2009-2010 Polls thread

[dave1381]

Re: 2009-2010 Polls thread

In any case, I think this is only going to be a question for one week. Nobody has ever swept a UMD/Minnesota season series before, and I don't see that changing this year.

In my opinion, Minnesota should be No. 1 until they lose a game at home with Raty in net. That's what's it's going to take to beat Minnesota in the WCHAs and NCAAs. Why should the poll reflect anything different?

Now of course polls always reflect some combination of "who is the favorite, who do we expect do well" vs. "who deserves to be No. 1 based on results to date, who has earned No. 1" .... but really at this point of the season, the Pairwise Rankings serves the latter purpose just fine, I like the poll to show more discretion. There's not much point in the poll if it merely regurgitates the Pairwise Rankings.

Of course, you could argue that Minnesota's poor road results are a reflection of their failures under pressure that might haunt them come tournament time... but yeah, I like Minnesota at No. 1.

If Minnesota plays Mercyhurst in the NCAA championship game, and the media looks at the USCHO poll and consider Mercyhurst to be the favorite, but most observers really think Minnesota is the favorite (if that's indeed the case), then I think the poll is failing.

 

[ARM]

Re: 2009-2010 Polls thread

In my opinion, Minnesota should be No. 1 until they lose a game at home with Raty in net. That's what's it's going to take to beat Minnesota in the WCHAs and NCAAs. Why should the poll reflect anything different?

The fundamental issue for me regarding a poll is what question is a poll attempting to answer -- who is the best team, which team has had the best season, what order do you predict that the teams will finish, or if teams met on neutral ice who would win? Solving these problems get complicated in a hurry because one must solve them for multiple teams simultaneously. My guess is that the average voter doesn't really lock unto one question for the entire ranking all season, but uses some sort of combination of best-team/best-season.

If one looks at best season, then Mercyhurst is the only possible #1. Best team -- they probably are as well. The reason, IMO, is that there are too many different "Minnesotas" and not enough data for any version. Minnesota at home with Räty, at home without her, road with Räty, road w/o, and then throw in versus a top ten team or not.

Räty is a special player and she can elevate the Gophers like Darwitz or Wendell once did. But I can't give them a pass for the UMD series, because Minnesota had enough on the ice to go to Duluth and win. They didn't get the job done. The Bulldogs made the plays they needed to make; Minnesota didn't. Whether she is around or not, Räty isn't going to score for them. I don't know any more about West's condition than I knew when she left the ice on Saturday, so even the potential question is hard to answer. If a team that struggles to score should lose their top point-producer and in many ways their leader as well, that doesn't bode well. Harvard has seemed to regroup w/o Kessler. Until Minnesota does, I wouldn't vote them #1.

 

[IceIsNice]

Re: 2009-2010 Polls thread

Just for fun, try taking the discussion away from girls hockey for a minute, whereas there has been polling for years and years in college football and basketball as well, and undoubtedly they have wrestled with similar challenges.

Suppose Kansas (currently this year's #1), was to lose to Syracuse (currently this year's #3). First suppose that Syracuse beat them outright by 15 points with both teams having healthy rosters playing head to head. Then, suppose that Kansas had their starting 5 all turn an ankle in the warmups, bad enough to miss most of that game, but not so bad as to not be there the following week.

Call me crazy, but I'm thinking pollsters wouldn't have much sympathy, and that Kansas would lose a few votes while Syracuse would most certainly gain some. Enough to change positions? Who knows! But I'm certain none of them would be saying.. "ahh, give Kansas a break, it was a fluke that they lost their starting five like that".

Meanwhile, I'm sort of reminded of that classic scene from My Cousin Vinny:

"Imagine you're a deer. You're prancing along. You get thirsty. You spot a little brook. You put your little deer lips down to the cool, clear water - BAM. A f.....n' bullet rips off part of your head. Your brains are lying on the ground in little bloody pieces. Now I ask ya, would you give a f.... what kind of pants the son-of-a-***** who shot you was wearing?"

I totally get the Räty effect, and I readily agree! ARM's point is valid in terms of what question is the poll trying to answer, and I think the question is based on actual results, not probable results, and in consideration of the totality of the season, who has the best "resume" thus far.

Just as we are reminded by all those investment commercials "past peformance is not necessarily indicative of future results".

Hang in there, no matter how the ranking comes out today, we should all be expecting one heck of a fight from The Golden Gophers down the stretch.

 

[MICZamboni]

Re: 2009-2010 Polls thread

In my opinion, Minnesota should be No. 1 until they lose a game at home with Raty in net. That's what's it's going to take to beat Minnesota in the WCHAs and NCAAs. Why should the poll reflect anything different?

