PDA

View Full Version : Hockey East - Who's in, who's out, who's home: by the numbers - 2012-13 edition



Pages : 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10 11 12

Todd
02-26-2013, 12:52 PM
So does this mean that MC @ BU is, in effect, a play-in game? Both are buried deep in the PWR and, it would seem that a loss by either team basically requires a HE tourney title for a trip to the NCAA tourney. I'm guessing the math does not work otherwise.
I'd bet that both teams are already at the point where the HE title is the only way they get in. MC's loss to BC was devastating from a PWR perspective; would have been huge to pick up H2H comparision points vs. top 5 team. BU getting swept by UML may have been a nail in their PWR coffin.
Jim Dahl does some awesome break downs over on his Sioux Sports Talk blog. If you scroll down, you'll find projections for BU and Providence. I don't believe he takes conference tournaments into account, but I could be wrong.

http://blog.siouxsports.com/2013/02/21/und-closes-in-on-ncaa-tournament-berth/

This was of course how BU looked going into being swept by Lowell.

That's a great use of data viz for sports.

Jim Dahl's analysis goes through the end of the RS. As he shows, at that point, if BU won 5 of its remaining 7 (it has already lost 2 to UML, so has only 5 left), they'd average out around a 13 PWR going into HE playoffs. Win "only" four, and they're averaging right on/under the bubble around 16-17.

What I don't know is whether he was comparing all the COP, TUC, H2H issues, or just RPI.

In the case of HE 3-6, they will also be playing strong enough competition that it will change their TUC record. Whoever survives will probably get that again in the semis (and perhaps the final). Win or lose, it will increase the strength of schedule for all in that group as well.

The other thing to note is that TUC records near the bubble - really everywhere but perhaps the very top teams - tend towards .500.

MC lost to BC and so lost a number of pairs. If they then beat BU or UML or a TUC in the HEQFs and beyond, those pairs can come right back.

Also to be considered: at this point in the season, RPIs tend to fall faster (or rise higher) towards .5000 than they climb (or fall) away from it. The further from the middle you are, the bigger the jump towards it and the harder the pull away.

Of course, the other teams in the other leagues also have to win and lose games, and teams will join and drop off of the TUC list as well. It's possible that MC's loss to Alaska or tie with Colgate could drop off their TUC tally. If UVM sweeps BU and BC, they should top .5000, adding a 2-0-1 to MC's TUC - and so on.

In sum: while we're drawing close to the time when it matters, there's more under the surface than just the games a given team is playing, so there's volatility - esp. at the bubble.

Umileated reminded me about Dahl's RPI page (http://siouxsports.com/hockey/rankings/rpi/) (my browser had dumped my links a while back). If you're into the math, from there, you can drill down into the detail of how any remaining games impact any teams RPI.

Example: The most important game for BU to win, in terms of gaining RPI, is the MC game. The most important not to lose, in terms of damaging their RPI, are the remaining UVM/NU games. If they sweep out the RS, they'll pick up about .0140 points. If they get 3/5, they'll be about where they are.

MC could add about .0160 by sweeping, and could be a little ahead of where they are now with 3/5.

Anyway, neither are "must" wins, but there are so few games left that if you don't win soon, you have no way to change where you are.

Insert Bill Parcells, Dennis Green, or - of course - Jim Mora quote of your choosing here.

Todd
02-26-2013, 12:54 PM
As unpredictable as this great race is, imagine how it would be if we had the screwball NHL system, where some games are worth 2 points and some are worth 3.

Then again, if we had that convoluted system, the race might not be this way....

Here (http://www.hockeyeastonline.com/pdf/men/snapshots/94_95.pdf) and here (http://www.hockeyeastonline.com/pdf/men/snapshots/95_96.pdf) - aka the Shootout Years.

jeteye1717
02-26-2013, 07:42 PM
For i-dotting and t-crossing:
If they were seeded today, with a pair of BC/PC games pending, the RR at the top should fall PC (2-0-2), BC (1-1-2), UNH (1-3-2). In case they get funky and go back to the old way of "bottom up" breaks, BC and PC are currently split H2H (0-0-1) and BC has more wins than PC, so BC would top out. But that's not what they've told us will happen, so I'll stick with PC/BC/UNH.

