After the Brown win we are 6 in NPI with, and I swear I am not making this up, 9 in SOS, I believe entirely on the strength of having played the NPI #1 Dartmouth (cf. Colgate at 7 in SOS). My ignorant guess is once Dartmouth loses a few we will dip into the mid teens if we keep up our rate of play and beat the teams we ought.
I'm looking at Dartmouth's remaining schedule, and I'm not seeing a lot of teams they "should" lose to. Certainly, they'll drop a few, but I think the only real challenges they have left are us, Q, and maybe (probably not) their two remaining Hockey East games. And I don't see them dropping all five of those. They'll probably win as many of those as they drop games to lesser opponents that they should beat. And they will be stoked to return to Lynah this year.
CHN's Power Ratings has Cornell at 1 for SOS. Colgate is 6. Yale is 3 (from four games, including D and Q). But losing to D didn't help SLU (58) as they have too many other games against lesser opponents diluting the effect.
Having played two UMass games has helped us. Q and BU will help too. But that's about it.
We will share in some of Dartmouth's riches, and we'll need it. Once we beat them in Lynah, I will feel much better about them continuing to have a great season.
Because if we beat them in Lynah, we can beat them in Lake Placid.
Quote from: pjd8 on November 15, 2025, 03:47:34 PMI'm looking at Dartmouth's remaining schedule, and I'm not seeing a lot of teams they "should" lose to. Certainly, they'll drop a few, but I think the only real challenges they have left are us, Q, and maybe (probably not) their two remaining Hockey East games. And I don't see them dropping all five of those. They'll probably win as many of those as they drop games to lesser opponents that they should beat. And they will be stoked to return to Lynah this year.
CHN's Power Ratings has Cornell at 1 for SOS. Colgate is 6. Yale is 3 (from four games, including D and Q). But losing to D didn't help SLU (58) as they have too many other games against lesser opponents diluting the effect.
Having played two UMass games has helped us. Q and BU will help too. But that's about it.
We will share in some of Dartmouth's riches, and we'll need it. Once we beat them in Lynah, I will feel much better about them continuing to have a great season.
Because if we beat them in Lynah, we can beat them in Lake Placid.
Overindexing on tiny sample sizes IMO. I doubt Dartmouth is an especially good team. Top 4 in the ECAC sure, but there's nothing impressive about their talent or who they've played so far. If the offsides no-call goes our way we probably tie them, and their other games are against very weak opposition. They have a worse team talent-wise on paper than they've had the past two seasons when they were what, like high-20s in the PWR at best?
It does not mean anything in November, but I'd rather be 3 (https://www.collegehockeynews.com/ratings/npi) than 53.
I just found a database of polls back to 1970. Kid in the candy store. Cornell results on TBRW soon to be expanded considerably.
As promised (http://www.tbrw.info/?/weekly_Updates/cornell_Poll_Block.html).
Some blank areas (e.g., all of the 1971-72 season) are not our failure in the polls, they are just lacking data. I will code those as grey once I have the full intervals.
It would be wonderful to find the 60s too, if the polling went back that early, to chart our rise and dominance. I strongly suspect we are solid red from 67-69.
Quote from: Trotsky on December 09, 2025, 06:50:16 AMAs promised (http://www.tbrw.info/?/weekly_Updates/cornell_Poll_Block.html).
Some blank areas (e.g., all of the 1971-72 season) are not our failure in the polls, they are just lacking data. I will code those as grey once I have the full intervals.
It would be wonderful to find the 60s too, if the polling went back that early, to chart our rise and dominance. I strongly suspect we are solid red from 67-69.
I'll look at The Intercollegiate Hockey Newsletter tonight.
I've just gotten a book scanner and am going to see it I can digitize what I have before donating it all to CU. I'm concerned that like UNH and RPI they may just put them in archive boxes. I think they should be online so anyone can look back through the early years. Unfortunately my collection starts in the 60s.
Quote from: Jim Hyla on December 11, 2025, 02:15:43 PMQuote from: Trotsky on December 09, 2025, 06:50:16 AMAs promised (http://www.tbrw.info/?/weekly_Updates/cornell_Poll_Block.html).
Some blank areas (e.g., all of the 1971-72 season) are not our failure in the polls, they are just lacking data. I will code those as grey once I have the full intervals.
It would be wonderful to find the 60s too, if the polling went back that early, to chart our rise and dominance. I strongly suspect we are solid red from 67-69.
I'll look at The Intercollegiate Hockey Newsletter tonight.
I've just gotten a book scanner and am going to see it I can digitize what I have before donating it all to CU. I'm concerned that like UNH and RPI they may just put them in archive boxes. I think they should be online so anyone can look back through the early years. Unfortunately my collection starts in the 60s.
Thank you so much, Jim.
It's really always the work of a handful of weird amateurs that saves these things. It sure won't be Cornell which would just Lost Ark it and then pulp it in 2040 for an extra $35. TBH I wouldn't even donate it to them; they don't deserve it. We need a privately run Cornell Hockey Museum with the university's grubby collaborationist mitts as far away from it as Heidegger from personal accountability.
Quote from: Trotsky on December 11, 2025, 02:19:51 PMQuote from: Jim Hyla on December 11, 2025, 02:15:43 PMQuote from: Trotsky on December 09, 2025, 06:50:16 AMAs promised (http://www.tbrw.info/?/weekly_Updates/cornell_Poll_Block.html).
Some blank areas (e.g., all of the 1971-72 season) are not our failure in the polls, they are just lacking data. I will code those as grey once I have the full intervals.
It would be wonderful to find the 60s too, if the polling went back that early, to chart our rise and dominance. I strongly suspect we are solid red from 67-69.
I'll look at The Intercollegiate Hockey Newsletter tonight.
I've just gotten a book scanner and am going to see it I can digitize what I have before donating it all to CU. I'm concerned that like UNH and RPI they may just put them in archive boxes. I think they should be online so anyone can look back through the early years. Unfortunately my collection starts in the 60s.
Thank you so much, Jim.
It's really always the work of a handful of weird amateurs that saves these things. It sure won't be Cornell which would just Lost Ark it and then pulp it in 2040 for an extra $35. TBH I wouldn't even donate it to them; they don't deserve it. We need a privately run Cornell Hockey Museum with the university's grubby collaborationist mitts as far away from it as Heidegger from personal accountability.
Okay, I'll let you fund it. :o
Until then I'm going to try and scan things that maybe someone/somewhere could host.
Maybe Adam would like to host copies of old Intercollegiate Hockey Newsletter.
Quote from: Jim Hyla on December 11, 2025, 03:05:32 PMQuote from: Trotsky on December 11, 2025, 02:19:51 PMQuote from: Jim Hyla on December 11, 2025, 02:15:43 PMQuote from: Trotsky on December 09, 2025, 06:50:16 AMAs promised (http://www.tbrw.info/?/weekly_Updates/cornell_Poll_Block.html).
Some blank areas (e.g., all of the 1971-72 season) are not our failure in the polls, they are just lacking data. I will code those as grey once I have the full intervals.
It would be wonderful to find the 60s too, if the polling went back that early, to chart our rise and dominance. I strongly suspect we are solid red from 67-69.
I'll look at The Intercollegiate Hockey Newsletter tonight.
I've just gotten a book scanner and am going to see it I can digitize what I have before donating it all to CU. I'm concerned that like UNH and RPI they may just put them in archive boxes. I think they should be online so anyone can look back through the early years. Unfortunately my collection starts in the 60s.
Thank you so much, Jim.
It's really always the work of a handful of weird amateurs that saves these things. It sure won't be Cornell which would just Lost Ark it and then pulp it in 2040 for an extra $35. TBH I wouldn't even donate it to them; they don't deserve it. We need a privately run Cornell Hockey Museum with the university's grubby collaborationist mitts as far away from it as Heidegger from personal accountability.
Okay, I'll let you fund it. :o
Until then I'm going to try and scan things that maybe someone/somewhere could host.
Maybe Adam would like to host copies of old Intercollegiate Hockey Newsletter.
Hell, I'll host the pdfs on TBRW.
For funding, well if only Cornell had alumni who were rich.
Quote from: Jim Hyla on December 11, 2025, 02:15:43 PMQuote from: Trotsky on December 09, 2025, 06:50:16 AMAs promised (http://www.tbrw.info/?/weekly_Updates/cornell_Poll_Block.html).
Some blank areas (e.g., all of the 1971-72 season) are not our failure in the polls, they are just lacking data. I will code those as grey once I have the full intervals.
It would be wonderful to find the 60s too, if the polling went back that early, to chart our rise and dominance. I strongly suspect we are solid red from 67-69.
I'll look at The Intercollegiate Hockey Newsletter tonight.
I've just gotten a book scanner and am going to see it I can digitize what I have before donating it all to CU. I'm concerned that like UNH and RPI they may just put them in archive boxes. I think they should be online so anyone can look back through the early years. Unfortunately my collection starts in the 60s.
I would love these files. Or access at least. You're right about UNH and RPI. Jim Finke was going to send me his stuff, but he passed away and I'm not sure what happened to it.
I have a few questions about the quality win bonus for Adam or anyone else who might know:
1. Why does the bonus exist in the first place? Why is beating #1 and losing to #60 better than the other way around?
2. Why do schools that don't benefit from the QWB (any non-NCHC/B1G/HE schools, ivies especially) let it exist still?
3. Is the quality win bonus larger with the new NPI? Looking at some of the bonuses less than halfway through the season it seems larger than I remember in the past with the RPI, but maybe I'm just wrong.
Cornell holds at 17 in USCHO and drops to 16 in USA Hockey, while settling into 14 in NPI.
Quote from: chimpfood on December 14, 2025, 01:05:04 PMI have a few questions about the quality win bonus for Adam or anyone else who might know:
1. Why does the bonus exist in the first place? Why is beating #1 and losing to #60 better than the other way around?
2. Why do schools that don't benefit from the QWB (any non-NCHC/B1G/HE schools, ivies especially) let it exist still?
3. Is the quality win bonus larger with the new NPI? Looking at some of the bonuses less than halfway through the season it seems larger than I remember in the past with the RPI, but maybe I'm just wrong.
1 and 2 - who knows. It's all arbitrary philosophical decisions - going back to my argument against home site Regionals.
3 - it may just appear that way in terms of how we're presenting it. it's not as straightforward to calculate now that the whole thing is a recursive, iterative process. I don't think it has much more, if any, weight than in the past.
5 ECAC teams in the top 14 of the NPI.
6 Dartmouth
10 Quinnipiac
12 Cornell
13 Harvard
16 Princeton
It is better to be in this position, where the mere act of playing in conference does not pull us down into a gravity well.
Quote from: adamw on December 17, 2025, 01:33:42 PMIt's all arbitrary philosophical decisions - going back to my argument against home site Regionals
Slllllllllllllllowly I turned...
Quote from: Trotsky on January 03, 2026, 09:28:02 AM 6 Dartmouth
10 Quinnipiac
12 Cornell
13 Harvard
16 Princeton
It is better to be in this position, where the mere act of playing in conference does not pull us down into a gravity well.
We're up to 12 in npi? Great.
It's volatile. We had dropped as low as 17 after That Didn't Happen in Potsdam.
BearLover mentioned reversion to the mean for Dartmouth in another thread. If true, it sure is nice for the league they over-performed in their out-of-conference games. It would be highly entertaining if we have something like this at year end; fans of other conferences would lose their minds.
At the moment, we are 11th.
From a USCHO post (https://fanforum.uscho.com/threads/chl-to-ncaa-recruiting-megathread.36913/post-2952354)
Rights to 08 F Anthony Dontigny (Cornell) traded to Rimouski and he will join the team from BCHL West Kelowna once Hockey Canada processes the transaction.
Quote from: ursusminor on January 05, 2026, 02:22:12 PMFrom a USCHO post (https://fanforum.uscho.com/threads/chl-to-ncaa-recruiting-megathread.36913/post-2952354)
Rights to 08 F Anthony Dontigny (Cornell) traded to Rimouski and he will join the team from BCHL West Kelowna once Hockey Canada processes the transaction.
Not exactly meeting the BearLover point producer standards. Or anyone's. https://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/pdisplay.php?pid=290852
Quote from: ugarte on January 05, 2026, 02:33:25 PMQuote from: ursusminor on January 05, 2026, 02:22:12 PMFrom a USCHO post (https://fanforum.uscho.com/threads/chl-to-ncaa-recruiting-megathread.36913/post-2952354)
Rights to 08 F Anthony Dontigny (Cornell) traded to Rimouski and he will join the team from BCHL West Kelowna once Hockey Canada processes the transaction.
Not exactly meeting the BearLover point producer standards. Or anyone's. https://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/pdisplay.php?pid=290852
As a center?
Is he good at faceoffs or shutdown or something? Why would he make the jump from BCHL to QMJHL...
Quote from: ursusminor on January 05, 2026, 02:22:12 PMFrom a USCHO post (https://fanforum.uscho.com/threads/chl-to-ncaa-recruiting-megathread.36913/post-2952354)
Rights to 08 F Anthony Dontigny (Cornell) traded to Rimouski and he will join the team from BCHL West Kelowna once Hockey Canada processes the transaction.
Sorry that I somehow posted this on the wrong thread.
Neglected to post our big jump in the polls (http://www.tbrw.info/?/weekly_Updates/cornell_Poll_History.html):
14 in USCHO up from 17
12 in USA Hockey up from 17
So...currently ninth in NPI.
I'm wondering if one of the PWR (now NPI) gurus might be able to compute where we'd be right now if we:
--had won in OT last night (second Alaska game)
--had tied in OT last night (second Alaska game)
Thanks (if anyone feels like doing this.)
Quote from: andyw2100 on January 11, 2026, 06:54:45 PMSo...currently ninth in NPI.
I'm wondering if one of the PWR (now NPI) gurus might be able to compute where we'd be right now if we:
--had won in OT last night (second Alaska game)
--had tied in OT last night (second Alaska game)
Thanks (if anyone feels like doing this.)
So I found the spot on CHN that actually allows you to customize the NPI numbers by changing past results and/or inputting future results. (Very cool! Thanks, Adam!)
A tie or an OT win would have had us at 10th. An OT loss would have had us at 11th. A regulation loss would have seen us at 15th. (I had actually expected more of a drop from the first three possible outcomes.)
I had the second Colgate-UNH game on today, and the NESN commentators made the point that if UNH had held on to go into OT the night before (Colgate got the game winner with 73 seconds left in regulation), it would have really helped the Wildcats in NPI.
I believe you mean UHN. 8)
If Cornell had won at MSG in regulation, we'd be #4 in NPI, or #5 with an OT win.
Quote from: ebilmes on January 16, 2026, 10:29:37 PMIf Cornell had won at MSG in regulation, we'd be #4 in NPI, or #5 with an OT win.
Too bad Stanley's shot with two minutes to go rang off the crossbar.
Quote from: ebilmes on January 16, 2026, 10:29:37 PMIf Cornell had won at MSG in regulation, we'd be #4 in NPI, or #5 with an OT win.
But we didn't.
We're still 9th, right? Or 10th? That's just fine. Still will get into the dance with that.
I cant complain about close losses after our last two games came down to the wire but we pulled out regulation wins. I think we've been pretty lucky this season, or maybe being clutch is real.
1. We have been as lucky as unlucky.
2. Clutch isn't real.
We are 9th, but closer to 4th than 11th.
Following Q's loss to UConn, Cornell moves to 9th and Q falls to 10th in the NPI by a difference of one-hundredth of a point (55.93 vs 55.92). Still, I believe it would have been better for Cornell in the long run if Q had won.
Wisconsin loses to Penn State and is now in 10th (55.58). Q at 8th (55.93) and Cornell in 9th (55.90)
Barring a collapse, we should get a top 4 ECAC seed and first round bye. We are in the driver's seat for the 2-seed, which would allow us to avoid Q until the final.
In the NPI the teams are tightly packed together. Only 65 hundredths of a point separates Q in 8th place (55.89) from Denver in 13th place (55.24). Given that going forward we will mostly be playing lowly ranked teams, there's potential for us to drop to 13th or so with one loss and then outside the bubble with another loss. (Of course, we can offset this by stacking wins outside those losses.)
To my eye, this past weekend was by far the best we looked the whole year and the first time I felt we looked the part of an NCAA team. If we keep it up, we will be in the dance. But there are no guarantees in hockey. I just hope this weekend was our true selves and not the breakout-challenged/turnover-prone team that preceded it.
Quote from: BearLover on January 25, 2026, 10:25:58 AMIn the NPI the teams are tightly packed together. Only 65 hundredths of a point separates Q in 8th place (55.89) from Denver in 13th place (55.24). Given that going forward we will mostly be playing lowly ranked teams, there's potential for us to drop to 13th or so with one loss and then outside the bubble with another loss. (Of course, we can offset this by stacking wins outside those losses.)
You're right that the low ranking of our future opponents puts us at NPI risk. I feel like we run into this every year with the ECAC.
An upside from an NPI perspective that is unique to this year, as I believe you have mentioned elsewhere, is that 70% of our regular season games going forward are on the road (that feels absurd to say on January 25). Road wins count 50% more than road losses (excluding neutral sites). From a location perspective, there was a concentration of "NPI risk" the past four weekends that we got through in good shape.
Doesn't mean there isn't ANY potential for bad losses at Lynah this year (looking at you, St. Lawrence), but I'd speculate we've gotten through more than typical at this point in the season (2x Alaska, 2x UNO, Brown, Yale, Union, RPI)
Quote from: BearLover on January 25, 2026, 10:25:58 AMBarring a collapse, we should get a top 4 ECAC seed and first round bye. We are in the driver's seat for the 2-seed, which would allow us to play the winner of the Pecknold Cup in the final.
