QUAlum2004
Well-known member
The way BC is playing they should easily get to Philadelphia. I don't think Lowell or Cornell will beat them. Just my opinion.
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.
The way BC is playing they should easily get to Philadelphia. I don't think Lowell or Cornell will beat them. Just my opinion.
manurespreader
Still upright
Re: The 2014 Pairwise, Bracketology and History Thread`
The way things are evolving there is almost no reason to even have regionals. Just take the conference champions and send them.
I know... but you get my point.
I'd much prefer to see an accomplished western team go east than play another western team, I've got that T shirt.. Same for the east. Let's see mass lowell out west, or some other highly ranked, but not quite number one school.
The way things are evolving there is almost no reason to even have regionals. Just take the conference champions and send them.
I know... but you get my point.
I'd much prefer to see an accomplished western team go east than play another western team, I've got that T shirt.. Same for the east. Let's see mass lowell out west, or some other highly ranked, but not quite number one school.
Re: The 2014 Pairwise, Bracketology and History Thread`
And, the latest in calculation controversy. I know that all the major sites have agreed to use the same formulation. However, I have noticed that our very own RHamilton has persisted in an alternative view.
And, Reilly's would have Minnesota State rather than Northeastern in the field. That is a big change, no?
Also, could JimDahl please post a convenient description of his math? I am still a little confused by the way that the weighting for home/road and/or win/loss applies to the SoS portion of the RPI calculation for each game.
Thanks.
And, the latest in calculation controversy. I know that all the major sites have agreed to use the same formulation. However, I have noticed that our very own RHamilton has persisted in an alternative view.
And, Reilly's would have Minnesota State rather than Northeastern in the field. That is a big change, no?
Also, could JimDahl please post a convenient description of his math? I am still a little confused by the way that the weighting for home/road and/or win/loss applies to the SoS portion of the RPI calculation for each game.
Thanks.
P
Priceless
Guest
Re: The 2014 Pairwise, Bracketology and History Thread`
Thanks to the Build Your Own Rankings Calculator we now have 11 years of Pairwise data to study. In that time there have been 20 teams that qualified thanks to the autobid and 156 who qualified by being ranked high enough (autobid or not) to make the NCAA tournament.
Of the 156 teams, a whopping 141 (90.4%) that qualified as of the final weekend of February have made the eventual field. No teams that were ranked in the top 7 after February dropped out of the eventual field. Only Denver in 2007 and Mankato in 2008 have fallen out of the top 11. The state of Michigan has taken it on the chin, as Western Michigan (2013), Northern Michigan (2012) and Michigan State (2010) have joined Duluth (2008) and Dartmouth (2005) as 12-seeds who have missed the tournament. Overall, 38 of the 44 (81.8%) teams ranked 9-12 qualified.
In 2004, 2006 and 2011 the field matched the pairwise rankings from the end of February perfectly.
The 2009 Air Force, 2010 Michigan and 2013 Union and Wisconsin teams were ranked 20th, 25th, 21st and 27th but came all the way back to earn a bid (granted, they were all autobids, but they were ranked high enough to make the field anyway). Aside from them, the lowest-ranked teams to make the field are #18 Colgate (2005) and eventual national champion Michigan State (2007).
There is one game left this weekend. The top 11 are set no matter what happens:
1 Minnesota
2 Boston College
3 Union
4 St. Cloud State
5 Wisconsin
6 Ferris State
7 Quinnipiac
8 Mass.-Lowell
9 North Dakota
10 Notre Dame
11 Providence
With Michigan win:
12 Michigan
13 Cornell
14 Vermont
15 Northeastern
--
16 Colgate
17 Minnesota State
18 Minnesota-Duluth
Scenario A:
Northeastern and Vermont are interchangeable.
Michigan and Notre Dame are switched to avoid Wisconsin-Michigan matchup.