OK, help me out here, as it appears I mis-remembered how HEA breaks standings ties of 3+ teams or more ... Since Todd has convinced me that cumulative H2H records amongst the tied teams is the first criterion (not most wins, as I mistakenly assumed), I can see how the above RR ordering is calculated. But once PC is deemed to top out, shouldn't the H2H of records of *just* the two remaining teams (BC, UNH) be used to break the tie for spots 2 and 3, without including PC who's already been awarded the top seed? And since that record is tied at 1-1-1, wouldn't most wins between just those two teams kick in next? If PC is deemed #1, then they're no longer tied with teams below them; thus only H2H records involving the remaining tied teams should be used. Or so I'd assumed from a strictly logical parsing of the situation, which of course means it won't and doesn't happen that way :-( Why does my brain keep flashing back - and not in a good way - to the infamous 'infinite loop' that once bedeviled the ECAC tie-breaking system ...

Umileated
02-26-2013, 08:24 PM
OK, help me out here, as it appears I mis-remembered how HEA breaks standings ties of 3+ teams or more ... Since Todd has convinced me that cumulative H2H records amongst the tied teams is the first criterion (not most wins, as I mistakenly assumed), I can see how the above RR ordering is calculated. But once PC is deemed to top out, shouldn't the H2H of records of *just* the two remaining teams (BC, UNH) be used to break the tie for spots 2 and 3, without including PC who's already been awarded the top seed? And since that record is tied at 1-1-1, wouldn't most wins between just those two teams kick in next? If PC is deemed #1, then they're no longer tied with teams below them; thus only H2H records involving the remaining tied teams should be used. Or so I'd assumed from a strictly logical parsing of the situation, which of course means it won't and doesn't happen that way :-( Why does my brain keep flashing back - and not in a good way - to the infamous 'infinite loop' that once bedeviled the ECAC tie-breaking system ...

It appears that Lowell has just joined the party, just to complicate things further.

UNH09
02-26-2013, 10:35 PM
It appears that Lowell has just joined the party, just to complicate things further. Lowell is out, given the record against BC and UNH.

Todd
02-27-2013, 11:33 AM
OK, help me out here, as it appears I mis-remembered how HEA breaks standings ties of 3+ teams or more ... Since Todd has convinced me that cumulative H2H records amongst the tied teams is the first criterion (not most wins, as I mistakenly assumed), I can see how the above RR ordering is calculated. But once PC is deemed to top out, shouldn't the H2H of records of *just* the two remaining teams (BC, UNH) be used to break the tie for spots 2 and 3, without including PC who's already been awarded the top seed? And since that record is tied at 1-1-1, wouldn't most wins between just those two teams kick in next? If PC is deemed #1, then they're no longer tied with teams below them; thus only H2H records involving the remaining tied teams should be used. Or so I'd assumed from a strictly logical parsing of the situation, which of course means it won't and doesn't happen that way :-( Why does my brain keep flashing back - and not in a good way - to the infamous 'infinite loop' that once bedeviled the ECAC tie-breaking system ...Short answer: Well, yes.

Longer answer: It's confusing because we don't have a good enough sample set to be positive what the league is going to do, although we used to.

If you dig through the historical reference material I recently posted, there are two main summary points at work here.

1) In a three-way tie (to keep it simple), there are three ways to split that comparison: Top-down, bottom-up - each of which removes a team and restarts with the remainder - and all-at-once, which looks at the stack and takes it as a whole if it has an order.

2) The league had demonstrated for years that it used to use the bottom-up method, but then, in what ended up being the first year with an actual - as opposed to hypothetical - 3-way tie, they changed the interpretation, but not the letter, of the rule.

Perhaps the best example of the impact of these is the UVM/NU/UMA example listed in the links from 2010. In that case, UVM and UMA would always be in that order, but NU could be 1st, 2nd, or 3rd, depending on which method was used.

In the case that actually arose (BU/ME/UML, IIRC), it turns out that all three methods would result in the same order (BU was 2-1-0 against both, ME was 2-1-0 vs UML: BU (4-2-0)/ME (3-3-0)/UML (2-4-0) regardless, without leaving the H2H matchups). That's off the top of my head, so if I got the teams wrong, that's my fault. If I got them right, then the Alzheimer's hasn't set in yet because I can recall the details of a three-way tie-breaker (and the hypothetical UVM/UMA, where is NU?) from three years ago.

In the case above:

All-at-once would look at them as they are and see that among all three, there is a clear distinction (PC is +.500, BC is .500 and UNH is -.500). Just call it a tie-break and seed it that way.
The "old" way of bottom-up is what I detailed, but is what shouldn't happen anymore.
Top-down is what you outline, and is probably what they would do. I say that because the rule says to reduce and restart. Since they're not reducing from the bottom anymore - and a-a-o (my preference, if it's available) doesn't reduce, it just settles - then top-down is the only method that still complies.

