College Hockey:
RPI Busts Out For Consolation Win

— The host Rensselaer Engineers took out some of the frustration of not making the finals of their own Rensselaer/HSBC Holiday Hockey Tournament, defeating Notre Dame, 6-2. The Engineers scored four times in the second period to put the Irish away.

“Coming off last night’s loss we were able to put it out of our minds and park it,” said Engineer coach Dan Fridgen. “Playing four periods of hockey last night versus what they had and I thought we were sluggish in the first. But in the second we picked it up and did a good job.”

The game was touch and go in the first period until the Engineers’ Hamish Cunning let out a long lead pass that found Jim Henkel. Henkel broke in alone and as he was being converged upon, he put a wrist shot in on Tony Zasowski. The shot caught him in the arm and went past him for the 1-0 lead.

As the second period started, the Engineers scored on the power play just 16 seconds in. Matt Murley got hit with a pass, broke past Brett Lebda and deked Zasowski for the 2-0 lead.

The Irish then put one on the board on the power play as Dan Carlson found a streaking Lebda and he beat Kevin Kurk.

Then the Engineers scored 51 seconds later as an initial Andrew McPherson shot was shoveled home by Ben Barr for his first collegiate goal.

The Engineers added two more in the second period when Carson Butterwick scored on the power play, and, just 33 seconds, later McPherson added a goal off of a faceoff play, giving the Engineers a 5-1 lead after two periods.

“That was the difference, no question,” said Irish head coach Dave Poulin about the second period. “At 0-0, we talked before the game about them trying to pop someone behind our defense and it was a total defensive breakdown that let Henkel in. They’re a different team when they’re up 1-0. And then they got rolling in the second period and we couldn’t match them.”

Ryan Dolder added a goal for the Irish in the third, but that was matched by a Scott Basiuk goal to give the final of 6-2.

The Irish (4-14-3) will host Ferris State next weekend and hope to put this
weekend behind them.

“We’re a team that’s really searching for some things right now,” said Poulin. “The good news is that it’s 2001 the next time we play and we can put it all behind us.

“We haven’t gotten a bounce all year and we haven’t created a bounce all year either. We’re a struggling hockey team, we’ve been struggling since two minutes into the season, but we’ll find a way to come out of it. We’ve got 18 league games left so there is enough time left for us.”

Meanwhile the Engineers (9-4-1) will head to Brown and Providence in ECAC action next week.

“A consolation is a very difficult game to play and the way we lost last night was a very difficult way to lose, but we did a real good job of coming out and putting it behind us and getting the victory,” said Fridgen. “You can’t be shy about it, you have to come out, you have an out of league opponent and it’s RPI versus Notre Dame and we have to do what’s best for our team.”

The following is a self-policing forum for discussing views on this story. Comments that are derogatory, make personal attacks, are abusive, or contain profanity or racism will be removed at our discretion. USCHO.com is not responsible for comments posted by users. Please report any inappropriate or offensive comments by clicking the “Flag” link next to that comment in order to alert the moderator.

Please also keep “woofing,” taunting, and otherwise unsportsmanlike behavior to a minimum. Your posts will more than likely be deleted, and worse yet, you reflect badly on yourself, your favorite team and your conference.

  • Kpc

    In your calculations do you take into account the number of points per game that are available? For example the sigma of 7.22 points in the CCHA represents 2.4 times the points available in a game.  The ECAC sigma of 4.75 represents 2.37 times the points available in a game.  Not as big a difference when you look at it that way. ( A more standard way to look at it would be sigma/mean.  CCHA = 7.22/36.5 = 0.20     ECAC = 4.75/18 = 0.26   which makes the CCHA even tighter than the ECAC. But if you looking for how things might swing for the remaining games the sigma/game points is probably better. )

    • http://twitter.com/SullivanHockey Brian Sullivan

       That’s a very good point: I neglected to appreciate that there are more points available per game in the CCHA due to shootouts. That said, I wonder if such adjustments would be necessary, as more points on the table doesn’t necessarily warp the ratios between the good and bad teams…?

      • Kpc

        Yes, but the standard deviation is NOT a ratio.  It represents the width of the distribution of, in this case, the number of points that each team has gotten so far in the season.  When you calculate a standard deviation of a set of numbers you’re assuming that the numbers are distributed around a mean value with a normal or Gaussian distribution.  That’s where the 68% number comes from.  Rescale the CCHA points by 2/3 (as if each game counted for 2 points) and the standard deviation becomes 4.8.  

        (Remember that the CCHA is not like the NHL – you don’t just get an extra point for winning a shootout.  It’s a 3/2/1 scale for Win/Shootout Win/Shootout Loss, so the direct 2/3 scaling is appropriate.)

North Dakota 2016 National ChampionsBNY Mellon Wealth Management