Pairwise Comparisons and PWR for D1 College Hockey (2007-2008)

© 1999-2007, Joe Schlobotnik (archives)

URL for this frameset: http://elynah.com/tbrw/tbrw.cgi?2008/pwr.shtml

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

Pairwise Comparisons (including games of 2008 March 22)

Pairwise Comparisons
Rk Team PWR RPI Comparisons Won
1 Michigan  (cc) 24 .5967 Mm ND NH CC BC DU SC MS Ck Mn Wi Nt Mk Ha Pn Vt BU MA MD NM Cr Ni MT Qn
2 Miami  (cc) 23 .5809 ND NH CC BC DU SC MS Ck Mn Wi Nt Mk Ha Pn Vt BU MA MD NM Cr Ni MT Qn
3 North Dakota  (wc) 22 .5822   NH CC BC DU SC MS Ck Mn Wi Nt Mk Ha Pn Vt BU MA MD NM Cr Ni MT Qn
4 New Hampshire (he) 21 .5715     CC BC DU SC MS Ck Mn Wi Nt Mk Ha Pn Vt BU MA MD NM Cr Ni MT Qn
5 CO College  (wc) 20 .5808       BC DU SC MS Ck Mn Wi Nt Mk Ha Pn Vt BU MA MD NM Cr Ni MT Qn
6 Boston Coll  (he) 18 .5481         DU SC MS   Mn Wi Nt Mk Ha Pn Vt BU MA MD NM Cr Ni MT Qn
7 Denver U  (wc) 18 .5670           SC MS Ck Mn Wi Nt Mk Ha Pn Vt BU MA MD NM Cr Ni MT Qn
8 St Cloud  (wc) 17 .5391             MS Ck Mn Wi Nt Mk Ha Pn Vt BU MA MD NM Cr Ni MT Qn
9 Mich State  (cc) 16 .5516               Ck Mn Wi Nt Mk Ha Pn Vt BU MA MD NM Cr Ni MT Qn
10 Clarkson  (ec) 16 .5354         BC       Mn Wi Nt Mk Ha Pn Vt BU MA MD NM Cr Ni MT Qn
11 Minnesota  (wc) 14 .5324                   Wi Nt Mk Ha Pn Vt BU MA MD NM Cr Ni MT Qn
12 Wisconsin  (wc) 11 .5228                         Ha Pn Vt BU MA MD NM Cr Ni MT Qn
13 Notre Dame  (cc) 10 .5298                     Wi Mk Ha Pn   BU   MD NM Cr Ni   Qn
14 MSU-Mankato  (wc) 10 .5272                     Wi   Ha   Vt BU MA MD   Cr Ni MT Qn
15 Harvard  (ec) 9 .5209                             Vt BU MA MD NM Cr Ni MT Qn
16 Princeton  (ec) 8 .5310                         Mk Ha Vt BU       Cr Ni MT Qn
17 Vermont  (he) 8 .5193                       Nt         MA MD NM Cr Ni MT Qn
18 Boston Univ  (he) 6 .5208                               Vt MA MD   Cr Ni MT  
19 Mass-Amherst  (he) 6 .5068                       Nt     Pn     MD   Cr   MT Qn
20 Minn-Duluth  (wc) 6 .5139                             Pn       NM Cr Ni MT Qn
21 Northern Mich (cc) 5 .5097                         Mk   Pn   BU MA         Qn
22 Cornell  (ec) 4 .5177                                       NM Ni MT Qn
23 Niagara  (ch) 4 .5107                                   MA   NM   MT Qn
24 Michigan Tech (wc) 3 .5100                       Nt               NM     Qn
25 Quinnipiac  (ec) 1 .5091                                 BU            

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 in the top 25 of Ratings Percentage Index (RPI). 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
Michigan 1 24 1 .5967 2 14-3-4 .7619
Miami 2 23 3 .5809 3 9-3-1 .7308
North Dakota 3 22 2 .5822 5 21-10-4 .6571
New Hampshire 4 21 5 .5715 1 15-4 .7895
CO College 5 20 4 .5808 6 19-11-1 .6290
Boston Coll 6 18 8 .5481 7 10-6-4 .6000
Denver U 7 18 6 .5670 8 17-12-1 .5833
St Cloud 8 17 9 .5391 12 13-15-3 .4677
Mich State 9 16 7 .5516 16 6-9-4 .4211
Clarkson 10 16 10 .5354 4 10-4-1 .7000
Minnesota 11 14 11 .5324 11 12-14-7 .4697
Wisconsin 12 11 15 .5228 15 11-15-5 .4355
Notre Dame 13 10 13 .5298 24 5-10-1 .3438
MSU-Mankato 14 10 14 .5272 14 11-14-3 .4464
Harvard 15 9 16 .5209 9T 8-8-2 .5000
Princeton 16 8 12 .5310 20 5-8 .3846
Vermont 17 8 18 .5193 19 5-9-4 .3889
Boston Univ 18 6 17 .5208 25 3-13-2 .2222
Mass-Amherst 19 6 25 .5068 17 6-9-3 .4167
Minn-Duluth 20 6 20 .5139 18 10-15-4 .4138
Northern Mich 21 5 23 .5097 13 8-10-3 .4524
Cornell 22 4 19 .5177 23 4-8-2 .3571
Niagara 23 4 21 .5107 9T 2-2 .5000
Michigan Tech 24 3 22 .5100 21 11-19-4 .3824
Quinnipiac 25 1 24 .5091 22 5-9-1 .3667

See also

Last Modified: 2020 February 1

Joe Schlobotnik / joe@amurgsval.org

HTML 4.0 compliant CSS2 compliant