Sioux have an opportunity to make PWR gains and position themselves for NCAA tournament berth

The Sioux have an opportunity to make a move in the PairWise Rankings (PWR) and toward an NCAA tournament selection.

Last weekend, a sweep was necessary just to maintain UND’s ranking of #14. The Sioux did sweep and rose modestly to #13.

This weekend, a sweep could easily push UND up a couple more spots into the relative safety of a #10-#12 ranking.

Any outcome in which UND fails to advance, whether winning a single game or none, would leave UND on the bubble for the NCAA tournament. The #14 ranked team stands a fair chance of making the tournament — it does so if 2 or fewer teams outside the top 16 gets autobids. However, UND’s ranking would be quite likely to move a slot or two while the Sioux watched the Final Five from home, leaving UND’s destiny out of its hands.

Likelihood of UND having a particular PWR ranking (or higher) on March 12, based on UND’s performance
0-2-0 1-2-0 2-1-0 2-0-0
1 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
2 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
3 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
4 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
5 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.01%
6 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.11%
7 0.00% 0.00% 0.02% 0.96%
8 0.00% 0.00% 0.26% 5.21%
9 0.00% 0.00% 2.05% 18.12%
10 0.00% 0.00% 10.88% 42.71%
11 0.00% 0.23% 39.66% 75.41%
12 0.86% 3.74% 80.26% 95.90%
13 7.46% 20.22% 96.92% 99.99%
14 31.13% 54.48% 99.99% 100.00%
15 64.52% 83.66% 100.00% 100.00%
16 89.11% 97.21% 100.00% 100.00%
17 98.74% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
18 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
19 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
20 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%

It doesn’t show up in the table (not enough decimal places), but there is about a 1/1,000,000 scenario in which UND comes out of the weekend #4 in the PWR and positioned for a 1 seed. The lowest likely rank, if swept, is #19.

Who else to watch this weekend

The two separate lists are the series UND cares most about if the Sioux win (outcomes that can flip other comparisons in UND’s favor) and the series that UND cares most about if the Sioux lose (outcomes that can flip comparisons away from UND).

If UND wins:

  • Wisconsin over Denver (win series)
  • Rensselaer over Union (one game if UND sweeps, series if UND goes 2-1)
  • Alaska Anchorage over Minnesota (win series)
  • Merrimack over Maine (win series if UND sweeps, not as important if UND goes 2-1)

If UND loses:

  • Maine over Merrimack (win series)
  • Michigan over Notre Dame (win series)
  • Lake Superior over Wester Michigan (one game)
  • Dartmouth over Cornell (win series)

The series listed are those that increase UND’s PWR by at least .75 on average.

Outlook for all NCAA teams

I didn’t run charts (like the UND chart above) for any teams other than UND yet, but the data is all in the table below. If you’d like to see any particular team in chart form, just let me know.

Here are the likely PWR rankings for each NCAA team as of March 12 (after all of this weekend’s best-of-3 series complete).

