JoePilot Posted February 22, 2015 Posted February 22, 2015 By my calculations using the Sioux Sports "what if" calculator, UND needs 3 more points to clinch home ice for the conference tournament. That seems crazy to think. Anyone want to check my work? Quote
Smoggy Posted February 22, 2015 Posted February 22, 2015 By my calculations using the Sioux Sports "what if" calculator, UND needs 3 more points to clinch home ice for the conference tournament. That seems crazy to think. Anyone want to check my work? crazy to think is Duluth right now goes on road for NCHC, but would be a #1 seed for NCAA. 1 Quote
Cratter Posted February 23, 2015 Posted February 23, 2015 It's crazy to think that the Frozen Faceoff will have better teams playing than the Frozen Four. Quote
willythekid Posted February 23, 2015 Posted February 23, 2015 Crazy to think people doubted/hoped the NCHC would fail. To be fair, nobody could have guessed it would be this dominate. Quote
The Sicatoka Posted February 23, 2015 Posted February 23, 2015 By my calculations using the Sioux Sports "what if" calculator, UND needs 3 more points to clinch home ice for the conference tournament. That seems crazy to think. Anyone want to check my work? Looking at remaining schedules, I think I agree with you. Quote
InHeavenThereIsNoBeer Posted February 23, 2015 Posted February 23, 2015 The "what-if" calculations I have ran make me think 3 points or more each of the 2 remaining weekends would be good enough for probably a share of The Penrose, if not winning outright. This is assuming a lot of the other teams split vs. each other and sweep CC and WMU. Quote
MoreSiouxForYou Posted February 23, 2015 Posted February 23, 2015 Crazy to think people doubted/hoped the NCHC would fail. To be fair, nobody could have guessed it would be this dominate. This year averaged with last year, makes the NCHC average. 2014 barely 3 teams + 2015 lets say 5 teams for sure =4 teams a year. I think that is what people expected was 3-4 teams every year. That is what I thought. It is nice that is half our league though. It is a rare year for this many power teams to be this far down. Who saw this happening in Wisco.? Or CC for a counter point? Quote
Siouxman Posted March 2, 2015 Posted March 2, 2015 Here we are with just one weekend to go in the regular season. I wondered how the league standings would compare on a 2 points for a win and one point for a tie system, compared to the current three points for a win, 2 points for a shootout win, and 1 point for a shootout loss. This is how it stacks up.Team - NCHC System - Two Point SystemUND - 47 - 32MU - 41 - 27UNO - 39 - 25DU - 38 - 25UMD - 36 - 25SCSU - 31 - 21WMU - 24 - 15CC - 8 - 6Under the two points for a win system, UND would already have clinched sole ownership of the Penrose Cup. More interestingly, UNO, DU, and UMD would all be tied for 3rd place heading into the final weekend. You could also point out that if UND had won any of the shootouts, it would have clinched sole ownership of the Penrose Cup at this point under the current system. I think the three way tie for third under the old system would add quite a bit more excitement to the race. Quote
InHeavenThereIsNoBeer Posted March 2, 2015 Posted March 2, 2015 Here we are with just one weekend to go in the regular season. I wondered how the league standings would compare on a 2 points for a win and one point for a tie system, compared to the current three points for a win, 2 points for a shootout win, and 1 point for a shootout loss. This is how it stacks up. Team - NCHC System - Two Point System UND - 47 - 32 MU - 41 - 27 UNO - 39 - 25 DU - 38 - 25 UMD - 36 - 25 SCSU - 31 - 21 WMU - 24 - 15 CC - 8 - 6 Under the two points for a win system, UND would already have clinched sole ownership of the Penrose Cup. More interestingly, UNO, DU, and UMD would all be tied for 3rd place heading into the final weekend. You could also point out that if UND had won any of the shootouts, it would have clinched sole ownership of the Penrose Cup at this point under the current system. I think the three way tie for third under the old system would add quite a bit more excitement to the race. Good stuff, really interesting especially bc last year I don't believe the format affected standings at all in the NCHC . Quote
jimdahl Posted March 3, 2015 Posted March 3, 2015 Here we are with just one weekend to go in the regular season. I wondered how the league standings would compare on a 2 points for a win and one point for a tie system, compared to the current three points for a win, 2 points for a shootout win, and 1 point for a shootout loss. This is how it stacks up. Team - NCHC System - Two Point System UND - 47 - 32 MU - 41 - 27 UNO - 39 - 25 DU - 38 - 25 UMD - 36 - 25 SCSU - 31 - 21 WMU - 24 - 15 CC - 8 - 6 Under the two points for a win system, UND would already have clinched sole ownership of the Penrose Cup. More interestingly, UNO, DU, and UMD would all be tied for 3rd place heading into the final weekend. You could also point out that if UND had won any of the shootouts, it would have clinched sole ownership of the Penrose Cup at this point under the current system. I think the three way tie for third under the old system would add quite a bit more excitement to the race. Very interesting, thanks for putting that together. Quote
The Sicatoka Posted March 3, 2015 Posted March 3, 2015 I'd put out my idea for a 5 points per game here: http://boardsroom.blogspot.com/2015/02/what-nchc-needs-to-change.html Under that system the current standings would be: http://boardsroom.blogspot.com The 5PPG System: Regulation win - 5 Overtime win - 4 Shootout win - 3 Shootout loss - 2 Overtime loss - 1 Regulation loss - 0 Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.