2022 Spontaneous/Miscellaneous Game Threads

[@inthe8m]

Please stop trying to assist the lax media is making the pac 12 relevant. The day is coming, but until then it continues to be an afterthought and with good reason. And I am actually a fan! SKO BUFFS!

I think the Pac12's stock would be significantly higher if they didn't spend so much of their season beating up on one another. Playing each other twice is terrible for everyone's resume.

I would say that it actually gives the top P12 teams a bit of a bump as long there are only two really bad teams in the conference (Oregon and Cal). The top 4 teams USC, Colorado, Stanford, and ASU get a bump in RPI and SOS due to playing each other twice and it being double counted. I do agree that they need to stop playing each other twice.

Actually RPI SOS calculations specifically exclude the games your opponents play against you, so by them playing everyone twice it double the amount of games that are excluded. They would be much better off playing 5 more OOC games instead of doubling up in conference

I would certainly like to see the detailed info that mentions exclusions. All the calcs I have seen include straight up W-L of your opponents and W-L of your opponents-opponents with no exclusions. Impact of your head-to-head against your opponents is taken into account in your W-L %.

[hmmm]

Please stop trying to assist the lax media is making the pac 12 relevant. The day is coming, but until then it continues to be an afterthought and with good reason. And I am actually a fan! SKO BUFFS!

I think the Pac12's stock would be significantly higher if they didn't spend so much of their season beating up on one another. Playing each other twice is terrible for everyone's resume.

I would say that it actually gives the top P12 teams a bit of a bump as long there are only two really bad teams in the conference (Oregon and Cal). The top 4 teams USC, Colorado, Stanford, and ASU get a bump in RPI and SOS due to playing each other twice and it being double counted. I do agree that they need to stop playing each other twice.

Actually RPI SOS calculations specifically exclude the games your opponents play against you, so by them playing everyone twice it double the amount of games that are excluded. They would be much better off playing 5 more OOC games instead of doubling up in conference

I would certainly like to see the detailed info that mentions exclusions. All the calcs I have seen include straight up W-L of your opponents and W-L of your opponents-opponents with no exclusions. Impact of your head-to-head against your opponents is taken into account in your W-L %.

FACTOR 2. Strength of Schedule: Take each opponent’s won-lost percentage against other Division I
teams excluding the team in question (in this case, Team A), and then average these percentages.
Example: Add together the won-lost percentages of all of Team A’s 25 Division I opponents (again,
excluding games against Team A and non-DI opponents). For Team A’s opponents, the sum of their
percentage was calculated at 14.7575. Now divide 14.7575 by 25 (the number of Team A’s Division I
opponents) to determine the average of .5903, which is also the opponents’ success percentage.

And since Factor 2 is 50% of the RPI calculation and you're basically throwing away 2 games for each opponent it can have a big effect. It's why the PAC12 teams have low RPIs despite some decent wins.

[Dr. Tact]

Barring a remarkable comeback, St. Joe's will take the A-10 title over UMass. They lead 15-10 with 2:00 to go in the 4th.

Wow, congrats to St. Joes!! I don't think they've ever beaten UMass. THWND!

First ever A10 championship and beat both the top seeds on the way. What a great result.

https://www.usalaxmagazine.com/college ... ampionship

Great stuff, maybe if crazyhorse this they can let us know what UMass's at-large chances look like and how this affects the at-large bids of others

Concordia with 31 saves in three days. Nice 3 day run by the SU transfer.

I am not sure SU could get 31 saves over three games if Hower and Sweitzer were both allowed to stand in the crease at the same time.

lol

[Cagekeeper]

Barring a remarkable comeback, St. Joe's will take the A-10 title over UMass. They lead 15-10 with 2:00 to go in the 4th.

Wow, congrats to St. Joes!! I don't think they've ever beaten UMass. THWND!

First ever A10 championship and beat both the top seeds on the way. What a great result.

https://www.usalaxmagazine.com/college ... ampionship

Great stuff, maybe if crazyhorse this they can let us know what UMass's at-large chances look like and how this affects the at-large bids of others

Concordia with 31 saves in three days. Nice 3 day run by the SU transfer.

