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 pairwise rankings

That distribution is unlikely to change very much, because the main driving factor for 'which conference gets the most teams in the NCAA?' is non conference records. If you look at non-conference records by Conference, you will see that the B10 and the HEA stomped the other conferences.

Since that is the case, the teams which play in those conferences have higher OppWin% and OppOppWin% and thus, SOMEONE from those conferences is going to end up high in the final Pairwise.

I would look for 5 B10 teams in the tourney, 2 from NCHC (unless there is a NCHC tournament upset), 1 from CCHA (Mankato is not as good this year),
and, 1 from AHA, 2 from ECAC (go Harvard), and 5 from ECAC.
 
Until PWR determines the national champion, here is my advanced analysis: In the nine years since the Big 10 conference started, NCHC has won 5 national championships. Big 10 teams were in 2 of the 9 championship games. I'm thinking a little more success will be needed to support the claim.
 
Welcome to college hockey and USCHO, SK. Hang around a bit and read some of these sages above and you might learn a thing or two.
 
model94 said:
Until PWR determines the national champion, here is my advanced analysis: In the nine years since the Big 10 conference started, NCHC has won 5 national championships. Big 10 teams were in 2 of the 9 championship games. I'm thinking a little more success will be needed to support the claim.
Click to expand...

Are you suggesting that whoever wins the national championship in a given year, the conference that the national champion plays in is automatically the best conference? Do you think the ECAC was the best conference in 2013 and 2014?

When I talk about best conference I'm referring to the overall depth of quality teams within that conference. Whoever happens to win the national championship is an entirely different topic altogether.
 
Speed Kills said:
Are you suggesting that whoever wins the national championship in a given year, the conference that the national champion plays in is automatically the best conference? Do you think the ECAC was the best conference in 2013 and 2014?

When I talk about best conference I'm referring to the overall depth of quality teams within that conference. Whoever happens to win the national championship is an entirely different topic altogether.
Click to expand...

The trouble is that saying this or that conference is better is pretty close to meaningless. No matter what conference, the players will get seen by the scouts. No matter what conference the players get opportunity to play for the title. It's all chest pounding mostly.
 
Why the hell is Stonehill College on that list and why have they only played one game? : ) ; )
 
Speed Kills said:
Are you suggesting that whoever wins the national championship in a given year, the conference that the national champion plays in is automatically the best conference? Do you think the ECAC was the best conference in 2013 and 2014?

When I talk about best conference I'm referring to the overall depth of quality teams within that conference. Whoever happens to win the national championship is an entirely different topic altogether.
Click to expand...

I'm not making a claim as to which is strongest, you are. I'm suggesting it's pretty big stretch for your claim when said conference hasn't won a national championship since it was conceived almost a decade ago, particularly when comparing to a conference that has won 5 of 9 since then. And if you really want to get picky, the two times that the Big 10 DID make to the final involved teams that just one season prior had been in a different conference - Michigan in 2015 (CCHA) and Notre Dame in 2018 (Hockey East). By any objective measure the success of the Big 10 hockey move has been underwhelming. I'm very happy that historically strong programs in the Big 10 are doing better now though.
 
Last edited:
Numbers said:
That distribution is unlikely to change very much, because the main driving factor for 'which conference gets the most teams in the NCAA?' is non conference records. If you look at non-conference records by Conference, you will see that the B10 and the HEA stomped the other conferences.

Since that is the case, the teams which play in those conferences have higher OppWin% and OppOppWin% and thus, SOMEONE from those conferences is going to end up high in the final Pairwise.

I would look for 5 B10 teams in the tourney, 2 from NCHC (unless there is a NCHC tournament upset), 1 from CCHA (Mankato is not as good this year),
and, 1 from AHA, 2 from ECAC (go Harvard), and 5 from ECAC.
Click to expand...

While better than FB (in which most NC games are essentially purchased wins), the number of hockey NC games is pretty small, less than 25% of a schedule.
 
model94 said:
While better than FB (in which most NC games are essentially purchased wins), the number of hockey NC games is pretty small, less than 25% of a schedule.
Click to expand...

This is very true. However, those 20-25% of a schedule is enough to make a huge difference in the PWR system. Remember, for example, what RPI is...
25% your own win %
21% your opponents win %
54% your opponents' opponents win %.

As far as the 21 and the 54 go, the conference games will all average them out. You play, for example, Notre Dame 4 games, and Penn State 4 games. It doesn't matter who wins the games between NoDame and PSU.

HOWEVER, if you conference is somewhere around 70% as a conference, then that "above 500 part" of your conference-mates schedule gets added to your RPI every single game you play. Every time.

