Yale Hockey 2010

[klumpmypants]

Re: Yale Hockey 2010

I was corrected that there is the outside possibility that Cornell doesn't make the tournament, but that involves too many variables. However, there is not much doubt in my mind that if they make the tournament, Cornell is a 2 or 3 and will be sent to Albany.

You don't seem to understand how non one seeds are placed in the regionals.

 

[klumpmypants]

Re: Yale Hockey 2010

I haven't been able to get them in Albany due to Cornell being a 2 or 3. It would be difficult not to put Cornell in Albany.
The problem with Worcester would be UNH. UNH is probably on the three line. Again UNH would be a great draw in Worcester. I see an outside possibility of being in Worcester. More likely, Yale sent to Fort Wayne or St. Paul.
I certainly am hoping for Worcester.

Please figure out how the tournament is selected and how the teams are placed before you go confusing everyone on this board. Geography has nothing to do with how 2-4 seeds are placed in the regionals. All that matters is their overall seed. Also go back and read my Yale PWR analysis.

Also, UNH isn't even in the tournament right now and very well won't be. This is not college basketball. Read the literature

 

[electpuck]

Re: Yale Hockey 2010

The two assumptions that I am making have to doin the same league playing each other in a first round match-up, and attendance. What criteria are you basing your assumption that I don't know what I'm talking about?

My UNH assumption has to do with the Pairwise predictor, with the chalk. No major surprises.

The committee has to stay with the seeding lines. The one line. the two line, The three line, and the four line.

Not to mention the travel concerns.

 

[klumpmypants]

Re: Yale Hockey 2010

The two assumptions that I am making have to doin the same league playing each other in a first round match-up, and attendance. What criteria are you basing your assumption that I don't know what I'm talking about?

My UNH assumption has to do with the Pairwise predictor, with the chalk. No major surprises.

Well other than UNH not being in the tournament, attendance is not a factor in placing individual teams. The rest of this post I don't really understand. Can you elaborate?

The top four teams are placed closest to home in rank order and then everyone else is placed entirely on their overall seed. Then they switch teams to avoid intra-conference matchups. Are you just assuming that Yale and Cornell will be slotted to play in the first round, so one will have to be moved? If so, that is just one possible scenario and you need to clarify that.

I think you overstate how much the committee moves teams within seeding bands. They only switch teams within a band to avoid intra-conference matchups in the first round. Anything else, i.e. attendance and travel concerns, takes a back seat to bracket integrity.

 

[BigDEli]

Re: Yale Hockey 2010

I think you overstate how much the committee moves teams within seeding bands. They only switch teams within a band to avoid intra-conference matchups in the first round. Anything else, i.e. attendance and travel concerns, takes a back seat to bracket integrity.

Moy disagrees with you. In fact, in the bracketology he just posted, he moves Yale three times, once to avoid an inter-conference match-up and twice for attendance reasons (first as part of an entire region swap and then just straight up with Northern Michigan), all of which takes Yale's first round opponent from Bemidji to St Cloud to North Dakota...

 

[burgie12]

Re: Yale Hockey 2010

Anything else, i.e. attendance and travel concerns, takes a back seat to bracket integrity.

Moy disagrees with you. In fact, in the bracketology he just posted, he moves Yale three times, once to avoid an inter-conference match-up and twice for attendance reasons (first as part of an entire region swap and then just straight up with Northern Michigan), all of which takes Yale's first round opponent from Bemidji to St Cloud to North Dakota...

An entire region swap does not affect bracket integrity, and is actually a smart move to (a) decrease travel distance, (b) increase attendance. I think the Yale-NMU and AHA champion-UAH swaps were over the top and not warranted.

The point still exists that non-1 seeds do not control their destiny as to where they are going to be placed (which I believe is the main point that klumpy was trying to make).

 

[BigDEli]

Re: Yale Hockey 2010

An entire region swap does not affect bracket integrity, and is actually a smart move to (a) decrease travel distance, (b) increase attendance. I think the Yale-NMU and AHA champion-UAH swaps were over the top and not warranted.

