Semifinal #IIHF Worlds predictions. How does Sweden’s win over Canada shake things up? #Bracketology #MoneyPuck

From my Bracketology blog post (here), I went three for four on the day.  I picked the first three matches, but missed the Sweden win over Canada.  The Sedin-Sedin-Danielsson line killed it (minus that bad shootout attempt by H. Sedin–yikes).  Patting myself on the back, I missed the prediction on the last game of the day, going all the way to a shootout, in a sudden death shoutout situation.  Moreover, besides the 50/50 split on the US-Russia match, this was the closest statistical matchup–see the previous odds and probabilities here (without any historical adjustments, injuries, etc.)  Now, I couldn’t guess the Canada-Sweden match any better than I could predict that 8-3 blowout of USA over Russia, but at least I wasn’t way off.

Here is my changed bracket, with Sweden in, but I will still take Finland in that game.  If there is a game this year I would pay to be at, it would be Sweden vs. Finland from Stockholm.  It should be a battle of goaltenders, but hopefully a low scoring affair doesn’t mean a lack of offensive action.

My gold medal match prediction stays the same, but will Sweden beat Switzerland?  I am going to guess Switzerland grabs the bronze medal now.  Sweden fought hard to come back against Canada, but have one main line and strong goalkeeping.  I am not sure if that will work against the Swiss–it didn’t work the first time they played.

So, here are the odds for the semifinal round and some comments.  Keep in mind, these are neutral odds based only on math formulations, not calculating in profits as a casino or bookie would.

	Likelihood	Moneyline      (US)	Decimial Odds (EU)
Finland	61.02%	-156	1.64
Sweden	38.98%	+150	2.50
Swiss	88.45%	-733	1.14
US	11.55%	+14	8.33

The early odds from bet365.com has Finland as the underdog.  This must have to do with Sweden having home-ice advantage.  I would bet on Finland for sure in this match.  It is not a big return (listed at +135), but it is the much better bet.  Sweden is most likely to lose based on the Log5 method and the moneyline reads -167 for them.  The bookies basically have swapped my neutral odds above.

As I assumed, after the US blowout of Russia, the oddsmakers at bet365.com are dismissing Switzerland’s undefeated run.  I too dismiss Switzerland over the US even with the odds in their favor from my guess, but my guess is against the grain of the analysis.  Maybe not as much as the +14 moneyline on the US (the game should be closer than US-Russia), but Switzerland should not be dismissed.  Switzerland’s and Finland’s chances of winning have decreased even though they moved on, but the Swiss should be really favored to win.

The returns are bad on this game.  +105 on the Swiss and -133 for the US isn’t worth wasting your money on.  Gambling tip from a non-gambler: bet Finland…I am 75% right so far and the stats give Finland a 3 in 5 chance to win.  Good luck to all the teams!

Breakdown of @USAHockey demolition over #Russia.

Toot toot tooting my horn this afternoon.  After running some odds and probability calculation yesterday, the US and Russia teams were 50/50 to win today’s game before the start (see all the odds here).  I correctly predicted in my IIHF Worlds Bracketolgy blog post (here) the USA would win if Gibson got the nod over Bishop in goal.  But, I don’t think anyone predicted an 8-3 drubbing.  I did think bringing Ovechkin on the roster this late was a mistake for the Russian side.  Was it?

Well, Ovechkin scored a goal and also had an assist.  So, two points in the first game was great on paper.  However, that goal was pretty meaningless.  The Russian’s were down 4-1 when he nailed the rear bar behind Gibson and a two goal difference was a close as they would get.  The Americans chased Bryzgalov from the net at the end of the second period.  Kovalchuk, who led the tournament in scoring, finished with zero points.  Medvedev and Radulov were in the tournament’s top ten leaders in scoring prior to this game; both finished with zero points.  Radulov finished -3, partly due to giving up a turnover on the powerplay which led to the US scoring shorthanded for goal number five in the early matchup.  If you look at things this way, Ovechkin was sort of the sole bright spot on a team where their star player’s didn’t show up.  I disagree with this take on things.

First off, credit to the Americans.  Bryzgalov’s GAA was low prior to the game, but he was seeing a low number of shots a game (credit to Russia’s defense).  On the other hand, his save percentage was pretty mediocre.  In the first match the US side sent only 22 shots his way, scoring on three of them.  In this match, similar results.  The big difference was 21 shots in the first TWO periods, scoring on four of those opportunities.

