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.
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.