Thanks to the Build Your Own Rankings Calculator we now have 11 years of Pairwise data to study. In that time there have been 20 teams that qualified thanks to the autobid and 156 who qualified by being ranked high enough (autobid or not) to make the NCAA tournament.
Of the 156 teams, a whopping 141 (90.4%) that qualified as of the final weekend of February have made the eventual field. No teams that were ranked in the top 7 after February dropped out of the eventual field. Only Denver in 2007 and Mankato in 2008 have fallen out of the top 11. The state of Michigan has taken it on the chin, as Western Michigan (2013), Northern Michigan (2012) and Michigan State (2010) have joined Duluth (2008) and Dartmouth (2005) as 12-seeds who have missed the tournament. Overall, 38 of the 44 (81.8%) teams ranked 9-12 qualified.
In 2004, 2006 and 2011 the field matched the pairwise rankings from the end of February perfectly.
The 2009 Air Force, 2010 Michigan and 2013 Union and Wisconsin teams were ranked 20th, 25th, 21st and 27th but came all the way back to earn a bid (granted, they were all autobids, but they were ranked high enough to make the field anyway). Aside from them, the lowest-ranked teams to make the field are #18 Colgate (2005) and eventual national champion Michigan State (2007).
There is one game left this weekend. The top 11 are set no matter what happens:
1 Minnesota
2 Boston College
3 Union
4 St. Cloud State
5 Wisconsin
6 Ferris State
7 Quinnipiac
8 Mass.-Lowell
9 North Dakota
10 Notre Dame
11 Providence
With Michigan win:
12 Michigan
13 Cornell
14 Vermont
15 Northeastern
--
16 Colgate
17 Minnesota State
18 Minnesota-Duluth
Scenario A:
Code:
[B]Bridgeport (Yale) Worcester (Holy Cross) Cincinnati (Miami) St Paul (Minnesota)[/B]
Union 3 Boston College 2 St Cloud 4 Minnesota 1
Ferris State 6 Quinnipiac 7 Wisconsin 5 Lowell 8
Providence 11 Michigan 12 Notre Dame 10 North Dakota 9
Northeastern 15 Cornell 13 Vermont 14 Mercyhurst 16Northeastern and Vermont are interchangeable.
Michigan and Notre Dame are switched to avoid Wisconsin-Michigan matchup.
Last edited:
Priceless.. What are you using to do the prediction in what happens after the game today? Did you find a simulator?
and I ask every year when does the famous NCAA predicter roll out.
Right before conference championship weekend.
P
Priceless
Guest
Re: The 2014 Pairwise, Bracketology and History Thread`
The customize tool on CHN. It is really only useful for predicting one game - each time it resets back to default and you would have to reenter every single game again. I don't recommend using it for the 21 games next Friday night as you'd be simming all day.
The customize tool on CHN. It is really only useful for predicting one game - each time it resets back to default and you would have to reenter every single game again. I don't recommend using it for the 21 games next Friday night as you'd be simming all day.
UnionHockeyManiac
Union Hockey fan for life
Two questions:
1. Is there any chance Union can catch Minnesota or BC?
2. There's been a lot of discussion about this on the Union thread but I figured I'd ask here as well. If Yale manages to get into the tournament as a #4 seed (by getting the auto-bid) and Union is still a #1 seed, would Union definitely be bumped out of Bridgeport to head out west because Yale is the host school?
1. Is there any chance Union can catch Minnesota or BC?
2. There's been a lot of discussion about this on the Union thread but I figured I'd ask here as well. If Yale manages to get into the tournament as a #4 seed (by getting the auto-bid) and Union is still a #1 seed, would Union definitely be bumped out of Bridgeport to head out west because Yale is the host school?
P
Priceless
Guest
Re: The 2014 Pairwise, Bracketology and History Thread`
1) It may be possible, but it isn't likely.
2) Yes. Union would probably be the #1 seed in Cincinnati.
1) It may be possible, but it isn't likely.