I am not sure SU could get 31 saves over three games if Hower and Sweitzer were both allowed to stand in the crease at the same time.

lol

Said it once. I’ll
Say it again. Best move she could have made. As a matter of fact. All 3 su transfers started that game. And all 3 never got any time at su. Smart x3

[OuttaNowhereWregget]

Barring a remarkable comeback, St. Joe's will take the A-10 title over UMass. They lead 15-10 with 2:00 to go in the 4th.

Wow, congrats to St. Joes!! I don't think they've ever beaten UMass. THWND!

First ever A10 championship and beat both the top seeds on the way. What a great result.

https://www.usalaxmagazine.com/college ... ampionship

Great stuff, maybe if crazyhorse this they can let us know what UMass's at-large chances look like and how this affects the at-large bids of others

Concordia with 31 saves in three days. Nice 3 day run by the SU transfer.

I am not sure SU could get 31 saves over three games if Hower and Sweitzer were both allowed to stand in the crease at the same time.

lol

Said it once. I’ll
Say it again. Best move she could have made. As a matter of fact. All 3 su transfers started that game. And all 3 never got any time at su. Smart x3

So, in other words, Syracuse is screwed for the NCAA tournament this year.

[hmmm]

Barring a remarkable comeback, St. Joe's will take the A-10 title over UMass. They lead 15-10 with 2:00 to go in the 4th.

Wow, congrats to St. Joes!! I don't think they've ever beaten UMass. THWND!

First ever A10 championship and beat both the top seeds on the way. What a great result.

https://www.usalaxmagazine.com/college ... ampionship

Great stuff, maybe if crazyhorse this they can let us know what UMass's at-large chances look like and how this affects the at-large bids of others

Concordia with 31 saves in three days. Nice 3 day run by the SU transfer.

I am not sure SU could get 31 saves over three games if Hower and Sweitzer were both allowed to stand in the crease at the same time.

lol

Said it once. I’ll
Say it again. Best move she could have made. As a matter of fact. All 3 su transfers started that game. And all 3 never got any time at su. Smart x3

So, in other words, Syracuse is screwed for the NCAA tournament this year.

Season Save%:
Emily Sterling = 57%
Taylor Moreno = 49%
Madison Doucette = 41%
Kimber Hower = 36%
Rachel Hall = 34%
Delaney Sweitzer = 26%

I'd say Syracuse and BC are going to need better Goalie play to get through the tournament.

[OuttaNowhereWregget]

So, in other words, Syracuse is screwed for the NCAA tournament this year.

Season Save%:
Emily Sterling = 57%
Taylor Moreno = 49%
Madison Doucette = 41%
Kimber Hower = 36%
Rachel Hall = 34%
Delaney Sweitzer = 26%

I'd say Syracuse and BC are going to need better Goalie play to get through the tournament.

But as Seacoaster pointed out the other day, BC has their defense, Syracuse does not. BC doesn’t have to rely on their goaltending nearly as much as Syracuse does, and that’s why the Orange are screwed.

[wlaxphan20]

So, in other words, Syracuse is screwed for the NCAA tournament this year.

Season Save%:
Emily Sterling = 57%
Taylor Moreno = 49%
Madison Doucette = 41%
Kimber Hower = 36%
Rachel Hall = 34%
Delaney Sweitzer = 26%

I'd say Syracuse and BC are going to need better Goalie play to get through the tournament.

But as Seacoaster pointed out the other day, BC has their defense, Syracuse does not. BC doesn’t have to rely on their goaltending nearly as much as Syracuse does, and that’s why the Orange are screwed.

I cannot read his mind, but I don't think Seacoaster meant that BC doesn't need solid goalie play because they have a better defense - he just meant BC has a better defense than Syracuse. IMO, BC's goalie play was one of the main reasons UVA hung around for as long as they did. It can give an opposing team hope & strengthen their confidence enough to turn the momentum in their favor. There are better teams than UVA that won't just hang around but use the momentum to win - especially in the post season where it's win or go home.

[hmmm]

So, in other words, Syracuse is screwed for the NCAA tournament this year.

