7AA 2018-2019

[Jeffy95]

As much as I hate to say it if Hermantown does not move up rapids should drop them next year, play Bemidji and brainerd home and home it’s the same distance. I am also sure you could probably get Moorhead and Roseau to also play home and home just play greenway for single A teams once a year like east plays The hunters. That is if they keep QRF next year It doesn’t bother me this year but it was a cool story and the kids deserved the 5 because of the hard work they put in but after this year seeding is going to matter more for Rapids as they continue to get better.

Couldn't agree more, they absolutely deserved the 4 or 5 with a great chance of advancing. Instead, we get Cloquet or Rapids one and done. It's really going to suck for them down the road if they're fighting for a 1 vs. 2 or 3 vs. 4. Even a 4 instead of a 5 gets you a home game which is huge. Really sucks for Cloquet and Marshall too because they have to play them. Probably time to do away with conferences.

Rapids doesn't play conference. They went independent a few years back. Agree to drop all single A and play Greenway only. Elks got jobbed as well. No way Forest Lake deserves the 4 spot should be Elks.

I meant for Cloquet and Marshall. They have to play Hermantown.

[Jeffy95]

With out knowing the exact formula it is hard (impossible) to tell which are better - low level AA versus high level A opponents.

Impossible? Not at all. Just a few minutes of research.

Looking at QRF on 2/11 vs. 2/15

Rapids beat the 29th overall QRF team in Cloquet.(AA) They lost to the 14th overall in Hermantown.(A)

They went up 6.3 points

Chisago Lakes beat the 147th overall in Cambridge Isanti. (AA) They also beat the 107th overall in St. Francis.(AA)

They went up 6.2 points.

Who would you say had the more impressive body of work between Rapids and Chisago? Difference is Chisago played two AA teams. Had Rapids beaten Cloquet and C/I, they would have gone up more.

[elliott70]

Exactly, impossible to know, up front, because it is a moving target.

[7TIMECHAMPS]

With out knowing the exact formula it is hard (impossible) to tell which are better - low level AA versus high level A opponents.

Impossible? Not at all. Just a few minutes of research.

Looking at QRF on 2/11 vs. 2/15

Rapids beat the 29th overall QRF team in Cloquet.(AA) They lost to the 14th overall in Hermantown.(A)

They went up 6.3 points

Chisago Lakes beat the 147th overall in Cambridge Isanti. (AA) They also beat the 107th overall in St. Francis.(AA)

They went up 6.2 points.

Who would you say had the more impressive body of work between Rapids and Chisago? Difference is Chisago played two AA teams.

Had Rapids beat Cloquet and St. Francis, they would have gone up roughly 9.5-9.8.

That isn’t a totally accurate comparison.

1. Chisago and Rapids didn’t start in the same position. So obviously it will be easier for a lower ranked team to make big jumps against lower competition. This would explain why Edina didn’t have a huge score jump when they beat Tonka. It is just as much about where you started.

2. It does not calculate only isolated scores. Meaning all of the scores in the state basically are being used in the formula. Not a 100% correlation I am saying.

Elliot is right it is next to impossible to know exactly unless you get into great detail and have a full understanding of how QRF works.

[kniven]

Cut the crap and hiperbly bullsquat. QRF is is a chucnky throw up flem puke. Pagestat is as on a beach in the tropics alone with a beautiful woman. First one is confusing and sick and the second.....simple an beautiful.

[elliott70]

They both are computer programs trying to do something without human emotion so that neither is capable of beauty,
Pagestat does a better job but to say it is without confusion is a bit of hyperbole.

[kniven]

They both are computer programs trying to do something without human emotion so that neither is capable of beauty,
Pagestat does a better job but to say it is without confusion is a bit of hyperbole.

Well I feel water, my brain tells me it is wet = pagestat
Well I feel water and somebody tells its sand = QRF

I don’t care what it is. If it doesn’t make sense? Yep

[Jeffy95]

With out knowing the exact formula it is hard (impossible) to tell which are better - low level AA versus high level A opponents.

Impossible? Not at all. Just a few minutes of research.

Looking at QRF on 2/11 vs. 2/15

Rapids beat the 29th overall QRF team in Cloquet.(AA) They lost to the 14th overall in Hermantown.(A)

They went up 6.3 points

Chisago Lakes beat the 147th overall in Cambridge Isanti. (AA) They also beat the 107th overall in St. Francis.(AA)

They went up 6.2 points.

