Leigh Torbin writes:
 
>        On this the eve of the next hockey signing period I felt it
>appropriate to take a look back at this past year. The following is a
>breakdown of which teams made the biggest improvements, or dropped the
>most in the RPI ratings. As a lot of schools at each end of the spectrum
>proves, recruits aren't the only thing, and blue-chippers by the dozen
>don't guarantee wins.
 (snip)
>        But notice, most of the teams at the top brought in big name
>players, that were generally of better caliber than their predecessors.
>UMass is sort of an exception, doing it witout an league Rookie of the
>Year candidate. As examples, WMU (+20) brought in Magliarditi, who won some
>games all by himself. BC (+14) added Reasoner, the reason for their success.
>        The opposite is true of schools near the bottom, like Princeton (-26),
>who's freshmen this year, pale in comparson (at this stage at least) to
>the seniors that they replaced. I don't mean to pick on the Tigers though.
 
IMO, the changes in RPI don't really reflect recruiting at all; Cornell,
for example, only had three freshmen regulars (Kyle Knopp, Jeff Burgoyne and
Jeff Oates). UVM had five rookies; the fourth line and two D -- certainly
useful contributors (especially Jan Kloubacek), but not the reason the
Cats went to the NCAA semis. Princeton and Harvard, on the other hand, had
two of the better rookie classes in the ECAC. Harvard placed three players
on the ECAC All-Rookie team and the Tigers freshmen were outstanding (by
comparison, Princeton's class of '99 outscored the class of '96 as freshmen,
70-13 in points. Even if you include JP O'Connor, who took this season
off, with the '96ers it is still 70-31). I think the change in RPI for
the ECAC teams is more  a reflection of how the juniors/seniors improved
from the previous season -- certainly that would explain RPI, Brown and Prince-
ton's troubles, since those upperclassmen generally underacheived.
In Cornell's case, likewise, the improvement of guys like Brad Chartrand
and PC Drouin made a huge difference. Harvard's decline, on the other
hand, is directly related to injuries. No team could have survived what
the Crimson went through unscathed; at one point, the entire first line
was out of uniform. Recruiting may make a difference over time, but it
will rarely make a drastic difference from one season to the next.
 
>1995 Final RPI, vs. 1996 Final RPI:
 
>10 Biggest Improvements:        10 Biggest Dips:
>Cornell            +20          Princeton       -26
>Western Michigan   +20          Northeastern    -18
>UMass              +15          Brown           -17
>Providence         +15          New Hampshire   -17
>Boston College     +14          RPI             -15
>UMass-Lowell       +13          Wisconsin       -10
>Ohio State         +12          N. Michigan     -8
>Lake State         +10          Yale            -7
>Colgate            +9           Harvard, MC,
>Notre Dame / UVM   +7           N. Dakota & SCSU -6
 
Geoff Howell
Drop the Puck Magazine
 
HOCKEY-L is for discussion of college ice hockey;  send information to
[log in to unmask], The College Hockey Information List.