This is a little outrageous! Pairwise Benefits for ECAC vs. Hockey East, WCHA, CCHA

[Howitz-ah]

Get ready to blast me if you want to, ECAC’ers, but rather than take bitter offense, just give me your thoughts:

I have to piggy back what Jim Connelly wrote on the Hockey East blog this week.

Don’t get me wrong, I’m very happy to see Yale’s success and I’m in no way implying that they can’t skate with the other leagues. I’m also glad to see the competition and bar-raising going on in the conference as a whole.

But at this point, if the season ended tomorrow, having 4 ECAC teams in the 16 would be detrimental to the level of competition our sport aspires for. Sure, HEA, WCHA and CCHA seem to take turns putting 4, 5, even as many as 6 teams in the tourney – but if your conference gets ‘more than their share’ of bids, they better, as a whole, put out a level of play backing that up. Those 3 conferences, by and large, do.

By every Frozen Four of recent memory, it’s been easy to forget the ECAC was even involved with their lackluster offerings of competition despite what those participants looked like in the regular season. This year has been a better regular season for the conference as a whole, but I’d like to rest assured that they are actually contributing to the best field of competition we could hope for.

------
Since expanding the field to 16 teams in 2003, this league has hardly been competitive.
Receiving 16 bids during those 8 years, they have combined for a whopping 6 wins. 4 of those 6 were by Cornell.

That stat means the ECAC has averaged 0.38 wins for every bid they’ve received in the tournament since 2003. Here’s the rest of the leagues for comparison

Hockey East: 1.38 wins per bid
WCHA: 1.20 wins per bid
CCHA: 0.92 wins per bid
ECAC: 0.38 wins per bid

In other words, for every 20 bids Hockey East is getting, they're winning over 27 games, while ECAC teams are winning 7 or 8 given the same 20 bids.

The league has offered dismal post-season competition, and at this point, would make up ¼ of the field. This, while teams like Miami, Boston University and Maine aren’t even given a shot to compete.

Yale’s a shoo-in for me – but, honestly, if you had any combo of the following matchups:

RPI, Union and Dartmouth vs. Miami, Boston University and Maine

I’m not sure you can convince me the ECAC wins 2 out of those 3 games.

 

[The Rube]

Re: This is a little outrageous! Pairwise Benefits for ECAC vs. Hockey East, WCHA, CC

 

[vicb]

Re: This is a little outrageous! Pairwise Benefits for ECAC vs. Hockey East, WCHA, CC

The ECAC will get whatever the Pairwise says they deserve. And if the Pairwise says 4 ECAC teams are in then I think it will be detrimental to the level of competition our sport aspires for to allow an "UNDESERVING ACCORDING TO THE PAIRWISE" HE, WCHA or CCHA team in .

 

[irishfan85]

Re: This is a little outrageous! Pairwise Benefits for ECAC vs. Hockey East, WCHA, CC

Get ready to blast me if you want to, ECAC’ers, but rather than take bitter offense, just give me your thoughts:

I have to piggy back what Jim Connelly wrote on the Hockey East blog this week.

Don’t get me wrong, I’m very happy to see Yale’s success and I’m in no way implying that they can’t skate with the other leagues. I’m also glad to see the competition and bar-raising going on in the conference as a whole.

But at this point, if the season ended tomorrow, having 4 ECAC teams in the 16 would be detrimental to the level of competition our sport aspires for. Sure, HEA, WCHA and CCHA seem to take turns putting 4, 5, even as many as 6 teams in the tourney – but if your conference gets ‘more than their share’ of bids, they better, as a whole, put out a level of play backing that up. Those 3 conferences, by and large, do.

By every Frozen Four of recent memory, it’s been easy to forget the ECAC was even involved with their lackluster offerings of competition despite what those participants looked like in the regular season. This year has been a better regular season for the conference as a whole, but I’d like to rest assured that they are actually contributing to the best field of competition we could hope for.

------
Since expanding the field to 16 teams in 2003, this league has hardly been competitive.
Receiving 16 bids during those 8 years, they have combined for a whopping 6 wins. 4 of those 6 were by Cornell.

That stat means the ECAC has averaged 0.38 wins for every bid they’ve received in the tournament since 2003. Here’s the rest of the leagues for comparison

Hockey East: 1.38 wins per bid
WCHA: 1.20 wins per bid
CCHA: 0.92 wins per bid
ECAC: 0.38 wins per bid


The league has offered dismal post-season competition, and at this point, would make up ¼ of the field. This, while teams like Miami, Boston University and Maine aren’t even given a shot to compete.

Yale’s a shoo-in for me – but, honestly, if you had any combo of the following matchups:

RPI, Union and Dartmouth vs. Miami, Boston University and Maine

I’m not sure you can convince me the ECAC wins 2 out of those 3 games.

