March 14, 2006
New England Prep Hockey Standings 2005-06*
| Team Results | Team Record | Winning % | Points | GF | GA | Diff | Last 5 | Streak |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Salisbury | 24-1-2 | .926 | 50 | 147 | 35 | +112 | 5-0-0 | W5 |
| Noble & Greenough | 23-3-2 | .857 | 48 | 139 | 51 | +88 | 3-1-1 | L1 |
| Taft | 19-5-0 | .792 | 38 | 85 | 48 | +37 | 4-1-0 | L1 |
| Cushing | 19-5-3 | .759 | 41 | 119 | 59 | +60 | 4-1-0 | L1 |
| Lawrence Academy | 19-5-4 | .750 | 42 | 93 | 52 | +41 | 4-1-0 | L1 |
| Belmont Hill | 16-4-5 | .740 | 37 | 78 | 56 | +22 | 3-2-0 | W1 |
| Hebron | 19-7-2 | .714 | 40 | 125 | 77 | +48 | 5-0-0 | W6 |
| Avon Old Farms | 17-6-3 | .712 | 37 | 123 | 68 | +55 | 3-1-1 | L1 |
| Exeter | 14-5-5 | .688 | 33 | 108 | 63 | +45 | 3-2-0 | W1 |
| Brunswick | 11-5-0 | .688 | 22 | 77 | 49 | +28 | 2-3-0 | L2 |
| Tabor | 14-6-3 | .674 | 31 | 93 | 73 | +20 | 5-0-0 | W10 |
| St. Paul's | 15-7-3 | .660 | 33 | 83 | 57 | +26 | 4-1-0 | L1 |
| Brooks | 14-7-3 | .646 | 31 | 94 | 72 | +22 | 2-2-1 | L1 |
| Hoosac | 9-5-0 | .643 | 18 | 78 | 43 | +35 | 3-2-0 | L2 |
| Middlesex | 13-7-2 | .636 | 28 | 85 | 64 | +21 | 3-2-0 | L1 |
| Andover | 14-7-5 | .635 | 33 | 85 | 58 | +27 | 1-4-0 | L4 |
| Westminster | 15-9-2 | .615 | 32 | 84 | 64 | +20 | 2-3-0 | L1 |
| Vermont Academy | 12-8-0 | .600 | 24 | 69 | 42 | +27 | 4-1-0 | L1 |
| Winchendon | 15-10-3 | .589 | 33 | 101 | 98 | +3 | 1-4-0 | L1 |
| Hotchkiss | 12-8-3 | .587 | 27 | 85 | 61 | +24 | 1-4-0 | L2 |
| South Kent | 11-8-1 | .575 | 23 | 79 | 63 | +16 | 3-2-0 | W1 |
| Berwick | 9-7-0 | .563 | 18 | 55 | 41 | +14 | 2-3-0 | W2 |
| Pomfret | 14-11-2 | .556 | 30 | 97 | 76 | +21 | 5-0-0 | W6 |
| Groton | 11-9-1 | .548 | 23 | 48 | 46 | +2 | 1-3-1 | L2 |
| St. George's | 10-8-4 | .545 | 24 | 91 | 76 | +15 | 2-2-1 | L1 |
| Brewster Academy | 11-10-1 | .523 | 23 | 90 | 76 | +14 | 1-4-0 | L2 |
| St. Mark's | 10-9-3 | .523 | 23 | 64 | 49 | +15 | 2-3-0 | L1 |
| Proctor | 15-14-0 | .517 | 30 | 112 | 118 | -6 | 4-1-0 | L1 |
| Frederick Gunn School | 14-13-6 | .515 | 34 | 106 | 98 | +8 | 3-2-0 | W2 |
| St. Sebastian's | 12-12-2 | .500 | 26 | 81 | 81 | 0 | 1-4-0 | L2 |
| Millbrook | 12-12-2 | .500 | 26 | 102 | 99 | +3 | 2-3-0 | W1 |
| Choate | 11-11-1 | .500 | 23 | 75 | 73 | +2 | 2-3-0 | W2 |
| Tilton | 10-10-3 | .500 | 23 | 61 | 62 | -1 | 2-2-1 | L1 |
| Thayer | 9-10-7 | .481 | 25 | 82 | 76 | +6 | 2-2-1 | W2 |
| Canterbury | 13-15-0 | .464 | 26 | 111 | 123 | -12 | 3-2-0 | L2 |
| Kent | 10-13-1 | .438 | 21 | 70 | 76 | -6 | 3-2-0 | L1 |
| Northfield Mt. Hermon | 8-12-4 | .417 | 20 | 71 | 98 | -27 | 4-1-0 | L1 |
| Berkshire | 11-16-2 | .414 | 24 | 89 | 94 | -5 | 4-1-0 | L1 |
| Governor's | 8-13-3 | .396 | 19 | 55 | 76 | -21 | 0-3-2 | T1 |
| Worcester Academy | 6-10-0 | .375 | 12 | 41 | 66 | -25 | 3-2-0 | L1 |
| Roxbury Latin | 6-12-1 | .342 | 13 | 51 | 70 | -19 | 3-2-0 | W1 |
| BB&N | 7-16-4 | .333 | 18 | 78 | 107 | -29 | 0-4-1 | L4 |
| Deerfield | 7-15-1 | .326 | 15 | 59 | 71 | -12 | 0-5-0 | L5 |
| Portsmouth Abbey | 6-13-0 | .316 | 12 | 57 | 98 | -41 | 2-3-0 | W1 |
| Rivers | 6-15-1 | .295 | 13 | 54 | 82 | -28 | 2-3-0 | W1 |
| Kimball Union | 7-18-1 | .288 | 15 | 52 | 103 | -51 | 2-2-1 | W1 |
| Holderness | 4-14-4 | .273 | 12 | 55 | 107 | -52 | 1-4-0 | L4 |
| Pingree | 6-20-1 | .241 | 13 | 55 | 118 | -63 | 2-3-0 | L1 |
| Milton | 5-20-2 | .222 | 12 | 55 | 94 | -39 | 2-2-1 | T1 |
| Albany Academy | 4-16-0 | .200 | 8 | 59 | 117 | -58 | 2-3-0 | W1 |
| New Hampton | 3-12-0 | .200 | 6 | 27 | 64 | -37 | 1-4-0 | L1 |
| Trinity-Pawling | 4-19-1 | .188 | 9 | 59 | 114 | -55 | 1-4-0 | L3 |
| Kingswood Oxford | 3-14-0 | .176 | 6 | 23 | 87 | -64 | 0-5-0 | L7 |
| Williston Northampton | 4-23-1 | .161 | 9 | 55 | 142 | -87 | 1-4-0 | L3 |
| North Yarmouth Academy | 3-17-0 | .150 | 6 | 49 | 111 | -62 | 0-5-0 | L5 |
| Loomis Chaffee | 2-19-2 | .130 | 6 | 49 | 126 | -77 | 0-5-0 | L14 |
*
Standings are generated automatically based on submitted game results & record against NEPSAC Opponents (i.e. excluding affiliates).
Rankings are based on Team Winning Percentage (Wins + [Ties/2]) / (Total Games Played).
Rankings are for display purposes only and may not meet
actual strength-of-schedule criteria.
