BuzzerBeater Forums

USA - III.4 > Season 13 Rookies

Season 13 Rookies

Set priority
Show messages by
From: Fella

This Post:
00
151666.2 in reply to 151666.1
Date: 7/15/2010 10:25:03 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
2323
amazing stats as usual!

From: kLepTo

This Post:
00
151666.3 in reply to 151666.1
Date: 7/15/2010 11:03:42 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
102102
Is this going to be an ongoing thing? Corcoran is pretty mediocre at this point in his career but he will start shooting the lights out by the end of the season and the next!

From: MagicMan

This Post:
00
151666.4 in reply to 151666.3
Date: 7/15/2010 11:42:37 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
55
I'll try to stay on top of it for the season. Weekly updates to the rankings.

This Post:
00
151666.5 in reply to 151666.4
Date: 7/15/2010 12:46:28 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
66
although I am not happy with my rookies, liked the analysis.

form is temporary class is permanent
This Post:
00
151666.6 in reply to 151666.5
Date: 7/21/2010 12:04:13 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
55
This week's Rookie Rankings is updated:

(http://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=0Ap-ztFnWrTG_dFRKN...)

As you may notice, some of the rooks will have inflated per 48 minutes stats until they play in a few more games.

Among the rookies getting significant PT:
Red Claws' Corcoran is looking solid with 26 points in 75 minutes this season.
The Magic's Souza continues to impress the team with his guttiness on the floor.
Flyers shooter Juan Javier Fenares (23 pts, 10-19 FG%), Prov City's young big man Marchand (12 rebs) and Gavno's imported rookie Sarza (9 pts, 12 rebs, 2 blks) all had impressive performances.

First-round picks Hector Vigil and Joel Lopez are having trouble adjusting to the new level of play in III.4.

I added a Rookie Points category to the stats, adding all their relevant stats and subtracting turnovers. If you've got a better way to rank them, please chime in.


This Post:
00
151666.7 in reply to 151666.6
Date: 7/21/2010 12:17:31 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
11
It's no surprise Vigil is at the bottom. He's scrimmage fodder with no scrimmages yet, and only played one game because I was conserving minutes.

From: kokka
This Post:
00
151666.8 in reply to 151666.7
Date: 7/21/2010 2:07:44 PM
Tachenko
III.3
Overall Posts Rated:
5757
My rookies are not good enough to play but since I have so many injuries they will have some minutes.

This Post:
00
151666.9 in reply to 151666.8
Date: 7/28/2010 10:47:17 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
55
This week's rookie rankings are out:

(http://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=0Ap-ztFnWrTG_dFRKN...)

Not much movement at the top, due to few players getting meaningful minutes.

However, several of the top rookies are on the transfer list, inlcuding sixth pick Hubert Corcoran, if anyone is interested in keeping home-grown talent in III4.

Last edited by MagicMan at 7/28/2010 10:47:26 AM

This Post:
00
151666.10 in reply to 151666.9
Date: 7/28/2010 11:23:48 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
5050
Tomas Owen will be better than Mosely. I can't see how Mosely, who's only played 11 minutes could be ranked so high. Either way, I like both players and I've decided to try training Owen to be a SF so I'm concentrating getting his OD and ID up. This allows Partridge/Candia to benefit since they will end up with training minutes when I train the Bigs and will allow Cantrell/Coyle or Cantrell/Titus to benefit when I train the 1-spot.

This Post:
00
151666.11 in reply to 151666.10
Date: 7/29/2010 8:46:43 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
55
Yeah, lack of minutes really skews the rankings.

If you (or anyone else) can help me out with a PER formula in a spreadsheet, the rankings would make more sense. As it is, I'm just adding up the per 48 averages and subtracting turnovers. So, it's not a real ranking system by any means.

Does it make more sense to just add together the totals instead of the averages?

This Post:
00
151666.12 in reply to 151666.11
Date: 7/29/2010 10:15:00 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
5050
No, adding the totals only creates a false sense of accomplishment. Mosely, having only played 11 minutes, gives off this false illusion that he's playing better than these other players below him. Now, it's just my opinion and I'm no expert, but my method for ranking was to first group players and then compare those players.

In this case, minutes is the easiest way to group.

It's pretty difficult to just explain over the forums but I created a Histogram to diagram players that played a particular amount of minutes and found that the middle of the pack will be alot heavier than the outside edges. You don't have a whole lot of players in this group so doing a histogram might prove to be fruitless.

I'd probably determine the average minutes and then include only players that rise above the average for all those rookies. That way it will reduce your sample down to a even more manageable size. In my personal opinion, you cannot fairely judge a player that has only had 11 minutes of league play versus a player that has had 70+ minutes, especially when doing a Per48 comparison.

Anyways, keep at what you are doing. Regardless of how i think of the rankings, it provides for some fantastic forum chatter. My rankings are far from being all that great. In fact, I'm going with a 99.9% chance that my rankings are far from telling the actual truth ... especially now that I'm going to being working on my AA in Mathematics so that I can transfer to a University and double major in Mathematics and Statistics. Everything I've done with my rankigns has been accomplished through trial-&-error and from what I remember back as a 5-level maintenance analyst for the US Air Force. They're nothing special and I have no doubte that my schooling will prove that. They're more for forum fodder, something to talk about ... and to excite any potential rivalries knowing they've got a player ranked really high about to matchup against an outstanding opponent.

Advertisement