FYP.
As we wait in joyful hope (https://www.uscho.com/rankings/d-i-mens-poll), note we have not been top 10 since November 18, 2024 (http://www.tbrw.info/?/weekly_Updates/cornell_Poll_History.html).
We have not been top 10 during the regular season as late as January 26 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H8OxKx6zKkQ) since COVID.
The Pecknold Cup (http://www.tbrw.info/?/ecac_History/ecac_Pecknold_Cup.html), for newbies.
Having a voters' poll at the same time as having the NPI makes no sense—really just clickbait at this point.
Quote from: Trotsky on January 26, 2026, 12:07:52 PMThe Pecknold Cup (http://www.tbrw.info/?/ecac_History/ecac_Pecknold_Cup.html), for newbies.
I love this.
Quote from: Trotsky on January 26, 2026, 12:07:52 PMThe Pecknold Cup (http://www.tbrw.info/?/ecac_History/ecac_Pecknold_Cup.html), for newbies.
I spent way too long on TBRW yesterday or the day before looking for this, LMAO.
Quote from: scoop85 on January 26, 2026, 02:51:08 PMHaving a voters' poll at the same time as having the NPI makes no sense—really just clickbait at this point.
Eh, I don't see it that way. (I'm guessing you felt the same with PWR, but if you didn't, I'd be curious what is different). I think of the NPI as trying to approximate who "deserves" to go to the NCAAs, which should be based on results, while the poll is ranking the teams relative to each other as to who is overall a "stronger/better" team. As more games are played in a season you'd expect those to converge, but teams can over/under-achieve over long stretches, plus the NPI has at least one known thumb on the scale, that being the extra weight given to road wins.
Quote from: stereax on January 26, 2026, 03:06:17 PMQuote from: Trotsky on January 26, 2026, 12:07:52 PMThe Pecknold Cup (http://www.tbrw.info/?/ecac_History/ecac_Pecknold_Cup.html), for newbies.
I spent way too long on TBRW yesterday or the day before looking for this, LMAO.
Apologies. Added to TBRW Topic Index (http://www.tbrw.info/?/tbrw_Indexes/tbrw_Topic_Index.html).
Anytime anybody wants an addition / direct link please just let me know. It's my own fault for not understanding indexing and key words.
I am sure 97% of what I do by hand can be automated and made much better. Particularly formatting.
Quote from: scoop85 on January 26, 2026, 02:51:08 PMHaving a voters' poll at the same time as having the NPI makes no sense—really just clickbait at this point.
It was during the days of PWR too. It's fun. It's totally dumb because none of the voters have seen more than 1 game or 2 from more than half the teams, if even that many. It just becomes a game of Groupthink and as the season winds down it converges with the PWR "magically."
The coaches and assistants don't even vote. They pawn it off on the SID, who doesn't know
anything and just gives it to an intern who almost certainly looks up PWR and then moves teams around according to I dunno uniform color or flow.
Flow rankings would be valuable, OTOH.
Quote from: Trotsky on January 26, 2026, 11:59:30 AMAs we wait in joyful hope (https://www.uscho.com/rankings/d-i-mens-poll), note we have not been top 10 since November 18, 2024 (http://www.tbrw.info/?/weekly_Updates/cornell_Poll_History.html).
We have not been top 10 during the regular season as late as January 26 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H8OxKx6zKkQ) since COVID.
And that foot is me (https://www.uscho.com/rankings/d-i-mens-poll).
6 Qpc
10 Cor
15 Drt
23 Hvd
24 Uni
32 Prn
Quote from: scoop85 on January 26, 2026, 02:51:08 PMHaving a voters' poll at the same time as having the NPI makes no sense—really just clickbait at this point.
polls and scientific rankings have been clickbait since the days of wire service dominance and newspapers using movable type.
Let's all take a moment to celebrate that this 10th-ranked team started this season with 12 true freshmen and 2 sophomore transfers including the primary goalie, 5 of the top 9 forwards and 3 of the top 6 defensemen.
That is gelling very well very quickly.
And now we get to enjoy them for the remainder of this season and (most of them) 3 further seasons where they get stronger and more experienced.
We could be at the beginning of a special run.
< surveys Hubei wet markets nervously >
Quote from: ugarte on January 26, 2026, 03:39:36 PMQuote from: scoop85 on January 26, 2026, 02:51:08 PMHaving a voters' poll at the same time as having the NPI makes no sense—really just clickbait at this point.
polls and scientific rankings have been clickbait since the days of wire service dominance and newspapers using movable type.
https://www.jstor.org/stable/2749389
Quote from: Trotsky on January 26, 2026, 03:44:56 PMLet's all take a moment to celebrate that this 10th-ranked team started this season with 12 true freshmen and 2 sophomore transfers including the primary goalie, 5 of the top 9 forwards and 3 of the top 6 defensemen.
That is gelling very well very quickly.
And now we get to enjoy them for the remainder of this season and (most of them) 3 further seasons where they get stronger and more experienced.
We could be at the beginning of a special run.
This is going to be so much fun.
Man, I love this team.
Quote from: JasonN95 on January 26, 2026, 03:11:05 PMQuote from: scoop85 on January 26, 2026, 02:51:08 PMHaving a voters' poll at the same time as having the NPI makes no sense—really just clickbait at this point.
Eh, I don't see it that way. (I'm guessing you felt the same with PWR, but if you didn't, I'd be curious what is different). I think of the NPI as trying to approximate who "deserves" to go to the NCAAs, which should be based on results, while the poll is ranking the teams relative to each other as to who is overall a "stronger/better" team. As more games are played in a season you'd expect those to converge, but teams can over/under-achieve over long stretches, plus the NPI has at least one known thumb on the scale, that being the extra weight given to road wins.
Yes, I felt the same way with PWR. I'll qualify my point to say it doesn't make sense to have a voters' poll after the 1st half of the season, when the NPI is more baked in with sufficient results.
Quote from: Trotsky on January 26, 2026, 03:44:56 PMLet's all take a moment to celebrate that this 10th-ranked team started this season with 12 true freshmen and 2 sophomore transfers including the primary goalie, 5 of the top 9 forwards and 3 of the top 6 defensemen.
That is gelling very well very quickly.
And now we get to enjoy them for the remainder of this season and (most of them) 3 further seasons where they get stronger and more experienced.
We could be at the beginning of a special run.
< surveys Hubei wet markets nervously >
Assuming the transfer portal plus NIL plus early entries don't become a thing
Quote from: underskill on January 26, 2026, 06:23:37 PMQuote from: Trotsky on January 26, 2026, 03:44:56 PMLet's all take a moment to celebrate that this 10th-ranked team started this season with 12 true freshmen and 2 sophomore transfers including the primary goalie, 5 of the top 9 forwards and 3 of the top 6 defensemen.
That is gelling very well very quickly.
And now we get to enjoy them for the remainder of this season and (most of them) 3 further seasons where they get stronger and more experienced.
We could be at the beginning of a special run.
< surveys Hubei wet markets nervously >
Assuming the transfer portal plus NIL plus early entries don't become a thing
Yes, Giant Meteor is always a possibility. cf. the serenity prayer.
(https://cdn.customsigns.com/media/catalog/product/c/s/cs_ys-pol-meteor_on-white_800.jpg)
Quote from: Trotsky on January 26, 2026, 06:34:48 PMQuote from: underskill on January 26, 2026, 06:23:37 PMQuote from: Trotsky on January 26, 2026, 03:44:56 PMLet's all take a moment to celebrate that this 10th-ranked team started this season with 12 true freshmen and 2 sophomore transfers including the primary goalie, 5 of the top 9 forwards and 3 of the top 6 defensemen.
That is gelling very well very quickly.
And now we get to enjoy them for the remainder of this season and (most of them) 3 further seasons where they get stronger and more experienced.
We could be at the beginning of a special run.
< surveys Hubei wet markets nervously >
Assuming the transfer portal plus NIL plus early entries don't become a thing
Yes, Giant Meteor is always a possibility. cf. the serenity prayer.
(https://cdn.customsigns.com/media/catalog/product/c/s/cs_ys-pol-meteor_on-white_800.jpg)
The poll loses all credibility when Harvard continues to receive votes.
Quote from: arugula on January 26, 2026, 11:32:05 PMThe poll loses all credibility when Harvard continues to receive votes.
I didn't know that it ever had credibility.
I thought the poll was only useful when we're above all our rivals, and otherwise it's fake.
Quote from: stereax on January 27, 2026, 09:32:59 AMI thought the poll was only useful when we're above all our rivals, and otherwise it's fake.
-- #nopolitics
Up (http://www.tbrw.info/?/weekly_Updates/cornell_Poll_Block.html) to 9 in USCHO (https://www.uscho.com/rankings/d-i-mens-poll), 8 in USA Hockey, along with 7 in NPI (http://www.tbrw.info/?/weekly_Updates/cornell_Poll_History.html).
At this time last year, in USCHO we were in the bottom of RV at 33rd (https://www.uscho.com/rankings/d-i-mens-poll/2025-02-03).
Quote from: Trotsky on February 02, 2026, 03:06:06 PMUp (http://www.tbrw.info/?/weekly_Updates/cornell_Poll_Block.html) to 9 in USCHO (https://www.uscho.com/rankings/d-i-mens-poll), 8 in USA Hockey, along with 7 in NPI (http://www.tbrw.info/?/weekly_Updates/cornell_Poll_History.html).
At this time last year, in USCHO we were in the bottom of RV at 33rd (https://www.uscho.com/rankings/d-i-mens-poll/2025-02-03).
Fire Schafer
Does anyone know the "last team in" by computer rankings in the current format? Or how often it has been each ranking? I assume it's something like 13,13,13,14,12,13,14,15,13 etc but was wondering what the realistic cutoff to feel safe might be.
Usually 14 I think. Atlantic Hockey steals a bid then one from another league. But I think in 2023 it might've gotten down to 12? I just remember Alaska was the last team out thanks to Colgate beating Harvard.
if you go thru the leagues
Atlantic will get 1
B10 has 3 that would have to lose before Wisc at 14
CCHA has two teams 13-15
ECAC has 3 before you get to Harv 21
HE has 2 before you get to Uconn
NCHC has 4
You can see Uconn or Mass, Miami, Minn St, Wisc stealing bids, Harvard as a stretch
so that means 10-11th is the worst cutoff?
Odds of all those multi bid conf having a total WC is low.
13th is probably safe, but 12th is probably 90% safe
There are 6 auto bids. There are 16 slots.
10th is safe. Be 10th or better when the frost clears.
10th is safest. 16th is out because of Atlantic. Usually the cutoff is between 13 and 14, because Atlantic takes one and then you tend to get an upset or three in the other conferences. B10, ECAC, NCHC should all have their winner in the top 16. HEA is a mess this year and CCHA is a tossup. So realistically 13+ should get us in. But yeah, 10+ is best.
How about we simply do not lose bad games? I think that will do wonders.
if they do the job vs the bottom teams and lose to Quin, getting to the Semis should be enough. but there is a 1-2 seed there for the taking.
just the BU game flip makes them a 1 seed.
Quote from: stereax on February 03, 2026, 07:18:25 PMHow about we simply do not lose bad games? I think that will do wonders.
We'll almost certainlty lose at least one bad game. ALMOST everybody (http://www.tbrw.info/?/cornell_History/cornell_H2H_by_Standing.html) does.
Quote from: Trotsky on February 04, 2026, 10:49:25 AMQuote from: stereax on February 03, 2026, 07:18:25 PMHow about we simply do not lose bad games? I think that will do wonders.
We'll almost certainlty lose at least one bad game. ALMOST everybody (http://www.tbrw.info/?/cornell_History/cornell_H2H_by_Standing.html) does.
For sure, realism is absolutely a thing and it's way more likely than not we cough up an extra game or two. On paper, though, the biggest "trap" games on the docket are Princeton and Clarkson. Besides the Q game, we can absolutely sweep the rest of the regular season.
Quote from: stereax on February 04, 2026, 11:53:48 AMQuote from: Trotsky on February 04, 2026, 10:49:25 AMQuote from: stereax on February 03, 2026, 07:18:25 PMHow about we simply do not lose bad games? I think that will do wonders.
We'll almost certainlty lose at least one bad game. ALMOST everybody (http://www.tbrw.info/?/cornell_History/cornell_H2H_by_Standing.html) does.
For sure, realism is absolutely a thing and it's way more likely than not we cough up an extra game or two. On paper, though, the biggest "trap" games on the docket are Princeton and Clarkson. Besides the Q game, we can absolutely sweep the rest of the regular season.
You're not implying that we can't sweep including Q, are you?
Quote from: Jim Hyla on February 09, 2026, 07:03:22 PMQuote from: stereax on February 04, 2026, 11:53:48 AMQuote from: Trotsky on February 04, 2026, 10:49:25 AMQuote from: stereax on February 03, 2026, 07:18:25 PMHow about we simply do not lose bad games? I think that will do wonders.
We'll almost certainlty lose at least one bad game. ALMOST everybody (http://www.tbrw.info/?/cornell_History/cornell_H2H_by_Standing.html) does.
For sure, realism is absolutely a thing and it's way more likely than not we cough up an extra game or two. On paper, though, the biggest "trap" games on the docket are Princeton and Clarkson. Besides the Q game, we can absolutely sweep the rest of the regular season.
You're not implying that we can't sweep including Q, are you?
We
can absolutely win Q. I would like to. But they match us well and it's not the game I would bet on us to win 😅
Speaking of NPI, Harvard winning bronze bumped us from 56.11 to 56.17 in the NPI, I'm pretty sure.
Quote from: stereax on February 09, 2026, 08:24:09 PMSpeaking of NPI, Harvard winning bronze bumped us from 56.11 to 56.17 in the NPI, I'm pretty sure.
Also bumped Dartmouth .06 - Q hasn't played them twice so they got a smaller increase.
Quote from: marty on February 09, 2026, 08:40:56 PMQuote from: stereax on February 09, 2026, 08:24:09 PMSpeaking of NPI, Harvard winning bronze bumped us from 56.11 to 56.17 in the NPI, I'm pretty sure.
Also bumped Dartmouth .06 - Q hasn't played them twice so they got a smaller increase.
BU on track to lose this. That would drop us to 56.14. If BU manages to come back and win this, we go up to 56.19. It's all so marginal.
Just gotta play them one game at a time.
And the good lord willing...
Quote from: stereax on February 09, 2026, 09:47:26 PMQuote from: marty on February 09, 2026, 08:40:56 PMQuote from: stereax on February 09, 2026, 08:24:09 PMSpeaking of NPI, Harvard winning bronze bumped us from 56.11 to 56.17 in the NPI, I'm pretty sure.
Also bumped Dartmouth .06 - Q hasn't played them twice so they got a smaller increase.
BU on track to lose this. That would drop us to 56.14. If BU manages to come back and win this, we go up to 56.19. It's all so marginal.
Just for completeness, since I said this in the other thread—the important thing here was BC losing which would hurt their NPI, more so than BU winning (barely) helping ours.
Quote from: Trotsky on February 09, 2026, 10:32:16 PMJust gotta play them one game at a time.
And the good lord willing...
Write it down!
They're your friends.
Weekend damage: we fall to 10th in NPI. Survivable if we don't make a habit of it.
Frankly I thought going L / T / L against three bad teams would hurt us more.
Quote from: Trotsky on February 15, 2026, 04:20:05 AMWeekend damage: we fall to 10th in NPI. Survivable if we don't make a habit of it.
Frankly I thought going L / T / L against three bad teams would hurt us more.
Notably we basically went T/T/L since the NPI treats an OT loss as 40% of a win, which is much closer to a tie than a loss.
One of the issues with college hockey counting OT results differently from regulation results is that we don't have the right verbiage for these results. While most sources such as the Sun and CHN treat an OT loss as a "loss" (eg. references to our record treat it as a loss), I think it's a lot more accurate to treat it as a tie. More accurate from an NPI perspective and also for judging the team, given 3x3 OT is not representative.
Basically, if a game goes to OT, it should be referred to as a tie, unless you want to be granular and differentiate OT wins/losses from regulation wins/losses. But doing this differentiating is cumbersome and most sources don't bother.
Quote from: Trotsky on February 15, 2026, 04:20:05 AMWeekend damage: we fall to 10th in NPI. Survivable if we don't make a habit of it.
Frankly I thought going L / T / L against three bad teams would hurt us more.
feels like it didn't hurt us a lot in the standings but did hurt us in the way that you see a fading luger's split times and hope that there's enough track left for course correction on the bottom turns if that analogy is relevant to your february 2026 viewing experience
Quote from: ugarte on February 15, 2026, 11:33:57 AMQuote from: Trotsky on February 15, 2026, 04:20:05 AMWeekend damage: we fall to 10th in NPI. Survivable if we don't make a habit of it.
Frankly I thought going L / T / L against three bad teams would hurt us more.
feels like it didn't hurt us a lot in the standings but did hurt us in the way that you see a fading luger's split times and hope that there's enough track left for course correction on the bottom turns if that analogy is relevant to your february 2026 viewing experience
Agree, we are not in Mikaela Shiffrin or Ilia Malinin territory.
It feels silly to talk about any of this given that our own play is by far the biggest determinant of whether we make the NCAAs, and we played like garbage this weekend. But, looking at the NPI now, there's a huge gap between Wisconsin at 15th and Mankato at 16th. Meanwhile, 10 (us) through 15 are bunched closer together than the difference between 15 and 16. If you assume 10-15 are the bubble teams, then we have to beat out X of these other five teams, where X is the number of teams outside the top 15 who get an automatic bid minus 1.