Who would you say had the more impressive body of work between Rapids and Chisago? Difference is Chisago played two AA teams.

Had Rapids beat Cloquet and St. Francis, they would have gone up roughly 9.5-9.8.

That isn’t a totally accurate comparison.

1. Chisago and Rapids didn’t start in the same position. So obviously it will be easier for a lower ranked team to make big jumps against lower competition. This would explain why Edina didn’t have a huge score jump when they beat Tonka. It is just as much about where you started.

2. It does not calculate only isolated scores. Meaning all of the scores in the state basically are being used in the formula. Not a 100% correlation I am saying.

Elliot is right it is next to impossible to know exactly unless you get into great detail and have a full understanding of how QRF works.

I agree that it's not a totally accurate comparison. I've never really studied the formula until now. Here it is:

What is the formula/concept?
•If you win:
◦X points for winning the game based on opponent Class
◦Y points times number of opponent wins based on opponent s opponents Class
•If you lose:
◦Y/3 points times number of opponent wins based on opponent s opponents Class
•The margin of victory/defeat is NOT part of the equation.
•This calculation happens for every game, then averaged out to the QRF number you see online.
•Once the average QRF is determined, it is compared to the average QRF of every other team in the State, and put into ranking order.

So the formula itself is pretty straightforward. What we don't know obviously is what value X and Y are. But we do know that X is higher if you beat a AA opponent. If it wasn't, they wouldn't have to specify, "based on opponent's class." So if you beat a AA team, you get more initial points than if you beat an A team. Then the second part comes in:

"◦Y or Y/3 points times number of opponent wins based on opponent s opponents Class"

It doesn't specifically say that the value of Y changes based on opponent's opponents Class, but I am pretty certain that is what they are saying. The only other possibility is that some wins aren't counted in the multiplier based on class, but that doesn't appear to be the case after looking at some movement from week to week and wouldn't seem logical to just completely ignore some wins. So I'm pretty confident on that.

So in Summary, I think you have two different values for X and two for Y, based on Class. My curiosity is now peaked and I might have to take this on and figure out those values. It can be done but would take some time for sure.

I don't follow your point #1 above though. There is nothing in here to suggest a higher move is possible just because you have a lower initial rank. Edina moved up 6.3 points from 2/11 to 2/15, same as Cloquet and .1 more than Chisago. So I don't see where there is any factor that makes it easier for a lower ranked team to make a higher jump.

From what I see at this point is the way you can make the Maximum possible jump from one ranking to the next is if you A. Win several games against AA opponents in that timeframe and B. Every team that you have played to that point wins several games against AA opponents. The other thing I noticed from looking briefly is that a lot of teams moved up right around that 6.2-6.5 range from 2/11-2/15. I saw very few variations from that.

[BodyShots]

Qrf is final for 7AA
1Andover
2Duluth East
3 CEC
4 Flake
5 Elk River
6 G Rapids
7 Duluth Marshall
8 St Francis
9 CBI

This is perfect! North Semi Final and a South Semi Final. Then we get to see a North vs South Final. The WWE couldn't schedule it any better.

Can they move the South Semi Final game down to the Super Rink, St. Cloud, or Aldrich? Nobody wants that long drive to play in front of just parents!

No AA team should play Hermantown. Take the competition away and maybe they will move up.

QRF is #1.

[jdh]

7AA SEEDINGS :
Andover
East
CEC
Forest Lake
Elk River
Grand Rapids
Marshall
St Francis
Cambridge

[7TIMECHAMPS]

Impossible? Not at all. Just a few minutes of research.

Looking at QRF on 2/11 vs. 2/15

Rapids beat the 29th overall QRF team in Cloquet.(AA) They lost to the 14th overall in Hermantown.(A)

They went up 6.3 points

Chisago Lakes beat the 147th overall in Cambridge Isanti. (AA) They also beat the 107th overall in St. Francis.(AA)

They went up 6.2 points.

Who would you say had the more impressive body of work between Rapids and Chisago? Difference is Chisago played two AA teams.

Had Rapids beat Cloquet and St. Francis, they would have gone up roughly 9.5-9.8.

That isn’t a totally accurate comparison.

