The Mad Scientist Top 25 Ranking Debate Topic

colonels19
Posts: 4399 (0)
Hall of Famer
78 90 3 1 168 2 1 11
Prospect
Quote: Originally Posted By oldresorter on 12/28/2009
is colonels using ratings to determine SOS? Yes If so, winning or losing such games does not matter does it? Clearly

And rankings do not have to reflect SOS, so although playing 6-20 UNC and 24-2 rutgers might have identical SOS components (assuming ratings are used 100% and not in part with other factors, which is the way I would do it They are), winning each game could have radically different impact on one's RANK (rutgers being worth far more???) Rutgers would be ranked much higher quite frankly because they're 24-2 and UNC is 6-20...correct.

12/28/2009 12:52 PM
zhawks
Posts: 881 (0)
Hall of Famer
208 66 38
Pro
Also you missed my point, I said this player is played at sf but is listed as a pg.
12/28/2009 12:52 PM
colonels19
Posts: 4399 (0)
Hall of Famer
78 90 3 1 168 2 1 11
Prospect
Quote: Originally Posted By isack24 on 12/28/2009Seriously, who gives a ****? Why don't we focus on the issue and get rid of all the "you're mean to me" posts. It's going both ways, so if everyone stops, then we can potentially accomplish something
Its turned into a big ******* contest...I'm more than willing to discuss issues, but it does get tiresome when I see people write..."you didn't address something"...that's comically incorrect.
12/28/2009 12:54 PM
dalter
Posts: 71 (0)
All Star
25
Prospect
How do you explain OR's example. UNC w. the slightly better overall rating, yet they are a terrible team and Rutgers is a national title contender. Easily, the best/most talented teams don't always win and/or outperform teams of lesser talent....82 Chaminade over Virginia, 85 Villanova over Georgetown...97 or 98 Temple over Virginia Tech in CFB.

Wait ... you think that a one-game example of an upset is analogous to team performance over an entire year? That's nonsensical and lacking in any semblance of logic. You try to rag on others for not being able to defend their points, it's obvious that you fancy yourself a great debater and a high-level thinker, when you are quite obviously neither.

This will be my last post of the thread. Getting through to you will never happen. For all the jackasses who've posted in this forum, you take the cake. Hopefully at some point (way, way) down the road, you'll realize that you're not even a fraction as smart as you have somehow come to think that you are. It will be a sobering reality for you, no doubt.
12/28/2009 12:55 PM
colonels19
Posts: 4399 (0)
Hall of Famer
78 90 3 1 168 2 1 11
Prospect
Quote: Originally Posted By dalter on 12/28/2009OK, in a system where team rating is the sole determinant of SOS, how does that not equate to talent outweighing performance
Ok let's say your opponent's OTR is a 500

If you beat them by 10, then let's say you get 510 points

If you lose to them by 1, then you'll get a negative number of points because you lost to that team.

Thus the mere point differential you get for winning and for losing should remotely show how this thing would shake out. The number of points your team earns for any one given game is almost solely based on winning and losing, so talent doesn't even come close to outweighing performance.
12/28/2009 1:01 PM
colonels19
Posts: 4399 (0)
Hall of Famer
78 90 3 1 168 2 1 11
Prospect
Quote: Originally Posted By zhawks on 12/28/2009What changes are you going to do to make OTRs better? You keep harping about them, lets hear them
Said this time and again...add IQ, subtract WE-ST-DU, base it on player usage/minutes, entertain an indy cat rating system if someone comes up with one.
12/28/2009 1:02 PM
colonels19
Posts: 4399 (0)
Hall of Famer
78 90 3 1 168 2 1 11
Prospect
Quote: Originally Posted By a_in_the_b on 12/28/2009
And yet again, I'll ask the question you just ignored: Do you think ratings alone would be an adequate team rating system? This is a multi part series of questions. There are follow ups
I'm catching up chill, there's a lot to respond to.
12/28/2009 1:04 PM
zhawks
Posts: 881 (0)
Hall of Famer
208 66 38
Pro
Quote: Originally Posted By colonels19 on 12/28/2009
Quote: Originally Posted By zhawks on 12/28/2009
What changes are you going to do to make OTRs better? You keep harping about them, lets hear them.
Said this time and again...add IQ, subtract WE-ST-DU, base it on player usage/minutes, entertain an indy cat rating system if someone comes up with one


So Rebound is going to be equaly weighted for pgs and pfs? LP will be weighted equaly for sgs and cs? Speed the same for pgs and pfs?
12/28/2009 1:04 PM
colonels19
Posts: 4399 (0)
Hall of Famer
78 90 3 1 168 2 1 11
Prospect
Quote: Originally Posted By metsmax on 12/28/2009
cant use IQ in all offenses and defenses - given that a team wont use most of them. IF one did use ALL offenses and defenses it would bias the results toward (a) teams that over invested in IQ by learning two offenses or (b) teams that run combo defense, etc I would just use the O and D IQ of what the team runs most often.

