Section 4AA

[Sparlimb]

Are we close enough we can start talking section hockey? It's a tough call on #1 in the section as both Roseville and Hill-Murray have two losses and both Roseville losses and one HM loss came during their Christmas tournament with both teams missing players. I think I can make a pretty good argument for Hill-Murray as #1 though. They have a higher strength of schedule for starters. Roseville lost to Minnetonka and South St. Paul, both teams HM has beaten this year (although HM also lost to Tonka once). Roseville tied Edina and HM beat them. So teams in common are: Edina, White Bear Lake, Blake, Minnetonka, South St. Paul, Stillwater and Mahtomedi. In those game, Roseville is 3-2-2 (with 2 games left vs. WBL and Stillwater), Hill-Murray is 8-1 (with a 3rd game vs SSP left to go). So I'm going to go with:

1. Hill-Murray
2. Roseville
3. White Bear Lake
4. Stillwater (better conference record, but worse overall and they (WBL ad Still) tied both times this year.
5. Cretin-Derham Hall
6. Minneapolis Novas
7. Tartan
8. North St. Paul
9. St. Paul Blades

Blast away...

[MinnGirlsHockey]

Are we close enough we can start talking section hockey? It's a tough call on #1 in the section as both Roseville and Hill-Murray have two losses and both Roseville losses and one HM loss came during their Christmas tournament with both teams missing players. I think I can make a pretty good argument for Hill-Murray as #1 though. They have a higher strength of schedule for starters. Roseville lost to Minnetonka and South St. Paul, both teams HM has beaten this year (although HM also lost to Tonka once). Roseville tied Edina and HM beat them. So teams in common are: Edina, White Bear Lake, Blake, Minnetonka, South St. Paul, Stillwater and Mahtomedi. In those game, Roseville is 3-2-2 (with 2 games left vs. WBL and Stillwater), Hill-Murray is 8-1 (with a 3rd game vs SSP left to go). So I'm going to go with:

1. Hill-Murray
2. Roseville
3. White Bear Lake
4. Stillwater (better conference record, but worse overall and went 0-1-1 against WBL edit: Score I heard is heresay until official, so winner of Saturday's game get's #3 seed unless one beats Roseville this week...)
5. Cretin-Derham Hall
6. Minneapolis Novas
7. Tartan
8. North St. Paul
9. St. Paul Blades

Blast away...

Looks pretty good to me. I have some slight differences towards the bottom, here's mine:
1. Hill-Murray
2. Roseville
3. White Bear Lake
4. Stillwater
5. Cretin-Derham Hall
6. North St. Paul
7. Minneapolis Novas
8. Tartan
9. St. Paul Blades

[Sparlimb]

NSP did beat Tartan last night, which happened after I was trying to pick between them. Minneapolis has a halfway decent record, but against pretty poor competition. With the strength of the top 4 teams in the section, I don't think we'll be talking about lower seeds for long.

[iceage]

NSP did beat Tartan last night, which happened after I was trying to pick between them. Minneapolis has a halfway decent record, but against pretty poor competition. With the strength of the top 4 teams in the section, I don't think we'll be talking about lower seeds for long.

I believe the head-to-head with Stillwater and WBL is 0-0-2. Both games I believe were 2-2 ties.

[Sparlimb]

NSP did beat Tartan last night, which happened after I was trying to pick between them. Minneapolis has a halfway decent record, but against pretty poor competition. With the strength of the top 4 teams in the section, I don't think we'll be talking about lower seeds for long.

I believe the head-to-head with Stillwater and WBL is 0-0-2. Both games I believe were 2-2 ties.

Both games were ties. So we could differentiate the two by overall record or record versus common opponents, but as I noted earlier, both get a chance at Roseville this week. I think if either Stillwater or WBL can win that game they would get the nod at number 3. I'm not sure either position is any better although it should be noted this section has sent a #4 and #5 seed to state in the last few years, so it can happen.

