2011-12 DI Rutter Computer Rankings

[OnMAA]

Re: 2011-12 DI Rutter Computer Rankings

Is the streak considered a rare event in a statistical sense? I will have to get back you on that.

if all teams are otherwise considered equal, the fact that only three teams out of a total population of about thirty teams have won the event in the last 11 years, would make it a low probability event, based on pure stats only. I'm sure it is easy for a stats person to come up with the actuall probabiity. Even the fact that 8 of 11 years there was an East-West final and that in 100% of the cases the West team won is a low probability event. Off course it depend what one considres to be a low probablity.

Another unique stat is occurring in D3. Evertime a new champion is crowned they have ALWAYS come back the next year to repeat. In addition, with one exception, no one has ever three peated, and once dethroned, a champion has never returned to claim another championship.

 

[dave1381]

Re: 2011-12 DI Rutter Computer Rankings

My sense is the biggest surprise in the WCHA's run was winning the national titles from 2000-2003. I don't think you'd predict the WCHA had a much greater chance of 50-50 winning any of those 4 years. I think the 2004-2011 titles were a much higher probability event than the WCHA winning the first 4, based on the relative strengths between the WCHA and everyone else during those two stretches.

 

[ARM]

Re: 2011-12 DI Rutter Computer Rankings

My sense is the biggest surprise in the WCHA's run was winning the national titles from 2000-2003. I don't think you'd predict the WCHA had a much greater chance of 50-50 winning any of those 4 years.

I'd agree with you on the other three years, but I think UMD in 2002 was the dominant team going into the season, and they likely would have demonstrated that more emphatically had it not been an Olympic year where a good portion of their roster was absent for much of the second half. And 2003 was an interesting year in that UMD and Minnesota had two of the more talented rosters of the sport to date, but then, so did Harvard and Dartmouth.

 

[LakersFan]

Re: 2011-12 DI Rutter Computer Rankings

For games played through November 13, 2011

Team 	Rating 	
1 	Wisconsin 	2.5952 
2 	Minnesota 	1.9158 
3 	Cornell 	1.1788 
4 	North Dakota 	1.0636 
5 	UMD 	        0.9502 	
6 	Boston Univ. 	0.9390 	
7 	Northeastern 	0.8136 	
8 	Harvard 	0.8046 	
9 	Bemidji State 	0.7800 
10 	Boston College 	0.7613

 

[D2D]

Re: 2011-12 DI Rutter Computer Rankings

Has the WCHA ever had 4 out of the top 5 teams in the Rutter rankings?

 

[LakersFan]

Re: 2011-12 DI Rutter Computer Rankings

For games played through November 20, 2011

  	Team 	Rating 
1 	Wisconsin 	2.6692 	
2 	Minnesota 	1.9800 	
3 	Cornell 	1.2828 	
4 	North Dakota 	1.2146 	
5 	Harvard 	1.1220 	
6 	Boston Univ.	1.0708 	
7 	UMD 	        1.0107 	
8 	Boston College 	0.9322 	
9 	Ohio State 	0.8647 	
10 	Bemidji State 	0.8196

Not sure how often the WCHA has had four out of the top five, but it didn't last long this time.

 

[ARM]

Re: 2011-12 DI Rutter Computer Rankings

Not sure how often the WCHA has had four out of the top five, but it didn't last long this time.

I doubt that it has ever happened before. It is tough to even keep four WCHA teams in the top eight once they start playing each other exclusively, which is getting close as the league doesn't have that many out-of-conference series left. Wisconsin is done playing OOC, so is UMD, and Minnesota will be after this weekend. UND is down to one game with Lindenwood, and after that, the teams take bites out of each other. It gets dispersed a little more in the ECAC, where the teams play a higher percentage of inter-conference games and have more league rivals to play.

 

[granddaddyscout]

Re: 2011-12 DI Rutter Computer Rankings

For games played through November 20, 2011

  	Team 	Rating 
1 	Wisconsin 	2.6692 	
2 	Minnesota 	1.9800 	
3 	Cornell 	1.2828 	
4 	North Dakota 	1.2146 	
5 	Harvard 	1.1220 	
6 	Boston Univ.	1.0708 	
7 	UMD 	        1.0107 	
8 	Boston College 	0.9322 	
9 	Ohio State 	0.8647 	
10 	Bemidji State 	0.8196

Not sure how often the WCHA has had four out of the top five, but it didn't last long this time.