2) Yes. Union would probably be the #1 seed in Cincinnati.
FiveHole12
Registered User
Re: The 2014 Pairwise, Bracketology and History Thread`
2. Not necessarily bumped out west, but Union won't be in Bridgeport IMO. This happened to BC in 2011. BC was #3 seed overall, Yale #1 overall hosting Bridgeport. Yale stays in Bridgeport and BC to Manchester. BUT, #4 seed UNH is hosting Manchester, so BC heads to St. Louis to avoid the first round interconference match up.
If seedings stay as they are (Minnesota 1, BC 2, Union 3, 4 St Cloud), and Yale makes the tourney, my guess is Union and BC swap regionals... so BC at Bridgeport and Union at Worcester. If BC regains the #1 PWR, my guess is BC gets Worcester, Union gets shipped west and St Cloud in Bridgeport.
1. That's a question for Priceless.
2. Not necessarily bumped out west, but Union won't be in Bridgeport IMO. This happened to BC in 2011. BC was #3 seed overall, Yale #1 overall hosting Bridgeport. Yale stays in Bridgeport and BC to Manchester. BUT, #4 seed UNH is hosting Manchester, so BC heads to St. Louis to avoid the first round interconference match up.
If seedings stay as they are (Minnesota 1, BC 2, Union 3, 4 St Cloud), and Yale makes the tourney, my guess is Union and BC swap regionals... so BC at Bridgeport and Union at Worcester. If BC regains the #1 PWR, my guess is BC gets Worcester, Union gets shipped west and St Cloud in Bridgeport.
P
Priceless
Guest
Re: The 2014 Pairwise, Bracketology and History Thread`
The current pairwise:
1 Minnesota 58
2 Boston College 57
3 Union 55
4 St. Cloud State 55
5 Wisconsin 54
6 Ferris State 53
7 Quinnipiac 52
8 Mass.-Lowell 51
9 North Dakota 50
10 Notre Dame 49
11 Providence 47
12 Michigan 46
13 Cornell 45
14 Vermont 45
15 Northeastern 44
16 Colgate 43
17 Minnesota State 42
18 Minnesota-Duluth 42
19 Yale 40
20 New Hampshire 38
21 Maine 37
22 Ohio State 37
23 Western Michigan 37
24 Clarkson 35
25 Alaska-Fairbanks 34
26 Denver 33
27 Rensselaer 33
28 Nebraska-Omaha 31
29 Alaska-Anchorage 30
30 Lake Superior 30
31 St. Lawrence 28
32 Bowling Green 27
33 Michigan Tech 27
34 Mercyhurst 25
35 Air Force 24
36 Brown 23
37 Harvard 22
38 Bentley 20
39 Connecticut 20
40 Michigan State 19
41 Miami 18
42 Northern Michigan 17
43 Bemidji State 16
44 Boston University 15
45 Dartmouth 14
46 Massachusetts 13
47 Merrimack 13
48 Colorado College 11
49 Robert Morris 10
50 Penn State 9
51 Holy Cross 8
52 Niagara 7
53 Canisius 6
54 RIT 5
55 Sacred Heart 5
56 Princeton 3
57 American Int'l 2
58 Alabama-Huntsville 1
59 Army 0
Historically speaking, the top 11 teams (in bold) should be safely in the tournament. Only two teams (of 121) have fallen out of the top 11 this late.
Also historically, teams not already ranked 12-18 do not make the tournament without winning the conference autobid. That may change a little this year because the volatility is still higher than normal. So if your team is in italics, you need the autobid.