1. Chisago and Rapids didn’t start in the same position. So obviously it will be easier for a lower ranked team to make big jumps against lower competition. This would explain why Edina didn’t have a huge score jump when they beat Tonka. It is just as much about where you started.

2. It does not calculate only isolated scores. Meaning all of the scores in the state basically are being used in the formula. Not a 100% correlation I am saying.

Elliot is right it is next to impossible to know exactly unless you get into great detail and have a full understanding of how QRF works.

I agree that it's not a totally accurate comparison. I've never really studied the formula until now. Here it is:

What is the formula/concept?
•If you win:
◦X points for winning the game based on opponent Class
◦Y points times number of opponent wins based on opponent s opponents Class
•If you lose:
◦Y/3 points times number of opponent wins based on opponent s opponents Class
•The margin of victory/defeat is NOT part of the equation.
•This calculation happens for every game, then averaged out to the QRF number you see online.
•Once the average QRF is determined, it is compared to the average QRF of every other team in the State, and put into ranking order.

So the formula itself is pretty straightforward. What we don't know obviously is what value X and Y are. But we do know that X is higher if you beat a AA opponent. If it wasn't, they wouldn't have to specify, "based on opponent's class." So if you beat a AA team, you get more initial points than if you beat an A team. Then the second part comes in:

"◦Y or Y/3 points times number of opponent wins based on opponent s opponents Class"

It doesn't specifically say that the value of Y changes based on opponent's opponents Class, but I am pretty certain that is what they are saying. The only other possibility is that some wins aren't counted in the multiplier based on class, but that doesn't appear to be the case after looking at some movement from week to week and wouldn't seem logical to just completely ignore some wins. So I'm pretty confident on that.

So in Summary, I think you have two different values for X and two for Y, based on Class. My curiosity is now peaked and I might have to take this on and figure out those values. It can be done but would take some time for sure.

I don't follow your point #1 above though. There is nothing in here to suggest a higher move is possible just because you have a lower initial rank. Edina moved up 6.3 points from 2/11 to 2/15, same as Cloquet and .1 more than Chisago. So I don't see where there is any factor that makes it easier for a lower ranked team to make a higher jump.

From what I see at this point is the way you can make the Maximum possible jump from one ranking to the next is if you A. Win several games against AA opponents in that timeframe and B. Every team that you have played to that point wins several games against AA opponents. The other thing I noticed from looking briefly is that a lot of teams moved up right around that 6.2-6.5 range from 2/11-2/15. I saw very few variations from that.

If your QRF score is an average of all of the scores then my #1 point has to make sense. In an extreme example what would happen if the last place team beat Edina? Their beginning average score would be so low and that one game beating a team with a lot of wins(more wins=more points) would give them a jump far larger than say Minnetonka beating Edina. When you already have a high score there is less room to jump.

For example two different teams play three games and then on their fourth game they play an opponent with the same score(or point value). I will assign fictional numbers to the example.

Team A wins it's first 3 games against opponents that are valued at 50 for an average score of 50.

Team B wins it first 3 games against opponents that are valued at 100 for an average score of 100.

Team A then plays it's 4th game against a team worth 125 and wins. Their average is now 68.75(50+50+50+125/4). Their score moved 18.75 points up.

Team B then plays it's 4th game against a team also worth 125 and wins. Their average is now 106.25(100+100+100+125/4). That is only a jump of 6.25.

Both teams played a 4th opponent worth the same amount of points but one started with a lower average making it possible to have a larger jump. If we are using averages then it has to work this way. Unless I am totally missing the boat on something here?

Your example with Edina essentially proves my point. Edina only got 6 points from a win vs Minnetonka. Rapids got the same amount of points for a win against Cloquet. Why is that? Shouldn't Edina get a larger gain because they beat a better team in Minnetonka? The answer is no because Edina had a higher starting score than Rapids. Basically I was saying this but in reverse. A team with an already high average score that beats a lower team will not get as good of a boost as a team with an already low score beating that same team.

To me without knowing what the wins vs class weight is you can't make a lot of the assumptions that have been made as far as scheduling. There is a down side to playing an A team relative to a AA team that is for certain. However, we do not really know what the gap is. It could be negligible or it could be significant. It would be a good idea for teams in 7AA to figure out the factors (or what would essentially be weighting) and use it for scheduling.

