UConn Hockey 2012-13 | Page 3 | The Boneyard

UConn Hockey 2012-13

Status
Not open for further replies.
Many of the shots were from long range, that's true. And UConn does seem to play that breakout style to some extent too. But there were several scrums in front of the net, at least two of which resulted in Penn State scores. And I don't love relying on your goaltender to stop 40 shots a night. Even if they aren't all quality shots. Actually what struck me about Penn State was that they were bigger and faster than I expected. And they've had a couple of decent wins, Ohio State in the Pittsburgh Holiday tourney for example. But I thought their goal tending in particular was suspect.
 
freescooter said:
Many of the shots were from long range, that's true. And UConn does seem to play that breakout style to some extent too. But there were several scrums in front of the net, at least two of which resulted in Penn State scores. And I don't love relying on your goaltender to stop 40 shots a night. Even if they aren't all quality shots. Actually what struck me about Penn State was that they were bigger and faster than I expected. And they've had a couple of decent wins, Ohio State in the Pittsburgh Holiday tourney for example. But I thought their goal tending in particular was suspect.
Expand ...
Ah, OK. Yeah, allowing 40 shots a night is not really the best strategy to go for, but some teams will allow the opposition to get their fair share of garbage shots and take advantage of the breakouts. I've seen teams run this against PC many times in the past, where the shots would be something like 40-20 in favor of PC, but the score would be something like 5-1 the other way. Goalie recruiting usually is the last to come along, it's a lot easier to take a mid-level winger and coach him into a breakout star or to find a diamond in the rough that other teams overlooked than it is to find an unnoticed goalie or coach one into a star. It'll come though as the program continues to (hopefully) build themselves up.
 
UConn has actually had pretty decent goal tending over the past few years. Bartus is pretty solid. The kid before him, name escapes me, was solid. Grogan looked not too bad. The Penn State kid looked a little shakey.
 
freescooter said:
Unfortunate that he won't get to coach them in Hockey East. He has really been the guy who held the program together during the years when it was easy to pick on, and from what I've heard, was instrumental in getting the Hockey East bid to fruition.
Expand ...

Great man and we owe him a debt of gratitude for being so instrumental in getting UCONN into Hockey East. This program is headed in the right direction.
 
.-.
Anyone know what the deal was/is with Joe Kalisz? He was supposed to be playing at UConn this year. then I read he'd be joining the team after the break, but I haven't seen or heard anyhting about him. Wasn't on the roster for last week's game. Any news?
 
Thanks for the update. What the heck happened to him? Leading scorer and MVP of the NAHL last year and he's playing for a club team?
 
Ok weekend brom the Icedogs.Got a split with a good Mercyhurst club. Won Friday night 5-4 though they almost blew a 4 goal lead, then got blown out Saturday 5-0 in a game where they spent most of the night with a guy in the penalty box (42 minutes in penalties). Coach Berard was not too happy. This team needs to do two things to win. Hit and play with discipline. When they've been disciplined they have been pretty good. That was not the case Saturday. They will have to be at their very best on Tuesday night when they travel to Quinnipiac to take on one of the top teams in the country in the Quinnipiac Bobcats. Quinny is ranked #1 in the PWR hockey's equivilent of the RPI. While they will be huge underdogs, if they get great goaltending and Bartus is capable of that, though he has been less consistent this season and has shared the nets with Grogan, who knows...
 
OTBPuckWatch 11:28am via Tweetbot for iOS
UConn has wasted no time taking some top CT-area prospects. Wasn’t sure they’d be able to loosen the stranglehold of other NE institutions.

goalmouthradio 11:27am via Twitter for Android
Jesse Schwartz commits to UConn. Details to follow.

goalmouthradio 11:29am via Web
Schwartz is the third member from South Kent to commit to UConn. Spent last season with Mississauga of the OJHL.

goalmouthradio 11:29am via Web
Scored 32 points (12g,20a) in 46 games with the Chargers last season. Plays on a line with Salvaggio this year.

goalmouthradio 11:31am via Web
The 18 year old forward stands at 5'10'' and 175 and is a native of Toronto.

goalmouthradio 11:34am via Web
Schwartz, a RW, a selected by the Erie Otters in the OHL priority draft. Made the decision to play NCAA hockey

OTBPuckWatch 11:30am via Tweetbot for iOS
Might not seem like a huge coup, but a number of traditional prep powers are CT-based, as well as, now, South Kent/Selects Academy…
 
Nice get. CT isn't exactly a major hotbed for recruiting, but there are some good players to be had from the private schools. Nick Bonino (BU) of Anaheim came from Old Farms, and the Atkinson brothers (BC), Cam plays for Columbus, came out of Greenwich. It'd be some time before UConn would have a realistic shot at players of that caliber, but if they can get some of their teammates, that's a step in the right direction.
 