So, yes, PC would be promoted and they would start over with BC v UNH H2H. Since that's 1-1-1, they would next go to wins, which is currently in BC's favor.

Since a-a-o and t-d gave the same result, I didn't break them out separately - only doing the *other* configuration - but perhaps I should have for clarity.

Since we're now in a four-way tie, this is literally yesterday's news, but it is still illustrative of the mechanics - and might end up being a tie again for 1st, or for the last Home Ice slot, or anywhere in between (I'm not going to do the math to see if they can't tie for 3rd).

Todd
02-27-2013, 11:38 AM
Playing with the what-if simulator for Hockey East, there is a possibility, however very remote, that the top 6 teams finish with 32 points each.


It would require the following results with points taken/available noted.

BC:
Lose to Lowell 0/2
Split with Providence 2/4
Split with Vermont 2/4

BU:
Lose to Merrimack 0/2
Sweep Vermont 4/4
Sweep Northeastern 4/4

MC:
Beat BU 2/2
Split with Lowell 2/4
Take only one point from Amherst 1/4

UML:
Beat BC 2/2
Split with Merrimack 2/4
Split with Providence 2/4

PC:
Split with BC 2/4
Split with Lowell 2/4

UNH:
Split with Amherst 2/4
Split with Maine 2/4

@WrathOfAramark:

Do you want to keep this updated to see if it's still possible?

For example:
BC lost to Lowell: check.
MC lost to BU, but could take 3, instead of 1 from UMA to get those missing two points.
BU took two unplanned points from MC, but could shed any two from UVM/NU.

We're still on target for 6@32!

Priceless
02-27-2013, 11:47 AM
Hockey East just tweeted this:


If there a tie-breaker of more than two teams, you take the h2h record vs. the tied teams, you then take the team with the best record...and separate them out and then start the tiebreaking process again...

Does that jive with what they've said before?

Patman
02-27-2013, 12:13 PM
Hockey East just tweeted this:



Does that jive with what they've said before?

Who knows... But I appreciate HEA saying that...

I'm starting to pseudo-code my object into R with thoughts of implementation for next season. Needless to say, with these things I get more interested with every Lowell win and less interested with every Lowell loss.

Todd
02-27-2013, 01:48 PM
Hockey East just tweeted this:

If there a tie-breaker of more than two teams, you take the h2h record vs. the tied teams, you then take the team with the best record...and separate them out and then start the tiebreaking process again...
Does that jive with what they've said before?
Thanks.

That's verification that they're going with Top-Down approach, which I what I was assuming, but wasn't sure of.

That might be the first time since the change from Bottom-Up that they've stated in writing what they're doing.

Todd
02-27-2013, 03:39 PM
After Tue 2/26:
MC 2 @ BU 5
UML 4 @ BC 2

--- Home Lock - 34 (Top 6) ---
PC 28 - 36 [1-6]
UNH 28 - 36 [1-6]
BC 28 - 36 [1-6]
UML 28 - 36 [1-6]
MC 27 - 35 [1-6]
BU 26 - 34 [1-7]
--- Home Eligible - 28 (Top 4) ---
--- In - 24 (ME) ---
UVM 19 - 27 [6-10]
UMA 17 - 25 [7-10]
ME 16 - 24 [7-10]
NU 13 - 21 [7-10]
--- Out - 17 (UMA) ---

Remaining LEAGUE storm-adjusted schedules:
PC - @BC/BC, @UML/UML
UNH - UMAx2, MEx2
BC - PC/@PC, @UVMx2
UML - MC/@MC, PC/@PC
MC - @UML/UML, UMA/@UMA
BU - UVMx2, @NU/NU
UVM - @BUx2, BCx2
UMA - @UNHx2, @MC/MC
ME - NUx2, @UNHx2
NU - @MEx2, BU/@BU


Sure, we could have had a five-way tie for first if BU and MC had tied, but really, isn't it more likely this season that BU would win and make the knot between the Top 6 even tighter? All six are within two points with 4 to play.

Does this mean that next weekend we can look forward to splits from BC/PC and UML/MC and UNH/UMA, while BU sweeps? The following weekend everyone gets two points, except MC gets three? Because that ties up the Top 6.

Just to make things more interesting, all the splits will happen 0-0-2 instead of 1-1-0 - that way we're still tied up at the end of each night.

