PDA

View Full Version : Too early for the PWR? Princeton and Brown say no!



Pages : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 [28] 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36

Craig P.
03-15-2011, 11:18 PM
Yes, I understand that. The topic of the cliff has come up many times. Somewhere I recall someone writing that switching from the top 25 being TUCs to everyone with .5 RPI would cure that. That made little sense since there still would be a cliff.
Best guess is, they were hoping that at this point in the season, the TUCs would be more or less fixed, with only teams that would be securely TUCs still playing now. That's the only way to make any sense of such a suggestion. Even if that held (which obviously, it doesn't), it would just be hiding the problem behind the couch rather than fixing it.

Priceless
03-15-2011, 11:26 PM
The latest bracketology (http://www.uscho.com/bracketology/2011/03/15/i-believe-were-in-and-unh/) blog

JB
03-16-2011, 09:21 AM
Best guess is, they were hoping that at this point in the season, the TUCs would be more or less fixed, with only teams that would be securely TUCs still playing now. That's the only way to make any sense of such a suggestion. Even if that held (which obviously, it doesn't), it would just be hiding the problem behind the couch rather than fixing it.

At the end of the day the PWR is only valid when all the games have been played. I think the TUC criteria is a good one, how did you do against good teams, I do question a 1-0 team getting the point over a 15-5-2 team. I think there should be not only a minimum games played bar (like 5) but also a number of different teams bar (like 3 just to take out a schedule quirk issue).

The "cliff" only exists because we all monitor the PWR game by game.

Priceless
03-16-2011, 09:43 AM
At the end of the day the PWR is only valid when all the games have been played. I think the TUC criteria is a good one, how did you do against good teams, I do question a 1-0 team getting the point over a 15-5-2 team. I think there should be not only a minimum games played bar (like 5) but also a number of different teams bar (like 3 just to take out a schedule quirk issue).

The "cliff" only exists because we all monitor the PWR game by game.

The problem with putting bars out there is that the component loses meaning. If we put the bar at five games and three opponents, BC has qualifying comparisons with only 10 teams. Yale qualifies vs 11 teams, but only five from outside the ECAC. It would work nicely for a criteria to show how a team did against the best teams in its conference, but not great nationally.

unofan
03-16-2011, 09:53 AM
The problem with putting bars out there is that the component loses meaning. If we put the bar at five games and three opponents, BC has qualifying comparisons with only 10 teams. Yale qualifies vs 11 teams, but only five from outside the ECAC. It would work nicely for a criteria to show how a team did against the best teams in its conference, but not great nationally.

Which is all a problem with college hockey's insular schedules. HEA, WCHA, and CCHA all play a crap ton of conference games, leaving just a handful of non-conference series.

Would be nice to see conference schedules pared down to 25 or so games at the most, freeing up more interconference dates. By comparison, basketball has roughly the same number of games (between 30-35 after conference tournaments end), yet only about 20 of those are conference games (16-18 during the regular season and conference tourny games).

FlagDUDE08
03-16-2011, 09:56 AM
Which is all a problem with college hockey's insular schedules. HEA, WCHA, and CCHA all play a crap ton of conference games, leaving just a handful of non-conference series.

Would be nice to see conference schedules pared down to 25 or so games at the most, freeing up more interconference dates.

Throw in that the ivies play one less month and 5 less games than everyone else, and it all gets convoluted. This is one of the reasons I don't like the ECAC is because it truly is unbalanced, hence why the ivies have gotten the autobids as of late (obviously with some exception, like CCT back in 2007), while non-ivies that play full schedules are left to hope that their NC play is good enough to get them in at-large.

unofan
03-16-2011, 10:04 AM
Throw in that the ivies play one less month and 5 less games than everyone else, and it all gets convoluted. This is one of the reasons I don't like the ECAC is because it truly is unbalanced, hence why the ivies have gotten the autobids as of late (obviously with some exception, like CCT back in 2007), while non-ivies that play full schedules are left to hope that their NC play is good enough to get them in at-large.

Wait...you're saying the Ivies have an advantage by starting play a month later? Qua?

