« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4

Author Topic: 2016 Bracketology  (Read 15756 times)

Offline Bartman

  • All-Region
  • *****
  • Posts: 1789
  • Karma: +276/-52
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Bracketology
« Reply #15 on: February 28, 2016, 05:28:19 pm »
Wow Tufts beats Williams. Can Williams still make the tourney if Geneseo beats Plattsburgh, or would that put 2 SUNYAC teams in and leave Williams out?  I would think Plattsburgh win keeps Williams in? Does Hobart have to beat Utica to stay in?Whatever happens, lots of good hockey next weekend.
Logged
"When I played college football ,I was slow, real slow, but when I caught them, it was glorious" Bartman
"When it's third and ten, you can take the milk drinkers and I'll take the whiskey drinkers.”
― Max McGee Green Bay Packers Super Bowl I
“I never graduated college, but I was only there for two terms – Truman’s and Eisenhower’s” – Alex Karras

Offline GPC1

  • Junior Varsity
  • *
  • Posts: 1
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Bracketology
« Reply #16 on: February 28, 2016, 05:56:13 pm »
If the assumption is that Adrian will get the NCHA autibid, then that means they will have to beat St Norbert. If this occurs, wouldn't the committee have Adrian as the number one seed in the west? And how would that affect the pairings going forward?
Logged

Offline FSU96

  • Second-stringer
  • **
  • Posts: 43
  • Karma: +1/-0
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Bracketology
« Reply #17 on: February 28, 2016, 09:39:26 pm »
I would think it wouldn't have any immediate effect on the brackets, due to the 500-mile rule. It may flip a semifinal pairing, though.
Logged

Offline Matthew Webb

  • Moderator
  • Starter
  • *****
  • Posts: 408
  • Karma: +13/-1
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Bracketology
« Reply #18 on: February 29, 2016, 09:03:01 am »
Quote from: GPC1 on February 28, 2016, 05:56:13 pm
If the assumption is that Adrian will get the NCHA autibid, then that means they will have to beat St Norbert. If this occurs, wouldn't the committee have Adrian as the number one seed in the west? And how would that affect the pairings going forward?

There are instances where it could matter, but in this case it probably won't. Regardless of where Adrian is seeded, there are only going to be a couple or perhaps as few as one other team in the field that it can play. What it could change, however, is where that game is played, especially if Adrian has to play Hobart. If Stevens Point and Adrian are in I think a Point @ Adrian QF is quite likely regardless of whether Adrian is 1 or 2 in the West, as travel restrictions mean it'd have to be Adrian v SNC, Hobart or Point and Point is the lowest ranked of the three.

There's another option out there in the event of an 8/3 and that's MIAC/SNC v Adrian for a quarterfinal. It risks a quarterfinal flight so per the handbook it should be avoided but I'd consider the chance of it to be some percentage greater than zero.
Logged
"It is hard to free fools from the chains they revere" - Voltaire

Offline spwood

  • Second-stringer
  • **
  • Posts: 164
  • Karma: +8/-1
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Bracketology
« Reply #19 on: March 01, 2016, 03:40:12 pm »
Quote from: Matthew Webb on February 16, 2016, 11:54:42 pm

Men's East

Men's West

We're going to need these updated for the current week!  The NCAA's links are still *&%$#@^ broken.... ;D

I'd love to see how Endicott got themselves ranked... it's not to help out anyone else in the region.  Their only game against a ranked team is a win over Babson.
Logged

Offline Matthew Webb

  • Moderator
  • Starter
  • *****
  • Posts: 408
  • Karma: +13/-1
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Bracketology
« Reply #20 on: March 02, 2016, 02:54:25 am »
Quote from: spwood on March 01, 2016, 03:40:12 pm
We're going to need these updated for the current week!  The NCAA's links are still *&%$#@^ broken.... ;D

I'd love to see how Endicott got themselves ranked... it's not to help out anyone else in the region.  Their only game against a ranked team is a win over Babson.

{original post redacted}

I'll be back later today...
« Last Edit: March 02, 2016, 03:13:12 am by Matthew Webb »
Logged
"It is hard to free fools from the chains they revere" - Voltaire

Offline PeterLangella

  • Second-stringer
  • **
  • Posts: 69
  • Karma: +2/-0
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Bracketology
« Reply #21 on: March 03, 2016, 08:23:31 pm »
Here's an interesting question: If Trinity, Point, and Geneseo all lose, does the NESCAC get three teams in?
Logged

Offline ChesapeakeRon

  • Junior Varsity
  • *
  • Posts: 1
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Bracketology
« Reply #22 on: March 03, 2016, 10:29:29 pm »
Always enjoy the bracketology calculations.  Regarding the last two Pool C bids, I agree that the four teams being compared have fairly equivalent resumes.  However, the only way Geneseo or Babson will be evaluated is if they lose another game.  Even though they would lose to a highly ranked team, it will hurt them.  Williams is done because they lost to the 8th seed in their conference tournament.  Shouldn't that hurt them more?
Logged