----
On the other side, if UNH splits w/UMA and BU sweeps UVM, those lower two are also tied going into the final w/e. If Maine takes three from NU, they could join those two at 19. Or, since the Top 6 config above has UMA only getting one from MC on the last weekend while UVM and ME each get two, will we have a tie for 7-8 - or will ME split with NU and then tie UMA on the final night in a 8-9 tb for the final slot? For UMA/ME, H2H goes 1-1-1, so it's a 2nd round tb to UMA. UVM also has the solo tb w/ ME (2-0-1).

---
I wonder, just how close will Home Lock and Home Eligible get before anyone cliches? Will we have to wait until the final night when they touch and all the seeds are decided at once?

----
Simple things first:
UML jumps beyond UVM's grasp. UVM already loses the tb to MC. BU jumps out of reach of UMA.

Now the only possible exchange between the Top 6 and Bottom 4 is that UVM could still catch BU.

Within each group, all positions are up for grabs.

----
Home Eligible can be eyeballed at his point.

We have four teams already at 28, so it has to be at least that high.
No one below that is required, by schedule, to jump over 28 (i.e., BU and MC don't have any more H2H games that would force one of them past 28).
PC/BC/UML all interplay, but UNH plays outside the group, so they can stay at 28.

Home Eligible rising depends on UNH and/or BU (who is also playing totally outside the group) rising, or the PC/BC/UML/MC interplay group distributing points. In real terms, that means that if they split series, the line moves up, because four teams have already reached 29 or higher. If PC and UML sweep this weekend, then how they distribute points H2H next weekend doesn't impact Home Eligible. However, if BC and MC both sweep, then next weekend's PC/UML series does. In fact, if BC, MC, and UNH all win this weekend (and/or if BU takes at least 3, the line will start moving as early as Friday, since PC and UML have to at least move someone up to 30 next weekend.

----
With UML and BU gaining on the prior Home Lock indicators, they pulled the benchmark down a point and add themselves into the calculus.

----
Once again, In and Out don't move because the Bottom 4 aren't involved.

----
So, who would come out ahead of the current four-way tie?

<table border="1"> <tr><th>RRRs</th><th>BC</th><th>UML</th><th>UNH</th><th>PC</th><th>Total</th></tr> <tr><td>BC:</td><td></td><td>2-1-0</td><td>1-1-1</td><td>0-0-1</td><td>3-2-2</td></tr> <tr><td>UML:</td><td>1-2-0</td><td></td><td>0-3-0</td><td>1-0-0</td><td>2-5-0</td></tr> <tr><td>UNH:</td><td>1-1-1</td><td>3-0-0</td><td></td><td>0-2-1</td><td>4-3-2</td></tr> <tr><td>PC:</td><td>0-0-1</td><td>0-1-0</td><td>2-0-1</td><td></td><td>2-1-2</td></tr></table> What's interesting here is that - with a number of games left to play - UML is three games under .500, but those games are distributed so that each of the other three is one game over.

With different numbers of games played, the totals are different, but they are all one game over .500.

That also makes it easy to seed without having to do the math.

I can go into it further - and this is also helpful when estimating changes in TUC for PWR without a calculator by your side - but you can often do these comparisond in your head by seeing what the record is that they have in common, seeing what you're adding in (what they don't have in common) and figuring out whether that boosts the first value up or drags it down.

For the top 3, you could either forget about the ties as they are a wash or add them in as a win and a loss, same difference. If we add them in, that makes the records PC 3-2, BC 4-3, UNH 5-4. Essentially, all three start with PC's record (3-2, one over .500) and then add some number of .500 records to it. Since 3-2 = .600 (PC), averaging in a .500 (BC) drags that down. Doing it again (UNH) drags it down further. You can calc it out if oyu want, but that estimate will hold up, the precise number is irrelevant, and that would be the order... if we were doing it all-at-once. In this case, with an a-a-o, UML will be seeded last right off the bat, and then you could seed the others as above.

However, the league said they would pick the top and then restart.

So: PC would be #1.

Then we compare the other three:
<table border="1"> <tr><th>RRRs</th><th>BC</th><th>UML</th><th>UNH</th><th>Total</th></tr> <tr><td>BC:</td><td></td><td>2-1-0</td><td>1-1-1</td><td>3-2-1</td></tr> <tr><td>UML:</td><td>1-2-0</td><td></td><td>0-3-0</td><td>1-5-0</td></tr> <tr><td>UNH:</td><td>1-1-1</td><td>3-0-0</td><td></td><td>4-1-1</td></tr></table> Here UNH takes the #2 slot because although they split with BC, they swept UML, where BC went 2-1-0. BC then tops UML H2H.

