2015 Pairwise Discussion & Predictions

[TonyTheTiger20]

Re: 2015 Pairwise Discussion & Predictions

PWR if:

Minny wins:

Rank Team Comparisons Won RPI
1 Boston College 15 0.6671
2 Minnesota 14 0.6596
3 Wisconsin 13 0.6158
4 Harvard 12 0.6136
5 Quinnipiac 11 0.5873
6 Boston University 10 0.5706
7 Clarkson 9 0.5582
8 North Dakota 8 0.5540
9 Minnesota-Duluth 7 0.5527
10 St. Lawrence 6 0.5497

Miny/UMD Tie:

Rank Team Comparisons Won RPI
1 Boston College 15 0.6670
2 Minnesota 14 0.6530
3 Wisconsin 13 0.6158
4 Harvard 12 0.6135
5 Quinnipiac 11 0.5872
6 Boston University 10 0.5705
7 Clarkson 9 0.5581
8 North Dakota 8 0.5540
9 Minnesota-Duluth 7 0.5576
10 St. Lawrence 6 0.5495

UMD wins:

Rank Team Comparisons Won RPI
1 Boston College 15 0.6669
2 Minnesota 14 0.6463
3 Wisconsin 13 0.6159
4 Harvard 12 0.6134
5 Quinnipiac 11 0.5872
6 Boston University 10 0.5705
7 Minnesota-Duluth 9 0.5624
8 Clarkson 8 0.5581
9 North Dakota 7 0.5540
10 St. Lawrence 6 0.5492

 

[Eeyore]

Re: 2015 Pairwise Discussion & Predictions

It looks like Clarkson, North Dakota, and UMD are locked in a three-enter, one leaves steel cage death match for the #7 spot. BU could conceivably collapse enough to fall out and St. Lawrence could get hot enough to force their way in but I don't think either is very likely.

 

[TonyTheTiger20]

Re: 2015 Pairwise Discussion & Predictions

It looks like Clarkson, North Dakota, and UMD are locked in a three-enter, one leaves steel cage death match for the #7 spot. BU could conceivably collapse enough to fall out and St. Lawrence could get hot enough to force their way in but I don't think either is very likely.

Keep in mind BU does have two against BC next week -- but even so, I think with 3 straight losses they still make it in as the #7 unless there's a 2nd autobid that gets in.

 

[ARM]

Re: 2015 Pairwise Discussion & Predictions

It looks like Harvard can pass Wisconsin by sweeping next weekend.

 

[TonyTheTiger20]

Re: 2015 Pairwise Discussion & Predictions

ARM, correct me if I'm wrong, but should North Dakota make the tournament, and BC/UM remain #1 and #2 in either order, BC would get the CHA champion regardless of who it is, isn't that right?

ND would be a bus trip to Minnesota and only Minnesota.

EDIT: Oho! Actually, no -- How's this for crazy:

1 BC
2 UM
3 HU
4 UW
5 QU
6 BU
7 ND
8 MU

Would give you:

1 BC vs 6 BU
2 UM vs 7 ND
3 HU vs 5 QU
4 UW vs 8 CHA (!!)

ahahaha

 

[Skate79]

Re: 2015 Pairwise Discussion & Predictions

It looks like Harvard can pass Wisconsin by sweeping next weekend.

Harvard should pass Wisconsin before next weekend. You beat the #1 team in the country who was unbeaten prior to your win, you deserve to move up at least one spot in the rankings. Sorry but to keep Harvard at #4 after last week renders the Pairwise and USCHO poll meaningless IMHO.

 

[TonyTheTiger20]

Re: 2015 Pairwise Discussion & Predictions

Harvard should pass Wisconsin before next weekend. You beat the #1 team in the country who was unbeaten prior to your win, you deserve to move up at least one spot in the rankings. Sorry but to keep Harvard at #4 after last week renders the Pairwise and USCHO poll meaningless IMHO.

They'll almost certainly be 3rd in the polls I think, but Pairwise is Math and takes the whole season into account.

Is there a single non-poll based ranking system that has Harvard above Wisconsin right now? I don't think there is. Maybe don't lose to Dartmouth and Princeton next time.

 

[ARM]

Harvard should pass Wisconsin before next weekend. You beat the #1 team in the country who was unbeaten prior to your win, you deserve to move up at least one spot in the rankings. Sorry but to keep Harvard at #4 after last week renders the Pairwise and USCHO poll meaningless IMHO.