For example, if the Atlantic Hockey winner is the only autobid outside the top 15, then we don't have to finish better than any of these five teams. If Atlantic Hockey and the CCHA both get an automatic-bid, then we have to beat one of these five teams. Etc.
From that perspective, this is very doable.
Quote from: BearLover on February 15, 2026, 01:09:46 PMIt feels silly to talk about any of this given that our own play is by far the biggest determinant of whether we make the NCAAs, and we played like garbage this weekend. But, looking at the NPI now, there's a huge gap between Wisconsin at 15th and Mankato at 16th. Meanwhile, 10 (us) through 15 are bunched closer together than the difference between 15 and 16. If you assume 10-15 are the bubble teams, then we have to beat out X of these other five teams, where X is the number of teams outside the top 15 who get an automatic bid minus 1.
For example, if the Atlantic Hockey winner is the only autobid outside the top 15, then we don't have to finish better than any of these five teams. If Atlantic Hockey and the CCHA both get an automatic-bid, then we have to beat one of these five teams. Etc.
From that perspective, this is very doable.
It would be deeply surprising if NCHC or B1G's autobids aren't a top 16 team. Atlantic obviously will not be. CCHA, I'd wager wouldn't be - only St Thomas is still in the top 16, and Augustana, Mich Tech, and Bowling Green are clumped in 17-19. That being said, whoever wins the CCHA might climb the NPI anyways, so who knows. Hockey East is a massive tossup, and it truly wouldn't surprise me if a Maine, a BU, an NEU, or a Merrimack made a surprise championship run. Really, anyone in that hellhole could do it. ECAC
should be one of us, Q, or D, but it's also a tossup given D hasn't been great either recently and Q chokes like it's going out of style. So doing that math, - 10+ is automatically in no matter what. 11-12 is almost assuredly safe. 13-14 is the worry zone, 15 or down and we're probably out.
If we can pull off a win against Q next week, that will be HUGE. Otherwise, we just have to stay the course, not cough up (m)any more easy points, and pray on a bunch of teams' downfalls. Ideally make a deep ECAC run anyway. None of this autobid business even matters if we win at Placid, but it'd be nice to have that security going up there.
Quote from: BearLover on February 15, 2026, 11:29:00 AMQuote from: Trotsky on February 15, 2026, 04:20:05 AMWeekend damage: we fall to 10th in NPI. Survivable if we don't make a habit of it.
Frankly I thought going L / T / L against three bad teams would hurt us more.
Notably we basically went T/T/L since the NPI treats an OT loss as 40% of a win, which is much closer to a tie than a loss.
One of the issues with college hockey counting OT results differently from regulation results is that we don't have the right verbiage for these results. While most sources such as the Sun and CHN treat an OT loss as a "loss" (eg. references to our record treat it as a loss), I think it's a lot more accurate to treat it as a tie. More accurate from an NPI perspective and also for judging the team, given 3x3 OT is not representative.
Basically, if a game goes to OT, it should be referred to as a tie, unless you want to be granular and differentiate OT wins/losses from regulation wins/losses. But doing this differentiating is cumbersome and most sources don't bother.
You're right - it's a pain in the ass. But we have to treat it like a loss, because that's what goes in the team's official record, and coach's record, for example.
There are numerous places on the site where we separate out these things into distinct columns or put OT records in parentheticals.
Quote from: adamw on February 15, 2026, 06:56:39 PMQuote from: BearLover on February 15, 2026, 11:29:00 AMQuote from: Trotsky on February 15, 2026, 04:20:05 AMWeekend damage: we fall to 10th in NPI. Survivable if we don't make a habit of it.
Frankly I thought going L / T / L against three bad teams would hurt us more.
Notably we basically went T/T/L since the NPI treats an OT loss as 40% of a win, which is much closer to a tie than a loss.
One of the issues with college hockey counting OT results differently from regulation results is that we don't have the right verbiage for these results. While most sources such as the Sun and CHN treat an OT loss as a "loss" (eg. references to our record treat it as a loss), I think it's a lot more accurate to treat it as a tie. More accurate from an NPI perspective and also for judging the team, given 3x3 OT is not representative.
Basically, if a game goes to OT, it should be referred to as a tie, unless you want to be granular and differentiate OT wins/losses from regulation wins/losses. But doing this differentiating is cumbersome and most sources don't bother.
You're right - it's a pain in the ass. But we have to treat it like a loss, because that's what goes in the team's official record, and coach's record, for example.
There are numerous places on the site where we separate out these things into distinct columns or put OT records in parentheticals.
Adam and Bearlover in agreement! Who says there's no chance for peace in the Middle East?!
Quote from: CU2007 on February 15, 2026, 10:10:32 PMQuote from: adamw on February 15, 2026, 06:56:39 PMQuote from: BearLover on February 15, 2026, 11:29:00 AMQuote from: Trotsky on February 15, 2026, 04:20:05 AMWeekend damage: we fall to 10th in NPI. Survivable if we don't make a habit of it.
Frankly I thought going L / T / L against three bad teams would hurt us more.
Notably we basically went T/T/L since the NPI treats an OT loss as 40% of a win, which is much closer to a tie than a loss.
One of the issues with college hockey counting OT results differently from regulation results is that we don't have the right verbiage for these results. While most sources such as the Sun and CHN treat an OT loss as a "loss" (eg. references to our record treat it as a loss), I think it's a lot more accurate to treat it as a tie. More accurate from an NPI perspective and also for judging the team, given 3x3 OT is not representative.
Basically, if a game goes to OT, it should be referred to as a tie, unless you want to be granular and differentiate OT wins/losses from regulation wins/losses. But doing this differentiating is cumbersome and most sources don't bother.
You're right - it's a pain in the ass. But we have to treat it like a loss, because that's what goes in the team's official record, and coach's record, for example.
There are numerous places on the site where we separate out these things into distinct columns or put OT records in parentheticals.
Adam and Bearlover in agreement! Who says there's no chance for peace in the Middle East?!
It's a trap. My money's on Adam laying the kill shot if bearlover.is kures in by false sense of security.
Quote from: abmarks on February 16, 2026, 06:32:11 AMQuote from: CU2007 on February 15, 2026, 10:10:32 PMQuote from: adamw on February 15, 2026, 06:56:39 PMQuote from: BearLover on February 15, 2026, 11:29:00 AMQuote from: Trotsky on February 15, 2026, 04:20:05 AMWeekend damage: we fall to 10th in NPI. Survivable if we don't make a habit of it.
Frankly I thought going L / T / L against three bad teams would hurt us more.
Notably we basically went T/T/L since the NPI treats an OT loss as 40% of a win, which is much closer to a tie than a loss.
One of the issues with college hockey counting OT results differently from regulation results is that we don't have the right verbiage for these results. While most sources such as the Sun and CHN treat an OT loss as a "loss" (eg. references to our record treat it as a loss), I think it's a lot more accurate to treat it as a tie. More accurate from an NPI perspective and also for judging the team, given 3x3 OT is not representative.
Basically, if a game goes to OT, it should be referred to as a tie, unless you want to be granular and differentiate OT wins/losses from regulation wins/losses. But doing this differentiating is cumbersome and most sources don't bother.
You're right - it's a pain in the ass. But we have to treat it like a loss, because that's what goes in the team's official record, and coach's record, for example.
There are numerous places on the site where we separate out these things into distinct columns or put OT records in parentheticals.
Adam and Bearlover in agreement! Who says there's no chance for peace in the Middle East?!
It's a trap. My money's on Adam laying the kill shot if bearlover.is kures in by false sense of security.
Frozen Four is in Vegas and no one will be betting on BearLover.
Quote from: marty on February 16, 2026, 06:49:20 AMQuote from: abmarks on February 16, 2026, 06:32:11 AMQuote from: CU2007 on February 15, 2026, 10:10:32 PMQuote from: adamw on February 15, 2026, 06:56:39 PMQuote from: BearLover on February 15, 2026, 11:29:00 AMQuote from: Trotsky on February 15, 2026, 04:20:05 AMWeekend damage: we fall to 10th in NPI. Survivable if we don't make a habit of it.
Frankly I thought going L / T / L against three bad teams would hurt us more.
Notably we basically went T/T/L since the NPI treats an OT loss as 40% of a win, which is much closer to a tie than a loss.
One of the issues with college hockey counting OT results differently from regulation results is that we don't have the right verbiage for these results. While most sources such as the Sun and CHN treat an OT loss as a "loss" (eg. references to our record treat it as a loss), I think it's a lot more accurate to treat it as a tie. More accurate from an NPI perspective and also for judging the team, given 3x3 OT is not representative.
Basically, if a game goes to OT, it should be referred to as a tie, unless you want to be granular and differentiate OT wins/losses from regulation wins/losses. But doing this differentiating is cumbersome and most sources don't bother.
You're right - it's a pain in the ass. But we have to treat it like a loss, because that's what goes in the team's official record, and coach's record, for example.
There are numerous places on the site where we separate out these things into distinct columns or put OT records in parentheticals.
Adam and Bearlover in agreement! Who says there's no chance for peace in the Middle East?!
It's a trap. My money's on Adam laying the kill shot if bearlover.is kures in by false sense of security.
Frozen Four is in Vegas and no one will be betting on BearLover.
You should do stand-up, your material is incredible
Quote from: BearLover on February 15, 2026, 11:29:00 AMQuote from: Trotsky on February 15, 2026, 04:20:05 AMWeekend damage: we fall to 10th in NPI. Survivable if we don't make a habit of it.
Frankly I thought going L / T / L against three bad teams would hurt us more.
Notably we basically went T/T/L since the NPI treats an OT loss as 40% of a win
This is a good point, thank you.
Quote from: BearLover on February 15, 2026, 11:29:00 AMBasically, if a game goes to OT, it should be referred to as a tie, unless you want to be granular and differentiate OT wins/losses from regulation wins/losses. But doing this differentiating is cumbersome and most sources don't bother.
Yes. I wonder if we polled the coaches and players they would vote to tie after 60, full stop.
Quote from: Trotsky on February 16, 2026, 11:21:57 AMQuote from: BearLover on February 15, 2026, 11:29:00 AMBasically, if a game goes to OT, it should be referred to as a tie, unless you want to be granular and differentiate OT wins/losses from regulation wins/losses. But doing this differentiating is cumbersome and most sources don't bother.
Yes. I wonder if we polled the coaches and players they would vote to tie after 60, full stop.
3v3 play is useful in that it prepares college athletes for NHL/similar league play, where OT proceeds the same way. Plus, strategy in 3v3 is markedly different than at 5v5.
That being said, the "possession game" OT has become fucking sucks to watch.
Quote from: stereax on February 16, 2026, 12:25:21 PMQuote from: Trotsky on February 16, 2026, 11:21:57 AMQuote from: BearLover on February 15, 2026, 11:29:00 AMBasically, if a game goes to OT, it should be referred to as a tie, unless you want to be granular and differentiate OT wins/losses from regulation wins/losses. But doing this differentiating is cumbersome and most sources don't bother.
Yes. I wonder if we polled the coaches and players they would vote to tie after 60, full stop.
3v3 play is useful in that it prepares college athletes for NHL/similar league play, where OT proceeds the same way. Plus, strategy in 3v3 is markedly different than at 5v5.
That being said, the "possession game" OT has become fucking sucks to watch.
3x3 OT sucks in the pros, too.
If nothing else, you should lose possession if you leave the offensive zone with the puck. Like a backcourt in basketball.
NHL players are also much better in open space than college players. But yea 3x3 sucks either way
Quote from: Dafatone on February 16, 2026, 12:56:18 PMQuote from: stereax on February 16, 2026, 12:25:21 PMQuote from: Trotsky on February 16, 2026, 11:21:57 AMQuote from: BearLover on February 15, 2026, 11:29:00 AMBasically, if a game goes to OT, it should be referred to as a tie, unless you want to be granular and differentiate OT wins/losses from regulation wins/losses. But doing this differentiating is cumbersome and most sources don't bother.
Yes. I wonder if we polled the coaches and players they would vote to tie after 60, full stop.
3v3 play is useful in that it prepares college athletes for NHL/similar league play, where OT proceeds the same way. Plus, strategy in 3v3 is markedly different than at 5v5.
That being said, the "possession game" OT has become fucking sucks to watch.
3x3 OT sucks in the pros, too.
If nothing else, you should lose possession if you leave the offensive zone with the puck. Like a backcourt in basketball.
It sucks full stop. But that's likely why the NCAA does it that way.
The NC$$ is aping NHL rules because they think it helps college players' prospects.
The only way to end shootout and 3x3 in NC$$ is uproot them everywhere.
(https://cdn.kobo.com/book-images/b75dfffc-c9ce-40c9-b5c4-669ddf38a3ce/353/569/90/False/world-socialist-revolution.jpg)
10 USCHO, 11 USA Hockey, 10 NPI
Q is 5 / 5 / 6
Quote from: Trotsky on February 16, 2026, 11:21:57 AMQuote from: BearLover on February 15, 2026, 11:29:00 AMBasically, if a game goes to OT, it should be referred to as a tie, unless you want to be granular and differentiate OT wins/losses from regulation wins/losses. But doing this differentiating is cumbersome and most sources don't bother.
Yes. I wonder if we polled the coaches and players they would vote to tie after 60, full stop.
If that were true, it would be the case. Because coaches are essentially the drivers as to what the rules are.
NPI with some games still in progress:
7 Qpc
10 Cor
11 Drt
21 Uni
27 Hvd
32 Prn
NPI:
8 Qpc
9 Drt
11 Cor
22 Uni
We're 11th, but closer to 6th than to 12th.
Yeah, looking at the numbers some more, I do suspect we are almost locked with a win tonight. To miss at that point, we'd have to lose both games in the ECAC quarterfinals, at home against a pretty weak team, AND have other results break against us.
Dartmouth is probably in even if they lose out (lose tonight AND lose both quarterfinals games). It will be their first NCAA appearance in 40 years.
Quote from: BearLover on February 28, 2026, 10:51:45 AMYeah, looking at the numbers some more, I do suspect we are almost locked with a win tonight. To miss at that point, we'd have to lose both games in the ECAC quarterfinals, at home against a pretty weak team, AND have other results break against us.
Dartmouth is probably in even if they lose out (lose tonight AND lose both quarterfinals games). It will be their first NCAA appearance in 40 years.
Closer to 50 (http://www.tbrw.info/?/ncaa_Tournament/ecac_NCAA_Appearances.htm) than 40!
To put it further into perspective, 5 teams that left to form Hockey East in 1985 appeared in the NC$$s
as ECAC members more recently than Dartmouth.
Why is the NPI so much more stable than the PWR late in the season? Is it simply the removal of the pairwise comparison itself?
Quote from: Trotsky on February 28, 2026, 11:35:38 AMWhy is the NPI so much more stable than the PWR late in the season? Is it simply the removal of the pairwise comparison itself?
I'm not sure that's entirely true. After most of the non-RPI criteria were removed from the Pairwise, things were pretty stable in recent years. Basically the Pairwise was almost entirely dominated by the RPI component, and everything else became irrelevant, so the quirks were all gone. So in effect, there really was no comparison stuff anymore for the last 10 years or what not.
NPI may be slightly more stable - but I don't know yet. I largely think it's perception. I've had some people say to me the opposite. So I dunno.
Us winning (and Dartmouth losing) hops us up to 9th as of right now!
Quote from: stereax on February 28, 2026, 10:36:10 PMUs winning (and Dartmouth losing) hops us up to 9th as of right now!
Great news though to be fair to the prior post we are much closer to 11th (0.19) than 8th (0.58).
But still... great news!
Quote from: adamw on February 28, 2026, 08:12:01 PMQuote from: Trotsky on February 28, 2026, 11:35:38 AMWhy is the NPI so much more stable than the PWR late in the season? Is it simply the removal of the pairwise comparison itself?
I'm not sure that's entirely true. After most of the non-RPI criteria were removed from the Pairwise, things were pretty stable in recent years. Basically the Pairwise was almost entirely dominated by the RPI component, and everything else became irrelevant, so the quirks were all gone. So in effect, there really was no comparison stuff anymore for the last 10 years or what not.
NPI may be slightly more stable - but I don't know yet. I largely think it's perception. I've had some people say to me the opposite. So I dunno.
Thanks. It is likely just my perception.
Quote from: Trotsky on February 28, 2026, 10:44:22 PMQuote from: stereax on February 28, 2026, 10:36:10 PMUs winning (and Dartmouth losing) hops us up to 9th as of right now!
Great news though to be fair to the prior post we are much closer to 11th (0.19) than 8th (0.58).
But still... great news!
Yeah, there are clumps and the 9-11ish spot is a big one... but GREAT NEWS NONETHELESS!
NCAA tournament is nearly locked. That would make 8 tournies in 9 seasons, pretty amazing. Probably just Quinnipiac and Denver who can say the same?
The team hasn't looked that impressive this season tbh. Tonight, CHN says our xG was 1.5 and Clarkson's was 2.1. I know CHN's xG stat is flawed, but even going by more traditional metrics like SOG...shots were even, at home, on senior night, against a middle-of-the-road team.
But still, the team has exceeded my expectations and I would give Casey an A so far.
Quote from: BearLover on March 01, 2026, 12:16:01 AMNCAA tournament is nearly locked. That would make 8 tournies in 9 seasons, pretty amazing. Probably just Quinnipiac and Denver who can say the same?
Not even Quinnipiac. They missed in 2018 and 2020. So only Denver. Not BC or BU or any of the Big 10 schools.
