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.

Colgate 2022-23

Status
Not open for further replies.
I took my wife out to dinner so I only saw until it was tied 1-1. Box score says we only had three shots in second, three shots in third, and none in OT. Were we getting outplayed after we tied the game ?
 
Ah Yes, the Pairwise...as you know it has been tweaked several times over the past 10 to 15 years. And, yes, you can all look at the rather complicated parameters that comprise a Pairwise ranking, but I have one question regarding the methodology. Assume two teams play on neutral ice with no overtime necessary. The winning team receives 1.0 points, the losing team, obviously, negative 1.0 points. The same two teams play at Team A's rink and Team A wins. Currently, and I think this is correct, the home team receives 0.8 points, the losing teams a negative 0.8 points. Assume Team B wins (on the road). They receive 1.2 points and Team A loses 1.2 points. This implies - or at least it implies to me - that in the aggregate the home team has a 60% chance of winning, hence the ratio of 1.2 to 0.8 (60/40). However, historically college hockey teams have won 55% of their home contests. Shouldn't the ratio really be 1.1 points for a road winner and only 0.9 points for a home winner (a 55/45 ratio and in line with the data). In addition, the real competition in the Pairwise System seems to be in those teams ranked between, say, 16th and 45th place. MIH is playing better, granted, but our o-o-c record of 3-7-2 against (in the aggregate) average opponents has really hurt our position. I would guess that if MIH had simply recorded a 5-5-2 o-o-c mark (with a quality road win against Merrimack) we would be somewhere around 25th. Our mark of 9-9-2 becomes 11-7-2 (.600) and, even with a Strength of Schedule that is not real high, The Gate would be 12 to 15 spots higher...comments are welcome...
 
Greencoat,
I think we should have split with N Mich, swept Vermont, and split with Niagara. Then we would be 13-6-1 and maybe be in the low 20s in the pairwise.
 
OK, I'll bite, bored this am. Cornell #17 in PWR. Their record Vs Top 10 PWR is 1-2. Vs Top 20 PWR is 1-2. Vs Top 30 PWR 3-2, throw in two wins vs Sacred Heart #29 PWR, A win and tie against #38 AIC

The one win in top 20 PWR was against UConn #9.

Other wins for Cornell # 40. PWR Princeton, SLU #38. Brown #44. Yale # 60 Dartmouth #61

In summary, one win top 20 PWR three wins in top 30 PWR 4-2-1 top 37 PWR 5 wins from #38 PWR thru #61 PWR

And Cornell is # 17 PWR ?? That one victory against UConn must be the factor, something seems out of wack here !
 
Last edited:
CHN lets you change outcomes of games, just found the tool. I changed the Cornell win over UConn, that dropped them to #27 PWR. Made splits in games under Magoo's theory back a few posts and we are #20 PWR.
 
Just changing the loss and tie against UVM to two wins put us at #26 PWR, that hurt us badly ! (37 now). It's a very fun tool !
 
Magoo said:
Greencoat,
I think we should have split with N Mich, swept Vermont, and split with Niagara. Then we would be 13-6-1 and maybe be in the low 20s in the pairwise.
Click to expand...

I just tried the tool on CHN. We would have been 17th with these outcomes. This is assuming all regulation wins - OT wins don't weigh as much.
 
That’s why these non conference games are important. Missed opportunities.

On to RPI/Union this weekend. My first chance to see the team in person - looking forward to it.
 
TheGreenCoat said:
Ah Yes, the Pairwise...as you know it has been tweaked several times over the past 10 to 15 years. And, yes, you can all look at the rather complicated parameters that comprise a Pairwise ranking, but I have one question regarding the methodology. Assume two teams play on neutral ice with no overtime necessary. The winning team receives 1.0 points, the losing team, obviously, negative 1.0 points. The same two teams play at Team A's rink and Team A wins. Currently, and I think this is correct, the home team receives 0.8 points, the losing teams a negative 0.8 points. Assume Team B wins (on the road). They receive 1.2 points and Team A loses 1.2 points. This implies - or at least it implies to me - that in the aggregate the home team has a 60% chance of winning, hence the ratio of 1.2 to 0.8 (60/40). However, historically college hockey teams have won 55% of their home contests. Shouldn't the ratio really be 1.1 points for a road winner and only 0.9 points for a home winner (a 55/45 ratio and in line with the data). In addition, the real competition in the Pairwise System seems to be in those teams ranked between, say, 16th and 45th place. MIH is playing better, granted, but our o-o-c record of 3-7-2 against (in the aggregate) average opponents has really hurt our position. I would guess that if MIH had simply recorded a 5-5-2 o-o-c mark (with a quality road win against Merrimack) we would be somewhere around 25th. Our mark of 9-9-2 becomes 11-7-2 (.600) and, even with a Strength of Schedule that is not real high, The Gate would be 12 to 15 spots higher...comments are welcome...
Click to expand...

Does the PW weight home v. visiting wins? I can't find any evidence that it does. It's essentially identical to the RPI, and the RPI doesn't consider venue, either... Or does it? Any helpful links will be much appreciated.

(I miss the KRACH.)
 
Last edited:
Interesting stats, RPI is 7-2-1 at home and 0-9 on the road. Union is 7-1 at home and 1-9-1 on the road.
 
iowabasedtraveler said:
And they kept referring to the Swede as their ‘starting goalie.’ Umm… he isn’t their starting goalie as he never started a game in Hamilton. Androlewicz is their (most recent) starting goalie and Mucitelli is their next (most recent) starting goalie. Now, I will grant you that Ostman may be their fave goalie. he he he.
Click to expand...

Ostberg is Maine's #1 goaltender by a wide margin. Discounting the 2 in Hamilton, he had started all but 3 of Maine's games. He missed both games due to illness.
 
Two wins this weekend would be huge. RPI and Union's 14-3-1 home record is a bit daunting to me ! Maybe the students are still on break and the places will be empty ?
 
sshablak said:
Two wins this weekend would be huge. RPI and Union's 14-3-1 home record is a bit daunting to me ! Maybe the students are still on break and the places will be empty ?
Click to expand...

I think Union is back in session - they have a trimester calendar. RPI is probably still on break.
 
sshablak said:
OK, I'll bite, bored this am. Cornell #17 in PWR. Their record Vs Top 10 PWR is 1-2. Vs Top 20 PWR is 1-2. Vs Top 30 PWR 3-2, throw in two wins vs Sacred Heart #29 PWR, A win and tie against #38 AIC

The one win in top 20 PWR was against UConn #9.

Other wins for Cornell # 40. PWR Princeton, SLU #38. Brown #44. Yale # 60 Dartmouth #61

In summary, one win top 20 PWR three wins in top 30 PWR 4-2-1 top 37 PWR 5 wins from #38 PWR thru #61 PWR

And Cornell is # 17 PWR ?? That one victory against UConn must be the factor, something seems out of wack here !
Click to expand...

I'm not bored, just confused. I didn't go to MIT so I'll defer to you intellectuals on the board to figure this P/W formula out.....ha
 
Carter Gylander in goal tonight.
Jack Watson in goal for RPI.

Fitst SOG. First goal. Alex DiPaolo. From Verboon and Belpedio.

PPG by RPI.

RPI 14, Colgate 6, SOG after one.
Colgate 1, RPI 1, score after one.

Colgate’s Ethan Mandervile on PP (from Young and Anderson).

Yes, Shabby, am here. And agree on period one.

RPI 21, Colgate 16, SOG after two.
Colgate 2, RPI 1, score after two.

RPI tied it up early in the third.
Shortly thereafter, RPI got a PPG to take the lead.
Carter Gylander not happy with last two goals against.
Now I am concerned… RPI player left alone in front of the net. 4-2 RPI.
Got one goal back by Anthony Stark… just trickled across the line.

RPI ENG.
RPI 33, Colgate 32, Faceoffs final.
RPI 32, Colgate 28, SOG final
RPI 5, Colgate 3, score final.
 
Last edited:
Thought we were outplayed in the first. Penalty on Gate was weak, then a blatant trip not called let RPI walk in for their goal.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top