.-.
They also won a pair from Bentley on Sunday and Monday, 4-1 and 9-0. Moved into a tie for 4th in the conference with a big series this weekend. Friday night Holy Cross comes to Freitas, and on Saturday UConn heads up the Pike to Holy Cross. The teams are currently tied for 4th and a 1st round bye in the conference tourney.
 
Huskies are having a very nice run right now. They took 2 wins at Army this weekend and with 1 weekend remaining are in 3rd place in the league standings. Holy Cross, in 4th has a game tonight against Sacred Heart and a pair with Army next weekend. Top 4 earn a 1st round bye and home ice for the next playoff round. This team has really put together a solid run since the break. 12-6-1 starting in the UConn Holiday Tournament.They've moved from 9th place to 3rd in a month. Haven't had a 0 point weekend since December and they have bounced back from a couple of tough losses to win games they needed to win. they lost to Holy Cross at home but managed to bounce back and win in Worcester 2 weeks ago. Sacred Heart, this weekend's opponent has struggled, to put it mildly. They were 0-24-2 going into last weekend, but have not quit. They beat Holy Cross last week and followed that up with a win and a tie against Bentley. So they have been playing much better. UConn needs to be on its game this weekend and absolutley cannot take anything for granted. After last year's epic collapse, losing 4 of their last 6 against the bottom of the league, they seem far more focused this time around. And with a week off and home ice on the line, they should be.
 
This weekend is shaping up to be pretty interesting for UConn and Atlantic Hockey. Depending on the outcomes the Huskies could finish anywhere form 2nd to 6th place. But one thing is for sure. If they just take care of business against the weakest team in the league, Sacred Heart, Friday at home and Saturday at SHU, they will finish no worse than 4th and lock up a bye for the 1st round of the AHA Tournament and Home Ice for round 2. Niagara has 1st place sewn up and very well could be the first AHA team to qualify for the NCAAs without winning the league tourney. But after that it is a horse race. Air Force (31 points, 13-7-5) Holy Cross (29, 13-9-3), UConn (28, 13-10-2), Robert Morris (27, 13-11-1) and Mercyhurst College (26, 12-11-2) and RIT (26, 11-10-4) are bunched together. Air Force and Niagara play in Colorado. UConn plays Sacred Heart home-home, Holy Cross plays Army home-home and RMU and Mercyhurst play each other. I won't go through all the combinations but If the Huskies take 4 points (2 wins) they will finish no worse than 4th. Two UConn wins and 2 Air Force losses and 2nd is in play depending on Holy Cross's results. Any losses and they are at the mercy of other games.
 
If UConn does run the table and somehow get the autobid, it's almost a total lock that they'd be placed in the Providence regional as Quinnipiac has all but sewn up the 1 seed in that region, and with the travel rules the committee uses, plus it would likely be the 1-16 matchup anyway, they'd likely put both teams there.

I'd love to root for this to happen, but unless it knocked Niagara below 16 in the PWR, I'd have to root against it or else it would be a massively negative thing for my guys' now slim NCAA hopes.
 
UConn is also on the edge, for the first time, of being an actual by-the-numbers "team under consideration", something like .004 below the cut-off of .5000 RPI.

It's incredibly doubtful they'd win more than one or two comparisons, if any, but it'd be kinda neat to see the Huskies in that final tally. I think they'd have to at least make the semis to get that far, because two games against Sacred Heart are *probably* not going to have much of an upward pull (although no downward pull, of course, as they'd be removed from the calculations if they became a drag).
 
.-.
kingdobbs said:
UConn is also on the edge, for the first time, of being an actual by-the-numbers "team under consideration", something like .004 below the cut-off of .5000 RPI.

It's incredibly doubtful they'd win more than one or two comparisons, if any, but it'd be kinda neat to see the Huskies in that final tally. I think they'd have to at least make the semis to get that far, because two games against Sacred Heart are *probably* not going to have much of an upward pull (although no downward pull, of course, as they'd be removed from the calculations if they became a drag).
Expand ...
Yes, the RPI stands at .4960 currently, so they'd sneak into the bottom. Of course, the term Team Under Consideration is a complete misnomer, since the teams at the bottom there aren't really under consideration for anything, it's just an arbitrary point the PWR system uses as a basis to compare everyone's records against the teams under consideration. Over on the USCHO boards, there's always a "TUC Cliff" argument around this time of year, as I'm sure dobbs , you've seen numerous times, about whether it should be axed completely.