TTT already addressed the computer polls, all of which consider the aggregate, not just one game. In human polls, it comes down to how close one had the teams prior to the recent week. IMO, it would have been close between Harvard and UW had the Badgers not lost.

 

[pokechecker]

Re: 2015 Pairwise Discussion & Predictions

I would think hockey fans would want Harvard above WI and BC/MN to stay the same so the bracket becomes MN vs. Harvard and BC vs. WI
although there is no guarantee those teams will meet
we don't need anymore Harvard/BC or MN/WI games this year unless those teams earn their way to the final

 

[ne7minder]

Re: 2015 Pairwise Discussion & Predictions

I would think hockey fans would want Harvard above WI and BC/MN to stay the same so the bracket becomes MN vs. Harvard and BC vs. WI
although there is no guarantee those teams will meet
we don't need anymore Harvard/BC or MN/WI games this year unless those teams earn their way to the final

From a strict "most interesting games" standpoint yeah, I'd love to see H/MN and BC/WI semi (if I won the lottery I would love to fund a weekend between those 4). But I always want the best 2 teams in the final. If that was MN/WI or BC/H then they deserve to be there even if we have seen them play each other a dozen times the last few years. But then how do we really identify the top teams and would that really ensure the best games? Thats what makes the forum interesting - we can all argue about what will hapen or what should happen and it means nothing when they drop the puck.

 

[Trillium]

Re: 2015 Pairwise Discussion & Predictions

They'll almost certainly be 3rd in the polls I think, but Pairwise is Math and takes the whole season into account.

Is there a single non-poll based ranking system that has Harvard above Wisconsin right now? I don't think there is. Maybe don't lose to Dartmouth and Princeton next time.

+1

 

[Skate79]

Re: 2015 Pairwise Discussion & Predictions

TTT already addressed the computer polls, all of which consider the aggregate, not just one game. In human polls, it comes down to how close one had the teams prior to the recent week. IMO, it would have been close between Harvard and UW had the Badgers not lost.

I get it. I just think that more weight should be given to wins over teams ranked above you. I don't dispute the fact that a team should be penalized for losing to an unranked team. Although Princeton has been winning lately against tougher competition (Cornell and SLU) so perhaps Harvard's loss to the Tigers is less damaging.

 

[Skate79]

Re: 2015 Pairwise Discussion & Predictions

I would think hockey fans would want Harvard above WI and BC/MN to stay the same so the bracket becomes MN vs. Harvard and BC vs. WI
although there is no guarantee those teams will meet
we don't need anymore Harvard/BC or MN/WI games this year unless those teams earn their way to the final

My thoughts exactly. Makes for a more interesting Frozen Four. And as you say, we have a lot of ice to cover before those match ups become a reality. There is still the matter of the quarters and the NCAA's desire to reduce travel and avoid another intraconference game.

 

[wwhyte]

Re: 2015 Pairwise Discussion & Predictions

My thoughts exactly. Makes for a more interesting Frozen Four. And as you say, we have a lot of ice to cover before those match ups become a reality. There is still the matter of the quarters and the NCAA's desire to reduce travel and avoid another intraconference game.

NCAA rules for women unfortunately don't say anything about avoiding intraconference games: it's (a) minimize flights (b) preserve bracket integrity. So barring epic collapses we're probably looking at BC/BU and HU/QU in the quarters, unfortunately.

 

[TonyTheTiger20]

Re: 2015 Pairwise Discussion & Predictions

NCAA rules for women unfortunately don't say anything about avoiding intraconference games: it's (a) minimize flights (b) preserve bracket integrity. So barring epic collapses we're probably looking at BC/BU and HU/QU in the quarters, unfortunately.

HU/QU looks extremely likely. BC/BU less so, just because Clarkson is in the mix.

I have a bracketology going up on BCI tomorrow at 9am, but it looks like BC is ~45% likely to play BU, ~40% likely to play Clarkson, ~7.5% likely to play Syracuse, and ~7.5% likely to play some unranked ECAC or Hockey East champion like Cornell or Northeastern.

The bracket if the season ended today would be:

Clarkson @ (1) Boston College
Mercyhurst @ (2) Minnesota
Boston University @ (3) Wisconsin
Quinnipiac @ (4) Harvard

The funny thing is you could theoretically swap BU and Quinnipiac, keep the same number of flights, and have 0 intraconference matchups, but there is nothing whatsoever in the handbook about minimizing them (like wwhyte said). There *IS* something in there about preserving bracket integrity, which is why we get QU/HU instead of BU/HU right now.

