All Forums > Hoops Dynasty Basketball > Hoops Dynasty > Missed PIT bid? Really?
5/14/2013 5:15 PM
My rankings already take that into account, so as far as my research goes, that is unnecessary.  Each game is viewed and weighted as its own individual piece of the puzzle.  I don't like looking at rankings in 50 team conglomerations because if 2 teams are 10-0 v. the top 50 and one team beat 2-11 and the other team beat 41-50, there's a big difference there.

I think my ranking system is similar to the projection report, however that it's better...all wins rate higher than all losses.

5/14/2013 5:35 PM
Posted by jsajsa on 5/14/2013 3:29:00 PM (view original):
The old system rewarded losing to good teams far more than this one does. This one doesn't care about good losses to a point, but if you have too many of those on your record you better have some good wins to go along with it. It's not a perfect system, but the current projection report is by far the best system this site has ever had.
I agree, this one is better.

And I was one of those who gamed the system (tough schedule and mostly road games).  Back then, you could have a pretty bad team, but if you played road games and vs the very top teams, you could be 8-18 and have a 70 RPI or so. When in actuallity you should be at 200 RPI or so.
5/14/2013 7:49 PM
Posted by tkimble on 5/14/2013 5:06:00 PM (view original):
Colonels- I have not seen anything that would lead me to believe that prestige is a factor in the Proj Report. What I have seen is that the amount it values good wins (top 50, top 100 to lesser extent) is huge. Any wins over teams not in the top 100 aren't worth anything. Also, in that same light, losing to top 50 teams doesn't hurt you that much, losing to top 100 is a little knock, but not that huge, and losses to teams over 100 RPI knocks you quite a bit. To me, this system really makes sense. If you can beat tournament level teams, you get in, if you're losing to non-tournament teams, you won't make it.

I'm on my phone, so I can't look, but if you'd like to examine those 3 teams, I propose we post their records vs. those 3 subsets of teams.
Do you think the top teams should always make it in, or should some mid-majors get the benefit of the doubt sometimes?
This post has a rating of , which is below the default threshold.
5/14/2013 8:38 PM
Posted by jetwildcat on 5/14/2013 7:49:00 PM (view original):
Posted by tkimble on 5/14/2013 5:06:00 PM (view original):
Colonels- I have not seen anything that would lead me to believe that prestige is a factor in the Proj Report. What I have seen is that the amount it values good wins (top 50, top 100 to lesser extent) is huge. Any wins over teams not in the top 100 aren't worth anything. Also, in that same light, losing to top 50 teams doesn't hurt you that much, losing to top 100 is a little knock, but not that huge, and losses to teams over 100 RPI knocks you quite a bit. To me, this system really makes sense. If you can beat tournament level teams, you get in, if you're losing to non-tournament teams, you won't make it.

I'm on my phone, so I can't look, but if you'd like to examine those 3 teams, I propose we post their records vs. those 3 subsets of teams.
Do you think the top teams should always make it in, or should some mid-majors get the benefit of the doubt sometimes?
It doesn't have to do with the top team, I think it should be purely resumé.  
5/14/2013 8:50 PM
Posted by professor17 on 5/14/2013 8:11:00 PM (view original):
Going back to real-life, if you win your regular season conference title, but fail to make the NCAA, you get an auto-bid to the NIT. I think the same thing should be considered in HD. You'd just have to have some mechanism in place for determining which of the two division champs is considered the regular season champion, for purposes of handing out the PT auto-bid.
My thought exactly as I read this post.  Reward a team who had a good season but lost in their tourney.
This post has a rating of , which is below the default threshold.
5/15/2013 3:58 PM
I fully support a .500 requirement for the PIT.
5/15/2013 6:51 PM
Posted by abitaamber on 5/15/2013 3:58:00 PM (view original):
I fully support a .500 requirement for the PIT.
I don't, it's going to lead guys to schedule weaker teams to boost their win pct...just shore up the Projection Report
5/15/2013 7:21 PM
Posted by colonels19 on 5/15/2013 6:51:00 PM (view original):
Posted by abitaamber on 5/15/2013 3:58:00 PM (view original):
I fully support a .500 requirement for the PIT.
I don't, it's going to lead guys to schedule weaker teams to boost their win pct...just shore up the Projection Report
It'll hurt them on the proj report...
5/15/2013 7:55 PM
Posted by colonels19 on 5/15/2013 6:51:00 PM (view original):
Posted by abitaamber on 5/15/2013 3:58:00 PM (view original):
I fully support a .500 requirement for the PIT.
I don't, it's going to lead guys to schedule weaker teams to boost their win pct...just shore up the Projection Report
Borderline teams generally just schedule away games at mediocre sim teams to artificially inflate their rpi anyway.  Is losing out on that "strategy" all that big of a deal?  

I say if you can't at least break even you shouldn't be rewarded with post season games.  
5/15/2013 8:03 PM
It cheapens the game when all they really need is a better ranking system...
5/15/2013 10:08 PM
The projection report is actually pretty good, much better than the old route of just using RPI. I hope there aren't any major changes there.

I would be in favor of creating a .500 cutoff for the PIT. Mediocre teams in tough conferences don't go scheduling a non-conference murderer's row in real life, and they shouldn't be rewarded for it here.
5/15/2013 11:46 PM
Posted by colonels19 on 5/15/2013 6:51:00 PM (view original):
Posted by abitaamber on 5/15/2013 3:58:00 PM (view original):
I fully support a .500 requirement for the PIT.
I don't, it's going to lead guys to schedule weaker teams to boost their win pct...just shore up the Projection Report
AKA schedule games that you can actually win, like I believe I did. Some of the teams I scheduled ended up being pretty weak but when it comes conference tourney time, only Sim AI teams will automatically accept invites. Thus I scheduled road games against what I thought would be the absolute best Sim AI teams available.
5/16/2013 1:18 AM
Few notes:

1) Love professor's idea. I only have Phelan to look at, but it would have only affected 2 teams going from out, to into the PIT. May very well be more on average, but it's a good idea.

2) I'm not in love with either idea of putting a wins limit or .500 record requirement for PIT, when it means more 21-9 teams that beat a bunch of nobodies gets the slot. 0-2 vs the top 50 and 2-7 vs the top 100 don't exactly scream "postseason team" to me.
of 5
All Forums > Hoops Dynasty Basketball > Hoops Dynasty > Missed PIT bid? Really?

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

Popular on WhatIfSports site: Baseball Simulation | College Basketball Game | College Football Game | Online Baseball Game | Hockey Simulation | NFL Picks | College Football Picks | Sports Games

© 1999-2014 WhatIfSports.com, Inc. All rights reserved. WhatIfSports is a trademark of WhatIfSports.com, Inc. SimLeague, SimMatchup and iSimNow are trademarks or registered trademarks of Electronic Arts, Inc. Used under license. The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.