That said, you're right, it would be a good step for the program. I can't remember a time when UConn finished in the TUC at all in the last 10 years.
 
brasssbonanzaa said:
Yes, the RPI stands at .4960 currently, so they'd sneak into the bottom. Of course, the term Team Under Consideration is a complete misnomer, since the teams at the bottom there aren't really under consideration for anything, it's just an arbitrary point the PWR system uses as a basis to compare everyone's records against the teams under consideration. Over on the USCHO boards, there's always a "TUC Cliff" argument around this time of year, as I'm sure dobbs , you've seen numerous times, about whether it should be axed completely.

That said, you're right, it would be a good step for the program. I can't remember a time when UConn finished in the TUC at all in the last 10 years.
Expand ...
I don't think they have ever even been this close. On a related note, I have to think that this performance, and certainly if they win out this weekend ought to make David Berard the man to beat in the head coaching search. No matter what else happens, this will likey be there best record in a decade. If by some chance they should get to the NCAA Tournament, you'd have to assume they won't even bother to look anywhere else. Even if they don't, given what they have done, and considering his background, he would seem to be a likely choice.
 
brasssbonanzaa said:
Yes, the RPI stands at .4960 currently, so they'd sneak into the bottom. Of course, the term Team Under Consideration is a complete misnomer, since the teams at the bottom there aren't really under consideration for anything, it's just an arbitrary point the PWR system uses as a basis to compare everyone's records against the teams under consideration. Over on the USCHO boards, there's always a "TUC Cliff" argument around this time of year, as I'm sure dobbs , you've seen numerous times, about whether it should be axed completely.

That said, you're right, it would be a good step for the program. I can't remember a time when UConn finished in the TUC at all in the last 10 years.
Expand ...

Well, they are technically "under consideration" because the PWR process does use comparisons against even the lowest of them to determine who's in and out, but they could probably swap in a different title and it'd still mean roughly the same. As it is, in the past it's been "Record against Top 25 in RPI", so that could have been how they classified the TUC criterion as well as the group of compared teams.

As far as the TUC cliff, I'm indifferent mostly because I reckon the week-to-week PWR published by USCHO and others to be only reflective of the process that happens once the last game finishes, and not a serious week to week tracking mechanism. Also, there does have to be some arbitrary cut off at some point, and unless they plan to run the PWR based on all eligible teams rather than just a selection of them, there's always going to be a cliff.

That being said, it's actually nice to see the workings of a wholly objective system in play, where most people are used to the subjectively determined BCS and NCAA basketball tournaments.
 
I don't love the selection process, but that's just me, I guess. I think when you get down to differentiating teams based on some complex calculation and somebody's in and somebody's out based on the 4th decimal place and the teams have never played each other, have few or no common opponents...well I'm not sure it really is much better than the more subjective process other sports use to select teams for their championships. It sort of looks more objective, but the deeper you drill down, I'm not sure it is much better. I've always felt strenght of schedule, for example, is really given too much weight since it assumes Team A can somehow control the quality of its opponents. And while over th long term, that might be true, in any given season it isn't. See for example Michigan, Michigan State, Ohio State, all of whom are having bad seasons. If you were trying to set up a tough non-conference schedule and added them in October, people would have said , "Wow, you've really put together a great non-conferece test." In March, not so much. I think you could absolutely make a case for taking at-large the last at-large teams on "subjective" factors and not do any dis-service to the final product. By the way I recognize that I'm in the minority on this.
 
freescooter said:
I don't love the selection process, but that's just me, I guess. I think when you get down to differentiating teams based on some complex calculation and somebody's in and somebody's out based on the 4th decimal place and the teams have never played each other, have few or no common opponents...well I'm not sure it really is much better than the more subjective process other sports use to select teams for their championships. It sort of looks more objective, but the deeper you drill down, I'm not sure it is much better. I've always felt strenght of schedule, for example, is really given too much weight since it assumes Team A can somehow control the quality of its opponents. And while over th long term, that might be true, in any given season it isn't. See for example Michigan, Michigan State, Ohio State, all of whom are having bad seasons. If you were trying to set up a tough non-conference schedule and added them in October, people would have said , "Wow, you've really put together a great non-conferece test." In March, not so much. I think you could absolutely make a case for taking at-large the last at-large teams on "subjective" factors and not do any dis-service to the final product. By the way I recognize that I'm in the minority on this.
Expand ...

