ARM
Fan of chipmunk-like mascots.
Re: Preliminary & Ongoing Pairwise Watch and 2013 NCAA Tournament Musing Thread
Now 3-0 in the 3rd.
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.
Preliminary & Ongoing Pairwise Watch and 2013 NCAA Tournament Musing Thread
- Thread starter brookyone
- Start date
TonyTheTiger20
#SOAR
Re: Preliminary & Ongoing Pairwise Watch and 2013 NCAA Tournament Musing Thread
Well then. I didn't see that coming.
NU is going to be a tough out for Minnesota, let me tell you.
Well then. I didn't see that coming.
NU is going to be a tough out for Minnesota, let me tell you.
Re: Preliminary & Ongoing Pairwise Watch and 2013 NCAA Tournament Musing Thread
It would be preferable to seeing North Dakota again. I'm really tired of the color green.
It would be preferable to seeing North Dakota again. I'm really tired of the color green.
Re: Preliminary & Ongoing Pairwise Watch and 2013 NCAA Tournament Musing Thread
Here are some thoughts on where things stand beyond what's obvious from the PWR. I'll consider some "creative" interpretations of the criterion, even though my impression was creative interpretations were being discouraged in the offseason. (Specifically, my impression is that the committee tended to reward conference postseason titles last season when things were close and criteria conflicted, even though conference postseason titles aren't officially a criterion.)
So in terms of how the committee ranks the teams, I think it's pretty much set
8. Northeastern/N.Dakota, 7. Mercyhurst, 6. Clarkson
There would be some creative arguments within the bounds of the criteria for pushing North Dakota up to 6 if they were to upset Minnesota, but I think UND just loses too many criteria even in that case. (If UND were elevated to 6 with such a win, you might as well through the whole system and admit Wisconsin to the tournament too.)
For the top 5, I'd say Cornell > BC is pretty much locked in now, and I don't see anyway that Cornell > Harvard and BC > Harvard aren't also locked in, barring some creativity.
So I'd expect the following:
Cornell, BU win: 2) Cornell 3) BU 4) BC 5) Harvard
Cornell, NU win: 2) Cornell 3) BC 4) BU 5) Harvard
Harvard, BU win: 2) BU 3) Cornell, 4) BC 5) Harvard
Harvard, NU win: 2) Cornell, 3) BC 4) Harvard 5) BC
Tough for Harvard to still end up at 5 with an ECAC title if BU wins, but I think there's just enough distance from Cornell and BC to prevent Harvard from passing them.
And yeah, Minnesota #1. You heard it hear... last.
As for flights, yes, the standard bracket minimizes flights so I doubt you'll see a deviation from that. If UND is #8, I would like for the current committee to be more like the 2007 committee and decide that a UND-Minnesota QF is lousy for the sport, esp. with the Frozen Four in Minnesota, and send UND to the East... but nothing that's happened since 2008 leads me to believe that'll happen.
Here are some thoughts on where things stand beyond what's obvious from the PWR. I'll consider some "creative" interpretations of the criterion, even though my impression was creative interpretations were being discouraged in the offseason. (Specifically, my impression is that the committee tended to reward conference postseason titles last season when things were close and criteria conflicted, even though conference postseason titles aren't officially a criterion.)
So in terms of how the committee ranks the teams, I think it's pretty much set
8. Northeastern/N.Dakota, 7. Mercyhurst, 6. Clarkson
There would be some creative arguments within the bounds of the criteria for pushing North Dakota up to 6 if they were to upset Minnesota, but I think UND just loses too many criteria even in that case. (If UND were elevated to 6 with such a win, you might as well through the whole system and admit Wisconsin to the tournament too.)
For the top 5, I'd say Cornell > BC is pretty much locked in now, and I don't see anyway that Cornell > Harvard and BC > Harvard aren't also locked in, barring some creativity.
So I'd expect the following:
Cornell, BU win: 2) Cornell 3) BU 4) BC 5) Harvard
Cornell, NU win: 2) Cornell 3) BC 4) BU 5) Harvard
Harvard, BU win: 2) BU 3) Cornell, 4) BC 5) Harvard
Harvard, NU win: 2) Cornell, 3) BC 4) Harvard 5) BC
Tough for Harvard to still end up at 5 with an ECAC title if BU wins, but I think there's just enough distance from Cornell and BC to prevent Harvard from passing them.
And yeah, Minnesota #1. You heard it hear... last.
As for flights, yes, the standard bracket minimizes flights so I doubt you'll see a deviation from that. If UND is #8, I would like for the current committee to be more like the 2007 committee and decide that a UND-Minnesota QF is lousy for the sport, esp. with the Frozen Four in Minnesota, and send UND to the East... but nothing that's happened since 2008 leads me to believe that'll happen.
Re: Preliminary & Ongoing Pairwise Watch and 2013 NCAA Tournament Musing Thread
Hmm. I think that if Harvard were to defeat Cornell tomorrow, that would make 2 out of 3 wins against the #2 team in the country and a big win on THEIR ice. I get that tournament titles don't really factor in but since the winner gets an autobid, there is significance in winning the tournament. For Harvard, yes, they lost to BC but is the distance really that great that since BC lost in the semis and if we win, we should take a back seat? If Harvard wins, they would have beaten the #6 and #2 ranked teams on foreign ice. How does that not factor in?
