Posted by Trentonjoe on 5/18/2012 9:21:00 PM (view original):
I got it to work from home....no dice at work.

The proxy setting fixed it for me.  I'm betting that's your issue.

Fixed bug with equations when using potential multipliers

OMG ... my favorite tool for HD too ... yatzr, you are a genius :D

Posted by hughesjr on 5/25/2012 8:37:00 AM (view original):
OMG ... my favorite tool for HD too ... yatzr, you are a genius :D

Makes life alot easier :)

I'm going in now and tinkering with the equations so i'll have them ready when i get home...not sure how i'm going to implement the potentials yet.. number-wise.. i might just keep it simple and do 1/1.25/1.5 for low/avg/high

I havent downloaded the new release yet but was messing with 2 equations.. current and potential and had the potential formula working with everything but durabiltiy/stamina/we (which is what he fixed in this release)..

What I do with potentials is this:

Low 0, Medium 10, High 25 ....

then this:

PG:
(A+A_P)*0.11+(SPD+SPD_P)*0.14+(REB+REB_P)*0+(DE+DE_P)*0.10+(BLK+BLK_P)*0+(LP+LP_P)*0.01+(PE+PE_P)*0.12+(BH+BH_P)*0.18+(P+P_P)*0.27+WE*0.03+(ST+ST_P)*0.03+(DU+DU_P)*0.01

SG:
(A+A_P)*0.11+(SPD+SPD_P)*0.14+(REB+REB_P)*0+(DE+DE_P)*0.10+(BLK+BLK_P)*0+(LP+LP_P)*0.03+(PE+PE_P)*0.24+(BH+BH_P)*0.13+(P+P_P)*0.18+WE*0.03+(ST+ST_P)*0.03+(DU+DU_P)*0.01

SF:
(A+A_P)*0.14+(SPD+SPD_P)*0.10+(REB+REB_P)*0.07+(DE+DE_P)*0.10+(BLK+BLK_P)*0.06+(LP+LP_P)*0.12+(PE+PE_P)*0.12+(BH+BH_P)*0.08+(P+P_P)*0.14+WE*0.03+(ST+ST_P)*0.03+(DU+DU_P)*0.01

PF:
(A+A_P)*0.19+(SPD+SPD_P)*0.08+(REB+REB_P)*0.12+(DE+DE_P)*0.10+(BLK+BLK_P)*0.08+(LP+LP_P)*0.14+(PE+PE_P)*0.09+(BH+BH_P)*0.05+(P+P_P)*0.08+WE*0.03+(ST+ST_P)*0.03+(DU+DU_P)*0.01

C:
(A+A_P)*0.18+(SPD+SPD_P)*0.03+(REB+REB_P)*0.20+(DE+DE_P)*0.10+(BLK+BLK_P)*0.15+(LP+LP_P)*0.22+(PE+PE_P)*0.01+(BH+BH_P)*0.00+(P+P_P)*0.04+WE*0.03+(ST+ST_P)*0.03+(DU+DU_P)*0.01

this tool is pretty awesome. its missing a few things, that i sent in to yatzr as suggestions. mostly, 4 things - need to be able to filter by eligible years - need to be able to filter out players ranked above a certain rank, like #120PG (particularly for d2 recruiting), showing rank on the page (important for all d1 schools under B prestige, and d2), and to make potential work linearly. you really want to add something to the current figure for potential.

however, there is a workaround for the linear potential thing. say, you want their max rating equation to be something simple, like high/med/low attributes, at 1,.7, and .3, say for a non scoring big:
1*A + .3*SPD + 1*REB+.7*DEF+.7*SB+.3*LP + .3*PER + .3*BH + .3*P + .7*WE+.7*STA

then, you want to work in potential. say you want to add 24 points for high, 12 for medium, 2-3 for low. then you could set high=1, average or unscouted = .5, low = .1, and make the formula
1*(A + A_P*24) + .3*(SPD + SPD_P*24) + 1*(REB + REB_P*24) + ...

which if A_P = high = 1, means 1*(ATH + 24) + ...
or if A_P = med = .5, means 1*(ATH + 12) + ...
or if A_P = low = .1, mean 1*(ATH + 2.4) + ...

