This page describes the methodology for this year's TBRW? Predictions. As always, if you catch an error please contact me.
RS is each team's points (real points, not derp points) in the prior ECAC regular season:
| RS | |
| Brown | 14 |
| Clarkson | 25 |
| Colgate | 28 |
| Cornell | 28 |
| Dartmouth | 25 |
| Harvard | 18 |
| Princeton | 19 |
| Quinnipiac | 35 |
| RPI | 15 |
| SLU | 20 |
| Union | 21 |
| Yale | 16 |
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:
| PS | |
| Brown | 0 |
| Clarkson | -1 |
| Colgate | -1 |
| Cornell | 0 |
| Dartmouth | 0 |
| Harvard | 0 |
| Princeton | 0 |
| Quinnipiac | -1 |
| RPI | +1 |
| SLU | +2 |
| Union | -1 |
| Yale | +1 |
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 | 14 | 4 | 10 | -6 | -3 |
| Clarkson | 25 | 10 | 15 | -5 | -3 |
| Colgate | 28 | 15 | 13 | +2 | +1 |
| Cornell | 28 | 15 | 13 | +2 | +1 |
| Dartmouth | 25 | 15 | 10 | +5 | +3 |
| Harvard | 18 | 9 | 9 | 0 | 0 |
| Princeton | 19 | 8 | 11 | -3 | -2 |
| Quinnipiac | 35 | 16 | 19 | -3 | -2 |
| RPI | 15 | 7 | 8 | -1 | -1 |
| SLU | 20 | 9 | 11 | -2 | -1 |
| Union | 21 | 10 | 11 | -1 | -1 |
| Yale | 16 | 8 | 8 | 0 | 0 |
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 | Collin Graf | Quinnipiac | Departed |
| ECAC F | Gabriel Seger | Cornell | Departed |
| ECAC F | Luke Haymes | Dartmouth | Returned |
| ECAC D | John Prokop | Union | Returned |
| ECAC D | Jayden Lee | Quinnipiac | Departed |
| ECAC G | Ian Shane | Cornell | Returned |
| POTY | Collin Graf | Quinnipiac | Departed |
| DF | Jacob Quillan | Quinnipiac | Departed |
| DD | Trey Taylor | Clarkson | Returned |
| ROTY | C.J. Foley | Dartmouth | Returned |
The calculation: add one point for each returning awardee while subtracting one for each departure:
| Return | Depart | RA | |
| Brown | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Clarkson | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| Colgate | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Cornell | 1 | 1 | 0 |
| Dartmouth | 2 | 0 | 2 |
| Harvard | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Princeton | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Quinnipiac | 0 | 4 | -4 |
| RPI | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| SLU | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Union | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| Yale | 0 | 0 | 0 |
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 | |
| 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 |
| 2020 | 18 | 33 | 21 | 38 | 22 | 27 | 8 | 30 | 27 | 6 | 12 | 22 |
| 2022 | 16 | 32 | 22 | 28 | 12 | 30 | 15 | 35 | 20 | 19 | 20 | 15 |
| 2023 | 13 | 21 | 25 | 31 | 9 | 36 | 16 | 40 | 18 | 24 | 17 | 16 |
| 2024 | 14 | 25 | 28 | 28 | 25 | 18 | 19 | 35 | 15 | 20 | 21 | 16 |
| Pts | 146 | 257 | 220 | 290 | 194 | 267 | 140 | 317 | 180 | 184 | 231 | 214 |
| Avg10 | 14.6 | 25.7 | 22.0 | 29.0 | 19.4 | 26.7 | 14.0 | 31.7 | 18.0 | 18.4 | 23.1 | 21.4 |
Summary:
| Avg10 | |
| Brown | 14.6 |
| Clarkson | 25.7 |
| Colgate | 22.0 |
| Cornell | 29.0 |
| Dartmouth | 19.4 |
| Harvard | 26.7 |
| Princeton | 14.0 |
| Quinnipiac | 31.7 |
| RPI | 18.0 |
| SLU | 18.4 |
| Union | 23.1 |
| Yale | 21.4 |
Now we put everything together to predict the final standings, by taking half from the Past and half from the Future.
Past, the relative measure of returning strength, is Prior (the sum of RS, PS, Imp, RA), divided by 2.
| RS | PS | Imp | RA | Prior | Past | |
| Brown | 14 | 0 | -3 | 0 | 11 | 5.5 |
| Clarkson | 25 | 0 | -3 | 1 | 23 | 11.5 |
| Colgate | 28 | +3 | +1 | 0 | 32 | 16.0 |
| Cornell | 28 | 0 | +1 | 0 | 29 | 14.5 |
| Dartmouth | 25 | 0 | +3 | 2 | 30 | 15.0 |
| Harvard | 18 | -1 | 0 | 0 | 17 | 8.5 |
| Princeton | 19 | +1 | -2 | 0 | 18 | 9.0 |
| Quinnipiac | 35 | -1 | -2 | -4 | 28 | 14.0 |
| RPI | 15 | -1 | -1 | 0 | 13 | 6.5 |
| SLU | 20 | -1 | -1 | 0 | 18 | 9.0 |
| Union | 21 | -1 | -1 | 1 | 20 | 10.0 |
| Yale | 16 | +1 | 0 | 0 | 17 | 8.5 |
Secondly, we want to make the same two estimates for the incoming players: their quality and quantity.
Avg10 above, carried down.
Fut, the relative estimate of incoming strength, equals Avg10 / 2.
| Avg10 | Fut | |
| Brown | 14.6 | 7.3 |
| Clarkson | 25.7 | 12.9 |
| Colgate | 22.0 | 11.0 |
| Cornell | 29.0 | 14.5 |
| Dartmouth | 19.4 | 9.7 |
| Harvard | 26.7 | 13.4 |
| Princeton | 14.0 | 7.0 |
| Quinnipiac | 31.7 | 15.9 |
| RPI | 18.0 | 9.0 |
| SLU | 18.4 | 9.2 |
| Union | 23.1 | 11.6 |
| Yale | 21.4 | 10.7 |
All that's left to do is add Past and Fut together (Net). Multiply by Norm = (22 - mean of Net)/12, to get the normalized RS strength (Nieu). Then rank order to get the ECAC standing (Pred).
Norm = .992854
Total:
| Past | Fut | Net | Norm | Nieu | Pred | |
| Brown | 5.5 | 7.3 | 12.8 | .32 | 13.12 | 12 |
| Clarkson | 11.5 | 12.9 | 24.4 | .32 | 24.72 | 5 |
| Colgate | 16.0 | 11.0 | 27.0 | .32 | 27.32 | 3 |
| Cornell | 14.5 | 14.5 | 29.0 | .32 | 29.32 | 2 |
| Dartmouth | 15.0 | 9.7 | 24.7 | .32 | 25.02 | 4 |
| Harvard | 8.5 | 13.4 | 21.9 | .32 | 22.22 | 6 |
| Princeton | 9.0 | 7.0 | 16.0 | .32 | 16.32 | 10 |
| Quinnipiac | 14.0 | 15.9 | 29.9 | .32 | 30.22 | 1 |
| RPI | 6.5 | 9.0 | 15.5 | .32 | 15.82 | 11 |
| SLU | 9.0 | 9.2 | 18.2 | .32 | 18.52 | 9 |
| Union | 10.0 | 11.6 | 21.6 | .32 | 21.92 | 7 |
| Yale | 8.5 | 10.7 | 19.2 | .32 | 19.52 | 8 |
.32