Pairwise Ranking

[Jeff Hopkins '82]

If Western loses twice, are they still a TUC?  If we eliminate a TUC loss and a TUC tie from our stats, how much does that help us?

[KenP]

It's a slippery slope.  Their RPI is .5060, just over TUC status.  If they lose 2 that could lower them below .5000.  But wait!  If Cornell sweeps (a must if we are talking about at-large bids), we might crack the RPI top 15.  In that case, Western now has a "quality road win" that could push their RPI back over .5000.   ::screwy::

[Al DeFlorio]

[Q]KenP Wrote:

It's a slippery slope.  Their RPI is .5060, just over TUC status.  If they lose 2 that could lower them below .5000.  But wait!  If Cornell sweeps (a must if we are talking about at-large bids), we might crack the RPI top 15.  In that case, Western now has a "quality road win" that could push their RPI back over .5000.     [/Q]
Seems to me there was a situation a few years ago involving a midwestern school (Michigan?) where if they swept a playoff series in two games their opponent would end their season as a non-TUC, thereby hurting the first school's PWR.  But if the first school took three games to win the series, their opponent would then remain a TUC, thus enhancing the first school's PWR. ::screwy::

So, conceivably, there can be situations where you should even root against your own team in order to improve its chances for an NCAA bid.  ::help::

[jtwcornell91]

[Q]KenP Wrote:

 It's a slippery slope.  Their RPI is .5060, just over TUC status.  If they lose 2 that could lower them below .5000.  But wait!  If Cornell sweeps (a must if we are talking about at-large bids), we might crack the RPI top 15.  In that case, Western now has a "quality road win" that could push their RPI back over .5000.[/Q]
It doesn't work that way.  You decide who the top 15 are using the pre-bonus RPI, then add the bonuses for quality wins agaisnt those teams.

[KenP]

[Q]jtwcornell91 Wrote:

It doesn't work that way.  You decide who the top 15 are using the pre-bonus RPI, then add the bonuses for quality wins agaisnt those teams.
 [/Q]

For argument sake, say Western is swept, and their RPI is .4995.  Let's also say that Cornell is a top 15 team according to (pre-bonus) RPI at selection time.  Western's quality win(s) will push their RPI back over .5000, making them a TUC once again.

[ugarte]

[Q]jtwcornell91 Wrote:

 [q]KenP Wrote:

 It's a slippery slope.  Their RPI is .5060, just over TUC status.  If they lose 2 that could lower them below .5000.  But wait!  If Cornell sweeps (a must if we are talking about at-large bids), we might crack the RPI top 15.  In that case, Western now has a "quality road win" that could push their RPI back over .5000.[/q]
It doesn't work that way.  You decide who the top 15 are using the pre-bonus RPI, then add the bonuses for quality wins agaisnt those teams.
 [/Q]I think KenP's example still works, John.  In the hypo Cornell is top 15 RPI pre-adjustment, while WMU is sitting on the fringe.  Post adjustment, WMU would bump over .500 and become a TUC.  (Or is TUC also judged pre-adjustment?)

[jtwcornell91]

[Q]ugarte Wrote:

 I think KenP's example still works, John.  In the hypo Cornell is top 15 RPI pre-adjustment, while WMU is sitting on the fringe.  Post adjustment, WMU would bump over .500 and become a TUC.  (Or is TUC also judged pre-adjustment?)




Edited 1 times. Last edit at 03/12/2004 10:40am. [/Q]
Oh, sorry, I read too fast and thought you were talking about wins against WMU (which we don't have anyway) becoming "quality wins".  What you say looks right.

[Ken \'70]

[Q]jtwcornell91 Wrote:

 ugarte Wrote:

 I think KenP's example still works, John.  In the hypo Cornell is top 15 RPI pre-adjustment, while WMU is sitting on the fringe.  Post adjustment, WMU would bump over .500 and become a TUC.  (Or is TUC also judged pre-adjustment?)




