ELynah Forum

General Category => Hockey => Topic started by: CrazyLarry on March 20, 2003, 01:47:22 PM

Title: You are the Committee
Post by: CrazyLarry on March 20, 2003, 01:47:22 PM
USCHO has John's YATC script, but once you plug in the results, you don't seem to actually get to be the Committee, as in years past, choosing a bubble, etc.  Am I missing something?
Title: Re: You are the Committee
Post by: Al DeFlorio on March 20, 2003, 02:30:12 PM
QuoteLarry Weintraub '98 wrote:

USCHO has John's YATC script, but once you plug in the results, you don't seem to actually get to be the Committee, as in years past, choosing a bubble, etc.

Can't be "the Committee" unless you know the bonus point formula. ::help::

Title: Re: You are the Committee
Post by: CrazyLarry on March 20, 2003, 04:39:37 PM
Sure I can.  I make them be what I want to help my favorite team, just like the committee is going to do...

::rolleyes::
Title: Re: You are the Committee
Post by: jtwcornell91 on March 20, 2003, 09:55:35 PM
Yeah, I wanted to do the build-the-brackets thing this year too, but I was too pressed for time (just got back from a four-day meeting where I gave three talks and staffed two 10pm-6am scientific monitoring shifts).  I figure the part that was most useful was actually the PWCs based on hypothetical conf tourney results, and that people can fill out the brackets on paper from there.



Post Edited (03-20-03 21:55)
Title: Re: You are the Committee
Post by: Keith K \'93 on March 20, 2003, 10:43:48 PM
So, can someone run through all of the possible outcomes now and post the possible best and worst PWR finishes?  Without RPI bonuses there only something like 2^15 = 32k possibilities left :-D  Well a couple more considering consy ties, but who's counting.  I've got a plane to catch or I'd do it myself.  Come on Whelan, you've got nothing better to do, right? :-D
Title: Re: You are the Committee
Post by: Andy Wallenstein \'86 on March 20, 2003, 11:13:43 PM
[Q]So, can someone run through all of the possible outcomes now and post the possible best and worst PWR finishes? Without RPI bonuses there only something like 2^15 = 32k possibilities left  Well a couple more considering consy ties, but who's counting. I've got a plane to catch or I'd do it myself. Come on Whelan, you've got nothing better to do, right?
[/Q]

Assuming no one undertakes the above, could someone please confirm that should Cornell win both of our games, and Colorado College loses one of theirs, that Cornell would be very likely to take over the number one spot?

I used John's page on USCHO to try to see this for myself, and unless I did something wrong (like putting in ridiculous numbers for the mysterious bonus) I believe that this is the case. But I'd love confirmation from someone who understands this stuff.

Thanks!
--Andy W.  '86

Title: Re: You are the Committee
Post by: rhovorka on March 20, 2003, 11:25:21 PM
QuoteAndy Wallenstein '86 wrote:

Assuming no one undertakes the above, could someone please confirm that should Cornell win both of our games, and Colorado College loses one of theirs, that Cornell would be very likely to take over the number one spot?

It's pretty easy using the USCHO interface (cool, John!).  I didn't enter any CCHA or MAAC results.  Entering the least helpful path for us (A W vs. Dartmouth) and the most helpful path for CC (L in the finals to Minn.), Cornell is in first by a comfortable margin: .5946 to .5915 in RPI.  In fact, in this scenario, Minnesota passes CC in RPI (.5920), but remains "tied" for 4th (losing the comparison with BU).

It's pretty obvious entering a couple scenarios that things can still change a lot, despite there not being many games left.  I just worked a scenario where BU fell from #4 to #7 simply by changing the result of the CCHA consolation game only.



Post Edited (03-20-03 23:31)
Title: Re: You are the Committee
Post by: Tom Pasniewski 98 on March 21, 2003, 07:18:21 AM
Well, I don't know if I found the absolutely worst case scenario but I thinks it's close.  In the ECAC's, the worst case is a Cornell loss to Brown and Dartmouth.  Elsewhere we assume that the higher seed wins except it makes little difference if Quinnipiac or Mercyhurst wins the MAAC as long as one of them does.  Then the higher seed wins each games except for our only non-conf. opponent still playing - Ohio State.  Lets say the lose both their games.  Cornell falls to a tie for 6th with Minny and loses the tiebreaker to fall to 7th.  Not sure Cornell can finish lower than 7th but even in that scenario, Cornell would stay east as a 2 seed.

