1999-2000 ECAC Bradley-Terry Ratings

© 1999, 2000, Joe Schlobotnik (archives)

URL for this frameset: http://www.slack.net/~whelan/tbrw/tbrw.cgi?2000/ecac.rrwp.shtml

Game results taken from US College Hockey Online's Division I composite schedule

Our ECAC standings page ranks the teams by winning percentage rather than by the traditional hockey method of total points (two for a win and one for a tie), and with different teams playing different numbers of games due to the cancellation of a portion of Vermont's season, the league itself used this method to order the final standings. While this corrects for the different numbers of games that teams may have played, it doesn't consider the fact that teams may have accumulated their conference records against stronger or weaker competition. (The effect at the end of this year's ECAC schedule is smaller than one typically finds after an unbalanced schedule like thos used by the WCHA or CCHA, since the imbalance amounts to teams having played one or zero games against Vermont, who were a roughly middle-of-the pack team before they halted play.) The following table lists the ECAC record for each team, broken down by opponent, followed by a projection of how they would be expected to fare in their cancelled games against Vermont if those games had been played, and finally the projected final record over an entire 22-game balanced schedule. All records are given as points for (i.e., twice the number of wins plus the number of ties) versus points against (ties plus twice losses).

Including games of 2000 March 18
# Team So Far Projected
PF-PA SLCgRPCrCkVtHaPnDaYaUnBn "Future" "Final"
1 St. Lawrence33-72-24-02-23-10-04-04-04-04-04-02-23.3-0.736.3-7.7
2 Colgate30-102-24-04-04-00-03-11-34-02-22-24-03.1-0.933.1-10.9
3 RPI23-190-40-42-22-21-14-02-22-24-02-24-01.1-0.924.1-19.9
4 Cornell21-192-20-42-24-00-02-22-20-42-24-03-12.2-1.823.2-20.8
5 Clarkson21-191-30-42-20-40-04-03-12-23-12-24-02.2-1.823.2-20.8
6 Vermont8-60-00-01-10-00-00-22-01-10-22-02-013.3-16.721.3-22.7
7 Harvard20-220-41-30-42-20-42-02-23-14-04-02-21.0-1.021.0-23.0
8 Princeton20-220-43-12-22-21-30-22-23-13-12-22-21.0-1.021.0-23.0
9 Dartmouth19-230-40-42-24-02-21-11-31-32-24-02-20.9-1.119.9-24.1
10 Yale16-260-42-20-42-21-32-00-41-32-23-13-10.8-1.216.8-27.2
11 Union13-290-42-22-20-42-20-20-42-20-41-34-00.7-1.313.7-30.3
12 Brown10-322-20-40-41-30-40-22-22-22-21-30-40.5-1.510.5-33.5

The projections are calculated using the Bradley-Terry method (which is also used to produce the KRACH ratings for all of college hockey). Each team has a rating, and the points in a head-to-head game are expected to be divided proportional to the ratings. (E.g., if Team A's rating is three times that of Team B, they are expected to accumulate a winning percentage of .750 in games between the two.) The correct ratings are those which reproduce the actual winning percentage to date for each team, and are shown in the following table along with the Head-to-Head Winning Probability (HHWP) between each pair of teams and the projected Round-Robin Winning Percentage (RRWP) each team would be expected to obtain by playing every other team an equal number of times.

Including games of 2000 March 18
# Team Rating Head-to-Head Winning Probability (HHWP) RRWP Winning
1 St. Lawrence460.6.603.791.805.805.831.835.835.848.882.911.935.826 .825
2 Colgate302.7.397.713.731.731.764.769.769.785.831.870.904.751 .750
3 RPI121. .548
4 Cornell111. .525
5 Clarkson111. .525
6 Vermont93. .571
7 Harvard91. .476
8 Princeton91. .476
9 Dartmouth82. .452
10 Yale61. .381
11 Union45. .310
12 Brown32. .238

See Also

Last Modified: 2012 March 25

Joe Schlobotnik / joe@amurgsval.org

HTML 4.0 compliant CSS2 compliant