Well then it could be easily said that Mercyhurst should have stayed number 1 until they lose at home with Bram on the ice.

 

[brookyone]

Re: 2009-2010 Polls thread

http://www.uscho.com/rankings/?data=uscho1w&week=poll

 

[dave1381]

Re: 2009-2010 Polls thread

Well then it could be easily said that Mercyhurst should have stayed number 1 until they lose at home with Bram on the ice.

Okay, that was an oversimplified line of argument.

Fact is though, even if you ignore my argument about projections, I think you can still make a solid case for Minnesota based solely on merit. (though I think the case for Minnesota purely on merit is weaker). Minnesota falls behind Mercyhurst, why, because they lost twice on the road to UMD. How did Mercyhurst do on the road at UMD this season? We don't know, that never happened. But we do know Minnesota swept UMD at home, and Mercyhurst split. Both teams are .500 against UMD. Why is Minnesota falling behind Mercyhurst on the basis of its performance against UMD?

You could then argue, ok, well it's because Minnesota looked better than UMD, and having lost that, they now are behind Mercyhurst. Ok...

So on the other common opponents, Minnesota had the better performance against Clarkson. What about the rest of the schedules? So the black marks on Minnesota's record are 1 pt at Harvard, getting swept at Wisconsin, and 2 points at Bemidji. Mercyhurst split Niagara at home and tied St. Cloud, and tie at Niagara. Seems Minnesota lost a lot more. Sure. But did Mercyhurst have any road games as tough as at Harvard and at Wisconsin? No... the best road results they have are sweeps of Rensselaer, Cornell their opening weekend, and St. Lawrence (who are borderline top 10 teams, but not Harvard @ Wisconsin). So yes, all the rankings Rutter, the RPI, KRACH, etc give Mercyhurst more credit for their road results than Minnesota gets for their road futility naturally... but if you switched the teams road schedules, can you really infer Mercyhurst would have done better?

I think the best thing you can do, given that Minnesota's futility was in road games of the caliber opponent that Mercyhurst has never played on the road, is to look at the record against common opponents. And that goes to Minnesota, based on their home sweep of UMD and Clarkson.

Now I do recognize by this logic, the 2007-2008 Harvard team (31-1) that never played the WCHA and lost only to UNH shouldn't have ever been No. 1, and I agree with that... now. And I think Wisconsin proved that. I've learned from that.

 

[IceIsNice]

Re: 2009-2010 Polls thread

USA Today Poll

USA TODAY/USA Hockey women's poll
Feb. 9, 2010

Rank School (first-place votes) Record Points Last week

1 Mercyhurst (19) 23-2-3 190 1
2 Minnesota 21-5-4 161 2
3 Minnesota Duluth 21-7-2 160 5
4 Clarkson 20-7-3 124 3
5 Harvard 15-5-4 119 6
6 New Hampshire 16-6-5 96 4
7 Connecticut 18-7-5 62 8
8 Northeastern 16-6-5 54 7
9 Providence 13-9-8 43 NR
10 Wisconsin 16-11-3 20 9

Others receiving votes: Cornell 11; Quinnipiac 3; St. Lawrence 1; Ohio State 1

 

[LakersFan]

Re: 2009-2010 Polls thread

I think the best thing you can do, given that Minnesota's futility was in road games of the caliber opponent that Mercyhurst has never played on the road, is to look at the record against common opponents. And that goes to Minnesota, based on their home sweep of UMD and Clarkson.

I think it is safe to say right now that Mercyhurst and Minnesota are the top 2 teams and should only meet in the NCAA final, if they both make it that far. If UMD wins the WCHA tournament, defeating Minnesota in the final, will the top two become more cloudy?

As for Mercyhurt's non-conference schedule, I think that when they created the schedule, they assumed St. Lawrence would be a top 10 team, which would have given them six non-conference games against potential tournament teams (UMD and Clarkson). I don't think you should ever fault a team's non-conference schedule when they attempt to play above-average teams, but when the season's results are compiled, the non-conference schedule looks weaker than anticipated.

 

[IceIsNice]

Re: 2009-2010 Polls thread

But did Mercyhurst have any road games as tough as at Harvard and at Wisconsin? No... the best road results they have are sweeps of Rensselaer, Cornell their opening weekend, and St. Lawrence (who are borderline top 10 teams, but not Harvard @ Wisconsin)

Just asking....why would Minnesota be awarded more "chits" or whatever for having to play @ Wisconsin as opposed to the Hurst playing @ Cornell?

Isn't this roughly a wash?

MattJ, help me out here...doesn't this get you're goat? LOL

 

[ARM]

Re: 2009-2010 Polls thread

... the best road results they have are sweeps of Rensselaer, Cornell their opening weekend

Just asking....why would Minnesota be awarded more "chits" or whatever for having to play @ Wisconsin as opposed to the Hurst playing @ Cornell?