Team March 12 PWR Possibilities
Overall Swept Advance (2-1-0 or 2-0-0)
Boston College 1 85.1%
2 12.7%
3 1.4%
4 0.6%
5 0.2%
6 0.0%
7 0.0%		 1 27.6%
2 34.0%
3 23.6%
4 11.8%
5 2.9%
6 0.1%
7 0.0%		 1 89.4%
2 10.6%
Michigan 1 2.2%
2 34.2%
3 15.4%
4 12.9%
5 13.9%
6 9.6%
7 5.4%
8 3.8%
9 1.8%
10 0.6%
11 0.1%
12 0.0%		 2 0.0%
3 0.6%
4 2.8%
5 11.3%
6 20.7%
7 26.4%
8 22.6%
9 11.1%
10 3.5%
11 0.8%
12 0.1%		 1 3.5%
2 53.5%
3 22.4%
4 14.3%
5 6.1%
6 0.3%
7 0.0%
Ferris State 1 0.0%
2 13.0%
3 26.0%
4 27.3%
5 18.4%
6 6.9%
7 3.2%
8 2.8%
9 1.7%
10 0.6%
11 0.1%
12 0.0%		 2 0.0%
3 0.2%
4 1.5%
5 6.0%
6 12.8%
7 21.4%
8 27.3%
9 20.6%
10 8.2%
11 1.7%
12 0.2%		 1 0.1%
2 14.6%
3 29.3%
4 30.4%
5 19.5%
6 5.7%
7 0.5%
8 0.0%
Mass.-Lowell 1 0.9%
2 18.4%
3 27.7%
4 16.0%
5 10.2%
6 9.2%
7 6.7%
8 3.4%
9 2.5%
10 2.6%
11 1.8%
12 0.5%
13 0.0%		 2 0.0%
3 0.4%
4 1.4%
5 5.0%
6 12.1%
7 16.8%
8 15.4%
9 14.2%
10 16.9%
11 12.5%
12 4.7%
13 0.5%		 1 1.1%
2 22.0%
3 33.0%
4 18.6%
5 10.8%
6 8.4%
7 4.9%
8 1.2%
9 0.1%
10 0.0%
11 0.0%
Boston University 1 0.0%
2 0.4%
3 3.2%
4 13.5%
5 23.7%
6 22.6%
7 11.5%
8 6.6%
9 5.6%
10 6.6%
11 5.0%
12 1.2%
13 0.2%		 5 0.0%
6 0.2%
7 1.5%
8 5.6%
9 16.3%
10 31.9%
11 31.0%
12 11.6%
13 1.9%		 1 0.0%
2 0.5%
3 4.1%
4 17.2%
5 30.2%
6 28.5%
7 13.1%
8 5.0%
9 1.2%
10 0.1%
11 0.0%
Miami 1 0.1%
2 0.8%
3 3.0%
4 6.0%
5 7.8%
6 8.2%
7 7.5%
8 9.5%
9 9.7%
10 7.0%
11 14.1%
12 17.1%
13 8.9%
14 0.2%
15 0.0%		 7 0.0%
8 0.0%
9 0.2%
10 4.6%
11 22.7%
12 41.5%
13 29.9%
14 0.9%
15 0.0%		 1 0.2%
2 1.5%
3 5.9%
4 11.9%
5 15.3%
6 16.2%
7 14.5%
8 17.0%
9 13.7%
10 3.2%
11 0.6%
12 0.0%
UMD 1 11.6%
2 20.4%
3 22.4%
4 19.8%
5 12.3%
6 7.3%
7 3.7%
8 1.7%
9 0.6%
10 0.2%
11 0.1%
12 0.0%
13 0.0%		 2 0.1%
3 1.7%
4 7.3%
5 16.4%
6 25.3%
7 22.7%
8 14.6%
9 7.5%
10 3.0%
11 1.0%
12 0.2%
13 0.0%		 1 12.7%
2 22.4%
3 24.4%
4 20.7%
5 11.5%
6 5.5%
7 2.1%
8 0.6%
9 0.1%
10 0.0%
11 0.0%
Michigan State 3 0.0%
4 0.0%
5 0.0%
6 0.5%
7 2.1%
8 6.8%
9 13.4%
10 15.4%
11 9.9%
12 9.5%
13 17.9%
14 14.3%
15 7.7%
16 2.1%
17 0.4%
18 0.0%
19 0.0%		 10 0.0%
11 0.1%
12 8.2%
13 28.8%
14 32.8%
15 21.3%
16 7.1%
17 1.4%
18 0.2%
19 0.0%		 3 0.0%
4 0.0%
5 0.1%
6 1.0%
7 4.4%
8 13.8%
9 27.2%
10 31.2%
11 17.9%
12 3.5%
13 0.8%
14 0.1%
UMN 2 0.0%
3 0.3%
4 2.1%
5 7.5%
6 19.3%
7 25.8%
8 15.3%
9 10.1%
10 8.3%
11 6.0%
12 3.7%
13 1.6%
14 0.1%
15 0.0%		 7 0.0%
8 0.1%
9 1.0%
10 7.0%
11 20.6%
12 37.8%
13 30.8%
14 2.7%
15 0.1%		 2 0.0%
3 0.4%
4 2.3%
5 8.1%
6 21.0%
7 28.0%
8 16.6%
9 10.7%
10 7.8%
11 4.1%
12 1.1%
13 0.0%
Maine 2 0.0%
3 0.0%
4 0.1%
5 0.5%
6 2.1%
7 5.5%
8 11.7%
9 16.1%
10 14.4%
11 11.6%
12 10.3%
13 8.7%
14 9.2%
15 5.7%
16 3.0%
17 0.9%
18 0.2%
19 0.0%
20 0.0%
21 0.0%		 11 0.2%
12 3.7%
13 15.8%
14 32.6%
15 27.6%
16 14.6%
17 4.5%
18 1.0%
19 0.1%
20 0.0%
21 0.0%		 2 0.0%
3 0.0%
4 0.1%
5 0.9%
6 3.6%
7 9.6%
8 20.4%
9 28.0%
10 23.1%
11 10.6%
12 3.2%
13 0.5%
Denver 1 0.0%
2 0.0%
3 0.1%
4 0.5%
5 1.3%
6 3.2%
7 6.5%
8 11.9%
9 17.6%
10 19.3%
11 16.3%
12 11.9%
13 7.1%
14 2.4%
15 1.3%
16 0.5%
17 0.1%		 9 0.0%
10 1.7%
11 12.3%
12 27.8%
13 28.7%
14 16.0%
15 9.3%
16 3.7%
17 0.5%		 1 0.0%
2 0.0%
3 0.1%
4 0.7%
5 1.9%
6 4.6%
7 9.5%
8 17.2%
9 25.2%
10 25.2%
11 13.5%
12 2.1%
UND 10 0.0%
11 0.2%
12 3.5%
13 16.5%
14 34.3%
15 29.1%
16 13.6%
17 2.8%		 n/a n/a
Notre Dame 8 0.0%
9 0.0%
10 0.1%
11 1.2%
12 4.9%
13 8.7%
14 9.6%
15 7.9%
16 6.3%
17 10.2%
18 20.9%
19 25.7%
20 4.4%
21 0.1%		 15 0.0%
16 0.2%
17 5.2%
18 25.1%
19 56.5%
20 12.6%
21 0.4%		 8 0.0%
9 0.0%
10 0.4%
11 3.2%
12 13.4%
13 23.9%
14 26.4%
15 21.0%
16 10.6%
17 1.0%
Western Michigan 11 0.1%
12 0.7%
13 5.1%
14 12.6%
15 16.1%
16 14.6%
17 8.7%
18 5.0%
19 14.3%
20 20.7%
21 2.2%
22 0.0%		 17 0.0%
18 4.3%
19 28.1%
20 59.2%
21 8.3%
22 0.1%		 11 0.1%
12 1.2%
13 9.0%
14 22.0%
15 28.3%
16 25.3%
17 13.3%
18 0.7%
19 0.0%
Northern Michigan 13 0.3%
14 4.4%
15 20.8%
16 31.5%
17 25.8%
18 13.8%
19 3.4%
20 0.1%
21 0.0%		 n/a n/a
Merrimack 6 0.0%
7 0.0%
8 0.1%
9 1.0%
10 4.2%
11 9.9%
12 11.8%
13 10.3%
14 5.0%
15 3.0%
16 7.4%
17 14.8%
18 16.3%
19 11.6%
20 3.8%
21 0.8%
22 0.1%
23 0.0%		 14 0.0%
15 0.2%
16 2.2%
17 12.4%
18 34.1%
19 35.6%
20 12.4%
21 2.8%
22 0.3%
23 0.0%		 6 0.0%
7 0.0%
8 0.3%
9 2.3%
10 9.8%
11 23.2%
12 27.7%
13 24.0%
14 10.9%
15 1.9%
16 0.0%
Union 2 0.0%
3 0.3%
4 1.3%
5 4.3%
6 11.0%
7 21.7%
8 24.7%
9 14.9%
10 10.1%
11 6.6%
12 3.7%
13 1.1%
14 0.1%
15 0.0%		 7 0.0%
8 0.6%
9 4.4%
10 13.5%
11 28.6%
12 32.8%
13 16.7%
14 3.1%
15 0.4%		 2 0.0%
3 0.3%
4 1.5%
5 4.8%
6 12.2%
7 24.1%
8 27.2%
9 15.8%
10 9.2%
11 3.9%
12 0.8%
13 0.0%
14 0.0%
Lake Superior 14 0.0%
15 0.5%
16 4.1%
17 12.2%
18 15.7%
19 12.4%
20 11.1%
21 11.6%
22 14.4%
23 11.7%
24 5.0%
25 1.2%
26 0.1%		 18 0.0%
19 0.1%
20 1.8%
21 10.4%
22 34.1%
23 34.1%
24 15.3%
25 3.8%
26 0.4%		 14 0.0%
15 1.1%
16 9.6%
17 28.3%
18 36.0%
19 20.4%
20 3.8%
21 0.8%
22 0.1%
23 0.0%
Ohio State 18 0.3%
19 6.6%
20 24.0%
21 33.4%
22 24.4%
23 9.9%
24 1.5%
25 0.1%		 n/a n/a
CC 13 0.0%
14 0.3%
15 3.5%
16 11.7%
17 18.6%
18 21.8%
19 17.4%
20 6.9%
21 10.2%
22 6.6%
23 2.3%
24 0.7%
25 0.1%		 18 0.7%
19 4.3%
20 17.2%
21 33.5%
22 27.4%
23 11.9%
24 4.3%
25 0.7%		 13 0.0%
14 0.4%
15 5.0%
16 16.7%
17 26.6%
18 30.4%
19 20.2%
20 0.7%
21 0.0%
Cornell 4 0.0%
5 0.0%
6 0.1%
7 0.4%
8 1.8%
9 5.0%
10 10.5%
11 17.2%
12 21.1%
13 13.7%
14 7.4%
15 4.5%
16 5.3%
17 5.6%
18 5.0%
19 2.3%
20 0.1%		 13 0.0%
14 0.5%
15 4.9%
16 16.0%
17 27.6%
18 31.7%
19 18.4%
20 0.8%		 4 0.0%
5 0.0%
6 0.1%
7 0.5%
8 2.3%
9 6.4%
10 13.6%
11 22.1%
12 27.2%
13 17.2%
14 8.3%
15 1.9%
16 0.3%
17 0.0%
Northeastern 23 0.0%
24 0.1%
25 1.7%
26 9.1%
27 22.4%
28 29.7%
29 23.3%
30 10.5%
31 2.7%
32 0.5%
33 0.1%
34 0.0%		 n/a n/a
SCSU 19 0.0%
20 0.2%
21 2.2%
22 9.5%
23 14.8%
24 14.4%
25 12.6%
26 7.3%
27 5.3%
28 6.6%
29 5.8%
30 5.3%
31 6.1%
32 4.7%
33 1.5%
34 0.1%
Non-TUC 3.6%		 27 0.0%
28 0.2%
29 2.5%
30 13.1%
31 30.4%
32 25.6%
33 8.1%
34 0.6%
Non-TUC 19.6%		 19 0.0%
20 0.4%
21 3.6%
22 15.7%
23 24.5%
24 23.8%
25 20.6%
26 9.7%
27 1.7%
28 0.0%
Bemidji State 20 0.0%
21 0.4%
22 4.1%
23 23.2%
24 35.9%
25 26.2%
26 9.9%
27 0.3%
28 0.0%		 n/a n/a
UW 17 0.0%
18 0.3%
19 2.8%
20 9.0%
21 8.7%
22 7.0%
23 5.6%
24 4.5%
25 8.3%
26 14.1%
27 13.1%
28 11.1%
29 9.1%
30 4.8%
31 1.3%
32 0.2%
33 0.0%
34 0.0%		 22 0.1%
23 0.6%
24 1.2%
25 2.6%
26 11.0%
27 20.0%
28 25.8%
29 22.8%
30 12.2%
31 3.2%
32 0.4%
33 0.0%
34 0.0%		 17 0.0%
18 1.0%
19 8.9%
20 29.1%
21 27.1%
22 19.1%
23 10.8%
24 3.5%
25 0.4%
26 0.0%
Massachusetts 20 0.0%
21 0.0%
22 0.2%
23 0.6%
24 1.1%
25 2.7%
26 4.4%
27 3.4%
28 2.5%
29 4.9%
30 9.8%
31 7.9%
32 2.7%
33 0.7%
34 0.1%
35 0.0%
Non-TUC 59.1%		 Non-TUC 100.0% 20 0.0%
21 0.2%
22 1.4%
23 4.1%
24 8.1%
25 19.8%
26 32.3%
27 23.3%
28 8.7%
29 1.8%
30 0.3%
31 0.0%
32 0.0%
New Hampshire 23 0.0%
24 0.0%
25 0.8%
26 3.6%
27 6.1%
28 5.4%
29 3.6%
30 2.7%
31 3.1%
32 3.0%
33 0.7%
34 0.0%
Non-TUC 70.8%		 Non-TUC 100.0% 23 0.0%
24 0.2%
25 3.7%
26 16.6%
27 28.0%
28 24.9%
29 15.5%
30 7.7%
31 2.6%
32 0.6%
33 0.1%
34 0.0%
Nebraska-Omaha 23 0.0%
24 0.0%
25 0.2%
26 0.9%
27 2.7%
28 4.7%
29 7.8%
30 7.2%
31 7.1%
32 5.8%
33 2.5%
34 0.5%
35 0.0%
Non-TUC 60.6%		 Non-TUC 100.0% 23 0.0%
24 0.0%
25 0.4%
26 2.4%
27 6.7%
28 11.9%
29 19.7%
30 18.2%
31 17.9%
32 14.7%
33 6.2%
34 1.2%
35 0.1%
Non-TUC 0.5%
Harvard 17 0.0%
18 0.2%
19 2.0%
20 10.2%
21 10.3%
22 10.9%
23 11.4%
24 12.6%
25 9.8%
26 7.6%
27 6.0%
28 2.7%
29 2.6%
30 5.6%
31 5.8%
32 2.2%
33 0.2%
34 0.0%		 26 0.0%
27 0.1%
28 2.0%
29 13.7%
30 34.3%
31 35.7%
32 13.3%
33 0.9%
34 0.0%		 17 0.0%
18 0.2%
19 3.1%
20 15.9%
21 16.1%
22 17.0%
23 17.7%
24 18.5%
25 10.0%
26 1.5%
27 0.0%
Alaska Non-TUC 100.0% n/a n/a
Providence Non-TUC 100.0% Non-TUC 100.0% Non-TUC 100.0%
MTech Non-TUC 100.0% Non-TUC 100.0% Non-TUC 100.0%
Quinnipiac 16 0.0%
17 0.1%
18 0.5%
19 1.2%
20 4.0%
21 6.5%
22 10.2%
23 11.4%
24 10.6%
25 9.3%
26 9.7%
27 10.6%
28 9.6%
29 8.9%
30 5.2%
31 1.7%
32 0.5%
33 0.1%
34 0.0%		 24 0.1%
25 1.1%
26 3.8%
27 9.9%
28 21.9%
29 32.9%
30 20.8%
31 6.9%
32 2.0%
33 0.4%
34 0.0%		 16 0.0%
17 0.1%
18 1.0%
19 2.5%
20 8.0%
21 12.9%
22 20.3%
23 22.6%
24 20.1%
25 11.0%
26 1.5%
27 0.0%
Colgate 18 0.0%
19 0.3%
20 5.6%
21 13.5%
22 12.6%
23 8.7%
24 6.6%
25 4.6%
26 4.2%
27 6.1%
28 7.8%
29 7.1%
30 9.1%
31 8.8%
32 3.5%
33 0.8%
34 0.1%
Non-TUC 0.7%		 25 0.0%
26 0.1%
27 0.7%
28 3.4%
29 13.0%
30 29.1%
31 33.6%
32 13.8%
33 3.1%
34 0.2%
Non-TUC 2.9%		 18 0.0%
19 0.6%
20 11.2%
21 27.1%
22 25.2%
23 17.1%
24 12.0%
25 6.0%
26 0.6%
27 0.2%
28 0.0%
Bowling Green Non-TUC 100.0% Non-TUC 100.0% Non-TUC 100.0%
Yale 23 0.0%
24 0.2%
25 1.4%
26 3.4%
27 4.6%
28 3.9%
29 4.0%
30 5.5%
31 6.4%
32 4.1%
33 1.6%
34 0.5%
35 0.1%
Non-TUC 64.3%		 Non-TUC 100.0% 23 0.1%
24 0.7%
25 3.8%
26 9.5%
27 12.9%
28 11.0%
29 11.2%
30 15.5%
31 17.9%
32 11.4%
33 4.5%
34 1.3%
35 0.1%
Dartmouth Non-TUC 100.0% Non-TUC 100.0% Non-TUC 100.0%
St. Lawrence Non-TUC 100.0% n/a n/a
Mankato Non-TUC 100.0% Non-TUC 100.0% Non-TUC 100.0%
Clarkson Non-TUC 100.0% n/a n/a
Air Force 22 0.0%
23 0.4%
24 6.9%
25 20.9%
26 23.8%
27 14.3%
28 6.1%
29 2.5%
30 0.7%
31 0.5%
32 0.7%
33 0.5%
34 0.2%
35 0.0%
Non-TUC 22.5%		 Non-TUC 100.0% 22 0.0%
23 0.5%
24 9.1%
25 27.7%
26 31.6%
27 19.0%
28 8.0%
29 3.3%
30 0.7%
31 0.0%
RIT 23 0.0%
24 0.0%
25 0.2%
26 1.4%
27 3.8%
28 6.0%
29 11.1%
30 16.2%
31 13.8%
32 11.4%
33 6.0%
34 1.6%
35 0.2%
Non-TUC 28.6%		 Non-TUC 100.0% 23 0.0%
24 0.0%
25 0.2%
26 1.9%
27 5.2%
28 8.4%
29 15.5%
30 22.6%
31 19.3%
32 15.9%
33 8.3%
34 2.3%
35 0.3%
Non-TUC 0.0%
Niagara 24 0.0%
25 0.1%
26 0.4%
27 1.4%
28 3.9%
29 8.8%
30 13.0%
31 15.2%
32 11.6%
33 5.9%
34 1.4%
35 0.1%
Non-TUC 38.3%		 Non-TUC 100.0% 24 0.0%
25 0.1%
26 0.7%
27 2.3%
28 6.3%
29 14.2%
30 21.0%
31 24.6%
32 18.7%
33 9.5%
34 2.3%
35 0.2%
Non-TUC 0.0%
AA Non-TUC 100.0% Non-TUC 100.0% Non-TUC 100.0%
Princeton Non-TUC 100.0% n/a n/a
Rensselaer Non-TUC 100.0% Non-TUC 100.0% Non-TUC 100.0%
Mercyhurst Non-TUC 100.0% Non-TUC 100.0% Non-TUC 100.0%
Holy Cross Non-TUC 100.0% Non-TUC 100.0% Non-TUC 100.0%
Robert Morris Non-TUC 100.0% Non-TUC 100.0% Non-TUC 100.0%
Vermont Non-TUC 100.0% n/a n/a
Brown Non-TUC 100.0% n/a n/a
Bentley Non-TUC 100.0% Non-TUC 100.0% Non-TUC 100.0%
Connecticut Non-TUC 100.0% Non-TUC 100.0% Non-TUC 100.0%
Canisius Non-TUC 100.0% n/a n/a
Alabama-Huntsville Non-TUC 100.0% n/a n/a
American Int’l Non-TUC 100.0% n/a n/a
Army Non-TUC 100.0% n/a n/a
Sacred Heart Non-TUC 100.0% n/a n/a

