Glen Keeney writes:
>I'm not sure very much should be made of raw percentage wins of one
>conference vs another, especially without taking into account which
>teams represented which conference. If the bottom teams of conference A
>play the top teams of conference B, B will probably look pretty good.
>
>Maybe someone would like to list the team pairings between ECAC and HE
>for this year?
First, here are the 42 HE-ECAC games that were played this year:
10/26/90 Colgate 6 at Lowell 4 NC
Providence 4 at St Lawrence 2 NC
New Hampshire 5 at Vermont 4 NC
10/27/90 Colgate 4 at Northeastern 2 NC
Boston University 9 at RPI 7 NC
Providence 7 at Vermont 3 NC
11/2/90 Vermont 1 at Boston College 5 NC
Northeastern 5 at Clarkson 9 NC
Lowell 3 at St Lawrence 6 NC
11/3/90 Colgate 9 at Boston University 6 NC
Lowell 4 at Clarkson 9 NC
RPI 5 at Providence 6 NC 3ot US Air Tournament
Championship
Northeastern 2 at St Lawrence 9 NC
11/20/90 Providence 7 at Brown 1 NC
Boston University 4 at Harvard 0 NC
11/23/90 Harvard 1 at Boston College 2 NC
New Hampshire 2 at Clarkson 4 NC
11/24/90 Northeastern 3 at Cornell 8 NC
Boston University 7 at Princeton 2 NC
New Hampshire 4 at St Lawrence 2 NC
11/25/90 Boston College 4 at RPI 5 NC
12/7/90 RPI 3 at New Hampshire 4 NC
12/21/90 Brown 5 at Maine 7 NC Dexter Shoe
Classic (Orono, ME)
12/22/90 Clarkson 4 at Maine 8 NC Dexter Shoe
Classic Championship
12/23/90 Dartmouth 3 vs Merrimack 6 NC Nissan/Jeep
Classic Consolation
12/28/90 Colgate 3 vs Lowell 4 NC 4ot Syracuse
Invitational (Syracuse, NY)
12/29/90 New Hampshire 6 vs Dartmouth 3 NC Sheraton/USAir
Classic (Burlington, VT)
Northeastern 3 at Vermont 4 NC Sheraton/USAir
Classic (Burlington, VT)
12/30/90 Northeastern 4 vs Dartmouth 6 NC Sheraton/USAir
Classic Consolation
New Hampshire 7 at Vermont 6 NC Sheraton/USAir
Classic Championship
1/11/91 St Lawrence 0 at Boston College 5 NC
Clarkson 5 at Boston University 3 NC
1/12/91 Clarkson 5 at Boston College 8 NC
St Lawrence 3 at Boston University 5 NC
RPI 4 at Lowell 3 NC ot
1/19/91 Dartmouth 1 at Lowell 7 NC
1/22/91 Boston College 8 at Dartmouth 2 NC
Yale 3 at New Hampshire 5 NC
1/29/91 Boston College 5 at Cornell 4 NC
Lowell 7 at Yale 2 NC
2/4/91 Harvard 2 vs Boston University 8 NC Beanpot (Boston,
MA)
2/11/91 Northeastern 5 vs Harvard 0 NC Beanpot
Consolation
I broke down the results into 4 categories: HE top 5 v. ECAC top 5,
ECAC top 5 v. HE bottom 3, HE top 5 v. ECAC bottom 7, and ECAC bottom 7
v. HE bottom 3. I decided to include BC, BU, Maine, Providence, and UNH
as the HE's top teams; the remaining three were considered HE bottom teams.
For the ECAC, I included Clarkson, Cornell, SLU, Harvard, and RPI as top
teams, and the remaining seven were bottom teams. Results:
W-L-T
HE top 5 v. ECAC top 5 13-3-0 .813
HE top 5 v. ECAC bottom 7 10-1-0 .909
HE bottom 3 v. ECAC top 5 1-6-0 .143
HE bottom 3 v. ECAC bottom 7 4-4-0 .500
HE top 5 v. ECAC 23-4-0 .852
HE bottom 3 v. ECAC 5-10-0 .333
ECAC top 5 v. HE 9-14-0 .391
ECAC bottom 7 v. HE 5-14-0 .263
Also, don't forget that five of eight, or 62.5% of HE teams are
included as "top" teams, while the ECAC has five of 12 or 41.7%. This
was done because PC and UNH tied for 4th in HE, and Harvard and RPI
tied for 4th in the ECAC. If we decide to go strictly with each
league's top 50% teams, with UNH going to the bottom half since they
lost the tiebreaker and finished 5th, the results are:
W-L-T
HE top half v. ECAC top half 13-2-0 .867
HE top half v. ECAC bottom half 4-1-0 .800
HE bottom half v. ECAC top half 5-8-0 .385
HE bottom half v. ECAC bottom half 6-3-0 .667
HE top half v. ECAC 17-3-0 .850
HE bottom half v. ECAC 11-11-0 .500
ECAC top half v. HE 10-18-0 .357
ECAC bottom half v. HE 4-10-0 .286
HE's top half beat up on the ECAC, both good and bad teams, and the
bottom half held its own at .500. In contrast, both the top and bottom
half of the ECAC were under .400. I was a little surprised at this,
because Clarkson has done well this year. Subtracting their record (4-2),
the top half of the ECAC is just 6-16-0 (.273). This supports what
Bill Fenwick said about the league being especially weak this year.
Note that a large percentage of the games (15 of 42, or 36%) were played
between the top half teams in each conference. And, the bottom half of HE
played 22 games against the ECAC, as opposed to 20 for the top half. But
28 of the 42 games (67%) involved the top half of the ECAC. The numbers
would appear to support what I have said about Hockey East being a stronger
conference top-to-bottom than the ECAC.
- mike
|