Season Save%:
Emily Sterling = 57%
Taylor Moreno = 49%
Madison Doucette = 41%
Kimber Hower = 36%
Rachel Hall = 34%
Delaney Sweitzer = 26%

I'd say Syracuse and BC are going to need better Goalie play to get through the tournament.

But as Seacoaster pointed out the other day, BC has their defense, Syracuse does not. BC doesn’t have to rely on their goaltending nearly as much as Syracuse does, and that’s why the Orange are screwed.

I cannot read his mind, but I don't think Seacoaster meant that BC doesn't need solid goalie play because they have a better defense - he just meant BC has a better defense than Syracuse. IMO, BC's goalie play was one of the main reasons UVA hung around for as long as they did. It can give an opposing team hope & strengthen their confidence enough to turn the momentum in their favor. There are better teams than UVA that won't just hang around but use the momentum to win - especially in the post season where it's win or go home.

Also, UVA hasn't played good defense all year and BC scored 42 goals on them in 2 games this year. BC can't rely on scoring 20 goals on MD and UNC who both play very good defense. BC is going to need Hall to step up like she did in semis last year.

[@inthe8m]

Please stop trying to assist the lax media is making the pac 12 relevant. The day is coming, but until then it continues to be an afterthought and with good reason. And I am actually a fan! SKO BUFFS!

I think the Pac12's stock would be significantly higher if they didn't spend so much of their season beating up on one another. Playing each other twice is terrible for everyone's resume.

I would say that it actually gives the top P12 teams a bit of a bump as long there are only two really bad teams in the conference (Oregon and Cal). The top 4 teams USC, Colorado, Stanford, and ASU get a bump in RPI and SOS due to playing each other twice and it being double counted. I do agree that they need to stop playing each other twice.

Actually RPI SOS calculations specifically exclude the games your opponents play against you, so by them playing everyone twice it double the amount of games that are excluded. They would be much better off playing 5 more OOC games instead of doubling up in conference

I would certainly like to see the detailed info that mentions exclusions. All the calcs I have seen include straight up W-L of your opponents and W-L of your opponents-opponents with no exclusions. Impact of your head-to-head against your opponents is taken into account in your W-L %.

FACTOR 2. Strength of Schedule: Take each opponent’s won-lost percentage against other Division I
teams excluding the team in question (in this case, Team A), and then average these percentages.
Example: Add together the won-lost percentages of all of Team A’s 25 Division I opponents (again,
excluding games against Team A and non-DI opponents). For Team A’s opponents, the sum of their
percentage was calculated at 14.7575. Now divide 14.7575 by 25 (the number of Team A’s Division I
opponents) to determine the average of .5903, which is also the opponents’ success percentage.

And since Factor 2 is 50% of the RPI calculation and you're basically throwing away 2 games for each opponent it can have a big effect. It's why the PAC12 teams have low RPIs despite some decent wins.

Thank you. I never know how much to trust the seemingly random pdfs you can find out there with the explanation of rpi. But, I ran the numbers and was able to replicate results for USC that match with https://lacrossereference.com/stats/rpi-d1-women/ of opponents' winning percentage of 0.5406.

I only ran the numbers for USC, but USC gets a bump in the SOS/RPI due to playing P12 teams twice over playing out-of-conference opponents with equivalent records. 54.06% instead of 52.95% of opponents' winning percentage. ymmv with other teams ...

usc bump 0502.png (80.19 KiB) Viewed 1123 times

[OuttaNowhereWregget]

So, in other words, Syracuse is screwed for the NCAA tournament this year.

Season Save%:
Emily Sterling = 57%
Taylor Moreno = 49%
Madison Doucette = 41%
Kimber Hower = 36%
Rachel Hall = 34%
Delaney Sweitzer = 26%

I'd say Syracuse and BC are going to need better Goalie play to get through the tournament.

But as Seacoaster pointed out the other day, BC has their defense, Syracuse does not. BC doesn’t have to rely on their goaltending nearly as much as Syracuse does, and that’s why the Orange are screwed.

I cannot read his mind, but I don't think Seacoaster meant that BC doesn't need solid goalie play because they have a better defense - he just meant BC has a better defense than Syracuse. IMO, BC's goalie play was one of the main reasons UVA hung around for as long as they did. It can give an opposing team hope & strengthen their confidence enough to turn the momentum in their favor. There are better teams than UVA that won't just hang around but use the momentum to win - especially in the post season where it's win or go home.

