PDA

View Full Version : Does playing fewer games hurt the Ivys in PWR?



Dirty Dream No. 2
11-05-2015, 10:05 PM
The Ivs play about six fewer games per season than everyone else. Do you guys think this hurts in them in Pairwise Rankings? I've always wondered about this.

I'm one of those suckers for tradition, so good (I guess) for the Ivys for sticking to their guns. But not if it hurts them. You want the opportunities for extra wins, right?

blackswampboy
11-05-2015, 11:22 PM
I asked the same question about ASU a while back, didn't hear an answer.
not that ASU's PWR is really gonna matter, but by my count they play 25 DI games this year--13 fewer than a couple of WCHA teams.

The Rube
11-05-2015, 11:27 PM
I want to say that if you win all your games, it won't matter...to use the extreme.

That being said, I'd have to imagine there IS a breaking point in balance between games played and credit in the PWR.

For the record, I tried to become a PWR guru like some on this board, and it drove me nuts. Too detailed to be worth my time to figure out. I can rattle off the very basics, and that's about it. There are some here that can mentally re-calculate on a game-by-game basis, which is helpful during conference tourneys and such. It's quite astounding.

college pucks
11-06-2015, 01:29 AM
I think Jim Dahl over at SS would be the person to ask. He is the guy that always comes out with those Pairwise predictor graphs.

He also ran a site: http://collegehockeyranked.com/ last year.

mookie1995
11-06-2015, 05:45 AM
Since the skull & bones crew run the world anyhow Mookie is guessing the ivy's are fine

(Real ivy's. Not Cornell)

Patman
11-06-2015, 08:21 AM
I asked the same question about ASU a while back, didn't hear an answer.
not that ASU's PWR is really gonna matter, but by my count they play 25 DI games this year--13 fewer than a couple of WCHA teams.

rankings are an attempt to measure quality... any type of data measurement is hindered by bias and variance. More data means less variance. Less data means higher variance.

So, directly...no. In fact there may be some small benefit if a team rides the wave of luck and that their true state is worse. More games reveal the true state.

Now, that all being said. Its hard to deal with the biases of the method regardless of the amount of data thrown at it... but likewise itdoens't have much to do with sample size.

FlagDUDE08
11-06-2015, 08:36 AM
The Ivs play about six fewer games per season than everyone else. Do you guys think this hurts in them in Pairwise Rankings? I've always wondered about this.

I'm one of those suckers for tradition, so good (I guess) for the Ivys for sticking to their guns. But not if it hurts them. You want the opportunities for extra wins, right?

They may play five fewer games (29 total), but the number of NC opponents is effectively on par with Atlantic and the WCHA (7 vs. 6-8, 10 on rare occasions). If you were to assume the win percentage as an average (yes I understand streaks exist, but let's assume over a large sampling of seasons), the only thing that really is the difference between Ivy and AHC/WCHA is the number of head-to-head comparisons. Sure, the common opponents are reduced, but does that hurt the WCHA or AHC?