HighSchoolHockeyForums.com

Here are the eight teams that will play in the 2A Tournament:

1AA Lakeville North
2AA Edina
3AA Eagan
4AA Roseville
5AA Mounds View
6AA Minnetonka
7AA Grand Rapids/Greenway
8AA Roseau

I think it's pretty much a given that Roseville, Minnetonka and Edina will get seeded, possibly in that order 1 to 3, but which team will get the 4th seed? IMO it will probably come down to Eagan or Lakeville North, but what does everyone else think?

Mounds View could be in there for the 4th spot consideration. My guess is that you are right in that it is most likely between LV N and Eagan for the 4th seed though.

Didn't Moundsview have the tougher route to get there than either LN or Eagan? I'd give it to the Mustangs!

ghshockeyfan wrote:Mounds View could be in there for the 4th spot consideration. My guess is that you are right in that it is most likely between LV N and Eagan for the 4th seed though.

ghs, looking forward to seeing your updated KRACH to get a better feel for this. Do you think the coaches who vote will pay attention to either KRACH or QRF? It's a pretty big deal who that 4th team is, because if you're one of the four teams that is NOT seeded you would likely have a much tougher game right off the bat in the quarterfinals. That said, no matter if you're seeded or not, you still have to win all three games to be crowned State Champion!

No idea if we'll have an updated QRF from MN Scores before the seeding.

The latest - not taking into account the games tonight that should impact it to some degree state the following:

1 Benilde-St. Margaret's (23-3-1) 133.5
2 Minnetonka (21-5-1) 130.9
3 Hill-Murray (25-2) 128.6
4 Edina (17-4-6) 128.3
5 Anoka (22-3-2) 125.3
6 Lakeville North (22-5-1) 122.5
7 Roseville (23-2-2) 121.1
8 Eagan (22-3-3) 116.9
9 Elk River/Zimmerman (20-4-3) 116.1
10 Lakeville South (21-6-1) 114.4
11 Mounds View (20-6-1) 108.2
12 Andover (17-10) 102.8
13 White Bear Lake (17-6-4) 101.3
14 Roseau (18-6-3) 100.9
15 North Wright County (17-8-2) 98.7
16 Hopkins (16-10-1) 97.0
17 Grand Rapids/Greenway (18-7-3) 96.6


KRACH - Including the games from Fri night:

CLASS AA RANKING (AS OF 2/18/2012 12:44:18 AM)
RK TEAM (LPH Rank as of 02/15) RECORD RATING

1 Hill-Murray (1) 25-3-0 854.648
2 Benilde-St. Margaret's (2) 23-3-1 574.781
3 Minnetonka (3) 22-5-1 559.301
4 Roseville (4) 24-2-2 476.144
5 Anoka (6) 22-3-2 284.492
6 Edina (5) 18-4-6 280.272
7 Lakeville North (8 ) 22-5-1 260.000
8 Eagan (9) 22-3-3 194.493
9 Lakeville South (10) 21-6-1 170.943
10 Elk River/Zimmerman (7) 20-4-3 156.177
11 Mounds View (11) 21-6-1 130.188
12 White Bear Lake (12) 17-6-4 96.023
13 Andover (13) 17-10-0 86.738
14 Stillwater Area (14) 16-9-2 77.458
15 Hopkins (15) 16-10-1 74.535
16 Roseau (20) 19-6-3 72.843
17 Irondale (17) 18-5-2 65.142
18 Chaska/Chanhassen (16) 20-7-1 56.284
19 Blaine (18 ) 14-11-3 55.015
20 Centennial 14-10-2 51.797
21 Grand Rapids/Greenway (19) 18-7-3 51.427


LPH 2/15:

1 HILL-MURRAY
2 Benilde-St. Margaret's
3 Minnetonka
4 Roseville Area
5 Edina
6 Anoka
7 Elk River/Zimmerman
8 Lakeville North
9 Eagan
10 Lakeville South
11 Mounds View
12 White Bear Lake
13 Andover
14 Stillwater Area
15 Hopkins
16 Chaska/Chanhassen
17 Irondale
18 Blaine
19 Grand Rapids/Greenway
20 Roseau

Based on KRACH including Fri night results:

http://www.bgoski.com/KRACH_AA_20120218.htm

The seeding would be as follows:

1 - 6AA Minnetonka
2 - 4AA Roseville
3 - 2AA Edina
4 - 1AA Lakeville North
5 - 3AA Eagan
6 - 5AA Mounds View
7 - 8AA Roseau
8 - 7AA Grand Rapids/Greenway

These two are very close - essentially even:
4 - 1AA Lakeville North
5 - 3AA Eagan

And 6 - 5AA Mounds View is not that far behind...

I assume they'll instead look at the common seeding criteria including #1 head-to-head and #2 common opponents to determine seeding of the top 4. I believe they still only seed the top 4.

1-3 looks fairly obvious, looks like Eagan beat Lakeville North twice so you would think they would get the nod at #4.

