2009-2010 DIII Rutter Computer Rankings Thread

[Plugger]

Re: 2009-2010 DIII Rutter Computer Rankings Thread

Gojackets,

You are correct, that is not a simple thing to do. If I get a chance, I will run the numbers without the D-II teams. Not sure when I will get to it.

LakersFan - Thanks for all of your efforts. Do not kill yourself on this. If you have included HC over the last couple of years, then keep them in to be consistent. They play primarily DIII teams, so I am not sure why anyone needs them thrown out. Do we next throw out teams under .500? What about teams that have a bus ride of more than 5 hours, as we have heard about teams that were flat after long travel (Amherst last year and Lake Forest this year). Just keep your poll the way it is, I think everyone appreciates your efforts.

[spike]

Re: 2009-2010 DIII Rutter Computer Rankings Thread

LakersFan - Thanks for all of your efforts. Do not kill yourself on this. If you have included HC over the last couple of years, then keep them in to be consistent. They play primarily DIII teams, so I am not sure why anyone needs them thrown out. Do we next throw out teams under .500? What about teams that have a bus ride of more than 5 hours, as we have heard about teams that were flat after long travel (Amherst last year and Lake Forest this year). Just keep your poll the way it is, I think everyone appreciates your efforts.

What he said.

[gojackets]

Re: 2009-2010 DIII Rutter Computer Rankings Thread

LakersFan - Thanks for all of your efforts. Do not kill yourself on this. If you have included HC over the last couple of years, then keep them in to be consistent. They play primarily DIII teams, so I am not sure why anyone needs them thrown out. Do we next throw out teams under .500? What about teams that have a bus ride of more than 5 hours, as we have heard about teams that were flat after long travel (Amherst last year and Lake Forest this year). Just keep your poll the way it is, I think everyone appreciates your efforts.

I didn't mean to ask her to do that. I figured if it was something she could just delete them nad recalculate. Don't do all that just for me.

[LakersFan]

Re: 2009-2010 DIII Rutter Computer Rankings Thread

I didn't mean to ask her to do that. I figured if it was something she could just delete them nad recalculate. Don't do all that just for me.

I know I have long hair, but...

*****http://math.bd.psu.edu/faculty/rutter/images/tempheadshot.jpg******

[LakersFan]

Re: 2009-2010 DIII Rutter Computer Rankings Thread

For games played through Feb 7, 2010

   	Team  		Rating  RPI.Rank  RPI
1	Plattsburgh	2.4369	1	0.6654
2	Elmira		2.0626	2	0.6395
3	Amherst		1.8273	3	0.6327
4	RIT		1.7121	4	0.6095
5	Middlebury	1.4935	7	0.5943
6	Trinity		1.3872	5	0.6015
7	Manhattanville	1.2189	10	0.5824
8	Holy Cross	1.1740	11	0.5766
9	Gustavus Adol.	1.0942	9	0.5852
10	Wis-River Falls	1.0901	6	0.5944

[gojackets]

Re: 2009-2010 DIII Rutter Computer Rankings Thread

For games played through Feb 7, 2010

   	Team  		Rating  RPI.Rank  RPI
1	Plattsburgh	2.4369	1	0.6654
2	Elmira		2.0626	2	0.6395
3	Amherst		1.8273	3	0.6327
4	RIT		1.7121	4	0.6095
5	Middlebury	1.4935	7	0.5943
6	Trinity		1.3872	5	0.6015
7	Manhattanville	1.2189	10	0.5824
8	Holy Cross	1.1740	11	0.5766
9	Gustavus Adol.	1.0942	9	0.5852
10	Wis-River Falls	1.0901	6	0.5944

Whats keeping Middlebury so high in your rankings?? Other than Trinity and Holy Cross(shouldn't count) the next highest ranked team they have beaten is currently 19th in your rankings, and they lost to the 21st ranked team? Does your system give them a lot of credit to playing high ranked teams even though they lose to them?

I'm just trying to figure it out....not criticizing

[rinky dink]

Re: 2009-2010 DIII Rutter Computer Rankings Thread

Whats keeping Middlebury so high in your rankings?? Other than Trinity and Holy Cross(shouldn't count) the next highest ranked team they have beaten is currently 19th in your rankings, and they lost to the 21st ranked team? Does your system give them a lot of credit to playing high ranked teams even though they lose to them?

I'm just trying to figure it out....not criticizing

I have watched for a couple of years, and decided to recently start to weigh in. You seem to have had a "Yellow Jacket" fly up your backside when it comes to Middlebury. Did some of these players do something to you, your family pet or someone you know, or do you just dislike Middlebury for personal reasons? It is abundantly apparent that you are more concerned with knocking them down than anything else. Really the only poll that counts is at the end of the season.

Let's face it, it would seem that the only way Middlebury will reach the NCAA's this year is by winning the NESCAC. I hope for your sake they don't, I think you may have a cardiac arrest with that one......BUT I'm just trying to figure it out.....not criticizing....

[NHDad]

Re: 2009-2010 DIII Rutter Computer Rankings Thread

I have watched for a couple of years, and decided to recently start to weigh in. You seem to have had a "Yellow Jacket" fly up your backside when it comes to Middlebury. Did some of these players do something to you, your family pet or someone you know, or do you just dislike Middlebury for personal reasons? It is abundantly apparent that you are more concerned with knocking them down than anything else.