And the year we missed was 2022, when we returned from a year off. Not bad.
Quote from: pjd8 on March 01, 2026, 03:41:17 AMQuote from: BearLover on March 01, 2026, 12:16:01 AMNCAA tournament is nearly locked. That would make 8 tournies in 9 seasons, pretty amazing. Probably just Quinnipiac and Denver who can say the same?
Not even Quinnipiac. They missed in 2018 and 2020. So only Denver. Not BC or BU or any of the Big 10 schools.
And the year we missed was 2022, when we returned from a year off. Not bad.
We should figure out a way to get this stat ingrained in every, even marginal, CU hockey fan.
Love what you have. The vast majority of schools would die for that kind of program.
To me, the mark of a good season is that we make the NCAAs. That's because it means we either won our league championship or won a ton of other games.
Cornell hockey doesn't get enough recognition for being consistently very good.
Of course, the more NCAA tournies we make, the longer grows our streak of getting in but not making the frozen four. If we do end up then NCAAs this year, as is very likely at this point, we'll be in a similar position to most seasons post-pandemic where we need to win a couple of 40-45% weighted coin flips to make the froze four. This is a good team, but we are going to be underdogs against anyone we play in the NCAAs (barring a major upset in the 4v1 game in our bracket).
When I watch this team, we don't look dominant. And when I look at the metrics, we certainly don't look dominant. We look decidedly average 5x5. But we have gotten strong goaltending and pretty good special teams, and if you get those things you can paper over other flaws.
As we won the ECAC the past two seasons, and as we do not need to win the championship to make the NCAAs, I view winning the ECAC tournament as more of a luxury this season. I hope we win and will complain if we don't, but there's a lot less pressure this time.
This post will age very badly if we lose both games in the quarterfinals AND then hit our 1-in-25(?) odds of everything else breaking against us such that we miss the NCAAs.
Quote from: BearLover on March 01, 2026, 11:23:38 AMWhen I watch this team, we don't look dominant.
I tend to agree, though we've certainly had our moments. I think that's a function of having so many freshmen.
And yet here we are, ninth in NPI, an Ivy title, and third in the ECAC having beaten everyone at least once, so we can do it again. Think what will happen as this freshman class matures.
The future's so bright, I gotta wear shades.
Quote from: pjd8 on March 01, 2026, 05:36:38 PMQuote from: BearLover on March 01, 2026, 11:23:38 AMWhen I watch this team, we don't look dominant.
I tend to agree, though we've certainly had our moments. I think that's a function of having so many freshmen.
And yet here we are, ninth in NPI, an Ivy title, and third in the ECAC having beaten everyone at least once, so we can do it again. Think what will happen as this freshman class matures.
The future's so bright, I gotta wear shades.
The only team we didn't beat at least once this season is BU- the only one e that we played once.
Quote from: The Rancor on March 01, 2026, 10:02:57 PMQuote from: pjd8 on March 01, 2026, 05:36:38 PMQuote from: BearLover on March 01, 2026, 11:23:38 AMWhen I watch this team, we don't look dominant.
I tend to agree, though we've certainly had our moments. I think that's a function of having so many freshmen.
And yet here we are, ninth in NPI, an Ivy title, and third in the ECAC having beaten everyone at least once, so we can do it again. Think what will happen as this freshman class matures.
The future's so bright, I gotta wear shades.
The only team we didn't beat at least once this season is BU- the only one e that we played once.
Yes, I was just referring to ECAC teams, but maybe that's a good omen for us if we meet them in the post season. It *might* happen. They are finally above .500.
Quote from: pjd8 on March 01, 2026, 10:08:16 PMQuote from: The Rancor on March 01, 2026, 10:02:57 PMQuote from: pjd8 on March 01, 2026, 05:36:38 PMQuote from: BearLover on March 01, 2026, 11:23:38 AMWhen I watch this team, we don't look dominant.
I tend to agree, though we've certainly had our moments. I think that's a function of having so many freshmen.
And yet here we are, ninth in NPI, an Ivy title, and third in the ECAC having beaten everyone at least once, so we can do it again. Think what will happen as this freshman class matures.
The future's so bright, I gotta wear shades.
The only team we didn't beat at least once this season is BU- the only one e that we played once.
Yes, I was just referring to ECAC teams, but maybe that's a good omen for us if we meet them in the post season. It *might* happen. They are finally above .500.
They have to win the HEA playoffs to get in. If they get in, they'll be a 4 seed. If we stay at 9 (highest 3 seed), we're probably going to be vs Denver,
probably one of the Michigans, and Bentley or whichever AHA team wants to be cannon fodder. (And if we're against Denver, it's almost certainly gonna be in Colorado.)
Quote from: BearLover on March 01, 2026, 11:23:38 AMTo me, the mark of a good season is that we make the NCAAs.
For me that is the mark of a GREAT season. A good season is we make Lake Placid.
I think we have been so spoiled by the frequency with which Schafer made the ECAC SF that it reset the level of expectation too high, and people are no longer sufficiently thrilled by just that in itself (http://www.tbrw.info/index.html?/ecac_Tournament/ecac_F4_Icon_Matrix.htm).
Quote from: Trotsky on March 02, 2026, 01:41:56 AMQuote from: BearLover on March 01, 2026, 11:23:38 AMTo me, the mark of a good season is that we make the NCAAs.
For me that is the mark of a GREAT season. A good season is we make Lake Placid.
I think we have been so spoiled by the frequency with which Schafer made the ECAC SF that it reset the level of expectation too high, and people are no longer sufficiently thrilled by just that in itself (http://www.tbrw.info/index.html?/ecac_Tournament/ecac_F4_Icon_Matrix.htm).
If you weren't thrilled in the semi last year...
Quote from: stereax on March 01, 2026, 10:42:48 PMQuote from: pjd8 on March 01, 2026, 10:08:16 PMQuote from: The Rancor on March 01, 2026, 10:02:57 PMQuote from: pjd8 on March 01, 2026, 05:36:38 PMQuote from: BearLover on March 01, 2026, 11:23:38 AMWhen I watch this team, we don't look dominant.
I tend to agree, though we've certainly had our moments. I think that's a function of having so many freshmen.
And yet here we are, ninth in NPI, an Ivy title, and third in the ECAC having beaten everyone at least once, so we can do it again. Think what will happen as this freshman class matures.
The future's so bright, I gotta wear shades.
The only team we didn't beat at least once this season is BU- the only one e that we played once.
Yes, I was just referring to ECAC teams, but maybe that's a good omen for us if we meet them in the post season. It *might* happen. They are finally above .500.
They have to win the HEA playoffs to get in. If they get in, they'll be a 4 seed. If we stay at 9 (highest 3 seed), we're probably going to be vs Denver, probably one of the Michigans, and Bentley or whichever AHA team wants to be cannon fodder. (And if we're against Denver, it's almost certainly gonna be in Colorado.)
I recommend listening to and reading the USCHO Braketology information. They lean toward Albany for us to
try to get some sort of crowd there...if we lose in the Quarters of ECAC, and maybe the semis, we might get sent to Denver, but if I'm betting, I'd say ALB vs. UMD. We'll see.
Quote from: BlueSky on March 02, 2026, 08:22:59 AMQuote from: stereax on March 01, 2026, 10:42:48 PMQuote from: pjd8 on March 01, 2026, 10:08:16 PMQuote from: The Rancor on March 01, 2026, 10:02:57 PMQuote from: pjd8 on March 01, 2026, 05:36:38 PMQuote from: BearLover on March 01, 2026, 11:23:38 AMWhen I watch this team, we don't look dominant.
I tend to agree, though we've certainly had our moments. I think that's a function of having so many freshmen.
And yet here we are, ninth in NPI, an Ivy title, and third in the ECAC having beaten everyone at least once, so we can do it again. Think what will happen as this freshman class matures.
The future's so bright, I gotta wear shades.
The only team we didn't beat at least once this season is BU- the only one e that we played once.
Yes, I was just referring to ECAC teams, but maybe that's a good omen for us if we meet them in the post season. It *might* happen. They are finally above .500.
They have to win the HEA playoffs to get in. If they get in, they'll be a 4 seed. If we stay at 9 (highest 3 seed), we're probably going to be vs Denver, probably one of the Michigans, and Bentley or whichever AHA team wants to be cannon fodder. (And if we're against Denver, it's almost certainly gonna be in Colorado.)
I recommend listening to and reading the USCHO Braketology information. They lean toward Albany for us to try to get some sort of crowd there...if we lose in the Quarters of ECAC, and maybe the semis, we might get sent to Denver, but if I'm betting, I'd say ALB vs. UMD. We'll see.
I keep an eye on the bracketology Reddit stuff, haha. But yeah, Albany makes a lot more sense for us. They'll almost certainly want Denver in Loveland, and NoDak in Sioux Falls, and the rest of it is just chip shuffling away. Good thing for us is that we're good at drawing crowds, which can help us get "closer" seeding even if it isn't chalk.
If it IS Albany, I'm gonna do whatever the hell I need to to try to be there. (And if it IS UMD... Kovich :( )
Quote from: stereax on March 02, 2026, 08:55:11 AMQuote from: BlueSky on March 02, 2026, 08:22:59 AMQuote from: stereax on March 01, 2026, 10:42:48 PMQuote from: pjd8 on March 01, 2026, 10:08:16 PMQuote from: The Rancor on March 01, 2026, 10:02:57 PMQuote from: pjd8 on March 01, 2026, 05:36:38 PMQuote from: BearLover on March 01, 2026, 11:23:38 AMWhen I watch this team, we don't look dominant.
I tend to agree, though we've certainly had our moments. I think that's a function of having so many freshmen.
And yet here we are, ninth in NPI, an Ivy title, and third in the ECAC having beaten everyone at least once, so we can do it again. Think what will happen as this freshman class matures.
The future's so bright, I gotta wear shades.
The only team we didn't beat at least once this season is BU- the only one e that we played once.
Yes, I was just referring to ECAC teams, but maybe that's a good omen for us if we meet them in the post season. It *might* happen. They are finally above .500.
They have to win the HEA playoffs to get in. If they get in, they'll be a 4 seed. If we stay at 9 (highest 3 seed), we're probably going to be vs Denver, probably one of the Michigans, and Bentley or whichever AHA team wants to be cannon fodder. (And if we're against Denver, it's almost certainly gonna be in Colorado.)
I recommend listening to and reading the USCHO Braketology information. They lean toward Albany for us to try to get some sort of crowd there...if we lose in the Quarters of ECAC, and maybe the semis, we might get sent to Denver, but if I'm betting, I'd say ALB vs. UMD. We'll see.
I keep an eye on the bracketology Reddit stuff, haha. But yeah, Albany makes a lot more sense for us. They'll almost certainly want Denver in Loveland, and NoDak in Sioux Falls, and the rest of it is just chip shuffling away. Good thing for us is that we're good at drawing crowds, which can help us get "closer" seeding even if it isn't chalk.
If it IS Albany, I'm gonna do whatever the hell I need to to try to be there. (And if it IS UMD... Kovich :( )
There's a chance I'll have to be out of town on the regional weekend, so I am convinced we will wind up in Sioux Falls just to spite me.
Quote from: pjd8 on March 01, 2026, 10:08:16 PMQuote from: The Rancor on March 01, 2026, 10:02:57 PMQuote from: pjd8 on March 01, 2026, 05:36:38 PMQuote from: BearLover on March 01, 2026, 11:23:38 AMWhen I watch this team, we don't look dominant.
I tend to agree, though we've certainly had our moments. I think that's a function of having so many freshmen.
And yet here we are, ninth in NPI, an Ivy title, and third in the ECAC having beaten everyone at least once, so we can do it again. Think what will happen as this freshman class matures.
The future's so bright, I gotta wear shades.
The only team we didn't beat at least once this season is BU- the only one e that we played once.
Yes, I was just referring to ECAC teams, but maybe that's a good omen for us if we meet them in the post season. It *might* happen. They are finally above .500.
Totally. I just thought it was pretty cool. Except for losing to BU. Never cool.
Quote from: Dafatone on March 02, 2026, 08:57:18 AMThere's a chance I'll have to be out of town on the regional weekend, so I am convinced we will wind up in Sioux Falls just to spite me.
Isaac's birthday party is the weekend of the regionals, so I'm not going anywhere. But that worked out pretty well for the ECAC semis/finals last year.
Honest to G_d, this is a joke, so please take it that way:
And at least my Dad can only die once, so we know that's not a condition precedent.
Quote from: stereax on March 02, 2026, 08:55:11 AMQuote from: BlueSky on March 02, 2026, 08:22:59 AMQuote from: stereax on March 01, 2026, 10:42:48 PMQuote from: pjd8 on March 01, 2026, 10:08:16 PMQuote from: The Rancor on March 01, 2026, 10:02:57 PMQuote from: pjd8 on March 01, 2026, 05:36:38 PMQuote from: BearLover on March 01, 2026, 11:23:38 AMWhen I watch this team, we don't look dominant.
I tend to agree, though we've certainly had our moments. I think that's a function of having so many freshmen.
And yet here we are, ninth in NPI, an Ivy title, and third in the ECAC having beaten everyone at least once, so we can do it again. Think what will happen as this freshman class matures.
The future's so bright, I gotta wear shades.
The only team we didn't beat at least once this season is BU- the only one e that we played once.
Yes, I was just referring to ECAC teams, but maybe that's a good omen for us if we meet them in the post season. It *might* happen. They are finally above .500.
They have to win the HEA playoffs to get in. If they get in, they'll be a 4 seed. If we stay at 9 (highest 3 seed), we're probably going to be vs Denver, probably one of the Michigans, and Bentley or whichever AHA team wants to be cannon fodder. (And if we're against Denver, it's almost certainly gonna be in Colorado.)
I recommend listening to and reading the USCHO Braketology information. They lean toward Albany for us to try to get some sort of crowd there...if we lose in the Quarters of ECAC, and maybe the semis, we might get sent to Denver, but if I'm betting, I'd say ALB vs. UMD. We'll see.
I keep an eye on the bracketology Reddit stuff, haha. But yeah, Albany makes a lot more sense for us. They'll almost certainly want Denver in Loveland, and NoDak in Sioux Falls, and the rest of it is just chip shuffling away. Good thing for us is that we're good at drawing crowds, which can help us get "closer" seeding even if it isn't chalk.
If it IS Albany, I'm gonna do whatever the hell I need to to try to be there. (And if it IS UMD... Kovich :( )
Denver must go to Loveland as the host.
Quote from: Beeeej on March 02, 2026, 09:48:38 AMAnd at least my Dad can only die once
"That's just cuz You People aren't born again." -- Nick Fuentes
Quote from: Trotsky on March 02, 2026, 11:23:29 AMQuote from: Beeeej on March 02, 2026, 09:48:38 AMAnd at least my Dad can only die once
"That's just cuz You People aren't born again." -- Nick Fuentes
known BU student
Quote from: DafatoneThere's a chance I'll have to be out of town on the regional weekend, so I am convinced we will wind up in Sioux Falls just to spite me.
Same for me if Albany. :(
Quote from: TimV on March 02, 2026, 01:23:08 PMQuote from: DafatoneThere's a chance I'll have to be out of town on the regional weekend, so I am convinced we will wind up in Sioux Falls just to spite me.
Same for me if Albany. :(
Same! That weekend is the end of my son's spring break / family vacation and the start of baseball season. The Pirates open at Citi so I'm going to both weekend games already (but will miss Skenes).
Quote from: ugarte on March 02, 2026, 01:38:08 PMQuote from: TimV on March 02, 2026, 01:23:08 PMQuote from: DafatoneThere's a chance I'll have to be out of town on the regional weekend, so I am convinced we will wind up in Sioux Falls just to spite me.
Same for me if Albany. :(
Same! That weekend is the end of my son's spring break / family vacation and the start of baseball season. The Pirates open at Citi so I'm going to both weekend games already (but will miss Skenes).
How many times have we not been placed in Allentown? Too many.
Quote from: Jeff Hopkins '82 on March 02, 2026, 02:47:07 PMQuote from: ugarte on March 02, 2026, 01:38:08 PMQuote from: TimV on March 02, 2026, 01:23:08 PMQuote from: DafatoneThere's a chance I'll have to be out of town on the regional weekend, so I am convinced we will wind up in Sioux Falls just to spite me.
Same for me if Albany. :(
Same! That weekend is the end of my son's spring break / family vacation and the start of baseball season. The Pirates open at Citi so I'm going to both weekend games already (but will miss Skenes).
How many times have we not been placed in Allentown? Too many.
Allentown is an easy drive for me, so I agree!
9s across the board (http://www.tbrw.info/weekly_Updates/cornell_Poll_History.html) today in USCHO, USA Hockey, and NPI.
Quote from: Trotsky on March 02, 2026, 04:05:32 PM9s across the board (http://www.tbrw.info/weekly_Updates/cornell_Poll_History.html) today in USCHO, USA Hockey, and NPI.
(https://media.phillyvoice.com/media/images/9-9-9_challenge_phillies.2e16d0ba.fill-735x490.jpg)
Quote from: Trotsky on March 02, 2026, 04:05:32 PM9s across the board (http://www.tbrw.info/weekly_Updates/cornell_Poll_History.html) today in USCHO, USA Hockey, and NPI.
(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herman_Cain#/media/File:Herman_Cain_by_Gage_Skidmore_4.jpg)
Quote from: stereax on March 02, 2026, 04:18:10 PMQuote from: Trotsky on March 02, 2026, 04:05:32 PM9s across the board (http://www.tbrw.info/weekly_Updates/cornell_Poll_History.html) today in USCHO, USA Hockey, and NPI.