Final seedings: PC/UNH/BC/UML for Home Ice which gives us a Merrimack Valley old-school DII final for the 4-5 game and a BU@BC 3-6 set. UNH hosts UVM for the Green v White Mountain border war, and PC welcomes UMA to the limited-capacity-but-plenty-of-seats-to-choose-from Schneider Arena.

Note that the difference between the all-at-once and top-down tb methods swapped BC and UNH for 2nd/3rd. UNH's damage within the group was primarily done by PC, who was removed from the tb after being seeded 1st.

If we had gone old-school and used the bottom-up method, UML would be tossed (seeded 4th) first, and we would get:

<table border="1"> <tr><th>RRRs</th><th>BC</th><th>UNH</th><th>PC</th><th>Total</th></tr> <tr><td>BC:</td><td></td><td>1-1-1</td><td>0-0-1</td><td>1-1-2</td></tr> <tr><td>UNH:</td><td>1-1-1</td><td></td><td>0-2-1</td><td>1-3-2</td></tr> <tr><td>PC:</td><td>0-0-1</td><td>2-0-1</td><td></td><td>2-0-2</td></tr></table> That would put UNH 3rd, as the lowest of the three, the PC/BC would get decided H2H.

Currently 0-0-1, that would go to 2nd tb, wins, which goes to BC.

Bottom-up: BC/PC/UNH/UML
All-At-Once: PC/BC/UNH/UML
Top-Down (and what the league said they'll do): PC/UNH/BC/UML

This is a more complicated version of what I will henceforth call the "NU Seeding Problem" from 2010. It's obvious here that - given the caveat that there are as many as four games to play H2H within this group for some of these teams - PC/UNH/UML will and perhaps should fall in that order. But - solely dependent on the arbitrarily selected tb methodology, BC could be 1st, 2nd, or 3rd within that foursome.

Personally, I'm on record as preferring the AAO method and I've explained why.

If you were to look at the results holistically:
PC is always one of the top teams (only failing on the 2nd tb to BC specifically in one configuration).
UML is always the bottom.
UNH only rises from 3rd when PC is artificially removed from the group (is PC not tied with them any more?) so that their 0-2-1 result goes away and they narrowly edge out BC.
BC is around second except when either slimly edged out down to 3rd or even more slimly elevated to 1st.

If you were doing that in your head, you'd seed it PC/BC/UNH/UML because it "feels" right, which matches the math of the AAO.

But... league says Top Down, so, see above.

[/soapbox]

At least they've clarified two weeks out. Thanks for that.

WrathOfAramark
02-27-2013, 08:23 PM
Update to the potential 6-way tie for first in HEA.

Results from Tuesday Feb 26.
UML:
Beat BC 2/2 http://www.geotender.com/img/icon_checkmark_green_small.png

BC:
Lose to Lowell 0/2http://www.geotender.com/img/icon_checkmark_green_small.png

MC:
Beat BU 2/2 http://www.safeharbor.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/red-xmark.png

BU:
Lose to Merrimack 0/2 http://www.safeharbor.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/red-xmark.png


The 6 way tie at 32 points can still happen. There are a few more solutions but this seemed the least ludicrous to me.
The following results are shown with points taken/available noted.

BC:
Split with Providence 2/4
Split with Vermont 2/4

BU:
Split with Vermont 2/4
Sweep Northeastern 4/4
Or
Sweep Vermont 4/4
Split with NU 2/4

MC:
Split with Lowell 2/4
Take only three points from Amherst 3/4
UML:
Split with Merrimack 2/4
Split with Providence 2/4

PC:
Split with BC 2/4
Split with Lowell 2/4

UNH:
Split with Amherst 2/4
Split with Maine 2/4

pressbox
02-28-2013, 06:11 AM
Update to the potential 6-way tie for first in HEA.

Results from Tuesday Feb 26.
UML:
Beat BC 2/2 http://www.geotender.com/img/icon_checkmark_green_small.png

BC:
Lose to Lowell 0/2http://www.geotender.com/img/icon_checkmark_green_small.png

MC:
Beat BU 2/2 http://www.safeharbor.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/red-xmark.png

BU:
Lose to Merrimack 0/2 http://www.safeharbor.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/red-xmark.png


The 6 way tie at 32 points can still happen. There are a few more solutions but this seemed the least ludicrous to me.
The following results are shown with points taken/available noted.

BC:
Split with Providence 2/4
Split with Vermont 2/4

BU:
Split with Vermont 2/4
Sweep Northeastern 4/4
Or
Sweep Vermont 4/4
Split with NU 2/4

MC:
Split with Lowell 2/4
Take only three points from Amherst 3/4
UML:
Split with Merrimack 2/4
Split with Providence 2/4

PC:
Split with BC 2/4
Split with Lowell 2/4

UNH:
Split with Amherst 2/4
Split with Maine 2/4

OK, for giggles and grins, based on everyone having 32 points as outlined above, show the final playoff seedings.