[7TIMECHAMPS]

That isn’t a totally accurate comparison.

1. Chisago and Rapids didn’t start in the same position. So obviously it will be easier for a lower ranked team to make big jumps against lower competition. This would explain why Edina didn’t have a huge score jump when they beat Tonka. It is just as much about where you started.

2. It does not calculate only isolated scores. Meaning all of the scores in the state basically are being used in the formula. Not a 100% correlation I am saying.

Elliot is right it is next to impossible to know exactly unless you get into great detail and have a full understanding of how QRF works.

I agree that it's not a totally accurate comparison. I've never really studied the formula until now. Here it is:

What is the formula/concept?
•If you win:
◦X points for winning the game based on opponent Class
◦Y points times number of opponent wins based on opponent s opponents Class
•If you lose:
◦Y/3 points times number of opponent wins based on opponent s opponents Class
•The margin of victory/defeat is NOT part of the equation.
•This calculation happens for every game, then averaged out to the QRF number you see online.
•Once the average QRF is determined, it is compared to the average QRF of every other team in the State, and put into ranking order.

So the formula itself is pretty straightforward. What we don't know obviously is what value X and Y are. But we do know that X is higher if you beat a AA opponent. If it wasn't, they wouldn't have to specify, "based on opponent's class." So if you beat a AA team, you get more initial points than if you beat an A team. Then the second part comes in:

"◦Y or Y/3 points times number of opponent wins based on opponent s opponents Class"

It doesn't specifically say that the value of Y changes based on opponent's opponents Class, but I am pretty certain that is what they are saying. The only other possibility is that some wins aren't counted in the multiplier based on class, but that doesn't appear to be the case after looking at some movement from week to week and wouldn't seem logical to just completely ignore some wins. So I'm pretty confident on that.

So in Summary, I think you have two different values for X and two for Y, based on Class. My curiosity is now peaked and I might have to take this on and figure out those values. It can be done but would take some time for sure.

I don't follow your point #1 above though. There is nothing in here to suggest a higher move is possible just because you have a lower initial rank. Edina moved up 6.3 points from 2/11 to 2/15, same as Cloquet and .1 more than Chisago. So I don't see where there is any factor that makes it easier for a lower ranked team to make a higher jump.

From what I see at this point is the way you can make the Maximum possible jump from one ranking to the next is if you A. Win several games against AA opponents in that timeframe and B. Every team that you have played to that point wins several games against AA opponents. The other thing I noticed from looking briefly is that a lot of teams moved up right around that 6.2-6.5 range from 2/11-2/15. I saw very few variations from that.

If your QRF score is an average of all of the scores then my #1 point has to make sense. In an extreme example what would happen if the last place team beat Edina? Their beginning average score would be so low and that one game beating a team with a lot of wins(more wins=more points) would give them a jump far larger than say Minnetonka beating Edina. When you already have a high score there is less room to jump.

For example two different teams play three games and then on their fourth game they play an opponent with the same score(or point value). I will assign fictional numbers to the example.

Team A wins it's first 3 games against opponents that are valued at 50 for an average score of 50.

Team B wins it first 3 games against opponents that are valued at 100 for an average score of 100.

Team A then plays it's 4th game against a team worth 125 and wins. Their average is now 68.75(50+50+50+125/4). Their score moved 18.75 points up.

Team B then plays it's 4th game against a team also worth 125 and wins. Their average is now 106.25(100+100+100+125/4). That is only a jump of 6.25.

Both teams played a 4th opponent worth the same amount of points but one started with a lower average making it possible to have a larger jump. If we are using averages then it has to work this way. Unless I am totally missing the boat on something here?

Your example with Edina essentially proves my point. Edina only got 6 points from a win vs Minnetonka. Rapids got the same amount of points for a win against Cloquet. Why is that? Shouldn't Edina get a larger gain because they beat a better team in Minnetonka? The answer is no because Edina had a higher starting score than Rapids. Basically I was saying this but in reverse. A team with an already high average score that beats a lower team will not get as good of a boost as a team with an already low score beating that same team.

To me without knowing what the wins vs class weight is you can't make a lot of the assumptions that have been made as far as scheduling. There is a down side to playing an A team relative to a AA team that is for certain. However, we do not really know what the gap is. It could be negligible or it could be significant. It would be a good idea for teams in 7AA to figure out the factors (or what would essentially be weighting) and use it for scheduling.