I couldn't agree more! I've been wondering the same thing....

[nbound]

Re: 2009-2010 DIII Rutter Computer Rankings Thread

it goes like this. If Middlebury and RIT each had a 25 game season and played 15 of those games against Plattsburg, Amherst and Elmira and lost them all, but, won 10 games against lower level teams that were unranked, they would still be in the top ten because they did not lose any games to unranked teams and their ONLY losses were to the top three teams in the country. Eastern Rules still apply. When an Eastern team does lose to an unranked eastern team it is considered a fluke and suffer very little in the polls. If a western team loses to an unranked eastern team they are basically banished from they polls unless they win out. Then they might be considered a mid level top 10 team Maybe.

[gojackets]

Re: 2009-2010 DIII Rutter Computer Rankings Thread

I have watched for a couple of years, and decided to recently start to weigh in. You seem to have had a "Yellow Jacket" fly up your backside when it comes to Middlebury. Did some of these players do something to you, your family pet or someone you know, or do you just dislike Middlebury for personal reasons? It is abundantly apparent that you are more concerned with knocking them down than anything else. Really the only poll that counts is at the end of the season.

Let's face it, it would seem that the only way Middlebury will reach the NCAA's this year is by winning the NESCAC. I hope for your sake they don't, I think you may have a cardiac arrest with that one......BUT I'm just trying to figure it out.....not criticizing....

If you've been watching for a couple of years, which I seriously doubt, this is the first year I have criticized Middlebury(not that I"m criticizing the team, but the people who rank them). I understand that in the USCHO poll that they are ranked as high as they are due to name recognition...I don't get why in a computer ranking they would be this high.

Can you give me one good reason why a team that has not beaten a ranked team, except trinity--who's only good win is against Middlebury--deserves to be in the top 10.

Let's say Conn College played the exact same schedule as Middlebury and had the same results....would you rank Conn College in the top 10?

Look at St Kates in the west. St Kate has a better record then gustavus, split with Gustavus...Gustavus is ranked in the top 10...St Kate has 1 vote.


And for completely worthless generic statement of the year....

Really the only poll that counts is at the end of the season.

is that really the best you got???

[Mania]

Re: 2009-2010 DIII Rutter Computer Rankings Thread

Eastern Rules still apply. When an Eastern team does lose to an unranked eastern team it is considered a fluke and suffer very little in the polls. If a western team loses to an unranked eastern team they are basically banished from they polls unless they win out.

1 Loss is little cause for concern if you have beaten a few top teams...which is the case for the top eastern teams. However, look at the top western teams and you see a big difference which makes it hard to compare. There is no clear front runner for the west, and all of the western teams that are in the rankings have lost multiple games to unranked teams. You can't say the same about the top eastern teams.

[Mr. Kitty]

Re: 2009-2010 DIII Rutter Computer Rankings Thread

Other than Trinity and Holy Cross(shouldn't count)

Why should Holy Cross be excluded? The point should be to get as much information on the quality of a team and the consistency of its performance.

I understand HC can't do the playoff thing, but if the Nepean Wildcats played everyone in ECAC-W and NCHA, then couldn't there be some fair comparisons against such a team -- even more so if it was a good team?

[rinky dink]

Re: 2009-2010 DIII Rutter Computer Rankings Thread

If you've been watching for a couple of years, which I seriously doubt, this is the first year I have criticized Middlebury(not that I"m criticizing the team, but the people who rank them). I understand that in the USCHO poll that they are ranked as high as they are due to name recognition...I don't get why in a computer ranking they would be this high.

Can you give me one good reason why a team that has not beaten a ranked team, except trinity--who's only good win is against Middlebury--deserves to be in the top 10.

Let's say Conn College played the exact same schedule as Middlebury and had the same results....would you rank Conn College in the top 10?

Look at St Kates in the west. St Kate has a better record then gustavus, split with Gustavus...Gustavus is ranked in the top 10...St Kate has 1 vote.


And for completely worthless generic statement of the year....



is that really the best you got???

Get to the Dr. quick and check out that thin skin!!!

[nbound]

Re: 2009-2010 DIII Rutter Computer Rankings Thread

1 Loss is little cause for concern if you have beaten a few top teams...which is the case for the top eastern teams. However, look at the top western teams and you see a big difference which makes it hard to compare. There is no clear front runner for the west, and all of the western teams that are in the rankings have lost multiple games to unranked teams. You can't say the same about the top eastern teams.

Really?....... Which top Eastern teams have Middlebury (beat Trinity but lost to Hamilton) or RIT beaten

[Mania]

Re: 2009-2010 DIII Rutter Computer Rankings Thread

Really?....... Which top Eastern teams have Middlebury (beat Trinity but lost to Hamilton) or RIT beaten

First of all I could care less about Middlebury or Trinity, who knows if they deserve to be on the rankings. Secondly, RIT has at least only lost to the top 3 teams in the country. I don't know if they belong where they are but they haven't lost to anyone below 3rd in the nation. My point is the western teams have lost to multiple unranked teams....not just one loss each, but two or more...I'm not saying they shouldn't be in the top 10, but should they be higher?...it is kinda hard to say they should be.