jimdahl

That's my fault, PWR isn't actually that tricky, I just have a tough time deciding how much detail to go into. My post pretty much assumed that you know how to calculate PWR and that you're following along with the Yale row in this table. I could have instead included full explanations of how PWR works, but feel redundant doing that every time. However, that's why I wrote the bold bottom-line sentence -- the interesting takeaway is that the comparison could flip with a single loss by Yale next weekend, but that in the long run the Sioux need to sweep CC to hold onto the comparison vs. Yale. The rest was just background supporting evidence for those statements, only of interest to people who like calculating PWR on their own.

Since Yale lost but there no was no movement in PWR, a few people have asked what it takes to pass Yale. Here's the short version: Flipping the comparison with Yale without taking RPI isn't currently possible. RPI is the only criterion currently in use in the comparison between UND and Yale. So, if UND didn't take RPI, it would need to win two other comparison criteria to get a 2-1 comparison win (remember that UND is currently losing 2 comparisons, Yale and Maine, to Yale's 0, so if UND just flipped one it would need the tie-breaker -- RPI). TUC is likely to come into play for Yale (it's current schedule and rankings have it meet exactly 10 TUCs, the minimum required number for the criterion to be used), but Yale has a commanding 1.000 record vs. TUCs compared to UND's .6750; Yale would pretty much have to lose all 4 for UND to take TUC, but it seems unlikely that Yale could lose those 4 while still beating UND in RPI. COP will come into play when UND plays CC, but Yale will then have a 1.000 record vs. TUCs. If UND sweeps CC, that will result in a tie for TUC, any other result will give the point to Yale. RPI is the shortest path to flipping the comparison, and probably necessary to keep the comparison through the end of the year (because of notes on TUC and COP above). What does it take to flip RPI? * A loss to Clarkson would likely result in an RPI around 0.5965, which would likely be enough for UND to take the RPI lead with a win over UNO. * A subsequent win over St. Lawrence would probably get dropped as a negative win, even with a loss to Clarkson; though a loss to St. Lawrence would also do the trick. Bottom-line: One more Yale loss, assuming UND keeps winning, is likely to be enough for UND to take the lead in PWR. The CC series is critical to UND's prospects of holding on to the comparison vs. Yale until the end, no less than a sweep will do.

SiouxU31 is right, Yale would be .6057 if not for the adjustments. But, in the spirit of teaching a man to fish... You can see the full details of the RPI calculation for any team by clicking "details" under the team name on the SiouxSports RPI page (when you lose this link, you can also get there by clicking rankings -> RPI under hockey on the front page). Here is Yale's RPI page At the top, it shows you the unadjusted calculation and the effect of the adjustments. One of the really cool things about those RPI details pages are the "future RPI" tables. The top part predicts the team's end-of-season RPI, based on how many of their remaining games they win. The bottom half shows the RPI value of each remaining scheduled game. Those that have the win column grayed out would be negative impact wins, if everything stayed the same. So, if Yale continued at its current pace, 4 more wins would be tossed out by the end of the season.

I actually think it's a funny idea to chant the name of the benched goalie instead of "sieve", but it's a little rough when the benched goalie is: 1) the best sv% in program history, and 2) out with a career-ending injury.

A good discussion of the recent NHL headshot injuries and what the rules actually are. Confusion reigns at Headshot Theater - SI NHL Red Light The NHL rules (particularly rule 48) are pretty clearly a mess. Given the recent attention in the NFL to concussions, and with Kariya out for the season and Crosby now sidelined due to one, will the NHL look at something like the IIHF's rule?

Wodon has a slightly different take... Eligibility of Yale Player questioned Sounds more like some anonymous whistle-blower tried to the stir the pot, but no one is interested in pursuing it, at this point.

Yep -- nothing cements an image of greatness like bringing home championships. Look how quickly Toews jumped up to be considered one of the league's most valuable players.

Wrong argument, Dave. I'm still arguing that Crosby isn't the overwhelmingly dominant player of the generation that Gretzky was. I've already said that Crosby is the best player in the league right now, and I've said he's certainly in the hunt for the best of his generation, but you can't credibly say he's overwhelmingly beyond a shadow of a doubt the best of the generation when he hasn't even been the best for the majority of his NHL career. I couldn't agree more. That's exactly the argument I've been trying to make, so I'm thrilled to see you coming around to agreeing with it -- who are we to think we know better than the players and writers which players are the best? Since Crosby joined the NHL, here's what the players have voted on, in terms of best player awards for which Crosby was eligible: Calder to Ovechkin in 2006 Pearson to Jagr in 2006 Pearson to Crosby in 2007 Pearson to Ovechkin in 2008 Pearson to Ovechkin in 2009 Lindsay to Ovechkin in 2010 Crosby sure doesn't jump out yet as the overwhelmingly dominant player of his generation the way Gretzky did (I already listed Gretzky's awards above). If he can keep up this level of play maybe he will in five or ten years, because at this point I would sure bet that he gets this year.

Thanks Snake. Indeed, I thought by so deliberately stating "the players and writers" it was clear I was combining Pearson/Lindsay and Hart trophies, not just Harts; but in hindsight, I can see the misunderstanding. But hey, the good news for Dave is that if the season ended today, Crosby would be nearly a lock for both, bringing him within one. Not quite yet the "overwhelmingly dominant" player of the generation the Gretzky analogy implies, but certainly in the hunt for "best".