This is probably the last time this season I’ll publish the entire NCAA. Next week I’ll pare it down to those within sight of making the NCAA tournament.

Methodology

Each forecast is based on at least one million monte carlo simulations of the games in the described period. For each simulation, the PairWise Ranking (PWR) is calculated and the results tallied. The probabilities presented in the forecasts are the share of simulations in which a particular outcome occurred.

The outcome of each game in each simulation is determined by random draw, with the probability of victory for each team set by their relative KRACH ratings. So, if the simulation set included a contest between team A with KRACH 300 and team B with KRACH 100, team A will win the game in very close to 75% of the simulations.

Resources

Weekend Preview: North Dakota vs. MSU-Mankato

On the surface, it looks like Troy Jutting’s Mavericks are playing better in the second half after a dismal 3-12-1 start to the season. Mankato has picked up points in six consecutive weekends of WCHA play, going 6-5-1 in those twelve games.

But there’s another way to look at the “tale of two seasons” for MSU-M. The Mavs have fared well against the other teams in the bottom six (St. Cloud State, Wisconsin, Bemidji State, Michigan Tech, and Alaska Anchorage), forging a record of 7-6-1. Mankato hasn’t yet played North Dakota, but has struggled against the others in the top six (Minnesota, Minnesota-Duluth, Denver, Colorado College, and Nebraska-Omaha), winning just once in 12 games (1-10-1).

Minnesota State-Mankato has been led by their freshman class. The seven first-year skaters have scored 31 goals and added 51 assists for 82 points in 164 games played, an average of .5 points per game for the entire class.

By contrast, North Dakota’s nine rookie skaters have netted 27 goals and chipped in 38 helpers for 65 total points in 229 games played for an average of .28 points per game.

UND’s second half resurgence has been helped by junior forward Carter Rowney, who has netted 16 goals this season, eight during the month of February alone.

North Dakota will be unable to field a full complement of players for this weekend’s action, as sophomore forward Taylor Dickin (lower body injury) joins a long list of injured Sioux players. North Dakota will dress nine forwards and eight defensemen for the two game series, with blueliners Joe Gleason and Dan Senkbeil playing up front. Despite the injuries, UND is 14-5-2 (.714) in their last 21 games.

Dave Hakstol’s team has secured home ice for the first round of the WCHA playoffs and sits squarely on the bubble for the NCAA tournament. Anything less than a sweep this weekend would be devastating for North Dakota’s postseason chances.

MSU-Mankato Team Profile

Head Coach: Troy Jutting (12th season at MSUM, 184-220-55, .461)
Pairwise Ranking: NR
National Rankings: NR
This Season: 12-20-2 overall, 8-16-2 WCHA (11th)
Last Season: 14-18-6, 8-16-4 WCHA (11th)

Team Offense: 2.79 goals scored/game
Team Defense: 3.38 goals allowed/game
Power Play: 20.4% (33 of 162)
Penalty Kill: 79.3% (130 of 164)

Key Players: Freshman F Jean-Paul Lafontaine (13-15-28), Freshman F Matt Leitner (9-18-27), Senior F Michael Dorr (8-10-18), Freshman D Zach Palmquist (6-12-18), Junior D Evan Mosey (2-8-10), Senior G Austin Lee (5-13-1, 3.20 GAA, .905 SV%, 1 SO)

North Dakota Team Profile

Head Coach: Dave Hakstol (8th season at UND, 205-105-30, .647)
Pairwise Ranking: 14th
National Rankings: #14/#15
This Season: 18-12-3 overall, 14-11-1 WCHA (4th)
Last Season: 32-9-3 overall (NCAA Frozen Four semifinalist), 21-6-1 WCHA (1st)

Team Offense: 3.06 goals scored/game
Team Defense: 2.79 goals allowed/game
Power Play: 21.7% (33 of 152)
Penalty Kill: 80.7% (113 of 140)

Key Players: Junior F Danny Kristo (15-21-36) Junior F Corban Knight (12-20-32), Sophomore F Brock Nelson (22-16-38), Freshman D Nick Mattson (5-11-16), Senior D Ben Blood (2-14-16), Senior G Brad Eidsness (6-3-1, 2.30 GAA, .914 SV%)

By The Numbers

Last Meeting: December 12, 2010 (Mankato, MN). In a rare Sunday afternoon contest, UND again rallied from an early deficit to secure the road victory, 4-2. Down one goal late in the game, the Mavericks couldn’t capitalize on nearly two minutes of 5 on 3 play, and North Dakota forward Evan Trupp iced the contest with an empty-netter in the final minute. On Friday night, the Green and White scored three 3rd period goals in under three minutes to come back and win 4-3.

Last Meeting in Grand Forks: January 9, 1010. North Dakota got two goals from Jason Gregoire for the second consecutive game and completed the sweep of the visiting Mavs, 3-2. The Fighting Sioux won Friday’s opener, 4-1. The game also marked junior forward Matt Frattin’s return to the lineup after serving a first-half suspension.

All-time Series: UND leads the all-time series, 35-10-7 (.740), including a 21-6-3 (.750) record in games played in Grand Forks.

Last ten: North Dakota has a sparkling 9-1-0 (.900) record in the last ten contests, and has lost just once in the last 18 meetings (16-1-1).

Game News and Notes

UND head coach Dave Hakstol is 20-3-2 (.840) against the Mavericks in his career. MSU-Mankato is just 1-11-1 when trailing after the opening period of play. North Dakota is 12-4-3 at home this season, but three of those four losses were by four goals (Boston College, Minnesota, St. Cloud State).

The Prediction

North Dakota is just 8-5-1 against the bottom six teams in the league, but they’ll add two wins to that total this weekend. UND will struggle in Saturday’s rematch, but special teams will be key. UND 5-2, 3-2.

Sioux hosting Minnesota State in a nearly must-win situation

UND continues to keep things interesting by doing just what it needs to do to keep its playoff hopes alive, but no more. A split last weekend left UND at #14 in the PairWise Rankings (PWR) and a good shot at making the NCAA tournament. The Sioux need a sweep this weekend to hold steady or rise slightly, anything less is likely to lead to a fall.

The PWR has played out pretty much as expected this Spring. If you look back at A first look at the PairWise Rankings and UND’s tournament possibilities from January 3, I forecast that the Sioux would need to win 11 of 15 to be confidently above #13 at the end of the regular season. Since then, the Sioux are 8-4-1 with 2 games remaining in the regular season, and this week’s forecast confirms that 2 more wins are needed to stand a good shot of finishing ranked #13 or above.

Probability of UND ending the regular season with a particular PWR rank or higher based on UND’s performance
Win 0 Win 1 Win 2
1 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
2 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
3 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
4 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
5 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
6 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
7 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
8 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
9 0.00% 0.00% 0.01%
10 0.00% 0.00% 0.33%
11 0.00% 0.00% 6.92%
12 0.00% 0.14% 24.24%
13 0.00% 2.49% 63.34%
14 0.10% 18.08% 94.57%
15 2.03% 54.65% 98.93%
16 14.01% 88.64% 100.00%
17 45.51% 100.00% 100.00%
18 99.97% 100.00% 100.00%
19 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
20 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%

The good news is that even with a split this weekend UND fans won’t have to abandon all hope. A split would leave UND with a better than 50% chance of being #15 or above and an 89% chance of being #16 or above. A good conference tournament could certainly push UND into NCAA tournament position from there.