The next problem was making room for Ovechkin.  This caused some line shuffling to get him in the game.  Loktionov was scratched and Tereshenko (-3) was promoted in his place to the top line with Radulov and Kovalchuk.  Anisimov was bumped to the third line to make room for Ovechkin and Kunetsov (-1) got on the third line in Tereshenko’s place.  On the fourth line, Russia had three new faces from the first time they played the US.  The US roster?  Nearly identical to the first time they played.  This without a doubt caused chemistry issues from a game Russia controlled first time around to a game where they were dominated.

Ice times were a major issue for Russia’s leaders because of Ovechkin.  Only Radulov saw an increase in ice time for the game, while Kovalchuk and Medvedev saw a decrease in playing time.  All three of these player’s saw an increase in their third period playing time today in an attempt to make a comeback when the game was still manageable.  In other words, outside of the third period, Radulov saw the same ice time, while Kovalchuk and Medvedev were on the ice two to three less shifts for each of the first two periods.

The results of line member swapping and adding Ovechkin: a combined -12 for these four players and an embarrassing 8-3 loss at the hands of the Americans.

#IIHFWorlds Probability of wins for quarterfinals #MoneyPuck

I thought I’d put a little math twist on tomorrow’s match-ups and calculate the probability of each team winning.  From here, hopefully I can create some odds.  I will compare them with what you could bet against online after the analysis.

First things first, using the “Log5″ method for calculating a team winning or losing (credit to Bill James in Baseball Abstract), this is what you do:

Win probability = (A – A * B) / (A + B – 2 * A * B) — where A represent Team A’s winning percentage and B represents Team B’s winning percentage.

For tomorrow, without running a regression and seeing if prior games, past year’s seeding, strength of schedule, luck, injuries, etc., make a difference, this is what we have:

Finland	77.88%
Russia	50.00%
US	50.00%
Slovakia	22.12%
Swiss	94.78%
Canada	70.59%
Sweden	29.41%
Czech	5.22%

Basically you have the percent chance each team will win their game tomorrow.  The next step is to convert these percentages into odds and then I will convert these into a moneyline.

Finland	-355
Russia	+/-100
US	+/-100
Slovakia	+355
Swiss	-1900
Canada	-245
Sweden	+245
Czech	+1900

For the explanation of the plus/minus on the moneyline, you can follow the link here:

Moneyline odds are usually considered “American” style odds, so here are the “European” style decimal odds:

Finland	1.28
Russia	2.00
US	2.00
Slovakia	4.55
Swiss	1.05
Canada	1.41
Sweden	3.45
Czech	20.00

Now, these wouldn’t guarantee a profit, because I would need to estimate the betting spread for each team and pass that over my profit margin, which is 8% customarily if I was a bookie.  What makes this fun is one can see how betting agencies set their odds differently from these “even odds” in order to make a profit.

I took a quick look at the lines over at bet365.com, where the internet says they have the lowest profit margins, meaning they should be the closest to my calculations.  It appears they take performance from past World Championships into play.  I’m not sure how much sense this makes when we see a Switzerland like this year  Maybe with professional club teams, but not here.  That is why a regression analysis would be important to see which things play the biggest role in winning or losing in the playoff round of a World Championship or other country-based format.

Nevertheless, the US is the biggest underdog (based on past matches against Russia).  Nevermind that they had the same record in the tournament and played a close match.  US is +300/4.00 and Russia is -400/1.25.  Seems a little ridiculous to me….but maybe this is where they clean up!

Switzerland is also an underdog against Czech Republic, when the Swiss have clearly been the better team.  They are currently listed at +180/2.80.  My -1900/+1900 clearly needed to be adjusted, but to make the Swiss the underdog seems a little crazy too.

I am dead on with my Canada and Finland odds, so it appears they have raised the probability of Sweden and Slovakia winning in order to meet their profit margin/lower potential payouts.  This was also likely adjusted because of what I believe is their faulty outlook on past games.

Ok–let’s see how this ends up!  Games start in nine hours!

#IIHFWorlds bracket and predictions – BRACKETOLOGY!

A little bracketology action for the IIHF World Championships.  Below is the quarterfinal round bracket with the teams and their 2012 IIHF seeding in parentheses.  The seeding for this tournament is to the left of the team in the bracket, with H or S indicating whether they were in the Helsinki or Stockholm Group for the preliminary rounds.