Also the theory that AA teams shouldn't schedule Hermantown applies to all A teams in reality. Rapid's loss to Greeenway also hurt their score worse than it would have if they had played a AA team equivalent to Greenway.

I hope 8AA never goes to this. Roseau would be hurt in seeding by playing quality A programs like EGF, Warroad, and TRF. The closest AA program is over two hours away. Their schedule would have to be Friday/Saturday games only just about if we wanted all AA teams on the schedule.

[hky17]

stoyanoff is back for cec, gives the jacks a small bit of hope of an upset of east.

[Usthockey13]

Don’t they have to beat rapids 1st?

[hky17]

correct, i would just be shocked if it wasn't cloquet and east at amsoil next saturday.

[alcloseshaver]

Did we really need an additional 7AA thread? The othe one is all encompassing.

[east hockey]

Did we really need an additional 7AA thread? The othe one is all encompassing.

We don't. They have been moved and combined with the main 7AA thread.

Lee

[east hockey]

correct, i would just be shocked if it wasn't cloquet and east at amsoil next saturday.

I wouldn't.

Lee

[hky17]

I will say I would not be surprised if Randolph and East found a way out of this section, This is why Ryder came back was to make one last run at a state title. Whoever makes it out of this section will be fun to watch at the X.

[hockey59]

I will say I would not be surprised if Randolph and East found a way out of this section, This is why Ryder came back was to make one last run at a state title. Whoever makes it out of this section will be fun to watch at the X.

It’s not like it would be surprising But Andover has a slightly more “talented” squad, and have posted a better regular season record & body of work, that’s not even debatable. But it helps playing at home in front of your students & fans on a Thursday night when Andover fans work during the day & have to travel 2.5 hours (in good driving conditions) If the section final was played at SCSU on a Thursday night (this year) I’d give the Huskies a 65/35
Chance, but playing at Amsoil it’s more like 55/45

[hky17]

I will say I would not be surprised if Randolph and East found a way out of this section, This is why Ryder came back was to make one last run at a state title. Whoever makes it out of this section will be fun to watch at the X.

It’s not like it would be surprising But Andover has a slightly more “talented” squad, and have posted a better regular season record & body of work, that’s not even debatable. But it helps playing at home in front of your students & fans on a Thursday night when Andover fans work during the day & have to travel 2.5 hours (in good driving conditions) If the section final was played at SCSU on a Thursday night (this year) I’d give the Huskies a 65/35
Chance, but playing at Amsoil it’s more like 55/45

Agree 100% also as we all know Ben Fritsinger is capable of stealing a game and almost did last year aganist them, it should be a good section final regardless of who wins and it should be evenly matched as well.

[kniven]

The Section 7A and 7AA Boy's Hockey Tournaments are almost here! @wdiowirt will once again live stream the Section 7A and 7AA Semifinal and Championship Games! The Section Championship Games will also be televised on WDIO!

[northwoods oldtimer]

Qrf is final for 7AA
1Andover
2Duluth East
3 CEC
4 Flake
5 Elk River
6 G Rapids
7 Duluth Marshall
8 St Francis
9 CBI

This is perfect! North Semi Final and a South Semi Final. Then we get to see a North vs South Final. The WWE couldn't schedule it any better.

Can they move the South Semi Final game down to the Super Rink, St. Cloud, or Aldrich? Nobody wants that long drive to play in front of just parents!

No AA team should play Hermantown. Take the competition away and maybe they will move up.

QRF is #1.

For sure go play in the metro, maybe at Ridder. Awesome!!

[Jeffy95]

That isn’t a totally accurate comparison.

1. Chisago and Rapids didn’t start in the same position. So obviously it will be easier for a lower ranked team to make big jumps against lower competition. This would explain why Edina didn’t have a huge score jump when they beat Tonka. It is just as much about where you started.

2. It does not calculate only isolated scores. Meaning all of the scores in the state basically are being used in the formula. Not a 100% correlation I am saying.

Elliot is right it is next to impossible to know exactly unless you get into great detail and have a full understanding of how QRF works.