The Ivies have gotten the bids as of late because they're the better teams as of late.

LTsatch
03-16-2011, 10:08 AM
Throw in that the ivies play one less month and 5 less games than everyone else, and it all gets convoluted. This is one of the reasons I don't like the ECAC is because it truly is unbalanced, hence why the ivies have gotten the autobids as of late (obviously with some exception, like CCT back in 2007), while non-ivies that play full schedules are left to hope that their NC play is good enough to get them in at-large.

Being able to offer scholarships to better players may offset some of that disparity for the non-ivy's, which is another part of the whole mess.:D

Craig P.
03-16-2011, 10:34 AM
At the end of the day the PWR is only valid when all the games have been played.

That's a cop-out. The issues exist regardless. At the end of the day, if there are times when it's better for a team's selection or seeding prospects for them to lose, you have a problem.

I don't mean to suggest that the underlying philosophy of the PWR is wrong, but there remain serious flaws in its implementation.

FlagDUDE08
03-16-2011, 11:03 AM
Wait...you're saying the Ivies have an advantage by starting play a month later? Qua?

The Ivies have gotten the bids as of late because they're the better teams as of late.

The non-ivies are usually more banged up by January or February because of the longer schedule. There are also a few other reasons which I won't discuss on here, as they have been mentioned countless times on some of the other threads.

goblue78
03-16-2011, 11:08 AM
Well, Yale, Dartmouth and Cornell aren't going to play five less games than RPI this year. After this weekend, they'll be even.

(Of course, that's not right... but they will have played five more than RPI in the last two weeks. Let's see who's banged up NOW.)

French Rage
03-16-2011, 01:51 PM
Wait...you're saying the Ivies have an advantage by starting play a month later? Qua?

The Ivies have gotten the bids as of late because they're the better teams as of late.

Add in that the Ivy teams' late start means they have less time to get warm during the initial OOC stretch at the start of the season, which in a conference like the ECAC in crucial in helping one's at-large chances.

Eaglefan06
03-16-2011, 02:21 PM
Which is all a problem with college hockey's insular schedules. HEA, WCHA, and CCHA all play a crap ton of conference games, leaving just a handful of non-conference series.

Would be nice to see conference schedules pared down to 25 or so games at the most, freeing up more interconference dates. By comparison, basketball has roughly the same number of games (between 30-35 after conference tournaments end), yet only about 20 of those are conference games (16-18 during the regular season and conference tourny games).

Yep, it would be nice if it was required that teams play 1 OOC game with a team from each conference.

RHamilton
03-17-2011, 12:55 AM
<p>It would definitely be interesting to hear if anyone has found anything outside those ranges.</p>

I found 75 scenarios that put UNH at #4 and 6 scenarios that put Maine at #21, other than that everything I've found matches up with the ranges you posted.

UNH Example:

Semifinal: Holy Cross over Air Force. Likelihood 38.90%.
Semifinal: RIT over Connecticut. Likelihood 79.35%.
Final: RIT over Holy Cross. Likelihood 75.43%.
CCHA
Semifinal: Notre Dame over Miami.
Semifinal: Western Michigan over Michigan.
Final: Western Michigan over Notre Dame.
Consolation: Miami ties Michigan.
ECAC
Semifinal: Dartmouth over Cornell.
Semifinal: Yale over Colgate.
Final: Dartmouth over Yale.
Consolation: Colgate ties Cornell.
HEA
Semifinal: New Hampshire over Merrimack.
Semifinal: Boston College over Northeastern.
Final: New Hampshire over Boston College.
WCHA
Play-In: Bemidji State over Minnesota-Duluth.
Semifinal: Bemidji State over Denver.
Play-In: Alaska-Anchorage over Colorado College.
Semifinal: North Dakota over Alaska-Anchorage.
Final: North Dakota over Bemidji State.