IIHF World Championship Bracket

In my written summaries section for the quarterfinals, each team’s preliminary round record will be shown in the following format:  wins-overtime wins-overtime loss-losses and point differential.

Russia (5-0-0-2 +15) vs. USA (5-0-0-2 +8)

Previous match:  Russia 5 – USA 3

Russia got the best of the US team in the preliminary round.  The US kept it tied through two periods, but Russia scored two goals in two minutes in the third period to get the win – including one from the tournament’s leading scorer Ilya Kovalchuk.  What seems like great news for the Russian side, and bad news for the Americans, was the announcement of Alex Ovechkin grabbing the last spot on the Russian roster.  With all of that firepower, how could the Russians lose in the rematch?

John Gibson in the net for the U.S. let in one goal in two games in net.  Will he get the start over Ben Bishop who let in four goals against the Slovak team today?  I would certainly hope so.

Moreover, while Kovalchuk and Ovechkin are prolific scorers, they have not won much in high pressure situations.  Why else is Ovechkin here (hint: the Capitals got stomped again in Game 7)?  Bryzgalov also looks susceptible to be scored on with a 93.4% save percentage.  The 1.33 goals against average points to good defense, which will go away the more Ovechkin is on the ice.

I will take the USA side on the rematch, especially if Gibson gets the nod.  If not, I give the edge to Russia.  For the bracket…I’ll commit to the good ol’ US of A.

Switzerland (6-1-0-0 +19) vs. Czech Republic (3-1-0-3 +7)

Previous match:  Switzerland 5 – Czech Republic 2

Two sides of the coin for these teams: the upstart Swiss side goes undefeated in the tournament and the Czech side wins only four games to steal the final playoff spot.  A loss against Norway and the Czech side is watching from the sidelines instead of playing the Swiss team.

While I hesitate to pick Switzerland as they are a bit of a Cinderella (ranked #9 by IIHF in 2012 – lowest ranked team in the playoffs), they have the momentum.  The four teams the Czech Republic beat in the preliminary round are the four teams not in the quarterfinals; their three losses came against the higher seeded teams.  The Czech’s should come in on a tear after a definitive 7 – 0 win over Norway, but Switzerland is playing confident.  Pick:  Swiss in a close one to continue the undefeated streak into the semis.

Finland (4-2-0-1 +9 ) vs. Slovakia (3-0-1-3 +1)

Previous match:  Finland 2 – Slovakia 0

Slovakia has been a bit of a mystery this tournament.  It appeared they would miss the playoff round, but upset the US team on the final day of play.  However, they also lost to France and the now-relegated-Austrian team.

The Finnish side got stronger during the tournament, with the exception of the overtime squeaker on the last day over Latvia, who had nothing left but pride to play for.  They sort of snuck into the top seed for the Helsinki group after the US fell flat against Slovakia on their last day.  Finland, for what it’s worth, will have home-ice advantage in the first round.  With more than just the home crowd on their side (this means you Kontiola, Aaltonen and Raanta) they clearly have the better team.  Slovakia will be riding high after sneaking into the playoffs, but adrenaline will not be enough.  Maybe not another shutout, but likely a clear victory for the Helsinki fans.

Canada (5-1-1-0 +15) vs. Sweden (5-0-0-2 +6)

Previous match:  Canada 3 – Sweden 0

Canada can score in bunches, and when the win, they win big.  They also have the tournament’s best goalkeeper in Mike Smith, though Dubnyk is getting most of the minutes.  Sweden likes to keep things close, which led to five wins for them with Enroth leading the way.  Sweden will need at least three goals, probably four to have a chance against Canada.  They were only able to get to four twice: a meaningless final matchup against Denmark and against fellow Scandinavian side Norway.  Along with Stamkos and Giroux, the Swedish team will have more they can handle.  If Sweden can score quick, they have a chance, but Canada is too strong.

Semifinal Round

Finland vs. Canada

This could be a great game between two evenly matched teams.  I am guessing it will be a low scoring, defensive affair.  For my entertainment, hopefully a shootout as well.  Finland is the better team and will move on to the goal medal round.

Switzerland vs. USA

The Swiss have played exceptional, but even Cinderella’s carriage turns back into a pumpkin.  The USA has a strong side and the clock will strike midnight on this fairy tale.  It has been a great tourney for the Swiss, but the best they will do is bringing home a bronze.  A huge step this year for Switzerland and well-deserved.

