2012 NCAA Tournament: Bracketology

[mnstate0fhockey]

And, one more thing, IronRange,

There are so many games left that it is really hard to predict much other than random chance right now. As an example, if you are familiar at all with the PWR, you know that one component is record against TUCs, or teams with a .500 RPI.

I am a Gopher fan. The Gophers lost to Northeastern this year, so it is to Minnesota's advantage that Northeastern not be a TUC - that loss does not count on their TUC record that way.

Right now, as far as I can tell, there is a chance that if Northeastern is swept this weekend, their RPI will fall below .500, and also they will not qualify for the HE tourney. That might be a great result for Minnesota. But, again, it might not, because all the tourney games might end up bumping Northeastern's RPI above .500 anyway, even if they don't play.

On the other hand, there is a chance they can be swept, and still make the tourney, and then lose in the first round, and then their RPI should be safely (to Minnesota's thinking) below .500.

All for one loss against a TUC to come off the Gophers' record. But, that one loss might be the difference in one or two comparisons, and that might make the difference between a 2 seed and 3 seed, or even a 4.

So, with all that in play, I think you can see why right now, the odds of UND being at the X can only be guessed at by 'random' if they make the field.

Very interesting stuff. Thanks

 

[J.D.]

Re: 2012 NCAA Tournament: Bracketology

Moy does his version on Wednesdays. But, it is not a prediction. Rather, it is an "if the season ended today, this is what the comittee would do." As such, it is more a primer on the process, than a real prediction of what the actual bracket will look like. His only prediction is on Saturday night after all the games are played.

Another valuable resource will be coming soon on collegehockeynews.com. That is Adam Wodon's creation. What he does is called, "Bracket ABCs." It's not a prediction of the actual bracket, but rather a breakdown of which teams need what to happen in order to make the field. So, the talks about TUC records of various schools, and also a few ComOpp matchups that hinder schools in the PWR.

All of that is not perfect. I remember last year, reading that it was hardly going to be possible for Minnesota to make the tourney... And, we know they didn't. However, had they not lost their quarterfinal to AA, they would have been in anyway, because so many little things fell their way.

PWR is a very complex calculation, and teams are tightly bunched....

Oh I know, no worries. It's still fun trying to predict what the committee would do under certain scenarios. What's funny is when it comes time to actually reveal the bracket, there never seems to be any controversial moves.

 

[Red Cows]

Re: 2012 NCAA Tournament: Bracketology

Keep in mind that playoffstatus.com does not rank teams by PWR, but rather their own ranking system. For Example, Union is #14 in their ranking, while they are #7 in the PWR. That is something to keep in mind when looking at that site.

Wow, thanks. I glossed over that.

What the hell good is their little system if it has no real meaning?

 

[willythekid]

Re: 2012 NCAA Tournament: Bracketology

Wow, thanks. I glossed over that.

What the hell good is their little system if it has no real meaning?

The Poles have meaning.

 

[SJHovey]

Re: 2012 NCAA Tournament: Bracketology

Of course I can't speak for all Michigan fans, for me this is nothing to 'scream' about. For the last 20, 21 years Michigan is more likely to face off against the WCHA in the NCAA's than any other team in Div 1. Last year we had to run a 4 team WCHA gauntlet to win the NC. We were 3 out of 4, a .750 win percentage vs the WCHA was good, but not good enough. I think our overall record vs the WCHA during those 20 years is a respectable .600. Considering that Union creamed us this season, I don't see anyone in the top 15 that is a gimme. We've played UND at the Ralph and at the Xcel, I prefer the Xcel. We've played UNH at the Verizon in Manchester. We've played BC at the Fleet Center. We've played Minnesota at the Xcel (I don't think we've ever faced the gophers at Mariucci during the NCAA's) I get the feeling that playing in front of other teams home crowds doesn't intimidate Michigan as much as it must other schools.

I'm sure there are other schools that have had similar experiences. UND has played each of the Boston schools in Boston, UNH in Manchester, Wisconsin at Kohl, Denver in Colorado, Michigan at Yost, etc...

Keep in mind this.