Also, UVA hasn't played good defense all year and BC scored 42 goals on them in 2 games this year. BC can't rely on scoring 20 goals on MD and UNC who both play very good defense. BC is going to need Hall to step up like she did in semis last year.

I don’t disagree with either of you. Maybe Seacoaster will weigh in and clarify.

But I stand by my original comment – Syracuse is screwed going into the NCAA tournament with their goaltending situation.

[wlaxphan20]

So, in other words, Syracuse is screwed for the NCAA tournament this year.

Season Save%:
Emily Sterling = 57%
Taylor Moreno = 49%
Madison Doucette = 41%
Kimber Hower = 36%
Rachel Hall = 34%
Delaney Sweitzer = 26%

I'd say Syracuse and BC are going to need better Goalie play to get through the tournament.

But as Seacoaster pointed out the other day, BC has their defense, Syracuse does not. BC doesn’t have to rely on their goaltending nearly as much as Syracuse does, and that’s why the Orange are screwed.

I cannot read his mind, but I don't think Seacoaster meant that BC doesn't need solid goalie play because they have a better defense - he just meant BC has a better defense than Syracuse. IMO, BC's goalie play was one of the main reasons UVA hung around for as long as they did. It can give an opposing team hope & strengthen their confidence enough to turn the momentum in their favor. There are better teams than UVA that won't just hang around but use the momentum to win - especially in the post season where it's win or go home.

Also, UVA hasn't played good defense all year and BC scored 42 goals on them in 2 games this year. BC can't rely on scoring 20 goals on MD and UNC who both play very good defense. BC is going to need Hall to step up like she did in semis last year.

I don’t disagree with either of you. Maybe Seacoaster will weigh in and clarify.

But I stand by my original comment – Syracuse is screwed going into the NCAA tournament with their goaltending situation.

I don't disagree that Syracuse is behind the 8 ball at the goalie position

[Seacoaster(1)]

I only meant that BC’s defense is superior to Syracuse’s. I was not passing on the goalie situation of either team. I think I did say Hall would make more than four saves, and someone replied “wanna bet.” I didn’t, so my beer money is still in my pocket. Hall had a brutal day, in my opinion. I don’t know how many saves she ended with, but everything went wrong for her. BC cannot win a national championship with a keeper at lower that 25%.

I came away really impressed with UNC, the prohibitive favorite in my estimation. They took the punch from UND, rebounded, toughed it out from there. Deep, a lot of weapons, good defenders and a goalie who Can. Be. Counted. On. To make the saves that can be made. With goalies in our scorers’ game, we want them to stop all the shots they should, and then grab a few out of the mist. Moreno does this.

[wlaxphan20]

I only meant that BC’s defense is superior to Syracuse’s. I was not passing on the goalie situation of either team. I think I did say Hall would make more than four saves, and someone replied “wanna bet.” I didn’t, so my beer money is still in my pocket. Hall had a brutal day, in my opinion. I don’t know how many saves she ended with, but everything went wrong for her. BC cannot win a national championship with a keeper at lower that 25%.

I came away really impressed with UNC, the prohibitive favorite in my estimation. They took the punch from UND, rebounded, toughed it out from there. Deep, a lot of weapons, good defenders and a goalie who Can. Be. Counted. On. To make the saves that can be made. With goalies in our scorers’ game, we want them to stop all the shots they should, and then grab a few out of the mist. Moreno does this.

Thanks, and I agree. Hall had 1 save according to the box score

[hmmm]

Please stop trying to assist the lax media is making the pac 12 relevant. The day is coming, but until then it continues to be an afterthought and with good reason. And I am actually a fan! SKO BUFFS!

I think the Pac12's stock would be significantly higher if they didn't spend so much of their season beating up on one another. Playing each other twice is terrible for everyone's resume.

I would say that it actually gives the top P12 teams a bit of a bump as long there are only two really bad teams in the conference (Oregon and Cal). The top 4 teams USC, Colorado, Stanford, and ASU get a bump in RPI and SOS due to playing each other twice and it being double counted. I do agree that they need to stop playing each other twice.

