January 10, 2012

Men's Computer Rankings - Jan. 10, 2012

by Steve Wiitala

 

After a holiday break layoff, the computer rankings return.  The last two weekends of play have provided us with some interesting results and some motion in the computer rankings.  Among the significant moves involving teams in the top 10 of the rankings, Plattsburgh picks up 30 points to move from sixth into a tie for second, Amherst loses 50 points to fall from second to seventh, and Williams picks up 40 points to move up from 18th to ninth.  Norwich is still well out in front with a 60 point lead over Oswego/Plattsburgh, but that difference is well outside the margin of error.  Norwich, statistically, is having a fine season and at this point everyone is in pursuit of the Cadets.  Behind Norwich we have a tie for second, a tie for fourth  between Castleton and Elmira, with River Falls virtually tied with those two as well.

 
 

Team (Poll Rank)

G

W

L

T

Rating

Prev. Rank

Prev. Rating

1

Norwich (1)

11

10

0

1

720

1

756

2

Oswego (3)

14

10

2

2

660

3

673

2

Plattsburgh (2)

11

10

2

3

660

6

630

4

Castleton (6)

15

12

3

0

639

5

646

4

Elmira (9)

14

8

5

1

639

4

654

6

Wis - River Falls (4)

15

11

2

2

636

8

624

7

Amherst (10)

11

9

2

0

628

2

678

8

Neumann (5)

13

10

3

0

618

14

588

9

Williams (11)

10

7

1

2

614

18

574

10

Wis. - Eau Claire (12)

16

10

6

0

610

12

608

11

Utica (7)

15

11

4

0

607

11

613

12

St. Thomas

14

9

3

2

602

9

617

13

St. Norbert (8)

15

7

4

4

602

10

616

14

Gustavus Adolphus (13)

15

9

4

2

590

23

561

15

Wesleyan

12

8

4

0

587

16

579

15

Wis. - Stevens Point

13

8

7

2

587

22

565

17

Manhattanville

10

5

4

1

585

17

578

17

Buffalo State

14

7

5

2

585

21

567

19

St. Scholastica

14

7

5

2

584

7

628

20

Concordia MN

15

7

5

3

573

13

606

21

Hobart

13

7

6

0

564

28

540

22

Bowdoin

11

7

3

1

561

43

483

22

Fredonia

13

6

4

3

561

18

574

24

Middlebury

12

6

4

2

554

27

555

25

Wis. – Superior (13)

15

8

5

2

550

26

559

26

Plymouth State

12

8

4

0

542

15

586

27

St. Olaf

14

7

4

3

539

24

560

28

Adrian  (15)

