What's new
By:
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.

2017 NCAA tournament selection thread

Re: 2017 NCAA tournament selection thread

joecct said:
They are a full member of the CCC - a recognized NCAA D-III multisport conference. Why shouldn't they be?

And they played for the ECAC-NE title last season.
Click to expand...

I was just asking. I haven't followed Endicott hockey much... The Oswego folks were discussing their Pool C chances against Endicott in their thread.
 
spwood said:
I was just asking. I haven't followed Endicott hockey much... The Oswego folks were discussing their Pool C chances against Endicott in their thread.
Click to expand...

As long as Endicott is ranked above Oswego, the Gulls will be getting in before the Lakers.
 
Re: 2017 NCAA tournament selection thread

NUProf said:
Unfortunately that concept was the one that actually was viable. The biggest issue with all of this is the fact that you can hurt your own profile by winning a game. If you are playing a team near the bottom of the rankings (such as 9 or 10 E) and you win, with your win causing them to fall out of the rankings, you hurt your own case and just as perversely if you had lost to one of those teams, somebody else beating them and knocking them out of the ratings will help you - because your RNK percentage will go up. If the team stayed ranked, their effect on your profile remains. It's a crazy system.
Click to expand...

Agreed, Prof... You'd think they'd at least adjust the RNK criterion to eliminate the possibility of hurting yourself via winning any game.

IMO, the RNK criterion shouldn't even exist in the first place... It's a "cliff", a la the old D-1 TUC construct, and a cliff should never exist in an equitable statistical model; every team should be evaluated along a continuum that includes every result. (But, of course, the committee can toss it out as a "factor", then weight it however they please, including the possibility of not affording it any weight at all.)

A crazy system, indeed.
 
Last edited:
Re: 2017 NCAA tournament selection thread

joecct said:
Should Colby be a ranked school?
Should Williams be dropped?
Click to expand...

Neither should be ranked. While statistically the NESCAC may benefit by producing high SOS within the conference, both teams have non-conference performance (2-2-1), (3-3-0) below what you would hope for in a ranked team. And their soon to be used RNK (.500), (.357) against last weeks ranked teams will compete poorly in one-on-one comparisons.
 
Re: 2017 NCAA tournament selection thread

peddler said:
Neither should be ranked. While statistically the NESCAC may benefit by producing high SOS within the conference, both teams have non-conference performance (2-2-1), (3-3-0) below what you would hope for in a ranked team. And their soon to be used RNK (.500), (.357) against last weeks ranked teams will compete poorly in one-on-one comparisons.
Click to expand...

The SOS ranking from in-conference games is always 0.500. Your SOS is really determined by 2 things - who you play outside your conference, and the success that your fellow conference members have outside of the conference. I haven't seen the conference vs. conference success rate this season, but my guess is that Middlebury and the the other teams at the bottom of the NESCAC will drag down the SOS of the NESCAC as a whole.
 
Re: 2017 NCAA tournament selection thread

NUProf said:
The SOS ranking from in-conference games is always 0.500. Your SOS is really determined by 2 things - who you play outside your conference, and the success that your fellow conference members have outside of the conference. I haven't seen the conference vs. conference success rate this season, but my guess is that Middlebury and the the other teams at the bottom of the NESCAC will drag down the SOS of the NESCAC as a whole.
Click to expand...

And where at this point would you expect to acquire SOS of any (viable in terms of NCAA criteria) kind?
 
Re: 2017 NCAA tournament selection thread

peddler said:
And where at this point would you expect to acquire SOS of any (viable in terms of NCAA criteria) kind?
Click to expand...

It will not be available until Tuesday afternoon again. The links on the NCAA Regional Rankings page now revert to stats from 2011.
 
Re: 2017 NCAA tournament selection thread

Birdwatcher said:
It will not be available until Tuesday afternoon again. The links on the NCAA Regional Rankings page now revert to stats from 2011.
Click to expand...

I have to say that, despite the lack of a bulletproof selection process that defines every aspect by weight, I miss having SOS and other "pairwise" info available on this site for D3 teams.
 
Re: 2017 NCAA tournament selection thread

peddler said:
And where at this point would you expect to acquire SOS of any (viable in terms of NCAA criteria) kind?
Click to expand...



