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.
WCHA 2015-16: So here's what we think that we know...
- Thread starter gfmorris
- Start date
- Status
bigblue_dl
Armed
Re: WCHA 2015-16: So here's what we think that we know...
Thanks a bunch BGSU. ****ing losers.
Thanks a bunch BGSU. ****ing losers.
Jimjamesak
Already insane, UAA making it worse
Well that'll make things interesting...
We deserved that, we sucked.
LSSULaker889294
Registered User
Re: WCHA 2015-16: So here's what we think that we know...
A shocker in Huntsville this weekend as Mankato leaves without a win. Hastings must be fuming.
A shocker in Huntsville this weekend as Mankato leaves without a win. Hastings must be fuming.
gfmorris
New member
Re: WCHA 2015-16: So here's what we think that we know...
Post-Week 20 BELOW: http://blog.wchaplayoffs.com/2016/02/15/2015-16-week-20-below/
If I bet money, it would be on Tech to win the MacNaughton. They have six very winnable games left, two in hand on the leader, and stay close to home. They may rue those two losses to Anchorage, but I'm pretty sure that they're going to make it to the end.
GFM
Post-Week 20 BELOW: http://blog.wchaplayoffs.com/2016/02/15/2015-16-week-20-below/
If I bet money, it would be on Tech to win the MacNaughton. They have six very winnable games left, two in hand on the leader, and stay close to home. They may rue those two losses to Anchorage, but I'm pretty sure that they're going to make it to the end.
GFM
JohnsonsJerseys
Michigan Tech Fan
Re: WCHA 2015-16: So here's what we think that we know...
Tech according my my calcs is the only team right now that controls their own destiny to be the #1 playoff seed, but will need help to win the cup as any tie in points leads to co-champions. MSU, BGSU and MTU could all finish with 41 points. Tech wins tie breaker "A" over BGSU with a 2-1-1 head to head record. Assuming everyone wins out, Tech would win tie breaker "B" over MSU with 17 wins vs 16 for MSU (they only played twice so "A" does not apply).
FSU and NMU are technically still in the hunt but would need a LOT of help. In short the top three have to lose out and FSU/NMU can't drop more than 3 pts the rest of the way. I don't see either of those scenarios happening.
Could we be headed for the first ever tri-champions in the WCHA?
Ryan J
True that Tech and BGSU have two games in hand, but MSU has four more points already in the bank. I would always take the points in the bank. Based on MSU's trip to UAH, clearly nothing is going to be a given these last three weeks. If we could predict the outcome of games... well it just wouldn't be the WCHA.
Tech according my my calcs is the only team right now that controls their own destiny to be the #1 playoff seed, but will need help to win the cup as any tie in points leads to co-champions. MSU, BGSU and MTU could all finish with 41 points. Tech wins tie breaker "A" over BGSU with a 2-1-1 head to head record. Assuming everyone wins out, Tech would win tie breaker "B" over MSU with 17 wins vs 16 for MSU (they only played twice so "A" does not apply).
FSU and NMU are technically still in the hunt but would need a LOT of help. In short the top three have to lose out and FSU/NMU can't drop more than 3 pts the rest of the way. I don't see either of those scenarios happening.
Could we be headed for the first ever tri-champions in the WCHA?
Ryan J
gfmorris
New member
Re: WCHA 2015-16: So here's what we think that we know...
If all three teams are tied, the A (4x HTH) comparison cannot be used. It's going to be pretty hard for all three of them to have the same record, as Mankato has two more ties than BG and four more than Tech. MTU is likely to win a B, because they have one more win than BGSU now and would very likely have more wins that MSU if tied in points (again, you'd need Tech to pick up four ties).
Two-way ties go to Tech over BG (at A, as you note), Tech over Mankato (very likely at B), and probably BG over Mankato (very likely at B).
GFM
If all three teams are tied, the A (4x HTH) comparison cannot be used. It's going to be pretty hard for all three of them to have the same record, as Mankato has two more ties than BG and four more than Tech. MTU is likely to win a B, because they have one more win than BGSU now and would very likely have more wins that MSU if tied in points (again, you'd need Tech to pick up four ties).
Two-way ties go to Tech over BG (at A, as you note), Tech over Mankato (very likely at B), and probably BG over Mankato (very likely at B).
GFM
JohnsonsJerseys
Michigan Tech Fan
Re: WCHA 2015-16: So here's what we think that we know...
I thought each comparison was evaluated between only two teams at a time, but now that I reread it, all three teams are evaluated on the same tie breaker. So yes, "A" is out in a 3-way BGSU, MSU, MTU tie as MSU and MTU only played twice.
Ryan J
I thought each comparison was evaluated between only two teams at a time, but now that I reread it, all three teams are evaluated on the same tie breaker. So yes, "A" is out in a 3-way BGSU, MSU, MTU tie as MSU and MTU only played twice.
Ryan J
gfmorris
New member
Re: WCHA 2015-16: So here's what we think that we know...
And it's my understanding from talking with the league in the past that, when a tiebreaker does not generate a clear winner (as a B tiebreaker might between these three teams), if one team does indeed drop out, it does so, and the tiebreakers start with the two, still-tied teams. I will verify that with Matt Hodson at the league office.