Who to cheer for this weekend

Other than UND’s own matchup, these are the games that most improve UND’s outcomes.

If UND sweeps:

  • New Hampshire over Maine
  • Nebraska-Omaha over Denver (sweep)
  • Bowling Green over N. Michigan (at least one)

If UND splits:

  • Notre Dame over Ohio St (at least one)
  • Massachusetts over Merrimack (sweep)
  • Bowling Green over N. Michigan (sweep)

If UND is swept:

  • Massachusetts over Merrimack (sweep)

I may relabel these in future posts, because they’re clearly split into offensive (comparisons UND is losing but can flip) and defensive (comparisons UND is winning but could lose). The offensive moves are those that help us most if we win — the Sioux could take the comparisons with Maine, Denver, and Northern Michigan if we win and they lose. The defensive moves are those that help us most if we lose — the Sioux want to hold onto the comparisons with Ohio St. and Merrimack by them losing.

A look around the WCHA

Minnesota, while not quite locked up, is sure in control of it’s own destiny.

Denver’s split also resulted in a chart that looks a lot like last week’s, but with the win 0 and win 4 chopped off, due to the split.

And unfortunately for CC, getting swept leaves their chart looking a lot like last week’s, but with the win 3 and win 4 chopped off. The Tigers hopes aren’t dead yet, but they’re fading fast.

A look around the NCAA

Finally, this one is big, here are the likelihoods of each each NCAA team having each PWR ranking after this weekend.

