Quote: Originally Posted By Weena on 12/21/2009Colonels19, do you only consider the overall or do you adjust for game day lineups? A couple of injuries can drop that 750 team to 690 real quick. Is it fair to use a win over a decimated 750 team the same as a win over a healthy 750 team

Yes it is because injuries are apart of the game. That team had some hurt guys...too bad...thems the breaks.

Quote: Originally Posted By vandydave on 12/21/2009

so overall ratings as they exist now are not indicators of success.

next.

This has nothing to do with anything. For what I'm suggesting, your team's overalls wouldn't matter, the overalls of your opponents would. Overall ratings are indicators of team talent and not success.....next....

Though you could make a ranking too that incorporates your team's overalls to see how well they do against expectations, but that's another can of worms that I've dabbled in as well. Its kind of like how well you done against the spread.

It's quite possible we'll need to add a margin component, but I want to see them in action before complicating the process any further.

Quote: Originally Posted By colonels19 on 12/21/2009

Quote: Originally Posted By vandydave on 12/21/2009

so overall ratings as they exist now are not indicators of success.

next.

This has nothing to do with anything. For what I'm suggesting, your team's overalls wouldn't matter, the overalls of your opponents would. Overall ratings are indicators of team talent and not success.....next....

Though you could make a ranking too that incorporates your team's overalls to see how well they do against expectations, but that's another can of worms that I've dabbled in as well. Its kind of like how well you done against the spread.

you are doing great with the shovel, keep going...

This post could not be converted. To view the original post's thread, click here.

You don't understand my concept, but I'm digging the grave, nice. Accept the fact that you don't understand what I'm trying to tell you.

Quote: Originally Posted By colonels19 on 12/21/2009

Quote: Originally Posted By arssanguinus on 12/21/2009

Regardless of the reason a team keeps losing, even if its the coach that makes them lose, why should you be rewarded for beating a team NOT living up to its potential?

Because you're basing your rankings off of concrete objective numbers that are directly apart of the game, not some mumbo jumbo combo of wins, SOS, and whatever else is in question. They need to shore up the overall ranking, maybe eliminate stamina and durability from it, but if they do its a damned good reference by which to rank teams

So what if it is a concrete number or not? It is a very deceptive number.

Quote: Originally Posted By colonels19 on 12/21/2009

Quote: Originally Posted By zhawks on 12/21/2009

Quote: Originally Posted By colonels19 on 12/21/2009

Quote: Originally Posted By zhawks on 12/21/2009

LOL I love it dalt!

That said colonels you should know that judging anything based on overall is very misleading at best.

You've never seen a ranking that has done it....overall rating is a better gauge of team talent/quality than wins-losses, RPI, SOS, or any other thing that you can come up with. Sure its not perfect, but if you have overall ratings, why not use them? THEY'RE CONCRETE for crying outside.

Once again, by saying this you are saying that coaching does not matter what-so-ever and that is where you are wrong. Also you are missing my main point, one that VD also made - You are using DUR/WE and STA to judge how good a team is? Again, overalls are very misleading at best.

Simple, have the overall rating be an average of all categories but those that you mentioned, then you have a damned good starting point

Great so all skills are now weighted equal? What about defense that is only used on 1 side of the ball? Or Ath/Spd which are used on both?

This post could not be converted. To view the original post's thread, click here.

Quote: Originally Posted By colonels19 on 12/21/2009

Quote: Originally Posted By zhawks on 12/21/2009
Did you really not know that 'Overall' is just simple addition of all the players ratings?

I knew, its still the best representation of team talent out there, is it not

Absolutely not anywhere close.

Quote: Originally Posted By colonels19 on 12/21/2009You don't understand my concept, but I'm digging the grave, nice. Accept the fact that you don't understand what I'm trying to tell you

i understand that you dont get it.

Quote: Originally Posted By zhawks on 12/21/2009

Quote: Originally Posted By colonels19 on 12/21/2009

Quote: Originally Posted By arssanguinus on 12/21/2009

Regardless of the reason a team keeps losing, even if its the coach that makes them lose, why should you be rewarded for beating a team NOT living up to its potential?

Because you're basing your rankings off of concrete objective numbers that are directly apart of the game, not some mumbo jumbo combo of wins, SOS, and whatever else is in question. They need to shore up the overall ranking, maybe eliminate stamina and durability from it, but if they do its a damned good reference by which to rank teams.

So what if it is a concrete number or not? It is a very deceptive number

You can make adjustments to make it near perfect and completely viable....don't look at it for what it is, but for what it could be. For the time being, I would still use overalls fwiw.

Quote: Originally Posted By colonels19 on 12/21/2009You don't understand my concept, but I'm digging the grave, nice. Accept the fact that you don't understand what I'm trying to tell you.

I think that might be the best advice you have given today and you should take it yourself.

This post could not be converted. To view the original post's thread, click here.

Quote: Originally Posted By zhawks on 12/21/2009

Quote: Originally Posted By colonels19 on 12/21/2009

Quote: Originally Posted By zhawks on 12/21/2009
Did you really not know that 'Overall' is just simple addition of all the players ratings?

I knew, its still the best representation of team talent out there, is it not?

Absolutely not anywhere close

Minus WE-ST-DU it isn't....really? Oh that's right, I forgot about the coach rating.........