Would love to see what would happen if BU and Providence stayed where they are at 4 and 14 and Cornell and UNH switched spots to 3 and 2 respectively, what the Committee would do.  On second thought, no I wouldn't. ::uhoh::
Title: Re: You are the Committee
Post by: Tom Pasniewski 98 on March 21, 2003, 07:21:28 AM
Also I didn't put any bonus points into the mix because I've generally learned not to talk about what I don't know about.  Yeah right.
Title: Re: You are the Committee
Post by: Jeff Hopkins \'82 on March 21, 2003, 07:24:40 AM
I've been doing some YATC playing, too.  Pretty much every combination I tried has us in the top 4 though sometimes its a tie.  What's less certain is who our opponent will be

Bad scenarios:  

- We lose in the ECAC finals and Minn beats CC.
- Neither Quinnipiac or Mercyhurst win the MAAC (i.e. BU ends up #4)

Good scenarios:

- We win the ECAC and Minn beats CC (we get #1 seed)

If both we and CC lose we do not pass CC, even if Ohio State wins the CCHA.

Some other interesting results is that Providence can still make it, especially if Brown stays a TUC by winning at least 1 game, if there are some upsets out west

JH
Title: Re: You are the Committee
Post by: Jeff Hopkins \'82 on March 21, 2003, 07:33:03 AM
Hadn't even contemplated two CU losses. ::worry::

JH
Title: Re: You are the Committee
Post by: Melissa\'01 on March 21, 2003, 09:07:44 AM
well here's NHL's spin on the bracketing.

http://www.nhl.com/intheslot/read/college/college032003.html
Title: Re: You are the Committee
Post by: Melissa\'01 on March 21, 2003, 09:10:06 AM
ooops. forgot taht ai wanted to post the best part of the article for those not wanting to read the whole damn thing ....

"There is no subjectivity in our selection of the top 16 teams," said McCaw, who will draw up the brackets with Air Force coach Frank Serratore, Michigan State AD Ron Mason, Canisius AD Tim Dillon, Yale associate AD Wayne Dean and Denver assistant AD Ron Grahame. "It is straight by the computer. I think the coaches appreciate that. There is no gamesmanship or politicking. Everything is done strictly by an agreed-upon criteria."

aged upon? well, how about explaining these bonus pts then?
Title: Re: You are the Committee
Post by: ugarte on March 21, 2003, 10:26:20 AM
"Objective" doesn't mean "public."  All of this anticipatory carping, while it might relieve some stress, is starting to get a little repetitive.

On Sunday evening at 6PM we will know if we have something to complain about.

Title: Re: You are the Committee
Post by: jkahn on March 21, 2003, 11:29:23 PM
In various scenarios I've run after Friday's games, it looks like the #1 seeds will be CC, Cornell, UNH and either Minn. if they win or Maine.  I'm sure Minn. would love to get by CC and thereby send CC out of the Minn. regional and into Ann Arbor.  The only way Maine seems to finish behind BU is if Minn. wins, and then it doesn't matter.  If Brown loses tomorrow, they'll fall out of being a TUC, opening up the possibility that if we don't win we could fall behind UNH.  I did run one scenario where we could still edge them by .0001 with the right results.  Of course, we'll get the bonus points - but hopefully we'll kill Harvard and not have to even think about this stuff after that.

Title: Re: You are the Committee
Post by: jkahn on March 22, 2003, 10:40:14 PM
Things are looking tricky for the committee.  Harvard and Minn. St. are tied for 12th, with Harvard winning tiebreaker.  St. Cloud is 14th.  With CC and Minn. both #1 seeds, there are three possibilities.  1) Cornell will have to play a WCHA team to avoid a WCHA intra-conference first round match-up, 2)  #1 Cornell will be given a better match-up, by switching Harv. and Minn. St.- although that would mean Harvard would have to get sent west or 3)  they have a WCHA first round game.  Any guesses?