The current pairwise:
1 Minnesota 58
2 Boston College 57
3 Union 55
4 St. Cloud State 55
5 Wisconsin 54
6 Ferris State 53
7 Quinnipiac 52
8 Mass.-Lowell 51
9 North Dakota 50
10 Notre Dame 49
11 Providence 47
12 Michigan 46
13 Cornell 45
14 Vermont 45
15 Northeastern 44
16 Colgate 43
17 Minnesota State 42
18 Minnesota-Duluth 42
19 Yale 40
20 New Hampshire 38
21 Maine 37
22 Ohio State 37
23 Western Michigan 37
24 Clarkson 35
25 Alaska-Fairbanks 34
26 Denver 33
27 Rensselaer 33
28 Nebraska-Omaha 31
29 Alaska-Anchorage 30
30 Lake Superior 30
31 St. Lawrence 28
32 Bowling Green 27
33 Michigan Tech 27
34 Mercyhurst 25
35 Air Force 24
36 Brown 23
37 Harvard 22
38 Bentley 20
39 Connecticut 20
40 Michigan State 19
41 Miami 18
42 Northern Michigan 17
43 Bemidji State 16
44 Boston University 15
45 Dartmouth 14
46 Massachusetts 13
47 Merrimack 13
48 Colorado College 11
49 Robert Morris 10
50 Penn State 9
51 Holy Cross 8
52 Niagara 7
53 Canisius 6
54 RIT 5
55 Sacred Heart 5
56 Princeton 3
57 American Int'l 2
58 Alabama-Huntsville 1
59 Army 0
Historically speaking, the top 11 teams (in bold) should be safely in the tournament. Only two teams (of 121) have fallen out of the top 11 this late.
Also historically, teams not already ranked 12-18 do not make the tournament without winning the conference autobid. That may change a little this year because the volatility is still higher than normal. So if your team is in italics, you need the autobid.
QUAlum2004
Well-known member
Re: The 2014 Pairwise, Bracketology and History Thread`
I think if Michigan can go 3-1 in their last 4 games with one of those wins versus Minnesota I think they would be pretty much in the tournament as they should be able to reach the Big 10 semi finals since they would be playing Penn State in the first round.
I think if Michigan can go 3-1 in their last 4 games with one of those wins versus Minnesota I think they would be pretty much in the tournament as they should be able to reach the Big 10 semi finals since they would be playing Penn State in the first round.
mnpokecheck
Drinking the Koolaid
Re: The 2014 Pairwise, Bracketology and History Thread`
Yeah, certainly no chance that Penn State could beat Michigan.
Re: The 2014 Pairwise, Bracketology and History Thread`
Ignore my site for now; I have not updated it to use home/away weighted OWP and OOWP as the others have. It reflects the formula that USCHO was using prior to the convergence of the sites. I hope to have it updated for the conference tournament weekend.
Ignore my site for now; I have not updated it to use home/away weighted OWP and OOWP as the others have. It reflects the formula that USCHO was using prior to the convergence of the sites. I hope to have it updated for the conference tournament weekend.
Re: The 2014 Pairwise, Bracketology and History Thread`
One More Quick Shout Out to JimDahl:
Jim, could you please clarify the home/road weighting part of the Oppwin% and Oppoppwin%? thanks. I see 2 possibilities:
a) both are weighted according to whether you won or not: 0.8 for homewins % roadlosses, etc
b) the weighting goes strictly by home or road.
In the case of a), the calculation for each game would be: WF*(.25*result of game + .21*(oppwin%) + .54*(oppoppwin%)) and the pre-QWB RPI is SUM (over all games of those calculations) divided by SUM(over all games of the WF) WF=weighting factor.
In the case of b), the calculation could not be done game by game, but each game would have 3 pieces: WF1*.25*result, WF2*.21*oppwin%, and WF2*.54*oppoppwin% And, the pre-QWB RPI requires averaging all 3 of those pieces, and then adding them together.
A) looks neater in that it allows each game to be considered individually, and it's easy to see which games have to be removed because of being wins vs weak teams.
B) is perhaps conceptually better, because A weights your SOS according to whether you won or lost the game, and theoretically, SoS is independent of results.