Hockey East fan here, but I think the league is down as a whole. BC is obviously very good, as they have been consistently for 13 years now. Unfortunately, Maine and BU have made their own beds by incompetent performances. The Terriers lost to RPI and Brown in consecutive games by scores of 4-1 and 6-1, respectively. Maine should not have gone 0-1-2 against Connecticut and Michigan State. I know last year means nothing in terms of Pairwise, but Union beat Maine 4-1 and 6-3 last year. Also, Dartmouth and St. Lawrence have beaten Hockey East's top team in the standings, UNH. The ECAC has performed better this year than in the past. I'm not saying it will mean more success in the NCAAs, but it is what it is.

In the end, I believe everything will work itself out. I have a feeling only 2 or 3 ECAC teams.

 

[Howitz-ah]

Re: This is a little outrageous! Pairwise Benefits for ECAC vs. Hockey East, WCHA, CC

The ECAC will get whatever the Pairwise says they deserve. And if the Pairwise says 4 ECAC teams are in then I think it will be detrimental to the level of competition our sport aspires for to allow an "UNDESERVING ACCORDING TO THE PAIRWISE" HE, WCHA or CCHA team in .

Even though the equations were adjusted mid-season, bolstering ECAC teams and hurting teams of other conferences?

Maine dropped from #10 to #18 when they made that change.

 

[vicb]

Re: This is a little outrageous! Pairwise Benefits for ECAC vs. Hockey East, WCHA, CC

The formula is what it is. I think it will be detrimental to the level of competition our sport aspires for to allow an "UNDESERVING ACCORDING TO THE PAIRWISE" HE, WCHA or CCHA team in and I stand by this.

 

[irishfan85]

Re: This is a little outrageous! Pairwise Benefits for ECAC vs. Hockey East, WCHA, CC

Even though the equations were adjusted mid-season, bolstering ECAC teams and hurting teams of other conferences?

Maine dropped from #10 to #18 when they made that change.

I do not believe they were adjusted mid-season. The two college hockey sites just did not know about the new policies/rules, unless I am missing something. Again, win more games. All three Hockey East teams on the bubble have lost games they should not have, as I said above. UNH and BU both have lost twice to ECAC teams. The ECAC had their best overall record against WCHA teams in league history.

I guarantee you if Maine went 2-0-1 against Connecticut and MSU instead of 0-1-2 and not blown a third period lead to UNH at home, they would not be sitting on the outside looking in.

 

[Howitz-ah]

Re: This is a little outrageous! Pairwise Benefits for ECAC vs. Hockey East, WCHA, CC

Hockey East fan here, but I think the league is down as a whole. BC is obviously very good, as they have been consistently for 13 years now. Unfortunately, Maine and BU have made their own beds by incompetent performances. The Terriers lost to RPI and Brown in consecutive games by scores of 4-1 and 6-1, respectively. Maine should not have gone 0-1-2 against Connecticut and Michigan State. I know last year means nothing in terms of Pairwise, but Union beat Maine 4-1 and 6-3 last year. Also, Dartmouth and St. Lawrence have beaten Hockey East's top team in the standings, UNH. The ECAC has performed better this year than in the past. I'm not saying it will mean more success in the NCAAs, but it is what it is.

In the end, I believe everything will work itself out. I have a feeling only 2 or 3 ECAC teams.

Very good points. But just to touch up:

The Union thing: I don't consider sweeping David Wilson in the season opening weekend an accomplishment.
The UNH thing: in all fairness, Dartmouth beat them in Manchester. UNH would likely lose to a jr high school team at the Verizon center. St Lawrence's 'tender stole one from them, but I'd love to see them do it twice.

 

[Howitz-ah]

Re: This is a little outrageous! Pairwise Benefits for ECAC vs. Hockey East, WCHA, CC

The formula is what it is. I think it will be detrimental to the level of competition our sport aspires for to allow an "UNDESERVING ACCORDING TO THE PAIRWISE" HE, WCHA or CCHA team in and I stand by this.

So you think the ECAC wins 2 out of 3?
-Miami vs. RPI
-BU vs. Union
-Maine vs. Dartmouth

 

[The Rube]

Re: This is a little outrageous! Pairwise Benefits for ECAC vs. Hockey East, WCHA, CC

Very good points. But just to touch up:

The Union thing: I don't consider sweeping David Wilson in the season opening weekend an accomplishment.
The UNH thing: in all fairness, Dartmouth beat them in Manchester. UNH would likely lose to a jr high school team at the Verizon center. St Lawrence's 'tender stole one from them, but I'd love to see them do it twice.

So we go with "fake wins"? By some accounts, MN stole one from UND a couple weeks ago. So that shouldn't count in the PWR?