The point still exists that non-1 seeds do not control their destiny as to where they are going to be placed (which I believe is the main point that klumpy was trying to make).

i don't want to speak for him but if i had to guess, electpuck was using the same logic Moy was when he created his bracket. his point was that if both Cornell and Yale make the tournament, they're likely to end up as either 2 or 3 seeds. with a regional in Albany and no one but Cornell to draw fans there, the ncaa would really like to have cornell there for attendance purposes. Once again, Moy did the same thing when he swapped to entire regions simply for attendance purposes, so Cornell could wind up in Albany and UW/SCSU would play in St Paul. You said yourself that this makes sense. If it does in fact make sense, then having Yale in Albany becomes highly unlikely (if not impossible), which in my mind was what electpuck was getting at.

 

[klumpmypants]

Re: Yale Hockey 2010

i don't want to speak for him but if i had to guess, electpuck was using the same logic Moy was when he created his bracket. his point was that if both Cornell and Yale make the tournament, they're likely to end up as either 2 or 3 seeds. with a regional in Albany and no one but Cornell to draw fans there, the ncaa would really like to have cornell there for attendance purposes. Once again, Moy did the same thing when he swapped to entire regions simply for attendance purposes, so Cornell could wind up in Albany and UW/SCSU would play in St Paul. You said yourself that this makes sense. If it does in fact make sense, then having Yale in Albany becomes highly unlikely (if not impossible), which in my mind was what electpuck was getting at.

Now you are mixing logic. Read what Burgie said about switching entire regions not affecting bracket integrity. What Moy left out is he is really only doing that because Denver would have to fly to St. Paul anyway. If they were withing driving distance from there as the #1 overall, no way their bracket moves.

What the NCAA would like for attendance purposes is irrelevant when it comes to Cornell. Please understand this.

 

[electpuck]

Re: Yale Hockey 2010

i don't want to speak for him but if i had to guess, electpuck was using the same logic Moy was when he created his bracket. his point was that if both Cornell and Yale make the tournament, they're likely to end up as either 2 or 3 seeds. with a regional in Albany and no one but Cornell to draw fans there, the ncaa would really like to have cornell there for attendance purposes. Once again, Moy did the same thing when he swapped to entire regions simply for attendance purposes, so Cornell could wind up in Albany and UW/SCSU would play in St Paul. You said yourself that this makes sense. If it does in fact make sense, then having Yale in Albany becomes highly unlikely (if not impossible), which in my mind was what electpuck was getting at.

Thank you, Big Deli.

Bracket integrity relies on the seeding bands in each region. Whether a one, a two, a three, or a four. Yale cannot play Cornell in the first round, and in all likely hood, Cornell will be in Albany as a two or a three.

My speculation about UNH, has to do with favorites winning in the league tournaments. UNH in the cases that I have run, would be in the 3 seed band or the three line. I think the committee might put them in Worcester to support its attendance. If this is the case, Yale being a three just as UNH, would be shipped west.

I'm willing to put more money on the bet that Cornell will be a two or a three seed in Albany.

This kind of discussion makes this time of year fun. Its not to put down other people on the boards.

 

[burgie12]

Re: Yale Hockey 2010

I think the committee might put them in Worcester to support its attendance. If this is the case, Yale being a three just as UNH, would be shipped west.

The point still exists that non-1 seeds do not control their destiny as to where they are going to be placed (which I believe is the main point that klumpy was trying to make).

.

The overriding factor in making the bracket is 1v16, 2v15, etc. with 1v8, 2v7, etc. being the tournament format.

Minimizing flights by switching entire pods also has a net positive effect on attendance. This is good. But, it is also secondary. Increasing attendance by switching individual teams is tertiary and arbitrary. It should not occur. Moy went overboard in his analysis.

Cornell does not control its destiny to be placed in Albany. The Big Red will only play in Albany if the pod that they are placed in will be going to Albany. And where the pod goes depends on the 1 seed. Not Cornell. Not UAH. Not RIT.

 

[klumpmypants]

Re: Yale Hockey 2010

Thank you, Big Deli.

Bracket integrity relies on the seeding bands in each region. Whether a one, a two, a three, or a four. Yale cannot play Cornell in the first round, and in all likely hood, Cornell will be in Albany as a two or a three.

My speculation about UNH, has to do with favorites winning in the league tournaments. UNH in the cases that I have run, have been in the 3 seed band or the three line. I think the committee might put them in Worcester to support its attendance. If this is the case, Yale being a three just as UNH, would be shipped west.

I'm willing to put more money on the bet that Cornell will be a two or a three seed in Albany.

