Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

2019-20 pwr

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • 2019-20 pwr

    Can be found here:
    https://www.uscho.com/rankings/pairw...ngs/d-iii-men/

    Interesting, but its way to early to get excited. Keep posting discussion here.
    CCT '77 & '78
    4 kids
    5 grandsons (BCA 7/09, CJA 5/14, JDL 8/14, JFL 6/16, PJL 7/18)
    1 granddaughter (EML 4/18)

    ”Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both.”
    - Benjamin Franklin

    Banned from the St. Lawrence University Facebook page - March 2016 (But I got better).

    I want to live forever. So far, so good.

  • #2
    Re: 2019-20 pwr

    At this point, it is foolish to even pay any attention to this metric. Until there is more connectivity in the competion graph, the teams with insular schedule are getting a huge boost..
    2007-2008 ECAC East/NESCAC Interlock Pick 'em winner
    2007-2008 Last Person Standing Winner,
    2013-2014 Last Person Standing Winner (tie)
    2016-2017 Last Person Standing Winner

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: 2019-20 pwr

      Originally posted by NUProf View Post
      At this point, it is foolish to even pay any attention to this metric. Until there is more connectivity in the competion graph, the teams with insular schedule are getting a huge boost..
      Yeah, there are too few cross-over games at the D-3 level for either the PWR (or it's twin, the RPI) to mean much...

      Yet, that's far better than the smoky-room BS, and we still have the far superior option of employing the KRACH.

      (If only.)

      Last edited by Fishman'81; 12-25-2019, 07:28 PM.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: 2019-20 pwr

        Originally posted by NUProf View Post
        At this point, it is foolish to even pay any attention to this metric. Until there is more connectivity in the competion graph, the teams with insular schedule are getting a huge boost..
        Well, too be fair, the only teams with insular schedules who are getting a boost are the better teams in weak conferences. The top-to-bottom stronger conferences tend to eat their own young.
        Last edited by Fishman'81; 12-25-2019, 07:35 PM.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: 2019-20 pwr

          Originally posted by Fishman'81 View Post
          Well, too be fair, the only teams with insular schedules who are getting a boost are the better teams in weak conferences. The top-to-bottom stronger conferences tend to eat their own young.
          Explain to me why you think Ken's metric is so superior. Give me a reason for your faith in this measurement. The lack of schedule connectivity creates problem with that metric as well. When the only path connecting two teams has a bridge, comparisons will not be reliable. Ken's metric is no better or worse than the RPI, only different with similar flaws for similar reasons.
          2007-2008 ECAC East/NESCAC Interlock Pick 'em winner
          2007-2008 Last Person Standing Winner,
          2013-2014 Last Person Standing Winner (tie)
          2016-2017 Last Person Standing Winner

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: 2019-20 pwr

            Originally posted by NUProf View Post
            Explain to me why you think Ken's metric is so superior. Give me a reason for your faith in this measurement. The lack of schedule connectivity creates problem with that metric as well. When the only path connecting two teams has a bridge, comparisons will not be reliable. Ken's metric is no better or worse than the RPI, only different with similar flaws for similar reasons.
            The KRACH is simply a better predictor of results than the PWR/RPI.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: 2019-20 pwr

              Originally posted by Fishman'81 View Post
              The KRACH is simply a better predictor of results than the PWR/RPI.
              On what basis do you make that claim? That's my question to you. It has flaws that are similar to the RPI and for the same reasons. Comparisons between the two regions are flawed with both metrics because the small number of E/W games gives the results of those games that are played excessively heavy influence in determining the comparisons between the two regions.
              2007-2008 ECAC East/NESCAC Interlock Pick 'em winner
              2007-2008 Last Person Standing Winner,
              2013-2014 Last Person Standing Winner (tie)
              2016-2017 Last Person Standing Winner

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: 2019-20 pwr

                Originally posted by NUProf View Post
                On what basis do you make that claim? That's my question to you. It has flaws that are similar to the RPI and for the same reasons. Comparisons between the two regions are flawed with both metrics because the small number of E/W games gives the results of those games that are played excessively heavy influence in determining the comparisons between the two regions.
                I understand that. There is a serious dearth of comparative D-3 data in many, many cases. None of the available metrics have a lot of grist for the mill at this level.

                But the KRACH has just held more water for years now, and that's clear. Certainly it's the best metric of the three, and you can look that up over the past several years.
                Last edited by Fishman'81; 12-28-2019, 08:04 PM.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: 2019-20 pwr

                  I am asking for a quantitative explanation as to why you keep saying that "KRACH has just held more water for years now." Is there evidence based data that shows that? I have read claims like that with no supporting documentation at all for years.
                  Last edited by NUProf; 12-29-2019, 02:46 PM.
                  2007-2008 ECAC East/NESCAC Interlock Pick 'em winner
                  2007-2008 Last Person Standing Winner,
                  2013-2014 Last Person Standing Winner (tie)
                  2016-2017 Last Person Standing Winner

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: 2019-20 pwr

                    Originally posted by NUProf View Post
                    I am asking for a quantitative explanation as to why you keep saying that "KRACH has just held more water for years now." Is there evidence based data that shows that? I have read claims like that with no supporting documentation at all for years.
                    Well, you can look up how well the KRACH has predicted outcomes vs. how the PW has, if you like... I have a ball-game to watch. ( And I haven't kept a log, but I'm completely confident that it has.)

