USCHO Fan Forum
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.
2015 Pairwise Discussion & Predictions
- Thread starter TonyTheTiger20
- Start date
TonyTheTiger20
#SOAR
Re: 2015 Pairwise Discussion & Predictions
No then Harvard's hanging tight in 4th -- I meant without the result of the Harvard game. Harvard has to win and Yale has to win for the Crimson to jump ahead right now.
TonyTheTiger20
#SOAR
Re: 2015 Pairwise Discussion & Predictions
Assuming all scores hold (NoDak over Kato, Lindenwood over Mercyhurst), PWR at the end of the night:
Rank Team Comparisons Won RPI
1 Boston College 16 0.6719
2 Minnesota 15 0.6585
3 Wisconsin 14 0.6038
4 Harvard 13 0.6096
5 Quinnipiac 12 0.5784
6 Boston University 11 0.5671
7 Clarkson 10 0.5610
8 Minnesota-Duluth 9 0.5567
9 North Dakota 8 0.5553
10 St. Lawrence 7 0.5506
Assuming all scores hold (NoDak over Kato, Lindenwood over Mercyhurst), PWR at the end of the night:
Rank Team Comparisons Won RPI
1 Boston College 16 0.6719
2 Minnesota 15 0.6585
3 Wisconsin 14 0.6038
4 Harvard 13 0.6096
5 Quinnipiac 12 0.5784
6 Boston University 11 0.5671
7 Clarkson 10 0.5610
8 Minnesota-Duluth 9 0.5567
9 North Dakota 8 0.5553
10 St. Lawrence 7 0.5506
Last edited:
Watson Rink
Registered User
Re: 2015 Pairwise Discussion & Predictions
Looks like there's a typo at #3 or #4?
Looks like there's a typo at #3 or #4?
robertearle
Well-known member
Re: 2015 Pairwise Discussion & Predictions
At the moment, even though Harvard has a better RPI than Wisconsin, Wisconsin is still winning the pair comparison, based on 'Common Opponents' and 'Teams under Consideration' played. BUT...
Today's Harvard-Clarkson game could change that, because Clarkson is a 'common opponent' between Harvard and Wisconsin. If Harvard beats Clarkson, then Wisconsin's better record advantage in the 'common opponent' part of the pair goes away, the PWR comparison flips, and Harvard moves to 3rd in the PWR. If Clarkson wins, the pair comparison remains as is (and maybe Wisconsin takes back the 'lead' in RPI).
At the moment, even though Harvard has a better RPI than Wisconsin, Wisconsin is still winning the pair comparison, based on 'Common Opponents' and 'Teams under Consideration' played. BUT...
Today's Harvard-Clarkson game could change that, because Clarkson is a 'common opponent' between Harvard and Wisconsin. If Harvard beats Clarkson, then Wisconsin's better record advantage in the 'common opponent' part of the pair goes away, the PWR comparison flips, and Harvard moves to 3rd in the PWR. If Clarkson wins, the pair comparison remains as is (and maybe Wisconsin takes back the 'lead' in RPI).
TonyTheTiger20
#SOAR
Re: 2015 Pairwise Discussion & Predictions
Playing with some numbers right now. Someone correct me if I'm wrong.
BC is #1 right now despite the tie. However, assuming Minnesota wins out, Minnesota will get 2 more TUC wins and will flip the TUC comparison. BC needs one more TUC win to stay ahead (BC beating Maine and BU and Minnesota beating UMD and Wisco would still have BC ahead in RPI).
So:
Assuming Minnesota wins out, for BC to be the #1 seed:
1) BC needs to beat BU -- specifically BU -- in the Hockey East finals (the only remaining TUC BC can play)
2) Dartmouth and Yale need to stay above the TUC cliff. I am pretty sure Yale stays a TUC even if they are swept, but Dartmouth probably has to take one of three from Clarkson.
Otherwise, Minnesota will be #1.
Also, Clarkson's strong weekend put them in good position to make the tournament. Duluth and North Dakota are really hurting right now.