UNH09
02-28-2013, 07:51 AM
OK, for giggles and grins, based on everyone having 32 points as outlined above, show the final playoff seedings.

Joe Bertagna's head just exploded, even he can't figure out that scenario

WrathOfAramark
02-28-2013, 08:14 AM
I'll try to break it down.
As an aside, and I might be wrong, I'm ignoring ties.
<table border="1">
<tr><th>RRRs</th><th>BC</th><th>UML</th><th>UNH</th><th>PC</th><th>MC</th><th>BU</th><th>Total</th></tr>
<tr><td><b>BC</b></td><td>&nbsp;</td><td>2-1-0</td><td>1-1-1</td><td>1-1-1</td><td>2-1-0</td><td>2-1-0</td><td>8-5-2</td></tr> <tr><td><b>UML</b></td><td>1-2-0</td><td>&nbsp;</td><td>0-3-0</td><td>2-1-0</td><td>1-2-0</td><td>3-0-0</td><td>7-8-0</td></tr> <tr><td><b>UNH</b></td><td>1-1-1</td><td>3-0-0</td><td>&nbsp;</td><td>0-2-1</td><td>1-2-0</td><td>2-1-0</td><td>7-6-2</td></tr> <tr><td><b>PC</b></td><td>1-1-1</td><td>1-2-0</td><td>2-0-1</td><td>&nbsp;</td><td>1-1-1</td><td>0-2-1</td><td>5-6-4</td></tr> <tr><td><b>MC</b></td><td>1-2-0</td><td>2-1-0</td><td>2-1-0</td><td>1-1-1</td><td>&nbsp;</td><td>0-3-0</td><td>6-8-1</td></tr> <tr><td><b>BU</b></td><td>1-2-0</td><td>0-3-0</td><td>1-2-0</td><td>2-0-1</td><td>3-0-0</td><td>&nbsp;</td><td>7-7-1</td></tr></table>
1 BC wins that. So remove them.

<table border="1">
<tr><th>RRRs</th><th>UML</th><th>UNH</th><th>PC</th><th>MC</th><th>BU</th><th>Total</th></tr> <tr><td><b>UML</b></td><td>&nbsp;</td><td>0-3-0</td><td>2-1-0</td><td>1-2-0</td><td>3-0-0</td><td>6-6-0</td></tr> <tr><td><b>UNH</b></td><td>3-0-0</td><td>&nbsp;</td><td>0-2-1</td><td>1-2-0</td><td>2-1-0</td><td>6-5-1</td></tr> <tr><td><b>PC</b></td><td>1-2-0</td><td>2-0-1</td><td>&nbsp;</td><td>1-1-1</td><td>0-2-1</td><td>4-5-3</td></tr> <tr><td><b>MC</b></td><td>2-1-0</td><td>2-1-0</td><td>1-1-1</td><td>&nbsp;</td><td>0-3-0</td><td>5-6-1</td></tr> <tr><td><b>BU</b></td><td>0-3-0</td><td>1-2-0</td><td>2-0-1</td><td>3-0-0</td><td>&nbsp;</td><td>6-5-1</td></tr></table>

2 UML wins that so remove them.
<table border="1">
<tr><th>RRRs</th><th>UNH</th><th>PC</th><th>MC</th><th>BU</th><th>Total</th></tr> <tr><td><b>UNH</b></td><td>&nbsp;</td><td>0-2-1</td><td>1-2-0</td><td>2-1-0</td><td>3-5-1</td></tr> <tr><td><b>PC</b></td><td>2-0-1</td><td>&nbsp;</td><td>1-1-1</td><td>0-2-1</td><td>3-3-3</td></tr> <tr><td><b>MC</td><td>2-1-0</td><td>1-1-1</td><td>&nbsp;</td><td>0-3-0</td><td>4-5-1</td></tr> <tr><td><b>BU</td><td>1-2-0</td><td>2-0-1</td><td>3-0-0</td><td>&nbsp;</td><td>6-2-1</td></tr></table>

3 BU wins that one. Remove them.

<table border="1">
<tr><th>RRRs</th><th>UNH</th><th>PC</th><th>MC</th><th>Total</th></tr> <tr><td><b>UNH</b></td><td>&nbsp;</td><td>0-2-1</td><td>1-2-0</td><td>1-4-1</td></tr> <tr><td><b>PC</b></td><td>2-0-1</td><td>&nbsp;</td><td>1-1-1</td><td>3-1-2</td></tr> <tr><td><b>MC</b></td><td>2-1-0</td><td>1-1-1</td><td>&nbsp;</td><td>4-1-1</td></tr></table>

