This page describes the methodology for this year's *TBRW? Predictions*.
As always, if you catch an error please contact the humble author.

RS is each team's points in the prior ECAC regular season:

RS | ||

Brown | 21 | |

Clarkson | 28 | |

Colgate | 17 | |

Cornell | 30 | |

Dartmouth | 23 | |

Harvard | 28 | |

Princeton | 18 | |

Quinnipiac | 30 | |

RPI | 16 | |

SLU | 8 | |

Union | 22 | |

Yale | 23 |

PS is the number of upset (lower seed) advances (+1) or eliminations (-1) in the previous season's ECAC tournament. The consolation game is ignored.

The upsets in the last season's ECAC tournament were:

*#8 Brown upset #1 Quinnipiac**#3 Clarkson upset #2 Cornell*

PS | ||

Brown | +1 | |

Clarkson | +1 | |

Colgate | 0 | |

Cornell | -1 | |

Dartmouth | 0 | |

Harvard | 0 | |

Princeton | 0 | |

Quinnipiac | -1 | |

RPI | 0 | |

SLU | 0 | |

Union | 0 | |

Yale | 0 |

Imp is the difference in points gained in the second half (games 12-22) minus the first half (games 1-11) of the prior ECAC regular season, divided by 2, rounded down. A positive Imp indicates the team had a better second half:

Pts | 2nd ½ | 1st ½ | Diff | Imp | ||

Brown | 21 | 12 | 9 | +3 | +1 | |

Clarkson | 28 | 14 | 14 | 0 | 0 | |

Colgate | 17 | 9 | 8 | +1 | 0 | |

Cornell | 30 | 13 | 17 | -4 | -2 | |

Dartmouth | 23 | 10 | 13 | -3 | -1 | |

Harvard | 28 | 18 | 10 | +8 | +4 | |

Princeton | 18 | 9 | 9 | 0 | 0 | |

Quinnipiac | 30 | 15 | 15 | 0 | 0 | |

RPI | 16 | 8 | 8 | 0 | 0 | |

SLU | 8 | 5 | 3 | +2 | +1 | |

Union | 22 | 11 | 11 | 0 | 0 | |

Yale | 23 | 8 | 15 | -7 | -3 |

The returning points ratio is the percentage of prior year's points
not lost to graduation or early departure. A player who left *during*
the prior year is counted as a departure. The following non-seniors are known
not to
be returning:

Clarkson | Nico Sturm | 45 pts |

Clarkson | Jake Kielly | 1 pt |

Dartmouth | Charley Michalowski | 0 pts |

Harvard | Adam Fox | 48 pts |

Harvard | Josh Marino | 11 pts |

Quinnipiac | Borgan Rafferty | 24 pts |

Quinnipiac | Andrew Shortridge | 3 pts |

Union | Liam Morgan | 26 pts |

RP% = Points Returning / Total Points from Prior Season

RP% | ||

Brown | .7179 | |

Clarkson | .7278 | |

Colgate | .8255 | |

Cornell | .7211 | |

Dartmouth | .7210 | |

Harvard | .6711 | |

Princeton | .4367 | |

Quinnipiac | .6226 | |

RPI | .8883 | |

SLU | .8867 | |

Union | .4829 | |

Yale | .6991 |

Backup data: here

Returning Awardees is the net return (or loss) of ECAC First Team, POTY, and ROTY awards. The potential repetition of a player (e.g., First Team and POTY) is intentional to allow for the impact of unusually talented players.

The prior ECAC awardees were:

Award | Name | Team | Status |

ECAC F | Barron | Cornell | Return |

ECAC F | Sturm | Clarkson | Depart |

ECAC F | Snively | Yale | Depart |

ECAC F | Kuffner | Princeton | Depart |

ECAC D | Fox | Harvard | Depart |

ECAC D | Priskie | Quinnipiac | Depart |

ECAC G | Shortridge | Quinnipiac | Depart |

POTY | Fox | Harvard | Depart |

ROTY | Dornbach | Harvard | Return |

The calculation: add one point for each returning awardee while subtracting one for each departure:

Return | Depart | RA | ||

Brown | 0 | 0 | 0 | |

Clarkson | 0 | 1 | -1 | |

Colgate | 0 | 0 | 0 | |

Cornell | 1 | 0 | +1 | |

Dartmouth | 0 | 0 | 0 | |

Harvard | 1 | 2 | -1 | |

Princeton | 0 | 1 | -1 | |

Quinnipiac | 0 | 2 | -2 | |

RPI | 0 | 0 | 0 | |

SLU | 0 | 0 | 0 | |

Union | 0 | 0 | 0 | |

Yale | 0 | 1 | -1 |

Avg10 measures traditional program strength, by taking the team's mean number of Points over the prior 10 seasons.

Brn | Clk | Cgt | Cor | Drt | Hvd | Prn | Qpc | RPI | SLU | Uni | Yal | ||

2010 | 16 | 11 | 26 | 31 | 17 | 17 | 18 | 22 | 23 | 23 | 28 | 32 | |

2011 | 18 | 19 | 11 | 24 | 26 | 15 | 24 | 19 | 24 | 13 | 36 | 35 | |

2012 | 14 | 22 | 23 | 30 | 19 | 25 | 16 | 23 | 17 | 21 | 32 | 22 | |

2013 | 20 | 19 | 15 | 19 | 22 | 14 | 20 | 37 | 27 | 22 | 24 | 25 | |

2014 | 17 | 24 | 29 | 24 | 16 | 16 | 8 | 28 | 21 | 18 | 37 | 24 | |

2015 | 13 | 19 | 26 | 22 | 26 | 25 | 6 | 35 | 18 | 29 | 17 | 28 | |

2016 | 12 | 23 | 14 | 22 | 22 | 28 | 9 | 37 | 23 | 25 | 18 | 31 | |

2017 | 7 | 23 | 15 | 31 | 16 | 34 | 19 | 27 | 12 | 28 | 34 | 18 | |

2018 | 15 | 29 | 23 | 36 | 23 | 25 | 22 | 20 | 10 | 7 | 33 | 21 | |

2019 | 21 | 28 | 17 | 30 | 23 | 28 | 18 | 30 | 16 | 8 | 22 | 23 | |

Pts | 153 | 217 | 199 | 269 | 210 | 227 | 160 | 278 | 191 | 194 | 281 | 259 | |

Avg10 | 15.3 | 21.7 | 19.9 | 26.9 | 21.0 | 22.7 | 16.0 | 27.8 | 19.1 | 19.4 | 28.1 | 25.9 |