TIM’S PICKS

Gold Medal Match

Finland vs. USA

In a quarterfinal rematch from 2012, these two teams make big steps toward the gold medal.  Last year, Finland wins this in Helsinki.  This year, they will have to celebrate in Stockholm.  The Finnish team ends a consistent run by the US who receives a well-deserved silver medal.

Bronze Medal Match

Switzerland vs. Canada

Switzerland goes from sixth in their group in 2012 to the top seed and into the bronze medal round.  Canada goes from a quarterfinal defeat against last year’s silver medalist to play the previously undefeated Swiss.  This could be a fun game to watch with lots of open play and scoring.  Give the Swiss credit for their run this year, but they will finish fourth.  Canada takes the bronze, again not making the gold medal around after losing to a gold medal team.  Again, big steps for both teams from last year and good steps for 2014 Sochi.

Final picks:

Finland:  Gold

USA*:  Silver

Canada:  Bronze

*If Russia wins the quarterfinal match against the USA, put them in the silver medal slot.

All quarterfinal matches begin on 16 May.  Next post will look at the odds of each of the teams winning the tourney.

Interesting rule could make for good first-round story line, but probably won’t. #MOLLiga #Hockey #playoffs

I am one full season in to a small European Hockey league and I am still getting surprised by the rules.  I read a post today from jegkorongblog.hu (Hungarian Ice Hockey blog) about the first seeded playoff team being able to pick their first round opponent.

This strikes me as odd, just because I have never heard of such a rule before.  Supposedly, if my Google Translate is working properly, other European leagues have a similar rule.  So, this rule is not unique to the MOL Liga.  However, I am thinking of the impact (or lack thereof) of such a rule in the MOL Liga specifically.

In this league, only four teams make the playoffs.  The first place team will likely choose the team they have the best chance of beating to get into the championship round.  In a regular seeding format, the best team gets to play the worst seeded playoff team; thus, this choice occurs automatically.  In some situations, maybe the fourth seeded team has had your number all season and you have a better chance at beating a higher seeded team in the first round and you want to take your chances in the championship round.  You’re hope then is that the other team can beat the team you are worried about.

But look, it’s the playoffs.  You are going to have to play a competitive team at some point.  You’re team is going to have to travel.  Sure, winning the championship is most important and if there is a little something you can do to give you a competitive advantage, then sure, go for it.

The interesting thing to me with this rule in a four team playoff is that you essentially choose your competitors first-round match-up.  That could be interesting if you think you could knock off your biggest challenge for the next round by making a choice for yourself.

Alright, here is a first-round playoff preview based on possible choices by DAB Docler, this season’s best regular season team.  If we had a normal seeding system, the first-round playoff matchups would be (assuming nothing crazy happens in today’s last set of matchups):

Scenario 1:

(1) DAB Docler v. (4) ASC Corona Brasov
(2) Miskolc Jegesmedvek v. (3) HSC Csikszereda

So, there is a good chance DAB takes Brasso by choice, making the above scenario reality.  This means the “choose your own team rule” was pointless and that seeding is the better way to go….at least in a season where DAB was way on top the entire season.

Advantages:  Potentially only one travel game to Romania for the playoffs if they can take care of business.  DAB has no good option for the Miskolc v. Csikszereda matchup.  If Miskolc wins, DAB has the more difficult matchup in the championship round.  If Csikszereda wins, then you have two rounds of travelling to Romania.  Travel versus opponent difficulty?  I take difficulty….it’s the playoffs and you’ve earned home ice.  Keep your guys comfortable in your city and in your arena.  For that reason, the regular seeding or Brasso choice would be smart.

Disadvantages:  Brasso is on fire.  Maybe the best goalkeeper in the league and the North American’s have been lighting up the score sheet.  DAB has been resting their big guns for the past couple weeks.  Do you take the chance of taking on the streaky team with potentially rusty guys?  I believe the away team gets the first home game, meaning this series could get interesting if Brasso steals the first game.

Scenario 2:

(1) DAB Docler v. (2) Miskolc Jegesmedvek
(3) HSC Csikszereda v. (4) ASC Corona Brasov

Advantages:  If I were DAB, this would be my choice.  You’ve been the best team in the league all season.  Take out the best team.  Give yourself the least amount of travel in the first round and if you win you ensure only one travel match, arguably against an easier team.  Also, this gives the Romanian fans some a rivalry opportunity in the first round.  I really think Brasso and Csikszereda could go either way too, so there is a better opportunity of two really good first round matchups….I think this is something the league could use.