First, Michigan has been in the field basically every year during your timeframe. Second, the NCAA goes out of it's way to keep teams from playing others in their own conference, at least during the first round. Finally, I would guess that the WCHA has placed about as many teams in the tournament as anyone else during that stretch. If Michigan is there every year, they can't play the CCHA and at least a fourth of the teams are WCHA teams, pretty clear who you're going to have to play.

 

[Wol4ine]

Re: 2012 NCAA Tournament: Bracketology

I don't have the time to do it, but it would be mildly interesting to see how many times Michigan has faced WCHA teams in comparison with other schools. North Dakota alone played BC in the NCAA Tournament 7 times from 1999-2008. Of course, the Sioux also have played Michigan 4 times since 1998.

I ran the numbers. for the last 21 years (since 1991) MIchigan is 29-21 overall in the NCAA. (They had 3 losses that first year, in best of 3 went Cornell 2-1 and BU 0-2). BC has a 29-9 record in that time. Maine is next highest 23-11.
Michigan hasn't played anyone more than 4 times.
vs CC 3-1
vs Wisc 3-1
vs Minn 2-2
vs UND 2-2
vs DU 2-0
vs Maine 1-3
vs BU 1-3
vs UNH 2-1
vs BC 1-2 (but that was a big 1 in '98)

@ SJH
Shouldn't the percentages of games played vs WCHA for UM be the same for MSU? other CCHA teams? They are not.
UM has played the WCHA 23 times (16-7) out of all 50 (29-21) games in the NCAA's.==>46%
MSU has played the WCHA 8 times (3-5) out of all 23 (10-13) games in the NCAA's.==>35%
Miami has played the WCHA 4 times (2-2) out of all 16 (7-9) games in the NCAA's.==>25%
All other CCHA teams have played the WCHA 11 times (4-7) out of all 44 (21-23) games in the NCAA's.==>25%

Maine has played the WCHA the next most often, 13 times (7-6)
BC has played the WCHA the next most often, 12 times (8-4)

 

[Priceless]

Re: 2012 NCAA Tournament: Bracketology

Also, it should be noted that this script does not include the conference playoffs at all, correct Priceless? So, this would take care of the regular season, and then you have to put in the playoffs yourself.

The way to do that in that script is
(4digityear)(2digitmonth)(2digitday)(space)(team1)(space)(goalsscoredbyteam1)(space)(team2)(goalsscoredbyteam2)(space)(NC)

Obviously, for this year's conference tourneys, that reduces to
201203(2digitdate) and then the rest. NC means non-conference. Conference playoff games are non-conference schedule games.

You have to make sure you use the right 2 digit code for each team.

And, the winner does not have to be listed first.

And, you do that for each game. Of course, you need to be careful to adjust who plays who down the line, to make sure you get the conference tourney brackets right.

I think I got all that right, didn't I Priceless?

Spot on. Usually road team is listed first, but that's cosmetic, and a byproduct of the old RPI-bonus system. Seedings for the conference playoffs have not been set obviously, but I will release a script once playoff matchups are finalized. The YATC calculators on this site and others should kick off before the conference semi-finals and finals.

 

[dxmnkd316]

Re: 2012 NCAA Tournament: Bracketology

You could always make a PWR spreadsheet that automatically calculates and seeds the conference tournaments

 

[Priceless]

Re: 2012 NCAA Tournament: Bracketology

You could always make a PWR spreadsheet that automatically calculates and seeds the conference tournaments

I'm bored, and usually have lots of time on my hands...but not THAT much.

 

[Patman]

Re: 2012 NCAA Tournament: Bracketology

Wow, thanks. I glossed over that.

What the hell good is their little system if it has no real meaning?

Isn't that true of any system?

I suspect that their website does take into account the full use of pairwise... I also suspect that it doesn't handle tie-breakers as specified... but mostly because its difficult... but for all I know they do. I also don't know if they try to predict tie games.

That being said, as a rough application, I trust them. Not for a precise story but certainly something that gives a good indication. Between this and some of the work at Sioux Sports I think we're getting more towards things that tell the story.