To maximize OWP, schedule teams out of conference that are going to have good winning percentages and make sure the rest of your league schedules bottom feeders. This means you get the benefit of the schedule of your OOC opponents, and of with the rest of your league beating up on dreck, their winning percentage goes up. For example, you play games against the top of the CCC and the MASCAC and encourage the rest of your league to play the bottom feeders in those leagues. OOWP is harder to manipulate, but again if your opponents play teams in the less robust leagues, they will end up with OWPs close to 0.500 for the non conference portion of their schedule. You don't have to play good teams to get a good SOS metric - just make sure you pick and choose carefully.
 
Last edited:
Re: 2017 NCAA tournament selection thread

NUProf said:
To maximize OWP, schedule teams out of conference that are going to have good winning percentages and make sure the rest of your league schedules bottom feeders. This means you get the benefit of the schedule of your OOC opponents, and of with the rest of your league beating up on dreck, their winning percentage goes up. For example, you play games against the top of the CCC and the MASCAC and encourage the rest of your league to play the bottom feeders in those leagues. OOWP is harder to manipulate, but again if your opponents play teams in the less robust leagues, they will end up with OWPs close to 0.500 for the non conference portion of their schedule. You don't have to play good teams to get a good SOS metric - just make sure you pick and choose carefully.
Click to expand...

You misunderstood my question. You did provide a fine example of how one might maximize their SOS. But my intention was to inquire after a source of SOS statistics (as in the old published "pairwise" SOS) to use for comparison purposes. One other than KRACH, which I agree is not functionally identical.
 
Last edited:
peddler said:
You misunderstood my question. You did provide a fine example of how one might maximize their SOS. But my intention was to inquire after a source of SOS statistics (as in the old published "pairwise" SOS) to use for comparison purposes. One other than KRACH, which I agree is not functionally identical.
Click to expand...

When they post new NCAA rankings on Tuesday, the links at the bottom (usually) update to the latest stats sheets. After a few days, they usually seem to revert to the 2011 stats until the next week's rankings.
 
Re: 2017 NCAA tournament selection thread

CARDS_rule_the_Burgh said:
When they post new NCAA rankings on Tuesday, the links at the bottom (usually) update to the latest stats sheets. After a few days, they usually seem to revert to the 2011 stats until the next week's rankings.
Click to expand...

Not unusual for one of the websites, especially the NCAA, to provide "historic" info at some point. Thanks
 
Re: 2017 NCAA tournament selection thread

peddler said:
Not unusual for one of the websites, especially the NCAA, to provide "historic" info at some point. Thanks
Click to expand...

Guess I misunderstood, too. I thought you were asking how does a team in a poor/mediocre league get a good SOS.

When the rankings come out Tuesday save the stats for future discussion until next Tuesday.
 
Re: 2017 NCAA tournament selection thread

NUProf said:
To maximize OWP, schedule teams out of conference that are going to have good winning percentages and make sure the rest of your league schedules bottom feeders. This means you get the benefit of the schedule of your OOC opponents, and of with the rest of your league beating up on dreck, their winning percentage goes up. For example, you play games against the top of the CCC and the MASCAC and encourage the rest of your league to play the bottom feeders in those leagues. OOWP is harder to manipulate, but again if your opponents play teams in the less robust leagues, they will end up with OWPs close to 0.500 for the non conference portion of their schedule. You don't have to play good teams to get a good SOS metric - just make sure you pick and choose carefully.
Click to expand...

Well, you can't "manipulate" who your conference-mates play. All a team can do -especially if they play in a so-so conference such as the NEHC- is to seek quality OOC scheduling.

That's all there is to it; there's no grand conspiracy at play -or one even remotely possible, considering all the variables involved- and the typical SOS metrics are good enough to hang our hats on, lacking anything better.
 
Re: 2017 NCAA tournament selection thread

Wow...SNC doesn't drop after a loss to MSOE? They must take head to head very seriously.
 
Re: 2017 NCAA tournament selection thread

SNC #1? We're 4-3 since the sweep of Adrian, losing to MSOE and CUW (twice!)... A bit surprising to me...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top