I had thoughts that you were a troll or a moron, but now I think you're both.

 

[irishfan85]

Re: This is a little outrageous! Pairwise Benefits for ECAC vs. Hockey East, WCHA, CC

Very good points. But just to touch up:

The Union thing: I don't consider sweeping David Wilson in the season opening weekend an accomplishment.
The UNH thing: in all fairness, Dartmouth beat them in Manchester. UNH would likely lose to a jr high school team at the Verizon center. St Lawrence's 'tender stole one from them, but I'd love to see them do it twice.

All sorts of excuses. Lame. Hockey East and WCHA have been the top two conferences in college hockey for quite some time now. Hockey East is having an off year. Get over it and as I said, the teams should have won more games and they would not be in this predicament.

 

[Howitz-ah]

Re: This is a little outrageous! Pairwise Benefits for ECAC vs. Hockey East, WCHA, CC

So we go with "fake wins"? By some accounts, MN stole one from UND a couple weeks ago. So that shouldn't count in the PWR?

I had thoughts that you were a troll or a moron, but now I think you're both.

Nope, wins are wins, but would they happen in March?

 

[Dirty]

Re: This is a little outrageous! Pairwise Benefits for ECAC vs. Hockey East, WCHA, CC

Nope, wins are wins, but would they happen in March?

No. Dartmouth couldn't beat a rug in March cause the EZAC isn't good at hockey.

 

[The Rube]

Re: This is a little outrageous! Pairwise Benefits for ECAC vs. Hockey East, WCHA, CC

Nope, wins are wins, but would they happen in March?

I dunno. Ask RIT. Or BSU. Or even Holy Cross.

It doesn't matter what happens in the post-season, if you want to question the PWR. It is what happens in the regular season. Hey, I don't think the EZAC is really good, but this argument is ludicrous, and I'm being polite.

 

[The Rube]

Re: This is a little outrageous! Pairwise Benefits for ECAC vs. Hockey East, WCHA, CC

Actually, now that I've had half a second to think about it, a "would they win in March?" SHOULD be a factor in the PWR! It's a brilliant idea!

Smoky Room Occupant #1: Hm, Brown is on the bubble, but really, would they win in March?
SRO#2: Naw, they play in a terrible conference; they're a flash in the pan. Leave them there.
SRO#1: What about Yale?
SRO#3: Well.....they did beat UND that one year.....eh, they get some bonus points for that. They can retain their high ranking.

 

[Howitz-ah]

Re: This is a little outrageous! Pairwise Benefits for ECAC vs. Hockey East, WCHA, CC

I dunno. Ask RIT. Or BSU. Or even Holy Cross.

It doesn't matter what happens in the post-season, if you want to question the PWR. It is what happens in the regular season. Hey, I don't think the EZAC is really good, but this argument is ludicrous, and I'm being polite.

Everyone loves an underdog and a team ruled out, for sure. But there's less room for it in our tournament than say basketball.

 

[vicb]

Re: This is a little outrageous! Pairwise Benefits for ECAC vs. Hockey East, WCHA, CC

The #2 and #3 teams in HE, UNH and BU, have a combined record of 2-4-2 against the #3,5,6,9,10 and 11 teams in the ECAC with the wins coming against the #6 and #11 ECAC teams. Hell looks to me like these 2 teams are the undeserving ones and maybe HE only deserves one team in the tourney .

 

[Howitz-ah]

Re: This is a little outrageous! Pairwise Benefits for ECAC vs. Hockey East, WCHA, CC

All sorts of excuses. Lame. Hockey East and WCHA have been the top two conferences in college hockey for quite some time now. Hockey East is having an off year. Get over it and as I said, the teams should have won more games and they would not be in this predicament.

Please try to sense some humor and sarcasm in the Union and Dartmouth things...

 

[Howitz-ah]

Re: This is a little outrageous! Pairwise Benefits for ECAC vs. Hockey East, WCHA, CC

The #2 and #3 teams in HE, UNH and BU, have a combined record of 2-4-2 against the #3,5,6,9,10 and 11 teams in the ECAC with the wins coming against the #6 and #11 ECAC teams. Hell looks to me like these 2 teams are the undeserving ones and maybe HE only deserves one team in the tourney .

No problem. That team would probably make it to St. Paul.

 

[The Rube]

Re: This is a little outrageous! Pairwise Benefits for ECAC vs. Hockey East, WCHA, CC

Everyone loves an underdog and a team ruled out, for sure. But there's less room for it in our tournament than say basketball.

So let's "fix" the PWR so teams who we feel can win in March are in? Heck right now I'd be all for it, as MN would be in the title game every year! Your ideas are intriguing to me and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter.