2005-2006 PWR - playoffs edition!

[nyc94]

Speaking again of Niagara, they are tied with Robert Morris at 2-2 late in the second.

Live box score at http://www.collegehockeyamerica.com/2005/tournament/msemi1.htm

[redhair34]

[quote Robb]
Go Purple Eagles!!!![/quote]

Niagara squandered a two goal lead and is tied with RMU at the end of 2 periods

[jtwcornell91]

[quote Ken '70]The result of how two teams actually did against each other as a means of breaking ties in an otherwise more complex system can hardly be called arbitrary.[/quote]

I didn't say using head-to-head results as a tiebreaker was arbitrary.  I said the selection criteria that make up the PWR were arbitrarily chosen.  Why is a TUC a team with an RPI above .500 and not just above .600?  Why are the RPI weights 25-50-25?  Why is the "quality wins" bonus whatever it is?  But my point is that any of these measures is still a way of quantifying the results of an entire season.

[quote Ken '70]RPI and KRACH are mathematical abstractions drawn from real results, but not the results themselves.[/quote]

So is winning percentage, but we still use that to determine the final standings within a league.  So is a point system that makes a win worth 3 points and an overtime or shootout loss worth 1.  Does that mean the NHL doesn't choose playoff teams based on the results of games, because they convert those results into points first?

[quote Ken '70]But this is a religious argument for you, so I'll bow out at this point.  Reasoning against an Islamic jihadist or KRACH devotee is equally futile.[/quote]

I see.  Anyone who disagrees with your opinion about the best way to rank teams--or even considers as valid something other your preferred system--is a fanatic.  Wonderful rhetorical tactic.  Have fun with your ball at home.

[French Rage]

Niagara up 3-2.

[jtwcornell91]

[quote French Rage]Niagara up 3-2.[/quote]

Final: Niagara 3, Robt Morris 2.

[nyc94]

Niagara's RPI is now .4992 so they are a TUC with the 3-2-1 bonus (not only 33-22-11)

[Tub(a)]

[quote nyc94]Niagara's RPI is now .4992 so they are a TUC with the 3-2-1 bonus (not only 33-22-11)[/quote]

I remember a lot of whining about having Niagara on the schedule at the beginning of the year, and I was probably part of it.

I don't know if Schafer got lucky or knew something that we didn't, but this would obviously be huge for CU.

[Josh '99]

After tonight's ECAC results, Clarkson's RPI now stands at .4997.  *sigh*

[nyc94]

Clarkson's RPI falls to .4997 with several western games still in progress.  They have no quality wins.

Niagara at .4982 with a quality road win at UNH.  And they play Bemidji Sunday in the CHA finals.

[schoaff]

[quote jmh30]After tonight's ECAC results, Clarkson's RPI now stands at .4997.  *sigh*[/quote]

Since we played 3 games worth of Hockey this weekend, think we can convince the NCAA to at least give them credit for an extra tie?

[Robb]

[quote nyc94].4997[/quote]
Stupid cliff.

[DeltaOne81]

[quote Robb][quote nyc94].4997[/quote]
Stupid cliff.[/quote]

It doesn't matter much, we're .7083 vs. TUC w/o them - 8-3-1.

With then we'd be 11-4-1, or .7188 .

If we had lost to them allowing them to be a TUC, we'd be 11-5-1, or .6765.


So at least there's no "if we had lost we'd be better" situation like Wisc had last (?) year.

And it makes no difference in any of our TUC categories at the moment, nevertheless overall comparisons. I guess it could when its all said and done, but, by then, Clarkson could be TUC with a few Miami, etc wins.

[abmarks]

I expect clarksons RPI to go up when all is said and done since Opp win % is 50% of the RPI.  Right now only Quinny and Bemidji are below Clarkson in RPI and not by much.  I didn't try any math, but since everyone left is going to be playing higher RPI teams I'fd think that the RPI of the group would go up over the remaining games.  

Cross your fingers.  We'll know the chances much better tomorrow night.
---------------

Clarkson's opponents that are still playing are:
Niagra, Bemidji
Miami
Quinny, Colgate, SLU, Harvard, Cornell, Harvard

[ebilmes]

Plugging in 33/22/11, we're alone in 6th. For 3/2/1, we're tied for 5th still.

[DeltaOne81]

After Saturday's games:

Initial 1-16, 2-15, etc placings:

Grand Forks:
1 Minn (1)
2 CC (
3 UND (9)
4 AHA/CHA (16)

Green Bay
1 Wisc (2)
2 Harvard (7)
3 Mich (10)
4 AHA/CHA (15)

Albany
1 Miami (3)
2 Cornell (6)
3 Maine (11)
4 UNO (14)

Worcester
1 BU (4)
2 MSU (5)
3 BC (12)
4 UNH (13)

Problems:
8 CC / 9 UND
3 Miami / 14 UNO
4 BU / 13 UNH

Flipping UNO/UNH solves both their problems.

CC/UND, well, they can't move UND (host), so they have to move CC. It makes most sense to switch #8 CC with #7 Harvard. And it also makes the least geographical changes. Here's hoping they'd go with that.

Grand Forks:
1 Minn (1)
2 Harvard (7)
3 UND (9)
4 AHA/CHA (16)

Green Bay
1 Wisc (2)
2 CC (
3 Mich (10)
4 AHA/CHA (15)

Albany
1 Miami (3)
2 Cornell (6)
3 Maine (11)
4 UNH (13)

Worcester
1 BU (4)
2 MSU (5)
3 BC (12)
4 UNO (14)

Harvard can complain because they play a harder #3 than they should in their own barn. CC is a bit further from home. If UNH wants to complain about being in Albany instead of Worcester, then they're a buncha whiners