Hmm. I think that if Harvard were to defeat Cornell tomorrow, that would make 2 out of 3 wins against the #2 team in the country and a big win on THEIR ice. I get that tournament titles don't really factor in but since the winner gets an autobid, there is significance in winning the tournament. For Harvard, yes, they lost to BC but is the distance really that great that since BC lost in the semis and if we win, we should take a back seat? If Harvard wins, they would have beaten the #6 and #2 ranked teams on foreign ice. How does that not factor in?
Re: Preliminary & Ongoing Pairwise Watch and 2013 NCAA Tournament Musing Thread
But BC vs. Harvard just isn't nearly as close as it looks on paper. BC beat Harvard, Cornell, and Clarkson and SLU (they played each once), so Harvard can't claim any special status for having gone 3-3 (best-case scenario) against Clarkson and Cornell. They both went .500 vs. BU so that's a wash. All Harvard really has going for it in comparison to BC is the win over Northeastern while BC went 2-2, and BC tied Dartmouth, while Harvard went 3-0-1. In addition, BC split Mercyhurst and UMD, while Harvard had no nonconference wins of note. Ok, also BC had one really lousy a result, a tie vs. Vermont.
Harvard, despite this, would end up with a better RPI than BC if it beats Cornell. All the other criteria all point clearly in BC's favor.
Game locations don't matter. Game contexts, according to the rules, don't matter wither.
But BC vs. Harvard just isn't nearly as close as it looks on paper. BC beat Harvard, Cornell, and Clarkson and SLU (they played each once), so Harvard can't claim any special status for having gone 3-3 (best-case scenario) against Clarkson and Cornell. They both went .500 vs. BU so that's a wash. All Harvard really has going for it in comparison to BC is the win over Northeastern while BC went 2-2, and BC tied Dartmouth, while Harvard went 3-0-1. In addition, BC split Mercyhurst and UMD, while Harvard had no nonconference wins of note. Ok, also BC had one really lousy a result, a tie vs. Vermont.
Harvard, despite this, would end up with a better RPI than BC if it beats Cornell. All the other criteria all point clearly in BC's favor.
Last edited:
Okay, I get it. Still I think we deserve consideration for home ice if we win tomorrow.
OnMAA
Vort Doen.....Heija Heija Heija
Re: Preliminary & Ongoing Pairwise Watch and 2013 NCAA Tournament Musing Thread
You have to hope for an NU win then.
Either way, it looks like Harvard will be pretty much at home anyways, facing off against either BC or BU.
Just checked the pairwise, and by my math, even if NU loses tomorrow, they are will still be ahead of UND in the HTH comparison. Is that correct ?.
You have to hope for an NU win then.
Either way, it looks like Harvard will be pretty much at home anyways, facing off against either BC or BU.
Just checked the pairwise, and by my math, even if NU loses tomorrow, they are will still be ahead of UND in the HTH comparison. Is that correct ?.
brookyone
Deport Right Wing Nuts
Re: Preliminary & Ongoing Pairwise Watch and 2013 NCAA Tournament Musing Thread
http://www.ncaa.com/liveschedule/2013/03/10
I assume this will be an active link tomorrow evening for a live broadcast of selections?
http://www.ncaa.com/liveschedule/2013/03/10
I assume this will be an active link tomorrow evening for a live broadcast of selections?
mnpokecheck
Drinking the Koolaid
Re: Preliminary & Ongoing Pairwise Watch and 2013 NCAA Tournament Musing Thread
What if the committee decides to remove games vs Minnesota from the formula to compare the non AQ teams, since MN did not play many non-WCHA teams and 0-4/5 records against MN skews pairwise of WI & UND. Just a thought. Also, as I mentioned in the WCHA thread - after looking at pairwise, I assume WI is #8 spot if Northeastern loses on Sunday. Thoughts?
What if the committee decides to remove games vs Minnesota from the formula to compare the non AQ teams, since MN did not play many non-WCHA teams and 0-4/5 records against MN skews pairwise of WI & UND. Just a thought. Also, as I mentioned in the WCHA thread - after looking at pairwise, I assume WI is #8 spot if Northeastern loses on Sunday. Thoughts?
Re: Preliminary & Ongoing Pairwise Watch and 2013 NCAA Tournament Musing Thread
If the committee gives special consideration to all WCHA teams for a Minnesota-heavy schedule, the North Dakota could still be the #8 team. That is based on the compare with St Lawrence and then with NE in the event of a NE loss. If I were the committee at this point, I would be hoping for a NE win, because I would not want to face the dilemma if they lost.
If the committee gives special consideration to all WCHA teams for a Minnesota-heavy schedule, the North Dakota could still be the #8 team. That is based on the compare with St Lawrence and then with NE in the event of a NE loss. If I were the committee at this point, I would be hoping for a NE win, because I would not want to face the dilemma if they lost.
