Polls 2019-20

[marty]

Nah. Too visceral, excuse the pun. Instead use numbers exclusively. If not, why are we building more super-cooled, solid rhodium computers fed and served by swarms of numbers-bearing supplicants?

Pretty sure those are just for porn.

The supplicants or the computers?

Computers.

The Supplicants is the live show.  Euripides worked blue.

The generics aren't blue.

[Trotsky]

Nah. Too visceral, excuse the pun. Instead use numbers exclusively. If not, why are we building more super-cooled, solid rhodium computers fed and served by swarms of numbers-bearing supplicants?

Pretty sure those are just for porn.

The supplicants or the computers?

Computers.

The Supplicants is the live show.  Euripides worked blue.

The generics aren't blue.

If the show lasts more than four hours I want my money back.

[Swampy]

Nah. Too visceral, excuse the pun. Instead use numbers exclusively. If not, why are we building more super-cooled, solid rhodium computers fed and served by swarms of numbers-bearing supplicants?

Pretty sure those are just for porn.

The supplicants or the computers?

Computers.

The Supplicants is the live show.  Euripides worked blue.

The generics aren't blue.

If the show lasts more than four hours I want my money back.

For the generics or for the show?

[Jeff Hopkins '82]

Nah. Too visceral, excuse the pun. Instead use numbers exclusively. If not, why are we building more super-cooled, solid rhodium computers fed and served by swarms of numbers-bearing supplicants?

Pretty sure those are just for porn.

The supplicants or the computers?

Computers.

The Supplicants is the live show.  Euripides worked blue.

Had to look that one up.  

I am an engineer after all.  Classics were never required.

[Trotsky]

Nah. Too visceral, excuse the pun. Instead use numbers exclusively. If not, why are we building more super-cooled, solid rhodium computers fed and served by swarms of numbers-bearing supplicants?

Pretty sure those are just for porn.

The supplicants or the computers?

Computers.

The Supplicants is the live show.  Euripides worked blue.

The generics aren't blue.

If the show lasts more than four hours I want my money back.

For the generics or for the show?

After four hours who cares?  After the first fifteen minutes it's all generic.

[Jim Hyla]

Code Select Expand

[b]USCHO Division I Men's Poll - February 10, 2020[/b]

Rnk Team     (First) Record Points Last Poll

1 North Dakota (48) 21-3-3 998 1
[b][u]2 Cornell        (1) 17-2-4 927 2[/u][/b]
3 Minnesota State (1) 26-4-2 920 3
4 Minnesota Duluth 17-9-2 794 6
[b][u]5 Clarkson 20-6-2 787 5[/u][/b]
6 Denver        17-6-5 739 7
7 Boston College 16-8-1 704 4
8 Massachusetts 18-9-2 684 8
9 Penn State 18-9-3 596 9
10 Arizona State 20-9-3 529 11
11 UMass Lowell 15-7-5 465 14
12 Northeastern 15-8-2 431 12
13 Ohio State 16-10-4 367 13
14 Providence 14-9-5 363 10
[b][u]15 Quinnipiac 17-9-2 294 16[/u][/b]
16 Bemidji State 16-8-4 180 18
17 Maine        15-9-4 159 NR
[b][u]18 Harvard        11-7-4 150 17[/u][/b]
19 Northern Michigan 16-10-4 146 15
20 Sacred Heart 18-8-2 92 20

Others receiving votes: Michigan State 67, Western Michigan 42,
Minnesota 32, Notre Dame 10, AIC 8, Bowling Green 7,
New Hampshire 4, Boston University 3, Michigan 2

[b]USA Today/USA Hockey Magazine Men's College Hockey Poll
February 10, 2020[/b]
Team              Points (First) Last Poll Record Weeks in Poll

1 University North Dakota 504 (30) 1 21-3-3 15
[b][u]2 Cornell University 462 (3) 2 17-2-4 19[/u][/b]
3 Minnesota State Univer 456 3 26-4-2 19
4 Univer Minnesota Duluth 375 7 17-9-2 19
5 University of Denver 348 5 17-6-5 19
6 Boston College        333 4 16-8-1 17
[b][u]7 Clarkson University 318 6 20-6-2 19[/u][/b]
8 University Massachusetts279 8 18-9-2 19
9 Penn State University 242 10 18-9-3 19
10 Arizona State University192 9 20-9-3 7
11 U Massachusetts Lowell  149 14 15-7-5 8
12 Northeastern University 125 12 15-8-2 19
13 Ohio State University 92 13 16-10-4 19
14 Providence College 53 10 14-9-5 12
[b][u]15 Quinnipiac University 47 15 17-9-2 5[/u][/b]

Others receiving votes: University of Maine 36, Western Michigan University 14,
Bemidji State University 13, [b][u]Harvard University 12[/u][/b],
Bowling Green State University 11, Northern Michigan University 10,
Michigan State University 5, University of Minnesota 3, Sacred Heart University 1.

[b]NCAA Tournament Pairwise Comparison Ratings[/b]

Rk Team       PCWs RPI Rk QWB-† W-L-T Win % Wgtd Win % - ‡
1 North Dakota 59 .6165 1 .0078 21-3-3 .8333 .8425
2 Minnesota State 58 .6048 2 .0076 26-4-2 .8438 .8375
[b][u]3 Cornell 57 .5961 3 .0039 17-2-4 .8261 .8377[/u][/b]
4 Minnesota-Duluth56 .5716 5 .0081 17-9-2 .6429 .6377
5 Denver        55 .5752 4 .0066 17-6-5 .6964 .6906
6 Boston College 54 .5628 6 .0045 16-8-1 .6600 .6603
7 Massachusetts 53 .5565 7 .0053 18-9-2 .6552 .6597
8 Penn State 52 .5515 8 .0017 18-9-3 .6500 .6376
[b][u]9 Clarkson 51 .5512 9 .0014 20-6-2 .7500 .7429[/u][/b]
10 Arizona State 50 .5501 10 .0040 20-9-3 .6719 .6827
11 Mass.-Lowell 49 .5466 11 .0053 15-7-5 .6481 .6403
12 Northeastern 48 .5454 12 .0026 15-8-2 .6400 .6496
13 Maine        46 .5431 13 .0059 15-9-4 .6071 .6349
[b][u]14 Quinnipiac 46 .5421 14 .0034 17-9-2 .6429 .6591
15 Ohio State 45 .5401 15 .0020 16-10-4 .6000 .5993
16 Providence 44 .5352 17 .0058 14-9-5 .5893 .5804[/u][/b]
17     Bemidji State 43 .5366 16 .0022 16-8-4 .6429 .6489
18 Western Michigan41 .5328 18 .0031 14-10-4 .5714 .5667
[b][u]19 Northrn Michigan40 .5319 19 .0023 16-10-4 .6000 .6014
20 Michigan State 40 .5310 20 .0033 14-13-1 .5179 .5182
21 Harvard 39 .5301 21 .0037 11-7-4 .5909 .5973[/u][/b]

[b]KRACH: Division I Men[/b]

Rank Team       Rating RRWP Win % Rk W-L-T  Win % Win Ratio SOS Rk SOS

1 North Dakota 963.6 .8800 2 21-3-3 0.8333 5.000 3 192.7
2 Minnesota State 898.1 .8727 1 26-4-2 0.8438 5.400 10 166.3
[b][u]3 Cornell        531.2 .8080 3 17-2-4 0.8261 4.750 28 111.8[/u][/b]
4 Denver        441.1 .7807 5 17-6-5 0.6964 2.294 4 192.3
5 Minnesota Duluth393.4 .7627 12 17-9-2 0.6429 1.800 1 218.5
6 Boston College 269.9 .6980 8 16-8-1 0.6600 1.941 17 139.0
7 Penn State 267.6 .6964 10 18-9-3 0.6500 1.857 16 144.1
[b][u]8 Clarkson 247.6 .6821 4 20-6-2 0.7500 3.000 42 82.53
9 Ohio State 236.1 .6732 17 16-10-4 0.6000 1.500 13 157.4[/u][/b]
10 Bemidji State 232.5 .6703 12 16-8-4 0.6429 1.800 20 129.2
11 Massachusetts 232.4 .6702 9 18-9-2 0.6552 1.900 21 122.3
12 Arizona State 231.3 .6693 7 20-9-3 0.6719 2.048 27 113.0
13 Western Michigan219.6 .6594 22 14-10-4 0.5714 1.333 11 164.7
14 Minnesota 215.2 .6555 26 13-11-4 0.5357 1.154 6 186.5
[b][u]15 Northrn Michigan201.6 .6429 17 16-10-4 0.6000 1.500 19 134.4
16 Michigan State 200.3 .6416 31 14-13-1 0.5179 1.074 5 186.5[/u][/b]
17 Northeastern 195.2 .6365 15 15-8-2 0.6400 1.778 31 109.8
18 UMass Lowell 191.6 .6329 11 15-7-5 0.6481 1.842 33 104.0
19 Michigan 181.2 .6218 31 13-12-3 0.5179 1.074 7 168.7
[b][u]20 Quinnipiac 176.2 .6162 12 17-9-2 0.6429 1.800 36 97.89[/u][/b]
21 Notre Dame 175.2 .6151 31 12-11-5 0.5179 1.074 12 163.1
[b][u]22 Providence 175.1 .6150 20 14-9-5 0.5893 1.435 22 122.0[/u][/b]