Title: Re: You are the Committee
Post by: jtwcornell91 on March 22, 2003, 11:21:03 PM
The best-case scenario is if the bonus is sufficient to give SCSU the comparison with Mankato (they need at least .0021 for a quality road win).  In that case they pull even with Harvard at 12th in the PWR.  But 11th-place OSU is actually in a rock-scissors-paper comparison situation with SCSU and Harvard; the only reason they're not all tied in the PWR is that SCSU and Harvard lose comparisons to Dartmouth and NMU, respectively.  So if they only look at comparisons among tournament teams when setting the band (which is in keeping with what's been done on the past, focussing on individual comparisons), they have to pick two 3-seeds and one 4-seed out of OSU, Harvard, and SCSU using the RPI.  OSU has the lowest RPI of the bunch (unless the neutral quality win bonus is big enough to put them past Harvard, but it would have to be .0077 for that), which means they'd be a 4-seed.  Then all is well, since Minnesota can be paired with OSU and UNH with Mankato, leaving Wayne State and the MAAC winner for Cornell and CC.

Title: Re: You are the Committee
Post by: neil shapiro on March 22, 2003, 11:43:00 PM
I sure hope you are right John...but at this point, I know that I will have a lot more interest in the selection show than thought I would!
Title: Re: You are the Committee
Post by: jkahn on March 22, 2003, 11:59:23 PM
Based on the input above from John, here's a shot at the regionals:
Worcester: Cornell, BU, St. Cloud, Mercyhurst (or Q'pac)
Providence: UNH, Maine, Harvard, Minn. St.
Ann Arbor: CC, BC, Mich., Wayne St.
Minn: Minn., Ferris St., UND, Ohio St.
John, hopefully the committee will only look at comparisons between tournament teams - it would be easier if "you are the committee"



Post Edited (03-23-03 00:00)
Title: Re: You are the Committee
Post by: Denison on March 23, 2003, 12:19:47 AM
Any idea when tomorrow that the real committee makes public its determination?
Title: Re: You are the Committee
Post by: Denison on March 23, 2003, 12:20:39 AM
I should have said when today the committee makes up its mind?
Title: Re: You are the Committee
Post by: jtwcornell91 on March 23, 2003, 12:29:32 AM
There is a selection show at 6pm Eastern, televised on either ESPN or ESPNews, depending on basketball and war.

Title: Re: You are the Committee
Post by: Leung \'96 on March 23, 2003, 02:40:32 AM
Interesting, but accurate way to put it, John.
Title: Re: You are the Committee
Post by: neil shapiro on March 23, 2003, 12:39:34 PM
JTW,

As I understand it, you used the PWR from the current TUC list of RPI .500+ and any NCAA AQs.

What would the PWR look like if you made the TUC list just the 16 schools that are in the Tourney?
Title: Re: You are the Committee
Post by: jtwcornell91 on March 23, 2003, 01:15:57 PM
Quoteneil shapiro wrote:
As I understand it, you used the PWR from the current TUC list of RPI .500+ and any NCAA AQs.

What would the PWR look like if you made the TUC list just the 16 schools that are in the Tourney?
Actually I looked at pairwise comparisons among teams in the tourney.  That's how Harvard and SCSU end up with the last two 3-seeds rather than OSU and Harvard.  OSU is ahead of Harvard and SCSU in the overall PWR but they all win the same number of comparisons against the tournament field itself.  (Making reasonable assumptions for the size of the quality wins bonus.)

Title: Re: You are the Committee
Post by: jkahn on March 24, 2003, 06:07:20 PM
See Adam Wodon's well written article on the seeding procedure at:
http://uscho.com/news/2003/03/24_006604.php
Of course, if the committee had read this thread Sunday morning, see JTW's post at 23:01 and mine at 23:59 Saturday, all this angst could have been avoided.  How do we get JTW, Adam or someone who understands math on the committee - perhaps as a consultant?  This is not sour grapes, and the committee needs to understand that.   Last year our first round game was easier than we deserved.

Title: Re: You are the Committee
Post by: jtwcornell91 on March 24, 2003, 06:14:35 PM
Yeah, that's the frustrating thing; they were not painted entirely into a corner, but missed the way out that several of us pointed out Saturday night.

Title: Re: You are the Committee
Post by: CrazyLarry on March 25, 2003, 10:12:12 AM
I think it is only a matter of time before John is appointed to the committtee.  The entire college hockey world recognizes him as the statistical authority of record.
Title: Re: You are the Committee
Post by: Jeff Hopkins \'82 on March 25, 2003, 12:38:00 PM
It'll never happen.  

I think the NCAA actually enjoys being clueless.  That way they can continue to retain their amateur status.

JH