I agree that it's not a totally accurate comparison. I've never really studied the formula until now. Here it is:

What is the formula/concept?
•If you win:
◦X points for winning the game based on opponent Class
◦Y points times number of opponent wins based on opponent s opponents Class
•If you lose:
◦Y/3 points times number of opponent wins based on opponent s opponents Class
•The margin of victory/defeat is NOT part of the equation.
•This calculation happens for every game, then averaged out to the QRF number you see online.
•Once the average QRF is determined, it is compared to the average QRF of every other team in the State, and put into ranking order.

So the formula itself is pretty straightforward. What we don't know obviously is what value X and Y are. But we do know that X is higher if you beat a AA opponent. If it wasn't, they wouldn't have to specify, "based on opponent's class." So if you beat a AA team, you get more initial points than if you beat an A team. Then the second part comes in:

"◦Y or Y/3 points times number of opponent wins based on opponent s opponents Class"

It doesn't specifically say that the value of Y changes based on opponent's opponents Class, but I am pretty certain that is what they are saying. The only other possibility is that some wins aren't counted in the multiplier based on class, but that doesn't appear to be the case after looking at some movement from week to week and wouldn't seem logical to just completely ignore some wins. So I'm pretty confident on that.

So in Summary, I think you have two different values for X and two for Y, based on Class. My curiosity is now peaked and I might have to take this on and figure out those values. It can be done but would take some time for sure.

I don't follow your point #1 above though. There is nothing in here to suggest a higher move is possible just because you have a lower initial rank. Edina moved up 6.3 points from 2/11 to 2/15, same as Cloquet and .1 more than Chisago. So I don't see where there is any factor that makes it easier for a lower ranked team to make a higher jump.

From what I see at this point is the way you can make the Maximum possible jump from one ranking to the next is if you A. Win several games against AA opponents in that timeframe and B. Every team that you have played to that point wins several games against AA opponents. The other thing I noticed from looking briefly is that a lot of teams moved up right around that 6.2-6.5 range from 2/11-2/15. I saw very few variations from that.

If your QRF score is an average of all of the scores then my #1 point has to make sense. In an extreme example what would happen if the last place team beat Edina? Their beginning average score would be so low and that one game beating a team with a lot of wins(more wins=more points) would give them a jump far larger than say Minnetonka beating Edina. When you already have a high score there is less room to jump.

For example two different teams play three games and then on their fourth game they play an opponent with the same score(or point value). I will assign fictional numbers to the example.

Team A wins it's first 3 games against opponents that are valued at 50 for an average score of 50.

Team B wins it first 3 games against opponents that are valued at 100 for an average score of 100.

Team A then plays it's 4th game against a team worth 125 and wins. Their average is now 68.75(50+50+50+125/4). Their score moved 18.75 points up.

Team B then plays it's 4th game against a team also worth 125 and wins. Their average is now 106.25(100+100+100+125/4). That is only a jump of 6.25.

Both teams played a 4th opponent worth the same amount of points but one started with a lower average making it possible to have a larger jump. If we are using averages then it has to work this way. Unless I am totally missing the boat on something here?

Your example with Edina essentially proves my point. Edina only got 6 points from a win vs Minnetonka. Rapids got the same amount of points for a win against Cloquet. Why is that? Shouldn't Edina get a larger gain because they beat a better team in Minnetonka? The answer is no because Edina had a higher starting score than Rapids. Basically I was saying this but in reverse. A team with an already high average score that beats a lower team will not get as good of a boost as a team with an already low score beating that same team.

To me without knowing what the wins vs class weight is you can't make a lot of the assumptions that have been made as far as scheduling. There is a down side to playing an A team relative to a AA team that is for certain. However, we do not really know what the gap is. It could be negligible or it could be significant. It would be a good idea for teams in 7AA to figure out the factors (or what would essentially be weighting) and use it for scheduling.

Yes, you are correct again Sevvy. I dove into the first part of the formula so much today I didn't even read down a line and see the Average component. Now I'm just a D-Bagger back at square one. But let's make sure we're all being fair here. Your example for after 4-5 games is good. But when you're dealing with averages, it's not gonna be the same if you plug in 20-22 games. But still a great point, nonetheless.

The averages make it a little more complicated. Now I really have to decide if I want to try to figure this thing out or not. I'll probably just have a beer and watch Law and Order. But you never know...….

[kniven]

Let section playoffs begin! On your mark, get set, GO!!