This kind of discussion makes this time of year fun. Its not to put down other people on the boards.

I was not trying to put you down. I apologize. I am not RC so that isn't my MO. In no way do I want to deter fan interest or participation. I just want you and everyone to understand how this works so that we can be well-informed fans that have well-informed discussions. But you obviously just didn't follow what Burgie and I have said. Saying in all likelihood Cornell will be in Albany makes no sense. Cornell will be in Albany if they end up in Denver's bracket. That is it.

Bracket integrity relies on more than just the bands. It relies on a strict 1 vs 16, 2 vs 15, 3 vs 14, etc. setup. That setup is only deviated from to avoid intra-conference games. Teams are not freely moved within seeding bands to help attendance or alleviate travel. Only entire brackets can be moved and that won't be done just to get Cornell in Albany. The reason Moy did it in today's bracketology is because it would get UW and SCSU in St. Paul as well, not just because Cornell would be in Albany.

The same goes for UNH. The committee isn't just going to put them in Worcester. It all has to shake out correctly.

As Burgie implied, Moy took too many liberties with this week's Bracketology (which I should not have to point out is a meaningless exercise other than to illustrate the process, since the brackets it produces are meaningless as soon as another game is played). But even as he said, he only switched Yale the third time (after switching them first to avoid an intra-WCHA matchup, and then as part of an entire bracket flop) because they had already been swtiched the once to avoid a matchup thus switching them again does not really affect bracket integrity the same way.

Just go back to my post from early Tuesday morning. It will show you how Yale can not only be in Albany, but as the 2 seed.

 

[BigDEli]

Re: Yale Hockey 2010

Just go back to my post from early Tuesday morning. It will show you how Yale can not only be in Albany, but as the 2 seed. It is somewhat disconcerting that that post never drew any discussion.

wait, you already did a post about this? why didn't you say so? how come no one is talking about it?

 

[DisplacedCornellian]

Re: Yale Hockey 2010

Saying in all likelihood Cornell will be in Albany makes no sense.

Listen to the man, he knows what he's talking about. The fact that Cornell would draw well in Albany does not mean they will be placed there.

By way of anecdotal evidence, look at where Cornell has been placed in their most recent tourney appearances.

2008-2009: Grand Rapids
2005-2006: Green Bay
2004-2005: Minneapolis

 

[ScoobyFanClub]

Re: Yale Hockey 2010

Listen to the man, he knows what he's talking about. The fact that Cornell would draw well in Albany does not mean they will be placed there.

By way of anecdotal evidence, look at where Cornell has been placed in their most recent tourney appearances.

2008-2009: Grand Rapids
2005-2006: Green Bay
2004-2005: Minneapolis

Yes - you and Klump - both correct. Cornell will not just be in Albany - as is obvious from this. They - and every other team - are simply placed to set up the 1 vs. 8, 2 vs. 7, 3. vs. 6 and 4 vs. 5 scenario. .... That is the case for every one of these NCAAs mentioned above. It's complete luck of the draw, in that sense. If Cornell wants to be in Albany - it has to be the seed the matches the No. 1 seed that's in Albany. There's no way of telling that right now - so really, no one has any idea.

 

[BigDEli]

Re: Yale Hockey 2010

Yes - you and Klump - both correct. Cornell will not just be in Albany - as is obvious from this. They - and every other team - are simply placed to set up the 1 vs. 8, 2 vs. 7, 3. vs. 6 and 4 vs. 5 scenario. .... That is the case for every one of these NCAAs mentioned above. It's complete luck of the draw, in that sense. If Cornell wants to be in Albany - it has to be the seed the matches the No. 1 seed that's in Albany. There's no way of telling that right now - so really, no one has any idea.

no one is saying Cornell controls their own destiny, or that being in Albany is an absolute. no one thinks the selection committee will look at a blank bracket, slot the four #1 seeds, and then immediately place Cornell in Albany as if they were a host school, bracket integrity be ****ed. But some people (Moy and electpuck for example) feel that the system isn't as rigid and cut and dried as others do. There are rules that allow for the break-up of the strict bracket (host teams and first round conference matchups, for example), and the committee may decide to add other conditions. as such, there is a question about whether the committee has enough leeway to utilize the fungibility inherent in the system, and the committee may face some pretty catastrophic attendance options at first glance. I personally believe that every year the committee gives itself a mandate and says "this year, x and y and z are our guiding principles once we get beyond 1 vs 16 seeding", and you never quite know what those mandates are until the brackets are announced.

