HOCKEY-L Archives

- Hockey-L - The College Hockey Discussion List

Hockey-L@LISTS.MAINE.EDU

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Condense Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Sender:
The College Hockey Discussion List <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:
From:
"John T. Whelan" <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Tue, 6 Jan 1998 03:37:38 -0700
Comments:
Reply-To:
"John T. Whelan" <[log in to unmask]>
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (55 lines)
        How's that for a teaser?  Now appearing, as a joint
presentation of The Big Red What? and Joe Schlobotnik's Sports Machine
("...if you mean, have I drunk of the essence of the game..."):
 
If the Season Ended Today      http://www.cc.utah.edu/~jtw16960/pframe.html
 
        An analysis based on this week's Pairwise Comparisons,
(derived from the scores on US College Hockey Online), of how the
selection committee might choose and seed the tournament field.
 
The NCAA Selection Procedure   http://www.cc.utah.edu/~jtw16960/pwframe.html
 
        PWR?  RPI?  TUC?  What is he talking about?!  In this article
I define the terms and lay out the selection and seeding procedure as
I understand it.  (Feedback is heartily encouraged.)
 
(BTW, Don't let the file names scare you; there's an alternate menu on
those pages for non-frame browsers.)
 
        This week's analysis is actually pretty straightforward,
except for one interesting aspect regarding the second bye in the
East.  A quick glance at the comparison chart
 
   Team         PWR  RPI                  Comparisons Won
 1 Mich State    24 .589 BUNHNDMiMmYaSCPvCgWiBCCCNMPnMeNELSCrNtMDRPCkMLMT
 2 Boston Univ   23 .624   NHNDMiMmYaSCPvCgWiBCCCNMPnMeNELSCrNtMDRPCkMLMT
 3 New Hampshire 21 .629     NDMiMm  SCPvCgWiBCCCNMPnMeNELSCrNtMDRPCkMLMT
 4 North Dakota  21 .609       MiMmYaSCPvCgWiBCCCNMPnMeNELSCrNtMDRPCkMLMT
 5 Michigan      20 .602         MmYaSCPvCgWiBCCCNMPnMeNELSCrNtMDRPCkMLMT
 6 Miami         19 .581           YaSCPvCgWiBCCCNMPnMeNELSCrNtMDRPCkMLMT
 7 Yale          19 .577   NH        SCPvCgWiBCCCNMPnMeNELSCrNtMDRPCkMLMT
 
would seem to indicate BU and New Hampshire as the top teams in the
East.  However, looking closely at it we see that while BU beats out
all of the other Eastern teams for the first bye, it is Yale who wins
comparisons with all Eastern teams except BU to claim the second one.
No matter that New Hampshire wins more total comparisons, it is the
individual comparison between UNH and Yale that matters.  (Note also
that in a three-way comparison involving those two teams plus Michigan
or Miami, UNH would win because they have the highest RPI.  Thus it is
also significant that the NCAA doesn't consider giving Eastern byes to
Western teams, since it means UNH's pairwise wins over the CCHA
schools are not relevant to the awarding of the 2E seed.)  A curious
situation, and one that underscores the differences between seeding by
total number of comparisons won (as in 1996) and by individual
comparisons (introduced in 1997).
                                        John Whelan, Cornell '91
                                        <[log in to unmask]>
                <http://www.cc.utah.edu/~jtw16960/joe.html>
 
Cornell Men's Ice Hockey: Back-to-back ECAC and Ivy League Champions
 
HOCKEY-L is for discussion of college ice hockey;  send information to
[log in to unmask], The College Hockey Information List.

ATOM RSS1 RSS2