GFM
And it's my understanding from talking with the league in the past that, when a tiebreaker does not generate a clear winner (as a B tiebreaker might between these three teams), if one team does indeed drop out, it does so, and the tiebreakers start with the two, still-tied teams. I will verify that with Matt Hodson at the league office.
GFM
gfmorris
New member
Re: WCHA 2015-16: So here's what we think that we know...
... but the thing is that Mankato having seven ties makes it harder for us to get to a situation where we have a three-way tie and eliminate one team at B. It requires a situation something like:
Mankato 15-6-7 / 37 [2-2-0 to finish]
Tech 16-7-5 / 37 [3-1-2 to finish]
BG 16-7-5 / 37 [4-2-0 to finish]
This leaves us with three teams at 37, two of which have identical records, both of which have one more conference win than the third team. If you eliminate the Mavericks at B and re-run a two-way comparison between BG and Tech, the Huskies win at A.
GFM
... but the thing is that Mankato having seven ties makes it harder for us to get to a situation where we have a three-way tie and eliminate one team at B. It requires a situation something like:
Mankato 15-6-7 / 37 [2-2-0 to finish]
Tech 16-7-5 / 37 [3-1-2 to finish]
BG 16-7-5 / 37 [4-2-0 to finish]
This leaves us with three teams at 37, two of which have identical records, both of which have one more conference win than the third team. If you eliminate the Mavericks at B and re-run a two-way comparison between BG and Tech, the Huskies win at A.
GFM
gfmorris
New member
Re: WCHA 2015-16: So here's what we think that we know...
Week 21 predictions, likely standings table: http://blog.wchaplayoffs.com/2016/02/16/2015-16-week-21-below-based-predictions/
UAH, you may have played your way back in this thing.
GFM
Week 21 predictions, likely standings table: http://blog.wchaplayoffs.com/2016/02/16/2015-16-week-21-below-based-predictions/
UAH, you may have played your way back in this thing.
GFM
Andrew J Carter
New member
Re: WCHA 2015-16: So here's what we think that we know...
Congrats to the Beavers for their 3-0 win over #14 Tech. Tech has had our # lately. With the exception of a couple ties, we haven't gotten a W against Tech in our last 10 games. A Beaver sweep would be a pleasant surprise. Go Beavers!
Congrats to the Beavers for their 3-0 win over #14 Tech. Tech has had our # lately. With the exception of a couple ties, we haven't gotten a W against Tech in our last 10 games. A Beaver sweep would be a pleasant surprise. Go Beavers!
LSSULaker889294
Registered User
Re: WCHA 2015-16: So here's what we think that we know...
A great night for Mankato and they didn't play
A great night for Mankato and they didn't play
Last edited:
purpleinnebraska
Well-known member
With the surprises we're seeing each week, we should change the title of this thread to "Here's What We Know: Squat"
Wi.Huskies Fan
Registered User
Re: WCHA 2015-16: So here's what we think that we know...
I was really surprised with last night's scores. BG score was the biggest shocker and Bemidji with the shutout over Tech.
I was really surprised with last night's scores. BG score was the biggest shocker and Bemidji with the shutout over Tech.
gfmorris
New member
Re: WCHA 2015-16: So here's what we think that we know...
Week 21 BELOW: http://blog.wchaplayoffs.com/2016/02/23/week-21-below/
I'm hoping to give a best guess at standings predictions by Friday. My intent is to provide a weighted version of the playoff branches that I've done for the last three years, which involves setting up the spreadsheet and calculating BELOW percentages for +3W, +2W, +1W, OTW, T, OTL -1L, -2L, -3L for all 20 games, then calculate the probability of each of those nine events happening (e.g., UAH getting an OTW in Bemidji, losing the next night, losing the first game to BG, and getting an OTL on Senior Night). So that's 9*9*9*9 possible outcomes for each chain of four games. That may not end up happening.
GFM
Week 21 BELOW: http://blog.wchaplayoffs.com/2016/02/23/week-21-below/
I'm hoping to give a best guess at standings predictions by Friday. My intent is to provide a weighted version of the playoff branches that I've done for the last three years, which involves setting up the spreadsheet and calculating BELOW percentages for +3W, +2W, +1W, OTW, T, OTL -1L, -2L, -3L for all 20 games, then calculate the probability of each of those nine events happening (e.g., UAH getting an OTW in Bemidji, losing the next night, losing the first game to BG, and getting an OTL on Senior Night). So that's 9*9*9*9 possible outcomes for each chain of four games. That may not end up happening.
GFM
LSSULaker889294
Registered User
Re: WCHA 2015-16: So here's what we think that we know...
My guess at the final WCHA standings.
1- MSU
2- BGSU
3-MTU
4-FSU
5-NMU
6-BSU
7-LSSU
8-UAA
9-UA
10-UAH
My guess at the final WCHA standings.
1- MSU
2- BGSU
3-MTU
4-FSU
5-NMU
6-BSU
7-LSSU
8-UAA
9-UA
10-UAH
JohnsonsJerseys
Michigan Tech Fan
Re: WCHA 2015-16: So here's what we think that we know...
Ryan J
The underdog role... I like it.
Ryan J
- Status