(https://media.phillyvoice.com/media/images/9-9-9_challenge_phillies.2e16d0ba.fill-735x490.jpg)
(https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/8o92Ved2wvYhWHEjWKbBjk-1920-80.jpg.webp)
Quote from: stereax on March 01, 2026, 10:42:48 PMThey have to win the HEA playoffs to get in. If they get in, they'll be a 4 seed. If we stay at 9 (highest 3 seed), we're probably going to be vs Denver, probably one of the Michigans, and Bentley or whichever AHA team wants to be cannon fodder. (And if we're against Denver, it's almost certainly gonna be in Colorado.)
Not "almost certainly" - FYI - but it literally is a requirement that it will be.
Quote from: adamw on March 02, 2026, 06:05:57 PMQuote from: stereax on March 01, 2026, 10:42:48 PMThey have to win the HEA playoffs to get in. If they get in, they'll be a 4 seed. If we stay at 9 (highest 3 seed), we're probably going to be vs Denver, probably one of the Michigans, and Bentley or whichever AHA team wants to be cannon fodder. (And if we're against Denver, it's almost certainly gonna be in Colorado.)
Not "almost certainly" - FYI - but it literally is a requirement that it will be.
Wait, for real? I thought it was something that wasn't like...
required, but almost certain due to geographic stuff.
Quote from: Weder on March 02, 2026, 03:11:48 PMQuote from: Jeff Hopkins '82 on March 02, 2026, 02:47:07 PMQuote from: ugarte on March 02, 2026, 01:38:08 PMQuote from: TimV on March 02, 2026, 01:23:08 PMQuote from: DafatoneThere's a chance I'll have to be out of town on the regional weekend, so I am convinced we will wind up in Sioux Falls just to spite me.
Same for me if Albany. :(
Same! That weekend is the end of my son's spring break / family vacation and the start of baseball season. The Pirates open at Citi so I'm going to both weekend games already (but will miss Skenes).
How many times have we not been placed in Allentown? Too many.
Allentown is an easy drive for me, so I agree!
The PPL Center is only 2 miles from me. I'd be able to sleep in my own bed.
Quote from: stereax on March 02, 2026, 06:10:06 PMQuote from: adamw on March 02, 2026, 06:05:57 PMQuote from: stereax on March 01, 2026, 10:42:48 PMThey have to win the HEA playoffs to get in. If they get in, they'll be a 4 seed. If we stay at 9 (highest 3 seed), we're probably going to be vs Denver, probably one of the Michigans, and Bentley or whichever AHA team wants to be cannon fodder. (And if we're against Denver, it's almost certainly gonna be in Colorado.)
Not "almost certainly" - FYI - but it literally is a requirement that it will be.
Wait, for real? I thought it was something that wasn't like... required, but almost certain due to geographic stuff.
Nope. If a team is the "host" they must be seeded in that regional...assuming they make the tournament, that is.
https://www.bcinterruption.com/boston-college-bc-eagles-mens-womens-hockey-ranking-calculators/51511/what-if-the-2026-ncaa-mens-hockey-tournament-npi-predictor-frozen-four
Pretty neat tool here. I can get us up to #5 comfortably (which of course involves just about every result breaking our way).
I also played with some worst-case scenarios. I only spent a couple minutes, but I was finding it hard for UMass, UConn, or Augustana to pass us in NPI without winning their conference (which renders them passing us in NPI moot). In fact, I wasn't finding a way we could miss without OSU winning the B10. I'll play around more later, but is anyone able to find a scenario in which we miss that does NOT involve OSU winning the B10?
Quote from: BearLover on March 13, 2026, 01:27:01 PMhttps://www.bcinterruption.com/boston-college-bc-eagles-mens-womens-hockey-ranking-calculators/51511/what-if-the-2026-ncaa-mens-hockey-tournament-npi-predictor-frozen-four
Pretty neat tool here. I can get us up to #5 comfortably (which of course involves just about every result breaking our way).
I also played with some worst-case scenarios. I only spent a couple minutes, but I was finding it hard for UMass, UConn, or Augustana to pass us in NPI without winning their conference (which renders them passing us in NPI moot). In fact, I wasn't finding a way we could miss without OSU winning the B10. I'll play around more later, but is anyone able to find a scenario in which we miss that does NOT involve OSU winning the B10?
This is a lot of fun to play around with!
The lowest I can get us, provided it's not OSU in the B10, is 13. We know the AHA goes autobid only, we know the NCHC will have a winner who's top 16. I can't get a sim for the CCHA to be a 2-bid conference; it looks like HEA will be 2-bid as well (Prov and whoever comes out of the HEA gauntlet for playoffs). Follow the money, you've got Cornell in basically no matter what.
if you get WMU to lose to CC in 2 games there is a path for Cornell to 4th
Played around a bit more and found some interesting stuff. Namely, I don't think we can miss the NCAAs unless B10, HE, and ECAC are ALL won by someone behind us in NPI. That is to say, if (1) OSU doesn't win the B10, OR (2) Dartmouth or Quinnipiac wins the ECAC, OR (3) Providence wins HE, then we are in the NCAAs.
But here's the interesting part: our series vs Harvard does not itself dictate whether we make it, unless we sweep them. I found a scenario where we beat Harvard in 3 games and STILL miss the NCAAs, if we lose in the semis and basically everything else goes wrong.
If we sweep Harvard, we're locked. If we don't, we can still possibly miss.
I suspect the Playoff Odds website, which says we have above a 99% shot conditional on us getting swept, is wrong. (Probably because it underrates the odds of an upset.)
Quote from: upprdeck on March 13, 2026, 02:58:31 PMif you get WMU to lose to CC in 2 games there is a path for Cornell to 4th
CC got eliminated last weekend
I was just playing with the tool.. Didnt really look at what has happened already.
Quote from: BearLover on March 13, 2026, 03:01:47 PMQuote from: upprdeck on March 13, 2026, 02:58:31 PMif you get WMU to lose to CC in 2 games there is a path for Cornell to 4th
CC got eliminated last weekend
That explains why the CHN tool I quoted numbers from a couple of days ago had us at 0% chance of higher than fifth.
11 after the Friday loss.
At the moment it's looking like we are going to need one of Dartmouth, Providence, or not-OSU to win their conference.
Quote from: BearLover on March 13, 2026, 10:04:44 PMAt the moment it's looking like we are going to need one of Dartmouth, Providence, or not-OSU to win their conference.
Or Cornell, y'know ;)
Quote from: BearLover on March 13, 2026, 10:04:44 PMAt the moment it's looking like we are going to need one of Dartmouth, Providence, or not-OSU to win their conference.
Does Q not work? (nvm you mean that q lost game 1 also)
Quote from: ugarte on March 13, 2026, 11:40:20 PMQuote from: BearLover on March 13, 2026, 10:04:44 PMAt the moment it's looking like we are going to need one of Dartmouth, Providence, or not-OSU to win their conference.
Does Q not work?
It does but they lost tonight so they're an underdog to make it to the next round
But yeah, if they (or we, of course) win the ECAC then we're in
For the curious -
Losing today drops us to 54.53 in the NPI and puts us in 12th.
That means that we would need at least 2 conferences to autobid from the top 16.
NCHC will, all the remaining teams are top 16. B10 almost certainly will, unless OSU makes a miracle run. CCHA, from all my sims, looks like a one-bid conference (either Augustana takes the auto in top 16 or they slide out and whoever does autos in). AHA we know is autobid only. HEA and ECAC, who tf knows.
So even IF we get swept. We should still make it. Unless the hockey gods truly conspire against us.
As you were, LGR, and please make me have to come to Lynah at 4 pm on a Sunday. And then sort out bussing to Albany on a Thursday. 💜
Quote from: stereax on March 14, 2026, 09:57:22 AMFor the curious -
Losing today drops us to 54.53 in the NPI and puts us in 12th.
That means that we would need at least 2 conferences to autobid from the top 16.
NCHC will, all the remaining teams are top 16. B10 almost certainly will, unless OSU makes a miracle run. CCHA, from all my sims, looks like a one-bid conference (either Augustana takes the auto in top 16 or they slide out and whoever does autos in). AHA we know is autobid only. HEA and ECAC, who tf knows.
So even IF we get swept. We should still make it. Unless the hockey gods truly conspire against us.
As you were, LGR, and please make me have to come to Lynah at 4 pm on a Sunday. And then sort out bussing to Albany on a Thursday. 💜
The only way we can miss is via autobids. Nobody can pass us in NPI to knock us out; only autobids can. So AFAICT the only ways we can miss are
1. OSU winning the B10 [unlikely, maybe 15% chance], plus
2. someone other than Dartmouth/Quinnipiac winning the ECAC [somewhat likely at this point, given Q lost last night], plus
3. someone other than Providence winning HE [likely, giving they need to win 3 games in a row]
If we win the next two against Harvard we can still miss under the above scenario, if we then lose in the semis.
We clinch the NCAAs if OSU loses to MSU today.
Quote from: BearLover on March 14, 2026, 10:24:49 AMQuote from: stereax on March 14, 2026, 09:57:22 AMFor the curious -
Losing today drops us to 54.53 in the NPI and puts us in 12th.
That means that we would need at least 2 conferences to autobid from the top 16.
NCHC will, all the remaining teams are top 16. B10 almost certainly will, unless OSU makes a miracle run. CCHA, from all my sims, looks like a one-bid conference (either Augustana takes the auto in top 16 or they slide out and whoever does autos in). AHA we know is autobid only. HEA and ECAC, who tf knows.
So even IF we get swept. We should still make it. Unless the hockey gods truly conspire against us.
As you were, LGR, and please make me have to come to Lynah at 4 pm on a Sunday. And then sort out bussing to Albany on a Thursday. 💜
The only way we can miss is via autobids. Nobody can pass us in NPI to knock us out; only autobids can. So AFAICT the only ways we can miss are
1. OSU winning the B10 [unlikely, maybe 15% chance], plus
2. someone other than Dartmouth/Quinnipiac winning the ECAC [somewhat likely at this point, given Q lost last night], plus
3. someone other than Providence winning HE [likely, giving they need to win 3 games in a row]
If we win the next two against Harvard we can still miss under the above scenario, if we then lose in the semis.
We clinch the NCAAs if OSU loses to MSU today.
so what you're telling me is we gotta root for trey augustine
OSU and Princeton/Clarkson are the key now. Even if we win/lose we still get in if Mich handles things.
not sweeping takes us from an 8ish to out if bad things happen
interesting thing is that if we win and win next week and clarkson wins it all PSU can get knocked out
Quote from: upprdeck on March 14, 2026, 10:38:34 PMinteresting thing is that if we win and win next week and clarkson wins it all PSU can get knocked out
I would fucking love this.
Quote from: stereax on March 14, 2026, 10:40:28 PMQuote from: upprdeck on March 14, 2026, 10:38:34 PMinteresting thing is that if we win and win next week and clarkson wins it all PSU can get knocked out
I would fucking love this.
No. You would not fucking love Cornell losing to Clarkson in LP.
Quote from: Trotsky on March 14, 2026, 10:43:56 PMQuote from: stereax on March 14, 2026, 10:40:28 PMQuote from: upprdeck on March 14, 2026, 10:38:34 PMinteresting thing is that if we win and win next week and clarkson wins it all PSU can get knocked out
I would fucking love this.
No. You would not fucking love Cornell losing to Clarkson in LP.
No. Losing in Placid would suck. But PSU getting knocked out of the NCAAs would be EXCELLENT.
I am first and foremost a hater 💜
I hate Pedo State like every other sentient being, but they are a pimple on the butt of my rooting interests. Ahem.
Quote from: Trotsky on March 15, 2026, 12:25:31 AMI hate Pedo State like every other sentient being, but they are a pimple on the butt of my rooting interests. Ahem.
Looks like as per the matrix they can't fall out anyway :(
So it's between us and Wisconsin for the at-large spot in question. Two questions I have:
1. Are we locked to finish behind Wisconsin if we lose tomorrow, or do we have outs to finish ahead of them?
2. Are we locked to finish ahead of Wisconsin if we win tomorrow, or could we still finish behind them if we then lose to Princeton in Placid?
Quote from: BearLover on March 15, 2026, 01:41:31 AMSo it's between us and Wisconsin for the at-large spot in question. Two questions I have:
1. Are we locked to finish behind Wisconsin if we lose tomorrow, or do we have outs to finish ahead of them?
2. Are we locked to finish ahead of Wisconsin if we win tomorrow, or could we still finish behind them if we then lose to Princeton in Placid?
0. Not necessarily. If we win tomorrow and do well in Placid, we can become a 2 seed. But 12 is either us or Wisco.
1. If we lose tomorrow, we drop to 54.76. Wisconsin is out of its tournament. The only thing that could happen would be minor NPI adjustments with other results. The gap is .31, though, which is too high imo to be messed with that way.
2. Win tomorrow pulls us up from 55.46 to 55.51. Which is trivial. I can't sim the Princeton-Cornell game directly on CHN, but I tried flipping the Cornell home game to Princeton and that simply dropped us back to 55.46, I think. But I don't trust that. Let me try the BC one.
Quote from: stereax on March 15, 2026, 02:03:44 AMQuote from: BearLover on March 15, 2026, 01:41:31 AMSo it's between us and Wisconsin for the at-large spot in question. Two questions I have:
1. Are we locked to finish behind Wisconsin if we lose tomorrow, or do we have outs to finish ahead of them?
2. Are we locked to finish ahead of Wisconsin if we win tomorrow, or could we still finish behind them if we then lose to Princeton in Placid?
0. Not necessarily. If we win tomorrow and do well in Placid, we can become a 2 seed. But 12 is either us or Wisco.
1. If we lose tomorrow, we drop to 54.76. Wisconsin is out of its tournament. The only thing that could happen would be minor NPI adjustments with other results. The gap is .31, though, which is too high imo to be messed with that way.
2. Win tomorrow pulls us up from 55.46 to 55.51. Which is trivial. I can't sim the Princeton-Cornell game directly on CHN, but I tried flipping the Cornell home game to Princeton and that simply dropped us back to 55.46, I think. But I don't trust that. Let me try the BC one.
If we lose in semis to Princeton:
55.23 if Princeton wins Placid.
55.14 if Dartmouth does.
55.16 if Clarkson does.
Wisconsin is at 55.32ish.
There's a field where we win in 3, lose to Princeton in the semis, Princeton (or Clarkson) wins Placid, OSU wins B10, we're out by a hair.
AHA is autobid. NCHC is top 16 bid. Neither of these effectively matter. CCHA is either autobid or there are enough top 16 bids that we're safe anyway (Augustana can still get in if things break their way - there's about an 18% chance). Doesn't matter. HEA is autobid and I can't rig it to get any other team high enough. Doesn't matter anyway.
The only results that matter now are Mich-OSU for the B10 and the ECACs. Everything else is basically trivial.
So, as I have always (literally never) said: it's great to be a Michigan Wolverine!
Quote from: stereax on March 15, 2026, 02:03:44 AMQuote from: BearLover on March 15, 2026, 01:41:31 AMSo it's between us and Wisconsin for the at-large spot in question. Two questions I have:
1. Are we locked to finish behind Wisconsin if we lose tomorrow, or do we have outs to finish ahead of them?
2. Are we locked to finish ahead of Wisconsin if we win tomorrow, or could we still finish behind them if we then lose to Princeton in Placid?
0. Not necessarily. If we win tomorrow and do well in Placid, we can become a 2 seed. But 12 is either us or Wisco.
1. If we lose tomorrow, we drop to 54.76. Wisconsin is out of its tournament. The only thing that could happen would be minor NPI adjustments with other results. The gap is .31, though, which is too high imo to be messed with that way.
2. Win tomorrow pulls us up from 55.46 to 55.51. Which is trivial. I can't sim the Princeton-Cornell game directly on CHN, but I tried flipping the Cornell home game to Princeton and that simply dropped us back to 55.46, I think. But I don't trust that. Let me try the BC one.
0. Sorry, to clarify I was just talking about making the tournament. I know we can fall below Wisconsin and still make it (if other results break our way), or end up with a 2-seed (if we win out), but this exercise was meant to see how few games we NEED to win to finish ahead of Wisconsin, which means we're locked.
1. I suspect you're right and we need to win tomorrow, but...
2. I'm realizing there's something wrong with the BC page. It lists Wisconsin's NPI as way higher than it actually is (at least way higher than it is on CHN or USCHO). What gives?
Quote from: BearLover on March 15, 2026, 02:21:58 AMQuote from: stereax on March 15, 2026, 02:03:44 AMQuote from: BearLover on March 15, 2026, 01:41:31 AMSo it's between us and Wisconsin for the at-large spot in question. Two questions I have:
1. Are we locked to finish behind Wisconsin if we lose tomorrow, or do we have outs to finish ahead of them?
2. Are we locked to finish ahead of Wisconsin if we win tomorrow, or could we still finish behind them if we then lose to Princeton in Placid?
0. Not necessarily. If we win tomorrow and do well in Placid, we can become a 2 seed. But 12 is either us or Wisco.
1. If we lose tomorrow, we drop to 54.76. Wisconsin is out of its tournament. The only thing that could happen would be minor NPI adjustments with other results. The gap is .31, though, which is too high imo to be messed with that way.
2. Win tomorrow pulls us up from 55.46 to 55.51. Which is trivial. I can't sim the Princeton-Cornell game directly on CHN, but I tried flipping the Cornell home game to Princeton and that simply dropped us back to 55.46, I think. But I don't trust that. Let me try the BC one.