[ghshockeyfan]

KRACH has as of this AM:

http://www.bgoski.com/KRACH_SEC_20120129.htm

1 Hill-Murray 21-2-0 997.699 AA 4
6 Roseville 19-2-2 234.201 AA 4
15 White Bear Lake 15-4-4 87.261 AA 4
18 Stillwater Area 14-7-2 68.354 AA 4
48 Cretin-Derham Hall 9-11-2 17.400 AA 4
83 Minneapolis 8-14-2 2.543 AA 4
86 North St. Paul 4-16-2 2.274 AA 4
93 Tartan 3-12-6 1.638 AA 4
98 St. Paul Blades 4-14-0 0.765 AA 4

I think the human rankers typically look to seeding in this order:

#1 Head-to-head results
#2 Common Opponents results

Problem with seeding is that it usually hapens before the final couple games are played unfortunately...

[hockeymannorth]

KRACH has as of this AM:

http://www.bgoski.com/KRACH_SEC_20120129.htm

1 Hill-Murray 21-2-0 997.699 AA 4
6 Roseville 19-2-2 234.201 AA 4
15 White Bear Lake 15-4-4 87.261 AA 4
18 Stillwater Area 14-7-2 68.354 AA 4
48 Cretin-Derham Hall 9-11-2 17.400 AA 4
83 Minneapolis 8-14-2 2.543 AA 4
86 North St. Paul 4-16-2 2.274 AA 4
93 Tartan 3-12-6 1.638 AA 4
98 St. Paul Blades 4-14-0 0.765 AA 4

I think the human rankers typically look to seeding in this order:

#1 Head-to-head results
#2 Common Opponents results

Problem with seeding is that it usually hapens before the final couple games are played unfortunately...

as far as i know KRACH doesn"t pick sections coaches do

[ghshockeyfan]

KRACH has as of this AM:

http://www.bgoski.com/KRACH_SEC_20120129.htm

1 Hill-Murray 21-2-0 997.699 AA 4
6 Roseville 19-2-2 234.201 AA 4
15 White Bear Lake 15-4-4 87.261 AA 4
18 Stillwater Area 14-7-2 68.354 AA 4
48 Cretin-Derham Hall 9-11-2 17.400 AA 4
83 Minneapolis 8-14-2 2.543 AA 4
86 North St. Paul 4-16-2 2.274 AA 4
93 Tartan 3-12-6 1.638 AA 4
98 St. Paul Blades 4-14-0 0.765 AA 4

I think the human rankers typically look to seeding in this order:

#1 Head-to-head results
#2 Common Opponents results

Problem with seeding is that it usually hapens before the final couple games are played unfortunately...

as far as i know KRACH doesn"t pick sections coaches do

That's my understanding as well - unless something has changed anyway.

Interestingly there was a "big" announcement about the MN Scores QRF being an "option" for section seeding before the start of the season. Or at least that's what I remember. Not sure how this all played out but would be interesting to hear from some of those that are "in the know."

I'll have to try searching for that thread on here... And in the interim here are links to QRF:

These look to be going live Dec 5...

***New "Overall" list this year - probably related to the major announcement for section seeding (they adjusted algorithm a bit and approach I believe):
http://minnesota-scores.net/classqrf.ph ... 0&class=-2

Class AA:
http://minnesota-scores.net/classqrf.ph ... 10&class=3

Class A:
http://minnesota-scores.net/classqrf.ph ... 10&class=2

[ghshockeyfan]

Found it:

Interesting development with Section seeding option using these:
http://www.ushsho.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=26886

[Sparlimb]

Found it:

Interesting development with Section seeding option using these:
http://www.ushsho.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=26886

For as questionable as the QRF is, I'm not sure it is the right resource for coaches to be using to seed sections. I know I have my favorite team, but I can't see how they have HM 6th with 3 wins over the top 5 teams they have. And somehow Minnetonka is 3rd after a terrible loss to Wayzata. Can someone explain that? Not saying those teams aren't really good and that you can't make a good argument for Anoka as #1 with only 1 loss. Makes me scratch my head.