Team Mar. 5 PWR Possibilities
Overall Win none Win all
Boston College 1 24.4%
2 60.1%
3 8.9%
4 4.8%
5 1.7%
6 0.1%
7 0.0%
8 0.0%		 1 0.5%
2 1.7%
3 15.4%
4 44.6%
5 34.8%
6 2.8%
7 0.2%
8 0.1%		 1 25.5%
2 65.1%
3 7.4%
4 1.8%
5 0.2%
6 0.0%
Michigan 1 4.3%
2 22.2%
3 70.1%
4 3.3%
5 0.2%
6 0.0%		 n/a n/a
Ferris State 1 0.2%
2 2.2%
3 10.8%
4 51.8%
5 30.4%
6 4.6%
7 0.0%		 n/a n/a
UMD 1 71.0%
2 14.0%
3 2.8%
4 2.1%
5 2.6%
6 3.2%
7 3.1%
8 0.9%
9 0.3%
10 0.1%
11 0.0%		 1 0.0%
2 0.1%
3 0.4%
4 3.3%
5 14.8%
6 31.6%
7 35.1%
8 10.0%
9 3.6%
10 0.8%
11 0.2%		 1 93.0%
2 6.9%
3 0.0%
Boston University 1 0.2%
2 1.4%
3 5.6%
4 23.2%
5 34.0%
6 19.1%
7 6.5%
8 0.6%
9 1.4%
10 2.4%
11 3.1%
12 2.4%
13 0.1%
14 0.0%		 5 0.0%
6 0.3%
7 2.4%
8 5.9%
9 13.2%
10 23.6%
11 30.1%
12 23.8%
13 0.7%
14 0.0%		 1 0.5%
2 3.0%
3 12.1%
4 47.0%
5 37.3%
6 0.1%
7 0.0%
Miami 3 0.0%
4 0.0%
5 1.2%
6 8.3%
7 21.4%
8 30.4%
9 29.8%
10 8.8%
11 0.0%
12 0.0%		 n/a n/a
Michigan State 5 0.0%
6 0.1%
7 1.0%
8 5.9%
9 23.0%
10 35.9%
11 23.3%
12 10.4%
13 0.5%
14 0.0%		 n/a n/a
UMN 2 0.0%
3 0.0%
4 1.3%
5 14.2%
6 37.4%
7 29.5%
8 4.6%
9 1.3%
10 1.2%
11 3.1%
12 3.3%
13 2.4%
14 0.7%
15 0.5%
16 0.4%
17 0.1%
18 0.0%
19 0.0%		 7 0.0%
8 0.2%
9 0.9%
10 8.8%
11 26.0%
12 27.7%
13 20.6%
14 6.2%
15 4.8%
16 3.8%
17 0.7%
18 0.3%
19 0.0%		 2 0.0%
3 0.0%
4 2.7%
5 27.4%
6 50.3%
7 18.5%
8 0.8%
9 0.2%
10 0.0%
11 0.0%
Mass.-Lowell 2 0.1%
3 1.8%
4 13.6%
5 15.5%
6 23.9%
7 18.1%
8 8.0%
9 5.7%
10 2.9%
11 4.0%
12 2.4%
13 1.7%
14 1.1%
15 0.8%
16 0.4%
17 0.1%
18 0.0%
19 0.0%		 6 0.0%
7 0.0%
8 0.4%
9 2.6%
10 9.7%
11 16.2%
12 21.3%
13 20.0%
14 12.7%
15 9.8%
16 5.2%
17 1.7%
18 0.2%
19 0.0%		 2 0.1%
3 3.5%
4 26.8%
5 27.9%
6 29.7%
7 11.7%
8 0.3%
Northern Michigan 5 0.0%
6 0.0%
7 0.1%
8 1.2%
9 5.7%
10 15.5%
11 26.4%
12 17.0%
13 9.8%
14 7.7%
15 3.9%
16 4.1%
17 3.6%
18 4.8%
19 0.2%
20 0.0%		 13 0.0%
14 0.0%
15 0.4%
16 6.0%
17 26.5%
18 64.0%
19 2.8%
20 0.2%		 5 0.0%
6 0.0%
7 0.2%
8 1.4%
9 6.5%
10 17.7%
11 30.2%
12 19.4%
13 11.2%
14 8.7%
15 3.2%
16 1.5%
17 0.0%
Maine 5 0.0%
6 0.0%
7 0.3%
8 1.6%
9 8.2%
10 22.8%
11 21.0%
12 14.4%
13 9.3%
14 9.8%
15 5.8%
16 5.3%
17 1.2%
18 0.4%
19 0.0%		 8 0.0%
9 0.1%
10 0.6%
11 2.1%
12 11.3%
13 21.1%
14 28.0%
15 16.8%
16 15.4%
17 3.5%
18 1.1%
19 0.0%		 5 0.0%
6 0.0%
7 0.5%
8 2.5%
9 12.4%
10 34.4%
11 30.8%
12 16.1%
13 3.0%
14 0.2%
15 0.0%
UND 9 0.0%
10 0.2%
11 3.8%
12 10.2%
13 23.7%
14 23.9%
15 15.8%
16 13.5%
17 5.9%
18 3.0%
19 0.0%		 14 0.1%
15 1.9%
16 12.1%
17 31.4%
18 54.5%
19 0.0%		 9 0.0%
10 0.3%
11 6.5%
12 17.3%
13 39.2%
14 31.2%
15 4.4%
16 1.1%
Western Michigan 13 0.0%
14 0.3%
15 4.1%
16 27.6%
17 48.7%
18 19.3%
19 0.1%		 n/a n/a
Denver 6 0.0%
7 0.0%
8 0.1%
9 0.8%
10 4.3%
11 13.6%
12 32.8%
13 31.8%
14 6.2%
15 5.3%
16 3.7%
17 0.9%
18 0.6%
19 0.0%
20 0.0%		 11 0.0%
12 0.2%
13 5.2%
14 16.1%
15 37.7%
16 29.0%
17 7.2%
18 4.7%
19 0.0%
20 0.0%		 6 0.0%
7 0.0%
8 0.2%
9 1.9%
10 9.6%
11 23.8%
12 36.3%
13 26.5%
14 1.5%
15 0.1%
16 0.0%
Merrimack 9 0.0%
10 0.1%
11 1.1%
12 3.8%
13 5.9%
14 10.7%
15 13.8%
16 20.5%
17 13.8%
18 23.5%
19 2.6%
20 1.9%
21 1.6%
22 0.5%
23 0.0%
24 0.0%
25 0.0%		 15 0.0%
16 0.0%
17 1.6%
18 57.8%
19 10.3%
20 13.7%
21 12.4%
22 3.8%
23 0.3%
24 0.0%
25 0.0%		 9 0.0%
10 0.2%
11 2.8%
12 9.2%
13 13.3%
14 20.7%
15 18.3%
16 12.7%
17 10.2%
18 11.2%
19 1.4%
20 0.0%
Notre Dame 11 0.0%
12 0.0%
13 0.1%
14 1.0%
15 3.0%
16 6.2%
17 14.9%
18 27.1%
19 11.7%
20 20.1%
21 11.0%
22 4.0%
23 0.9%
24 0.0%		 17 0.0%
18 1.8%
19 16.0%
20 37.6%
21 27.7%
22 13.4%
23 3.4%
24 0.1%		 11 0.0%
12 0.0%
13 0.3%
14 2.0%
15 5.9%
16 12.3%
17 29.3%
18 50.0%
19 0.1%
20 0.0%
Ohio State 10 0.0%
11 0.0%
12 0.2%
13 0.8%
14 3.8%
15 7.5%
16 10.5%
17 10.6%
18 17.2%
19 25.9%
20 17.7%
21 4.6%
22 1.3%
23 0.0%
24 0.0%		 18 1.2%
19 39.3%
20 40.1%
21 14.5%
22 4.8%
23 0.2%
24 0.0%		 10 0.0%
11 0.0%
12 0.4%
13 1.6%
14 7.6%
15 15.1%
16 21.1%
17 21.5%
18 32.4%
19 0.2%
20 0.0%
Union 3 0.0%
4 0.0%
5 0.2%
6 3.3%
7 20.0%
8 46.7%
9 23.8%
10 5.8%
11 0.2%
12 0.0%		 n/a n/a
Lake Superior 17 0.0%
18 1.4%
19 29.4%
20 23.4%
21 15.0%
22 10.5%
23 8.6%
24 6.1%
25 3.5%
26 1.7%
27 0.4%
28 0.0%
29 0.0%		 20 0.3%
21 4.0%
22 13.2%
23 24.7%
24 28.0%
25 18.1%
26 9.4%
27 2.1%
28 0.1%
29 0.0%		 17 0.0%
18 2.2%
19 45.9%
20 33.6%
21 13.8%
22 4.4%
23 0.1%
24 0.0%
CC 18 2.2%
19 25.8%
20 23.7%
21 25.1%
22 9.5%
23 5.5%
24 4.5%
25 2.5%
26 0.9%
27 0.2%
28 0.0%
29 0.0%
30 0.0%		 20 0.2%
21 3.3%
22 21.9%
23 28.9%
24 25.1%
25 14.1%
26 5.1%
27 1.2%
28 0.1%
29 0.0%
30 0.0%		 18 6.2%
19 71.4%
20 21.1%
21 1.3%
22 0.1%
Cornell 9 0.0%
10 0.0%
11 0.4%
12 3.2%
13 14.0%
14 34.9%
15 39.6%
16 7.8%
17 0.1%		 n/a n/a
UW 16 0.0%
17 0.0%
18 0.2%
19 2.7%
20 6.2%
21 13.6%
22 11.1%
23 6.3%
24 6.5%
25 7.4%
26 6.2%
27 7.4%
28 10.6%
29 11.1%
30 7.4%
31 2.7%
32 0.6%
33 0.1%
34 0.0%		 24 0.1%
25 3.3%
26 8.0%
27 15.2%
28 23.7%
29 25.2%
30 16.8%
31 6.2%
32 1.3%
33 0.2%
34 0.0%		 16 0.0%
17 0.1%
18 1.7%
19 23.2%
20 37.9%
21 27.4%
22 7.7%
23 1.4%
24 0.3%
25 0.1%
26 0.0%
27 0.0%
Northeastern 18 0.0%
19 0.0%
20 0.2%
21 1.0%
22 1.8%
23 2.2%
24 3.7%
25 8.7%
26 13.1%
27 12.1%
28 7.6%
29 3.1%
30 1.3%
31 1.1%
32 0.7%
33 0.3%
34 0.0%
35 0.0%
Non-TUC 42.9%		 26 0.0%
27 0.0%
28 0.2%
29 0.6%
30 1.6%
31 2.3%
32 1.6%
33 0.6%
34 0.1%
35 0.0%
Non-TUC 93.0%		 18 0.0%
19 0.1%
20 1.9%
21 10.2%
22 17.7%
23 21.8%
24 24.6%
25 16.0%
26 6.6%
27 1.1%
28 0.1%
29 0.0%
SCSU 17 0.0%
18 0.3%
19 0.9%
20 1.9%
21 2.6%
22 3.3%
23 2.5%
24 4.5%
25 7.7%
26 11.6%
27 9.6%
28 4.9%
29 1.5%
30 1.1%
31 0.6%
32 0.4%
33 0.1%
34 0.0%
35 0.0%
Non-TUC 46.5%		 23 0.0%
24 0.0%
25 0.1%
26 0.2%
27 0.4%
28 0.7%
29 1.0%
30 1.7%
31 1.2%
32 0.8%
33 0.2%
34 0.0%
35 0.0%
Non-TUC 93.5%		 17 0.5%
18 3.6%
19 10.7%
20 21.6%
21 28.6%
22 28.4%
23 6.0%
24 0.7%
25 0.0%
Bemidji State 22 0.0%
23 0.1%
24 2.0%
25 9.3%
26 19.1%
27 14.0%
28 9.1%
29 12.0%
30 13.3%
31 7.5%
32 2.7%
33 0.7%
34 0.1%
35 0.0%
Non-TUC 10.1%		 Non-TUC 100.0% 22 0.0%
23 0.1%
24 4.3%
25 19.8%
26 40.4%
27 27.0%
28 6.8%
29 1.5%
30 0.1%
31 0.0%
New Hampshire 22 0.0%
23 0.0%
24 0.9%
25 4.6%
26 9.0%
27 10.3%
28 7.7%
29 8.5%
30 13.9%
31 14.2%
32 7.9%
33 1.8%
34 0.2%
35 0.0%
Non-TUC 21.0%		 25 0.0%
26 0.0%
27 0.2%
28 2.1%
29 9.3%
30 20.0%
31 21.4%
32 12.0%
33 2.8%
34 0.2%
35 0.0%
Non-TUC 32.0%		 22 0.0%
23 0.1%
24 2.7%
25 13.4%
26 26.2%
27 29.7%
28 18.2%
29 6.9%
30 2.4%
31 0.4%
32 0.0%
33 0.0%
Alaska 25 0.0%
26 0.0%
27 0.1%
28 0.7%
29 2.2%
30 4.1%
31 4.7%
32 3.4%
33 1.4%
34 0.3%
35 0.0%
36 0.0%
Non-TUC 83.1%		 Non-TUC 100.0% 25 0.0%
26 0.0%
27 0.2%
28 1.8%
29 6.0%
30 11.1%
31 12.8%
32 9.1%
33 3.8%
34 0.8%
35 0.1%
36 0.0%
Non-TUC 54.3%
Nebraska-Omaha 20 0.0%
21 0.4%
22 2.6%
23 4.6%
24 3.1%
25 1.3%
26 1.0%
27 6.3%
28 15.7%
29 16.2%
30 5.8%
31 0.8%
32 0.0%
Non-TUC 42.2%		 Non-TUC 100.0% 20 0.1%
21 2.9%
22 21.5%
23 37.7%
24 25.2%
25 10.3%
26 1.9%
27 0.3%
28 0.0%
Massachusetts 21 0.0%
22 0.3%
23 1.1%
24 3.0%
25 4.0%
26 2.7%
27 2.5%
28 5.8%
29 12.4%
30 13.8%
31 9.5%
32 3.2%
33 0.6%
34 0.1%
35 0.0%
Non-TUC 41.0%		 Non-TUC 100.0% 21 0.1%
22 2.3%
23 8.6%
24 23.3%
25 30.9%
26 21.2%
27 10.7%
28 2.6%
29 0.4%
30 0.0%
31 0.0%
MTech 23 0.0%
24 0.3%
25 1.0%
26 2.3%
27 3.9%
28 4.1%
29 3.1%
30 2.0%
31 0.9%
32 0.2%
33 0.0%
Non-TUC 82.1%		 Non-TUC 100.0% 23 0.1%
24 1.6%
25 5.8%
26 12.7%
27 22.0%
28 22.7%
29 17.3%
30 11.4%
31 5.1%
32 1.2%
33 0.0%
Harvard 18 0.0%
19 0.4%
20 3.5%
21 17.9%
22 32.0%
23 24.7%
24 16.9%
25 3.4%
26 1.0%
27 0.1%
28 0.0%		 n/a n/a
Providence 25 0.0%
26 0.1%
27 0.4%
28 1.2%
29 2.0%
30 2.3%
31 1.6%
32 0.7%
33 0.1%
34 0.0%
35 0.0%
Non-TUC 91.7%		 Non-TUC 100.0% 25 0.1%
26 0.7%
27 4.7%
28 14.4%
29 23.7%
30 27.6%
31 19.1%
32 8.0%
33 1.6%
34 0.2%
35 0.0%
Quinnipiac 18 0.0%
19 0.3%
20 1.4%
21 6.6%
22 16.4%
23 21.2%
24 20.0%
25 13.9%
26 6.4%
27 4.2%
28 3.7%
29 3.0%
30 1.9%
31 0.8%
32 0.2%
33 0.0%
34 0.0%		 24 0.1%
25 1.1%
26 5.8%
27 14.4%
28 22.9%
29 24.1%
30 19.4%
31 9.6%
32 2.3%
33 0.3%
34 0.0%		 18 0.0%
19 0.3%
20 1.8%
21 8.1%
22 20.1%
23 25.9%
24 24.0%
25 15.2%
26 4.1%
27 0.4%
28 0.0%
29 0.0%
Colgate 20 0.0%
21 0.5%
22 6.6%
23 22.1%
24 27.9%
25 29.2%
26 11.3%
27 2.1%
28 0.2%
29 0.0%
30 0.0%		 n/a n/a
Bowling Green Non-TUC 100.0% Non-TUC 100.0% Non-TUC 100.0%
St. Lawrence Non-TUC 100.0% Non-TUC 100.0% Non-TUC 100.0%
Yale 26 0.0%
27 0.1%
28 0.6%
29 2.0%
30 5.0%
31 7.7%
32 6.9%
33 3.6%
34 1.0%
35 0.1%
36 0.0%
Non-TUC 73.1%		 Non-TUC 100.0% 26 0.0%
27 0.1%
28 0.9%
29 3.2%
30 8.0%
31 12.3%
32 11.0%
33 5.8%
34 1.5%
35 0.2%
36 0.0%
Non-TUC 57.0%
Mankato Non-TUC 100.0% Non-TUC 100.0% Non-TUC 100.0%
Clarkson Non-TUC 100.0% Non-TUC 100.0% Non-TUC 100.0%
AA Non-TUC 100.0% Non-TUC 100.0% Non-TUC 100.0%
Air Force 23 0.0%
24 0.4%
25 3.4%
26 13.6%
27 26.3%
28 27.4%
29 17.3%
30 8.3%
31 2.8%
32 0.4%
33 0.0%		 n/a n/a
RIT 27 0.0%
28 0.0%
29 0.1%
30 0.3%
31 0.3%
32 0.2%
33 0.1%
34 0.0%
35 0.0%
Non-TUC 98.9%		 n/a n/a
Niagara Non-TUC 100.0% n/a n/a
Dartmouth Non-TUC 100.0% Non-TUC 100.0% Non-TUC 100.0%
Princeton Non-TUC 100.0% Non-TUC 100.0% Non-TUC 100.0%
Mercyhurst Non-TUC 100.0% n/a n/a
Robert Morris Non-TUC 100.0% Non-TUC 100.0% Non-TUC 100.0%
Holy Cross Non-TUC 100.0% Non-TUC 100.0% Non-TUC 100.0%
Rensselaer Non-TUC 100.0% Non-TUC 100.0% Non-TUC 100.0%
Vermont Non-TUC 100.0% Non-TUC 100.0% Non-TUC 100.0%
Brown Non-TUC 100.0% Non-TUC 100.0% Non-TUC 100.0%
Bentley Non-TUC 100.0% Non-TUC 100.0% Non-TUC 100.0%
Connecticut Non-TUC 100.0% Non-TUC 100.0% Non-TUC 100.0%
Canisius Non-TUC 100.0% Non-TUC 100.0% Non-TUC 100.0%
Alabama-Huntsville Non-TUC 100.0% n/a n/a
American Int’l Non-TUC 100.0% Non-TUC 100.0% Non-TUC 100.0%
Army Non-TUC 100.0% Non-TUC 100.0% Non-TUC 100.0%
Sacred Heart Non-TUC 100.0% Non-TUC 100.0% Non-TUC 100.0%

Three conferences (the AHA, CCHA, and ECAC) are already in their conference playoffs this week playing best-of-three series. For those teams the “win all” column includes all the scenarios in which that team wins two games, combining scenarios in which they go 2-0 with those in which they go 2-1.