Summary:

Avg10 | ||

Brown | 15.3 | |

Clarkson | 21.7 | |

Colgate | 19.9 | |

Cornell | 26.9 | |

Dartmouth | 21.0 | |

Harvard | 22.7 | |

Princeton | 16.0 | |

Quinnipiac | 27.8 | |

RPI | 19.1 | |

SLU | 19.4 | |

Union | 28.1 | |

Yale | 25.9 |

Now we put everything together to predict the final standings. This is a function of both the strength of returning players and an estimate of the strength of the new players.

Firstly, we want a measure of total returning strength, both the quality of the prior roster and its quantity -- the percentage of that roster returning.

**Prior**, the quality, is the sum of RS, PS, Imp, and RA.

RP%, the quantity, is simply carried down from above.

**Past, **the** **relative measure of returning
strength, is the product of Prior and RP%.

RS | PS | Imp | Aw | Prior | RP% | Past | ||

Brown | 21 | +1 | +1 | 0 | 23 | .7179 | 16.5117 | |

Clarkson | 28 | +1 | 0 | -1 | 28 | .7278 | 20.3784 | |

Colgate | 17 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 17 | .8255 | 14.0335 | |

Cornell | 30 | -1 | -2 | +1 | 28 | .7211 | 20.1908 | |

Dartmouth | 23 | 0 | -1 | 0 | 22 | .7210 | 15.8620 | |

Harvard | 28 | 0 | +4 | -1 | 31 | .6711 | 20.8041 | |

Princeton | 18 | 0 | 0 | -1 | 17 | .4367 | 7.4239 | |

Quinnipiac | 30 | -1 | 0 | -2 | 27 | .6226 | 16.8102 | |

RPI | 16 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 16 | .8883 | 14.2128 | |

SLU | 8 | 0 | +1 | 0 | 9 | .8867 | 7.9803 | |

Union | 22 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 22 | .4829 | 10.6238 | |

Yale | 23 | 0 | -3 | -1 | 19 | .6991 | 13.2829 |

Secondly, we want to make the same two estimates for the incoming players: their quality and quantity.

Avg10 above, carried down.

**Inc%**, the estimate of quantity, is simply 1 - RP%.

**Fut, **the** **relative estimate of incoming
strength, is the product of Avg10 and Inc%.

Avg10 | Inc% | Fut | ||

Brown | 15.3 | .2821 | 4.3161 | |

Clarkson | 21.7 | .2722 | 5.9067 | |

Colgate | 19.9 | .1745 | 3.4726 | |

Cornell | 26.9 | .2789 | 7.5024 | |

Dartmouth | 21.0 | .2790 | 5.8590 | |

Harvard | 22.7 | .3289 | 7.4660 | |

Princeton | 16.0 | .5633 | 9.0128 | |

Quinnipiac | 27.8 | .3774 | 10.4917 | |

RPI | 19.1 | .1117 | 2.1335 | |

SLU | 19.4 | .1133 | 2.1980 | |

Union | 28.1 | .5171 | 14.5305 | |

Yale | 25.9 | .3009 | 7.7933 |

All that's left to do is add Past and Fut together (**Net**),
normalize so teams will have a mean of
22 points (**Norm **= 22 - *mean of Net*), yielding predicted RS (**Nieu**),
rounded to **Pts**
and the ECAC standing (**Pred**).

Total:

Past | Fut | Net | Norm | Nieu | Pts | Pred | ||

Brown | 16.5117 | 4.3161 | 20.8278 | +.4336 | 21.2614 | 21 | 8 | |

Clarkson | 20.3784 | 5.9067 | 26.2851 | +.4336 | 26.7187 | 27 | 4 | |

Colgate | 14.0335 | 3.4726 | 17.5060 | +.4336 | 17.9396 | 18 | 9 | |

Cornell | 20.1908 | 7.5024 | 27.6932 | +.4336 | 28.1268 | 28 | 2 | |

Dartmouth | 15.8620 | 5.8590 | 21.7210 | +.4336 | 22.1546 | 22 | 6 | |

Harvard | 20.8041 | 7.4660 | 28.2701 | +.4336 | 28.7037 | 29 | 1 | |

Princeton | 7.4239 | 9.0128 | 16.4367 | +.4336 | 16.8706 | 17 | 10 | |

Quinnipiac | 16.8102 | 10.4917 | 27.3019 | +.4336 | 27.7355 | 28 | 3 | |

RPI | 14.2128 | 2.1335 | 16.3462 | +.4336 | 16.7798 | 17 | 11 | |

SLU | 7.9803 | 2.1980 | 10.1783 | +.4336 | 10.6119 | 11 | 12 | |

Union | 10.6238 | 14.5305 | 25.1543 | +.4336 | 25.5879 | 25 | 5 | |

Yale | 13.2829 | 7.7933 | 21.0762 | +.4336 | 21.5098 | 21 | 7 |