whatcha gonne do with combo defense teams? press/man - average of the two? And you've stumped the Schwab lol. I would hope that if and when WIS adjusted the OTR formula that they could factor these scenarios in, but currently, I don't have an answer for you...this is an admitted, unforeseen roadblock to me adding in IQ. Thanks.
12/28/2009 1:06 PM
colonels19
Posts: 4399 (0)
Hall of Famer
78 90 3 1 168 2 1 11
Prospect
Quote: Originally Posted By zhawks on 12/28/2009Because he is a much better small forward then pg, your system would not recognise this
It doesn't matter, his ratings don't adjust at all, so for how my system equates SOS, this doesn't matter...I don't care where specific coaches want to play specific players...that's that every day sports miniutae that I was talking about...the "thems the breaks" scenarios. You can't logically factor in every last little thing that happened. PG playing SF sneezed at 2:07 PM ET.
12/28/2009 1:08 PM
colonels19
Posts: 4399 (0)
Hall of Famer
78 90 3 1 168 2 1 11
Prospect
Quote: Originally Posted By zhawks on 12/28/2009Also you missed my point, I said this player is played at sf but is listed as a pg
I never contested that and I argued correctly...reread as necessary.
12/28/2009 1:09 PM
zhawks
Posts: 881 (0)
Hall of Famer
208 66 38
Pro
Quote: Originally Posted By colonels19 on 12/28/2009
Quote: Originally Posted By zhawks on 12/28/2009
Because he is a much better small forward then pg, your system would not recognise this.
It doesn't matter, his ratings don't adjust at all, so for how my system equates SOS, this doesn't matter...I don't care where specific coaches want to play specific players...that's that every day sports miniutae that I was talking about...the "thems the breaks" scenarios. You can't logically factor in every last little thing that happened. PG playing SF sneezed at 2:07 PM ET
LP doesn't even factor into the engine for a guard, it does for a sf. Again you are showing how your lack of HD knowledge doesn't allow you to create an accurate ranking system.

This is my last post in my thread, I hope that you treat anyone else who decides to continue this pointless debate with you better then you did me.
12/28/2009 1:12 PM
colonels19
Posts: 4399 (0)
Hall of Famer
78 90 3 1 168 2 1 11
Prospect
Quote: Originally Posted By dalter on 12/28/2009
How do you explain OR's example. UNC w. the slightly better overall rating, yet they are a terrible team and Rutgers is a national title contender. Easily, the best/most talented teams don't always win and/or outperform teams of lesser talent....82 Chaminade over Virginia, 85 Villanova over Georgetown...97 or 98 Temple over Virginia Tech in CFB.

Wait ... you think that a one-game example of an upset is analogous to team performance over an entire year? Nope, that game is 1/30th or so of an entire schedule...3.3%. They got credit for beating that team in that game, but if you don't continue your winning ways throughout the entire season, that big win is going to be swallowed up by a lot of small and or big losses and your team will slide down the rankings accordingly. That's nonsensical and lacking in any semblance of logic. Agreed You try to rag on others for not being able to defend their points, it's obvious that you fancy yourself a great debater and a high-level thinker, when you are quite obviously neither. Its a shame you're not here to read this, because your question shows that you didn't understand.

This will be my last post of the thread. Getting through to you will never happen. For all the jackasses who've posted in this forum, you take the cake. Hopefully at some point (way, way) down the road, you'll realize that you're not even a fraction as smart as you have somehow come to think that you are. It will be a sobering reality for you, no doubt. HA! Perhaps somewhere down the road you'll understand that people with opposing opinions that you don't completely understand aren't wrong just because you're closed-minded and think otherwise.....be well.

12/28/2009 1:14 PM
a_in_the_b
Posts: 1653 (0)
Hall of Famer
1 18 666 3
Pro
Quote: Originally Posted By colonels19 on 12/28/2009
Quote: Originally Posted By zhawks on 12/28/2009
Because he is a much better small forward then pg, your system would not recognise this.
It doesn't matter, his ratings don't adjust at all, so for how my system equates SOS, this doesn't matter...I don't care where specific coaches want to play specific players...that's that every day sports miniutae that I was talking about...the "thems the breaks" scenarios. You can't logically factor in every last little thing that happened. PG playing SF sneezed at 2:07 PM ET
SO a decision that vastly effects the performance of the team. . doesn't matter?

I'm with Z. Sheez. Bubye.

12/28/2009 1:14 PM
colonels19
Posts: 4399 (0)
Hall of Famer
78 90 3 1 168 2 1 11
Prospect
Quote: Originally Posted By zhawks on 12/28/2009
Quote: Originally Posted By colonels19 on 12/28/2009

Quote: Originally Posted By zhawks on 12/28/2009
What changes are you going to do to make OTRs better? You keep harping about them, lets hear them.
Said this time and again...add IQ, subtract WE-ST-DU, base it on player usage/minutes, entertain an indy cat rating system if someone comes up with one.



So Rebound is going to be equaly weighted for pgs and pfs? LP will be weighted equaly for sgs and cs? Speed the same for pgs and pfs?
Unless someone comes up with something else for me to look at, yes.
12/28/2009 1:14 PM
◂ Prev 1...70|71|72|73|74|75 Next ▸
The Mad Scientist Top 25 Ranking Debate 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.