Methodology

Each forecast is based on at least one million monte carlo simulations of the games in the described period. For each simulation, the PairWise Ranking (PWR) is calculated and the results tallied. The probabilities presented in the forecasts are the share of simulations in which a particular outcome occurred.

The outcome of each game in each simulation is determined by random draw, with the probability of victory for each team set by their relative KRACH ratings. So, if the simulation set included a contest between team A with KRACH 300 and team B with KRACH 100, team A will win the game in very close to 75% of the simulations.

Resources

Weekend Preview: UND at Denver

In the new National Collegiate Hockey Conference, it is clear that Denver/North Dakota will be at the top of the league rivalries.

The two schools clearly do not like each other, and the feud goes all the way back to Geoff Paukovitch’ illegal check on Sioux forward Robbie Bina during the 2005 WCHA Final Five.

Since that game (a Denver victory), the two teams have met five times in tournament play. Denver won the 2005 NCAA title with a victory over North Dakota and claimed a 2008 WCHA Final Five win as well. UND has won the last three playoff games between the schools, including two consecutive victories in the WCHA Final Five (2010 and 2011) and last season’s NCAA Midwest Regional final which sent the Fighting Sioux to the Frozen Four.

Along the way, we’ve had dasher dances, brawls, and a certain coach losing his way to the visiting locker room. The last time these two teams played in Denver, the referees called 20 penalties.

North Dakota has gone with the same lineup of 18 skaters since a rash of injuries left them with no other options. For Denver, forwards Beau Bennett (injury) and Dan Olszewski (suspension) will not dress, and injured defenseman Dan Makowski is out as well.

The big story for the Pioneers is the return of goaltender Sam Brittain. The sophomore suffered a knee injury against North Dakota in the Final Five last year and lost more than half a season with the Pios and a chance to play for Team Canada in the World Junior Championships.

For North Dakota, the headline is the emergence of forward Carter Rowney. The junior forward has potted 14 goals (2nd on the team) and gives UND a true second line scoring threat. Rowney had four goals over 67 games in his first two seasons.

After losing five out of his first eight games in Denver as head coach of the Fighting Sioux, UND head coach Dave Hakstol has altered his travel schedule. The team arrived in Denver on Wednesday and held a full practice on Thursday in advance of the weekend series.

Across the league, the top six teams in the standings are facing off in weekend action. Minnesota-Duluth (2nd) is hosting Colorado College (t-4th), while Minnesota (1st) travels to Nebraska-Omaha (t-4th). North Dakota (t-4th) could leapfrog Denver (3rd) in the standings with a road sweep.

Denver Team Profile

Head Coach: George Gwozdecky (18th season at DU, 416-249-59 .615)
Pairwise Ranking: t-11th
National Rankings: #9/#10
This Season: 18-10-4 overall, 13-7-4 WCHA (3rd)
Last Season: 25-12-5 Overall (NCAA Midwest Regional Finalist), 17-8-3 WCHA (2nd)

Team Offense: 3.47 goals scored/game
Team Defense: 2.72 goals allowed/game
Power Play: 23.3% (31 of 133)
Penalty Kill: 81.1% (120 of 148)

Key Players: Junior F Drew Shore (18-24-42), Sophomore F Jason Zucker (17-20-37), Sophomore F Nick Shore (10-19-29), Freshman D Joey LaLeggia (10-23-33), Senior D John Lee (3-9-12), Sophomore G Sam Brittain (4-2-0, 2.51 GAA, .923 SV%, 1 SO)

North Dakota Team Profile

Head Coach: Dave Hakstol (8th season at UND, 204-104-30, .648)
Pairwise Ranking: 14th
National Rankings: #14/#12
This Season: 17-11-3 overall, 13-10-1 WCHA (t-4th)
Last Season: 32-9-3 overall (NCAA Frozen Four semifinalist), 21-6-1 WCHA (1st)

Team Offense: 3.03 goals scored/game
Team Defense: 2.71 goals allowed/game
Power Play: 22.2% (32 of 144)
Penalty Kill: 82.3% (107 of 130)

Key Players: Junior F Danny Kristo (14-19-33) Junior F Corban Knight (11-19-30), Sophomore F Brock Nelson (20-15-35), Freshman D Nick Mattson (5-11-16), Senior D Ben Blood (2-12-14), Senior G Brad Eidsness (5-2-1, 1.92 GAA, .926 SV%)

By The Numbers

Last Meeting: March 27, 2011 (Green Bay, WI). North Dakota punched their ticket to the NCAA Frozen Four with a 6-1 victory over Denver. The Pioneers lone goal came with .1 seconds remaining in the opening period. UND also defeated DU in the WCHA Final Five title game one weekend earlier.

Last Meeting in Denver: November 21, 2009. The Pioneers survived a late disallowed goal and a 6-on-3 advantage in the closing seconds to preserve a 3-2 victory and series sweep over visiting North Dakota. DU won the series opener 1-0 on Drew Shore’s power play tally midway through the game.

Most Important Meeting: It’s hard to pick just one game, as the two teams have played four times for the national title. Denver defeated UND for the national championship in 1958, 1968, and 2005, while the Sioux downed the Pioneers in 1963. And just least season, North Dakota defeated Denver in the WCHA Final Five championship and Midwest Regional championship games.

Last Ten Games: Denver has had slight edge lately, going 5-4-1 (.550) in the last ten meetings between the schools. Only two of the last ten games between the teams have taken place in Denver (Grand Forks 5, St. Paul 2, Green Bay 1).

All-time Series: UND leads the all-time series, 133-115-8 (.535), but the Pioneers have had the better of it at altitude, claiming a 66-49-3 (.564) mark in games played in Denver.

Game News and Notes

Friday’s opener can be seen on NBC Sports, with Saturday’s rematch on FSN+. North Dakota has given up the second-fewest goals (62) in league play this season, while Denver has allowed 70 (fifth). UND is attempting to secure home ice in the first round of the WCHA playoffs for the tenth consecutive season, the longest active streak in the league. Denver head coach George Gwozdecky just might squat on the dasher in front of his team’s bench.

The Prediction

The extra day in Denver will help the Green and White earn a split. UND will survive a late Denver onslaught in the opener but will fall in the rematch. UND 3-2, Denver 3-1.

Sioux-Pioneers matchup has playoff implications for both

The #14 UND men’s hockey team continues to do what’s required to keep its NCAA playoff hopes alive, but faces a tough test against the #12 Denver Pioneers, who also find themselves needing a good run to ensure an NCAA playoff bid.

With a win and a tie last weekend, UND can still afford one more loss and still be well-positioned for the NCAA playoffs (#13 or higher in the PWR Rankings) going into conference tournament time. With two or three more losses, UND’s playoff hopes would still be alive, but dependent on a good run in the WCHA tournament.

Probability of UND ending the regular season with a particular PWR rank or higher based on UND’s performance
PWR Win 0 Win 1 Win 2 Win 3 Win 4
1 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
2 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
3 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.01%
4 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.25%
5 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 2.35%
6 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.01% 10.75%
7 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.07% 28.09%
8 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.50% 51.64%
9 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 2.38% 74.58%
10 0.00% 0.00% 0.01% 8.54% 90.66%
11 0.00% 0.00% 0.12% 23.71% 98.18%
12 0.00% 0.00% 1.05% 49.03% 99.97%
13 0.00% 0.01% 5.96% 76.28% 100.00%
14 0.00% 0.21% 21.18% 93.17% 100.00%
15 0.00% 2.62% 49.72% 98.80% 100.00%
16 0.23% 11.96% 78.98% 99.86% 100.00%
17 2.04% 30.27% 94.10% 99.99% 100.00%
18 8.32% 53.23% 98.82% 100.00% 100.00%
19 23.98% 74.92% 99.81% 100.00% 100.00%
20 48.34% 90.09% 99.98% 100.00% 100.00%

With just one more loss, UND would stand about a 76% chance of finishing #13 or higher. With two more losses, that drops to 6%.

UND isn’t alone in watching this weekend’s matchup with keen interest. Denver wants at least two wins in its remaining four regular games to ensure heading into the conference playoffs at #13 or higher, though can afford to slip a little more than UND.

With a sweep last weekend, Minnesota is looking more like a lock for the NCAA tournament.

And CC’s recent struggles have given the Tigers a steep, but doable, hill to climb.

This weekend

UND’s outcome spread for the weekend is tightening up a bit.

Probability of UND ending the regular season with a particular PWR rank or higher based on UND’s performance
PWR Win 0 Win 1 Win 2
1 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
2 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
3 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
4 0.00% 0.00% 0.01%
5 0.00% 0.00% 0.13%
6 0.00% 0.00% 1.51%
7 0.00% 0.00% 7.74%
8 0.00% 0.00% 23.03%
9 0.00% 0.00% 46.96%
10 0.00% 0.08% 74.56%
11 0.00% 1.10% 93.94%
12 0.00% 8.02% 99.78%
13 0.23% 33.01% 100.00%
14 2.64% 68.60% 100.00%
15 13.38% 91.72% 100.00%
16 40.17% 98.83% 100.00%
17 68.82% 99.92% 100.00%
18 87.60% 100.00% 100.00%
19 96.54% 100.00% 100.00%
20 99.42% 100.00% 100.00%
21 99.94% 100.00% 100.00%
22 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
23 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
24 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%
25 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%

While a sweep would obviously be great for the Sioux, even a split would give UND about a 69% chance of leaving the weekend #14 or higher.

