BuzzerBeater Forums

BB Global (English) > New rating system

New rating system

Set priority
Show messages by
This Post:
00
3824.1
Date: 10/26/2007 3:33:48 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
214214
I haven't seen any other threads for this anywhere so i apologise if i'm double posting.

Can someone please explain how this new rating feature works?
(it's displayed a lot nicer than below, i just couldn't copy/paste it exactly as it shows on the box score)


Matchup Ratings
Position Points per 100 Shots
PG 74.8
SG 86.4
SF 73.2
PF 45.5
C 88.7


Matchup Ratings
Position Points per 100 Shots
PG 90.0
SG 92.2
SF 90.8
PF 99.3
C 115.1

This Post:
00
3824.2 in reply to 3824.1
Date: 10/26/2007 3:40:14 AM
1986 Celtics
IV.21
Overall Posts Rated:
88
so its meant to help you analyze where you got beat and why...

let me analyze this one for you...

basically across the board at every position team 2 had a more dominant offense than team 1. Additionally the PF for team 1 was simply overwhelmed and shut down defensively.. its up to you to figure out if that's because he had an absolute lockdown defender on him or was because he was that incompetent offensively.

I would be shocked if team 1 were even close in this game... they would have had to dominate the boards and turnover differential to have even a chance.

To be more formulaic..a high number for your team means you had a strong offensive performance there vs you opponents defense. Alternatively, looking at your opponents numbers will tell you how you did defensively.

Quantitatively the number is what it says.. how many points do you expect to score when that player takes a shot (times 100).

This Post:
00
3824.3 in reply to 3824.2
Date: 10/26/2007 3:48:29 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
00
Okay....but in my game all of my players had 20+ advantages and I only won by 2. So that confuses me. (1998647)

This Post:
00
3824.4 in reply to 3824.3
Date: 10/26/2007 3:52:39 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
2121
Well that is simply because each of your players did not each get 100 shots on goal.

Creator of (http://www.buzzerbeaterstats.com) and (http://www.buzzerbeaternews.com/) -- Ex GM of Australia -- Division 1 winner of Italy Season 1 then moved team to Australia after the country was created by the BBs. Australian team manager for 2 seasons. Won various tournaments and division 1 titles in the following seasons.
This Post:
00
3824.5 in reply to 3824.4
Date: 10/26/2007 3:58:04 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
00
Okay, well then the new ratings are much better, but still inaccurate. If you have to get a +20 for every position to win by two, then how much does it take to get a blow out?

For example: (814626) . You would expect the team that has a 40 point advantage at SG to win, instead of losing by 10.

Edit: I would like to say I really appriciate what the BBs are doing, keep it up!

Edited by packer_22 (10/26/2007 4:01:20 AM CET)

Last edited by packer_22 at 10/26/2007 4:01:20 AM

This Post:
00
3824.6 in reply to 3824.2
Date: 10/26/2007 4:01:51 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
214214
Luckily i was team 2 in this case and won the game then :P


The rating seems a little off to me though.

My small forwards for example.

One of them shot 18 times for 21 points.
The second shot 17 times for 19 points.
Neither had any free throws (although i don't know if that counts).

Given those figures, shouldn't my SF rating be above 100?

This Post:
00
3824.7 in reply to 3824.6
Date: 10/26/2007 4:29:07 AM
1986 Celtics
IV.21
Overall Posts Rated:
88
this is actually the expected efficancy.. not the computed efficancy.. the idea is to give you a rating that is disconnected from how "unlucky" you got in shooting.

This Post:
00
3824.8 in reply to 3824.7
Date: 10/26/2007 4:32:18 AM
1986 Celtics
IV.21
Overall Posts Rated:
88
there are a number of things this system doesn't take into account...

one is how lucky/unlucky you were.

two is rebounding

three is steals/turnovers

four is FT shooting

in your case 1 (they shot better from 3 than i would have expected, and you worse) and 4 is FT shooting.. you did it poorly and they did it well.
that being said you did win the game.. the thing i'm most surprised/concerned about is that you had such an advantage inside, but your PG kept jacking shots.

Edited by BB-Forrest (10/26/2007 4:33:15 AM CET)

Last edited by BB-Forrest at 10/26/2007 4:33:15 AM

This Post:
00
3824.9 in reply to 3824.8
Date: 10/26/2007 5:45:41 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
214214
Hmm, seems a bit confusing to me but it's nice as a bit of an indicator of how things went i suppose.

From: brian
This Post:
00
3824.10 in reply to 3824.9
Date: 10/26/2007 4:10:46 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
576576
I really like this revision, gives a great idea of where you strengths were and how you might be able to capitalize on them better.

"Well, no ones gonna top that." - http://tinyurl.com/noigttt
This Post:
00
3824.11 in reply to 3824.8
Date: 10/31/2007 12:31:54 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
00
there are a number of things this system doesn't take into account...

one is how lucky/unlucky you were.

two is rebounding

three is steals/turnovers

four is FT shooting

in your case 1 (they shot better from 3 than i would have expected, and you worse) and 4 is FT shooting.. you did it poorly and they did it well.
that being said you did win the game.. the thing i'm most surprised/concerned about is that you had such an advantage inside, but your PG kept jacking shots.

Edited by BB-Forrest (10/26/2007 4:33:15 AM CET)

bad passing, and a very high driving....?=)

horny on the ball, wanted to do everything himself....one man show...

TR stands for? in the stats..

Edited by manmanmanm (10/31/2007 12:32:53 AM CET)

Last edited by manmanmanm at 10/31/2007 12:32:53 AM