4. Merrimack wins that one so we're left with UNH and PC.

<table border="1">
<tr><td><b>RRRs</b></td><td><b>UNH</b></td><td><b>PC</b></td><td><b>Tota</b></td></tr> <tr><td><b>UNH</b></td><td>&nbsp;</td><td>0-2-1</td><td>0-2-1</td></tr> <tr><td><b>PC</b></td><td>2-0-1</td><td>&nbsp;</td><td>2-0-1</td></tr></table>

Providence 5
UNH 6

-- Final standings for top six

1 BC
2 UML
3 BU
4 MC
5 PC
6 UNH

Then we have
7 Vermont – 23 pts
8 UMass 20 pts
9 Maine 20 pts.
10 NU 15 pts.


Tie breakers: Amherst and Maine have a tied record at 1-1-1.
League wins: UMA 9, ME 7.
UMA is the 8 seed.

1 BC
2 UML
3 BU
4 MC
5 PC
6 UNH
7 UVM
8 UMA

Quarterfinal matchups:

8. UMA @ 1. BC
7. UVM @ 2. UML
6. UNH @ 3. BU
5. PC @ 4 MC

UNH09
02-28-2013, 08:27 AM
I'll try to break it down.
As an aside, and I might be wrong, I'm ignoring ties.
<table border="1">
<tr><th>RRRs</th><th>BC</th><th>UML</th><th>UNH</th><th>PC</th><th>MC</th><th>BU</th><th>Total</th></tr>
<tr><td><b>BC</b></td><td>&nbsp;</td><td>2-1-0</td><td>1-1-1</td><td>1-1-1</td><td>2-1-0</td><td>2-1-0</td><td>8-5-2</td></tr> <tr><td><b>UML</b></td><td>1-2-0</td><td>&nbsp;</td><td>0-3-0</td><td>2-1-0</td><td>1-2-0</td><td>3-0-0</td><td>7-8-0</td></tr> <tr><td><b>UNH</b></td><td>1-1-1</td><td>3-0-0</td><td>&nbsp;</td><td>0-2-1</td><td>1-2-0</td><td>2-1-0</td><td>7-6-2</td></tr> <tr><td><b>PC</b></td><td>1-1-1</td><td>1-2-0</td><td>2-0-1</td><td>&nbsp;</td><td>1-1-1</td><td>0-2-1</td><td>5-6-4</td></tr> <tr><td><b>MC</b></td><td>1-2-0</td><td>2-1-0</td><td>2-1-0</td><td>1-1-1</td><td>&nbsp;</td><td>0-3-0</td><td>6-8-1</td></tr> <tr><td><b>BU</b></td><td>1-2-0</td><td>0-3-0</td><td>1-2-0</td><td>2-0-1</td><td>3-0-0</td><td>&nbsp;</td><td>7-7-1</td></tr></table>
1 BC wins that. So remove them.

<table border="1">
<tr><th>RRRs</th><th>UML</th><th>UNH</th><th>PC</th><th>MC</th><th>BU</th><th>Total</th></tr> <tr><td><b>UML</b></td><td>&nbsp;</td><td>0-3-0</td><td>2-1-0</td><td>1-2-0</td><td>3-0-0</td><td>6-6-0</td></tr> <tr><td><b>UNH</b></td><td>3-0-0</td><td>&nbsp;</td><td>0-2-1</td><td>1-2-0</td><td>2-1-0</td><td>6-5-1</td></tr> <tr><td><b>PC</b></td><td>1-2-0</td><td>2-0-1</td><td>&nbsp;</td><td>1-1-1</td><td>0-2-1</td><td>4-5-3</td></tr> <tr><td><b>MC</b></td><td>2-1-0</td><td>2-1-0</td><td>1-1-1</td><td>&nbsp;</td><td>0-3-0</td><td>5-6-1</td></tr> <tr><td><b>BU</b></td><td>0-3-0</td><td>1-2-0</td><td>2-0-1</td><td>3-0-0</td><td>&nbsp;</td><td>6-5-1</td></tr></table>