[b]USCHO Division I Women's Poll - February 10, 2020[/b]

Rnk Team     (First) Record Points Last Poll

[b][u]1 Cornell       (11) 21-1-3 145 2[/u][/b]
2 Wisconsin (4) 26-3-1 135 1
3 Northeastern 25-3-1 120 3
4 Minnesota 23-5-3 110 4
[b][u]5 Princeton 19-4-1 84 6[/u][/b]
6 Ohio State 17-8-5 64 5
[b][u]6 Clarkson 20-4-6 64 7[/u][/b]
8 Minnesota Duluth 15-9-4 46 9
9 Boston University 20-6-3 41 8
[b][u]10 Harvard        13-10-1 7 10
10 Quinnipiac 17-10-3 7 NR[/u][/b]

Others receiving votes: Robert Morris 2

[b]Women's National Collegiate PairWise Rankings[/b]

Rnk Team        PWR W-L-T W% W% Rnk RPI RPI Rnk

1 Wisconsin 40 26-3-1 0.8833 2 0.6683* 1
[b][u]2 Cornell        39 21-1-3 0.9000 1 0.6659* 2[/u][/b]
3 Minnesota 38 23-5-3 0.7903 5 0.6442* 3
4 Northeastern 37 25-3-1 0.8793 3 0.6412* 4
[b][u]5 Princeton 36 19-4-1 0.8125 4 0.6156* 5
6 Ohio State 35 17-8-5 0.6500 8 0.6045 6
7 Clarkson 34 20-4-6 0.7667 6 0.5894* 7[/u][/b]
8 Minnesota Duluth33 15-9-4 0.6071 12 0.5838 8
9 Boston Univer 32 20-6-3 0.7414 7 0.5779* 9
[b][u]10 Harvard        31 13-10-1 0.5625 15 0.5468* 10
11 Quinnipiac 30 17-10-3 0.6167 11 0.5455* 11
12 Robert Morris 29 16-9-3 0.6250 10 0.5374* 12
13 Colgate        28 14-12-6 0.5312 20 0.5371* 13[/u][/b]

[b]KRACH: National Collegiate Women[/b]

Rank Team       Rating RRWP Win % Rk W-L-T  Win % Win Ratio SOS Rk SOS

1 Wisconsin 4447. .9338 2 26-3-1 0.8833 7.571 4 587.4
[b][u]2 Cornell        3188. .9127 1 21-1-3 0.9000 9.000 6 354.2[/u][/b]
3 Minnesota 2759. .9024 5 23-5-3 0.7903 3.769 2 732.0
[b][u]4 Ohio State 1454. .8481 8 17-8-5 0.6500 1.857 1 782.9[/u][/b]
5 Northeastern 1284. .8359 3 25-3-1 0.8793 7.286 13 176.3
[b][u]6 Princeton 1239. .8323 4 19-4-1 0.8125 4.333 10 285.8[/u][/b]
7 Minnesota Duluth 989.7 .8087 12 15-9-4 0.6071 1.545 3 640.4
[b][u]8 Clarkson 710.7 .7709 6 20-4-6 0.7667 3.286 12 216.3[/u][/b]
9   Bemidji State 435.0 .7087 24 14-15-3 0.4844 0.939 5 463.0
10 Boston University398.0 .6968 7 20-6-3 0.7414 2.867 17 138.8
[b][u]11 Harvard         367.7 .6860 15 13-10-1 0.5625 1.286 9 286.0
12 Colgate         304.0 .6596 20 14-12-6 0.5312 1.133 11 268.2
13 Quinnipiac 281.0 .6485 11 17-10-3 0.6167 1.609 14 174.7[/u][/b]
14 Minnesota State 258.5 .6366 27 11-15-5 0.4355 0.771 7 335.1
[b][u]15 Robert Morris 252.0 .6330 10 16-9-3 0.6250 1.667 16 151.2[/u][/b]


[French Rage]

A good year to enjoy Cornell hockey in all of its forms.

