HighSchoolHockeyForums.com

Final for the year.

Rank Team SoS
1 Eden Prairie 0.643
2 Minnetonka 0.632
3 Wayzata 0.625
4 Edina 0.617
5 Grand Rapids 0.616
6 Hill-Murray 0.604
7 Moorhead 0.600
8 Holy Family 0.595
9 St. Thomas Academy 0.594
10 Roseau 0.594
11 Duluth Marshall 0.583
12 Duluth East 0.583
13 Lakeville North 0.582
14 Brainerd 0.577
15 Prior Lake 0.571
16 Bemidji 0.570
17 Breck 0.567
18 Benilde-St. Margaret's 0.565
19 Burnsville 0.564
20 Lakeville South 0.563
21 Maple Grove 0.562
22 Centennial 0.562
23 Blaine 0.559
24 St. Cloud Cathedral 0.558
25 Orono 0.557

Thanks for posting this. Good stuff.

Is strength of schedule calculated by combining the winning percentages of all opponents?

Congratulations on playing the toughest schedules in the state. That’s awesome! The state of hockey should have a separate state tournament just for these squads.

Already in place for the top 4 - it's called the Lake Conference

kniven wrote: The state of hockey should have a separate state tournament just for these squads.

Why?

It is awesome that teams can find the appropriate level of competition to ensure competitive games.

Would rather see Strength of Non Conference schedule. Would tell a lot more about who is seeking tough competition and who is coasting on bye.

And yes, I get it, that playing in the Lake makes you look for some breaks in the schedule. I'm more talking about the teams in the SEC, SSC, and conferences that aren't stacked. For instance, WBL isn't even listed in the top 25 of this post, but I bet their Non Conference schedule is pretty high.

I am trying to find STMA, St. Cloud, Rogers and Buffalo but couldn't find them. I did see Moorhead, Brainerd, Bemidji and Roseau though.

Traxler wrote:Is strength of schedule calculated by combining the winning percentages of all opponents?

These appear to be RPI strength of schedule figures. RPI SOS is calculated by using 2/3 of opponents’ winning percentages and 1/3 of the winning percentages of the opponents of your opponents. It is a fairly simplistic metric, and people have harped on the NCAA for years for using it as a tournament selection criterion in many sports. (Overall RPI is 75% SOS and 25% of a team’s own winning percentage.)

For comparison, here are the PageStat SOS ratings. Fairly similar, but the Class A teams notably fare worse in this system.

Stang5280 wrote:

Traxler wrote:Is strength of schedule calculated by combining the winning percentages of all opponents?

These appear to be RPI strength of schedule figures. RPI SOS is calculated by using 2/3 of opponents’ winning percentages and 1/3 of the winning percentages of the opponents of your opponents. It is a fairly simplistic metric, and people have harped on the NCAA for years for using it as a tournament selection criterion in many sports. (Overall RPI is 75% SOS and 25% of a team’s own winning percentage.)

For comparison, here are the PageStat SOS ratings. Fairly similar, but the Class A teams notably fare worse in this system.

Thanks for this explanation. You even taught me something useful about the RPI that I didn’t know.

Traxler wrote:

Stang5280 wrote:

Traxler wrote:Is strength of schedule calculated by combining the winning percentages of all opponents?

These appear to be RPI strength of schedule figures. RPI SOS is calculated by using 2/3 of opponents’ winning percentages and 1/3 of the winning percentages of the opponents of your opponents. It is a fairly simplistic metric, and people have harped on the NCAA for years for using it as a tournament selection criterion in many sports. (Overall RPI is 75% SOS and 25% of a team’s own winning percentage.)

For comparison, here are the PageStat SOS ratings. Fairly similar, but the Class A teams notably fare worse in this system.

Thanks for this explanation. You even taught me something useful about the RPI that I didn’t know.

De nada. Here is the link to Victor’s full spreadsheet for those who may be interested in further info: MN HS Hockey RPI. Click on the “RPI Data” link for the full SOS rankings.

As noted on the front page explanation, these rankings do not distinguish between A and AA opponents, and merely rank SOS according to the records of opposition. If you scroll further down the SOS list, you begin to see some wonky things, like Hibbing being ahead of Elk River, and Sartell being ahead of Cloquet. So these rankings are primarily useful in comparing the schedules of teams who play nearly a full A or AA slate of games. Once you get a significant number of interclass games, the system begins to fall apart. (The winning percentage component also falls down in this respect when ranking teams using the full RPI - Monticello and North Branch are top ten A teams, for example.) it is really more a fun data crunching exercise than anything.