It's very likely that the tournament will shake out as:
1/2 BC
1/2 Minnesota
3/4 Wisconsin
3/4 Harvard
5 Quinnipiac
6/7 Boston University
6/7 Clarkson
8 CHA Champion
Assuming Syracuse or RIT do not win the CHA, that would give:
Minnesota vs. CHA champion
BC vs. lower of BU/Clarkson
Higher of Harvard/Wisco vs higher of BU/Clarkson
Lower of Harvard/Wisco vs. QU
QU could feasibly drop I guess but it's not likely.
Playing with some numbers right now. Someone correct me if I'm wrong.
BC is #1 right now despite the tie. However, assuming Minnesota wins out, Minnesota will get 2 more TUC wins and will flip the TUC comparison. BC needs one more TUC win to stay ahead (BC beating Maine and BU and Minnesota beating UMD and Wisco would still have BC ahead in RPI).
So:
Assuming Minnesota wins out, for BC to be the #1 seed:
1) BC needs to beat BU -- specifically BU -- in the Hockey East finals (the only remaining TUC BC can play)
2) Dartmouth and Yale need to stay above the TUC cliff. I am pretty sure Yale stays a TUC even if they are swept, but Dartmouth probably has to take one of three from Clarkson.
Otherwise, Minnesota will be #1.
Also, Clarkson's strong weekend put them in good position to make the tournament. Duluth and North Dakota are really hurting right now.
It's very likely that the tournament will shake out as:
1/2 BC
1/2 Minnesota
3/4 Wisconsin
3/4 Harvard
5 Quinnipiac
6/7 Boston University
6/7 Clarkson
8 CHA Champion
Assuming Syracuse or RIT do not win the CHA, that would give:
Minnesota vs. CHA champion
BC vs. lower of BU/Clarkson
Higher of Harvard/Wisco vs higher of BU/Clarkson
Lower of Harvard/Wisco vs. QU
QU could feasibly drop I guess but it's not likely.
Last edited:
Re: 2015 Pairwise Discussion & Predictions
Duluth and the Whioux have an advantage, though. Next week, they play teams that are not only TUCs but will remain TUCs no matter the outcome. BU doesn't play a TUC and if Clarkson beats Dartmouth, my eyeballs suggest that that pushes Dartmouth off the cliff.
That doesn't help UND much, at least not yet. In their comparison with BU they already win record vs. TUC and can't catch BU in record vs. COp; I don't think that UND would flip RPI if they both sweep, though if UND beats Bemidji twice and BU has to go three games, that could change. They currently lose all three comparisons with Clarkson and while sweeping would flip TUC, it probably won't be enough to flip RPI unless Dartmouth wins a game, and they can't flip COp at all.
The UMD comparisons, though, are a different story. If UMD sweeps Ohio State, they flip the TUC criterion with BU and pull pretty close in RPI, given that the best BU can hope for is to sweep and drop both games from their RPI. As they already win COp, they are back in the game. (All of this is subject to the committee deciding that the RPI gap is sufficiently great that it trumps the other two, but all three will be close.
The UMD comparison with Clarkson is a bit more complicated. They already win COp. Sweeping Ohio State wouldn't flip the TUC criterion by itself but if Clarkson pushes Dartmouth off the cliff, which I'm pretty sure a sweep would do, then they lose their two earlier wins against Dartmouth and that causes them to lose the TUC criterion. Perversely, Clarkson might be better off if they lose one game to Dartmouth so long as that would allow Dartmouth to remain a TUC (I haven't run the numbers on that); it depends upon how much their RPI takes a hit from that.
The upshot is that I think UMD has a very good chance to pass, or at least catch, both BU and Clarkson if all three teams sweep, at least in the rankings as of next Sunday. UND won't, but if they sweep, they will probably be close enough that winning a semi against Wisconsin even if they lose in the final could push them past BU if BU also wins a semi and loses the final. Ditto for UMD and holding on to their lead. Obviously, any of these teams winning their conference tournament pushes them in on an autobid and makes things tougher for the others.