Disadvantages:  Conventional wisdom would say you are tempting fate.  You rested your players for two or three weeks and now you are asking to play an opponent who has scored as much as you have and are the league’s second best team.  Maybe getting them after a first-round warm-up makes more sense.

Scenario 3:

(1) DAB Docler v. (3) HSC Csikszereda
(2) Miskolc Jegesmedvek v. (4) ASC Corona Brasov

Advantages:  DAB has dominated everyone all season–they should win this match.  You also put the hottest team up against your most challenging opponent.  Either way, you knock off a potential championship round stumbling block.

Disadvantages:  You might give yourself two rounds of travelling to Romania.

Again, if I were DAB, I would take Miskolc in the first round.  If you can’t beat them now, you’re not going to beat them in the next round.  You ensure only one round of travelling and a championship round against one of the two lower seeded teams.

But, my bet is they pick the fourth seeded team, currently Brasso.  This is why this rule makes little sense in a four team playoff format.  I imagine the best team will always pick the worse team for the best shot to the championship round.  Again, maybe if the teams in the league were a lot closer competitively then this could make a difference.

 

***Post update***

I learned after this original post that tiebreakers in MOL Liga go by the following rules:

“Ranking of the teams:

1. upon the total points received
2. in case of equal total points: upon the points received on direct matches against each other
3. in case of equal points received on direct matches: upon the goal difference on the direct matches
4. in case of equal goal difference on the direct matches: upon the more goals scored on the direct matches
5. In case of equal goals scored on the direct matches: upon the goal difference of the whole season
6. In case of the goal difference of the season is equal: upon the more goals scored during the whole season

This means ASC Corona Brasov was actually the odd team out and needed help from Nove Zamky to make it into the playoffs, because Nove Zamky had the better head-to-head record.  That did not happen and Nove Zamky took the fourth seed.  This too is an odd rule for hockey and for European sports.  Yet, I like this rule a lot.  I now too am happy for the best team-first round choice rule….

Redeeming myself, DAB Docler took my advice and chose Miskolc for the second round.  Though there will not be an all-Romanian MOL Liga first round matchup, the rest of my reasoning stands.  They keep themselves to only having to leave the country for one round, if they beat Miskolc.  They give us something really good to watch in the first round.  We will also get to see if resting their top players for the past few weeks will have any effect on DAB’s dominating season.

Here is the final standings on the season:

#MOLLiga Playoff scenarios. #hockey

After following the league all year, with a short hiatus over the holidays, it is a fun time for hockey.  Playoffs are starting for hockey all throughout Europe.  In the MOL Liga, there are still three teams fighting for the final two spots with only four game days left.  Below is the breakdown of possible scenarios based on tonight’s games, but first, the standings.

Points breakdown, which makes this oh so confusing growing up watching North American sports where a win is a win.  Nevertheless:

• 3 points for a regulation or overtime win;
• 2 points for a shootout win;
• 1 point for an overtime or shootout loss.

First, the easy ones.  DAB Docler (Dunaujvaros Acelbikak) have locked up the top spot and will have home-ice advantage throughout the playoffs.  The two Budapest teams, Ferencvaros and Ujpest, are out of playoff contention.

Miskolc Jegesmedvek

Miskolc have also locked up a playoff spot.  They also control their own destiny to grab the second seed and need only one point to secure first round home-ice.  However, if they lose out and HSC Csikszereda wins the rest of their games, Miskolc could drop to the third seed.  Miskolc plays Ferencvaros tonight at home, who put up a spirited performance against Nove Namky on Sunday night.

HSC Csikszereda

Csikszereda has not clinched a playoff spot yet, but could today on their night off, and they control their own chances.  Here are there playoff scenarios:

• If Csikszereda loses the remainder of their games and Nove Zamky and Corona Brasov win their games, then Csikszereda misses the playoffs;
• If Csikszereda gets one point in their final three games or if Nove Zamky or Corona Brasov get less than three points in their final three games, then Csikszereda clinches a spot;
• Csikszereda, if they make the playoffs, have the opportunity to get as high as the second seed, but could fall as low as fourth.

