tie things in the second period, but NU regained the lead by the end of the period - and dropped a 4-2 decision to the Huskies.
Did UMA quit and/or lose their focus in the second period on Saturday night? Probably.
Did NU adapt a more defensive strategy - eschewing some attacking (and SOG) opportunities to try to preserve a one-goal lead at Lowell? Probably.
Interestingly ... on Friday night in Durham, the SOG's were also pretty comparable (in UNH's favor) to the two Saturday games I've mentioned above.
So what does that tell us - just comparing these 3 games played by four HE teams in mid-November with similar end-of-game SOG totals?
* The team with more SOG's won twice, and lost once;
* The team that won each game did NOT trail (goals) after one period;
* The team that won each game led the game (goals) after two periods
Other examples drawn from UNH's games earlier in the season include the following:
* Clarkson outshot UNH in the first period (and overall), but UNH never trailed and won handily 4-1;
* Minnesota led after 2 periods, and held on for a 3-2 win despite UNH outshooting them in the 3rd period;
* Michigan led after one period, and held on for a tie after being outshot 27-9 over the final 45 minutes;
* The following evening, Michigan won in OT, SOG's were vrtually even, and both teams had brief mid-period leads earlier in the game;
* RPI took a two-goal lead into the first break, and held on to win 4-2 despite being outshot 27-13 by UNH in the last two periods;
* UML beat UNH at home 5-3, leading after the first two periods, while UNH outshot the Riverhawks 26-19 the last two period, and 37-27 overall;
* The following evening, UML led after two periods, and eventually won in OT despite UNH outshooting them 11-5 in the 3rd period and OT
I mentioned a scenario a few posts ago, which posed a basic "do you prefer playing with an early lead?" question. I think this small sample of games above feeds my personal preference that it is FAR more important to come out prepared from the opening faceoff, set the tone from the outset, spend your team's energy getting ahead in the game, and then letting your opponent expend their energy for the rest of the game trying to reverse things.
Maybe the game that offered the most stark example of the "score first and set the tone" approach (at least in my mind) was the 1999 Hockey East Finals between UNH and BC. This was a game between two teams that had gotten to the Frozen Four in 1998 (UNH lost to Michigan in the semis, and BC lost to Michigan in OT in the Finals), while in the weeks that followed the 1999 HE Finals, BC would lose to UMaine in the semis, and then UNH would lose to UMaine in OT in the Finals). So two evenly-matched teams/programs at the time, on paper ... and at the time, both BC and UNH enjoying similar post-season reputations as the teams that just couldn't seal the deal in the Frozen Four (my, how times have changed in little over a decade now
). So ... how does the 1999 HE Finals play out?
* BC scores three early goals, and then answers a UNH goal quickly to lead 4-1 after one period;
* UNH carries the play for the last two periods, getting two quick ones in the second period, and one late in the 3rd to tie things up and force OT;
* BC comes out and dominates OT, and UNH looks totally spent, with Blake Bellefeiulle making it official about midway through the first OT (5-4 BC)
I tried to find the SOG stats for that game, but couldn't find them, but I would be surprised if they didn't favor UNH heavily after the first period. But I don't think UNH breathed heavily on Scott Clemmenson during the entirety of the OT, while Ty Conklin was peppered behind a retreating UNH defense before the game-winner.
In some ways, it was a gallant effort by UNH to dig out of two separate 3-goal deficits. But they never led in the game, and when it mattered, BC was dominant.
So when I say SOG's are really not important, and are only a very superficial measure of any given game ... it's only because from my time playing and coaching competitive team sports, I've always felt there was more value towards getting off to a good start with good preparation (tactical and mental), making that count early in the game, setting a tone, and forcing an opponent to play outside of its own comfort zone to try to claw the outcome away from us. It's not a foolproof formula - nothing is - but I'll put my money on this approach, and leave the SOG numbers to everyone else. JMHO.
