Scores that ratings are based upon, sorted by team. Scores through March 22, 2008 Previous 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,Omaha,_____________________________ 39 17 0, 1.3, 6.8, 8.14, 5.66 2,Cedar Rapids,______________________ 32 22 0, 0.9, 6.9, 7.75, 8.60 3,Indiana,___________________________ 36 18 0, 0.5, 7.0, 7.46, 6.12 4,Sioux Falls,_______________________ 31 23 0, 0.5, 7.0, 7.45, 8.39 5,Lincoln,___________________________ 28 27 0, 0.4, 7.0, 7.36, 6.27 6,Chicago,___________________________ 29 25 0, 0.4, 7.0, 7.33, 8.65 7,Waterloo,__________________________ 32 22 0, 0.3, 7.0, 7.26, 9.89 8,Sioux City,________________________ 30 24 0, 0.2, 7.0, 7.17, 6.56 9,Ohio,______________________________ 22 31 0, -0.5, 7.0, 6.47, 6.79 10,Tri-City,__________________________ 22 33 0, -0.9, 7.1, 6.20, 5.30 11,Des Moines,________________________ 13 41 0, -1.4, 7.1, 5.79, 6.07 12,Green Bay,_________________________ 12 43 0, -1.5, 7.1, 5.60, 7.11 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,Omaha,_____________________________ 39 17 0, 0.4, 6.9, 7.34, 6.66 2,Indiana,___________________________ 36 18 0, 0.3, 7.0, 7.30, 6.68 3,Waterloo,__________________________ 32 22 0, 0.2, 7.0, 7.17, 7.69 4,Cedar Rapids,______________________ 32 22 0, 0.2, 7.0, 7.16, 7.56 5,Sioux Falls,_______________________ 31 23 0, 0.1, 7.0, 7.13, 8.00 6,Sioux City,________________________ 30 24 0, 0.1, 7.0, 7.10, 7.04 7,Chicago,___________________________ 29 25 0, 0.1, 7.0, 7.08, 7.93 8,Lincoln,___________________________ 28 27 0, 0.0, 7.0, 7.03, 6.40 9,Ohio,______________________________ 22 31 0, -0.2, 7.0, 6.84, 6.82 10,Tri-City,__________________________ 22 33 0, -0.2, 7.0, 6.82, 6.39 11,Des Moines,________________________ 13 41 0, -0.5, 7.0, 6.53, 6.44 12,Green Bay,_________________________ 12 43 0, -0.6, 7.1, 6.50, 6.58 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 ClubUSHSHO.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