 

[robertearle]

Re: 2015 Pairwise Discussion & Predictions

Is there a typo in this week's USCHO poll?

It shows BC getting all 15 votes (10 points apiece) for a 150 total.

But then it has Minnesota 2nd with 139; if BC got all 15 1st place votes, isn't 135 the most possible for Minnesota to get (all 15 2nd-place votes at 9 points per)?

 

[Skate79]

Re: 2015 Pairwise Discussion & Predictions

NCAA rules for women unfortunately don't say anything about avoiding intraconference games: it's (a) minimize flights (b) preserve bracket integrity. So barring epic collapses we're probably looking at BC/BU and HU/QU in the quarters, unfortunately.

The way the ECAC is shaping up down the stretch, Quinnipiac could face Harvard in the tournament title game. That would mean, under your scenario, they would travel back to Cambridge the following Saturday to face the Crimson. Why would the NCAA want a repeat of a title game played the week before? Again, this is projecting quite a bit into the future and we've got a number of games to play before that scenario could take place but I'm puzzled by how this keeps bracket integrity. The same could also be said for BC/BU if those teams face each other in the WHEA tournament.

Last year Harvard traveled to Wisconsin to play the Badgers in the NCAA quarters. Why couldn't Quinnipiac make the same trip this year?

 

[Skate79]

Re: 2015 Pairwise Discussion & Predictions

HU/QU looks extremely likely. BC/BU less so, just because Clarkson is in the mix.

I have a bracketology going up on BCI tomorrow at 9am, but it looks like BC is ~45% likely to play BU, ~40% likely to play Clarkson, ~7.5% likely to play Syracuse, and ~7.5% likely to play some unranked ECAC or Hockey East champion like Cornell or Northeastern.

The bracket if the season ended today would be:

Clarkson @ (1) Boston College
Mercyhurst @ (2) Minnesota
Boston University @ (3) Wisconsin
Quinnipiac @ (4) Harvard

The funny thing is you could theoretically swap BU and Quinnipiac, keep the same number of flights, and have 0 intraconference matchups, but there is nothing whatsoever in the handbook about minimizing them (like wwhyte said). There *IS* something in there about preserving bracket integrity, which is why we get QU/HU instead of BU/HU right now.

Don't you mean North Dakota instead of Mercyhurst? I don't see the Lakers in the Top Ten unless I'm missing something.

 

[Eeyore]

Re: 2015 Pairwise Discussion & Predictions

Don't you mean North Dakota instead of Mercyhurst? I don't see the Lakers in the Top Ten unless I'm missing something.

The CHA winner gets an autobid so they don't have to be in the top ten.

 

[Eeyore]

Re: 2015 Pairwise Discussion & Predictions

The way the ECAC is shaping up down the stretch, Quinnipiac could face Harvard in the tournament title game. That would mean, under your scenario, they would travel back to Cambridge the following Saturday to face the Crimson. Why would the NCAA want a repeat of a title game played the week before?

WCHA fans have been wondering this for years. If you're just figuring out that they'll put on a conference tournament repeat, you're late to the party.

Again, this is projecting quite a bit into the future and we've got a number of games to play before that scenario could take place but I'm puzzled by how this keeps bracket integrity.

Bracket intergrity means that the #1 seed plays the #8 seed, the #2 plays #7, #3 plays #6, and #4 plays #5. Right now, bracket integrity, which is a written consideration whereas avoiding intraconference matchups is not, would dictate a Harvard/Quinnipiac NCAA quarterfinal. Even if Harvard moves up to #3, with the other mandated consideration being travel costs, sending QU to Cambridge would be the best way to maintain bracket integrity given the complete set of mandates.

Last year Harvard traveled to Wisconsin to play the Badgers in the NCAA quarters. Why couldn't Quinnipiac make the same trip this year?

Last year Minnesota and Wisconsin were the only WCHA teams in the tournament and both earned the right to host (the mandate that the top four seeds host is absolute). Since there are no non-WCHA teams close enough to bus to either Madison or Minneapolis, the NCAA was going to have to spring for flights for two teams to go west regardless. Since the flights were necessary, the committee kept pretty much to bracket integrity, which meant that Harvard went to Madison. This year, it's looking like things are likely to be more complicated, with a third WCHA team in the mix. Regardless, though, if Harvard remains the #4 seed and Quinnipiac the #5, you will almost certainly play them in the quarters.

Like it or not, that they just played is not something the committee will consider.