Posted by coach_billyg on 5/27/2012 12:05:00 PM (view original):
this tool is pretty awesome. its missing a few things, that i sent in to yatzr as suggestions. mostly, 4 things - need to be able to filter by eligible years - need to be able to filter out players ranked above a certain rank, like #120PG (particularly for d2 recruiting), showing rank on the page (important for all d1 schools under B prestige, and d2), and to make potential work linearly. you really want to add something to the current figure for potential.

however, there is a workaround for the linear potential thing. say, you want their max rating equation to be something simple, like high/med/low attributes, at 1,.7, and .3, say for a non scoring big:
1*A + .3*SPD + 1*REB+.7*DEF+.7*SB+.3*LP + .3*PER + .3*BH + .3*P + .7*WE+.7*STA

then, you want to work in potential. say you want to add 24 points for high, 12 for medium, 2-3 for low. then you could set high=1, average or unscouted = .5, low = .1, and make the formula
1*(A + A_P*24) + .3*(SPD + SPD_P*24) + 1*(REB + REB_P*24) + ...

which if A_P = high = 1, means 1*(ATH + 24) + ...
or if A_P = med = .5, means 1*(ATH + 12) + ...
or if A_P = low = .1, mean 1*(ATH + 2.4) + ...

This is exactly how i had mine setup.. where you used 24 as the magic number.. i sat here and thought about it and even went back over the forum trying to find those numbers just to make sure.. since im new here i had kept those numbers in the back of my mind when trying to see if guards were going to eventually reach the magical 120 combined ATH/SPD, etc..I had it setup on excel but was then having to manually calculate the potentials when seeing a now/then comparison and it was just very time consuming..I took my formulas that i was using in excel and implemented it on the tool and its made a world of difference in the amount of time spent.. now if i can hammer out the potentials i'll be good to go (i still need to learn to gameplan but thats another chapter lol)

I'm recruiting right now and have my numbers all locked in and am going to try and see how close these numbers match in a few seasons (if i stay in d3 at same school for 3-4 seasons) just to see how accurate i have the program/formulas.. i'll probably track my team year to year to see how each player progresses from day 1 of their frosh year, to day 1 of soph year, to day 1 of JR year and so on..



 

ok - could someone who knows math explain the equations to me?

i know they take recruits and grade them out to what they'll end up being - but how the hell do you guys come up with those long *** things?

Posted by trobone on 5/28/2012 7:44:00 AM (view original):
ok - could someone who knows math explain the equations to me?

i know they take recruits and grade them out to what they'll end up being - but how the hell do you guys come up with those long *** things?

PG:
(A+A_P)*0.11+(SPD+SPD_P)*0.14+(REB+REB_P)*0+(DE+DE_P)*0.10+(BLK+BLK_P)*0+(LP+LP_P)*0.01+(PE+PE_P)*0.12+(BH+BH_P)*0.18+(P+P_P)*0.27+WE*0.03+(ST+ST_P)*0.03+(DU+DU_P)*0.01

i'm stealing this from hughes post above..this is for a PG recruit

If you dissect the formula and look at the attributes you can see how he values his players by position.

According to hughes.. his most desired stats (he made up his own multipliers) are as follows for PG
P - 0.27
BH - 0.18
SPD - 0.14
PE - 0.12
A - 0.11
DE - 0.10

if you add the whole equation up and his multipliers it should equal at least 1.0 (or 100%).  

The formula itself is kinda straight forward

A for assist, it takes the current Assist (A) and adds it to the potential Assist in the future and those are then multiplied by his 0.11 multiplier that he randomly came up with. (so (A+A_P)*0.11 is what the portion is for assists in his magical formula)..then it jumps to speed and does the same thing...

i dont know if i even answered your question or helped at all but i gave it a shot lol

I think what is confusing some people is the potential aspect that yatzr threw into the mix.. which is awesome by the way.. with basketball and the way their ratings are laid out. u actually have a good idea what to expect on each stat if you recruit that state.. normally, without the potential portion it'd be a straight formula like A*0.11+SPD*0.14+    and so on...

That helps a lot. NOw how do I put it into the tool?

