Re: How to improve the Pairwise
I think winning your conference removes all doubt.
At-Large teams hurt the intensity of the conference tournaments. After all, if you're 4th in the PWR, a loss won't knock you out. Remove the at-large and even #1 has to work to get to the NCAA tournament.
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
How to improve the Pairwise
Collapse
X
-
Re: How to improve the Pairwise
I agree that Kratch could be added but otherwise I want a transparent system.
I still believe in making the QWB a geometric progression instead of an arithmetic one. Also, Brad Schlossmann said yesterday that at the end of the season, UND was not really playing as hard as it might have otherwise. He pointed to the consolation game of the NCHC tournament, and said both teams just went thru the motions. I agree with that, and it's not just UND that does it. So I would find a way to lesson the points given to a team that beats another team who has clinched. It's not the same quality of win and it has an effect out of proportion to what is deserved.
Leave a comment:
-
Re: How to improve the Pairwise
Originally posted by ExileOnDaytonStreet View PostI don't see why KRACH means you have to replace the PWR. Just use KRACH instead of RPI.
The only complaints that I really have with the current method is that RPI is a more finicky metric.
Leave a comment:
-
Re: How to improve the Pairwise
I don't see why KRACH means you have to replace the PWR. Just use KRACH instead of RPI.
The only complaints that I really have with the current method is that RPI is a more finicky metric.
Leave a comment:
-
Re: How to improve the Pairwise
Q: How to improve the Pairwise?
A: Don't. Scrap it. Use KRACH.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by ExileOnDaytonStreet View PostListening to today's USCHO Live recording. http://www.uscho.com/uscho-live/2016...a-frozen-four/
HEA commish Joe Bertagna did a fair amount of bloviating about the selection process, saying that there should basically be more wiggle room to go against the coaches' wishes to have transparency in the selection/seeding process. Basically in favor of a more basketball-like closed-door, smoky boardroom sort of shenanigans... specifically taking into account how a team is playing in the last X number of games to fudge stuff around.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but is there really anyone on the boards here who thinks that way?
Whatever arguments we might have over the numerical method chosen, I feel like we can all agree that we like the transparency of a purely numerical method.
In the end, I favor the ultimate transparency of a formulaic driven result. It does remove the drama and I think sports people don't like it because it makes the world too clean and it doesn't work with their own preconceptions.
Leave a comment:
-
Re: How to improve the Pairwise
Originally posted by ExileOnDaytonStreet View PostListening to today's USCHO Live recording. http://www.uscho.com/uscho-live/2016...a-frozen-four/
HEA commish Joe Bertagna did a fair amount of bloviating about the selection process, saying that there should basically be more wiggle room to go against the coaches' wishes to have transparency in the selection/seeding process. Basically in favor of a more basketball-like closed-door, smoky boardroom sort of shenanigans... specifically taking into account how a team is playing in the last X number of games to fudge stuff around.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but is there really anyone on the boards here who thinks that way?
Whatever arguments we might have over the numerical method chosen, I feel like we can all agree that we like the transparency of a purely numerical method.
Leave a comment:
-
Re: How to improve the Pairwise
Listening to today's USCHO Live recording. http://www.uscho.com/uscho-live/2016...a-frozen-four/
HEA commish Joe Bertagna did a fair amount of bloviating about the selection process, saying that there should basically be more wiggle room to go against the coaches' wishes to have transparency in the selection/seeding process. Basically in favor of a more basketball-like closed-door, smoky boardroom sort of shenanigans... specifically taking into account how a team is playing in the last X number of games to fudge stuff around.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but is there really anyone on the boards here who thinks that way?
Whatever arguments we might have over the numerical method chosen, I feel like we can all agree that we like the transparency of a purely numerical method.
Leave a comment:
-
Re: How to improve the Pairwise
I do want to point out, even though it might be redundant, that if you used a geometric progression in calculating the QWB you could cut it off at 10 teams and not have a cliff.
Leave a comment:
-
Re: How to improve the Pairwise
Originally posted by Wisko McBadgerton View PostHere's a thought. What does it say about the selection system when you feel the need to tailor schedules to it, rather than schedule based on what is in the best interest of any given team and their fans. For example: Sure, Michigan Tech vs. Merrimack is ok, but are any fans of either really excited about it?
Seems to me the selection system should be tailored to what will best drive the sport, not the other way 'round.
Personally, I like seeing my team play any OOC team, and especially one I've never seen them play before. The last couple of seasons, Lowell's hosted Michigan, Michigan State, Penn State, Quinnipiac, Arizona State, Colorado College, RPI, and AIC. It's been awesome! I kind of wish they wouldn't schedule so many holiday tournaments so there'd be one more non-conference home game to schedule and I could see another team. Even if the team is kinda bad (ASU, AIC, CC) it's cool to see new teams.
Anyway, it's the same in every college sport: if you have postseason aspirations, you need to schedule and play high-quality opponents. This is not unique to hockey.
Leave a comment:
-
Re: How to improve the Pairwise
Originally posted by davyd83 View Post-
It's about two hours more in pure driving time staying in the States, but add in getting 28-30 people of varying nationalities through customs at the Soo and then again at Johnstown, ONT, or at Port Huron & Johnstown and you have another element to consider.
Leave a comment:
-
Re: How to improve the Pairwise
Originally posted by billmich88888 View Postcrossing at the Soo........?
It's about two hours more in pure driving time staying in the States, but add in getting 28-30 people of varying nationalities through customs at the Soo and then again at Johnstown, ONT, or at Port Huron & Johnstown and you have another element to consider.
Leave a comment:
-
Re: How to improve the Pairwise
Here's a thought. What does it say about the selection system when you feel the need to tailor schedules to it, rather than schedule based on what is in the best interest of any given team and their fans. For example: Sure, Michigan Tech vs. Merrimack is ok, but are any fans of either really excited about it?
Seems to me the selection system should be tailored to what will best drive the sport, not the other way 'round.
Leave a comment:
-
Re: How to improve the Pairwise
Originally posted by davyd83 View PostThrough Canada is actually longer.
Leave a comment:
Leave a comment: