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.

Division I Rutter Rankings for 2013-2014

Re: Division I Rutter Rankings for 2013-2014

Eeyore said:
If you produce a strong correlation between Canadian players and inferior teams in the WCHA, does this relationship hold in other conferences?
Click to expand...

pokechecker said:
yes.
Click to expand...

Actually the answer is No.

For example the top two teams in the ECAC happen to be the two teams stocked with the most Canadians in that league, in one case all but one of the players on the roster is Canadian. The team that has won the ECAC season the last four years is vast majority Canadian content.
 
pokechecker said:
excuse me for omitting the obvious (which even you were able to perceive)



yes


Thanks for the post, I was going to mention much of what you said, but I just knew someone would say it so much more eloquently than I could. Besides, I thought it would be best to spoon feed it since not everyone here is Ivy League, ... or even Big Ten. You know, best to digest in small bites so as not to tax cranial capacity.
Click to expand...

What a knob!!!
 
Re: Division I Rutter Rankings for 2013-2014

OnMAA said:
Actually the answer is No.
For example the top two teams in the ECAC
Click to expand...

The hypothesis is only valid for D1
further, the model uses the number of NCAA D1 championships won in both the numerator and the denominator as factors, and since you cannot divide by zero, and anything multiplied by zero is zero. :p
 
Re: Division I Rutter Rankings for 2013-2014

I've always wondered, if the ECAC doesn't let the bottom 4 teams compete in the ECAC tournament (and therefore are precluded from the NCAA tournament)
why do the ECAC teams get to include games against those bottom 4 teams for purposes of seeding in the NCAA tournament?
if they are not good enough to be considered for the ECAC & NCAA tournament, games against them shouldn't count in ranking them
 
Re: Division I Rutter Rankings for 2013-2014

pokechecker said:
I've always wondered, if the ECAC doesn't let the bottom 4 teams compete in the ECAC tournament (and therefore are precluded from the NCAA tournament)
why do the ECAC teams get to include games against those bottom 4 teams for purposes of seeding in the NCAA tournament?
if they are not good enough to be considered for the ECAC & NCAA tournament, games against them shouldn't count in ranking them
Click to expand...

Until year before last, HE did not have all teams in the play-offs either. It is up to the league to dictated how they decide the league championship. Other than who ends up being champ, has nothing to do with the NCAA seedings, that is purely based on a teams overall record.

Personally think it is silly to have 100% of all teams make the play-offs. My believe is it should be 50% max and really only teams that have a record 500 or better.
 
Re: Division I Rutter Rankings for 2013-2014

OnMAA said:
Until year before last, HE did not have all teams in the play-offs either. It is up to the league to dictated how they decide the league championship. Other than who ends up being champ, has nothing to do with the NCAA seedings, that is purely based on a teams overall record.

Personally think it is silly to have 100% of all teams make the play-offs. My believe is it should be 50% max and really only teams that have a record 500 or better.
Click to expand...

You missed the bigger problem with the post. Thanks to the idiocy that is RPI, teams looking to get into the NCAAs don't "get" to include games against the bottom four in the ECAC; if they lose games to those teams, they have to include them. If they win, they get to exclude them, since they would otherwise hurt that team's RPI.
 
Re: Division I Rutter Rankings for 2013-2014

For games played through October 27, 2013

Code: 
  	Team 		Rating 	Last Week
1 	Minnesota 	3.832	1
2 	Cornell 	2.122	2
3 	Wisconsin 	1.729	3
4 	Harvard 	1.716	6
5 	North Dakota 	1.566	5
6 	UMD 		1.202	10
7 	Ohio State 	1.119	5
8 	Clarkson 	0.959	8
9 	Quinnipiac 	0.668	9
10 	Mercyhurst 	0.608	NR

I used to be able to look one or two posts back to find last weeks rankings.....
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: ARM
Re: Division I Rutter Rankings for 2013-2014

For games played through November 3, 2013

Code: 
  	Team 		Rating	Last Week	
1 	Minnesota 	3.881	1
2 	Wisconsin 	2.122	3
3 	Cornell 	1.697	2	
4 	North Dakota 	1.461	5
5 	Ohio State 	1.018	7
6 	Quinnipiac 	0.920	9
7 	Boston Univ. 	0.795	NR
8 	Harvard 	0.774	4
9 	UMD	 	0.716	6
10 	Boston College 	0.690	NR
 
