BuzzerBeater Forums

I know that, but if a player has 0 shots, like the example above, he should have 0 PP100, because there is nothing to calculate. The C has zero shots, but 51.2 PP100. How is this possible?

All I'm asking is whether the FT or shoots that result in shooting fouls are taken into account when PP100 are calculated...

I know that, but if a player has 0 shots, like the example above, he should have 0 PP100, because there is nothing to calculate. The C has zero shots, but 51.2 PP100. How is this possible?

All I'm asking is whether the FT or shoots that result in shooting fouls are taken into account when PP100 are calculated...

It doesn't matter how many shots he took. The game engine calculates that if he took 100 shots, he'd average that number of points. It's not based on any real results, just game engine calculations.

Ι, personally, contacted BB-Marin last year, via bb-mail and asked for clarification on whether FTs are included in the pp100 rating or not.
He kindly responded to my query and asked for the purpose of it. When i explained why i wanted it, a day later, thankfully, he replied that he looked at the GE and found nothing indicating that FTs are part of the pp100 ratings.

So, Villagkoura's initial post and questions make a lot of sense, since we have a game that C played for 48mins, without an (non fouled)attempted field goal, yet the C position gets a pp100 rating other than zero.

As to hrudey's explanation, it's hard to accept without official verification.
Mainly because pp100s relate to the game's attempted shots. They should.
After taking into account all the conditions these shots were taken under, then the GE should calculate the equivalent points in 100 similar shots.
Otherwise, what does it calculate? How many points we would get a hundred times a player touched the ball or had the ball and was facing the basket etc? It doesn't make sense.
The rating is points per 100 shots(similar to those taken in the game). If there are no shots, there should be no pp100.


Last edited by maddoghellas at 1/22/2014 11:33:56 AM

As to hrudey's explanation, it's hard to accept without official verification.
Mainly because pp100s relate to the game's attempted shots. They should.
After taking into account all the conditions these shots were taken under, then the GE should calculate the equivalent points in 100 similar shots.
Otherwise, what does it calculate? How many points we would get a hundred times a player touched the ball or had the ball and was facing the basket etc? It doesn't make sense.
The rating is points per 100 shots(similar to those taken in the game). If there are no shots, there should be no pp100.

Go through any number of games you like, look at the number of points scored and the number of PP100 predicted for players who attempted zero free throws, and then see how many times that the PP100 is exactly equal to points divided by shots multiplied by 100. It will be exceedingly rare for that to be the case, because that's not at all what it is measuring. If that were the case, they'd have it down in the stat line with steals, points, blocked shots, etc. Instead, it's up with the team ratings, which are also abstract calculations by the engine that are not direct results of what happened in the game, but instead a tool to evaluate how your team performed.

But if you prefer an official answer, the game manual states:

For games played during season 3 and later, we have replaced this with the more comprehensive matchup ratings. The matchup rating represents the number of points that players at a given position would have scored, on average, if they were to take 100 shots. A higher number is indicative of better scoring opportunities at that position over the course of the game, and of course you should try to take full advantage of your strength when selecting your tactics. Since tactics can be very complicated, you should ask your fellow players in the Forums what they have learned, because they can tell you a lot more from their own experience than we can in a brief description of the engine. Good luck!

I'm pleased to see a thread on this because it's rarely discussed anywhere, and I have yet to find a good use for the information. I'm sure it would be helpful if I understood how to apply it to future games, but I don't. I'd imagine I'm not alone in this.

Go through any number of games you like, look at the number of points scored and the number of PP100 predicted for players who attempted zero free throws, and then see how many times that the PP100 is exactly equal to points divided by shots multiplied by 100. It will be exceedingly rare for that to be the case, because that's not at all what it is measuring. If that were the case, they'd have it down in the stat line with steals, points, blocked shots, etc. Instead, it's up with the team ratings, which are also abstract calculations by the engine that are not direct results of what happened in the game, but instead a tool to evaluate how your team performed.