This should be fairly simple...Minnetonka has to be number 1, Roseville should be number 2, and Edina number 3...after that who knows. Eagan beat Lakeville N twice throughout the season, but finished one point behind LN in the standings. If its me. I would put Mounds View fourth.

Wait just a minute ghshockeyfan.
If KRACH is based on who has beaten whom, then aren't your top 4 ranks failing miserably?
And if it's geared toward figuring who would beat whom in a future matchup, then it has failed just as miserably......
And it really penalizes teams that have 2, that's right, not 1 but 2, girls who play on the USA freakin' under 18 team.
The real problem with KRACH is that you are asked to not believe your own eyes......
If any coaches use either of these rankings for anything they should have their heads examined.

capitalist wrote:Wait just a minute ghshockeyfan.
If KRACH is based on who has beaten whom, then aren't your top 4 ranks failing miserably?
And if it's geared toward figuring who would beat whom in a future matchup, then it has failed just as miserably......
And it really penalizes teams that have 2, that's right, not 1 but 2, girls who play on the USA freakin' under 18 team.
The real problem with KRACH is that you are asked to not believe your own eyes......
If any coaches use either of these rankings for anything they should have their heads examined.

capitalist, you must not have noticed ghshockey fan's last sentence in his post:

"I assume they'll instead look at the common seeding criteria including #1 head-to-head and #2 common opponents to determine seeding of the top 4. I believe they still only seed the top 4."

I recall the announcement by minnesotascores.net at the beginning of the season that coaches in any of the sections COULD decide to use QRF for section seeding purposes (which they apparently didn't do) but I don't remember anything being said about state tournament seeding. I assume that the coaches will analyze the teams just like ghshockey fan assumes, in the usual way just like they've done for the past few years...

I believe the only question that remains is, which team will get that No. 4 seed?

Oh wow - this was a good one. I was asked if anyone flipped-out yet today about KRACH due to "upsets." And here we go...

I'll take this one line-by-line...

capitalist wrote:Wait just a minute ghshockeyfan.

OK - let's all take a deep breath.

capitalist wrote:If KRACH is based on who has beaten whom, then aren't your top 4 ranks failing miserably?

One game does not a season make, "upsets" happen, and have you checked LPH or QRF? Here's the detail on how KRACH works:
1) http://www.mngirlshockeyhub.com/page/sh ... h-rankings
2) http://www.mscs.dal.ca/~butler/krachexp.htm

capitalist wrote:And if it's geared toward figuring who would beat whom in a future matchup, then it has failed just as miserably......

It gives odds. As we all know teams beat odds from time-to-time. And re-read the prior line above.

capitalist wrote:And it really penalizes teams that have 2, that's right, not 1 but 2, girls who play on the USA freakin' under 18 team.

Yep, built that into the algorithm just to target Roseville. Are you serious right now?

capitalist wrote:The real problem with KRACH is that you are asked to not believe your own eyes......

The real problem with any ranking is that you need to understand how it works (read the details linked above). KRACH is not asking you to "not believe your own eyes." Other rankings aren't either. KRACH is using cold hard results over the course of an entire season to rank teams. Again, one game does not a season make. "Upsets" happen.

capitalist wrote:If any coaches use either of these rankings for anything they should have their heads examined.

Not quite sure why any coaches would be using these rankings to help them coach or "anything." Do you know of any coaches that are using these rankings for something?

OK I'm busted. I flipped out.
What did it was seeing the final ranking with HM and BSM still #1 and #2.

From the hockey hub site:
All games Thursday at Xcel Energy Center

11 a.m./ 2 seed Roseville (24-2-2) vs. Grand Rapids/Greenway (18-7-3)
1 p.m./ 3 seed Edina (18-4-6) vs. Mounds View (21-6-1)
6 p.m./ 1 seed Minnetonka (22-5-1) vs. Eagan (22-3-3)
8 p.m./ 4 seed Lakeville North (22-5-1) vs. Roseau (19-6-3)

capitalist wrote:OK I'm busted. I flipped out.
What did it was seeing the final ranking with HM and BSM still #1 and #2.

I totally understand. I was very curious to see how KRACH (and eventually QRF/LPH) would handle the recent results (that's why I was running this at 1AM on a Sat).

I understand that it really comes down to the body of work for these teams over the course of the entire season.

KRACH, at this point, just doesn't see the entire season results putting RV &/or Tonka over HM &/or BSM after the recent "upsets." Hats off to RV & Tonka. Another shining example of why we play the games on the ice and not on paper, by rankings, or computers.

Interesting twist - no private teams in AA tourney this year. Class A Breck is the only one in either tourney.

capitalist wrote:What did it was seeing the final ranking with HM and BSM still #1 and #2.

I know this has no bearing on anything, but it's kind of odd that HM and BSM outshot Roseville and Minnetonka by similar margins:

HM 29-16
BSM 26-15

I think all four of these teams are pretty even with one another, but as we know what really matters is which team scores more goals than the other team on the particular day that they play the section final.