                    And, as an aside, do you actually believe that the PWR is a more thorough metric? Please. Of course you don't. The KRACH employs far more data, and you know that. "Statistical regression", as you you used to say all the time.

                    Now, you're a PW guy? Come on.
                    Last edited by Fishman'81; 12-29-2019, 10:53 PM.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: 2019-20 pwr

                      The fact its just the two of you bantering here is all anyone needs to know....

                      Happy New Year - Welcome To The Roaring 20's!!!
                      LakerEagleLover

                      I support tuition payments past...

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: 2019-20 pwr

                        Originally posted by LakerEagleLover View Post
                        The fact its just the two of you bantering here is all anyone needs to know....
                        True enough.

                        This D-3 thread is fairly moribund, and I seriously doubt that uscho itself will even continue to exist at all, three years down the road.

                        It was fun while it lasted, though.

                        But it has to be said that Prof attempts to prey on the general ignorance of the population, even on this humble forum.
                        Last edited by Fishman'81; 01-01-2020, 10:07 PM.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: 2019-20 pwr

                          The "way to early" 2020 NCAA field looks like this.
                          First the Pool A 1st place teams. Their PWR ranking is included in ()

                          CCC - Univ. of New England (15)
                          MASCAC - Plymouth State (57)
                          MIAC - Augsburg (24)
                          NCHA - Lake Forest (2)
                          NEHC - Norwich (3)
                          NESCAC - Trinity (1)
                          SUNYAC - Oswego (31)
                          UCHC - Wilkes (7)

                          The remaining 4 teams are the highest remaining teams in the PWR
                          1 Trinity 83 10-1-0 0.9091 1 0.6514* 1
                          2 Lake Forest 82 13-2-1 0.8438 3 0.6241* 2
                          3 Norwich 81 12-2-1 0.8333 4 0.6224* 3
                          4 Canton 80 8-2-2 0.7500 11 0.6043* 4
                          5 UW-Eau Claire 79 11-2-1 0.8214 6 0.5977* 5
                          6 Utica 78 10-2-2 0.7857 7 0.5954* 6
                          7 Elmira 76 9-3-1 0.7308 13 0.5934* 7

                          7 Wilkes 76 11-2-0 0.8462 2 0.5930* 8
                          9 Babson 75 8-3-2 0.6923 18 0.5906 9
                          10 Hobart 73 10-3-2 0.7333 12 0.5902* 10
                          10 Geneseo 73 12-3-1 0.7812 8 0.5866* 11
                          12 UW-Superior 72 12-2-1 0.8333 4 0.5829* 12

                          Seeding the tournament
                          1 Trinity
                          2 Lake Forest
                          3 Norwich
                          4 Canton
                          5 Eau Claire
                          6 Utica
                          7 Elmira
                          8 Wilkes
                          9 Univ. of New England
                          10 Augsburg
                          11 Oswego
                          12 Plymouth State

                          I'll do another one in a week.
                          CCT '77 & '78
                          4 kids
                          5 grandsons (BCA 7/09, CJA 5/14, JDL 8/14, JFL 6/16, PJL 7/18)
                          1 granddaughter (EML 4/18)

                          ”Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both.”
                          - Benjamin Franklin

                          Banned from the St. Lawrence University Facebook page - March 2016 (But I got better).

                          I want to live forever. So far, so good.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: 2019-20 pwr

                            28 Middlebury 55 7-6-0 0.5385 35 0.5346 28
                            28 St. Norbert 55 8-8-2 0.5000 39 0.5344 29
                            30 UW-Stevens Point 53 9-6-1 0.5938 32 0.5340* 30

                            How the mighty have fallen
                            5x NCAA D3 Ice Hockey Champion: 2008, 2011, 2012, 2014, 2018
                            2x Super Bowl Champion: XLII, XLVI

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: 2019-20 pwr

                              By my quick look at the PWR this week, I come up with a 10-2 split. Stevenson replaces Wilkes as the UCHC rep. The teams would be seeded this way:

                              W1 - Lake Forest (1)
                              W2 - Augsburg (27)

                              E1 - Norwich (1)
                              E2 - Trinity (3)
                              E3 - Utica (4)
                              E4 - Babson (4)
                              E5 - Geneseo (6)
                              E6 - Canton (7)
                              E7 - Stevenson (10)
                              E8 - University of New England (15)
                              E9 - Oswego (30)
                              E10 - Plymouth State (54)


                              First round:

                              Plymouth State @ Babson (I switched Plymouth State and Oswego for easy of travel). Strictly by the numbers, Oswego would play here)
                              Oswego @ Utica
                              University of New England @ Geneseo (499 miles)
                              Stevenson @ Canton (459 miles)

                              Interesting travel for the first round here... 3 New England schools, 4 New York schools, and one in Maryland... would they drastically play with the matchups to try and reduce travel a little? (For instance, you could switch Canton and U. of New England (496 miles). I would love to have seen what they did with this lineup... I doubt the final setup will only have 2 western teams.
                              Last edited by spwood; 01-21-2020, 01:44 PM.
                              Steve
                              Penn State Class of '95
                              Plattsburgh State Class of '99

                              If corn oil is made from corn, and vegetable oil is made from vegetables, then what is baby oil made from?

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X