Some good points here, and PWR certainly is not a perfect system by any means. If you haven't before, take a look at the KRACH system, it's posted on USCHO.com and collegehockeynews.com, something that a lot of people have been advocating for for a long time. Sort of a similar concept, but executed differently, and many think more effectively.

The thing I like about PWR (and this applies to KRACH as well), is that it's 100% based on results and what happened on the ice, there's no arbitrary voting or secret computer formulas that you can't predict a la BCS. Team A basically knows exactly what they need to do to get in as the season progresses. Of course, the flipside of that is, you get these statistical oddities and things like a TUC cliff, or SOS questions. Comparing it against the other two major sport's selection process, I think it's the best for the sport. Certainly the BCS is a complete sham and no one should ever use it. I'm not sure a committee would work for hockey as it does in basketball, mostly because far fewer hockey games are televised and they're generally all at the same time throughout the season, so it's not really feasible for a committee to get their eyes on teams enough to make a good decision. Teams from the AHA and ECAC are almost never on TV so it wouldn't be possible for the committee to see them play. As far as I know, only three of the five conference tournaments are even televised, and none of them except for now Hockey East on NBCSN are televised on a national network.

Perhaps a PWR type system with some wiggle room allowed for the committee to take into account things like injuries, if a team played the first half of the year with a guy injured and did poorly but now he's back and their record is improved, or something like that, would be good, but with the lack of exposure of the sport, you run the risk of them making a complete judgment on a team by reading box scores and not seeing teams with their own two eyes. While the basketball committee certainly doesn't watch every team's every game, they at the very least have the ability to see any team they want during championship on TV somewhere.

The term college hockey fans love to throw out in response to PWR complaints.....simple math. In the end, at least the champion is decided on the ice and not by a computer. And generally, from what I've seen, team 17 usually doesn't have much of a gripe.
 
brasssbonanzaa said:
Some good points here, and PWR certainly is not a perfect system by any means. If you haven't before, take a look at the KRACH system, it's posted on USCHO.com and collegehockeynews.com, something that a lot of people have been advocating for for a long time. Sort of a similar concept, but executed differently, and many think more effectively.

The thing I like about PWR (and this applies to KRACH as well), is that it's 100% based on results and what happened on the ice, there's no arbitrary voting or secret computer formulas that you can't predict a la BCS. Team A basically knows exactly what they need to do to get in as the season progresses. Of course, the flipside of that is, you get these statistical oddities and things like a TUC cliff, or SOS questions. Comparing it against the other two major sport's selection process, I think it's the best for the sport. Certainly the BCS is a complete sham and no one should ever use it. I'm not sure a committee would work for hockey as it does in basketball, mostly because far fewer hockey games are televised and they're generally all at the same time throughout the season, so it's not really feasible for a committee to get their eyes on teams enough to make a good decision. Teams from the AHA and ECAC are almost never on TV so it wouldn't be possible for the committee to see them play. As far as I know, only three of the five conference tournaments are even televised, and none of them except for now Hockey East on NBCSN are televised on a national network.

Perhaps a PWR type system with some wiggle room allowed for the committee to take into account things like injuries, if a team played the first half of the year with a guy injured and did poorly but now he's back and their record is improved, or something like that, would be good, but with the lack of exposure of the sport, you run the risk of them making a complete judgment on a team by reading box scores and not seeing teams with their own two eyes. While the basketball committee certainly doesn't watch every team's every game, they at the very least have the ability to see any team they want during championship on TV somewhere.

The term college hockey fans love to throw out in response to PWR complaints.....simple math.
Expand ...
I certainly don't advocate anything like the BCS system, and you raise good points about differences between hockey and basketball in terms of the ability of committee members to see teams play. Though I suspect that is changing a little with the advent of online content. I think for example that all the AHA games are available online. None the less you have a good point. I think overall, though, the basketball system is pretty good. Can you make an argument that a few teams get in who don't belong and a couple get left out who do? Absolutley. But in some ways that adds to the mystique if you will. Between Selection Sunday and the first round, everyone talks about why a Utah was selected over Iowa and St Marys over a Florida State. And the relative merits of mid-majors vs lower ranked power conference teams. While hockey doesn't have the same level of appeal, it wouldn't hurt to have some controversy to get it onto the radar. The "clinical" simple math approach pretty much precludes that, and when it doesn't it is an argument you'd hear at a convention for math majors rather than sports fans. Seems to me like a missed opportunity too. Again, I get that I'm in the minority and most people like the system as it is more or less.
 