Who Sioux fans should watch

Here are the outcomes that result in an average move of at least .75 PWR spots for UND across the simulations, sorted by UND outcome so you know which are defensive. Lists are in order of importance.

If UND sweeps:

  • Alaska-Anchorage over Alaska (sweep)
  • Colorado College over Minnesota-Duluth (sweep)
  • Notre Dame over Michigan St (sweep)
  • Northeastern over Maine (at least one)
  • Nebraska-Omaha over Minnesota (at least one)

If UND splits:

  • Alaska-Anchorage over Alaska (sweep)
  • Mass.-Lowell over Merrimack (at least one)
  • Nebraska-Omaha over Minnesota (at least one)
  • Lake Superior splits with Northern Michigan

If UND gets swept:

  • Alaska-Anchorage over Alaska (at least one)
  • Mass.-Lowell over Merrimack (sweep)
  • Ferris St. over Western Michigan (at least one)
  • Michigan St. over Notre Dame (at least one)
  • Minnesota-Duluth over Colorado College (at least one)

This being only the second week I’ve split the “what to watch” by UND outcome, it’s interesting to see how what maximizes UND’s outcome for the week changes based on UND’s own performance. If UND sweeps, Sioux fans will be cheering for Colorado College and Notre Dame to knock off bigger dogs.

With a one-week outlook, though, CC and ND will be nipping at our heels if the Sioux lose, such that our one-week PWR would be maximized by each losing at least one game. However, to make the tournament UND needs to be looking up the ladder not down, so our overall final PWR outcome still probably draws the most benefit from those lower ranked teams sweeping those higher ranked teams.

Methodology

Each forecast is based on at least a million monte carlo style simulation of the remaining games in the regular season. For each simulation, the PairWise Ranking (PWR) is calculated and the results tallied. The probabilities presented in the forecasts are the share of simulations in which a particular outcome occurred.

The outcome of each game in each simulation is determined by random draw, with the probability of victory for each team set by their relative KRACH ratings. So, if the simulation set included a contest between team A with KRACH 300 and team B with KRACH 100, team A will win the game in very close to 75% of the simulations.

Resources

Weekend Preview: North Dakota vs. Michigan Tech

One of these teams, but likely not both, will be at home for the first round of the WCHA playoffs in March.

For North Dakota, it would be their tenth consecutive home playoff series, the longest active streak in the league. Michigan Tech has never hosted the first round of the conference tournament under the current fomat.

The Huskies sit one point back of 6th place UND in the race for home ice. Colorado College and Nebraska-Omaha are tied for 4th place, one point ahead of North Dakota. The top six teams in the final WCHA standings will earn home playoff games.

It would be easy for the casual fan to overlook first year head coach Mel Pearson and his Michigan Tech squad, given the fact that UND has taken the last ten meetings between the teams by a combined score of 53-14. But MTU is improved in every area – scoring offense, scoring defense, power play, and penalty kill – and expect to have junior forward Milos Gordic (8-5-13 in 20 games) back for this series.

For the record, Mel Pearson spent the previous 23 seasons as an assistant coach at Michigan and was behind the bench for the Wolverines 2-0 Frozen Four victory over North Dakota last April. MTU assistant coach Bill Muckalt and goaltending coach Steve Shields are former Michigan players. Pearson played his college hockey at Michigan Tech.

North Dakota continues to roll out the only healthy bodies left in the locker room, and have gone 12-4-1 in the last 17 games. After a torried 6-2-1 start, Michigan Tech is a pedestrian 6-9-2 in the past 17.

For UND, junior goaltender Aaron Dell has played the majority of minutes this season, but look for Dell and senior netminder Brad Eidsness to split starts this weekend.

It’s a bit of an unusual end to the regular season for the Green and White: after hosting Michigan Tech in the first two meetings between the teams this year, North Dakota plays at Denver and vs. MSU-Mankato to close out the schedule, two other teams UND has not faced all season.

After next season (2012-13), it is unclear whether North Dakota and Michigan Tech will continue their storied rivalry. UND will move to the National Collegiate Hockey Conference, while MTU will remain in the WCHA and maintain ownership of the historic MacNaughton Cup.

Michigan Tech Team Profile

Head Coach: Mel Pearson (1st season at MTU, 13-14-3, .483)
Pairwise Ranking: NR
National Rankings: NR/NR
This Season: 13-14-3 overall, 10-9-3 WCHA (7th)
Last Season: 4-30-4 overall, 2-24-2 WCHA (12th)

Team Offense: 3.07 goals scored/game
Team Defense: 3.00 goals allowed/game
Power Play: 20.6% (28 of 136)
Penalty Kill: 83.8% (109 of 130)

Key Players: Senior F Brett Olson (9-18-27), Senior F Jordan Baker (9-16-25), Junior F Milos Gordic (8-5-13), Freshman F David Johnstone (9-14-23), Junior D Steven Seigo (3-16-19), Sophomore D Daniel Sova (2-9-11), Senior G Josh Robinson (12-11-3, 2.85 GAA, .909 SV%, 3 SO)

North Dakota Team Profile

Head Coach: Dave Hakstol (8th season at UND, 203-104-29, .647)
Pairwise Ranking: t-15th
National Rankings: #14/#15
This Season: 16-11-2 overall, 12-10-0 WCHA (6th)
Last Season: 32-9-3 overall (NCAA Frozen Four semifinalist), 21-6-1 WCHA (1st)

Team Offense: 3.07 goals scored/game
Team Defense: 2.79 goals allowed/game
Power Play: 21.3% (29 of 136)
Penalty Kill: 81.5% (101 of 124)

Key Players: Junior F Danny Kristo (14-17-31) Junior F Corban Knight (8-18-26), Sophomore F Brock Nelson (20-12-32), Freshman D Nick Mattson (5-10-15), Senior D Ben Blood (2-12-14), Junior G Aaron Dell (12-9-2, 2.80 GAA, .890 SV%, 1 SO)

By The Numbers

Last meeting: March 12, 2011 (Grand Forks, ND). In the second and decisive game of the WCHA first-round playoff series, UND battled a tough Michigan Tech squad and secured a 3-1 victory to advance to the WCHA Final Five in St. Paul, MN. Two second period goals in the span of two minutes erased an early 1-0 Michigan Tech lead. North Dakota had won the previous three meetings between the teams by a combined score of 25-3.

Most Important Meeting: The Sioux and Huskies have never met in the NCAA tournament, so I will go with the most important meeting that never was: in 1965, the Sioux lost to Boston College, 4-3, one game short of the national championship game, where they would have faced the Michigan Tech Huskies, who won the second of their three titles by defeating the Eagles. UND settled for third place that season, downing Brown University, 9-5. North Dakota went 13-3-0 in the regular season in 1964-65, with two of those three losses coming at the hands of Michigan Tech.

All-time Series: UND leads the all-time series, 144-90-9 (.611), including a 81-33-4 (.703) record in games played in Grand Forks. The teams first met in 1948.

Last Ten: UND has won the last ten games between the teams. The last time the Huskies earned a point against North Dakota was back in January 2009, when the teams skated to a 3-3 tie in Houghton. North Dakota avenged the tie with a 5-0 drubbing the following night. The Fighting Sioux have outscored the Huskies 53-14 in the last ten games.

Game News and Notes

UND head coach Dave Hakstol is 22-5-1 (.804) in his coaching career against Michigan Tech. MTU has picked up points in four of five road series this season. Bemidji State is the only WCHA team to sweep the visiting Huskies this year. North Dakota junior forward Carter Rowney is on a tear this season, potting twelve goals this season (29 games) after collecting just four goals in his first two years at UND (67 games).

The Prediction

The Huskies are eager to bring their new look to Engelstad Arena, and Friday’s first period will tell the tale. Both games will be close, and Michigan Tech could earn a point or two this weekend, but UND has been focused, particularly at home. UND 4-3, 5-3.

Sioux looking for sweep to bolster PairWise Ranking

With just 6 games left in the regular season, UND’s PWR outlook remains pretty clear. Consistent with last week’s forecast (that UND could lose two more and likely be in the top 13 at the end of the regular season) and results (one loss), this week’s forecast shows that UND can only lose one more and still be more likely than not to finish the regular season top 13.

However, as also revealed last week, if UND loses two more, the Sioux are right on the cusp (a 47% chance of being #14 or higher) such that a good result and/or a little bit of luck in the WCHA tournament could be enough to push the Sioux into the NCAAs.

Presented a little differently, here are UND chances of being at or above each rank at the end of the regular season based on the number of remaining games the Sioux win:

PWR
Rank		 Win 2 Win 3 Win 4 Win 5 Win 6
1 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.01%
2 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.10%
3 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 1.10%
4 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.02% 6.72%
5 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.23% 23.02%
6 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 1.56% 51.30%
7 0.00% 0.00% 0.01% 6.03% 78.00%
8 0.00% 0.00% 0.06% 16.51% 93.08%
9 0.00% 0.00% 0.33% 33.75% 98.37%
10 0.00% 0.00% 1.35% 55.06% 99.73%
11 0.00% 0.00% 4.48% 75.34% 99.96%
12 0.00% 0.02% 12.21% 89.36% 100.00%
13 0.00% 0.18% 26.55% 96.59% 100.00%
14 0.00% 1.02% 46.97% 99.20% 100.00%
15 0.02% 4.25% 68.87% 99.87% 100.00%
16 0.16% 12.70% 85.82% 99.99% 100.00%
17 0.93% 28.49% 95.32% 100.00% 100.00%
18 3.73% 49.73% 98.93% 100.00% 100.00%
19 11.86% 71.49% 99.83% 100.00% 100.00%
20 28.10% 88.11% 99.98% 100.00% 100.00%

Remember that once the regular season is finished, UND still has a chance to play up to about five more games in the conference tournament.

End of regular season outlooks for other WCHA teams on the bubble

Colorado College is in a slightly worse spot than the Sioux. Losing just one more gives the Tigers a 71% chance of finishing #13 or higher, while losing 2 more leaves CC with only a 3% chance of finishing #13 or higher.

Minnesota, in contrast, is in a slightly better spot than the Sioux. Even with two more losses, the Gophers stand a 79% chance of being top 13 at the end of the regular season. With three more losses that plummets to 6.8%, while with only a single loss that rockets to 99.2%.