A little more from the SC Times... Huskies' Mosey out on rules violation

If you just read the newspaper, you wouldn't think anything was untoward about this at all.... Hepp Leaves SCSU, goes pro - SC Times Ok. However, the student run radio station acknowledges message board rumors, but admits they can't confirm.... Three Men's Hockey Players Off Team-Mosey Dismissed For Violation of Team Rules - KVSC Though they do note in their Twitter feed that Johnson's departure is likely coincidental:

No doubt -- there's a reason Buff came up in the earlier game about picking one player to build a team around. Having their leading scorer playing at defense hasn't really hurt Atlanta in the standings, either. It'll be interesting to see what happens in coming years, because his breakout kind of feels like a fluke to me, but Dudley is sure looking like a genius for now. Buff's having an awesome season and certainly has to be drawing some attention for the Norris if he keeps it up.

Exactly -- you simply don't like him. That is, I've thought, the best explanation for why there's such a big gap between your perception of his talent and the opinion of the players and writers who have given him 5 MVPs in as many years.

Good eye, it took me a long time to even find where they deviated in the teens. It turns out I picked up a bad score for the Bowling Green vs. Holy Cross game. That had such minor implications that it escaped my attention. Entirely my fault, in that I've even got it set up so the system sent me an email (which I hadn't yet read) noting that USCHO and CHN were reporting different scores for the game. Fixed.

Mankato made a huge leap in RPI and ascension to being a TUC, with wins over Notre Dame and Brown. With UND's wins over Mankato, that's a nice boost to UND's TUC, and enough to flip the comparison with BC. It's a nice reminder of how volatile things can be when the team you're watching isn't even playing, particularly when the TUC cliff gets involved.

Yeah, is this thread HIPAA compliant? Was JFR authorized to release her injury status?

Ovi is a showboater, and I really do understand why a lot of traditional hockey fans don't like that. I personally think it's just what Washington needed, but can't blame non-Caps fans for disliking it. Crosby, however, is widely disparaged as a whiner and a diver. You can disagree with that reputation, but if you follow the Pens as seriously as you claim, you've clearly heard of it. My personal favorite -- when he asked the ref if they could get the fans to stop throwing hats after Ovi's playoff hat trick

It's tough to argue that Crosby has been the best player in the league in this generation when at least one other player from the same generation has won way more individual accolades (MVP votes from the players, MVP votes from the writers, first all-star team votes, and scoring titles). Crosby has some impressive team trophies, which is the ultimate goal of the sport, but there's still plenty of room for debate about what individual player has been the best. No doubt Crosby is the best offensive player so far this season, and if he keeps it up will likely get himself a scoring title and an MVP or two. To be called the best of this generation will require him doing that more than twice. To be compared to Gretzky would require him to pretty much own the league for the next ten years.

As has been discussed elsewhere, the Sioux are in the rare position of being in good shape for a tournament bid before New Years. I hope that means we're looking forward to a Spring of watching the Sioux scrap for a #1 seed, but either way there will be rankings to watch... UND individual comparisons ...and I found myself wondering about this #2 vs #3 game, so thought it a good time to start a thread. Though the Bulldogs are currently a spot above UND (PWR), UND is actually winning the comparison by virtue of the RPI tie-breaker. The H2H will clearly take over after tomorrow's game, making it a must-win for UND to remain #3 going into the new year. As to the possibility of UND climbing if they win, here are the 3 comparisons UND is currently losing-- Boston College has TUC (.6364 to .5769) and COP (.8 to .4167). A win this weekend should only make up about half the difference on TUC, not enough to flip it. Maine has H2H. No opportunity to flip this one until TUC or COP come into play. Yale has RPI. UND's last win over UMD contributed something like .696, so it seems like UND would only rise to something like .586 with a win, not enough to take RPI. Bottom line -- a loss almost certainly will lead to a drop, a win at best maintains the current ranking (all other things equal).

Your pick was a foregone conclusion, but this is a bit much. Sid's great, but you and the NHL try almost too hard to convince people of that, which probably hurts your cause. After hearing him hyped as the next Gretzky for much of his youth, I haven't really heard it much after his first couple years in the league. Now that some results are in: Sid after 5 NHL seasons 1 Hart (writers' MVP) 1 Art Ross (scoring title) 1 Pearson (players' MVP) 1 Stanley Cup Gretzky after 5 NHL seasons 5 Harts 4 Art Ross 4 Pearson 1 Stanley Cup One thing they do have in common, neither got a Calder (though for Gretzky it's because he was ineligible, not considered a rookie). Sid is one of a few great young players in the NHL right now, but he's no Gretzky.

I think the most interesting part of the game of having to choose a single player is deciding which position is most critical. You get (who you think is) the best in the game at one position, but then have to build around him with unprotected players. As a real owner I'd want scoring, because that puts butts in the seats (though in all fairness, the Wild took a decidedly different approach). In this game, where all you care about is maximizing the chance of a championship within 10 years, it sure would be tempting to take a goaltender. But goaltenders also seem higher risk -- it's easy to guess which young forwards will still be making an impact in 5-10 years, but I feel less confident about Quick or Pavelec...

Is this the right one?

Cool. I think I figured it out (minimal effort, based on the clues provided, I swear), but am hesitant to "out" him without approval...

My read on Washington is that Boudreau decided the old formula wasn't winning playoff series and is trying to make the Caps more defensive. Needless to say it's been a tough transition, but even after a month-long slump Ovechkin is still T-6th in scoring in the league. It's just been easy to miss, especially if you're watching the highlight reels instead of the games, because instead of flashy goals he's mostly getting assists. However, Crosby has certainly finally broken out and delivered on some of the promise all the experts saw in him. It's been pretty difficult to make a case for him as MVP in any of his previous years, but if he can keep this up...

http://video.kings.nhl.com/videocenter/console?catid=731&id=88738