13

9

4

0

537

31

525

29

Western NE College

11

7

4

0

534

24

560

30

Wentworth

13

8

4

1

525

47

474

31

Salem State

11

6

4

1

522

30

529

32

St. Mary's

13

4

9

0

520

34

521

33

Mass-Dartmouth

11

7

3

1

519

36

514

34

Geneseo

15

9

6

0

517

31

525

35

New England College

12

7

5

0

516

33

523

36

Wis. - Stout

15

6

8

1

512

29

530

37

Curry

11

7

4

0

511

20

571

38

Tufts

11

5

5

1

507

51

460

39

Hamilton

11

5

5

1

502

41

488

40

Southern Maine

11

5

6

0

500

35

517

40

Potsdam

14

7

7

0

500

37

507

42

St. Anselm

9

4

3

2

490

39

498

43

Bethel

15

5

10

0

487

38

504

44

Brockport

14

4

8

2

485

40

497

45

Milw School of Eng

13

10

3

0

483

44

482

46

Hamline

15

6

8

1

481

44

482

47

Augsberg

13

5

8

0

467

55

439

48

Marian

13

6

3

4

465

50

461

49

Johnson and Wales

13

9

4

1

462

46

478

50

Cortland

16

4

11

1

461

48

470

51

Mass-Boston

13

5

6

2

460

42

484

52

Morrisville

14

2

11

1

458

52

455

53

Conn. College

11

3

7

1

455

68

373

54

Becker

14

5

8

1

436

64

399

55

Worcester State

12

5

5

2

431

49

464

55

Lawrence

13

5

5

3

431

59

429

57

St. John's

13

3

8

2

430

57

431

58

Colby

10

2

8

0

426

61

418

58

Trinity

10

3

7

0

426

56

436

60

Babson

13

3

10

0

424

53

448

61

Westfield State

10

2

6

2

422

57

431

62

Skidmore

14

4

9

1

421

60

421

63

Fitchburg State

12

3

7

2

411

67

385

64

Assumption

12

6

7

1

409

54

444

65

St. Michael's

10

2

6

2

401

62

402

66

Northland

12

3

7

2

384

65

396

67

Stonehill

12

5

6

1

382

63

400

68

Framingham State

10

1

7

2

374

66

388

69

U New England

11

3

6

2

363

69

352

70

Finlandia

12

1

11

0

339

72

334

71

Nichols

13

3

9

1

331

73

325

72

Suffolk

11

2

9

0

326

71

344

73

Salve Regina

13

3

10

0

325

69

352

74

Concordia WI

13

1

10

2

309

74

314

75

Franklin Pierce

11

1

7

3

283

75

293

76

Lake Forest

11

1

10

0

271

76

272

77

So. New Hampshire

14

1

12

1

233

77

251
 

Margin of error table

 

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

9

25

              

10

24

24

            

11

24

23

22

          

12

23

22

22

21

        

13

22

22

21

21

20

      

14

22

21

21

20

20

20

    

15

21

21

20

20

20

19

19

  

16

21

20

20

20

19

19

19

18
 
 

To read this table, locate the number of games played by the team with the greater number of games in the row, and the number of games played by the other team in the appropriate column.  For example to determine if the difference between Elmira and Williams is with the margin of error, note that Elmira has played 14 games and Williams has played 10.  Reading the row labeled 14 and the column labeled 10, we see that the margin of error for the comparison is 21.  Since the difference of ratings between the two is 25, we can conclude that the difference between the two is significant, and to this point in the season, Elmira’s performance with respect to the factors we measure has been superior to that of Williams.

 

Relative Conference Strength?

On the discussion board just before the break, I was asked about the comparison of the strength of the leagues using statistical measurements.  With no games on the schedule, I looked at three potential measures of league strength.  The first is the median rating of the teams in the league.  The median is often preferred as measure of center for a data set which has skewed distribution.  This happens in leagues in which there is a dominant team or a team that lags far behind the others.  The second is the mean rating of the teams in the league, and the final one is the winning percentage of the teams in out of conference play.  Here’s what we found:
 
 

Median

Median Rank

Mean

Mean Rank

NC Win%

NC Win% Rank

ECAC E

475.0

6

493.4

6

0.5094

5

ECAC NE

462.0

7

430.6

8

0.4322

8

ECAC W

607.0

1

602.6

1

0.7176

1

MASCAC

431.0

8

460.1

7

0.4507

7

NESCAC

530.5

3

526.0

4

0.6154

3

NE - 10

332.5

10

326.8

10

0.2286

10

SUNYAC

517.0

5

543.0

3

0.5263

4

MCHA

407.5

9

402.4

9

0.2639

9

MIAC

520.0

4

521.0

5

0.4623

6

NCHA

587.0

2

583.0

2

0.7128

2
 

These results are interesting, but perhaps not surprising.  It does appear that the two strongest leagues by these measures are the ECAC West and the NCHA, while the two weakest are the Northeast 10 and the MCHA. Are these statistics definitive, of course not, but they can be a source for interesting discussion.

 

Thoughts?

Questions, comments, arguments or otherwise, don't hesitate to jump into the discussion in the D3hockey forum.


 ~
Dr. Steve Wiitala is a Professor Emeritus of Mathematics at Norwich University in Northfield, Vermont. He possesses a M.A. from Western Washington University and a Ph.D. from Dartmouth College. He is a statistical consultant specializing in quality improvement.
comments powered by Disqus
No contests today.
No contests today.
No contests today.

What We're Reading