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.

Latest D1 Power Rankings

O

octonion

New member
The full list and R code.

Code: 
 rk  |             school              | div |  str  |  ofs  |  dfs  |  sos  
-----+---------------------------------+-----+-------+-------+-------+-------
   1 | harvard                         |   1 | 3.893 | 1.878 | 0.483 | 1.464
   2 | minnesota-duluth                |   1 | 3.820 | 1.858 | 0.486 | 1.593
   3 | vermont                         |   1 | 3.743 | 1.621 | 0.433 | 1.442
   4 | michigan-tech                   |   1 | 3.728 | 1.603 | 0.430 | 1.456
   5 | minnesota-state                 |   1 | 3.666 | 1.965 | 0.536 | 1.471
   6 | boston-university               |   1 | 3.620 | 1.759 | 0.486 | 1.449
   7 | nebraska-omaha                  |   1 | 3.467 | 1.835 | 0.529 | 1.511
   8 | minnesota                       |   1 | 3.462 | 1.776 | 0.513 | 1.465
   9 | miami                           |   1 | 3.442 | 1.703 | 0.495 | 1.526
  10 | bowling-green                   |   1 | 3.394 | 1.770 | 0.522 | 1.461
  11 | north-dakota                    |   1 | 3.133 | 1.649 | 0.526 | 1.460
  12 | st-lawrence                     |   1 | 3.113 | 1.679 | 0.539 | 1.460
  13 | denver                          |   1 | 3.031 | 1.685 | 0.556 | 1.503
  14 | umass-lowell                    |   1 | 2.968 | 1.836 | 0.619 | 1.455
  15 | penn-state                      |   1 | 2.887 | 1.741 | 0.603 | 1.455
  16 | merrimack                       |   1 | 2.865 | 1.452 | 0.507 | 1.446
  17 | ferris-state                    |   1 | 2.844 | 1.427 | 0.502 | 1.434
  18 | providence                      |   1 | 2.789 | 1.318 | 0.472 | 1.420
  19 | colgate                         |   1 | 2.743 | 1.478 | 0.539 | 1.445
  20 | michigan                        |   1 | 2.740 | 1.866 | 0.681 | 1.454
  21 | yale                            |   1 | 2.732 | 1.366 | 0.500 | 1.449
  22 | cornell                         |   1 | 2.720 | 1.242 | 0.456 | 1.470
  23 | robert-morris                   |   1 | 2.707 | 1.687 | 0.623 | 1.283
  24 | boston-college                  |   1 | 2.679 | 1.536 | 0.573 | 1.461
  25 | union                           |   1 | 2.642 | 1.699 | 0.643 | 1.430
 
Re: Latest D1 Power Rankings

O.K.

I'll bite.

Just what the heck are we looking at here?
 
Re: Latest D1 Power Rankings

Red Cows said:
O.K.

I'll bite.

Just what the heck are we looking at here?
Click to expand...

looks like a Poisson random effects model of goal data estimated under frequentist techniques.

---

octonion has never said this but I've come to learn that he works in statistics for professional sports.

edit: I've toyed with doing roughly the same under Bayes paradigm... just been too lazy and I don't want to do it without a season simulator. That and I'd have to custom write the software which is... annoying.
 
Last edited:
Re: Latest D1 Power Rankings

darker98 said:
This makes no sense to a normal observer.
Click to expand...

Kinda my observation as well.

This bears little semblance to Pairwise, KRACH, the USCHO poll, or ESPN's poll.

I concede that those 4 things bear little semblance to each other right now, either (other than Pairwise and KRACH).

I note that octonion's rep went from green to red since my original post above.

I'll reserve further judgement until the poster explains what we are looking at and the derivation of it.
 
Re: Latest D1 Power Rankings

Despite the mistakes, it appears to me this is a regression analysis that uses one of two methods to account for the randomness of some results.But i'm not a mathematician like ralph is.
 
Re: Latest D1 Power Rankings

manurespreader said:
Despite the mistakes, it appears to me this is a regression analysis that uses one of two methods to account for the randomness of some results.But i'm not a mathematician like ralph is.
Click to expand...

I am sure that Patman knows a lot more about this than I do.
 
