DING DING DING December 1 release notes Topic

seble
Posts: 880 (0)
Hall of Famer
24 44 35 306 121 185
Prospect
Posted by Iguana1 on 12/5/2011 12:06:00 PM (view original):
I should also mention that there is a cap on margin at 20 points, so anything over 20 is treated the same as 20.  That was in place from the beginning, but I never mentioned it.


Is there any thought on trying to normalize the margin of victory to the pace of the game, or to total points scored? 
Or will a 50-30 win be viewed the same as a 100-80 win. 
This is a good idea.  I will try to get that in when I have a chance.
12/5/2011 1:25 PM
plane129
Posts: 52 (0)
Hall of Famer
50
Prospect
What about OT games?  If I win by 15 in OT, that should be valued less than winning by 15 in regulation. In fact, an OT game should be a MOV of zero for both teams.
12/5/2011 1:54 PM
alblack56
Posts: 3329 (0)
Hall of Famer
490
Pro

Including MOV in NT selection is nonsense.

1)It  penalizes slow tempo.
   I've twice made the NT, and won it as a double-digit seed, by slowing the tempo the entire season.  My last one, DIII  Naismith season #41, my MOV for the entire season was 2.3 ppg.  I was likely the last at-large team selected that season.  If MOV had been a consideration, we would've had the National Champion playing in the PIT.

2)  It renders late game strategy meaningless
   Why should I allow my subs to play in blowouts when I need to run up the score to impress the 'committee'?.  If my goal is to win by at least 20, I can't call a timeout and make a lineup change when the lead shrinks to 19.

3) It impairs Dynasty building.
   I often start my freshmen when I face a weak team.  That enhances their development and gives them more impact in the coming seasons.  That's one strategy that's been most useful when I build a dynasty program.  If the point becomes to win by as much as possible, I'll no longer be willing to risk a closer game and that important strategy will be history

12/5/2011 2:07 PM (edited)
dacj501
Posts: 4779 (0)
Hall of Famer
1 305
Pro
Posted by alblack56 on 12/5/2011 2:07:00 PM (view original):

Including MOV in NT selection is nonsense.

1)It  penalizes slow tempo.
   I've twice made the NT, and won it as a double-digit seed, by slowing the tempo the entire season.  My last one, DIII  Naismith season #41, my MOV for the entire season was 2.3 ppg.  I was likely the last at-large team selected that season.  If MOV had been a consideration, we would've had the National Champion playing in the PIT.

2)  It renders late game strategy meaningless
   Why should I allow my subs to play in blowouts when I need to run up the score to impress the 'committee'?.  If my goal is to win by at least 20, I can't call a timeout and make a lineup change when the lead shrinks to 19.

3) It impairs Dynasty building.
   I often start my freshmen when I face a weak team.  That enhances their development and gives them more impact in the coming seasons.  That's one strategy that's been most useful when I build a dynasty program.  If the point becomes to win by as much as possible, I'll no longer be willing to risk a closer game and that important strategy will be history

I agree with all these points.
12/5/2011 2:24 PM
sweetpeapapa
Posts: 14 (0)
Hall of Famer
2 3 389 53 1
Prospect
Posted by a_in_the_b on 12/2/2011 9:27:00 PM (view original):
I would put it on the "What would a new player of the game think' spectrum. . . . and new players mostly WILL NOT understand a 7 - 20 or even 11 - 17 team getting in postseason over a 22 - 5 with a 'goodish' RPI.  And we want to retain new players - not discourage them.  Which is not done by making them either confused or upset because they believe they got gypped.  Even if the 7 - 20 team IS a better team by the ratings. . . . its still not, to them, going to pass the eye or smell test.
I agree that we need to create a postseason model that replicates RL. Given that, FSU getting into ANY postseason is just crazy talk with 7 wins. Sure they are in the ACC, which is why you schedule an easy non-con schedule, to try and get to 500%. Awarding a coach for being an idiot and scheduling 10 tough teams in non-con, then playing a stacked ACC reg season is NOT they way to go here. IN RL that kind of coaching logic gets you fired and fired quick. In WIS playing in the ACC and playing as stacked non-con has also historically proven a trainwreck, why award stupid coaching behaviors now?

As far as a 22-5 teams with loses to crappy teams, no way they have a shot at the NT in any engine. That is what the PIT is for....it is also for 12-14 ACC teams who have an idea how to schedule, either in WIS or real life.


