Pairwise Comparisons and PWR for D1 College Hockey (2006-2007)

© 1999-2007, Joe Schlobotnik (archives)

URL for this frameset: http://elynah.com/tbrw/tbrw.cgi?2007/pwr.shtml

Game results taken from College Hockey News's Division I composite schedule

Pairwise Comparisons (including games of 2007 March 17)

Pairwise Comparisons
Rk Team PWR RPI Comparisons Won
1 Minnesota  (wc) 24 .5840 Nt Ck BC NH SC BU Mi MS MA ND SL Wi Me Mm DU MT CC Da Vt Qn Cr LS RT NO
2 Notre Dame  (cc) 23 .5782 Ck BC NH SC BU Mi MS MA ND SL Wi Me Mm DU MT CC Da Vt Qn Cr LS RT NO
3 Clarkson  (ec) 22 .5645   BC NH SC BU Mi MS MA ND SL Wi Me Mm DU MT CC Da Vt Qn Cr LS RT NO
4 Boston Coll  (he) 21 .5603     NH SC BU Mi MS MA ND SL Wi Me Mm DU MT CC Da Vt Qn Cr LS RT NO
5 New Hampshire (he) 20 .5618       SC BU Mi MS MA ND SL Wi Me Mm DU MT CC Da Vt Qn Cr LS RT NO
6 St Cloud  (wc) 19 .5621         BU Mi MS MA ND SL Wi Me Mm DU MT CC Da Vt Qn Cr LS RT NO
7 Boston Univ  (he) 17 .5447           Mi   MA ND SL Wi Me Mm DU MT CC Da Vt Qn Cr LS RT NO
8 Michigan  (cc) 16 .5495             MS MA   SL Wi Me Mm DU MT CC Da Vt Qn Cr LS RT NO
9 Mich State  (cc) 16 .5400           BU   MA   SL Wi Me Mm DU MT CC Da Vt Qn Cr LS RT NO
10 Mass-Amherst  (he) 15 .5328                 ND SL Wi Me Mm DU MT CC Da Vt Qn Cr LS RT NO
11 North Dakota  (wc) 15 .5542             Mi MS   SL Wi   Mm DU MT CC Da Vt Qn Cr LS RT NO
12 St Lawrence  (ec) 13 .5384                     Wi Me Mm DU MT CC Da Vt Qn Cr LS RT NO
13 Wisconsin  (wc) 12 .5292                       Me Mm DU MT CC Da Vt Qn Cr LS RT NO
14 Maine  (he) 12 .5306                   ND     Mm DU MT CC Da Vt Qn Cr LS RT NO
15 Miami  (cc) 10 .5320                           DU MT CC Da Vt Qn Cr LS RT NO
16 Denver U  (wc) 8 .5329                             MT CC   Vt Qn Cr LS RT NO
17 Michigan Tech (wc) 8 .5223                               CC Da Vt Qn Cr LS RT NO
18 CO College  (wc) 7 .5232                                 Da Vt Qn Cr LS RT NO
19 Dartmouth  (ec) 7 .5280                             DU     Vt Qn Cr LS RT NO
20 Vermont  (he) 5 .5166                                     Qn Cr LS RT NO
21 Quinnipiac  (ec) 4 .5238                                       Cr LS RT NO
22 Cornell  (ec) 3 .5071                                         LS RT NO
23 Lake Superior (cc) 2 .5096                                           RT NO
24 RIT  (ah) 1 .5054                                             NO
25 NE-Omaha  (cc) 0 .5055                                              

Explanation of the Table

The table above lists all of the Teams Under Consideration (TUCs) for the NCAA tournament. This includes all tournament-eligible Division 1 teams with a Ratings Percentage Index (RPI) of .500 or above. Each team has been compared to each other team on the basis of the NCAA selection criteria. Those criteria are:

RPI
The Ratings Percentage Index, described in detail on our RPI page.
TUC
Record vs other Teams Under Consideration. Head-to-head games are explicitly excluded from this criterion, which is judged on straight Winning Percentage (with ties as always counting as half a win and half a loss) in the relevant games.
COp
Record vs Common Opponents. Again, this is resolved on the basis of Winning Percentage.
H2H
Head-to-head results. Each win in head-to-head competition carries the same weight as each of the other criteria.

A team gets one point towards the comparison for each of the first three criteria it wins, plus one point for each head-to-head victory. Whichever team has more points according to this method wins the criterion. In case of a tie, the team with the higher RPI wins the criterion.

In each team's row, in the "Comparisons Won" part of the grid, are listed the abbreviations of all the teams with which they win comparisons. Each of these cells is a link to a mini-table (which will appear in a pop-up window under most browser setups) detailing the results of the four criteria. The RPI row of the mini-table contains the overall record and RPI for each team, the TUC, and COp rows contain the record and winning percentage in the games relevant to each criterion, and the H2H row contains the head-to-head record of each team against the other.

The PWR column in the main table gives the total number of comparisons won by each team. The teams are ordered according the their PWR; if two or more teams are tied in the PWR, the tie is broken if possible according to the number of comparisons each wins against the other tied teams; if this fails to resolve the tie (which can be thought of a ro-sham-bo situation: Rock crushes Scissors, Scissors cut Paper, Paper covers Rock), the RPI is used to break the tie.

Breakdown of Criteria

The following table lists, for each Team Under Consideration, the two selection criteria which are more or less the same in each comparison: RPI and record vs TUCs. Each team's name in the table is a link to a rundown of the games contributing to these two criteria.

Note a team's record in the "vs TUCs" column is that against all TUCs; since head-to-head games are left out of this criterion, the record used in an actual comparison will be different if the two teams have played each other.

Team Comps Won RPI vs TUCs
Rk PWR Rk RPI Rk W-L-T Pct
Minnesota 1 24 1 .5840 3 15-8-2 .6400
Notre Dame 2 23 2 .5782 1 11-2-2 .8000
Clarkson 3 22 3 .5645 2 11-5-3 .6579
Boston Coll 4 21 6 .5603 4 13-8 .6190
New Hampshire 5 20 5 .5618 6 12-8-2 .5909
St Cloud 6 19 4 .5621 8 10-7-6 .5652
Boston Univ 7 17 9 .5447 7 10-7-5 .5682
Michigan 8 16 8 .5495 12T 9-8-1 .5278
Mich State 9 16 10 .5400 5 11-7-2 .6000
Mass-Amherst 10 15 13 .5328 9 9-7-3 .5526
North Dakota 11 15 7 .5542 10 13-11-2 .5385
St Lawrence 12 13 11 .5384 11 9-8 .5294
Wisconsin 13 12 16 .5292 18 11-16-1 .4107
Maine 14 12 15 .5306 19 8-12-1 .4048
Miami 15 10 14 .5320 12T 9-8-1 .5278
Denver U 16 8 12 .5329 17 8-12-3 .4130
Michigan Tech 17 8 20 .5223 14 11-11-3 .5000
CO College 18 7 19 .5232 15 10-12-4 .4615
Dartmouth 19 7 17 .5280 21 4-8-2 .3571
Vermont 20 5 21 .5166 16 10-14 .4167
Quinnipiac 21 4 18 .5238 20 5-9-1 .3667
Cornell 22 3 23 .5071 22 4-8-1 .3462
Lake Superior 23 2 22 .5096 23 6-12-1 .3421
RIT 24 1 25 .5054 24 1-3 .2500
NE-Omaha 25 0 24 .5055 25 1-10-4 .2000

See also

Last Modified: 2020 February 1

Joe Schlobotnik / joe@amurgsval.org

HTML 4.0 compliant CSS2 compliant