If today was selection day, you'd only have 4 teams from the east in the tournament (AHA champ notwithstanding), and some people think that might cause the committee to surprise you. or it might not surprise, and they'll stay true to strict 1 vs 16 integrity. some of us see it as black and white, and some of us see it as a shade of gray. naturally, the people who see it as black and white won't allow for any surprises, and the people who see gray seem to expect surprises.

To be clear, I personally don't know who's right, and probably shouldn't have chimed in to begin with. I just thought people we're reading more into what electpuck was saying than I though he was.

 

[klumpmypants]

Re: Yale Hockey 2010

no one is saying Cornell controls their own destiny, or that being in Albany is an absolute. no one thinks the selection committee will look at a blank bracket, slot the four #1 seeds, and then immediately place Cornell in Albany as if they were a host school, bracket integrity be ****ed.

Actually, this seems to be exactly what electpuck is saying about Cornell and UNH, as I read his posts. As I understand him, he thinks that within a seeding band, this is exactly what the committee does, so long as intra-conference matchups are avoided. That last part he understands quite correctly, while the first part is totally incorrect.

But some people (Moy and electpuck for example) feel that the system isn't as rigid and cut and dried as others do.

Moy does feel it is cut and dried, so does every expert including Adam Wodon of CHN. Moy moved Yale once to avoid intra-conference matchup. Once that had to be done, it did not hurt bracket integrity all that much to move them again within the band. The other move they made was part of a full bracket switch, which has no effect on integrity. All of these things could occur. So BigDeli, if that is all you are trying to say, you are right. I think electpuck thinks it goes farther though, as I said above.

There are rules that allow for the break-up of the strict bracket (host teams and first round conference matchups, for example), and the committee may decide to add other conditions.

Except the committee has never done what electpuck or you are saying they might. except as laid out in the literature on the "flight is a flight" rule with #1 seeds as I talked about this year with Denver. I think Denver is a lock for Albany.

as such, there is a question about whether the committee has enough leeway to utilize the fungibility inherent in the system, and the committee may face some pretty catastrophic attendance options at first glance.

Can you cite an example where attendance has ever been a factor in placing teams as you suggest it can be?

I personally believe that every year the committee gives itself a mandate and says "this year, x and y and z are our guiding principles once we get beyond 1 vs 16 seeding", and you never quite know what those mandates are until the brackets are announced.

What have these mandates been in, say, the past three years?

If today was selection day, you'd only have 4 teams from the east in the tournament (AHA champ notwithstanding), and some people think that might cause the committee to surprise you.

If anyone else thinks this, please speak up. It will never turn out that way in the end. More east teams are bound to be in. And some of them will be sent east and some west based on the final PWR. And the committee will not change which ones are east or which are west, nor move more east, to appease attendance. It simply will not happen nor has it ever happened.

some of us see it as black and white, and some of us see it as a shade of gray.

People that see it as gray are wrong. This discussion happens every year and every year the committee proves all of them wrong. I understand the tendency to want to believe the system can't really be that rigid, but it is. In basketball, these discussions are very fruitful because the committee takes all these factors into account. The hockey committee just doesn't, it kind of insulates them from the criticism of snubbing teams and bad seedings because they can just say, hey it's an objective system.

naturally, the people who see it as black and white won't allow for any surprises, and the people who see gray seem to expect surprises.

To be clear, I personally don't know who's right, and probably shouldn't have chimed in to begin with. I just thought people we're reading more into what electpuck was saying than I though he was.

BigDeli, thanks for contributing to this discussion. It's not personal. Nor is it with electpuck. We're all just learning together.

I don't think I read too deeply into what electpuck was saying. Nor do I think you are. I just disagree. And I respectfully withdraw my previous rhetorical questions to you, unless you'd like to discuss.

 

[BigDEli]

Re: Yale Hockey 2010

Moy does feel it is cut and dried, so does every expert including Adam Wodon of CHN. Moy moved Yale once to avoid intra-conference matchup. Once that had to be done, it did not hurt bracket integrity all that much to move them again within the band. The other move they made was part of a full bracket switch, which has no effect on integrity. All of these things could occur. So BigDeli, if that is all you are trying to say, you are right. I think electpuck thinks it goes farther though, as I said above.