HC Nove Zamky

Nove Zamky is hanging on to the final playoff spot and the also control their own destiny.  There was a bit of a scare yesterday as Ferencvaros controlled the game early before giving up three third period goals.  Nove Zamky sealed the win with an empty netter with just over a minute to go to win 5-3.  Here are there playoff scenarios:

• Nove Zamky can clinch by winning their final three games or if Corona Brasov loses in regulation in two of their final three games;
• Currently, Nove Zamky has the point differential over Csikszereda, which is used for tiebreakers.  So, if Nove Zamky can make up the four point differential on Csikszereda they could grab the third seed.

ASC Corona Brasov

Brasso has been hanging on the edge of the final playoff spot all year.  They had an opportunity to gain on Nove Zamky last night, but lost in overtime against DAB Docler.  They still have a chance, but they need help.

• Brasso has the goal differential tiebreaker over both Nove Zamky and Csikszereda.  If they can tie either team in points, they can move as high as the third seed.
• Brasso needs one of the two teams above them to lose.  Csikszereda would have to lose all of their games for Brasso to take their spot.  They only need to gain one game on Nove Zamky to tie.

The interesting games down the stretch mostly fall into Brasso’s hands.  They have to play DAB Dolcer again on 24 February, but Nove Zamky has to play them tonight.  Brasso needs to win tonight and hope the Dunaujvaros plays their starters like they did against them on Sunday.  Brasso also has to play Csikszereda on 22 February.  The playoffs will be finalized likely based on the results of these three games.

Anyone up for a trip to Romania?

#2013WJC (delayed) #Moneypuck update. Results of pulling your goalie…does it matter?

A quick look at the results of pulling your keeper in the World Junior Championships.  There are some potential problems with this analysis.  First, if you switch goalies because you either leading by a lot or losing by a lot there may not be a reason for the teams to play as hard.  Bench players may also get more time, meaning less skill on the ice, possibly less scoring and defense.  Nevertheless, it’ll be interesting to look at the results.

The first keeper pulled was in game 2: Switzerland vs. Latvia.  The Swiss were up 5 to 2 after the second period and Latvia switched in Punnenovs for Merzlikins.  Switzerland’s offensive performance declined in the 3rd period, putting only 9 shots on goal in the 3rd (17 in the 1st and 13 in the 2nd).  However, the Swiss outscored the Latvian side 2-0 in the final period.  Latvia actually played worse in the 3rd period with the new keeper.

Punnenovs got the start in the final two games and finished with a 5.02 GAA.  Merzlikins finished with a 6.23 GAA.

The U.S. switched goalies after going up big against Germany in their 8-0 win.  Though it is hard to say definitively it had an effect, Gibson lost to a much better Russian side in their next match.

Germany moved away from Subban after there 9-3 loss to Canada.  Cupper started the final three games and lost 8-0, 7-0, and 2-1.

In both the U.S. vs. Russia and U.S. vs. Canada losses, Gibson was pulled in the final minutes to give the Americans an extra skater.  Neither instance led to the equalizer.  It would be interesting to see if more offense was generated when Gibson was out of the net, even though there were no goals.

Finland scored in five seconds after pulling Korpisalo in their 5-4 shootout win over Switzerland.  This goal was made by the extra skater, Markus Granlund, but during a faceoff.  Scoring on a possession in the offensive zone within five seconds makes it difficult to credit the goal to having the extra skater.  Nevertheless, that was the case.

So, it appears that in a tournament setting, that pulling your goalie when you are up to give them a rest in later games could affect them negatively in later games.  Also, generally speaking, pulling your goalie more often than not does not lead to that equalizer goal.  The wisdom is that the man advantage gives a team a better opportunity to score, but the extra goal rarely comes to fruition.

 

***This article was originally drafted in January.  Since there was an interesting goalie pulling situation in the under 20 tournament for the Hungarian team.  Mark Plekszan started in goal the first game and was chased out.  Hungary lost that first game.  He was replaced in the following game, but got the start again later.  He was again chased from the net; however, he was pulled early enough in the first period that Hungary was able to come back and win that game.  The mixed result here is that pulling him in the tournament probably didn’t help his confidence.   Yet, making an early decision in a tournament to pull your keeper could be beneficial.  Though, it seems if a team decides to make that switch, then they should stick with their decision for the rest of the tournament.  This was played out in the 2013 WJC and some of the Olympic prequalifying tournaments, as the teams that switched goalies the least had the most success.