Posted by cjones4mvp on 5/28/2012 8:00:00 AM (view original):

Posted by trobone on 5/28/2012 7:44:00 AM (view original):
ok - could someone who knows math explain the equations to me?

i know they take recruits and grade them out to what they'll end up being - but how the hell do you guys come up with those long *** things?

PG:
(A+A_P)*0.11+(SPD+SPD_P)*0.14+(REB+REB_P)*0+(DE+DE_P)*0.10+(BLK+BLK_P)*0+(LP+LP_P)*0.01+(PE+PE_P)*0.12+(BH+BH_P)*0.18+(P+P_P)*0.27+WE*0.03+(ST+ST_P)*0.03+(DU+DU_P)*0.01

i'm stealing this from hughes post above..this is for a PG recruit

If you dissect the formula and look at the attributes you can see how he values his players by position.

According to hughes.. his most desired stats (he made up his own multipliers) are as follows for PG
P - 0.27
BH - 0.18
SPD - 0.14
PE - 0.12
A - 0.11
DE - 0.10

if you add the whole equation up and his multipliers it should equal at least 1.0 (or 100%).  

The formula itself is kinda straight forward

A for assist, it takes the current Assist (A) and adds it to the potential Assist in the future and those are then multiplied by his 0.11 multiplier that he randomly came up with. (so (A+A_P)*0.11 is what the portion is for assists in his magical formula)..then it jumps to speed and does the same thing...

i dont know if i even answered your question or helped at all but i gave it a shot lol

I think what is confusing some people is the potential aspect that yatzr threw into the mix.. which is awesome by the way.. with basketball and the way their ratings are laid out. u actually have a good idea what to expect on each stat if you recruit that state.. normally, without the potential portion it'd be a straight formula like A*0.11+SPD*0.14+    and so on...

good explanation. my only comment is, if you add the whole equation up, it doesn't matter at all what it sums to. it can sum to .1 or 10 or 100, doesn't matter.

Posted by cjones4mvp on 5/28/2012 8:00:00 AM (view original):

Posted by trobone on 5/28/2012 7:44:00 AM (view original):
ok - could someone who knows math explain the equations to me?

i know they take recruits and grade them out to what they'll end up being - but how the hell do you guys come up with those long *** things?

PG:
(A+A_P)*0.11+(SPD+SPD_P)*0.14+(REB+REB_P)*0+(DE+DE_P)*0.10+(BLK+BLK_P)*0+(LP+LP_P)*0.01+(PE+PE_P)*0.12+(BH+BH_P)*0.18+(P+P_P)*0.27+WE*0.03+(ST+ST_P)*0.03+(DU+DU_P)*0.01

i'm stealing this from hughes post above..this is for a PG recruit

If you dissect the formula and look at the attributes you can see how he values his players by position.

According to hughes.. his most desired stats (he made up his own multipliers) are as follows for PG
P - 0.27
BH - 0.18
SPD - 0.14
PE - 0.12
A - 0.11
DE - 0.10

if you add the whole equation up and his multipliers it should equal at least 1.0 (or 100%).  

The formula itself is kinda straight forward

A for assist, it takes the current Assist (A) and adds it to the potential Assist in the future and those are then multiplied by his 0.11 multiplier that he randomly came up with. (so (A+A_P)*0.11 is what the portion is for assists in his magical formula)..then it jumps to speed and does the same thing...

i dont know if i even answered your question or helped at all but i gave it a shot lol

I think what is confusing some people is the potential aspect that yatzr threw into the mix.. which is awesome by the way.. with basketball and the way their ratings are laid out. u actually have a good idea what to expect on each stat if you recruit that state.. normally, without the potential portion it'd be a straight formula like A*0.11+SPD*0.14+    and so on...

Pretty straightforward explanation, but I think "A" is for Athleticism, not Assist.