Re: Division I Rutter Rankings for 2013-2014

For games played through November 10, 2013

Code: 
  	Team 		Rating	Last Week
1 	Minnesota 	3.84	1
2 	Wisconsin 	1.95	2
3 	Cornell 	1.64	3
4 	North Dakota 	1.30	4
5 	Harvard 	1.09	8
6 	Boston Univ. 	0.95	7	
7 	Boston College 	0.77	10
8 	Quinnipiac 	0.61	6
8 	UMD 		0.61	9
10 	Clarkson 	0.56	NR
 
Re: Division I Rutter Rankings for 2013-2014

Here is what Minnesota's Rutter Ranking looked like coming into today:

Code: 
 	Team	         Rating	
1	Minnesota	 3.9313
Probably won't see a Rutter Ranking that high for a while.
 
Re: Division I Rutter Rankings for 2013-2014

ARM said:
Here is what Minnesota's Rutter Ranking looked like coming into today:

Code: 
 	Team	         Rating	
1	Minnesota	 3.9313
Probably won't see a Rutter Ranking that high for a while.
Click to expand...

Anything over three is way up there.
 
Re: Division I Rutter Rankings for 2013-2014

Interesting to see how Rutter has NoDak passing Cornell, and BC not even in the top ten:

Code: 
 	Team	Rating	RPI.Rank	RPI
1	Minnesota	 3.0037	 1	0.6601
2	Wisconsin	 1.9514	 3	0.6189
3	North Dakota	 1.7694	 5	0.6111
4	Cornell  	 1.6175	 2	0.6349
5	Harvard  	 1.2552	 4	0.6119
6	Boston Univer.	 0.9591	 7	0.5845
7	Minnesota Dul.	 0.9533	12	0.5499
8	Quinnipiac	 0.8719	 6	0.5980
9	Clarkson	 0.5946	 9	0.5742
10	Robert Morris	 0.5896	10	0.5696
11	Boston College	 0.5623	11	0.5623
12	Princeton	 0.4698	 8	0.5768
13	Ohio State	 0.4674	17	0.4857
14	Mercyhurst	 0.3029	13	0.5337
 
Last edited:
Re: Division I Rutter Rankings for 2013-2014

For games played through November 17, 2013

Code: 
  	Team 		Rating	Last Week 	
1 	Minnesota 	3.00	1
2 	Wisconsin 	1.95	2
3 	North Dakota 	1.77	4
4 	Cornell 	1.62	3
5 	Harvard 	1.26	5
6 	Boston Univ. 	0.96	7
7 	UMD 	        0.95	8
8 	Quinnipiac 	0.87	8
9 	Clarkson 	0.59	10
9	Robert Morris 	0.59	NR

Comments...

- Minnesota still with a high rating. One loss against a top 4 team will not drive it down too far.
- I think BC is the right spot. Their rating is 0.56, so they are not far from the top 10
- I just did a quick check, and there have been teams in the top 10 with ratings of less than 0.40. I thought the 0.59 was low, but it was not.
 
Re: Division I Rutter Rankings for 2013-2014

Surprising to me that at this stage of the season only one team from Hockey East makes the top 10.
 
Re: Division I Rutter Rankings for 2013-2014

D2D said:
Surprising to me that at this stage of the season only one team from Hockey East makes the top 10.
Click to expand...

... also surprising which one it is. I think we've seen unexpectedly weak performances from BC and Providence, and a pretty strong one from BU. Outside those three teams no-one looked really likely to do much damage to the ratings this season.
 
Re: Division I Rutter Rankings for 2013-2014

wwhyte said:
... also surprising which one it is. I think we've seen unexpectedly weak performances from BC and Providence, and a pretty strong one from BU. Outside those three teams no-one looked really likely to do much damage to the ratings this season.
Click to expand...

Some early season predictors had NEU in the same mix as Providence, but you are right, the Friars and Eagles are the two most perplexing teams from HE sofar. IMHO Jury still out a bit on BU, as they have not yet faced a lot of top 10 competition. Having said that, they are winning the games they are "expected" to win to stay in the mix. Same cannot be said for BC and PC at this point.

To me the biggest surprise so far is the relative strength of the ECAC over HE in NC play between the two. Last year HE was the stronger conference between the two, this year not so much. Overall HE is 23-30-4 with a -44 goal differential in Non-Conference play.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top