If UMD or UND lose their series next week, or quite probably even if they win a three game series, then they are in serious, serious trouble. But so long as they sweep, they're still right in the mix.
Duluth and the Whioux have an advantage, though. Next week, they play teams that are not only TUCs but will remain TUCs no matter the outcome. BU doesn't play a TUC and if Clarkson beats Dartmouth, my eyeballs suggest that that pushes Dartmouth off the cliff.
That doesn't help UND much, at least not yet. In their comparison with BU they already win record vs. TUC and can't catch BU in record vs. COp; I don't think that UND would flip RPI if they both sweep, though if UND beats Bemidji twice and BU has to go three games, that could change. They currently lose all three comparisons with Clarkson and while sweeping would flip TUC, it probably won't be enough to flip RPI unless Dartmouth wins a game, and they can't flip COp at all.
The UMD comparisons, though, are a different story. If UMD sweeps Ohio State, they flip the TUC criterion with BU and pull pretty close in RPI, given that the best BU can hope for is to sweep and drop both games from their RPI. As they already win COp, they are back in the game. (All of this is subject to the committee deciding that the RPI gap is sufficiently great that it trumps the other two, but all three will be close.
The UMD comparison with Clarkson is a bit more complicated. They already win COp. Sweeping Ohio State wouldn't flip the TUC criterion by itself but if Clarkson pushes Dartmouth off the cliff, which I'm pretty sure a sweep would do, then they lose their two earlier wins against Dartmouth and that causes them to lose the TUC criterion. Perversely, Clarkson might be better off if they lose one game to Dartmouth so long as that would allow Dartmouth to remain a TUC (I haven't run the numbers on that); it depends upon how much their RPI takes a hit from that.
The upshot is that I think UMD has a very good chance to pass, or at least catch, both BU and Clarkson if all three teams sweep, at least in the rankings as of next Sunday. UND won't, but if they sweep, they will probably be close enough that winning a semi against Wisconsin even if they lose in the final could push them past BU if BU also wins a semi and loses the final. Ditto for UMD and holding on to their lead. Obviously, any of these teams winning their conference tournament pushes them in on an autobid and makes things tougher for the others.
If UMD or UND lose their series next week, or quite probably even if they win a three game series, then they are in serious, serious trouble. But so long as they sweep, they're still right in the mix.
robertearle
Well-known member
Re: 2015 Pairwise Discussion & Predictions
Not sure how much (if at all) this changes anything you said, but just to point out that right now we don't yet know who Duluth and North Dakota will be playing next week (though they will be playing TuCs). That will be determined with tomorrow's (Sunday) Duluth - Ohio State game (yet another TuC game that can help or hurt Duluth's chances)
Not sure how much (if at all) this changes anything you said, but just to point out that right now we don't yet know who Duluth and North Dakota will be playing next week (though they will be playing TuCs). That will be determined with tomorrow's (Sunday) Duluth - Ohio State game (yet another TuC game that can help or hurt Duluth's chances)
TonyTheTiger20
#SOAR
Re: 2015 Pairwise Discussion & Predictions
Isn't this EXCITING??
I love this time of year.
Isn't this EXCITING??
I love this time of year.Re: 2015 Pairwise Discussion & Predictions
Exiting? Yes. But this year looks more discombobulated than many. I'm not concerned about the top 4 or their order, it's close enough to be just fine but the next 8 are a tossup. Part of that is not seeing enough games with some of them, part is that some of those 8 have had ups and downs that do not always correlate to TUCs. This is a year I sort of wish they could throw a play-in weekend for 5-12 because, in my admittedly narrow vision, they all look about equally deserving of at least another game or two.
Isn't this EXCITING??
Exiting? Yes. But this year looks more discombobulated than many. I'm not concerned about the top 4 or their order, it's close enough to be just fine but the next 8 are a tossup. Part of that is not seeing enough games with some of them, part is that some of those 8 have had ups and downs that do not always correlate to TUCs. This is a year I sort of wish they could throw a play-in weekend for 5-12 because, in my admittedly narrow vision, they all look about equally deserving of at least another game or two.