It's simply impossible for a conference to overcome a bad non-conf schedule and still get a bunch of teams into the tournament.
 
model94 said:
I'm not making a claim as to which is strongest, you are. I'm suggesting it's pretty big stretch for your claim when said conference hasn't won a national championship since it was conceived almost a decade ago, particularly when comparing to a conference that has won 5 of 9 since then. And if you really want to get picky, the two times that the Big 10 DID make to the final involved teams that just one season prior had been in a different conference - Michigan in 2015 (CCHA) and Notre Dame in 2018 (Hockey East). By any objective measure the success of the Big 10 hockey move has been underwhelming. I'm very happy that historically strong programs in the Big 10 are doing better now though.
Click to expand...

If I was making a claim based on the last 10 years combined, you would be absolutely right to call it a stretch. But that isn't my claim, my claim is based on the current season only. I don't think there is any question whatsoever that the Big Ten is VASTLY SUPERIOR to the NCHC THIS SEASON.
 
Numbers said:
This is very true. However, those 20-25% of a schedule is enough to make a huge difference in the PWR system. Remember, for example, what RPI is...
25% your own win %
21% your opponents win %
54% your opponents' opponents win %.

As far as the 21 and the 54 go, the conference games will all average them out. You play, for example, Notre Dame 4 games, and Penn State 4 games. It doesn't matter who wins the games between NoDame and PSU.

HOWEVER, if you conference is somewhere around 70% as a conference, then that "above 500 part" of your conference-mates schedule gets added to your RPI every single game you play. Every time.

It's simply impossible for a conference to overcome a bad non-conf schedule and still get a bunch of teams into the tournament.
Click to expand...

Well, that depends...

Conferences, though, are simply constructs that de-facto sports politicians have redistricted since the dawn of college athletics... If you play a tough slate, regardless of any sort of conference affiliation, the RPI will take care of itself.

If you want a true meritocracy, every school should function as an Independent, and schedule as well as possible every year.

Never going to happen, but imagine how good the NCAA field would be in that case.
 
Last edited:
Fishman'81 said:
Well, that depends...

Conferences, though, are simply constructs that de-facto sports politicians have redistricted since the dawn of college athletics... If you play a tough slate, regardless of any sort of conference affiliation, the RPI will take care of itself.

If you want a true meritocracy, every school should function as an Independent, and schedule as well as possible every year.

Never going to happen, but imagine how good the NCAA field would be in that case.
Click to expand...

I agree with this, but I also want to point out, again, that 'tough slate' is only defined in terms of the results (not the reputation) of the teams on your schedule. For the sake of our little discussion here, let's divide every team's schedule in a hypothetical way between conf games and non-conf games.

As mentioned previously, everything that has to do with the conference slate will balance the strength of schedule portion of the RPI to 50% (this means the OppWin% and the OppOppWin%), leaving only one thing that can be done to raise RPI - win your own games.

Now consider the non-conf portion. This portion is defined to include BOTH my own non-conf games, and those of my conference mates. This is where all of the variability lies, and in the case of the B10 this year, this portion is already chock full of over-.500 results. Those aren't going away, because there aren't very many non conference games left.

Conference, to me, are security in scheduling. If I am Minnesota, I know I have 24 games already scheduled. That's a very positive thing.
 
Speed Kills said:
If I was making a claim based on the last 10 years combined, you would be absolutely right to call it a stretch. But that isn't my claim, my claim is based on the current season only. I don't think there is any question whatsoever that the Big Ten is VASTLY SUPERIOR to the NCHC THIS SEASON.
Click to expand...

We'll see. We can play "last 5 years" or "last 3 years" if you want. The results are the same.
 
Numbers said:
This is very true. However, those 20-25% of a schedule is enough to make a huge difference in the PWR system. Remember, for example, what RPI is...
25% your own win %
21% your opponents win %
54% your opponents' opponents win %.

As far as the 21 and the 54 go, the conference games will all average them out. You play, for example, Notre Dame 4 games, and Penn State 4 games. It doesn't matter who wins the games between NoDame and PSU.

HOWEVER, if you conference is somewhere around 70% as a conference, then that "above 500 part" of your conference-mates schedule gets added to your RPI every single game you play. Every time.

It's simply impossible for a conference to overcome a bad non-conf schedule and still get a bunch of teams into the tournament.
Click to expand...


That's exactly my point. A mere 25% of games essentially determine PWR outcomes. They become over-weighted.
 
model94 said:
Until PWR determines the national champion, here is my advanced analysis: In the nine years since the Big 10 conference started, NCHC has won 5 national championships. Big 10 teams were in 2 of the 9 championship games. I'm thinking a little more success will be needed to support the claim.
Click to expand...

This is the correct answer. Until the Big Ten can bring home some championships, everything else is irrelevant.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top