Re: Hockey East - Bye, Home, and Road: by the numbers - 2016-17 edition
(part two)
---
Well, we know that UMA can be 12th, but how high can they get with the remaining interplay of point sharing? We saw after Tuesday that some of the teams are going to have to get to 19 that aren't there yet. The key for UMA will be how many teams that they can't catch can we limit to stem their fall.
For starters, UMA wins out. Then, there are three teams (BC, BU, UVM) that UMA can't catch. Those teams can soak up all available points to give UMA a hand. Without playing any other games, we have UMA in a tie for 4th at 17 with ND and UML.
Now, we can't use the 5-way RRRs from Tuesday that gave us UMA up top. Why? Because UMA lost (so can't reach 19 any more) and the actual results don't match our scenario we used to distribute points to get that logjam. So, we start anew.
Right away we can see that ND (17) and PC (16) have to distribute 4 points from their series. That means at least one of them has to pass UMA (17). That's a 4th team they can't catch. No Bye for the Minutemen.
PC (16) and CT (15) also have to distribute 4 points, so one of them has to pass 17. If we let that be PC in both instances, then that's the same team and UMA is still behind only four.
That said, CT (15) and UNH (15) also have to distribute 4. That means either a new, fifth team gets past UMA at 17, or we add to the tie at 17. If we go with the tie, then UML v UNH (both at 17) has to lift one of those two. Since that's UML's only undecided game, I'm going to give UNH those two points, and keep UML (who would lose a sweep to UMA) at 17 and all games done.
Now we have CT (15) v UNH (17), so we have to promote one of those two as the fifth past UMA.
So... let's catch our breath. Where are we?
BC, BU, UVM all past UMA
ND or PC
PC or CT
CT or UNH
That means it makes sense that either we move up ND and CT, leaving PC (16) and UNH (17) back, or PC and UNH, leaving ND (17) and CT (15) back. (We could also do PC and CT, leaving ND and UNH back, but that wastes and opportunity for soaking points from PC/CT.)
What else do we have to resolve?
ME (9) plays both ND and PC. They should sweep whoever we leave behind of that pair and (to save flexibility) be swept by whoever we promote. That leaves ME with 13 points either way (see correction below).
At this point, MC (12) has only their pair with ME left undecided. Let's have MC sweep that to stay at 16 and take four points away from Maine's Max.
We still have the balance of NU's (13) schedule against CT and ME to deal with, plus the CT/MC game Saturday.
With so many games on tap for CT, and UMA sweeping PC here. It feels like we should let ND and CT go and soak up points. (I realize that UMA was swept by PC's pair-mate UNH, but don't forget UML will be in the mix at 17 in the RR and UMA will sweep them too. Still a net 4-2-0. 2-2-0 from PC/UNH is better than the 1-2-1 from ND/CT.)
Oh, look! It turns out PC has only one game remaining against Maine, since they played Friday. So much the better. Plus, at 16, we want PC in the RR with UMA at 17, so they can tie Maine to soak that point away from ME leaving them at 10, not 13.
That just leaves us with ME (10) and NU (13). Anything but a NU sweep leaves both behind UMA. In fact, along with MC (16), the only teams behind UMA. However, that leaves us open to pulling NU into the RR in case that helps UMA. We could also move MC a point up if that helps. Since UMA has a MC sweep, I'm going to do that pre-emptively by either taking one from CT (well past UMA now) or ME (well below).
So:
BC, BU, UVM, CT, ND all past 17.
UMA at 17 with MC, UML, UNH, PC.
ME behind.
NU pending.
OK. Let's see how the 5-way RR would work before adding in NU if needed. A lot of UMA sweeps in here, so I'm optimistic.
There we have it.
Now, what is it we "have"...
Due to our selective picking of UMA being in ties predominately with teams they sweep, they come out atop this jam. Better yet, we don't have to add NU because we only need one answer that works.
With UMA having a 6-2-0 record and giving 0-2-0 to three of the other four teams, the only real concerns were 1) if one of the three that UMA swept in turn swept the others and we had a tb among 6-2-0 teams, or 2) that UNH (the "fourth" team) would ride their 2-0-0 start and lose fewer than 4 points to the rest of the grid. #1 wouldn't really be an issue because any of those three would lose H2H vs UMA due to the sweep.
#2 wasn't settled however until the last match-up on the grid. UNH was 4-1-1 with PC pending. If they had swept PC, their 6-1-1 would best UMA. Even 1-0-1 from PC would leave them with 12 points (5-1-2) to match UMA. The league has never clarified how to break such a tie ("best record": do they go by points (go to TBs) or is 6-2-0 better because of more wins... or 5-1-2 better because of fewer losses?) Assuming a tie, they would go H2H and the UNH sweep would move UNH up. Then UMA's 6-0-0 record would leave them next in line.
As it turns out, the sweep went the other way, with PC taking 2-0-0 from UNH - so, UMA wins the grid.
That means that selecting ND and CT to move up and soak points worked out. We limited the damage to only losing two more places and UMA can still be... 6th.
UMA range: 6-12.
(part two)
---
Well, we know that UMA can be 12th, but how high can they get with the remaining interplay of point sharing? We saw after Tuesday that some of the teams are going to have to get to 19 that aren't there yet. The key for UMA will be how many teams that they can't catch can we limit to stem their fall.