The phrase "did not hurt bracket integrity all that much" is subjective, not black and white. Moy thinks it's ok for the committee to make that third switch for Yale and the UAH/RIT switch, and you said earlier that you don't. Either that's a gray area, or you feel it's cut a dried and Moy doesn't.

If anyone else thinks this, please speak up. It will never turn out that way in the end. More east teams are bound to be in. And some of them will be sent east and some west based on the final PWR. And the committee will not change which ones are east or which are west, nor move more east, to appease attendance. It simply will not happen nor has it ever happened.

Are you asking people to speak up about how many teams from the East will make it, or to speak up if they think the committee would make surprising choices under those circumstances? Because we're not speculating on who gets in... nobody knows that yet. We're talking about what happens after the teams are selected, and Moy suggests today that he believes, right now, the NCAA would would surprise you. So at the very least, USCHO's resident bracketologist feels that way. Again, not my argument, his argument.

Thank you for making it clear that this isn't personal... i didn't think it was, but I appreciate your reinforcing that for the sake of civility. Similarly, my points here are not meant to be personal, and are admittedly a bit argumentative, but honestly I was in your camp until I saw Moy's piece today and was mad at the thought that it was somehow ok for the NCAA to upgrade Yale's first round opponent from Bemidji to NoDak for less than obvious reasons. Next thing I knew, I was compelled to comment about electpucks and what I thought he was getting at.

 

[electpuck]

Re: Yale Hockey 2010

Here's my whole scenario:
This is predicated on all the chalk winning this weekend in conference tournaments. Chalk is favorites for those who don't speak the language.
This was done by USCHO's Pairwaise Predictor.

PWR:
Denver
Miami
Wisconsin
BC
North Dakota
Saint Cloud
Cornell
Bemidji
Ferris
Yale
Alaska
UNH
UVM
NMU
RIT
UAH

Bands look like this:
1 Seeds: Denver, Miami, Wisconsin, BC
2 Seeds:North Dakota, St. Cloud, Cornell, Bemidji
3 Seeds: Ferris, Yale, Alaska, UNH
4 Seeds: NMU, UVM, RIT, UAH

Straight up(1-16, 2-15, etc. and Keeping with bands above):

St. Paul:
Denver
Bemidji
Ferris
AH

Fort Wayne:
Miami
Cornell
Yale
RIT

Albany:
Wisconsin
SCST
Alaska
UVM

Worcester:
BC
ND
UNH
NMU

Intra Conference Problems:

Only in Fort Wayne with Yale-Cornell

St. Paul:
Denver
Bemidji
Ferris
AH

Fort Wayne:
Miami
SCST
Yale
RIT

Albany:
Wisconsin
Cornell
Alaska
UVM

Worcester:
BC
ND
UNH
NMU

Attendance:
Albany and Worcester are Fine. Fort Wayne and the West need some help.
Switch Yale and Ferris.
St. Paul:
Denver
Bemidji
Yale
UAH

Fort Wayne:
Miami
SCST
Ferris
RIT

Albany:
Wisconsin
Cornell
Alaska
UVM

Worcester:
BC
ND
UNH
NMU

St.Paul might be a little week. The main point I think I was making: Under this scenario: it would be very difficult for Yale to be in Albany. Not as difficult to imagine them in Worcester, but I would still think that Yale would be going out west.

 

[ScoobyFanClub]

Re: Yale Hockey 2010

Klump is right again .... The mandates are set in stone, by and large, in the committee handbook. The committee does have leeway in certain areas, but has chosen not to use it. Except for very rare and extreme circumstances -- i.e. moving Air Force from a 16 to a 15 so that it would stay in Colorado Springs because neither Denver or CC qualified that year (and that basically did nothing to 'bracket integrity') ... the committee has not paid a snot of attention to attendance.

It doesn't mean they can't - they just haven't. And people focusing on that in the last few years have been consistently wrong in the end, and/or confused, including any bracket gurus who tried to prognosticate otherwise.

 

[ScoobyFanClub]

Re: Yale Hockey 2010

naturally, the people who see it as black and white won't allow for any surprises, and the people who see gray seem to expect surprises.

I think the point is - sure, you might get a surprise. But I think expecting one, based upon the last 7 years, is not wise.