ARM
Fan of chipmunk-like mascots.
Re: 2015 Pairwise Discussion & Predictions
They've all lost games that they shouldn't, including lately, so if they don't make the cut, they can look in the mirror. We can feel bad for a NoDak if it doesn't get in, but it lost home games to Vermont and Syracuse. The coaching staff has followed how this works long enough to know those losses would be damaging, so you have to find a way to play better than just okay. Same for the rest; they've done good things and bad things, and the latter have left them at the mercy of the system. To leave no doubt, win the conference tournament.
Re: 2015 Pairwise Discussion & Predictions
I don't disagree but I am still much in favor of resolving these things on the ice. I know it is a bit of apples/oranges but the a lot of people thought OSU did not belong in the football final 4 & had they had their way the championship game would have been between two teams who couldn't win their way into the game. I do not care if some statistical analysis says UND or SLU 'deserves' to be included, I'd rather they prove it against each other. A few teams are statistically superior (part of the apple/orange thing is slightly more comparatives in hockey). Maybe the flu swept through the locker room for a couple of weeks, maybe the frosh hit a wall midway through & Christmas break refreshed or they powered through but are just dead now. It may not be logical, it may not be the way the system is organized but it's the way I feel. Probably because I am a fan that loves to see 'high-risk' winner takes all games because of the passion they engender.
I don't disagree but I am still much in favor of resolving these things on the ice. I know it is a bit of apples/oranges but the a lot of people thought OSU did not belong in the football final 4 & had they had their way the championship game would have been between two teams who couldn't win their way into the game. I do not care if some statistical analysis says UND or SLU 'deserves' to be included, I'd rather they prove it against each other. A few teams are statistically superior (part of the apple/orange thing is slightly more comparatives in hockey). Maybe the flu swept through the locker room for a couple of weeks, maybe the frosh hit a wall midway through & Christmas break refreshed or they powered through but are just dead now. It may not be logical, it may not be the way the system is organized but it's the way I feel. Probably because I am a fan that loves to see 'high-risk' winner takes all games because of the passion they engender.
TonyTheTiger20
#SOAR
Re: 2015 Pairwise Discussion & Predictions
They do -- and this was resolved by teams like North Dakota losing to Vermont and Syracuse.
Re: 2015 Pairwise Discussion & Predictions
One could also argue that adding that extra weekend for "bubble teams" would put the top teams (who have each earned being one of the top teams, on the ice) at a disadvantage, by taking them out of their normal rhythm. They are used to playing every weekend, and two weeks between games is enough to lose focus. And as far as the OSU football analogy goes, wasn't winning the B1G conference tournament the way they got it? The bubble teams here can still get in if they replicate that.
One could also argue that adding that extra weekend for "bubble teams" would put the top teams (who have each earned being one of the top teams, on the ice) at a disadvantage, by taking them out of their normal rhythm. They are used to playing every weekend, and two weeks between games is enough to lose focus. And as far as the OSU football analogy goes, wasn't winning the B1G conference tournament the way they got it? The bubble teams here can still get in if they replicate that.
ARM
Fan of chipmunk-like mascots.
Re: 2015 Pairwise Discussion & Predictions
I think all the teams get hit by those "maybe" stretches over the course of the season. Minnesota was definitely impacted during the first Bemidji Series, to an extent in both games. BC has been impacted several times with players being gone. UND has had a very tough season in terms of off-ice things, no doubt. The Lisa Marvin accident is above and beyond what most teams see, and they have had other things as well. There is no magic fix for that beyond the chance to get hot and make it right in the conference tournament.
Re: 2015 Pairwise Discussion & Predictions
Yes. Some teams will definitely be exiting over the next couple of weeks.
As for the system, no, it's not entirely fair. However, there is no possible system that would be objectively fair in all possible situations. It doesn't exist. And Ohio State didn't prove that it belonged in the football playoff by winning it; all it proved was that it could win back to back games against very good teams under at least one set of conditions. TCU could have beaten those same two teams under at least one set of possible conditions, too. Ditto Baylor. And Auburn. And Mississippi State. And at least a half dozen other teams. The only way you justify entry into a tournament is by meeting the criteria to be admitted, not by whether or not it's possible that you could win it.