Offline PSUChamps2001

  • Junior Varsity
  • *
  • Posts: 13
  • Karma: +2/-0
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Bracketology
« Reply #23 on: March 03, 2016, 10:55:58 pm »
In theory it should, but it doesn't in all aspects. Part of the DIII Selection Flaw....the only way it really "hurts" them is in SOS, as playing a lower win% team will drop yours some. It also will drop your Win%, but is no different there. Tufts really doesn't have any common opponents with any of the other Pool C teams (unless Trinity was to lose) in which both Trinity and Williams would end up being 2-1 vs Tufts, so its a wash.
Logged

Offline Matthew Webb

  • Moderator
  • Starter
  • *****
  • Posts: 408
  • Karma: +13/-1
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Bracketology
« Reply #24 on: March 03, 2016, 11:56:52 pm »
Quote from: PeterLangella on March 03, 2016, 08:23:31 pm
Here's an interesting question: If Trinity, Point, and Geneseo all lose, does the NESCAC get three teams in?

I thought about that earlier, and...I don't know. Technically. We have an idea what would happen (which might be different from what we'd project on Sunday) and we have a good reason for having this idea, but we're not even going there unless the events of this weekend force us to on Sunday :)

Put it this way: I know what I would bet on happening but am not sure whether it would match the conclusion we would come to when applying our own analysis.
« Last Edit: March 04, 2016, 12:05:48 am by Matthew Webb »
Logged
"It is hard to free fools from the chains they revere" - Voltaire

Offline Matthew Webb

  • Moderator
  • Starter
  • *****
  • Posts: 408
  • Karma: +13/-1
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Bracketology
« Reply #25 on: March 04, 2016, 12:01:47 am »
Quote from: ChesapeakeRon on March 03, 2016, 10:29:29 pm
Always enjoy the bracketology calculations.  Regarding the last two Pool C bids, I agree that the four teams being compared have fairly equivalent resumes.  However, the only way Geneseo or Babson will be evaluated is if they lose another game.  Even though they would lose to a highly ranked team, it will hurt them.  Williams is done because they lost to the 8th seed in their conference tournament.  Shouldn't that hurt them more?

You'd think so, and that's why we really don't like swinging a comparison on the RNK comparison. It makes no sense that a loss to a top-ranked team should hurt a team more than a loss to an unranked one, but that it can. Thus, on our end we try to focus more on what useful information RNK tells us and we tend to focus more on the wins part of it as opposed to taking it as an end-all-be-all number that's simply higher or lower than that of some other team.

What's better? Endicott being 1-0 in RNK with a win over Babson, or a fictional team that is 4-4 in RNK with some losses but also wins over, say, Plattsburgh, Trinity, Geneseo and UMass Boston? I know what I think, but there are certainly some who would look at the 1.000 v .500, go no further, and give Endicott the edge.
Logged
"It is hard to free fools from the chains they revere" - Voltaire

Offline spwood

  • Second-stringer
  • **
  • Posts: 164
  • Karma: +8/-1
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Bracketology
« Reply #26 on: March 06, 2016, 01:10:00 pm »
Despite Plattsburgh's destruction last night (although Plattsburgh did outshoot the Knights), are they still seriously in the mix for Pool C?
Logged

Offline Bartman

  • All-Region
  • *****
  • Posts: 1789
  • Karma: +276/-52
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Bracketology
« Reply #27 on: March 06, 2016, 06:16:27 pm »
Didn't Plattsburgh lose to Williams H2h? So, I would think the Pool C's are SNC, UWSP and Williams, but then I am not the expert here, and don't have the latest data. We will know tomorrow morning. It will be interesting to confirm the separation that Adrian and SNC have on the rest of the field when actual play starts for them in the tourney. Saw Hobart win Saturday and they look very strong but the rest of the ECACW was a bit down this year, so if they get a chance to play one of the big 2 western maulers, I hope they can represent the East well.
Logged
"When I played college football ,I was slow, real slow, but when I caught them, it was glorious" Bartman
"When it's third and ten, you can take the milk drinkers and I'll take the whiskey drinkers.”
― Max McGee Green Bay Packers Super Bowl I
“I never graduated college, but I was only there for two terms – Truman’s and Eisenhower’s” – Alex Karras

Offline Bartman

  • All-Region
  • *****
  • Posts: 1789
  • Karma: +276/-52
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Bracketology
« Reply #28 on: March 06, 2016, 08:53:27 pm »
OK, just reviewed the Bracket forecast and I think it makes total sense. Now let's see what the NCAA does.
Logged
"When I played college football ,I was slow, real slow, but when I caught them, it was glorious" Bartman
"When it's third and ten, you can take the milk drinkers and I'll take the whiskey drinkers.”
― Max McGee Green Bay Packers Super Bowl I
“I never graduated college, but I was only there for two terms – Truman’s and Eisenhower’s” – Alex Karras

Offline spwood

  • Second-stringer
  • **
  • Posts: 164
  • Karma: +8/-1
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Bracketology
« Reply #29 on: March 06, 2016, 09:35:18 pm »
I've been following this process for a long time now and I still don't understand what is significant for SOS.  .538 is significant over .525?  I'm not saying I think Plattsburgh is getting in, I'm just looking for more information on what is significant in each of the criteria...
Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4
« previous next »