Still wish I had my simulator though

 

[Fighting Sioux 23]

Re: 2012 NCAA Tournament: Bracketology

I ran the numbers. for the last 21 years (since 1991) MIchigan is 29-21 overall in the NCAA. (They had 3 losses that first year, in best of 3 went Cornell 2-1 and BU 0-2). BC has a 29-9 record in that time. Maine is next highest 23-11.
Michigan hasn't played anyone more than 4 times.
vs CC 3-1
vs Wisc 3-1
vs Minn 2-2
vs UND 2-2
vs DU 2-0
vs Maine 1-3
vs BU 1-3
vs UNH 2-1
vs BC 1-2 (but that was a big 1 in '98)

@ SJH
Shouldn't the percentages of games played vs WCHA for UM be the same for MSU? other CCHA teams? They are not.
UM has played the WCHA 23 times (16-7) out of all 50 (29-21) games in the NCAA's.==>46%
MSU has played the WCHA 8 times (3-5) out of all 23 (10-13) games in the NCAA's.==>35%
Miami has played the WCHA 4 times (2-2) out of all 16 (7-9) games in the NCAA's.==>25%
All other CCHA teams have played the WCHA 11 times (4-7) out of all 44 (21-23) games in the NCAA's.==>25%

Maine has played the WCHA the next most often, 13 times (7-6)
BC has played the WCHA the next most often, 12 times (8-4)

How did you count Northern Michigan from 1991 in that sampling? Similar with Bemidji State from prior to 2011? Basically, did you look at current conference affiliation, or affiliation at the time they played the game?

 

[davyd83]

Re: 2012 NCAA Tournament: Bracketology

How did you count Northern Michigan from 1991 in that sampling? Similar with Bemidji State from prior to 2011? Basically, did you look at current conference affiliation, or affiliation at the time they played the game?

Northern Michigan, then a WCHA member played Alaska-Anchorage (WCHA), Maine (HEA) and BU (HEA) in the '91 tourney.

 

[Fighting Sioux 23]

Re: 2012 NCAA Tournament: Bracketology

Northern Michigan, then a WCHA member played Alaska-Anchorage (WCHA), Maine (HEA) and BU (HEA) in the '91 tourney.

Problem is Anchorage didn't play in the WCHA until 1993-1994. I believe they were an independent in 1991.

 

[FreshFish]

Re: 2012 NCAA Tournament: Bracketology

I was looking at bracket projections and was reminded of a story, perhaps apocryphal, of an elementary school student who submitted a nearly perfect men's division one NCAA basketball tournament bracket. When asked how he did it, he replied that he imagined a battle between the school mascots! (a Jayhawk might divebomb a Husky and peck at its eyes then flit away before the Husky could bite, a Gator could swallow an Orange in one gulp, etc. etc. -- my examples are not actual examples from the tournament in question).

I had the amusing mental image of non-hockey people organizing the brackets by team colors....let's put all the red ones here, all the green ones there, etc.

 

[J.D.]

Re: 2012 NCAA Tournament: Bracketology

Blue: Air Force, Michigan, UML, Maine

Maroon(ish): BC, Minnesota, UMD, Ferris, Denver, Union

Red: BU, Cornell, Miami, Ohio State

Green: MSU, UND

 

[Numbers]

Re: 2012 NCAA Tournament: Bracketology

Did y'all see that Moy's latest masterpiece left Ferris in St Paul with Minnesota? I read it about an hour ago, and I can't remember the details. I think that after he took care of the interconference swaps (NoDak for OSU to avoid Ferris, and Miami for Denver to avoid UMD), he then swapped Den/BU for Miami/UMD for attendance at Green Bay and Bridgeport, and he swapped Maine for Michigan State for the sake of attendance at Worcester and St Paul (like St Paul needs any help.....).

Leaving:
St Paul : 4-FSU v 14-NoDak; 8-Minnesota v 10-Michigan State (total of 36 combined seedings)
Green Bay : 2-Michigan v 15-Cornell; 5-UMD v 11-Miami (33)
Bridgeport : 3-UML v 13-OSU; 6-BU v 12-Denver (34 the hard way)
Worcester : 1-BC v 16-AHA Champ; 7-Union v 9-Maine (33)

Comments??