[allhoc11]

Found it:

Interesting development with Section seeding option using these:
http://www.ushsho.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=26886

For as questionable as the QRF is, I'm not sure it is the right resource for coaches to be using to seed sections. I know I have my favorite team, but I can't see how they have HM 6th with 3 wins over the top 5 teams they have. And somehow Minnetonka is 2nd after a terrible loss to Wayzata. Can someone explain that?

Girls hockey has not adopted this, coaches vote to seed teams. It will be an interesting discussion topic at the section seeding meetings I imagine.

I've always thought that QRF was less accurate than Krach. The girls game has come a long way, as the underdogs rarely had enough talent to upset the top tier teams, the talent base has increased a lot lately, and there is more of an "any given day" feel in the game. It should make for some exciting section playoffs!

[ghshockeyfan]

Found it:

Interesting development with Section seeding option using these:
http://www.ushsho.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=26886

For as questionable as the QRF is, I'm not sure it is the right resource for coaches to be using to seed sections. I know I have my favorite team, but I can't see how they have HM 6th with 3 wins over the top 5 teams they have. And somehow Minnetonka is 2nd after a terrible loss to Wayzata. Can someone explain that?

Hmm... This is where the lack of transparency for the QRF is problematic for me. As I said in another post, I'll have to ask for the details. I'm biased towards KRACH for obvious reasons - however, I would think even an average of KRACH and QRF would be better than either alone (unless QRF is really that skewed)...

[ghshockeyfan]

Found it:

For as questionable as the QRF is, I'm not sure it is the right resource for coaches to be using to seed sections. I know I have my favorite team, but I can't see how they have HM 6th with 3 wins over the top 5 teams they have. And somehow Minnetonka is 2nd after a terrible loss to Wayzata. Can someone explain that?

Girls hockey has not adopted this, coaches vote to seed teams. It will be an interesting discussion topic at the section seeding meetings I imagine.

I've always thought that QRF was less accurate than Krach. The girls game has come a long way, as the underdogs rarely had enough talent to upset the top tier teams, the talent base has increased a lot lately, and there is more of an "any given day" feel in the game. It should make for some exciting section playoffs!

I thought this was likely the case - still a coach vote. Someone mentioned the posibility that each section could decide if they wanted to vote or use QRF or another alternative (e.g. KRACH).

One thing that could be done is to use KRACH and/or QRF as a sanity check of the coaches' vote - or to help with any tie breaking, etc. I know that there are tie breakers down to a coin toss - but it would be interesting to see how another alternative would assist such as the computerized rankings.

[Sparlimb]

Found it:

For as questionable as the QRF is, I'm not sure it is the right resource for coaches to be using to seed sections. I know I have my favorite team, but I can't see how they have HM 6th with 3 wins over the top 5 teams they have. And somehow Minnetonka is 2nd after a terrible loss to Wayzata. Can someone explain that?

Hmm... This is where the lack of transparency for the QRF is problematic for me. As I said in another post, I'll have to ask for the details. I'm biased towards KRACH for obvious reasons - however, I would think even an average of KRACH and QRF would be better than either alone (unless QRF is really that skewed)...

I see the issue now. If you read (http://minnesota-scores.net/qrf.php) you'll see the explanation. They are really docking a team for playing Class A competition. So HM loses points by beating SSP (who could beat 3/4 of the AA teams), beating Warroad, and losing to Breck (who still might be the best team regardless of class). But HM REALLY gets pounded when teams in their conference are Class A. Which puts a team in a tough spot, because the Classic Suburban is the right conference for HM in every sport but boy's hockey (they are relatively new to success in ladies hockey). As I said earlier, it doesn't really matter because they still get the same chance to win the tournament as every other team. I prefer a system that doesn't differentiate between class, because that truly doesn't change how good any one team is. Here is the classical problem with the QRF if I read it correctly: Hill-Murray would have a higher QRF had they been a Class A team.

