Dick Tuthill writes:
>        I'm kind of amused by the designations of the various regions.   Saw
>a couple of Connecticut players who play for eastern schools on the "West"
>team.   How on earth were the regions assigned,  or were they simply
>disregarded for hockey (would make a lot of sense:-)
 
I believe they were disregarded, since they don't really make sense
for a sport like hockey.
 
>        Secondly,  statistics can be misleading.   Many of the HE schools
>quoted listed far in excess of 20 players on the roster.   Would it not
>make sense to make the comparison between players who get appreciable
>playing time?
 
I'm not sure it would make a significant difference.  A quick look at
the final HE stats from last season shows the following numbers of
players who appeared in 25% or more of their team's games:
 
BC     21 of 26 (26 players appearing in one game or more)
BU     22 of 25
Maine  22 of 27
UMA    24 of 28
UML    25 of 26
Merr   24 of 28
UNH    23 of 31
NU     23 of 29
Prov   24 of 26
 
25% tends to be about 9-10 games for these teams.  I suppose it would
depend partly on whether one considers that to be appreciable playing
time - some may think it should be more, some less.  And the NC$$, I
believe, considers more than 10% (or about 4 games) enough to take up
a year of eligibility.
 
It's also true that some of the players may have received credit for a
GP but actually tended to dress as fourth liners and rarely saw the
ice.  But since most teams in HE do make use of their fourth line
somewhat regularly (even if it is going 1-2-3-1-2-3-4-etc), I don't
think this is much of a factor.
 
I guess the point is that the teams are not stocked with a large
number of players who only played a game or two during the season.
However, at UML, 20 of 26 players played in 25 games or more while
another 5 players played between 10 and 16 games.  If you don't think
those 5 players saw appreciable time in their games played, then you
might agree that the stat showing 25 of 26 players appearing in 25% of
the games is misleading.
 
BTW, for non-goalies, to get credit for a GP, all you have to do is
dress for a game.  You don't have to take a shift or even serve a
bench minor.  Goalies, on the other hand, only get credit when they
actually play.  So a third-string goalie like BU's Shawn Ferullo who
dressed for every game (or nearly every game, I am not positive) but
only played in 5, is listed with 5 GP.
 
[disclaimer - since there is no official definition of GP for college
hockey, as with many stats, my definition is simply the one I
understand and that is used by the teams and conferences I am most
familiar with.]
 
>        I am concerned here primarily about perceptions on the part of the
>NCAA.   Sports with high percentages of foreign participation do not get as
>much respect as they should.
 
That's an interesting hypothesis, one that I had not considered as
regards the seeming lack of respect hockey gets from the NC$$.  I
can't agree or disagree at this point, but I am interested in hearing
comments from others.
---                                                                   ---
Mike Machnik                                            [log in to unmask]
Cabletron Systems, Inc.                                    *HMM* 11/13/93