Actually RPI SOS calculations specifically exclude the games your opponents play against you, so by them playing everyone twice it double the amount of games that are excluded. They would be much better off playing 5 more OOC games instead of doubling up in conference

I would certainly like to see the detailed info that mentions exclusions. All the calcs I have seen include straight up W-L of your opponents and W-L of your opponents-opponents with no exclusions. Impact of your head-to-head against your opponents is taken into account in your W-L %.

FACTOR 2. Strength of Schedule: Take each opponent’s won-lost percentage against other Division I
teams excluding the team in question (in this case, Team A), and then average these percentages.
Example: Add together the won-lost percentages of all of Team A’s 25 Division I opponents (again,
excluding games against Team A and non-DI opponents). For Team A’s opponents, the sum of their
percentage was calculated at 14.7575. Now divide 14.7575 by 25 (the number of Team A’s Division I
opponents) to determine the average of .5903, which is also the opponents’ success percentage.

And since Factor 2 is 50% of the RPI calculation and you're basically throwing away 2 games for each opponent it can have a big effect. It's why the PAC12 teams have low RPIs despite some decent wins.

Thank you. I never know how much to trust the seemingly random pdfs you can find out there with the explanation of rpi. But, I ran the numbers and was able to replicate results for USC that match with https://lacrossereference.com/stats/rpi-d1-women/ of opponents' winning percentage of 0.5406.

I only ran the numbers for USC, but USC gets a bump in the SOS/RPI due to playing P12 teams twice over playing out-of-conference opponents with equivalent records. 54.06% instead of 52.95% of opponents' winning percentage. ymmv with other teams ...


usc bump 0502.png

Sure, but Oregon and Cal have a combined 5 wins and 4 of the USC games were against them. If you replace those two extra games with quality OOC teams your SOS would go up a lot. Playing Stanford, ASU and CU twice doesn't hurt. If you look at the higher rated SOS teams their Category 2 percentages are .61 and higher. That would make a huge difference in the Pac12 RPIs if they replaced Oregon and Cal's 12% and 19% winning percentages with teams that had a winning percent in the 60s or higher. If those OOC schools also played tough schedules it would also improve their Category 3 scores

[@inthe8m]

Please stop trying to assist the lax media is making the pac 12 relevant. The day is coming, but until then it continues to be an afterthought and with good reason. And I am actually a fan! SKO BUFFS!

I think the Pac12's stock would be significantly higher if they didn't spend so much of their season beating up on one another. Playing each other twice is terrible for everyone's resume.

I would say that it actually gives the top P12 teams a bit of a bump as long there are only two really bad teams in the conference (Oregon and Cal). The top 4 teams USC, Colorado, Stanford, and ASU get a bump in RPI and SOS due to playing each other twice and it being double counted. I do agree that they need to stop playing each other twice.

Actually RPI SOS calculations specifically exclude the games your opponents play against you, so by them playing everyone twice it double the amount of games that are excluded. They would be much better off playing 5 more OOC games instead of doubling up in conference

I would certainly like to see the detailed info that mentions exclusions. All the calcs I have seen include straight up W-L of your opponents and W-L of your opponents-opponents with no exclusions. Impact of your head-to-head against your opponents is taken into account in your W-L %.

FACTOR 2. Strength of Schedule: Take each opponent’s won-lost percentage against other Division I
teams excluding the team in question (in this case, Team A), and then average these percentages.
Example: Add together the won-lost percentages of all of Team A’s 25 Division I opponents (again,
excluding games against Team A and non-DI opponents). For Team A’s opponents, the sum of their
percentage was calculated at 14.7575. Now divide 14.7575 by 25 (the number of Team A’s Division I
opponents) to determine the average of .5903, which is also the opponents’ success percentage.

And since Factor 2 is 50% of the RPI calculation and you're basically throwing away 2 games for each opponent it can have a big effect. It's why the PAC12 teams have low RPIs despite some decent wins.

