>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.