[cth95]

Did you say "Hockey in all of its forms"?  

Jughead- The Hockey Song

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wu0NIBAUz5w

[osorojo]

Good questions deserve good answers. I visit this site to read facts and opinions about Cornell hockey games, preferably written in English. Beyond what's revealed in the box score I little enjoy and learn less about Cornell Hockey from charts, graphs, and columns of statistics - but then I'm retired and I don't have to put up with that crap any more.

[Trotsky]

Good questions deserve good answers. I visit this site to read facts and opinions about Cornell hockey games, preferably written in English. Beyond what's revealed in the box score I little enjoy and learn less about Cornell Hockey from charts, graphs, and columns of statistics - but then I'm retired and I don't have to put up with that crap any more.

But, and this may come as a surprise, you aren't everyone.

Here is a direct message written in English.  This is a diverse group.  We have all sorts of white males!  We post and enjoy in many different ways.  Because many of us come from a math background, and are nerds, we also post and masticate many, many columns of statistics.  We enjoy this.

If you don't enjoy it, that's fine.  Like Wittgenstein, "pass over it in silence."  Contribute where and how you wish and take your enjoyment thusly.

tl; dr: I'm sure you're a nice fellow so stop letting that other dick post in your name.

[ugarte]

Beyond what's revealed in the box score ...

read a little farther in the box score than "goals" and see if it deepens your understanding of what happened over the course of the 60 minutes or whether it is useful for the predictive value of the event

[BearLover]

Good questions deserve good answers. I visit this site to read facts and opinions about Cornell hockey games, preferably written in English. Beyond what's revealed in the box score I little enjoy and learn less about Cornell Hockey from charts, graphs, and columns of statistics - but then I'm retired and I don't have to put up with that crap any more.

But, and this may come as a surprise, you aren't everyone.

Here is a direct message written in English.  This is a diverse group.  We have all sorts of white males!  We post and enjoy in many different ways.  Because many of us come from a math background, and are nerds, we also post and masticate many, many columns of statistics.  We enjoy this.

If you don't enjoy it, that's fine.  Like Wittgenstein, "pass over it in silence."  Contribute where and how you wish and take your enjoyment thusly.

tl; dr: I'm sure you're a nice fellow so stop letting that other dick post in your name.

This forum could be far more stats-heavy than it is. There are all sorts of advanced hockey statistics that don't ever make it onto this forum but which give more color to a game and to a team than "shots" and "goals." Statistics help us understand what we're watching on the ice. They reveal team weaknesses and strengths, how teams match up against each other, which players are effective, and more. This is why every NHL front office, and every front office in every major sport for that matter, places a huge emphasis on analytics. Statistics supplements, but does not supplant, what we watch on the ice with our own eyes.

Speaking for myself, but I suspect for many others here as well, I do not know enough about the X's and O's of hockey to confidently assert anything about hockey strategy. I can give my thoughts, but the notion that I know more than a 25-year ultra-successful head coach of my favorite hockey program, or any college hockey coach for that matter, is asinine. However, I (and many others on here) do have an understanding of statistics at least as good as most hockey coaches, and as such analytics is one dimension on which I feel I can offer valuable input.

[Robb]

Wow - you aspire for "valuable?"  Way outta my league.  I'd settle for being thought to provide mildly interesting or amusing inputs occasionally.  

[Trotsky]

Wow - you aspire for "valuable?"  Way outta my league.  I'd settle for being thought to provide mildly interesting or amusing inputs occasionally.  

I'll give you "mildly."  Perhaps even "tepidly."  I think I'd stop short at "moderately," though.  That's a high bar.

[Trotsky]

This forum could be far more stats-heavy than it is. There are all sorts of advanced hockey statistics that don't ever make it onto this forum but which give more color to a game and to a team than "shots" and "goals."

DRINK DEEP TO THE DREGS!!!

Every time I see "Fenwick" I think of Bill.  You still out there, old man?