Warrior General Games

Like you want to know what I did to switch it around? Or did you want to know how many places the teams were moved?

What new areas are you using to determine the ranking system, compared to the first ranking.

The first system was simple

1. W-L
2. Points for
3. Head to Head in immediate positions.

The second system isnt the final system but at the moment it is

1. Points for - Points against = X
2. W-L
3. Head to head wasnt taken to account at this time.

I'm trying to think of a way to calculate strength of schedule to slide in as #3.

Edit: Found a way to caluclate for Strength of schedule

Originally posted by chicagopax
The first system was simple

1. W-L
2. Points for
3. Head to Head in immediate positions.

The second system isnt the final system but at the moment it is

1. Points for - Points against = X
2. W-L
3. Head to head wasnt taken to account at this time.

I'm trying to think of a way to calculate strength of schedule to slide in as #3.

Edit: Found a way to caluclate for Strength of schedule

Let me start off by saying that I appreciate what you're doing, as I've said numerous times in this thread that I think it, and you, are awesome.

That being said, I think you're not weighting things properly when you use math to do the rankings. If you're going to use pure math to calculate the rankings, you need to weight record a lot more than "points for and points against". Why? Because in the end... points for and against are merely a tie-breaker. What gets you into the playoffs? Your record.

So for instance, I think it's silly to say that a team that Team A, at 1-3, is ranked higher than Team B, at 2-2, just because Team B has given up literally, 11 more points. When it comes down to it, right now, Team A is five spots out of the playoff race, while Team B is in the playoffs. In my opinion there, Team B gets the nod. (Note... that wasn't a hypothetical.)

Am I bringing this up because I'm a little sad that the 2-2 Omaha Lightning are ranked 30 of 32, well behind the 24th ranked Avengers that stand at 0-4? Of course. I'm also not a fan of science and whatnot when you've got the Sactown Bulldogs ranked at 11 and us at 30 when we beat them, and we have the same record. In my opinion, any time you've got Team A and Team B with the exact same record, and Team A BEAT Team B, Team A should be ranked higher.

--

I also think you may want to distinguish between a scientific ranking of the teams and an actual "power ranking". Sure, when you look at the math of it all, maybe a low team might match up well with a middle team. However, if you look at any power rankings by any media guy, you're not going to find guys ranking 0-4 teams above 2-2 teams.

In my experience, "power rankings" typically take into account things that can't be measured... things like momentum, ability to win close games, team morale. On the other hand, something like ESPN's Hollinger Rankings for the NBA are based purely on statistics. Typically, those two types of lists don't mesh very well, because they're two completely different beasts.

--

So all that being said, here's my point: Your first system was much better than your second. I appreciate what you're doing, but when you do the math, and it comes out with weird disparities like I've mentioned, you might want to tinker with the math to yield different results.

OR, I could shut up, and take the time to create my own rankings and post them in the same thread, sort of like the different polls in college football. Either way, just throwing out some thoughts and opinions...

Well I read through all of that and understand why you might not like it so I will be willing to put this out there.

Vote on which system y'all like more.

System 1

(W-L is most prevalent)

System 2

( [PF-PA] is most prevalent)

Either vote here or in a PM.

Actually, a lot of advanced stats types have proven that a pythagorean type formula with PF & PA shows a team's strength much better than any other format.

The problem is that it's too early in the season for it to give accurate results. One outlying game against Death Valley will plummet any team to the bottom of the rankings.

The best options would be to add a strength-of-schedule component. But that'd greatly increase the time needed for something that's--I'm sure--already taking very long.

Vote: System 2

personally I would like to see the system that is the closest of the two, to what GLB uses to decide who goes to the playoffs. other than that I really have no preference. and thank you for putting in the time to do this for us.

System 1: 1

System 2: 1

Originally posted by chicagopax
System 1: 1

System 2: 1

Not sure if you counted me for system 1, but I'm all for it.

Although, like I said earlier, I may come up with something else for some rankings myself. Particularly when these damn law school finals are over...

I'll vote 1.

Even though its flawed.

Chicagopax, I know you hate our team but i wanted to say your doing a great job!

P.S. The players on my acct are shared between myself, my father and brother. We have been shaking up our roster to allow others to start on the team to help keep the peace.

Death Valley Vipers

Croc hunter coming to the vipers as well. Guess he'll hate us more :O

Slightly hurt that my 33 pancake performance didnt get any honorable mention for week 4.

Also im on the hurricanes and im gonna put this post and your website in a post on our forum. I love what your doing.

Originally posted by Varsity18
Slightly hurt that my 33 pancake performance didnt get any honorable mention for week 4.


That's insane, in one game????? WOW!!