The reason RPI is a horrible metric isn't because it's not fair in some situations. It's because it doesn't actually measure what the people who use it think it does.
Yes. Some teams will definitely be exiting over the next couple of weeks.
As for the system, no, it's not entirely fair. However, there is no possible system that would be objectively fair in all possible situations. It doesn't exist. And Ohio State didn't prove that it belonged in the football playoff by winning it; all it proved was that it could win back to back games against very good teams under at least one set of conditions. TCU could have beaten those same two teams under at least one set of possible conditions, too. Ditto Baylor. And Auburn. And Mississippi State. And at least a half dozen other teams. The only way you justify entry into a tournament is by meeting the criteria to be admitted, not by whether or not it's possible that you could win it.
The reason RPI is a horrible metric isn't because it's not fair in some situations. It's because it doesn't actually measure what the people who use it think it does.
Re: 2015 Pairwise Discussion & Predictions
A) I **** thee, autocorrect!
B) Not looking for "fair" Looking for a way to have more exciting games where it is do or die
C) I'm not convinced that RPI is better or worse than any other system, does not matter if NCAA chose some other system as there is no perfect system
D) As I said, this is not an argument made from logic so arguing logic is not going to make a difference. The argument is made because no system is perfect so lets have some exciting and fun games & leave it up to the players to prove who belongs there this week.
E) I admit that may also mean teams that had better seasons lose to a hot team or get the flu at the exact wrong time so that should demonstrate even more clearly that I am not making a logical argument
A) I **** thee, autocorrect!
B) Not looking for "fair" Looking for a way to have more exciting games where it is do or die
C) I'm not convinced that RPI is better or worse than any other system, does not matter if NCAA chose some other system as there is no perfect system
D) As I said, this is not an argument made from logic so arguing logic is not going to make a difference. The argument is made because no system is perfect so lets have some exciting and fun games & leave it up to the players to prove who belongs there this week.
E) I admit that may also mean teams that had better seasons lose to a hot team or get the flu at the exact wrong time so that should demonstrate even more clearly that I am not making a logical argument
Watson Rink
Registered User
Re: 2015 Pairwise Discussion & Predictions
The key word to me in the post above is "things"...plural. My gut feel isn't in the direction of one seasonal national championship, a concept which is bound to be chimerical, but rather is in favor of several winner-takes-all games spread over the course of the season. For me, the season is an Easter Egg hunt which includes many eggs to collect in your basket. Beanpot, ECAC regular season title, ECAC tourney, NCAAs, even the weekly polls....the different eggs become collectible at various times in the season, against different competition, and the seedings are based on different criteria, some objective, some subjective....you want to accumulate as many eggs as you can.....and then in the great Hot Stove League of later life you can recall a rich patchwork quilt "oh yes, that was the year that BC won the Beanpot and Harvard won the ECAC tourney and they both went to the NCAAs and...."
[I know somebody is going to finish my sentence by saying "and then they both got smashed to a pulp by Minnesota and Wisconsin" but I've beaten you to the punch!]
The key word to me in the post above is "things"...plural. My gut feel isn't in the direction of one seasonal national championship, a concept which is bound to be chimerical, but rather is in favor of several winner-takes-all games spread over the course of the season. For me, the season is an Easter Egg hunt which includes many eggs to collect in your basket. Beanpot, ECAC regular season title, ECAC tourney, NCAAs, even the weekly polls....the different eggs become collectible at various times in the season, against different competition, and the seedings are based on different criteria, some objective, some subjective....you want to accumulate as many eggs as you can.....and then in the great Hot Stove League of later life you can recall a rich patchwork quilt "oh yes, that was the year that BC won the Beanpot and Harvard won the ECAC tourney and they both went to the NCAAs and...."
[I know somebody is going to finish my sentence by saying "and then they both got smashed to a pulp by Minnesota and Wisconsin" but I've beaten you to the punch!]
Last edited: