BuzzerBeater Forums

>>Looking at the team ratings your teams look about equal, so I could realistically see the result going either way. I think you may have answered your own question somewhat in that the reason for the big difference in score was turnovers and to a lesser extent fouls.<<

Not my question at all. I understand basketball stats and their consequences. What I want answers to are the questions I actually asked, why did the game ratings contradict the game result?

As to T/Os, how could I get a slightly higher game flow rating than my opponent when I committed SIX TIMES AS MANY T/Os? That makes no sense to me.

As a quick note, the guy with 6 PFs in one minute was, most likely, injured. The match viewer displays injured players as having fouled out. I'll try and give you a more in-depth analysis a little later...

Well, I was saying that I don't think the game ratings contradict the result at all.

And as far as game flow, that is more a result of passing and how well your team executed the offensive game plan. Turnovers can be a result of bad passing or bad handling, or just good defense by the other team. Game flow does not correspond to turnovers.

>>Ratings wise both teams are about equal,>>

Yes, and I can understand this was an upset win against me. That it was a route against me led me to think of two possibilities:

1) My team played liked Putrid Pieces of Pig Poop (PPPPs)

Answer: well, maybe three decent ratings, two PPPPs, so

2) The other team must have played very well.

Aghh!! They played even worse!! Lower ratings across the board!

How is it possible for my team to be slightly better than the other, play slightly better and get whipped by 17?

3) Turnovers.

Okay, that is the answer. 24 to 4 is huge. Why did this happen? My team must have thrown the ball around like drunken sailors:

Aghh!! my offensive flow was higher than my opponents!

So that's my predicament. I can see the stats. I can read the feedback (game ratings of players and teams). These don't align. So how do I correct this situation?
How do I apply the game's feedback to make meaningful decisions regarding my team?

This isn't isolated. I've looked at a huge chunk of games played in Season 3 in my division (last year had a different system, I'm led to believe, so that is no use) and perhaps one game in four or five leaves me scratching my head as to what the feedback ratings mean. By this I mean the player scores and the team ratings don't explain the result of the game.

I came in I'm favored (slight but true) and my guys played better, how can I have been blown out? A close loss would be random, but the feedback is not what I would have expected from a blowout loss.

Again, I'm not complaining about losing, I'm complaining about the feedback reports not explaining the result of the game by a wide margin.




Edited by Your_Imaginary_Friend (11/14/2007 6:50:36 PM CET)

Last edited by Your_Imaginary_Friend at 11/14/2007 6:50:36 PM

Ok, for points 1&2, player rating are not meant to compare different players, it is a measure of how that player played compared to his own potential. If my star player gets a 6.0 and one of my scrubs gets a 7.0 in a certain game it doesn't mean the scrub was a better player, just that he fulfilled more of his potential in that game. Player rating is not for comparing different players.

For point 3, Offensive flow does not equal turnovers. Turnovers are not a major part of game ratings because they don't need to be. You don't need a rating system to tell you how many times you turned the ball over, it is right there in the box score.

I would say the feedback from this game explains the result perfectly, two teams shot the ball about equally well percentage wise, defended the areas of the court about equally, but one tem took over 20 more shots and over 10 more FT's due to turnovers and fouls, and thus they rightly won by a large margain.

>>Well, I was saying that I don't think the game ratings contradict the result at all.

And as far as game flow, that is more a result of passing and how well your team executed the offensive game plan. Turnovers can be a result of bad passing or bad handling, or just good defense by the other team. Game flow does not correspond to turnovers.<<

Turnovers are a huge component of game flow. If my team is turning the ball over, whether by steals or stupid passes, I should not have a better game flow rating than my opponent, who did none of these.

If my rating is slightly better than my opponent who did not turnover the ball, I must have done something extremely right in order to earn that rating. What was it I did right? The feedback does not tell me that. I see nothing good. What am I missing that I did right?

We're out of synch on our responses, and so I'll wait a bit before responding to your last post.

Well first of all the difference between your offensive flow and your opponents is very small. Basically a third of a point on a 20 point scale. But I would say your offensive flow was better because your team shot better from the field. You made 41% of your shots while your opponent only made 37%. I would say the higher offensive flow shows that your team ran the offense a little bit better and got better shots. Unfortunately this was cancelled out by the other team taking a lot more shots.

>>I would say the higher offensive flow shows that your team ran the offense a little bit better and got better shots.>>

We DID NOT run our offense better. We turned it over SIX TIMES as often as they did.

If 'running the offense' does not have 'not turning the ball over' as a fundamental metric, then I'm at a complete loss to understand this.

If what you are saying is that 'when you weren't turning the ball over 24 times you ran your offense better than they did,' well that is nonsense. A bit like asking 'What did you think of the play, Mrs. Lincoln?"

I can't do anything with this information, if what you say is true. Its like saying, 'Other than the arrows in all your troopers, your battle plan was fine, General Custer."

Again, thanks for your comments. They simply aren't helping me to make sense of the game's feedback. Perhaps that's not possible right now. I do hope this thread is of use to the BB developers in highlighting what's frustrating right now.

A couple of more points to chew over:

>>>defended the areas of the court about equally<<

A know the team ratings were equal, but he had 16 steals, I had 3. So we didn't defend equally well. He had much better defensive results, and that wasn't reflected in the team rating or the player ratings.

If his 16-3 edge in steals was 'random', is there nothing I could have done to prevent that? My handling and passing are equal (slightly better actually) than his, so buying players with better HANDLING might not be an answer, since I'm already better than him.

I understand your point about not comparing ratings and potentials, but when his team did so well, why did he get such low ratings? If he didn't look at the score, he would have thought he was blown off the court, IMO.

I'm not comparing player to player, I'm looking at the sum of the five starters compared to the other five starters and seeing my team graded much higher. This makes no sense to me. When I'm blown out, I expect poor ratings.

I don't understand how anyone can look at this game and think my starters performed closer to their true potential than his did.

This is from the Rules:

"Offensive Flow (how well the offense produces assists, avoids turnovers): point guard weighted very heavily, shooting guard weighted medium, small forward weighted medium."

So you are wrong about T/Os not counting.