HighSchoolHockeyForums.com

Sorry for the self promotion, but I gotta get my hockey ratings site out there somehow.

I may be a bit premature in posting and opening this up to everyone, so be aware that my whole project still a work in progress. But hopefully there's some good stuff that you'll enjoy, or maybe want to argue to me about.

https://sites.google.com/site/mnhockeystats/

Remember to take them with a grain of salt, as the season goes on, they become more accurate.

Delano at #4 and Minnetonka at #24??
Gotta be a glitch in your slide rule NumberCruncher

You're right, you need a bigger data set. In time those games will be played.

Pomeroy figures in every possession and his true measure is how much teams score independent of pace.

Delano is so high because of the same reason a statistical evaluation of the top college QBs ever said 4 of the top 6 were from the WAC. Sure, Dan Fouts and Jim McMahon were good, but their stats were so gaudy because of who they played.

A lot of teams would have Delano's record with Delano's schedule. Separation of A and AA would address this. If you want them together it will take more time with more games played between A and AA teams.

I kinda like them.

Especially the team they have at #1.

Good luck with your continued tinkering...I always enjoy looking at all the other rankings.

Litchfield at #12 and Mounds View at #100? Yes, I would like a grain of salt, sir.

Anyways, as Karl said, just do some more tinkering and the outliers should assume their rightful positions on the list.

I don't know the best way to explain it, nor do I understand it completely, but it seems to be more of a rating system (as the site says) than a ranking system.

"relative to the teams they play, this is how they do"

Not sure exactly how to use it practically though. If teams only played teams in their conference, for example, it seems it would be great to judge match ups, and probably rank.

Delano lost. I read your entry on the blog. It was only 3-2, so I don't know if they'll drop.

It seems your system doesn't factor the value of a win enough. Agree that 3-2 is a whole lot different than 1-2? I'm not sure you capture that.

More important than your score relative to how many you usually give up and how many you usually score is I think your goals scored in that game relative to how many they scored in that game.

Sagarin's process makes sense.

Pomeroy's work is predictive because it actually measures team strength in terms of points scored and points allowed per possession. (His blog is great BTW.) I don't see yours as predictive at all.

Thanks for providing the back years. An A team that only plays A teams seems to be way overrated. It works well when they play 10 AA teams, though.

Probably the worst ranking I've ever seen. Litchfield, Delano, Providence Too many others. Why even do this? Brutal.

Not perfect but fun to look at.
Keep it up!!

NumberCruncher wrote:Sorry for the self promotion, but I gotta get my hockey ratings site out there somehow.

I may be a bit premature in posting and opening this up to everyone, so be aware that my whole project still a work in progress. But hopefully there's some good stuff that you'll enjoy, or maybe want to argue to me about.

https://sites.google.com/site/mnhockeystats/

Remember to take them with a grain of salt, as the season goes on, they become more accurate.

I think the one thing you could add to make these rankings more accurate is some kind of a ranking system for the overall strength of the conference and teams with in. Then use that as a multipler. For example, Lake would be one of the strongest conference/teams would have the highest ranking/highest multipler. Wright County conference/teams would be much lower.

Not sure how one would handle the independents though..

picking teams out of a hat would be better

CB00 wrote:Probably the worst ranking I've ever seen. Litchfield, Delano, Providence Too many others. Why even do this? Brutal.

It is not a ranking system, it is a rating system, which is different.

I think if it also had a conference page, that would help.

HShockeywatcher wrote:

CB00 wrote:Probably the worst ranking I've ever seen. Litchfield, Delano, Providence Too many others. Why even do this? Brutal.

It is not a ranking system, it is a rating system, which is different.

I think if it also had a conference page, that would help.

OK, probably the worst rating system I've ever seen. Enough said.

It says page under construction...I cant see the ratings.

bubblehockey27 wrote:It says page under construction...I cant see the ratings.

Last time I saw those rankings they were off, Moose Lake was #8 or something. The constructor needed/needs to fix the formula.

Should work on the BCS too... (or get rid of it!!!)

I've got another good site for ratings & rankings.