[ghshockeyfan]

For as questionable as the QRF is, I'm not sure it is the right resource for coaches to be using to seed sections. I know I have my favorite team, but I can't see how they have HM 6th with 3 wins over the top 5 teams they have. And somehow Minnetonka is 2nd after a terrible loss to Wayzata. Can someone explain that?

Hmm... This is where the lack of transparency for the QRF is problematic for me. As I said in another post, I'll have to ask for the details. I'm biased towards KRACH for obvious reasons - however, I would think even an average of KRACH and QRF would be better than either alone (unless QRF is really that skewed)...

I see the issue now. If you read ( http://minnesota-scores.net/qrf.php ) you'll see the explanation. They are really docking a team for playing Class A competition. So HM loses points by beating SSP (who could beat 3/4 of the AA teams), beating Warroad, and losing to Breck (who still might be the best team regardless of class). But HM REALLY gets pounded when teams in their conference are Class A. Which puts a team in a tough spot, because the Classic Suburban is the right conference for HM in every sport but boy's hockey (they are relatively new to success in ladies hockey). As I said earlier, it doesn't really matter because they still get the same chance to win the tournament as every other team. I prefer a system that doesn't differentiate between class, because that truly doesn't change how good any one team is. Here is the classical problem with the QRF if I read it correctly: Hill-Murray would have a higher QRF had they been a Class A team.

Wow. I thought they dropped that aspect - but apparently not based on the interpretation you provided.

If that's the case - then my KRACH bias might just be justified! This is one thing KRACH does "right" IMHO - it doesn't care about the Class designation of your opponent. It only cares how high they are ranked OVERALL (and whether or not the result is a W/L/T).

[Hansonbrother]

Are we close enough we can start talking section hockey? It's a tough call on #1 in the section as both Roseville and Hill-Murray have two losses and both Roseville losses and one HM loss came during their Christmas tournament with both teams missing players. I think I can make a pretty good argument for Hill-Murray as #1 though. They have a higher strength of schedule for starters. Roseville lost to Minnetonka and South St. Paul, both teams HM has beaten this year (although HM also lost to Tonka once). Roseville tied Edina and HM beat them. So teams in common are: Edina, White Bear Lake, Blake, Minnetonka, South St. Paul, Stillwater and Mahtomedi. In those game, Roseville is 3-2-2 (with 2 games left vs. WBL and Stillwater), Hill-Murray is 8-1 (with a 3rd game vs SSP left to go). So I'm going to go with:

1. Hill-Murray
2. Roseville
3. White Bear Lake
4. Stillwater (better conference record, but worse overall and they (WBL ad Still) tied both times this year.
5. Cretin-Derham Hall
6. Minneapolis Novas
7. Tartan
8. North St. Paul
9. St. Paul Blades

Blast away...

My only argument with this is the fact that you acknowledge the fact that Roseville was missing players off their roster over the holidays. I ask this one question, as I understand other teams lost a player over that span as well. But did they lose two key players? Keep this in mind as you make up your mind.. If Hill would have lost Brandt AND their next best player, would they have faired the same. Go right down the line with the best teams in the state. How good would they be if they were to lose their best two players? When you lose two players that are not only all-state, but US National worthy. Since Flug and Stecklein have been back they are 7-0 with 4 shutouts. Something to ponder. Hill only lost Brandt for 2 games if memory serves correct and finished worse in the Kaposia than Roseville did.

