Sender: |
|
Date: |
Tue, 17 Mar 1998 14:13:07 -0600 |
Reply-To: |
|
Subject: |
|
MIME-Version: |
1.0 |
Content-Transfer-Encoding: |
7bit |
Content-Type: |
text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" |
From: |
|
Comments: |
|
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
>Just wanted to point out that the 10th place team in the ECAC is not at
#42
>in RPI...but is 34th...you are looking at the 12th placed team...
Thank you -- that's what I getting at ...
>LEAGUE AVE RPI AVE RANK TEAMS INCLUDED
>H.E .4401 33.67 Prov., Merr.,
>Amherst
>WCHA .4467 34.00 M.T., Denver,
A.A.
>CCHA .4675 29.75 N.D., F.S.,
W.M.,
>A.F.
>ECAC .4702 30.25 Prin., Cornell,
>UVM, SLU
>
>Does it show what Adam was saying that maybe if comparable teams were
>looked at across the board, a different story might emerge?
You see how not having a 10th team (HEA and WCHA) affects things too ---
just add Mankato to the WCHA and see how much further down it gets ...
then add 2 more teams.
Of course the argument is not statistically perfect --- because with two
more weak teams to feed on -- the higher teams get more wins than they
would otherwise have. Of course, those teams would still exist -- and
like Mankato now - would count in the team's record if they played them.
So I think the point is made.
Let's re-run the study by taking out games played against the 10-12
teams -- and just compare records of 1-9 teams against only those 36
teams.
AW
HOCKEY-L is for discussion of college ice hockey; send information to
[log in to unmask], The College Hockey Information List.
|
|
|