One week outlook

The Sioux, once again, face a large spread in their possible PWR outcomes for the weekend. A sweep is most likely to push the Sioux into the 20-22 range, while getting swept is likely to drop them as much as ten spots.

Ferris St., sitting on its first #1 PWR ranking, is going to have to work this weekend to hold onto it. Even with a sweep, the Bulldogs have only a 35% chance of staying #1, while with a split that likelihood drops to 9%. The series, other than their own, which would be most beneficial to Ferris St this week is Merrimack defeating Boston College.

Minnesota faces an even bigger spread than UND. The Gophers have big stakes in quite a few games this week, cheering for (in order of importance):

  • Wisconsin over Denver
  • St. Cloud over Alaska Anchorage
  • Boston College over Merrimack
  • Massachusetts over Maine

Finally, Colorado College is the only one of the three WCHA bubble teams that is unlikely to move into tournament position this weekend, even with a sweep.

Methodology

Each forecast is based on at least a million monte carlo style simulation of the remaining games in the regular season. For each simulation, the PairWise Ranking (PWR) is calculated and the results tallied. The probabilities presented in the forecasts are the share of simulations in which a particular outcome occurred.

The outcome of each game in each simulation is determined by random draw, with the probability of victory for each team set by their relative KRACH ratings. So, if the simulation set included a contest between team A with KRACH 300 and team B with KRACH 100, team A will win the game in very close to 75% of the simulations.

Resources

Weekend Preview: UND at Minnesota-Duluth

North Dakota has lost just three times in the past 15 games (11-3-1), and, according to Jim Dahl’s work, could find themselves in the top ten of the Pairwise rankings with a sweep this weekend. UND would also likely rise a bit in the Pairwise with a split.

Minnesota-Duluth has shown some cracks in the armor recently. The Bulldogs have gone just 3-3-1 in the past seven after rattling off a 17-game unbeaten streak (14-0-3). Losses to Michigan Tech and Alaska-Anchorage in consecutive weekends have some in Duluth wondering if UMD can repeat as NCAA champions.

At the end of last season (2010-11), many expected these two squads to go to battle for the national title. Duluth held up their end of the bargain, dispatching Notre Dame in their semifinal. UND fell short, however, falling to Michigan 2-0 in heartbreaking fashion.

North Dakota and Minnesota-Duluth are two of eight schools scheduled to begin play in the new National Collegiate Hockey Conference beginning in 2013-14.

Minnesota-Duluth Team Profile

Head Coach: Scott Sandelin (12th season at UMD, 210-206-56, .504)
Pairwise Ranking: 5th
National Rankings: #3/#3
This Season: 18-6-4 overall, 12-5-3 WCHA (2nd)
Last Season: 26-10-6 overall (NCAA National Champions), 15-8-5 WCHA (4th)

Team Offense: 3.75 goals scored/game
Team Defense: 2.46 goals allowed/game
Power Play: 18.7% (26 of 139)
Penalty Kill: 78.1% (100 of 128)

Key Players: Senior F Jack Connolly (15-27-42), Sophomore F J.T. Brown (16-21-37), Senior F Travis Oleksuk (16-21-37), Senior D Brady Lamb (5-14-19), Senior D Scott Kishel (3-14-17), Senior G Kenny Reiter (17-5-4, 2.30 GAA, .914 SV%, 3 SO)

North Dakota Team Profile

Head Coach: Dave Hakstol (8th season at UND, 202-103-29, .648)
Pairwise Ranking: t-15th
National Rankings: #16/#15
This Season: 15-10-2 overall, 11-9-0 WCHA (t-5th)
Last Season: 32-9-3 overall (NCAA Frozen Four semifinalist), 21-6-1 WCHA (1st)

Team Offense: 3.04 goals scored/game
Team Defense: 2.78 goals allowed/game
Power Play: 21.4% (27 of 126)
Penalty Kill: 83.8% (93 of 111)

Key Players: Junior F Danny Kristo (14-17-31) Junior F Corban Knight (8-18-26), Sophomore F Brock Nelson (19-12-31), Freshman D Nick Mattson (5-10-15), Senior D Ben Blood (2-11-13), Junior G Aaron Dell (11-8-2, 2.81 GAA, .892 SV%, 1 SO)

By The Numbers

Last Meeting: December 30, 2010 (Duluth, MN). North Dakota scored three 2nd period goals in a span of 74 seconds to spoil the opening of Amsoil Arena for the homestanding Bulldogs. The U.S. Hockey Hall of Fame Game featured #3 UND against #2 Duluth, and the visiting squad from Grand Forks blanked UMD 5-0. Arena officials had to sound the goal horn after the game to let fans know how it would sound.

Most Important Meeting: March 22, 1984 (Lake Placid, NY) Minnesota-Duluth and North Dakota met in the national semifinal game, with the Bulldogs defeating the Fighting Sioux 2-1 in overtime to advance to the championship. UND went on to defeat Michigan State 6-5 (OT) for third place, while Duluth fell to Bowling Green 5-4 in four overtimes, the longest championship game ever played.

All-time Series: UND leads the all-time series, 134-74-8 (.639), including a 54-38-5 (.582) record in games played in Duluth.

Last Ten: North Dakota is 6-4-0 (.600) in the last ten games between the teams. UND has outscored Duluth 30-19 in the past ten contests.

Game News and Notes

UND teammates Danny Kristo and Ben Blood are among 77 players on the fan ballot for college hockey’s Hobey Baker Award. Head coaches Dave Hakstol and Scott Sandelin each have notched more than 200 career victories. UMD’s recent skid came after a string of eight straight road games. Both North Dakota goalies (Aaron Dell and Brad Eidsness) have sub-1.90 goals-against averages in games against Duluth.

The Prediction

North Dakota is finding ways to get points on the road every weekend, but Duluth is looking to flip the scoreboard from last season’s 5-0 embarrassment. It’s possible that UND will notch three points this weekend by tying one up late, but I’ll go with a split. UMD 3-2, UND 4-2.

UND facing #5 UMD has opportunity to climb in the PWR

UND has the potential to make a big move in the PairWise Rankings (PWR) if the Sioux can upset the struggling Bulldogs.

With tie-breakers, UND is currently #15 in the PWR. (Current PWR)

A sweep would most likely put UND in the 8-9 range (about 61% likelihood), with 7-10 probable (about 91%).

Even with a split, UND stands a fair chance of climbing a little. UND would climb to 12 or better in about 17% of scenarios, 13-14 in about 48%, stay at 15 in about 21%, and fall to 16 or lower in about 11%.

Looking ahead to the end of the regular season

UND’s regular season outlook improved slightly over its weekend off. It’s starting to look possible to lose three more before conference tournament time and still be well situated for making the NCAA tournament.

What to watch this weekend (other than UND)

Minnesota defeating Denver would be a big help to UND. UND could easily take the comparison with Denver by flipping both TUC and COP.

Alabama-Huntsville over Miami also has a big effect on UND’s ranking. Presumably this is a defensive play, preventing Miami from the taking the lead in RPI and the comparison, should UND falter this weekend.

There are a number of lesser series that seem to have RPI implications that could help UND this week:

  • Bowling Green over Northern Michigan
  • Michigan over Michigan State (only helpful if they sweep)
  • Alaska-Anchorage over Mankato (only helpful if they sweep)
  • Alaska over LSSU (only helpful if they sweep)
  • Western Michigan over Ohio State (only helpful if they sweep)
  • Ferris St over Notre Dame (only helpful if they sweep)

The only surprise in that list is AA over Mankato, since neither is nor is threatening to become a TUC. I think it’s an RPI play, AA is an opponent of UND’s while Mankato isn’t, yet. If that’s what’s happening, this is one of those outcomes that’s helpful for a week, but doesn’t matter in the long run.

Resources

UND’s PWR not likely to move much in bye week

Bye weeks this time of year give us a great window into how much PWR movement is external to our team’s own performance. While staying put at #16 is actually the single most likely outcome, anything from #14 to #17 is reasonably likely (#10 to #21 are mathematically possible).

PWR Likelihood
10 0.001%
11 0.063%
12 0.654%
13 3.459%
14 11.078%
15 23.734%
16 33.407%
17 19.939%
18 6.276%
19 1.305%
20 0.084%
21 0.000%

The games/series that would benefit idle UND the most are:

  • Michigan sweep over Miami
  • Ohio St winning at least one over Michigan St
  • Ferris St sweep over Northern Michigan
  • Alaska winning at least one over Western Michigan
  • CC sweep over Denver

End of season outlook

The story is unchanged from last week, UND can lose 2 games and still finish the regular season with a likely at-large tournament bid (PWR higher than 13). With a sweep last weekend, they’ve moved from needing 8 of 10 to needing 6 of 8.

Most important series for UND

bigchief asked last week which remaining series is most important for UND. They’re all pretty close, but here are the average relative differences in rankings for UND based on its performance in each series:

Matchup Average increase
in PWR from
1 win		 Average increase
in PWR from
2 wins
UND over Denver 3.67 7.67
UND over UMD 3.70 7.49
UND over MTech 3.55 6.81
UND over Mankato 3.07 6.17

For example, if UND sweeps Denver it finishes an average of 7.67 PWR ranks higher than if it gets swept by Denver.

Checking up on last week’s prediction

Last week I said that if UND swept, #15-18 were most likely. As you can see on the chart, the single most likely ranking was #16 at about 22%, which is exactly where UND landed.

Similarly, UW showed a strong peak at #27, about a 61% chance, if UND swept. The Badgers currently sit at #27.

Mass. Lowell winning two of three last week prevented us from finding out if they were really on as precarious a cliff as I predicted, but they did land firmly in the predicted range for winning two. A split between Miami and Northern Michigan also prevented the big movement that seemed possible for both with a sweep in either direction.

Following Northern Michigan and Mass.-Lowell

These two continue to generate buzz, so here’s a longer term (end of regular season) outlook for each.

With 8 regular season games remaining, Northern Michigan is well-positioned, but needs to keep producing. A 1-seed isn’t out of reach, but would require a good run.

With 10 regular season games remaining, Mass.-Lowell is in the driver’s seat. Only a stunning loss of form, losing over half their remaining games, would likely drop them into the danger zone of not making the tournament. Winning 7 would position them well for a 1 seed.

Resources