[Sparlimb]

Are we close enough we can start talking section hockey? It's a tough call on #1 in the section as both Roseville and Hill-Murray have two losses and both Roseville losses and one HM loss came during their Christmas tournament with both teams missing players. I think I can make a pretty good argument for Hill-Murray as #1 though. They have a higher strength of schedule for starters. Roseville lost to Minnetonka and South St. Paul, both teams HM has beaten this year (although HM also lost to Tonka once). Roseville tied Edina and HM beat them. So teams in common are: Edina, White Bear Lake, Blake, Minnetonka, South St. Paul, Stillwater and Mahtomedi. In those game, Roseville is 3-2-2 (with 2 games left vs. WBL and Stillwater), Hill-Murray is 8-1 (with a 3rd game vs SSP left to go). So I'm going to go with:

1. Hill-Murray
2. Roseville
3. White Bear Lake
4. Stillwater (better conference record, but worse overall and they (WBL ad Still) tied both times this year.
5. Cretin-Derham Hall
6. Minneapolis Novas
7. Tartan
8. North St. Paul
9. St. Paul Blades

Blast away...

My only argument with this is the fact that you acknowledge the fact that Roseville was missing players off their roster over the holidays. I ask this one question, as I understand other teams lost a player over that span as well. But did they lose two key players? Keep this in mind as you make up your mind.. If Hill would have lost Brandt AND their next best player, would they have faired the same. Go right down the line with the best teams in the state. How good would they be if they were to lose their best two players? When you lose two players that are not only all-state, but US National worthy. Since Flug and Stecklein have been back they are 7-0 with 4 shutouts. Something to ponder. Hill only lost Brandt for 2 games if memory serves correct and finished worse in the Kaposia than Roseville did.

The only thing we can say for sure is that Roseville tied Blake in that tournament and HM beat Blake, but that doesn't prove anything. I'm not arguing HM is necessarily better, just that based on the information we have that they'll likely be seeded #1. They are the heavy favorites to play for the section title then and we'll finally get to see who is better. I did note that after the tournament they (HM) were better off losing their first game as they went 2-1 in the tournament versus Roseville who went 0-2-1. Look forward to another rematch in the finals...

[capitalist]

....the Classic Suburban is the right conference for HM in every sport but boy's hockey (they are relatively new to success in ladies hockey).....

Next year it will be a good fit again in Girl's hockey.

[drop the puck]

....the Classic Suburban is the right conference for HM in every sport but boy's hockey (they are relatively new to success in ladies hockey).....

Next year it will be a good fit again in Girl's hockey.

Sure - losing HB will be a game changer for them in Section 4AA, BUT probably not for Classic Suburban.

Those listed 3rd - 6th on the scoring sheet are 10th grade, 2 9th graders, and an 8th grader. Strong JV team to boot.

HM Varisty team is younger than many teams that they are playing.

[Sparlimb]

....the Classic Suburban is the right conference for HM in every sport but boy's hockey (they are relatively new to success in ladies hockey).....

Next year it will be a good fit again in Girl's hockey.

Not so sure about that. HM's JV lost 2 games this year against a who's who of teams. So they obviously won't be the top dog, but they'll be good and they'll be very good in 2 years.

[drop the puck]

If those 9th and 8th graders on varsity were on JV, then what .

HM boy's and girl's coaching staffs are best in class.

[observer]

That's one good section!

Whatever the seed I like Roseville over HM to get to State. Section semifinals and final will be outstanding games.

[drop the puck]

Stillwater or WBL could always get hot at the right time too. Goal tending and a couple pucks finding the net on the otherside of the ice is all it takes. HM was the #4 seed last year in sections.

[HSRef77]

Stillwater or WBL could always get hot at the right time too. Goal tending and a couple pucks finding the net on the otherside of the ice is all it takes. HM was the #4 seed last year in sections.

This is so true. I don't think the "most talented" team has made it out of this section in a few years. It's always been the team playing the best and goaltending has played a huge part.

[goalzilla]

Very true about the top seeds not making it for the last couple of years. If it hinges on goaltending the nod has to go to Roseville. HM can go the distance if they play as a unit and Brandt plays her game, but they must to keep the puck off the goalie. WB could pull the upset if they click their goalie has the ability to get hot she did it last year...Unfortunately Stillwater isnt a factor, have a couple decent skaters around EZ, but tending is weak. Gut feeling is that eventhough Roseville is probably the best rounded I think it may be HM's year. Gonna be fun to watch.