Show all posts by user
Discussions about the Cornell men's and women's hockey teams
Re: Opponents and Others, 2022-23 - 1 year ago
Trotsky The statement that the probabilities are too high has not been demonstrated empirically. They may be, they may not, but "feeling" they are too high is not a mathematical argument. Easy enough to run the numbers. If people want to put some reality behind their gut feelings, they should. Actually, jfeath17 demonstrated that KRACH-based win percentages over 65% were too highby KGR11 - Hockey
Re: Season's Over - 4 years ago
I think it would be appropriate to have a banner for each team acknowledging that they had the highest winning percentage in men's and women's hockey. I think it's debatable whether or not the men should be considered national champions as they were not higher in KRACH or Pairwise. The top winning percentages are not debatable.by KGR11 - Hockey
Re: Corona Virus And Playoff Games - 4 years ago
Trotsky A 2-loss season and finishing with a 9-game wining streak wouldn't be bad. But man this would be disappointing. Yes, it's the prudent thing to do. Stupid prudence. +1by KGR11 - Hockey
Re: Corona Virus And Playoff Games - 4 years ago
adamw I'd put the odds of having fans at Lake Placid or any NCAA games at 0.47% math Based on how many Monte Carlo simulations?by KGR11 - Hockey
Re: Bracketology for 2020 NCAAs - 4 years ago
I've critiqued the Pairwise Probability Matrix the last couple of weeks, but I think it's worth stating that it is WAY better suited to answer the question posed in this week's USCHO bracketology post (Which bubble teams have a shot at playing for an NCAA hockey national championship?).by KGR11 - Hockey
Re: Bracketology for 2020 NCAAs - 4 years ago
adamw KGR11 Here's an example of the issue with using KRACH to predict final pairwise: Cornell (KRACH Rating: 526) is playing St Lawrence (KRACH Rating: 11) in a few weeks. My understanding is that the ratings can be used to come up with a pseudo-record between the two teams (Cornell with 526 wins, St Lawrence with 11). The Monte Carlo simulation uses this record to determine how often Cornelby KGR11 - Hockey
Re: Bracketology for 2020 NCAAs - 4 years ago
Here's an example of the issue with using KRACH to predict final pairwise: Cornell (KRACH Rating: 526) is playing St Lawrence (KRACH Rating: 11) in a few weeks. My understanding is that the ratings can be used to come up with a pseudo-record between the two teams (Cornell with 526 wins, St Lawrence with 11). The Monte Carlo simulation uses this record to determine how often Cornell wins. In tby KGR11 - Hockey
Re: Bracketology Starts - 6 years ago
BearLover Casually getting screwed every single year. Yeah, that decision is screwed up.by KGR11 - Hockey
Re: Bracketology Starts - 6 years ago
adamw Trotsky Seems to me that HC winning would be a godsend for the committee since it locks down a presumptive patsy and a site. St. Cloud gets the Bemidji 2009 Memorial Reward and goes to Worcester and the committee only has to worry about the 1/4 permutations of the other 3 sites. It's iron clad that the committee will never cross over a tier line, right? (e.g., they would never move theby KGR11 - Hockey
Re: 2018 ECAC Permutations - ECAC tournament draw - 6 years ago
jfeath17 While you can't perfectly verify a prediction model, you can get an idea of its performance by separating the past data into training and testing sets. The fact that we are trying to predict probabilities and not simple classification does make it much more difficult to evaluate the performance. For classification problems the predictor is either right or wrong so it is easy to state a aby KGR11 - Hockey
Re: 2018 ECAC Permutations - ECAC tournament draw - 6 years ago
Trotsky adamw abmarks it would be interesting to run a KRACH computation for last year's full NHL regular season, for example, and then see if the numbers pass people's gut checks or not. This is honestly an unnecessary exercise. For past results, it's hard to improve on KRACH. The KRACH ratings, if you played the schedule that already happened, would come out to the actual results. That's theby KGR11 - Hockey
Re: 2018 ECAC Permutations - ECAC tournament draw - 6 years ago
BearLover I think this discussion is getting old too, but since some people keep saying those criticizing the model are doing so based on "feel," I just want to say that we really aren't. (a) jfeath17 already showed KRACH overstates the chances of higher-ranked teams winning an individual game. (b) When combining several artificially inflated individual probabilities together (Cornell'sby KGR11 - Hockey
Re: 2018 ECAC Permutations - ECAC tournament draw - 6 years ago
adamw The beauty of it is, what anyone thinks of Cornell's chances vs. one team or another doesn't matter. KRACH is what it is. And there is nothing better that perfectly captures PAST results. There are many "flaws" if you will to the model when it comes to projecting odds of winning future games - but I don't think they're flaws. They're just incomplete. All of the reasons stated aby KGR11 - Hockey
Re: 2018 ECAC Permutations - ECAC tournament draw - 6 years ago
My purpose in posting the percentages was to add new context to the discussion of KRACH's AQ results. BearLover doesn't buy the probability attributed to Cornell to win the AQ and I wanted to outline how it compares to other bye teams' AQ probabilities. I don't think this changes anyone's opinion, but it's an interesting metric to show how KRACH judges the top 4 ECAC teams. Of course, part of thby KGR11 - Hockey
Re: 2018 ECAC Permutations - ECAC tournament draw - 6 years ago
Updated probabilities for ECAC teams with byes to win the ECAC championship from the pairwise probability matrix: Cornell: 55% Clarkson: 22% Union: 10% Harvard: 6% The average team in the quarterfinal has a 12.5% probability to win the championship; Cornell is 4.4x more likely than the average QF team to win it all. That's a testament how great Cornell's season has been (or how bad the seaby KGR11 - Hockey