Re: Preliminary & Ongoing Pairwise Watch and 2013 NCAA Tournament Musing Thread
I still think UND will get the #8 spot with an NU loss. I replied in the WCHA thread with my reasoning.
ARM
Fan of chipmunk-like mascots.
Re: Preliminary & Ongoing Pairwise Watch and 2013 NCAA Tournament Musing Thread
The comparison between UND and SLU is one of those where the raw numbers look bad for North Dakota only because UND went 0-5 versus Minnesota and SLU went 0-2. The committee should throw out the Minnesota results for both in the COP and evaluate the rest of the COP, which I assume is just Clarkson, an opponent where UND was 1-1 and SLU was 1-3. If the committee can't recognize that UND did better against the common opponents with SLU, then why have a committtee at all?
Re: Preliminary & Ongoing Pairwise Watch and 2013 NCAA Tournament Musing Thread
I agree with others anticipating that UND is in if Northeastern loses.
To be clear, the deviation from the PWR isn't "special consideration" for UND in treating the Minnesota games. It's simply about the committee evaluating the SLU-UND comparison like they do any other, and when that happens, it's clear the UND wins that comparison, and is No. 8.
Specifically, my observation is the committee has always (1) picked a team with clear margins in one criterion over small margins in others, even if the PWR algorithm favors the other team (2) de facto evaluated the common opponent criterion like the men do. Both of these factors suggest the committee would judge UND to have won the comparison against SLU, since (1) UND has a huge edge in RPI, and (2) UND has a better win pct. vs Clarkson while they have the same 0 win pct. vs. Minnesota.
One caveat I've mentioned before: there was some demand from coaches to give the committee less discretion in the past to increase transparency. I told everyone who asked my opinion on this that it was terrible idea, but I have no idea whether the committee moved in that direction. And if they did, I hope they actually used to the men's way of evaluating common opponents
I agree with others anticipating that UND is in if Northeastern loses.
To be clear, the deviation from the PWR isn't "special consideration" for UND in treating the Minnesota games. It's simply about the committee evaluating the SLU-UND comparison like they do any other, and when that happens, it's clear the UND wins that comparison, and is No. 8.
Specifically, my observation is the committee has always (1) picked a team with clear margins in one criterion over small margins in others, even if the PWR algorithm favors the other team (2) de facto evaluated the common opponent criterion like the men do. Both of these factors suggest the committee would judge UND to have won the comparison against SLU, since (1) UND has a huge edge in RPI, and (2) UND has a better win pct. vs Clarkson while they have the same 0 win pct. vs. Minnesota.
One caveat I've mentioned before: there was some demand from coaches to give the committee less discretion in the past to increase transparency. I told everyone who asked my opinion on this that it was terrible idea, but I have no idea whether the committee moved in that direction. And if they did, I hope they actually used to the men's way of evaluating common opponents
Last edited:
TonyTheTiger20
#SOAR
Re: Preliminary & Ongoing Pairwise Watch and 2013 NCAA Tournament Musing Thread
So, 8th place is indeed interesting... Wisco or NoDak? NoDak, right?
And straight bracket integrity, yes?
So, 8th place is indeed interesting... Wisco or NoDak? NoDak, right?
And straight bracket integrity, yes?
Last edited:
Re: Preliminary & Ongoing Pairwise Watch and 2013 NCAA Tournament Musing Thread
That'd be my best guess since it saves money too, though I would love for the NCAA to actually care about staging a national tournament again, to use ARM's way of putting things. The committee hasn't behaved that way since coaches complained about Harvard being sent to Wisconsin in 2007 to avoid intraconference matchups, and that's a shame, because the 2005-2007 QF matchups were just much better than anything since. Some of that is supposedly doing what the coaches asked for , and some of that is about saving $$$$.
Re: Preliminary & Ongoing Pairwise Watch and 2013 NCAA Tournament Musing Thread
If Wisconsin were selected, the committee would then justify their decision by saying this is what the coaches wanted, for the system to be more fair and transparent -- because there's nothing more transparent than losing out on an NCAA bid because you fell to 0-5 in your conference final against a team that also happened to play and beat the 11th-or-12th-best team in the country twice.
But I hope the committee makes the right decision.
The only way Wisconsin gets selected is if the committee decided in the offseason to be cowards and outsource the whole selection process to the USCHO PWR, without actually making the changes to the common opponents criterion that's consistent with their past behavior and which men's hockey actually formally legislated.
If Wisconsin were selected, the committee would then justify their decision by saying this is what the coaches wanted, for the system to be more fair and transparent -- because there's nothing more transparent than losing out on an NCAA bid because you fell to 0-5 in your conference final against a team that also happened to play and beat the 11th-or-12th-best team in the country twice.
But I hope the committee makes the right decision.
Re: Preliminary & Ongoing Pairwise Watch and 2013 NCAA Tournament Musing Thread
Calm before the storm... 5 minutes away
http://www.ncaa.com/live/player?vid=2013/783&date=2013/03/10
Calm before the storm... 5 minutes away
http://www.ncaa.com/live/player?vid=2013/783&date=2013/03/10