Υοu've lost me there.
I've done the calculations with FTs included as attempts( 2fts= 1AFG), i was getting way off the mark(final score or points scored per position).
After ΒΒ-Μarin's clarification i excluded free throws, was still getting as you say too, big inconsistancies.
But i can't pinpoint where exactly you disagree with me.

The team ratings can be calculated. It is stated they have nothing to do with the opponent, only our players skillsets, game shapes, enthousiasm, location and lately GPD prediction.

Go through any number of games you like, look at the number of points scored and the number of PP100 predicted for players who attempted zero free throws, and then see how many times that the PP100 is exactly equal to points divided by shots multiplied by 100. It will be exceedingly rare for that to be the case, because that's not at all what it is measuring. If that were the case, they'd have it down in the stat line with steals, points, blocked shots, etc. Instead, it's up with the team ratings, which are also abstract calculations by the engine that are not direct results of what happened in the game, but instead a tool to evaluate how your team performed.

Υοu've lost me there.
I've done the calculations with FTs included as attempts( 2fts= 1AFG), i was getting way off the mark(final score or points scored per position).
After ΒΒ-Μarin's clarification i excluded free throws, was still getting as you say too, big inconsistancies.
But i can't pinpoint where exactly you disagree with me.

The team ratings can be calculated. It is stated they have nothing to do with the opponent, only our players skillsets, game shapes, enthousiasm, location and lately GPD prediction.

Mostly the bold stuff:

As to hrudey's explanation, it's hard to accept without official verification.
Mainly because pp100s relate to the game's attempted shots. They should.
After taking into account all the conditions these shots were taken under, then the GE should calculate the equivalent points in 100 similar shots.
Otherwise, what does it calculate? How many points we would get a hundred times a player touched the ball or had the ball and was facing the basket etc? It doesn't make sense.
The rating is points per 100 shots(similar to those taken in the game). If there are no shots, there should be no pp100.

Οk, im back on track

So, in your opinion if the pp100 doesn't relate to the game's attempted shots, where does it? Or you believe that it's not a necessary requirement, they do relate (only)to something "existing/identifiable"?

Imagine coin flip.
1st day coin was flipped 100 times. Result: 60 heads, 40 tails.
2nd day coin was flipped 2 times. Result: 0 heads, 2 tails.
3rd day coin wasn't flipped. Result: 0 heads, 0 tails.
What can we say about boxscore?
Boxscore in 1st day: 60-40.
Boxscore in 2nd day: 0-2.
Boxscore in 3rd day: 0-0.
So what can we say about probability (heads and tails per 100 flips)?
Probability in 1st day: 60% - 40%
Probability in 2nd day: 0% - 100%
Probability in 3rd day: non exists.
Wrong. Even children know that coin flip probability in all three days always is 50% - 50%.
Probability exists even without attempts. And result of limited number of attempts very often is different than probability.
So it is what points per 100 shots means in BB.

Of course PP100 is broken (or at least misleading) because it doesn't include team effort, but it is issue to other discussion. So when you are CTed then PP100 means "theoretical PP100 if opponent wouldn't play CT" or something like that.

Last edited by B.B.King at 1/22/2014 4:29:17 PM

Are yoy telling me that GE is "flipping a coin", in order to produce the pp100s and doesn't calculate each match's constants and variables in order to come up with a result?
I seriously doubt it, there is no indication anywhere, neither in the game manual nor any BB statements, for such thing.
Im ok if told officialy that this is the case.

Common belief is that pp100s include all aspects of the match ups. Opponents skills, stamina, enthusiasm, attitude, location, the whole lot. Except FTs.
Having that in mind, all the differences from my calculations to the final points scored, i attributed them to "randomness".
But even randomness would have a very large margin, from game to game.

My suspicions are two.

a) Randomness exists as calculated, very unpredictable with regards to its peak point. This theory intergrates the probabilities you mentioned.

b) pp100s are very accurate, BUT one or more of the variables that we believe to be intergrated, actually isn't.
Since we get almost always, in the same match, some players from the same team overscoring and others underscoring(pp100 wise), such variable wouldn't be enthusiasm, attitude or location for instance, that affect a team's players equally.