Posted by trobone on 5/28/2012 10:23:00 AM (view original):
That helps a lot. NOw how do I put it into the tool?

you put exactly what you see typed here into the tool. 

i recommend starting without potential, and working potential in second. 

the simplest formula you can use is:
A
which simply gives recruits a score equal to their athleticism

say all you really care about in bigs is ath and reb, you can just use
A + REB

but if you want reb to be worth a little more, maybe use
A + 1.2*REB

just keep growing your formula out until you get everything in you want (this is not a good formula to use just an example):
A + 1.2*REB + .8*DEF + .5*SB + 1*WE * 1*ST

Posted by hughesjr on 5/27/2012 4:39:00 AM (view original):
What I do with potentials is this:

Low 0, Medium 10, High 25 ....

then this:

PG:
(A+A_P)*0.11+(SPD+SPD_P)*0.14+(REB+REB_P)*0+(DE+DE_P)*0.10+(BLK+BLK_P)*0+(LP+LP_P)*0.01+(PE+PE_P)*0.12+(BH+BH_P)*0.18+(P+P_P)*0.27+WE*0.03+(ST+ST_P)*0.03+(DU+DU_P)*0.01

SG:
(A+A_P)*0.11+(SPD+SPD_P)*0.14+(REB+REB_P)*0+(DE+DE_P)*0.10+(BLK+BLK_P)*0+(LP+LP_P)*0.03+(PE+PE_P)*0.24+(BH+BH_P)*0.13+(P+P_P)*0.18+WE*0.03+(ST+ST_P)*0.03+(DU+DU_P)*0.01

SF:
(A+A_P)*0.14+(SPD+SPD_P)*0.10+(REB+REB_P)*0.07+(DE+DE_P)*0.10+(BLK+BLK_P)*0.06+(LP+LP_P)*0.12+(PE+PE_P)*0.12+(BH+BH_P)*0.08+(P+P_P)*0.14+WE*0.03+(ST+ST_P)*0.03+(DU+DU_P)*0.01

PF:
(A+A_P)*0.19+(SPD+SPD_P)*0.08+(REB+REB_P)*0.12+(DE+DE_P)*0.10+(BLK+BLK_P)*0.08+(LP+LP_P)*0.14+(PE+PE_P)*0.09+(BH+BH_P)*0.05+(P+P_P)*0.08+WE*0.03+(ST+ST_P)*0.03+(DU+DU_P)*0.01

C:
(A+A_P)*0.18+(SPD+SPD_P)*0.03+(REB+REB_P)*0.20+(DE+DE_P)*0.10+(BLK+BLK_P)*0.15+(LP+LP_P)*0.22+(PE+PE_P)*0.01+(BH+BH_P)*0.00+(P+P_P)*0.04+WE*0.03+(ST+ST_P)*0.03+(DU+DU_P)*0.01

wow i am retarded. i just figured you had to use the potential multiplier as a multiplier, but i guess there is no reason for the constraint. much easier to just make it 25, 10, 0 and add it.

Hey guys, thanks for all the feedback.  coach_billyg, it took me awhile, but I did read all of yours that you PMed me .  I've been pretty busy the past several days (no baby yet though), so I haven't had much of a chance to respond.  Here are some changes that I'm planning on making in the short term.

1. Checkboxes for position filter instead of a dropdown.  That way, you can look at several different positions at the same time instead of just ALL or a single position.
2. Checkboxes for years of eligibility so that you can filter on that.
3. max() and min() functions in the equations.  It's apparent now that my assumption on how people would use the potential "multipliers" was wrong and that they should really be potential "additives".  Several people mentioned they want to add the potential additive to the attribute and have it cap out at 100.  You'll be able to do something like "min(A+A_P,100)" for that.
4. Have a column for rank and a filter for rank

5. I want to change the way equations work, but want some more feedback on this.  In GD, it almost never makes sense to play a player out of position (it did at one time, but then that usefulness was removed), so it never makes sense to share an equation across positions.  This is the main reason the equations are set up the way they are now.  It sounds like it's the exact opposite in HD.  I have two ideas for this

5a) Get rid of equations per position and just have 6 total equations that are shared across all positions.  I can also easily set this up to have custom column names for each of these equations.
or
5b) Have a separate dropdown on the main search to pick which position's equations you want to currently show.  The custom column names are possible with this too, but it gets kind of confusing.

Personally, I like 5a better because it's cleaner and less confusing, but I'm afraid that 6 total equations just wouldn't be sufficient.  Let me know what you guys think.