Help us Jim. Thanks
One More Quick Shout Out to JimDahl:
Jim, could you please clarify the home/road weighting part of the Oppwin% and Oppoppwin%? thanks. I see 2 possibilities:
a) both are weighted according to whether you won or not: 0.8 for homewins % roadlosses, etc
b) the weighting goes strictly by home or road.
In the case of a), the calculation for each game would be: WF*(.25*result of game + .21*(oppwin%) + .54*(oppoppwin%)) and the pre-QWB RPI is SUM (over all games of those calculations) divided by SUM(over all games of the WF) WF=weighting factor.
In the case of b), the calculation could not be done game by game, but each game would have 3 pieces: WF1*.25*result, WF2*.21*oppwin%, and WF2*.54*oppoppwin% And, the pre-QWB RPI requires averaging all 3 of those pieces, and then adding them together.
A) looks neater in that it allows each game to be considered individually, and it's easy to see which games have to be removed because of being wins vs weak teams.
B) is perhaps conceptually better, because A weights your SOS according to whether you won or lost the game, and theoretically, SoS is independent of results.
Help us Jim. Thanks
Re: The 2014 Pairwise, Bracketology and History Thread`
And, in the dept of "What do we know for sure?"
Concerning Minn and BC:
In the event BC comes out ahead in RPI, this comparison depends on the ComOpp portion. There are only a few games left that affect this, so, in order:
1) If Notre Dame loses to BU, BC has only one Common Game potentially left, and no way to raise their record. Thus, Minnesota would need only a split with Michigan to guarantee winning this comparison and gaining the overall #1. As little as a tie would work, if Minnesota defeated either Mich or Wisc in the B10 tourney.
2) If Notre Dame wins, but there is an upset in other HEA games, then Notre Dame is across the bracket from BC. This changes things a little. Minnesota would need win and tie to clinch the overall #1. Split works with a win against Mich or Wsc in the B10 tourney
3) If Notre Dame plays BC in the HEA quarters, Minnesota needs sweep to clinch overall #1
And, in the dept of "What do we know for sure?"
Concerning Minn and BC:
In the event BC comes out ahead in RPI, this comparison depends on the ComOpp portion. There are only a few games left that affect this, so, in order:
1) If Notre Dame loses to BU, BC has only one Common Game potentially left, and no way to raise their record. Thus, Minnesota would need only a split with Michigan to guarantee winning this comparison and gaining the overall #1. As little as a tie would work, if Minnesota defeated either Mich or Wisc in the B10 tourney.
2) If Notre Dame wins, but there is an upset in other HEA games, then Notre Dame is across the bracket from BC. This changes things a little. Minnesota would need win and tie to clinch the overall #1. Split works with a win against Mich or Wsc in the B10 tourney
3) If Notre Dame plays BC in the HEA quarters, Minnesota needs sweep to clinch overall #1
UnionHockeyManiac
Union Hockey fan for life
Re: The 2014 Pairwise, Bracketology and History Thread`
According to Mike McMahon at College Hockey News and http://www.playoffstatus.com/ncaahockey/ncaahockeytournseedprob.html - BC, Minnesota and Union have locked up No. 1 seeds in the National Tournament. The 4th #1 seed is up still up for grabs with St. Cloud, Ferris State, Quinnipiac, Mass-Lowell, North Dakota, and Wisconsin (in order of likelihood). A few other schools have a very small chance (1% or less).
According to Mike McMahon at College Hockey News and http://www.playoffstatus.com/ncaahockey/ncaahockeytournseedprob.html - BC, Minnesota and Union have locked up No. 1 seeds in the National Tournament. The 4th #1 seed is up still up for grabs with St. Cloud, Ferris State, Quinnipiac, Mass-Lowell, North Dakota, and Wisconsin (in order of likelihood). A few other schools have a very small chance (1% or less).
Playoff status does not use PWR in any way. I just had a reply to an email query about that.