Edited 1 times. Last edit at 03/12/2004 10:40am.
Oh, sorry, I read too fast and thought you were talking about wins against WMU (which we don't have anyway) becoming "quality wins".  What you say looks right.

 [/Q]

1.  I'm pretty sure you have to be a TUC to benefit from an RPI bonus, so in the hypothetical it wouldn't do WMU any good.

2. More importantly, even if swept, WMU won't drop out of TUC.  Do the math yourself.  They benefit as much or more from adding Notre Dame's winning % and their Opp % as they lose from adding 2 to their own loss column.

3.  No way Cornell get's high enough in the PWR to earn a spot that way except if they win out, and probably not even then.  Of course if they win out,  an at-large is meaningless for them, but it will probably drop Colgate out of the top 14.

[ugarte]

[Q]Ken '70 Wrote:1.  I'm pretty sure you have to be a TUC to benefit from an RPI bonus, so in the hypothetical it wouldn't do WMU any good.[/q]Rule citation please? This doesn't make a lot of sense to me.
[q]3.  No way Cornell get's high enough in the PWR to earn a spot that way except if they win out, and probably not even then.  Of course if they win out,  an at-large is meaningless for them, but it will probably drop Colgate out of the top 14.[/Q]Keep hope alive!

[jkahn]

[Q]Do the math yourself. They benefit as much or more from adding Notre Dame's winning % and their Opp % as they lose from adding 2 to their own loss column.[/Q]
No they wouldn't benefit as much.  Here's the math, with some liberal rounding and simplification. Two losses added to a .500 team, would drop their win percentage by .026 to .474.  Assuming ND's winning percentage finishes at .600, and the current average of WMU's oppnents winning percentage is .500 (I don't have the data handy but it can't be too far off), the average would rise to .505.  The effect on opponent's oppenents percentage is likely to be negligible.  Thus they lose 25% of .026 and gain 50% of .005, for a net loss of .004.  It does look like WMU would still be a TUC however.

[RedAR]

I'm sure this has been mentioned somewhere else, but I haven't been able to go through all the messages.

After last night's results, Cornell is tied with Colgate for the #15 spot.


Edit: corrected 14 to 15

[finchphil]

It looks like Cornell and Colgate are actually tied for the 15th slot, meaning that there would not be an at large bid for either team, given the autobids for the non-major conferences.  Cornell currently wins the comparison with Colgate so that's a little help.  Harvard is now a TUC and Brown is out of the TUC range, so that helped Cornell rise, despite the loss last night.  Of course, Cornell has to win tonight and get more in Albany to have a chance....winning the tournament is still likely the only way to get in.  

[Josh '99]

Wow...  we flipped the Colgate comparison?  Uhhh...  Thanks, Harvard?  Feels weird saying that.

[Tom Pasniewski 98]

Win out and forget about it or....

Speaking of flipping, it looks like the Cornell-Notre Dame comparison is flippable say if Ohio State beats Notre Dame at the CCHA championships which would give Cornell the common opponents piece of that comparison.  A Cornell win against a TUC in the ECAC's would bring them to .500 against TUC's for the Notre Dame comparison since the Cornell-Notre Dame counts in the H2H and not the record against TUC's.  Cornell could then win COp and TUC's against Notre Dame and win that comparison.

Just kidding...

But like Jayson Moy likes to do in his Bracketology, the above is mostly moot because Notre Dame would beat a TUC and a common opponent in Western Michigan as has been mentioned, to get to the CCHA championships and that would not make the comparison flippable and Notre Dame is helped by the bonus.  I'd like to think that we are close enough to Notre Dame in the comparison and have a win over them that the committee would look at the comparison carefully if a bubble situation arose between both of us.  

In the present PWR, Notre Dame, Colorado College and an ECAC team can not all make the NCAA's.  It's kind of sad though that the WCHA has six, and the CCHA five of the top fourteen spots in the PWR and the ECAC currently has none.