12/5/2011 3:48 PM
sweetpeapapa
Posts: 14 (0)
Hall of Famer
2 3 389 53 1
Prospect
Also why isn't the PRI factored into NT decisions more with the new engine? Seems odd to see fairly high PRI teams not make the NT, or even be close on the new tourney watch feature. Is a teams talent getting factored in more now? 
12/5/2011 4:05 PM
Rails
Posts: 263 (0)
Hall of Famer
21 193 13
Prospect
MOV is also impacted by teams who play their mop ups late in blowouts versus those who don't.
12/5/2011 5:42 PM
jtt8355
Posts: 593 (0)
Hall of Famer
201
Prospect
rails: that's number 2 on alblack56's comment, above.
12/5/2011 5:46 PM
seble
Posts: 880 (0)
Hall of Famer
24 44 35 306 121 185
Prospect
Margin is going to stay as a component.  There's no way you can exclude that and get an accurate picture.  I guarantee that the real selection committee is influenced by a big win or big loss.  But with the tweaks I'm making it's not nearly as important as winning and as important as playing a strong schedule.  You don't need to stress about whether you win by 10 or by 15.  It won't make a huge difference in the big picture.  Now if you're consistently just barely winning, then that's not going to be as impressive as winning by double digits.  That's how it should be.


12/5/2011 7:21 PM
bscoresby
Posts: 473 (0)
Hall of Famer
1 217 7 105 1
Prospect
Posted by seble on 12/5/2011 7:21:00 PM (view original):
Margin is going to stay as a component.  There's no way you can exclude that and get an accurate picture.  I guarantee that the real selection committee is influenced by a big win or big loss.  But with the tweaks I'm making it's not nearly as important as winning and as important as playing a strong schedule.  You don't need to stress about whether you win by 10 or by 15.  It won't make a huge difference in the big picture.  Now if you're consistently just barely winning, then that's not going to be as impressive as winning by double digits.  That's how it should be.


as a DI mid major- Wyoming- this is a pile of bull crap.  I schedule a hard schedule because that is the only way to prep for deep NT runs.

Last year I beat Wisconsin,  Kansas, and Cinncinati(all rpi top5 and top 10 teams) in the 8th, 9th, and 10th game.  I blew none of them out, but I guarantee that people would have noticed BIG TIME if this happened in real life.
12/5/2011 7:35 PM
stinenavy
Posts: 4004 (0)
Hall of Famer
4 330 1
All Star
So do you think that those wins don't matter in this system?

Seems everyone is going quite overboard.
12/5/2011 8:04 PM
salag
Posts: 321 (0)
Hall of Famer
114
Prospect
But if Wyoming plays its conference foes and only beats them by 2-5 pts, then you shouldn't get much props for that. Those three wins will help you enormously.

In real life, say Duke plays Presbyterian at the beginning of the year (Coach K's 902nd win). If the game came down to foul shots and Duke wins by 4 or 5, that a cause for concern and will not be seen as a "good" win for Duke, but will look good for Presbyterian. So it won't *hurt* Duke at all, but will help Presbyterian a little.

Like seble says, its a small component, don't worry all that much about it.
12/5/2011 8:13 PM
pepwaves007
Posts: 61 (0)
Hall of Famer
125
Prospect
Posted by stinenavy on 12/5/2011 8:04:00 PM (view original):
So do you think that those wins don't matter in this system?

Seems everyone is going quite overboard.
Agreed. Not sure why you are so upset bscoresby. Seble just told us that MOV will be less important than both wins and SOS.

I actually am happy that MOV is included in tourney selection criteria, as long as, like seble assured us, it is not a major factor.
12/5/2011 8:21 PM
bscoresby
Posts: 473 (0)
Hall of Famer
1 217 7 105 1
Prospect
Seble said "big wins" meaning MOV, but for a mid major, a big win is any against a nationally ranked team.... regardless of MOV

and FWIW, I won league games by an average of 25 or so, which would be a ridiculous factor to include.  I'd be especially peeved if I played in the ACC where every game is a battle and the MOV is like 1.2 pts.
12/5/2011 8:32 PM (edited)
pepwaves
Posts: 596 (0)
Hall of Famer
120
Rookie
Posted by bscoresby on 12/5/2011 8:32:00 PM (view original):
Seble said "big wins" meaning MOV, but for a mid major, a big win is any against a nationally ranked team.... regardless of MOV

and FWIW, I won league games by an average of 25 or so, which would be a ridiculous factor to include.  I'd be especially peeved if I played in the ACC where every game is a battle and the MOV is like 1.2 pts.
He said the "real" (not HD) selection committee is influenced by big wins. Then he went on to say, "but" that wouldn't be nearly as important in HD's selection criteria as actual "wins" and SOS. So in your case, the fact that you beat three really good teams will count for more than the actual MOV in those games.

Again, I think people are overreacting a bit here...
12/5/2011 8:43 PM
◂ Prev 1...10|11|12|13|14...16 Next ▸
DING DING DING December 1 release notes Topic
△Top△Bottom

Search Criteria

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

© 1999-2026 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.