0. Sorry, to clarify I was just talking about making the tournament. I know we can fall below Wisconsin and still make it (if other results break our way), or end up with a 2-seed (if we win out), but this exercise was meant to see how few games we NEED to win to finish ahead of Wisconsin, which means we're locked.
1. I suspect you're right and we need to win tomorrow, but...
2. I'm realizing there's something wrong with the BC page. It lists Wisconsin's NPI as way higher than it actually is (at least way higher than it is on CHN or USCHO). What gives?
We NEED to make the finals in Placid to lock. We can lose the final but we gotta make it to be 100% sure we're top 11.
Functionally, it's literally equivalent if we lose tomorrow vs in the semis. In either case, we end up in 12, almost certainly (bc the BC site seems to possibly be wonky so I'm not giving decrees here).
Annoyingly, this is where Q losing actually fucks US over - if Q won, we'd be seeded against Dartmouth, and losing to Dartmouth does not screw us the way losing to Harvard or Princeton does. In which case, we could've made Placid and been in, most likely.
Thanks, Rand. Even when you fucking lose, you screw us.
Not sure. I don't think the BC site has been updated with tonight's games yet. That could be it? Bc you're right - on the CHN site it shows Wisconsin at 55.05, which would mean all of this calculus is moot as we stay above them no matter what by making it to Placid, unless OSU winning bumps them that much? Nope. Doesn't seem to be that, from simming it on CHN. Plus, most of Wisconsin's opponents (barring Mich and OSU) are out of the tournaments anyway...
Quote from: stereax on March 15, 2026, 02:28:53 AMQuote from: BearLover on March 15, 2026, 02:21:58 AMQuote from: stereax on March 15, 2026, 02:03:44 AMQuote from: BearLover on March 15, 2026, 01:41:31 AMSo it's between us and Wisconsin for the at-large spot in question. Two questions I have:
1. Are we locked to finish behind Wisconsin if we lose tomorrow, or do we have outs to finish ahead of them?
2. Are we locked to finish ahead of Wisconsin if we win tomorrow, or could we still finish behind them if we then lose to Princeton in Placid?
0. Not necessarily. If we win tomorrow and do well in Placid, we can become a 2 seed. But 12 is either us or Wisco.
1. If we lose tomorrow, we drop to 54.76. Wisconsin is out of its tournament. The only thing that could happen would be minor NPI adjustments with other results. The gap is .31, though, which is too high imo to be messed with that way.
2. Win tomorrow pulls us up from 55.46 to 55.51. Which is trivial. I can't sim the Princeton-Cornell game directly on CHN, but I tried flipping the Cornell home game to Princeton and that simply dropped us back to 55.46, I think. But I don't trust that. Let me try the BC one.
0. Sorry, to clarify I was just talking about making the tournament. I know we can fall below Wisconsin and still make it (if other results break our way), or end up with a 2-seed (if we win out), but this exercise was meant to see how few games we NEED to win to finish ahead of Wisconsin, which means we're locked.
1. I suspect you're right and we need to win tomorrow, but...
2. I'm realizing there's something wrong with the BC page. It lists Wisconsin's NPI as way higher than it actually is (at least way higher than it is on CHN or USCHO). What gives?
We NEED to make the finals in Placid to lock. We can lose the final but we gotta make it to be 100% sure we're top 11.
Not sure. I don't think the BC site has been updated with tonight's games yet. That could be it?
I have a weird feeling Wisconsin's NPI is inflated on the BC site and we actually would be locked with a win tomorrow. I can't confirm this, but I don't understand how they could possibly be 55.053 on USCHO and much higher on the BC site even after it accounts for the fact they lost to OSU last week. I could be wrong, but is it really possible that they could jump from 55.053 to around 55.335 just from other results? That seems implausible, but I'm not sure.
Quote from: BearLover on March 15, 2026, 02:40:11 AMQuote from: stereax on March 15, 2026, 02:28:53 AMQuote from: BearLover on March 15, 2026, 02:21:58 AMQuote from: stereax on March 15, 2026, 02:03:44 AMQuote from: BearLover on March 15, 2026, 01:41:31 AMSo it's between us and Wisconsin for the at-large spot in question. Two questions I have:
1. Are we locked to finish behind Wisconsin if we lose tomorrow, or do we have outs to finish ahead of them?
2. Are we locked to finish ahead of Wisconsin if we win tomorrow, or could we still finish behind them if we then lose to Princeton in Placid?
0. Not necessarily. If we win tomorrow and do well in Placid, we can become a 2 seed. But 12 is either us or Wisco.
1. If we lose tomorrow, we drop to 54.76. Wisconsin is out of its tournament. The only thing that could happen would be minor NPI adjustments with other results. The gap is .31, though, which is too high imo to be messed with that way.
2. Win tomorrow pulls us up from 55.46 to 55.51. Which is trivial. I can't sim the Princeton-Cornell game directly on CHN, but I tried flipping the Cornell home game to Princeton and that simply dropped us back to 55.46, I think. But I don't trust that. Let me try the BC one.
0. Sorry, to clarify I was just talking about making the tournament. I know we can fall below Wisconsin and still make it (if other results break our way), or end up with a 2-seed (if we win out), but this exercise was meant to see how few games we NEED to win to finish ahead of Wisconsin, which means we're locked.
1. I suspect you're right and we need to win tomorrow, but...
2. I'm realizing there's something wrong with the BC page. It lists Wisconsin's NPI as way higher than it actually is (at least way higher than it is on CHN or USCHO). What gives?
We NEED to make the finals in Placid to lock. We can lose the final but we gotta make it to be 100% sure we're top 11.
Not sure. I don't think the BC site has been updated with tonight's games yet. That could be it?
I have a weird feeling Wisconsin's NPI is inflated on the BC site and we actually would be locked with a win tomorrow. I can't confirm this, but I don't understand how they could possibly be 55.053 on USCHO and much higher on the BC site even after it accounts for the fact they lost to OSU last week. I could be wrong, but is it really possible that they could jump from 55.053 to around 55.335 just from other results? That seems implausible, but I'm not sure.
I agree with you there - it seems ridiculously unlikely that other results would pull them up that far (a jump of 0.3), especially because, from what I see, the only other result that should affect them is Mich-OSU, and the effects of that change seemed minimal.
Yeah just simmed it on chn and wisco goes down to 54.99 with an osu win and 54.93 with a mich win
Quote from: stereax on March 15, 2026, 02:47:06 AMQuote from: BearLover on March 15, 2026, 02:40:11 AMQuote from: stereax on March 15, 2026, 02:28:53 AMQuote from: BearLover on March 15, 2026, 02:21:58 AMQuote from: stereax on March 15, 2026, 02:03:44 AMQuote from: BearLover on March 15, 2026, 01:41:31 AMSo it's between us and Wisconsin for the at-large spot in question. Two questions I have:
1. Are we locked to finish behind Wisconsin if we lose tomorrow, or do we have outs to finish ahead of them?
2. Are we locked to finish ahead of Wisconsin if we win tomorrow, or could we still finish behind them if we then lose to Princeton in Placid?
0. Not necessarily. If we win tomorrow and do well in Placid, we can become a 2 seed. But 12 is either us or Wisco.
1. If we lose tomorrow, we drop to 54.76. Wisconsin is out of its tournament. The only thing that could happen would be minor NPI adjustments with other results. The gap is .31, though, which is too high imo to be messed with that way.
2. Win tomorrow pulls us up from 55.46 to 55.51. Which is trivial. I can't sim the Princeton-Cornell game directly on CHN, but I tried flipping the Cornell home game to Princeton and that simply dropped us back to 55.46, I think. But I don't trust that. Let me try the BC one.
0. Sorry, to clarify I was just talking about making the tournament. I know we can fall below Wisconsin and still make it (if other results break our way), or end up with a 2-seed (if we win out), but this exercise was meant to see how few games we NEED to win to finish ahead of Wisconsin, which means we're locked.
1. I suspect you're right and we need to win tomorrow, but...
2. I'm realizing there's something wrong with the BC page. It lists Wisconsin's NPI as way higher than it actually is (at least way higher than it is on CHN or USCHO). What gives?
We NEED to make the finals in Placid to lock. We can lose the final but we gotta make it to be 100% sure we're top 11.
Not sure. I don't think the BC site has been updated with tonight's games yet. That could be it?
I have a weird feeling Wisconsin's NPI is inflated on the BC site and we actually would be locked with a win tomorrow. I can't confirm this, but I don't understand how they could possibly be 55.053 on USCHO and much higher on the BC site even after it accounts for the fact they lost to OSU last week. I could be wrong, but is it really possible that they could jump from 55.053 to around 55.335 just from other results? That seems implausible, but I'm not sure.
I agree with you there - it seems ridiculously unlikely that other results would pull them up that far (a jump of 0.3), especially because, from what I see, the only other result that should affect them is Mich-OSU, and the effects of that change seemed minimal.
I saw they played Minnesota State twice, but even when I punched in Minnesota State losing next round, Wisconsin's NPI was still really high. So I don't know. Maybe there's some nuance I'm missing, but I don't see how Wisconsin's NPI can get that high. Like, I plugged in all of this weekend's results, and then assumed some results for next weekend, but the ones next weekend shouldn't affect Wisconsin much and I don't get how their NPI ends up so high.
Quote from: BearLover on March 15, 2026, 02:54:19 AMQuote from: stereax on March 15, 2026, 02:47:06 AMQuote from: BearLover on March 15, 2026, 02:40:11 AMQuote from: stereax on March 15, 2026, 02:28:53 AMQuote from: BearLover on March 15, 2026, 02:21:58 AMQuote from: stereax on March 15, 2026, 02:03:44 AMQuote from: BearLover on March 15, 2026, 01:41:31 AMSo it's between us and Wisconsin for the at-large spot in question. Two questions I have:
1. Are we locked to finish behind Wisconsin if we lose tomorrow, or do we have outs to finish ahead of them?
2. Are we locked to finish ahead of Wisconsin if we win tomorrow, or could we still finish behind them if we then lose to Princeton in Placid?
0. Not necessarily. If we win tomorrow and do well in Placid, we can become a 2 seed. But 12 is either us or Wisco.
1. If we lose tomorrow, we drop to 54.76. Wisconsin is out of its tournament. The only thing that could happen would be minor NPI adjustments with other results. The gap is .31, though, which is too high imo to be messed with that way.
2. Win tomorrow pulls us up from 55.46 to 55.51. Which is trivial. I can't sim the Princeton-Cornell game directly on CHN, but I tried flipping the Cornell home game to Princeton and that simply dropped us back to 55.46, I think. But I don't trust that. Let me try the BC one.
0. Sorry, to clarify I was just talking about making the tournament. I know we can fall below Wisconsin and still make it (if other results break our way), or end up with a 2-seed (if we win out), but this exercise was meant to see how few games we NEED to win to finish ahead of Wisconsin, which means we're locked.
1. I suspect you're right and we need to win tomorrow, but...
2. I'm realizing there's something wrong with the BC page. It lists Wisconsin's NPI as way higher than it actually is (at least way higher than it is on CHN or USCHO). What gives?
We NEED to make the finals in Placid to lock. We can lose the final but we gotta make it to be 100% sure we're top 11.
Not sure. I don't think the BC site has been updated with tonight's games yet. That could be it?
I have a weird feeling Wisconsin's NPI is inflated on the BC site and we actually would be locked with a win tomorrow. I can't confirm this, but I don't understand how they could possibly be 55.053 on USCHO and much higher on the BC site even after it accounts for the fact they lost to OSU last week. I could be wrong, but is it really possible that they could jump from 55.053 to around 55.335 just from other results? That seems implausible, but I'm not sure.
I agree with you there - it seems ridiculously unlikely that other results would pull them up that far (a jump of 0.3), especially because, from what I see, the only other result that should affect them is Mich-OSU, and the effects of that change seemed minimal.
I saw they played Minnesota State twice, but even when I punched in Minnesota State losing next round, Wisconsin's NPI was still really high. So I don't know. Maybe there's some nuance I'm missing, but I don't see how Wisconsin's NPI can get that high. Like, I plugged in all of this weekend's results, and then assumed some results for next weekend, but the ones next weekend shouldn't affect Wisconsin much and I don't get how their NPI ends up so high.
My head hurts looking at the backend NPI charts. Maybe just because it was last officially updated on March 7?
Or the formulas could be wrong/off, lol.
My concern now is that a win vs Harvard bumps us only .05 up, but a loss tanks us like .7 - and if we lose against Princeton, will we actually be high enough to cushion that blow? Because the BC site is inflating our NPI too, I think...
Quote from: stereax on March 15, 2026, 02:59:25 AMQuote from: BearLover on March 15, 2026, 02:54:19 AMQuote from: stereax on March 15, 2026, 02:47:06 AMQuote from: BearLover on March 15, 2026, 02:40:11 AMQuote from: stereax on March 15, 2026, 02:28:53 AMQuote from: BearLover on March 15, 2026, 02:21:58 AMQuote from: stereax on March 15, 2026, 02:03:44 AMQuote from: BearLover on March 15, 2026, 01:41:31 AMSo it's between us and Wisconsin for the at-large spot in question. Two questions I have:
1. Are we locked to finish behind Wisconsin if we lose tomorrow, or do we have outs to finish ahead of them?
2. Are we locked to finish ahead of Wisconsin if we win tomorrow, or could we still finish behind them if we then lose to Princeton in Placid?
0. Not necessarily. If we win tomorrow and do well in Placid, we can become a 2 seed. But 12 is either us or Wisco.
1. If we lose tomorrow, we drop to 54.76. Wisconsin is out of its tournament. The only thing that could happen would be minor NPI adjustments with other results. The gap is .31, though, which is too high imo to be messed with that way.
2. Win tomorrow pulls us up from 55.46 to 55.51. Which is trivial. I can't sim the Princeton-Cornell game directly on CHN, but I tried flipping the Cornell home game to Princeton and that simply dropped us back to 55.46, I think. But I don't trust that. Let me try the BC one.
0. Sorry, to clarify I was just talking about making the tournament. I know we can fall below Wisconsin and still make it (if other results break our way), or end up with a 2-seed (if we win out), but this exercise was meant to see how few games we NEED to win to finish ahead of Wisconsin, which means we're locked.
1. I suspect you're right and we need to win tomorrow, but...
2. I'm realizing there's something wrong with the BC page. It lists Wisconsin's NPI as way higher than it actually is (at least way higher than it is on CHN or USCHO). What gives?
We NEED to make the finals in Placid to lock. We can lose the final but we gotta make it to be 100% sure we're top 11.
Not sure. I don't think the BC site has been updated with tonight's games yet. That could be it?
I have a weird feeling Wisconsin's NPI is inflated on the BC site and we actually would be locked with a win tomorrow. I can't confirm this, but I don't understand how they could possibly be 55.053 on USCHO and much higher on the BC site even after it accounts for the fact they lost to OSU last week. I could be wrong, but is it really possible that they could jump from 55.053 to around 55.335 just from other results? That seems implausible, but I'm not sure.
I agree with you there - it seems ridiculously unlikely that other results would pull them up that far (a jump of 0.3), especially because, from what I see, the only other result that should affect them is Mich-OSU, and the effects of that change seemed minimal.
I saw they played Minnesota State twice, but even when I punched in Minnesota State losing next round, Wisconsin's NPI was still really high. So I don't know. Maybe there's some nuance I'm missing, but I don't see how Wisconsin's NPI can get that high. Like, I plugged in all of this weekend's results, and then assumed some results for next weekend, but the ones next weekend shouldn't affect Wisconsin much and I don't get how their NPI ends up so high.
My head hurts looking at the backend NPI charts. Maybe just because it was last officially updated on March 7?
Or the formulas could be wrong/off, lol.
My concern now is that a win vs Harvard bumps us only .05 up, but a loss tanks us like .7 - and if we lose against Princeton, will we actually be high enough to cushion that blow? Because the BC site is inflating our NPI too, I think...
You're probably right that our NPI is screwed up on the BC site too. However, I'm super confused how beating Harvard would bump us only .05. How much did we gain beating Harvard tonight (Saturday)? Should be similar tomorrow.
Quote from: BearLover on March 15, 2026, 02:40:11 AMI have a weird feeling Wisconsin's NPI is inflated on the BC site and we actually would be locked with a win tomorrow. I can't confirm this, but I don't understand how they could possibly be 55.053 on USCHO and much higher on the BC site even after it accounts for the fact they lost to OSU last week. I could be wrong, but is it really possible that they could jump from 55.053 to around 55.335 just from other results? That seems implausible, but I'm not sure.
It's pretty easy to understand how - most likely because that site isn't calculating things correctly. CHN's is known to be factually accurate because I actually work with the person who literally provides the data to the NCAA. I've had numerous good conversations with the person who runs the BC page, nice guy - I've tried to help him best I could - but I'm not sure he has everything precisely calculated. I don't go there or check his work - I'm just judging by our conversations. So - be careful.
We'll have our You Are the Committee tool out soon.
Fun fact: playoffstatus.com (https://www.playoffstatus.com/ncaahockey/ncaahockeytournseedprob.html) gives us a < 1% yet non-zero chance of a 1-band.
I think we are in a good spot because the things we need to happen to get into the big dance are all more likely to happen than not.
If Cornell plays like they did last night there is no way Harvard beats us. They just aren't that good. If they then advance to lake placid the road to the ecac title becomes Princeton and then probably Dartmouth. That is considerably easier than Dartmouth and then Q.
I think Michigan will probably take care of Ohio State.
Full faith that the Big Red takes care of business today.
I played with the BC site, since we dont know how wonky it is.
Cornell gets to the finals
OSU/Clarkson/Umass win
We got a 10seed and PSU was out.