.-.
freescooter said:
I certainly don't advocate anything like the BCS system, and you raise good points about differences between hockey and basketball in terms of the ability of committee members to see teams play. Though I suspect that is changing a little with the advent of online content. I think for example that all the AHA games are available online. None the less you have a good point. I think overall, though, the basketball system is pretty good. Can you make an argument that a few teams get in who don't belong and a couple get left out who do? Absolutley. But in some ways that adds to the mystique if you will. Between Selection Sunday and the first round, everyone talks about why a Utah was selected over Iowa and St Marys over a Florida State. And the relative merits of mid-majors vs lower ranked power conference teams. While hockey doesn't have the same level of appeal, it wouldn't hurt to have some controversy to get it onto the radar. The "clinical" simple math approach pretty much precludes that, and when it doesn't it is an argument you'd hear at a convention for math majors rather than sports fans. Seems to me like a missed opportunity too. Again, I get that I'm in the minority and most people like the system as it is more or less.
Expand ...

You'd be surprised, there's a contingent of fans who don't like the PWR, but most of those just want KRACH. Hockey fans are very whiny, though and don't like change, so moving to a "smoke-filled back room" as they call it, would infuriate many. Lots tend to think there's bias against the western teams, and vice versa. I think the setup of the NCAA, with it essentially being an East vs. West makes it tough, few writers and people involved in the sport cover both eastern leagues and the two western leagues. I agree some subjectivity could do some good, though. But it still makes for a wicked fun tournament, just better if your team's in it.
 
Exhibit A regarding why I don't love these formula systems
From Chris lerch's blog:
EDIT: About an hour after I posted this on Sunday night, the Penn State-Wisconsin game went final. Penn’s State’s loss dropped Holy Cross’ RPI below .500, removing it from the list of TUCs (ah, the acronyms). Since you need ten games against TUCs for them to figure in the PWR (you with me?) Holy Cross was a double whammy for Robert Morris, because now that Crusaders are for at least the moment no longer a TUC, Robert Morris doesn’t have the ten games it needs against TUCs and so the whole criteria is thrown out.
As a result, the Colonials fell from an on-the-doorstep No. 17 ranking to not-a-chance-in-heck 25th. Because of one game! (Possibly two if Merrimack-Boston College though a six-degrees of hockey separation, also had some influence.)
I’ll wager that never before has a pair of Monday night hockey games that didn’t involve Robert Morris have such an effect on coach Derek Schooley’s squad. Penn State will again challenge Wisconsin, and Holy Cross is traveling to Sacred Heart. If things go the right way, RMU is back in business.
​
Teams ought to be rewarded or not based on what they do. Not on what somebody else did to some third team and they did to a 4th team. fundamentally, my problem with the selection system is that it is nothing more than a fancy way of saying Team X beat Team Y and Team Y beat Team Z therefore Team X is better then Team Z. Dress it up in all the formulas and all the fancy calculations you want. that is what you're doing at the end of the day.
 
Agree though that the tourney is great. Playoff hockey is one of the more intense sports there is.
 
Well, of course, freescooter, things like this only really happen as a result of the fact that the rankings are tracked by fans and the hockey news websites on basically a game by game basis, even though they're only really ever applied when the last conference tournament ends. I remember the discussion in some PWR analysis of teams occasionally having the perverse incentive according to the math to deliberately lose games to aid their tournament chances (UAA-Wisconsin a few years ago, and the Holy Cross-Bentley "controversy" discovered in '06 which led to the ending of a longstanding rule which made any conference tourney winner an automatic TUC), but I kind of feel like even though the perverse incentives exist, coaches would be reluctant to actually exercise them (if not outright hostile to the suggestion on its face) .

That being said, "strength of schedule" is a component that is inescapably driven by the results of other teams having an effect on an individual team's ranking, so I'm not exactly sure how we'd remove that aspect of it; I think the best we can do is find a least-disruptive way of mitigating that. I like KRACH as a more elegant replacement for RPI, but I also like the simplicity of the calculation of RPI, so here we are.
 
College Hockey News (@chnews)
3/2/13, 9:49 PM
Atlantic byes ...Niagara, Air Force, Holy Cross, Connecticut -- good job UConn under interim coach David Berard
 
UConn was a bit sloppy, to say the least, Friday night. And it was a little worrisome that Grogan played poorly at home. He wasn't great the last itme they were home against Holy Cross. Good to know he and the whole team pulled it together and locked up a bye on Saturday. I have to say Beranrd has done a real nice job with this team. They haven't lost a weekend since December.
 
.-.
Status
Not open for further replies.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,196
Messages
4,556,393
Members
10,442
Latest member
Virginiafan


Top Bottom