NAHL Junior A Hockey Rankings 2007-2008

Scores that ratings are based upon, sorted by team. Scores through April 13, 2008 Previous Week's Rankings  New ratings will be posted each week, time permitting.

Maximum Goal Differential = 7 See Rankings Without Considering Goal Differential Below RANK TEAM W L T GmPerf Sched Total Last 5 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 1,St. Louis,_________________________ 47 11 0, 1.7, 7.5, 9.19, 9.19 2,Mahoning Valley,___________________ 38 22 0, 1.0, 7.8, 8.77, 9.69 3,Topeka,____________________________ 42 19 0, 1.9, 6.4, 8.27, 10.30 4,Alpena,____________________________ 30 29 0, 0.1, 7.8, 7.94, 7.93 5,USNTDP,____________________________ 28 31 0, -0.2, 8.0, 7.86, 7.93 6,North Iowa,________________________ 39 21 0, 1.0, 6.7, 7.69, 7.28 7,Traverse City,_____________________ 24 35 0, -0.4, 7.9, 7.48, 7.97 8,Springfield,_______________________ 28 32 0, 0.0, 7.2, 7.26, 5.69 9,Marquette,_________________________ 26 33 0, -0.5, 7.7, 7.16, 5.43 10,Wichita Falls,_____________________ 38 23 0, 0.6, 6.5, 7.11, 5.12 11,Fairbanks,_________________________ 42 19 0, 1.0, 5.9, 6.89, 8.41 12,Fargo-Moorhead,____________________ 27 33 0, 0.2, 6.6, 6.73, 9.60 13,Alexandria,________________________ 31 32 0, -0.0, 6.5, 6.47, 6.44 14,Southern Minnesota,________________ 31 33 0, -0.5, 6.9, 6.38, 6.12 15,Texas,_____________________________ 20 40 0, -0.8, 6.9, 6.09, 3.87 16,Bismarck,__________________________ 21 38 0, -1.1, 6.6, 5.53, 5.34 17,Alaska,____________________________ 16 44 0, -1.9, 6.5, 4.61, 3.09 18,Kenai River,_______________________ 12 45 0, -1.8, 6.4, 4.60, 5.32 Maximum Goal Differential = 1 (i.e. just considers W, L, T and schedule strength) RANK TEAM W L T GmPerf Sched Total Last 5 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 1,St. Louis,_________________________ 47 11 0, 0.6, 7.1, 7.74, 7.74 2,Mahoning Valley,___________________ 38 22 0, 0.3, 7.2, 7.50, 8.25 3,Alpena,____________________________ 30 29 0, 0.0, 7.2, 7.26, 7.13 4,USNTDP,____________________________ 28 31 0, -0.1, 7.3, 7.25, 7.13 5,Topeka,____________________________ 42 19 0, 0.4, 6.9, 7.23, 7.83 6,North Iowa,________________________ 39 21 0, 0.3, 6.9, 7.20, 7.07 7,Wichita Falls,_____________________ 38 23 0, 0.2, 6.9, 7.10, 6.13 8,Traverse City,_____________________ 24 35 0, -0.2, 7.3, 7.08, 7.53 9,Fairbanks,_________________________ 42 19 0, 0.4, 6.7, 7.07, 7.68 10,Marquette,_________________________ 26 33 0, -0.1, 7.2, 7.06, 6.15 11,Springfield,_______________________ 28 32 0, -0.1, 7.1, 7.03, 6.34 12,Southern Minnesota,________________ 31 33 0, -0.0, 6.9, 6.91, 6.64 13,Alexandria,________________________ 31 32 0, -0.0, 6.9, 6.85, 6.76 14,Fargo-Moorhead,____________________ 27 33 0, -0.1, 6.9, 6.79, 7.49 15,Texas,_____________________________ 20 40 0, -0.3, 7.0, 6.64, 6.23 16,Bismarck,__________________________ 21 38 0, -0.3, 6.9, 6.59, 7.15 17,Alaska,____________________________ 16 44 0, -0.5, 6.9, 6.40, 6.07 18,Kenai River,_______________________ 12 45 0, -0.6, 6.9, 6.28, 6.78 The program starts all teams with an equal arbitrary value and then adjusts them all recursively based on game scores until the lowest cumulative error between expected goal differentials and actual goal differentials is reached (convergence). One effect often noticed is that a team's rating can change slightly without playing due to previous opponents playing which affects their rating and their opponent's rating, etc. The Total column is in goal units and the difference in this value between any two teams is the predicted goal differential for a game played at a neutral site between those two teams. It should be noted that these rankings are an average performance value for each team for the entire season, all games are equally weighted, so a team's latest game may make up only 1/40th of a teams rating at the end of the season. Actually, there are two different rankings listed below. The first is as described above with the maximum goal differential used per game set at 7. This ordering ends up similar to CCHP, although differences do arise due to CCHP considering home ice advantage and CCHP not using a goal differential limit. The second ranking sets maximum goal differential at 1, thereby just considering whether the game was won, lost, or tied (and strength of opponent). Note that the Total column in the GD=1 ranking is therefore in win percentage units rather than goal units. A rated .01 ahead of B can be interpreted as saying that if these two teams played exclusively against each other, A's predicted winning percentage is 1 percentage point higher than B's (i.e. A's predicted winning percentage vs. B would be .495, B's against A would be .505). However, since the teams do not play exclusively against the other it is actually a little bit more complex than above as teams can be ranked as high as 1.0 above their average opponent (if they were undefeated and untied) and as low as 1.0 below their average opponent (if they lost all of their games). Not surprisingly, the ordering ends up very similar to KRACH . Links to other ratings: High School Rankings for 25 States  High School National Rankings  New England Prep  Midget Minor AAA  Midget Major AAA  Men's NCAA D1  USHL  NAHL  ACHA College Club

USHSHO.com High School Ice Hockey Forums

Over 4000 registered members, HS message boards for over 30 states + midget, junior, college, and pro hockey forums!
Receive email when this page changes

U.S. High School Hockey Online. All rights reserved.