How often has the WCHA had 6 of the top 10 and 3 of the top 4. Still shows a lot of strength in the WCHA.

 

[LakersFan]

Re: 2011-12 DI Rutter Computer Rankings

For games played through November 27, 2011

  	Team 	        Rating  USCHO.com Poll
1 	Wisconsin 	2.6619	1
2 	Minnesota 	2.0887 	2
3 	Cornell 	1.6256 	3
4 	North Dakota 	1.1260 	5
5 	UMD	        0.9750	9 
6 	Ohio State 	0.8857	12 	
7 	Bemidji State 	0.8827	8
8 	Mercyhurst 	0.8733	6
9 	Boston Univ.    0.8679	7 	
10 	Boston College 	0.8122 	4

I added the USCHO.com poll just to show the difference between the polls and my rankings. KRACH also has Ohio State 6 (after eliminating Holy Cross).

 

[D2D]

Re: 2011-12 DI Rutter Computer Rankings

Amazing that WCHA now has six of the top seven in Rutter. I seriously wonder if a conference has ever done this, in any other poll in any other sport?

 

[granddaddyscout]

Re: 2011-12 DI Rutter Computer Rankings

Amazing that WCHA now has six of the top seven in Rutter. I seriously wonder if a conference has ever done this, in any other poll in any other sport?

I doubt Mankato or SCS will be cracking this list anytime soon, but pretty impressive. Interesting where BC is on this ranking as opposed to the popularity contest approach.

 

[ARM]

Re: 2011-12 DI Rutter Computer Rankings

Interesting where BC is on this ranking as opposed to the popularity contest approach.

My guess as to the reason for this is that BC's best wins have come against teams whose stock has fallen. BC beat UMD (and also lost to the 'Dogs by five goals) and BC is five places higher in the poll. BC beat BU (and also lost to them by three goals) and the Eagles are three spots higher. BC beat Northeastern twice, the Huskies also lost to Dartmouth, and dropped in the poll. Voters don't tend to factor these erosions in their votes, but they do have a ripple effect with the computer rankings. Bemidji has better wins than BC, but I'm sure that more voters have watched the Eagles, and they are an impressive team to watch.

 

[OnMAA]

Re: 2011-12 DI Rutter Computer Rankings

For games played through November 27, 2011

  	Team 	        Rating  USCHO.com Poll
1 	Wisconsin 	2.6619	1
2 	Minnesota 	2.0887 	2
3 	Cornell    	1.6256 	3
4 	North Dakota 	1.1260 	5
5 	UMD       	0.9750	9 
6 	Ohio State 	0.8857	12 	
7 	Bemidji State 	0.8827	8
8 	Mercyhurst 	0.8733	6
9 	Boston Univ.      0.8679	7 	
10 	Boston College 	0.8122 	4

I added the USCHO.com poll just to show the difference between the polls and my rankings. KRACH also has Ohio State 6 (after eliminating Holy Cross).

To me the Rutter poll seems to reward teams for playing the top 2 (Minny and Wisco), so that pushes all those teams up. Does anyone know the overall record of WCHA teams in NC matchups. That probably tells the tale as well.

P.S....Fixed yer tabs.

 

[ARM]

Re: 2011-12 DI Rutter Computer Rankings

Does anyone know the overall record of WCHA teams in NC matchups.

The aggregate is 29-7-3, but five of those are versus Lindenwood, so essentially, 24-7-3.

P.S....Fixed yer tabs.

It probably is a function of your browser or screen settings. LakersFan's formatting looks correct to me, and yours is off for BU.

 

[OnMAA]

Re: 2011-12 DI Rutter Computer Rankings

It probably is a function of your browser or screen settings. LakersFan's formatting looks correct to me, and yours is off for BU.

Interesting. Thanks for that info. The columns look fine for me in edit mode, but not in final post display mode. The appearance is that is has got to do somethings with tabs and multiple spaces, as numbers in rows with short team names are more to the left.