Quote from: adamw on March 15, 2026, 03:28:24 AMQuote from: BearLover on March 15, 2026, 02:40:11 AMI have a weird feeling Wisconsin's NPI is inflated on the BC site and we actually would be locked with a win tomorrow. I can't confirm this, but I don't understand how they could possibly be 55.053 on USCHO and much higher on the BC site even after it accounts for the fact they lost to OSU last week. I could be wrong, but is it really possible that they could jump from 55.053 to around 55.335 just from other results? That seems implausible, but I'm not sure.
It's pretty easy to understand how - most likely because that site isn't calculating things correctly. CHN's is known to be factually accurate because I actually work with the person who literally provides the data to the NCAA. I've had numerous good conversations with the person who runs the BC page, nice guy - I've tried to help him best I could - but I'm not sure he has everything precisely calculated. I don't go there or check his work - I'm just judging by our conversations. So - be careful.
We'll have our You Are the Committee tool out soon.
Woot!
Mostly just trying to figure out what happens if we lose the Princeton game, but can't do that natively on CHN :/
Quote from: BearLover on March 15, 2026, 03:05:53 AMQuote from: stereax on March 15, 2026, 02:59:25 AMQuote from: BearLover on March 15, 2026, 02:54:19 AMQuote from: stereax on March 15, 2026, 02:47:06 AMQuote from: BearLover on March 15, 2026, 02:40:11 AMQuote from: stereax on March 15, 2026, 02:28:53 AMQuote from: BearLover on March 15, 2026, 02:21:58 AMQuote from: stereax on March 15, 2026, 02:03:44 AMQuote from: BearLover on March 15, 2026, 01:41:31 AMSo it's between us and Wisconsin for the at-large spot in question. Two questions I have:
1. Are we locked to finish behind Wisconsin if we lose tomorrow, or do we have outs to finish ahead of them?
2. Are we locked to finish ahead of Wisconsin if we win tomorrow, or could we still finish behind them if we then lose to Princeton in Placid?
0. Not necessarily. If we win tomorrow and do well in Placid, we can become a 2 seed. But 12 is either us or Wisco.
1. If we lose tomorrow, we drop to 54.76. Wisconsin is out of its tournament. The only thing that could happen would be minor NPI adjustments with other results. The gap is .31, though, which is too high imo to be messed with that way.
2. Win tomorrow pulls us up from 55.46 to 55.51. Which is trivial. I can't sim the Princeton-Cornell game directly on CHN, but I tried flipping the Cornell home game to Princeton and that simply dropped us back to 55.46, I think. But I don't trust that. Let me try the BC one.
0. Sorry, to clarify I was just talking about making the tournament. I know we can fall below Wisconsin and still make it (if other results break our way), or end up with a 2-seed (if we win out), but this exercise was meant to see how few games we NEED to win to finish ahead of Wisconsin, which means we're locked.
1. I suspect you're right and we need to win tomorrow, but...
2. I'm realizing there's something wrong with the BC page. It lists Wisconsin's NPI as way higher than it actually is (at least way higher than it is on CHN or USCHO). What gives?
We NEED to make the finals in Placid to lock. We can lose the final but we gotta make it to be 100% sure we're top 11.
Not sure. I don't think the BC site has been updated with tonight's games yet. That could be it?
I have a weird feeling Wisconsin's NPI is inflated on the BC site and we actually would be locked with a win tomorrow. I can't confirm this, but I don't understand how they could possibly be 55.053 on USCHO and much higher on the BC site even after it accounts for the fact they lost to OSU last week. I could be wrong, but is it really possible that they could jump from 55.053 to around 55.335 just from other results? That seems implausible, but I'm not sure.
I agree with you there - it seems ridiculously unlikely that other results would pull them up that far (a jump of 0.3), especially because, from what I see, the only other result that should affect them is Mich-OSU, and the effects of that change seemed minimal.
I saw they played Minnesota State twice, but even when I punched in Minnesota State losing next round, Wisconsin's NPI was still really high. So I don't know. Maybe there's some nuance I'm missing, but I don't see how Wisconsin's NPI can get that high. Like, I plugged in all of this weekend's results, and then assumed some results for next weekend, but the ones next weekend shouldn't affect Wisconsin much and I don't get how their NPI ends up so high.
My head hurts looking at the backend NPI charts. Maybe just because it was last officially updated on March 7?
Or the formulas could be wrong/off, lol.
My concern now is that a win vs Harvard bumps us only .05 up, but a loss tanks us like .7 - and if we lose against Princeton, will we actually be high enough to cushion that blow? Because the BC site is inflating our NPI too, I think...
You're probably right that our NPI is screwed up on the BC site too. However, I'm super confused how beating Harvard would bump us only .05. How much did we gain beating Harvard tonight (Saturday)? Should be similar tomorrow.
Quote from: BearLover on March 15, 2026, 03:05:53 AMQuote from: stereax on March 15, 2026, 02:59:25 AMQuote from: BearLover on March 15, 2026, 02:54:19 AMQuote from: stereax on March 15, 2026, 02:47:06 AMQuote from: BearLover on March 15, 2026, 02:40:11 AMQuote from: stereax on March 15, 2026, 02:28:53 AMQuote from: BearLover on March 15, 2026, 02:21:58 AMQuote from: stereax on March 15, 2026, 02:03:44 AMQuote from: BearLover on March 15, 2026, 01:41:31 AMSo it's between us and Wisconsin for the at-large spot in question. Two questions I have:
1. Are we locked to finish behind Wisconsin if we lose tomorrow, or do we have outs to finish ahead of them?
2. Are we locked to finish ahead of Wisconsin if we win tomorrow, or could we still finish behind them if we then lose to Princeton in Placid?
0. Not necessarily. If we win tomorrow and do well in Placid, we can become a 2 seed. But 12 is either us or Wisco.
1. If we lose tomorrow, we drop to 54.76. Wisconsin is out of its tournament. The only thing that could happen would be minor NPI adjustments with other results. The gap is .31, though, which is too high imo to be messed with that way.
2. Win tomorrow pulls us up from 55.46 to 55.51. Which is trivial. I can't sim the Princeton-Cornell game directly on CHN, but I tried flipping the Cornell home game to Princeton and that simply dropped us back to 55.46, I think. But I don't trust that. Let me try the BC one.
0. Sorry, to clarify I was just talking about making the tournament. I know we can fall below Wisconsin and still make it (if other results break our way), or end up with a 2-seed (if we win out), but this exercise was meant to see how few games we NEED to win to finish ahead of Wisconsin, which means we're locked.
1. I suspect you're right and we need to win tomorrow, but...
2. I'm realizing there's something wrong with the BC page. It lists Wisconsin's NPI as way higher than it actually is (at least way higher than it is on CHN or USCHO). What gives?
We NEED to make the finals in Placid to lock. We can lose the final but we gotta make it to be 100% sure we're top 11.
Not sure. I don't think the BC site has been updated with tonight's games yet. That could be it?
I have a weird feeling Wisconsin's NPI is inflated on the BC site and we actually would be locked with a win tomorrow. I can't confirm this, but I don't understand how they could possibly be 55.053 on USCHO and much higher on the BC site even after it accounts for the fact they lost to OSU last week. I could be wrong, but is it really possible that they could jump from 55.053 to around 55.335 just from other results? That seems implausible, but I'm not sure.
I agree with you there - it seems ridiculously unlikely that other results would pull them up that far (a jump of 0.3), especially because, from what I see, the only other result that should affect them is Mich-OSU, and the effects of that change seemed minimal.
I saw they played Minnesota State twice, but even when I punched in Minnesota State losing next round, Wisconsin's NPI was still really high. So I don't know. Maybe there's some nuance I'm missing, but I don't see how Wisconsin's NPI can get that high. Like, I plugged in all of this weekend's results, and then assumed some results for next weekend, but the ones next weekend shouldn't affect Wisconsin much and I don't get how their NPI ends up so high.
My head hurts looking at the backend NPI charts. Maybe just because it was last officially updated on March 7?
Or the formulas could be wrong/off, lol.
My concern now is that a win vs Harvard bumps us only .05 up, but a loss tanks us like .7 - and if we lose against Princeton, will we actually be high enough to cushion that blow? Because the BC site is inflating our NPI too, I think...
You're probably right that our NPI is screwed up on the BC site too. However, I'm super confused how beating Harvard would bump us only .05. How much did we gain beating Harvard tonight (Saturday)? Should be similar tomorrow.
We gained a lot beating them yesterday, but plugging into CHN we only bump that .05 with a win today. I think it's because their quality win bonus goes down if/when we kick their asses again.
Quote from: stereax on March 15, 2026, 10:11:51 AMQuote from: BearLover on March 15, 2026, 03:05:53 AMQuote from: stereax on March 15, 2026, 02:59:25 AMQuote from: BearLover on March 15, 2026, 02:54:19 AMQuote from: stereax on March 15, 2026, 02:47:06 AMQuote from: BearLover on March 15, 2026, 02:40:11 AMQuote from: stereax on March 15, 2026, 02:28:53 AMQuote from: BearLover on March 15, 2026, 02:21:58 AMQuote from: stereax on March 15, 2026, 02:03:44 AMQuote from: BearLover on March 15, 2026, 01:41:31 AMSo it's between us and Wisconsin for the at-large spot in question. Two questions I have:
1. Are we locked to finish behind Wisconsin if we lose tomorrow, or do we have outs to finish ahead of them?
2. Are we locked to finish ahead of Wisconsin if we win tomorrow, or could we still finish behind them if we then lose to Princeton in Placid?
0. Not necessarily. If we win tomorrow and do well in Placid, we can become a 2 seed. But 12 is either us or Wisco.
1. If we lose tomorrow, we drop to 54.76. Wisconsin is out of its tournament. The only thing that could happen would be minor NPI adjustments with other results. The gap is .31, though, which is too high imo to be messed with that way.
2. Win tomorrow pulls us up from 55.46 to 55.51. Which is trivial. I can't sim the Princeton-Cornell game directly on CHN, but I tried flipping the Cornell home game to Princeton and that simply dropped us back to 55.46, I think. But I don't trust that. Let me try the BC one.
0. Sorry, to clarify I was just talking about making the tournament. I know we can fall below Wisconsin and still make it (if other results break our way), or end up with a 2-seed (if we win out), but this exercise was meant to see how few games we NEED to win to finish ahead of Wisconsin, which means we're locked.
1. I suspect you're right and we need to win tomorrow, but...
2. I'm realizing there's something wrong with the BC page. It lists Wisconsin's NPI as way higher than it actually is (at least way higher than it is on CHN or USCHO). What gives?
We NEED to make the finals in Placid to lock. We can lose the final but we gotta make it to be 100% sure we're top 11.
Not sure. I don't think the BC site has been updated with tonight's games yet. That could be it?
I have a weird feeling Wisconsin's NPI is inflated on the BC site and we actually would be locked with a win tomorrow. I can't confirm this, but I don't understand how they could possibly be 55.053 on USCHO and much higher on the BC site even after it accounts for the fact they lost to OSU last week. I could be wrong, but is it really possible that they could jump from 55.053 to around 55.335 just from other results? That seems implausible, but I'm not sure.
I agree with you there - it seems ridiculously unlikely that other results would pull them up that far (a jump of 0.3), especially because, from what I see, the only other result that should affect them is Mich-OSU, and the effects of that change seemed minimal.
I saw they played Minnesota State twice, but even when I punched in Minnesota State losing next round, Wisconsin's NPI was still really high. So I don't know. Maybe there's some nuance I'm missing, but I don't see how Wisconsin's NPI can get that high. Like, I plugged in all of this weekend's results, and then assumed some results for next weekend, but the ones next weekend shouldn't affect Wisconsin much and I don't get how their NPI ends up so high.
My head hurts looking at the backend NPI charts. Maybe just because it was last officially updated on March 7?
Or the formulas could be wrong/off, lol.
My concern now is that a win vs Harvard bumps us only .05 up, but a loss tanks us like .7 - and if we lose against Princeton, will we actually be high enough to cushion that blow? Because the BC site is inflating our NPI too, I think...
You're probably right that our NPI is screwed up on the BC site too. However, I'm super confused how beating Harvard would bump us only .05. How much did we gain beating Harvard tonight (Saturday)? Should be similar tomorrow.
Quote from: BearLover on March 15, 2026, 03:05:53 AMQuote from: stereax on March 15, 2026, 02:59:25 AMQuote from: BearLover on March 15, 2026, 02:54:19 AMQuote from: stereax on March 15, 2026, 02:47:06 AMQuote from: BearLover on March 15, 2026, 02:40:11 AMQuote from: stereax on March 15, 2026, 02:28:53 AMQuote from: BearLover on March 15, 2026, 02:21:58 AMQuote from: stereax on March 15, 2026, 02:03:44 AMQuote from: BearLover on March 15, 2026, 01:41:31 AMSo it's between us and Wisconsin for the at-large spot in question. Two questions I have:
1. Are we locked to finish behind Wisconsin if we lose tomorrow, or do we have outs to finish ahead of them?
2. Are we locked to finish ahead of Wisconsin if we win tomorrow, or could we still finish behind them if we then lose to Princeton in Placid?
0. Not necessarily. If we win tomorrow and do well in Placid, we can become a 2 seed. But 12 is either us or Wisco.
1. If we lose tomorrow, we drop to 54.76. Wisconsin is out of its tournament. The only thing that could happen would be minor NPI adjustments with other results. The gap is .31, though, which is too high imo to be messed with that way.
2. Win tomorrow pulls us up from 55.46 to 55.51. Which is trivial. I can't sim the Princeton-Cornell game directly on CHN, but I tried flipping the Cornell home game to Princeton and that simply dropped us back to 55.46, I think. But I don't trust that. Let me try the BC one.
0. Sorry, to clarify I was just talking about making the tournament. I know we can fall below Wisconsin and still make it (if other results break our way), or end up with a 2-seed (if we win out), but this exercise was meant to see how few games we NEED to win to finish ahead of Wisconsin, which means we're locked.
1. I suspect you're right and we need to win tomorrow, but...
2. I'm realizing there's something wrong with the BC page. It lists Wisconsin's NPI as way higher than it actually is (at least way higher than it is on CHN or USCHO). What gives?
We NEED to make the finals in Placid to lock. We can lose the final but we gotta make it to be 100% sure we're top 11.
Not sure. I don't think the BC site has been updated with tonight's games yet. That could be it?
I have a weird feeling Wisconsin's NPI is inflated on the BC site and we actually would be locked with a win tomorrow. I can't confirm this, but I don't understand how they could possibly be 55.053 on USCHO and much higher on the BC site even after it accounts for the fact they lost to OSU last week. I could be wrong, but is it really possible that they could jump from 55.053 to around 55.335 just from other results? That seems implausible, but I'm not sure.
I agree with you there - it seems ridiculously unlikely that other results would pull them up that far (a jump of 0.3), especially because, from what I see, the only other result that should affect them is Mich-OSU, and the effects of that change seemed minimal.
I saw they played Minnesota State twice, but even when I punched in Minnesota State losing next round, Wisconsin's NPI was still really high. So I don't know. Maybe there's some nuance I'm missing, but I don't see how Wisconsin's NPI can get that high. Like, I plugged in all of this weekend's results, and then assumed some results for next weekend, but the ones next weekend shouldn't affect Wisconsin much and I don't get how their NPI ends up so high.
My head hurts looking at the backend NPI charts. Maybe just because it was last officially updated on March 7?
Or the formulas could be wrong/off, lol.
My concern now is that a win vs Harvard bumps us only .05 up, but a loss tanks us like .7 - and if we lose against Princeton, will we actually be high enough to cushion that blow? Because the BC site is inflating our NPI too, I think...
You're probably right that our NPI is screwed up on the BC site too. However, I'm super confused how beating Harvard would bump us only .05. How much did we gain beating Harvard tonight (Saturday)? Should be similar tomorrow.
We gained a lot beating them yesterday, but plugging into CHN we only bump that .05 with a win today. I think it's because their quality win bonus goes down if/when we kick their asses again.
I think that's wrong. QWB should be a minor factor. Which tool are you using, btw? I'm not familiar with anything like that on CHN before the You Are the Committee comes out.
Maybe adamw can clarify since he's here—how much NPI does Cornell gain if they win today, and are they locked if they do?
would you people stop embedding 12 layers of quotes! it's insane on mobile!
Quote from: BearLover on March 15, 2026, 10:19:06 AMI think that's wrong. QWB should be a minor factor. Which tool are you using, btw? I'm not familiar with anything like that on CHN before the You Are the Committee comes out.
Maybe adamw can clarify since he's here—how much NPI does Cornell gain if they win today, and are they locked if they do?
I usually use the CHN-native NPI customizer. (https://www.collegehockeynews.com/ratings/npi#) Where you see the NPI stats, there's a thing on the right where you can input future games' results and see the change in NPI.
Quote from: ugarte on March 15, 2026, 10:25:52 AMwould you people stop embedding 12 layers of quotes! it's insane on mobile!
HEY I JUST FIXED IT 😭
Quote from: ugarte on March 15, 2026, 10:25:52 AMwould you people stop embedding 12 layers of quotes! it's insane on mobile!
Use a computer screen like God intended. In my day, phones were PHONES, dammit!
the thing with the BC tool is that every team is different than what CHN days right now.
You plug in Cornell wins today and it has Augustana 13 where CHN has them 16. many teams are off by .4 and in both directions.
Quote from: stereax on March 15, 2026, 10:27:05 AMQuote from: BearLover on March 15, 2026, 10:19:06 AMI think that's wrong. QWB should be a minor factor. Which tool are you using, btw? I'm not familiar with anything like that on CHN before the You Are the Committee comes out.