OK how about this one? You say that one game can't change the rankings. I'll say that one game had a huge influence on the way the rankings went all year--Anoka beating Mtka in the first game of the season. Anoka's points got a big boost I suppose, and that filtered down to each team who beat or tied Anoka in the NWS conference, and then to each team who beat a team who beat or tied Anoka. Aside from Anoka beating Eagan, the NWS didn't have one significant non-conference win the rest of the year, yet 5 of their teams were ranked in your top 20. That league had parity, not strength, yet one game changed it all.
And yes, I'm just being argumentative now.

MNHockeyFan wrote:

capitalist wrote:What did it was seeing the final ranking with HM and BSM still #1 and #2.

I know this has no bearing on anything, but it's kind of odd that HM and BSM outshot Roseville and Minnetonka by similar margins:

HM 29-16
BSM 26-15

I think all four of these teams are pretty even with one another, but as we know what really matters is which team scores more goals than the other team on the particular day that they play the section final.

Shots on goal are deceiving. Roseville had 4 one-on-zero chances vs. HM--two goals, one loud clanging crossbar, and one shot wide. HM had no such chances on Roseville. They had one wild flurry on a power play in the 3rd period which could have been considered a good scoring chance, but almost all the HM shots were handleable, including those few from the great HB, especially by a great goalie like Allen. I wonder if the Mtka-BSM game was "similar". Knowing Minnetonka's D, I'd bet it was.

But yes, all 4 of those teams are very even. Too bad they all couldn't be at the X next week.

capitalist wrote:I wonder if the Mtka-BSM game was "similar". Knowing Minnetonka's D, I'd bet it was.

I wasn't there, but from the article in the Star Tribune this morning it doesn't appear that way:

"Benilde-St. Margaret's (21-3) won the shots battle 26-14 and had a hand in far more scoring chances throughout the game thanks to better team speed. But Rossman was there in the clutch, most notably on a sliding left-leg save with 5 minutes left in the second period and a blocker-pad stop on a breakaway by BSM's Caitlin Reilly in the early minutes of the third."

http://www.mngirlshockeyhub.com/news_ar ... _id=115187

Hey congrats to Roseville, I am glad they won but to say shots were deceiving? Roseville did have 4 or 5 "open" chances but that's all they had. And Hill-Murray had a heck of alot more than a flurry in the 3rd period. Allen made some huge saves in the first and also in the 2nd period. Hill-Murray outshot Roseville 14-3 in the 2nd period. Roseville was playing an extremely conservative game and did not put much if any pressure on Hill-Murray most of the game. I was a bit surprised at how Roseville decided to shadow Brandt with Brodt as it seemed to take away all Roseville's offense. But, they did win 4-1 and Brandt only got one goal so it's hard to argue with that.

Enrollments per the State HS League website:

2 seed Roseville -- 1840
Grand Rapids/Greenway -- 947 + 263 = 1210
3 seed Edina -- 2436
Mounds View -- 1671
1 seed Minnetonka -- 2750
Eagan -- 2147
4 seed Lakeville North -- 1711
Roseau -- 374

Well as it turned out each of the four seeded teams won their quarterfinal game. Here is a recap of the games:

Lightning lose upset bid
http://www.mngirlshockeyhub.com/news_ar ... _id=113956

Edina edges Mounds View
http://www.mngirlshockeyhub.com/news_ar ... _id=113956

Patient Minnetonka stops Eagan
http://www.mngirlshockeyhub.com/news_ar ... _id=113956

Lakeville North shuts out Roseau
http://www.mngirlshockeyhub.com/news_ar ... _id=113956

Looks like the title of this thread for 2013 will need to be changed to:

"Class AA State Tournament - which five teams will be seeded?"

http://www.startribune.com/sports/158510985.html

Interesting, although I don't know what practically will change. So seed #4 comes out "worst" in that they must play seed #5 in the first game instead of having a 75% chance in the past of not playing seed #5, but that probably is more fair for all teams concerned.

I'd much rather that teams are seeded prior to playing at State and place them in sections so you don't have #1 and #2 in the state playing each other in Section 6 Finals, for example, which may happen next year, and have #15 vs. #19 playing in some other Section Final. Yes, I understand the lure of the underdog, but State missed out on Benilde and H-M last year due to the the makeup of the current system and they'll likely miss out on a least 1 top-5 team again if things don't change, imho.

After all that, at least it's a step in the right direction.

sinbin wrote: I'd much rather that teams are seeded prior to playing at State and place them in sections so you don't have #1 and #2 in the state playing each other in Section 6 Finals, for example, which may happen next year, and have #15 vs. #19 playing in some other Section Final. Yes, I understand the lure of the underdog, but State missed out on Benilde and H-M last year due to the the makeup of the current system and they'll likely miss out on a least 1 top-5 team again if things don't change, imho.

I have said this for many years, it seems odd to me that we worry about seeding the teams at state to try to get the top two teams in the tournament to the championship game, when we don't care if the top 8 teams in the state have an equal chance to make the tourney. It has always seemed backwards to me, but I thought I was alone in this!