Maine Example:

AHA
Semifinal: Holy Cross over Air Force.
Semifinal: RIT over Connecticut.
Final: Holy Cross over RIT.
CCHA
Semifinal: Miami over Notre Dame.
Semifinal: Michigan over Western Michigan.
Final: Michigan over Miami.
Consolation: Western Michigan ties Notre Dame.
ECAC
Semifinal: Cornell over Dartmouth.
Semifinal: Colgate over Yale.
Final: Colgate over Cornell.
Consolation: Dartmouth ties Yale.
HEA
Semifinal: Merrimack over New Hampshire.
Semifinal: Boston College over Northeastern.
Final: Boston College over Merrimack.
WCHA
Play-In: Bemidji State over Minnesota-Duluth.
Semifinal: Bemidji State over Denver.
Play-In: Alaska-Anchorage over Colorado College.
Semifinal: Alaska-Anchorage over North Dakota.
Final: Alaska-Anchorage over Bemidji State.

Ralph Baer
03-17-2011, 01:24 AM
I found 75 scenarios that put UNH at #4 and 6 scenarios that put Maine at #21, other than that everything I've found matches up with the ranges you posted.

UNH Example:

Semifinal: Holy Cross over Air Force. Likelihood 38.90%.
Semifinal: RIT over Connecticut. Likelihood 79.35%.
Final: RIT over Holy Cross. Likelihood 75.43%.
CCHA
Semifinal: Notre Dame over Miami.
Semifinal: Western Michigan over Michigan.
Final: Western Michigan over Notre Dame.
Consolation: Miami ties Michigan.
ECAC
Semifinal: Dartmouth over Cornell.
Semifinal: Yale over Colgate.
Final: Dartmouth over Yale.
Consolation: Colgate ties Cornell.
HEA
Semifinal: New Hampshire over Merrimack.
Semifinal: Boston College over Northeastern.
Final: New Hampshire over Boston College.
WCHA
Play-In: Bemidji State over Minnesota-Duluth.
Semifinal: Bemidji State over Denver.
Play-In: Alaska-Anchorage over Colorado College.
Semifinal: North Dakota over Alaska-Anchorage.
Final: North Dakota over Bemidji State.

Maine Example:

AHA
Semifinal: Holy Cross over Air Force.
Semifinal: RIT over Connecticut.
Final: Holy Cross over RIT.
CCHA
Semifinal: Miami over Notre Dame.
Semifinal: Michigan over Western Michigan.
Final: Michigan over Miami.
Consolation: Western Michigan ties Notre Dame.
ECAC
Semifinal: Cornell over Dartmouth.
Semifinal: Colgate over Yale.
Final: Colgate over Cornell.
Consolation: Dartmouth ties Yale.
HEA
Semifinal: Merrimack over New Hampshire.
Semifinal: Boston College over Northeastern.
Final: Boston College over Merrimack.
WCHA
Play-In: Bemidji State over Minnesota-Duluth.
Semifinal: Bemidji State over Denver.
Play-In: Alaska-Anchorage over Colorado College.
Semifinal: Alaska-Anchorage over North Dakota.
Final: Alaska-Anchorage over Bemidji State.

Did all of these scenarios require ties in both consolation games, or were those just the cases that you chose to post?

burgie12
03-17-2011, 01:44 AM
Did all of these scenarios require ties in both consolation games, or were those just the cases that you chose to post?
Cornell defeating Colgate in the ECAC consolation game kept UNH in the #4 spot.

Priceless
03-17-2011, 07:20 AM
write something knowledgeable

Sounds like I rubbed someone the wrong way :p

FlagDUDE08
03-17-2011, 08:11 AM
Although "Without a Peer" is mainly focused upon RPI's outcomes, there is a link to RHamilton's hard work on determining the potential outcomes for everyone: http://www.withoutapeer.com/2011/03/hacking-pairwise.html

Eaglefan06
03-17-2011, 12:37 PM
Sounds like I rubbed someone the wrong way :p

It was probably Red Cloud.....jealous that you get the attention for doing a great job and he gets none.

Priceless
03-17-2011, 12:43 PM
It was probably Red Cloud.....jealous that you get the attention for doing a great job and he gets none.

Nah, I have him on ignore, so when he negs me (which he does, repeatedly) I don't see what he wrote. :)

No, I have Extra so I know who it was. I assume he gave me the neg because I had the audacity to point out that Maine is still alive.