Re: Latest D1 Power Rankings

Ralph Baer said:
I am sure that Patman knows a lot more about this than I do.
Click to expand...

yeah, I didn't see anything ostensibly wrong in the code. On principle I'd be worried about whether the necessary linear restriction is in the model for all team related terms. Team effects are only observed relative to other teams and thus is sucked out by the intercept term.
 
Re: Latest D1 Power Rankings

Tater said:
It's the only system that has gotten Harvard right.
Click to expand...

IMO, I tend to go with score-based models because it does attempt to capture the nature of the game itself... whatever imperfection it may be. The difference in people's opinions tends to be the question or whether teams can will themselves to win games versus winning games coming as a process of being trained to score.

Clearly the players are not emotionless automatons so there is certainly give in the latter... however I think that coaches in the modern era have come to the conclusion that what they do is a process and that the game itself is statement of that process, albeit an imperfect statement.

They aren't going to express it in formulae like us nerds may but the mindset is similar.
 
Re: Latest D1 Power Rankings

Patman said:
IMO, I tend to go with score-based models because it does attempt to capture the nature of the game itself... whatever imperfection it may be. The difference in people's opinions tends to be the question or whether teams can will themselves to win games versus winning games coming as a process of being trained to score.

Clearly the players are not emotionless automatons so there is certainly give in the latter... however I think that coaches in the modern era have come to the conclusion that what they do is a process and that the game itself is statement of that process, albeit an imperfect statement.

They aren't going to express it in formulae like us nerds may but the mindset is similar.
Click to expand...
Might be, I wonder if you think this is strictly a ranking system based on past history, or is it a predictive model,( if a regression analysis can be considered such), and second, is it any more meaningful than Krach is.

And third, is the poster a Harvard Guy? Since I tend to ascribe ulterior motives to things like this.
 
Last edited:
Re: Latest D1 Power Rankings

manurespreader said:
Might be, I wonder if you think this is strictly a ranking system based on past history, or is it a predictive model,( if a regression analysis can be considered such), and second, is it any more meaningful than Kratch is.

And third, is the poster a Harvard Guy? Since I tend to ascribe ulterior motives to things like this.
Click to expand...

I don't believe so... the quickest way to see Harvard ranked that high is legit is to look at Robin Locke's results (Robin is a professor at St. Lawrence). His model uses score data at the end of regulation less any ENG scored.

In that one Harvard is 6th.

As a prediction method... and yes it is... it can be more meaningful than KRACH. While there is an appeal of probabilistic notions in KRACH the fact they have to deal with ties makes it problematic and thus is better viewed from the heuristic standpoint.

edit: however, KRACH applied to "non-tie" sports can be viewed as predictive in nature.

---

I don't know if he's a "harvard guy" though I believe it took another Harvard guy to tell me who he is. I know of one his employers but I feel it is not warranted to divulge this information though I believe he is no longer in their employ. I have met "octonion" before but that was before he posted here as "octonion".

edit: i only found out who he was at the Pittsburgh frozen four
 
Last edited:
Re: Latest D1 Power Rankings

Yes, this is a pretty standard Poisson model. The one issue I've had with it in the past (and some might find this a feature, not a bug) is that there is partial carryover of strength from prior seasons (or at least there used to be... I haven't really studied his code this year). It is predictive in the sense that it generates an offensive and defensive strength for each team. It is not predictive in the sense that it doesn't look at what games remain to be played for any team and project any sort of W-L-T record from that. For a quick survey of how these models work, anyone can look at the documentation for the model I wrote in 2011... https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/5755704/ranking.doc
It discusses how these models differ from KRACH and the Pairwise and how to use one predictively...
 
Re: Latest D1 Power Rankings

goblue78 said:
Yes, this is a pretty standard Poisson model. The one issue I've had with it in the past (and some might find this a feature, not a bug) is that there is partial carryover of strength from prior seasons (or at least there used to be... I haven't really studied his code this year). It is predictive in the sense that it generates an offensive and defensive strength for each team. It is not predictive in the sense that it doesn't look at what games remain to be played for any team and project any sort of W-L-T record from that. For a quick survey of how these models work, anyone can look at the documentation for the model I wrote in 2011... https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/5755704/ranking.doc
It discusses how these models differ from KRACH and the Pairwise and how to use one predictively...
Click to expand...

predictive would just be the follow-up execution. The model is predictive... but if you don't use it to make predictions... well, that's on you :p
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top