Have similar inconsistencies with picture displays. On one computer they show as links, on another they show the picture within the post. (This is for pictures encaptured with the "IMG" as opposed to "URL" delimiters)

 

[dave1381]

Re: 2011-12 DI Rutter Computer Rankings

My guess as to the reason for this is that BC's best wins have come against teams whose stock has fallen. BC beat UMD (and also lost to the 'Dogs by five goals) and BC is five places higher in the poll. BC beat BU (and also lost to them by three goals) and the Eagles are three spots higher. BC beat Northeastern twice, the Huskies also lost to Dartmouth, and dropped in the poll. Voters don't tend to factor these erosions in their votes, but they do have a ripple effect with the computer rankings. Bemidji has better wins than BC, but I'm sure that more voters have watched the Eagles, and they are an impressive team to watch.

I have a slightly different explanation. The PWR much closely track how the voters tend to think (either because the voters follow the PWR, or because they have similar prefences.)

The primary in which the PWR/voters/computer rankings differ is that the computer rankings (KRACH / Rutter) generally impose a much harsher penalty on the margin for a bad loss, and BC right now has two bad losses (Maine & Quinnipiac). That's why BC is trailing Harvard in the computer rankings (because Harvard's worst loss is Dartmouth).

 

[ARM]

Re: 2011-12 DI Rutter Computer Rankings

Dave, good explanation. I suspect that when all is said and done, there won't be a lot of separation between Dartmouth and Quinnipiac, but I agree with what you say.

 

[dave1381]

Re: 2011-12 DI Rutter Computer Rankings

Right ARM. Yesterday's post is already out of date, since Maine is now a solid middle-of-the-pack team and BC's win over Maine was enough to move BC ahead of Harvard in both the Rutter and KRACH. I'll start talking more about a more relevant comparison -- UND & BC.

BC is ahead of ND in all three Pairwise Criteria (BC is 5th overall and UND is 6th), yet in both Rutter & KRACH, ND is 4th and BC 8th, so why is that? I believe the KRACH/Rutter are more in line with reality.

The simple explanation is the PWR doesn't give North Dakota enough credit for splitting with Minnesota, penalizes North Dakota too much for losing to Wisconsin, and then doesn't penalize BC enough for losing to Maine and Quinnipiac, who are a both a notch below North Dakota's worst results - 0-1-1 vs. UMD and 1-1 vs. Bemidji. And BC was also 1-1 vs. UMD.

Going through the criteria....

The common opponent comparison is clear -- both teams split BU, and BC split UMD while ND took only a point. I don't see that crtierion looking any better for ND going forward, though I can't say I have a clear prediction about how UMD & BU will look going forward.

The record vs. RPI top 12 criteria doesn't count BC's worst losses, while it counts ND's best losses. ND really has no hope of passing BC here with 8-10 games against Minnesota and Wisconsin this season, let alone the rest of the WCHA.

RPI is the one category where North Dakota has the best chance of passing BC, but the RPI still doesn't give ND enough credit for the WCHA's strength. Five of ND's 7 WCHA opponents are in the top 10, according to KRACH/Rutter, but the RPI simply does not give as much credit to the WCHA, so chances are stacked against ND ever moving past BC, even they continue to split teams like Minnesota and play above .500 against teams like Bemidji/OSU/UMD, and beat MSU/SCSU.

 

[ARM]

Re: 2011-12 DI Rutter Computer Rankings

The common opponent comparison is clear -- both teams split BU, and BC split UMD while ND took only a point.

We don't have long to wait for the other half of UMD/UND, as that comes up next weekend. Looking at it as a human, not a computer for a second, while both split BU, the Terriers had Kohanchuk versus NoDak and Poulin for a game plus, while the Eagles haven't seen either. From watching BU against Northeastern and Providence, it looks like right now BU is an opponent to which a top-four team should not be losing. Of course, any computer model will be blind to all of that.

 

[granddaddyscout]

Re: 2011-12 DI Rutter Computer Rankings

Unfortunately the systems in place can't effectively compensate for the delta in caliber of play between the WCHA and the rest of the women's hockey world. In addition the human's involved appear committed to promoting their self-serving agendas when casting their votes. It seems to parallel NCAA football where the SEC is clearly at a different level, yet Arkansas is ranked 8th after losing only to Bama and LSU, while Boise State, Houston, and Stanford are ranked above them with much weaker schedules. In a year where the WCHA should have 4 NCAA tournament teams, my bet is they won't. It will interesting to see if BC now jumps to number 2 with Minny and Cornell notching defeats since it is apparently ok for BC to lose or have very unimpressive wins against non-top flight teams.