Re: Cornell at Union, 2/24/18 - 6 years ago
I remember Q being pretty bad as well. We started chanting "Let them play!" whenever they played canned music. Does Union have a band these days? Did they have any restrictionsby KGR11 - Hockey
Cornell at Union, 2/24/18 - 6 years ago
Do you start Stewart tonight? Might be good to get him some in-game practice before the playoffs in case he has to take over for Galajda at some point. It's also his final regular season game. The game also has no bearing on our standing in the league and probably marginal standing in the pairwise.by KGR11 - Hockey
Re: 2018 ECAC Permutations - 6 years ago
jfeath17, do you have an equation for that logistic regression? If you do, adamw could plug the KRACH-generated winning percentage into it get an empirical winning % for the pairwise probability matrix. adamw, for the Monte Carlo with 20k samples, I estimate this will add a couple million extra computations to the model. I'm pretty sure that's not a big deal. There may be confidence questionsby KGR11 - Hockey
Re: Road trips. - 6 years ago
Jim Hyla CU2007 Bad weather Friday? Games available on TV. I should have given mention of the band, without them, the games would have been super quiet. They are great. When and if you donate to CU, put a couple of bucks to the Pep Band Fund. It helps them to travel. There's a fundraiser today, 7-11 PM, through D.P. Dough when you mention the band. For every calzone or 10 dollar purchase made,by KGR11 - Hockey
Re: Bracketology Starts - 6 years ago
BearLover KGR11 I checked your math, 88% for a single game is correct. But if we're the #1 team in the ECAC, we wouldn't be playing against the middle of the pack; we'd be playing against the worst team left, so the highest team we'd play is #8. On average, we're probably playing #9. Sorry, I meant "middle of the pack" as in the PWR, not the ECAC, because I was talking about us being tby KGR11 - Hockey
Re: Bracketology Starts - 6 years ago
BearLover Trotsky I don't agree at all with any of this line of criticism. Roughly in order: 1. Just because intuitions disagree with odds doesn't mean the odds are wrong or the methodology is flawed. No one is arguing this. But sometimes the odds are so, for lack of a better term, at odds with what we perceive to be true that heavy skepticism is warranted. 2. We operate with a host ofby KGR11 - Hockey
Re: Bracketology Starts - 6 years ago
Trotsky Beeeej RichH BearLover andyw2100 We are now at a 90% probability of getting a 1-seed! I'm pretty sure this playoffstatus predictor is heavily flawed. It does not appear to sufficiently account for the inherent variance of a hockey game and considers a good team losing to a lesser team an extremely unlikely event. For example, it gives Cornell a 96% chance of making Lake Placid, whichby KGR11 - Hockey
Re: Polls 2017-18 - 6 years ago
Between just Notre Dame and Cornell (the two teams getting almost all the #1 votes), I think Cornell has a good argument for being the #1 ranked team. We haven't beaten great teams, but we also haven't lost to bad teams. Can you really rank a team that's lost to Sacred Heart at home above Cornell at this point in the season? Their position as #1 in the polls is definitely tenuous, but I thinkby KGR11 - Hockey
Re: Miami 12/1-2 - 6 years ago
I'm pretty sure there was a big gap between us and teams below us in RPI before last night's game. After last night, it got tighter. We'll probably drop multiple spots if we lose tonight.by KGR11 - Hockey
Re: NCAA tourney - 7 years ago
I did some data analysis based on what BearLover's saying. I found the ECAC'S OOC winning % for each year for Schafer's tenure (Source: CHN) and plotted it against the number of Cornell NCAA Tournament games (TBRW). There is a negative correlation: A 10% increase in ECAC OOC% means a 0.33 decrease in the number of NCAA tournament games Cornell plays (Rsquared value=0.04). This comparison leaveby KGR11 - Hockey
Re: 2018 schedule and tourney. - 7 years ago
Another problem with first rounds at home: Arenas would have to be reserved for potential hockey games instead of for money-generating events. This could be a significant problem for some teams (UCONN) which don't even own their home arenas. That said, I love the idea of having something else to fight for after making the tournament (Top 8 get at least one weekend at home, Top 4 get two).by KGR11 - Hockey
Re: Bracketology 2016-17 Style - 7 years ago
adamw So - this conversation is actually quite relevant given that Cornell's odds have dropped to 65% in the new Matrix after today's game .... I have many thoughts on this topic, but no real answers. I appreciate constructive discussion. * Going into the weekend, Cornell, Penn State and Providence all had roughly 95%+ odds of making the NCAAs. Penn State and Providence both lost Friday,by KGR11 - Hockey
Re: Rankings - 7 years ago
BearLover scoop85 Geez, I just checked CHN's probability matrix and they have us at a 98% chance of making the NCAA's. While I like that number, I'm still uptight about it. I'll feel much better if we win our QF series in 2 straight. The probability matrix, as I've argued before, overvalues the chances of a stronger team beating a weaker team. For instance, look at Harvard: the model gives themby KGR11 - Hockey
Re: Rankings - 7 years ago
Dafatone KenP Keep in mind St. Cloud has a losing record and at this time is not eligible for the NCAA tournament. That provides extra cushion for Cornell. They have two games with Colorado College, then a playoff with a higher seed. We likely need them to get swept in that playoff. As has been mentioned here before, it's silly just how much they get rewarded for going 2-7 against the toby KGR11 - Hockey