Isn't this roughly a wash?

MattJ, help me out here...doesn't this get you're goat? LOL

Dave is mitigating the Cornell result due to it being the Big Red's first action while Mercyhurst already had games under their belt. A similar situation existed in 2006 when the Lakers swept Dartmouth in their opening weekend; the computer loved that result, but it is harder for voters to know how much weight to give it.

 

[mattj711]

Re: 2009-2010 Polls thread

Just asking....why would Minnesota be awarded more "chits" or whatever for having to play @ Wisconsin as opposed to the Hurst playing @ Cornell?

Isn't this roughly a wash?

MattJ, help me out here...doesn't this get you're goat? LOL

Nah...I knew what Dave meant. Besides, my goat ran away in the early 2000s. But I'm thinking it might be time to get a replacement

 

[Watson Rink]

Should we declare a dead heat, or what?

Should we declare a dead heat, or what?

From a purely Harvard perspective, it appears that this is an incredibly tight horse race. All their nine games, against the #2, #4, #6, #7, #8, #9 and #11 teams, were decided by a single goal or ended in a tie (4W, 2L, 3T). And the lowest ranked team, #11 Cornell, took 3 of 4 points from the Crimson (with a one-goal differential over 125 minutes) while the highest ranked opponent, #2Minnesota, took 1 of 4 (1 goal differential over 125 minutes).

Some of this is no doubt due to Harvard being a defensive-oriented, low-scoring squad (somebody has said their scores for the season read like a computer program, all 1's and 0's) but it's a striking statistic nonetheless.

 

[Trillium]

Re: 2009-2010 Polls thread

Nah...I knew what Dave meant. Besides, my goat ran away in the early 2000s. But I'm thinking it might be time to get a replacement

Another benefit to considering more rural locations. I'd love to get a goat if it weren't against local bylaws.

 

[GHF]

Re: 2009-2010 Polls thread

Another benefit to considering more rural locations. I'd love to get a goat if it weren't against local bylaws.

Stop by my place sometime. The neighbors have chickens, roosters, steer, the one just south of me has Yak, had a zorse (zebra/horse cross), mules and further south there's one with ostriches ....

 

[ARM]

Re: 2009-2010 Polls thread

Mercyhurst gets all the "firsts" back in the latest USCHO poll.

USCHO.com Division I Women's Poll

February 15, 2010
Team (First Place Votes) Record Points Last Poll
1 Mercyhurst (15) 23-2-3 150 1
2 Minnesota 21-6-5 131 2
3 Minnesota-Duluth 22-8-2 122 2
4 New Hampshire 18-6-5 103 6
5 Harvard 17-6-4 87 5
6 Clarkson 20-8-4 74 4
7 Connecticut 19-7-6 66 7
8 Wisconsin 17-12-3 32 10
9 Northeastern 16-8-6 24 9
10 Cornell 13-8-6 17 NR
Others Receiving Votes: Providence 13, Quinnipiac 5, Ohio State 1

 

[Bergey1]

Re: 2009-2010 Polls thread

Hmm, I was really expecting NU to drop out this week.

 

[IceIsNice]

Re: 2009-2010 Polls thread

Wisconsin climbs from 10 to 8 on a split with an unranked, meanwhile Providence splits with UConn and gets bounced out?

Just a rookie here, trying to understand.... li'l help, anyone??

 

[HockeyTeacher]

Re: 2009-2010 Polls thread

Wisconsin climbs from 10 to 8 on a split with an unranked, meanwhile Providence splits with UConn and gets bounced out?

Just a rookie here, trying to understand.... li'l help, anyone??

Rookie??

It is not you that needs the help!!

 

[IceIsNice]

Re: 2009-2010 Polls thread

USA TODAY/USA Hockey women's poll
Feb. 16, 2010

Rank School (first-place votes) Record Points Last week

1 Mercyhurst (19) 23-2-3 190 1
2 Minnesota 21-6-5 168 2
3 Minnesota Duluth 22-8-2 147 3
4 New Hampshire 18-6-5 135 6
5 Clarkson 20-8-4 104 4
6 Harvard 17-6-4 101 5
7 Connecticut 19-7-6 81 7
8 Northeastern 16-8-6 44 8
9 Cornell 13-8-6 24 NR
10 Wisconsin 17-12-3 22 10

Others receiving votes: Providence College, 20; Boston University, 3; St. Cloud State University, 3; Quinnipiac University, 2; The Ohio State University, 1.

 

[IceIsNice]

Re: 2009-2010 Polls thread

I still don't get Providence dropping below Wisconsin, but this at least seems more palatable than the change in USCHO.