Maybe adamw can clarify since he's here—how much NPI does Cornell gain if they win today, and are they locked if they do?
I usually use the CHN-native NPI customizer. (https://www.collegehockeynews.com/ratings/npi#) Where you see the NPI stats, there's a thing on the right where you can input future games' results and see the change in NPI.
Thanks. I had never noticed that before. I think this tool is currently bugged, though. When I plug in Cornell winning today, their NPI goes down...?
Quote from: BearLover on March 15, 2026, 11:02:34 AMQuote from: stereax on March 15, 2026, 10:27:05 AMQuote from: BearLover on March 15, 2026, 10:19:06 AMI think that's wrong. QWB should be a minor factor. Which tool are you using, btw? I'm not familiar with anything like that on CHN before the You Are the Committee comes out.
Maybe adamw can clarify since he's here—how much NPI does Cornell gain if they win today, and are they locked if they do?
I usually use the CHN-native NPI customizer. (https://www.collegehockeynews.com/ratings/npi#) Where you see the NPI stats, there's a thing on the right where you can input future games' results and see the change in NPI.
Thanks. I had never noticed that before. I think this tool is currently bugged, though. When I plug in Cornell winning today, their NPI goes down...?
Try it again. Sometimes it goes down to .44, sometimes it goes up to .51. I don't get it either, might be a bug or just cache issues.
Quote from: Trotsky on March 15, 2026, 04:57:20 AMFun fact: playoffstatus.com (https://www.playoffstatus.com/ncaahockey/ncaahockeytournseedprob.html) gives us a < 1% yet non-zero chance of a 1-band.
There is a 1,000% chance that is false.
Quote from: stereax on March 15, 2026, 11:24:03 AMQuote from: BearLover on March 15, 2026, 11:02:34 AMQuote from: stereax on March 15, 2026, 10:27:05 AMQuote from: BearLover on March 15, 2026, 10:19:06 AMI think that's wrong. QWB should be a minor factor. Which tool are you using, btw? I'm not familiar with anything like that on CHN before the You Are the Committee comes out.
Maybe adamw can clarify since he's here—how much NPI does Cornell gain if they win today, and are they locked if they do?
I usually use the CHN-native NPI customizer. (https://www.collegehockeynews.com/ratings/npi#) Where you see the NPI stats, there's a thing on the right where you can input future games' results and see the change in NPI.
Thanks. I had never noticed that before. I think this tool is currently bugged, though. When I plug in Cornell winning today, their NPI goes down...?
Try it again. Sometimes it goes down to .44, sometimes it goes up to .51. I don't get it either, might be a bug or just cache issues.
I'll look into that. It does try to cache your results so that, after you hit submit the first time, when you go back, it's supposed to be in the state you left it so that you can adjust from there, rather than having to start over. So maybe there's some sort of incorrect compounding going on. If you spot anything, let me know.
Quote from: adamw on March 15, 2026, 11:51:04 AMQuote from: Trotsky on March 15, 2026, 04:57:20 AMFun fact: playoffstatus.com (https://www.playoffstatus.com/ncaahockey/ncaahockeytournseedprob.html) gives us a < 1% yet non-zero chance of a 1-band.
There is a 1,000% chance that is false.
Because it was last updated on Wednesday. Lol.
Quote from: adamw on March 15, 2026, 11:53:46 AMQuote from: stereax on March 15, 2026, 11:24:03 AMQuote from: BearLover on March 15, 2026, 11:02:34 AMQuote from: stereax on March 15, 2026, 10:27:05 AMQuote from: BearLover on March 15, 2026, 10:19:06 AMI think that's wrong. QWB should be a minor factor. Which tool are you using, btw? I'm not familiar with anything like that on CHN before the You Are the Committee comes out.
Maybe adamw can clarify since he's here—how much NPI does Cornell gain if they win today, and are they locked if they do?
I usually use the CHN-native NPI customizer. (https://www.collegehockeynews.com/ratings/npi#) Where you see the NPI stats, there's a thing on the right where you can input future games' results and see the change in NPI.
Thanks. I had never noticed that before. I think this tool is currently bugged, though. When I plug in Cornell winning today, their NPI goes down...?
Try it again. Sometimes it goes down to .44, sometimes it goes up to .51. I don't get it either, might be a bug or just cache issues.
I'll look into that. It does try to cache your results so that, after you hit submit the first time, when you go back, it's supposed to be in the state you left it so that you can adjust from there, rather than having to start over. So maybe there's some sort of incorrect compounding going on. If you spot anything, let me know.
I mean, that's the one thing I'm seeing right now. Dunno if it'd happen for other teams/stuff.
Quote from: stereax on March 15, 2026, 11:56:38 AMQuote from: adamw on March 15, 2026, 11:53:46 AMQuote from: stereax on March 15, 2026, 11:24:03 AMQuote from: BearLover on March 15, 2026, 11:02:34 AMQuote from: stereax on March 15, 2026, 10:27:05 AMQuote from: BearLover on March 15, 2026, 10:19:06 AMI think that's wrong. QWB should be a minor factor. Which tool are you using, btw? I'm not familiar with anything like that on CHN before the You Are the Committee comes out.
Maybe adamw can clarify since he's here—how much NPI does Cornell gain if they win today, and are they locked if they do?
I usually use the CHN-native NPI customizer. (https://www.collegehockeynews.com/ratings/npi#) Where you see the NPI stats, there's a thing on the right where you can input future games' results and see the change in NPI.
Thanks. I had never noticed that before. I think this tool is currently bugged, though. When I plug in Cornell winning today, their NPI goes down...?
Try it again. Sometimes it goes down to .44, sometimes it goes up to .51. I don't get it either, might be a bug or just cache issues.
I'll look into that. It does try to cache your results so that, after you hit submit the first time, when you go back, it's supposed to be in the state you left it so that you can adjust from there, rather than having to start over. So maybe there's some sort of incorrect compounding going on. If you spot anything, let me know.
I mean, that's the one thing I'm seeing right now. Dunno if it'd happen for other teams/stuff.
I know what's happening - but haven't fixed it yet.
If you "modify results" and click Cornell winning today - and submit. It switches your selection to Harvard (which can be seen by going back to the Customize tab - Harvard is selected). But if on the next try, you select Cornell again and hit submit, then that time it sticks.
So first try - you're going to see a worse NPI than they have now. Second try will be correct.
I'm also not sure that the script is accounting for that being a conference playoff game, and thus no more home/road weighting. Need to check that too.
Quote from: adamw on March 15, 2026, 11:59:21 AMQuote from: stereax on March 15, 2026, 11:56:38 AMQuote from: adamw on March 15, 2026, 11:53:46 AMQuote from: stereax on March 15, 2026, 11:24:03 AMQuote from: BearLover on March 15, 2026, 11:02:34 AMQuote from: stereax on March 15, 2026, 10:27:05 AMQuote from: BearLover on March 15, 2026, 10:19:06 AMI think that's wrong. QWB should be a minor factor. Which tool are you using, btw? I'm not familiar with anything like that on CHN before the You Are the Committee comes out.
Maybe adamw can clarify since he's here—how much NPI does Cornell gain if they win today, and are they locked if they do?
I usually use the CHN-native NPI customizer. (https://www.collegehockeynews.com/ratings/npi#) Where you see the NPI stats, there's a thing on the right where you can input future games' results and see the change in NPI.
Thanks. I had never noticed that before. I think this tool is currently bugged, though. When I plug in Cornell winning today, their NPI goes down...?
Try it again. Sometimes it goes down to .44, sometimes it goes up to .51. I don't get it either, might be a bug or just cache issues.
I'll look into that. It does try to cache your results so that, after you hit submit the first time, when you go back, it's supposed to be in the state you left it so that you can adjust from there, rather than having to start over. So maybe there's some sort of incorrect compounding going on. If you spot anything, let me know.
I mean, that's the one thing I'm seeing right now. Dunno if it'd happen for other teams/stuff.
I know what's happening - but haven't fixed it yet.
If you "modify results" and click Cornell winning today - and submit. It switches your selection to Harvard (which can be seen by going back to the Customize tab - Harvard is selected). But if on the next try, you select Cornell again and hit submit, then that time it sticks.
So first try - you're going to see a worse NPI than they have now. Second try will be correct.
I'm also not sure that the script is accounting for that being a conference playoff game, and thus no more home/road weighting. Need to check that too.
Yeah, but when I choose Harvard it goes down to 54.76. If it was actually choosing Harvard over Cornell, it'd show that, and not the 55.43 number...
Quote from: stereax on March 15, 2026, 12:02:03 PMQuote from: adamw on March 15, 2026, 11:59:21 AMQuote from: stereax on March 15, 2026, 11:56:38 AMQuote from: adamw on March 15, 2026, 11:53:46 AMQuote from: stereax on March 15, 2026, 11:24:03 AMQuote from: BearLover on March 15, 2026, 11:02:34 AMQuote from: stereax on March 15, 2026, 10:27:05 AMQuote from: BearLover on March 15, 2026, 10:19:06 AMI think that's wrong. QWB should be a minor factor. Which tool are you using, btw? I'm not familiar with anything like that on CHN before the You Are the Committee comes out.
Maybe adamw can clarify since he's here—how much NPI does Cornell gain if they win today, and are they locked if they do?
I usually use the CHN-native NPI customizer. (https://www.collegehockeynews.com/ratings/npi#) Where you see the NPI stats, there's a thing on the right where you can input future games' results and see the change in NPI.
Thanks. I had never noticed that before. I think this tool is currently bugged, though. When I plug in Cornell winning today, their NPI goes down...?
Try it again. Sometimes it goes down to .44, sometimes it goes up to .51. I don't get it either, might be a bug or just cache issues.
I'll look into that. It does try to cache your results so that, after you hit submit the first time, when you go back, it's supposed to be in the state you left it so that you can adjust from there, rather than having to start over. So maybe there's some sort of incorrect compounding going on. If you spot anything, let me know.
I mean, that's the one thing I'm seeing right now. Dunno if it'd happen for other teams/stuff.
I know what's happening - but haven't fixed it yet.
If you "modify results" and click Cornell winning today - and submit. It switches your selection to Harvard (which can be seen by going back to the Customize tab - Harvard is selected). But if on the next try, you select Cornell again and hit submit, then that time it sticks.
So first try - you're going to see a worse NPI than they have now. Second try will be correct.
I'm also not sure that the script is accounting for that being a conference playoff game, and thus no more home/road weighting. Need to check that too.
Yeah, but when I choose Harvard it goes down to 54.76. If it was actually choosing Harvard over Cornell, it'd show that, and not the 55.43 number...
at this point - I think it has something to do with remembering past selections and not clearing things out. Because if I hit "reset customizations" (which clears the local storage cache) and start over, it's fine.
I do need to have it account for league tournaments having no home/road weighting though
From CHN
Onward
Cornell got past Harvard on Sunday to complete the ECAC's four-some in Lake Placid. And according to our Probability Matrix, the Big Red are now a lock for the NCAAs. Other teams hinge on the bubble. Check out the current NPI, and use You Are the Committee to see what will happen based on next weekend's final results.
https://www.collegehockeynews.com/ratings/probabilityMatrix.php
I can't remember in which thread people were talking about this, but per the CHN probability matrix, there is a good chance we end up with the 6, 7, 9, or 11 seed. Very small chance we end up with 8 or 10.
I just listened to today's USCHO bracketology podcast. I believe the hosts stated several things that are factually wrong. However, they did mention an interesting caveat, which is that they aren't confident the NPI numbers currently available are 100% accurate because this is the first time college hockey has used NPI.
I do note that I spot-checked a few numbers and the USCHO and CHN NPI numbers match, so at the very least those two websites appear to be calculating it the same way.
You know what would fix the problem? The NCAA creating an API so other sites dont need to figure it out on their own.
It would need to be a smart API so you could adjust game results for what if stuff.
got a umass friend begging us to tcb to preserve their dwindling at-large chances. good position to be in imo.
Quote from: adamw on March 15, 2026, 11:59:21 AMI know what's happening - but haven't fixed it yet.
-- Congress
Quote from: GBR1234 on March 15, 2026, 08:24:33 PMhttps://www.collegehockeynews.com/ratings/probabilityMatrix.php
The top 4 already being locked in seems wild to me.
Also, WTF Wisco?
Also, also, why does Clarkson not map to a seed?
Edit: oh, I get it, scroll right. The columns aren't necessarily the tourny seeds, they are the final NPI positions.
Very nicely done table, Adam.
Especially as 3 of them are already done playing.
The fact that the NCHC has 4 of the top 6 kinda makes you wonder though
Duluth basically finished .500 in league 3-7 vs the top teams
but did great vs Lindwood. alaska, Bemidji, Omaha, ASU, Miami it adds up.
would 5-6 more wins do much for Cornells NPI?
Just winning vs BU or UMass would have given Cornell a chance for a top 4 seed perhaps?
Quote from: upprdeck on March 16, 2026, 03:56:59 PMEspecially as 3 of them are already done playing.
The fact that the NCHC has 4 of the top 6 kinda makes you wonder though
Duluth basically finished .500 in league 3-7 vs the top teams
but did great vs Lindwood. alaska, Bemidji, Omaha, ASU, Miami it adds up.
would 5-6 more wins do much for Cornells NPI?
Just winning vs BU or UMass would have given Cornell a chance for a top 4 seed perhaps?
Flipping the BU matchup in the NPI play-around-with-er gives Cornell 6 at 56.55 right now. Flip the first UMass one, 56.53. Flip both, 57.37 and 5th, 0.01 NPI points behind WMU.
Part of the pain of being in the Ivy League is that we schedule fewer games... so each loss means more.
Quote from: stereax on March 16, 2026, 05:00:34 PMQuote from: upprdeck on March 16, 2026, 03:56:59 PMEspecially as 3 of them are already done playing.
The fact that the NCHC has 4 of the top 6 kinda makes you wonder though
Duluth basically finished .500 in league 3-7 vs the top teams
but did great vs Lindwood. alaska, Bemidji, Omaha, ASU, Miami it adds up.
would 5-6 more wins do much for Cornells NPI?
Just winning vs BU or UMass would have given Cornell a chance for a top 4 seed perhaps?
Flipping the BU matchup in the NPI play-around-with-er gives Cornell 6 at 56.55 right now. Flip the first UMass one, 56.53. Flip both, 57.37 and 5th, 0.01 NPI points behind WMU.
Part of the pain of being in the Ivy League is that we schedule fewer games... so each loss means more.
Funny enough, if I flip the Princeton 2-AM-bus game and the RPI tie to wins, we end up at 56.77. Flip the Union game with it, 57.47, 4th, and getting bad wins discarded. That's without the BU or first UMass game.
It's all a game of inches. No point sitting in the coulda-woulda-shoulda now. Good thing UMass is doing well because that helps us a lot.
Quote from: stereax on March 16, 2026, 05:00:34 PMPart of the pain of being in the Ivy League is that we schedule fewer games... so each loss means more.
I'll never be able to find it again, but I saw a clip the the other day of the Wisconsin coach pushing for more regular season games. Don't know how widely held that opinion is among other coaches, though.
Quote from: Weder on March 16, 2026, 05:17:11 PMQuote from: stereax on March 16, 2026, 05:00:34 PMPart of the pain of being in the Ivy League is that we schedule fewer games... so each loss means more.
I'll never be able to find it again, but I saw a clip the the other day of the Wisconsin coach pushing for more regular season games. Don't know how widely held that opinion is among other coaches, though.
I've heard Denver coach advocate for this on the CHN podcast. He cited an increase in revenue. I doubt most schools earn much revenue at all from a couple more home games. The road team traveling for those games loses money. (Some like Brown almost certainly lose money from a couple more home and a couple more away games.) I get that schools are desperately scrapping for anything to boost their revenue sharing budgets, but this change seems self-serving for those proposing it.
Quote from: Weder on March 16, 2026, 05:17:11 PMQuote from: stereax on March 16, 2026, 05:00:34 PMPart of the pain of being in the Ivy League is that we schedule fewer games... so each loss means more.
I'll never be able to find it again, but I saw a clip the the other day of the Wisconsin coach pushing for more regular season games. Don't know how widely held that opinion is among other coaches, though.
He also advocated for home site regionals (at university rinks)
Quote from: BearLover on March 16, 2026, 01:07:00 PMI just listened to today's USCHO bracketology podcast. I believe the hosts stated several things that are factually wrong. However, they did mention an interesting caveat, which is that they aren't confident the NPI numbers currently available are 100% accurate because this is the first time college hockey has used NPI.
I do note that I spot-checked a few numbers and the USCHO and CHN NPI numbers match, so at the very least those two websites appear to be calculating it the same way.
Everything is correct. The only reason they say this is because of a (misguided - could use stronger words but) notion that we have to make believe we don't know the exact formula, and that we're just "approximating" it. This used to be a thing like 25 years ago where you had to do that dance. Some insight for you: No one gives a crap anymore. It's all out there. They know it's right, we know it's right. (This is not to say either site can't make algorithm errors - but if we did, we'd know about it in a hurry, and make it right)
Quote from: upprdeck on March 16, 2026, 01:46:20 PMYou know what would fix the problem? The NCAA creating an API so other sites dont need to figure it out on their own.
It would need to be a smart API so you could adjust game results for what if stuff.
If I told you how incestuous all this data gathering was, it would make your head spin. It's fine the way it is. Just trust me it's all right.
Going into the tournament, 9 in USCHO, 11 in USA Hockey, to go with 11 in NPI.