Thank you. I never know how much to trust the seemingly random pdfs you can find out there with the explanation of rpi. But, I ran the numbers and was able to replicate results for USC that match with https://lacrossereference.com/stats/rpi-d1-women/ of opponents' winning percentage of 0.5406.

I only ran the numbers for USC, but USC gets a bump in the SOS/RPI due to playing P12 teams twice over playing out-of-conference opponents with equivalent records. 54.06% instead of 52.95% of opponents' winning percentage. ymmv with other teams ...


usc bump 0502.png

Sure, but ...

IF my aunt had balls, she'd be my uncle.

(just a figure of speech, no offense intended for any mix or combination of pronouns)

[LarryGamLax]

hmmm said..."BC is going to need Hall to step up like she did in semis last year."

The above statement is true, but the chances of that happening a 2nd time are super-slim and Not. If you're betting, take Not!
Rachel Hall in ACC play has a Sv. Pct of 29%. Her overall Sv. Pct in 17 games is 34%. BC may have won a Title last year with Hall "stepping up" in the Semifinal and Final, but that cannot be a strategy going forward. Hall will have to climb Mount Olympus to step up this post season.

[Lax247]

Please stop trying to assist the lax media is making the pac 12 relevant. The day is coming, but until then it continues to be an afterthought and with good reason. And I am actually a fan! SKO BUFFS!

I think the Pac12's stock would be significantly higher if they didn't spend so much of their season beating up on one another. Playing each other twice is terrible for everyone's resume.

I would say that it actually gives the top P12 teams a bit of a bump as long there are only two really bad teams in the conference (Oregon and Cal). The top 4 teams USC, Colorado, Stanford, and ASU get a bump in RPI and SOS due to playing each other twice and it being double counted. I do agree that they need to stop playing each other twice.

Actually RPI SOS calculations specifically exclude the games your opponents play against you, so by them playing everyone twice it double the amount of games that are excluded. They would be much better off playing 5 more OOC games instead of doubling up in conference

I would certainly like to see the detailed info that mentions exclusions. All the calcs I have seen include straight up W-L of your opponents and W-L of your opponents-opponents with no exclusions. Impact of your head-to-head against your opponents is taken into account in your W-L %.

FACTOR 2. Strength of Schedule: Take each opponent’s won-lost percentage against other Division I
teams excluding the team in question (in this case, Team A), and then average these percentages.
Example: Add together the won-lost percentages of all of Team A’s 25 Division I opponents (again,
excluding games against Team A and non-DI opponents). For Team A’s opponents, the sum of their
percentage was calculated at 14.7575. Now divide 14.7575 by 25 (the number of Team A’s Division I
opponents) to determine the average of .5903, which is also the opponents’ success percentage.

And since Factor 2 is 50% of the RPI calculation and you're basically throwing away 2 games for each opponent it can have a big effect. It's why the PAC12 teams have low RPIs despite some decent wins.

Thank you. I never know how much to trust the seemingly random pdfs you can find out there with the explanation of rpi. But, I ran the numbers and was able to replicate results for USC that match with https://lacrossereference.com/stats/rpi-d1-women/ of opponents' winning percentage of 0.5406.

I only ran the numbers for USC, but USC gets a bump in the SOS/RPI due to playing P12 teams twice over playing out-of-conference opponents with equivalent records. 54.06% instead of 52.95% of opponents' winning percentage. ymmv with other teams ...


usc bump 0502.png

Sure, but ...

IF my aunt had balls, she'd be my uncle.

(just a figure of speech, no offense intended for any mix or combination of pronouns)

Seemed as good a place as any to interject with this : Abby hormes of High point is 1 goal away from tying CH record for goals In a season. Since HP will play in the finals looks pretty fair to say she will break North’s record pretty handily . Honestly I expected the record to stand more than 1 year .

[OuttaNowhereWregget]

Seemed as good a place as any to interject with this : Abby hormes of High point is 1 goal away from tying CH record for goals In a season. Since HP will play in the finals looks pretty fair to say she will break North’s record pretty handily . Honestly I expected the record to stand more than 1 year .

It's easy to break records when you play mostly cupcakes, and pot most of your goals against said cupcakes:

https://highpointpanthers.com/sports/wo ... e/schedule

[Seacoaster(1)]

Sigh.