For starters, UMA wins out. Then, there are three teams (BC, BU, UVM) that UMA can't catch. Those teams can soak up all available points to give UMA a hand. Without playing any other games, we have UMA in a tie for 4th at 17 with ND and UML.
Now, we can't use the 5-way RRRs from Tuesday that gave us UMA up top. Why? Because UMA lost (so can't reach 19 any more) and the actual results don't match our scenario we used to distribute points to get that logjam. So, we start anew.
Right away we can see that ND (17) and PC (16) have to distribute 4 points from their series. That means at least one of them has to pass UMA (17). That's a 4th team they can't catch. No Bye for the Minutemen.
PC (16) and CT (15) also have to distribute 4 points, so one of them has to pass 17. If we let that be PC in both instances, then that's the same team and UMA is still behind only four.
That said, CT (15) and UNH (15) also have to distribute 4. That means either a new, fifth team gets past UMA at 17, or we add to the tie at 17. If we go with the tie, then UML v UNH (both at 17) has to lift one of those two. Since that's UML's only undecided game, I'm going to give UNH those two points, and keep UML (who would lose a sweep to UMA) at 17 and all games done.
Now we have CT (15) v UNH (17), so we have to promote one of those two as the fifth past UMA.
So... let's catch our breath. Where are we?
BC, BU, UVM all past UMA
ND or PC
PC or CT
CT or UNH
That means it makes sense that either we move up ND and CT, leaving PC (16) and UNH (17) back, or PC and UNH, leaving ND (17) and CT (15) back. (We could also do PC and CT, leaving ND and UNH back, but that wastes and opportunity for soaking points from PC/CT.)
What else do we have to resolve?
ME (9) plays both ND and PC. They should sweep whoever we leave behind of that pair and (to save flexibility) be swept by whoever we promote. That leaves ME with 13 points either way (see correction below).
At this point, MC (12) has only their pair with ME left undecided. Let's have MC sweep that to stay at 16 and take four points away from Maine's Max.
We still have the balance of NU's (13) schedule against CT and ME to deal with, plus the CT/MC game Saturday.
With so many games on tap for CT, and UMA sweeping PC here. It feels like we should let ND and CT go and soak up points. (I realize that UMA was swept by PC's pair-mate UNH, but don't forget UML will be in the mix at 17 in the RR and UMA will sweep them too. Still a net 4-2-0. 2-2-0 from PC/UNH is better than the 1-2-1 from ND/CT.)
Oh, look! It turns out PC has only one game remaining against Maine, since they played Friday. So much the better. Plus, at 16, we want PC in the RR with UMA at 17, so they can tie Maine to soak that point away from ME leaving them at 10, not 13.
That just leaves us with ME (10) and NU (13). Anything but a NU sweep leaves both behind UMA. In fact, along with MC (16), the only teams behind UMA. However, that leaves us open to pulling NU into the RR in case that helps UMA. We could also move MC a point up if that helps. Since UMA has a MC sweep, I'm going to do that pre-emptively by either taking one from CT (well past UMA now) or ME (well below).
So:
BC, BU, UVM, CT, ND all past 17.
UMA at 17 with MC, UML, UNH, PC.
ME behind.
NU pending.
OK. Let's see how the 5-way RR would work before adding in NU if needed. A lot of UMA sweeps in here, so I'm optimistic.
RRRs | UMA | MC | UML | UNH | PC | Total |
UMA: | 2-0-0 | 2-0-0 | 0-2-0 | 2-0-0 | 6-2-0 | |
MC: | 0-2-0 | 0-2-0 | 0-1-1 | 1-0-1 | 1-5-2 | |
UML: | 0-2-0 | 2-0-0 | 1-1-0 | 0-2-0 | 3-5-0 | |
UNH: | 2-0-0 | 1-0-1 | 1-1-0 | 0-2-0 | 4-3-1 | |
PC: | 0-2-0 | 0-1-1 | 2-0-0 | 2-0-0 | 4-3-1 |
Now, what is it we "have"...
Due to our selective picking of UMA being in ties predominately with teams they sweep, they come out atop this jam. Better yet, we don't have to add NU because we only need one answer that works.
With UMA having a 6-2-0 record and giving 0-2-0 to three of the other four teams, the only real concerns were 1) if one of the three that UMA swept in turn swept the others and we had a tb among 6-2-0 teams, or 2) that UNH (the "fourth" team) would ride their 2-0-0 start and lose fewer than 4 points to the rest of the grid. #1 wouldn't really be an issue because any of those three would lose H2H vs UMA due to the sweep.
#2 wasn't settled however until the last match-up on the grid. UNH was 4-1-1 with PC pending. If they had swept PC, their 6-1-1 would best UMA. Even 1-0-1 from PC would leave them with 12 points (5-1-2) to match UMA. The league has never clarified how to break such a tie ("best record": do they go by points (go to TBs) or is 6-2-0 better because of more wins... or 5-1-2 better because of fewer losses?) Assuming a tie, they would go H2H and the UNH sweep would move UNH up. Then UMA's 6-0-0 record would leave them next in line.
As it turns out, the sweep went the other way, with PC taking 2-0-0 from UNH - so, UMA wins the grid.
That means that selecting ND and CT to move up and soak points worked out. We limited the damage to only losing two more places and UMA can still be... 6th.
UMA range: 6-12.
Comment