 

[Wol4ine]

Re: 2012 NCAA Tournament: Bracketology

I counted NMU in the WCHA when they were in the WCHA, UNO in the CCHA when they were in the CCHA, UAA as independent,BSU as CHA, Vermont I may have screwed up because they were later into the HEA, but I think I had them in the ECAC.

Yes, I had them in the ECAC. UNH, BC,BU and Maine are the only teams in the HEA that Michigan has played in the NCAA's.

There have been 15 IntraConference matchups in the WCHA in the Past 21 years.
There have been 13 IntraConference matchups in the HEA in the Past 21 years.
There have been 7 IntraConference matchups in the CCHA in the Past 21 years.
There have been 0 IntraConference matchups in the ECAC in the Past 21 years.

 

[hattrick16]

Re: 2012 NCAA Tournament: Bracketology

I don't take these bracketologies too seriously since the Pairwise can change pretty significantly over a weekend.

I just wanted to say that, since this will only be Ferris' second tournament appearance, it is likely they will have a solid following headed out to the regional. With a student body of 11,000 students in Big Rapids alone (not counting other campuses) FSU is a medium size college hockey school. In 2003, when the Bulldogs were sent to Minneapolis there were as many Ferris fans in the building (and the band) as there were North Dakota followers. I understand that the higher seed in the Pairwise gets priority, so Michigan going to Green Bay makes sense this week, but just because the team will likely fly to either Green Bay or St. Paul doesn't mean the regional selection is moot. The vast majority of fans will be driving and most will be leaving the morning of the game. If you're driving from Big Rapids, Green Bay shaves four hours off the drive and eight hours both ways.

It's a shame the NCAA insists on putting host teams at their own arena or city, giving big institutions a distinct advantage regardless of merit. Removing the concept of neutral sites really hurts the purity of the tournament. It's no news that the NCAA is a greedy group of people, it just sucks that the money driven ways of college basketball and college football are infecting the integrity of college hockey.

 

[FreshFish]

Re: 2012 NCAA Tournament: Bracketology

It's a shame the NCAA insists on putting host teams at their own arena or city, giving big institutions a distinct advantage regardless of merit. Removing the concept of neutral sites really hurts the purity of the tournament. It's no news that the NCAA is a greedy group of people, it just sucks that the money driven ways of college basketball and college football are infecting the integrity of college hockey.

I agree with your sentiments; at the same time there is a real problem to be addressed somehow. Similar to women's division I NCAA basketball tournament: how do you ask someone to be a host school if they are likely to lose money hosting the event?

It's one thing to criticize someone as money-"grubbing;" it is a different thing entirely to ask people to pay money to host an event. Where does the money come from to rent the arena, pay the security staff, etc. etc. if not from tickets and concessions sold to fans attending the games? Are the TV rights enough to cover all these expenses? Does the NCAA have a slush fund they can tap at will to pay for these events? If not, then where does the money come from to run these events?

The men's NCAA Division I basketball tournament can afford "neutral sites" because the TV rights generate enough money to pay for them. Women's basketball, men's ice hockey, not so much (though I could be wrong if things have changed in the past several years, as I am working off data that is several years old).

 

[J.D.]

Re: 2012 NCAA Tournament: Bracketology

I understand that the higher seed in the Pairwise gets priority, so Michigan going to Green Bay makes sense this week, but just because the team will likely fly to either Green Bay or St. Paul doesn't mean the regional selection is moot. The vast majority of fans will be driving and most will be leaving the morning of the game.

Completely agree. Furthermore, I just don't agree with slotting the lowest rated #1 seed and the lowest rated #2 seed together. I know that Ferris probably isn't too far behind the #1 seeds currently in front of them, but why not just send Michigan to St. Paul instead.

It's a shame the NCAA insists on putting host teams at their own arena or city, giving big institutions a distinct advantage regardless of merit. Removing the concept of neutral sites really hurts the purity of the tournament. It's no news that the NCAA is a greedy group of people, it just sucks that the money driven ways of college basketball and college football are infecting the integrity of college hockey.

It's not just big hockey institutions like Minnesota though. Michigan Tech is the host in GB, Holy Cross in Worcester and Yale in Bridgeport.