2 UML wins that so remove them.
<table border="1">
<tr><th>RRRs</th><th>UNH</th><th>PC</th><th>MC</th><th>BU</th><th>Total</th></tr> <tr><td><b>UNH</b></td><td>&nbsp;</td><td>0-2-1</td><td>1-2-0</td><td>2-1-0</td><td>3-5-1</td></tr> <tr><td><b>PC</b></td><td>2-0-1</td><td>&nbsp;</td><td>1-1-1</td><td>0-2-1</td><td>3-3-3</td></tr> <tr><td><b>MC</td><td>2-1-0</td><td>1-1-1</td><td>&nbsp;</td><td>0-3-0</td><td>4-5-1</td></tr> <tr><td><b>BU</td><td>1-2-0</td><td>2-0-1</td><td>3-0-0</td><td>&nbsp;</td><td>6-2-1</td></tr></table>

3 BU wins that one. Remove them.

<table border="1">
<tr><th>RRRs</th><th>UNH</th><th>PC</th><th>MC</th><th>Total</th></tr> <tr><td><b>UNH</b></td><td>&nbsp;</td><td>0-2-1</td><td>1-2-0</td><td>1-4-1</td></tr> <tr><td><b>PC</b></td><td>2-0-1</td><td>&nbsp;</td><td>1-1-1</td><td>3-1-2</td></tr> <tr><td><b>MC</b></td><td>2-1-0</td><td>1-1-1</td><td>&nbsp;</td><td>4-1-1</td></tr></table>

4. Merrimack wins that one so we're left with UNH and PC.

<table border="1">
<tr><td><b>RRRs</b></td><td><b>UNH</b></td><td><b>PC</b></td><td><b>Tota</b></td></tr> <tr><td><b>UNH</b></td><td>&nbsp;</td><td>0-2-1</td><td>0-2-1</td></tr> <tr><td><b>PC</b></td><td>2-0-1</td><td>&nbsp;</td><td>2-0-1</td></tr></table>

Providence 5
UNH 6

-- Final standings for top six

1 BC
2 UML
3 BU
4 MC
5 PC
6 UNH

Then we have
7 Vermont 23 pts
8 UMass 20 pts
9 Maine 20 pts.
10 NU 15 pts.


Tie breakers: Amherst and Maine have a tied record at 1-1-1.
League wins: UMA 9, ME 7.
UMA is the 8 seed.

1 BC
2 UML
3 BU
4 MC
5 PC
6 UNH
7 UVM
8 UMA

Quarterfinal matchups:

8. UMA @ 1. BC
7. UVM @ 2. UML
6. UNH @ 3. BU
5. PC @ 4 MC

How are you getting Lowell as a 2 with fewer points than both UNH and BU?

Umileated
02-28-2013, 08:27 AM
I'll try to break it down.

<table border="1">
<tr><th>RRRs</th><th>UML</th><th>UNH</th><th>PC</th><th>MC</th><th>BU</th><th>Total</th></tr> <tr><td><b>UML</b></td><td>*</td><td>0-3-0</td><td>2-1-0</td><td>1-2-0</td><td>3-0-0</td><td>6-6-0</td></tr> <tr><td><b>UNH</b></td><td>3-0-0</td><td>*</td><td>0-2-1</td><td>1-2-0</td><td>2-1-0</td><td>6-5-1</td></tr> <tr><td><b>PC</b></td><td>1-2-0</td><td>2-0-1</td><td>*</td><td>1-1-1</td><td>0-2-1</td><td>4-5-3</td></tr> <tr><td><b>MC</b></td><td>2-1-0</td><td>2-1-0</td><td>1-1-1</td><td>*</td><td>0-3-0</td><td>5-6-1</td></tr> <tr><td><b>BU</b></td><td>0-3-0</td><td>1-2-0</td><td>2-0-1</td><td>3-0-0</td><td>*</td><td>6-5-1</td></tr></table>

2 UML wins that so remove them.

...

8. UMA @ 1. BC
7. UVM @ 2. UML
6. UNH @ 3. BU
5. PC @ 4 MC

Why are you pulling Lowell (6-6-0) before UNH and BU (each 6-5-1)?

UNH09
02-28-2013, 08:33 AM
Why are you pulling Lowell (6-6-0) before UNH and BU (each 6-5-1)?

Given the correct assumption,

BC
UNH
BU
Mack
PC
UML

Terrier520
02-28-2013, 08:38 AM
Given the correct assumption,

BC
UNH
BU
Mack
PC
UML
PC
PC gets the 5th and the 7th seed? Jon would be ****ed at having to go on the road to two different matchups.

UNH09
02-28-2013, 08:42 AM
PC gets the 5th and the 7th seed? Jon would be ****ed at having to go on the road to two different matchups.

Editing mistake... But the goons could do it!