HOCKEY-L Archives

- Hockey-L - The College Hockey Discussion List

Hockey-L@LISTS.MAINE.EDU

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Steve Moerland <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Date:
Fri, 10 Feb 1995 17:20:20 EST
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (28 lines)
Jim Love wrote, in part:
>  What does this do for the confidence of the UIC goalie (Lord, in this
>case) ??  The message is: you're *so* bad tonight we can do better with
>*no one* in net !!
    Well actually, look at the stats.  The Broncos scored six goals in the
first 37 minutes for an average of about one goal per 6.16 minutes with the
keeper in.  They scored 3 in the 23 minutes with him out, averaging about 1
per 7.67 minutes.  Actually the empty net had a better night than Lord did.
 
>> Illinois @ Chicago  0-0-4--4    14-29   2-7
>> Western Michigan    2-4-3--9    14-28   3-8
 
>  Given my comments above, these stats confuse me .... How can UIC be
>credited for only 2 PP goals ??  In only 7 attempts ??  Is the entire time
>they had their goalie pulled considered a single PP attempt ??  At any
>rate, all 4 of their goals should be considered PP goals, shouldn't they ??
>Where's a stats guru when we need one ??
  Only two of the goals were powerplay goals.  6 on 5 is NOT a powerplay.  In
order to determine if its a powerplay or not you need to count ALL of the
players on the ice, including the goalies.  Powerplays are impossible without
a penalty.  So the two 6 on 5 (6 on 6 if you count the Broncs' goalie) go down
as even-strength goals.  The two 6 on 4 (6 on 5 with keeper) are powerplay
goals.
 
>  Cheers from Solomons - Jim
                                       --Steve Moerland
                                         MSU '92, UK '95

ATOM RSS1 RSS2