p_malinich
Data Expert
www.elevenlions.com
Posts: 4,201
|
Post by p_malinich on Dec 17, 2012 23:46:25 GMT -6
So why did our rating change when we didn't play?
If you watch your Power Rating closely (which I don't recommend), you may notice that your Rating changed and you didn't play in that window.
The most likely thing that happened is that a former opponent won or tied a game.
Since your strength of opponent is measured by their wins/ties for the whole season, every time they win or tie, your points for strength will increase.
As the season rolls along, it won't be as noticeable, but it happens none-the-less.
|
|
|
Post by Boomer on Dec 17, 2012 23:57:43 GMT -6
So why isn't Brother Martin #1 on Power Ratings? So why did our rating drop after a win? . The real answer is the same reason Glenmora (just for example, no denigration intended) is ranked 12th ahead of Menard, Parkview, Rapides (who they lost 4-0), St. Martin's, Country Day, Haynes, etc.... the ranking program is just a ... program. It dumbly looks at results, regardless of schedule. Get used to seeing "top 10" teams with minimal games, relatively weak schdules against other teams with weaker schedules. We will see some bizarre top tens and playoff brackets, just like basketball it will be too late to return to a more logical system. Oh well...progress.
|
|
p_malinich
Data Expert
www.elevenlions.com
Posts: 4,201
|
Post by p_malinich on Dec 18, 2012 7:29:38 GMT -6
So why isn't Brother Martin #1 on Power Ratings? So why did our rating drop after a win? . The real answer is the same reason Glenmora (just for example, no denigration intended) is ranked 12th ahead of Menard, Parkview, Rapides (who they lost 4-0), St. Martin's, Country Day, Haynes, etc.... the ranking program is just a ... program. It dumbly looks at results, regardless of schedule. Get used to seeing "top 10" teams with minimal games, relatively weak schdules against other teams with weaker schedules. We will see some bizarre top tens and playoff brackets, just like basketball it will be too late to return to a more logical system. Oh well...progress. I definitely understand the limitations of a program, and I'm not lobbying for or against the new proposed system. I'm just doing my best to understand it myself (and share those learnings with the soccer community at large). The human element that currently exists also has limitations in: - Mis-reporting of scores (as affected Haynes 2-3 years ago)
- Mis-seeding of teams (as affected Newman, Lusher, Episcopal BR, and others last year)
So what I do like most about the proposal is that scores will be required to be reported to LHSAA in a timely manner. The whole system will be more visible (and yes, will still have flaws).
|
|
p_malinich
Data Expert
www.elevenlions.com
Posts: 4,201
|
Post by p_malinich on Dec 18, 2012 8:17:47 GMT -6
So why isn't Brother Martin #1?Brother Martin has all 10 1st place votes in D-I. Lafayette is in 2nd, but has a most 8 2nd place votes. Further, Brother Martin is 10-0 and Lafayette is 7-1-1. Then why is Lafayette in 1st in the Power Ratings and Brother Martin in 3rd (with Newman tucked in between)? Results component: You get 10 points for a win, 5 for a tie, and 0 for a loss. - Brother Martin has averaged 10 points for its results (all wins)
- Lafayette has averaged 8.3 points (7 wins & 1 tie in 9 games),
- Brother Martin has the lead here 10.0 to 8.3.
Strength of schedule component: Keep in mind that this component is based on the # of wins that the opponent has (not their WLT %). In this component... - Brother Martin's "biggest win" is over St. Paul's (who has 8.5 wins). And 4 of their 10 wins have been over teams with 2 or fewer wins. That winds up being an average of 4.9 points for strength of schedule.
- Lafayette, on the other hand, beat Airline (and earned their 19 wins). They also have 3 additional wins over teams with 9 or more wins. That's 4 teams "better" than St. Paul's win by Brother Martin. On the low end, Lafayette's tie was with Acadiana (earning 75% of Acadiana's wins), which was worth the same as beating Rummel each time for Brother Martin. And Lafayette's loss to Airline still earned them 1/2 of Airline's 19 wins making it essentially the same as Brother Martin beating West Jefferson (with 0 wins). Lafayette has earned 9.0 points for strength of schedule.
- Lafayette has the lead here 9.0 to 4.9
Put that all together and Lafayette's Power Rating is 17.3 putting them clearly in 1st place and Brother Martin's is 14.9 in 3rd place with 4th thru 6th less than 0.2 points behind. So which is right? Is Brother Martin #1 based on the voters and their criteria? Or is Lafayette #1 based on the attempt to combine results and strength of schedule? Again, I'm NOT trying to say who deserves it or who doesn't. I'm simply trying to help everyone (including me) understand why the Ratings are where they are. Last year, there were plenty of complaints about the Power Ratings not making sense & I didn't understand them well enough then to explain them. So this year, that's what I'm attempting to do. Feel free to ask questions - I probably won't have time to do an in-depth analysis on every team, but will try to help give clarity to the system.
|
|
|
Post by loJic on Dec 18, 2012 8:36:11 GMT -6
I say we bring the loJic rating back. Wait....that means more work for me. The pOkLE ratings!!!
|
|
p_malinich
Data Expert
www.elevenlions.com
Posts: 4,201
|
Post by p_malinich on Dec 18, 2012 8:38:00 GMT -6
So what's the difference between LHSAA and Flat3 rating?Flat3 has been the standard since before me (which is granted only a few years). It was named after the Moderator that designed it (I believe). There have been a few other calculations that have been tried, but Flat3 seemed to generally agree more with the voters (my opinion) so it has stood. LHSAA NEW calc has similar, but different, thinking - There are only 3 tiers rather than 5. Shootout wins/losses are not distinguished from other wins/losses.
- More emphasis is given to the result (10 points for a win instead of 5), which in essence dilutes the portion related to strength of opponent.
The impact? Brother Martin is a great example here as well. Under the flat3 system, which tried to account more for opponent's strength, Brother Martin would actually be in 9th place (rather than 3rd) getting passed by St. Amant, Airline, Caddo Magnet, and St. Thomas More. (Again, strength of opponent in both these systems has been defined as the number of wins/ties your opponent has - not their WLT %). Like has been said, the LHSAA calculation is what's being proposed for use beginning next year for wild cards and for seeding. Just trying to help focus the discussion and expand the understanding. Now I need to get to work. Ask questions - will check in later....
|
|
|
Post by chspc2 on Dec 19, 2012 10:01:45 GMT -6
And won't we be required to play a certain amount of games?
There are some teams that do not come close to playing a full schedule. And won't that affect the power ratings?
|
|
|
Post by loJic on Dec 19, 2012 11:06:00 GMT -6
And won't we be required to play a certain amount of games? There are some teams that do not come close to playing a full schedule. And won't that affect the power ratings? I think 12 or 15 for the power rankings to take full affect. The teams that do not play the minimum amount of games required are disqualified if i'm not mistaken.
|
|
|
Post by Chalmetteowl on Dec 19, 2012 11:17:17 GMT -6
those teams can still get in the playoffs if they qualify through their district
the best thing about the LHSAA using power ratings is the online schedule...
|
|
|
Post by beauchenecoach on Dec 19, 2012 11:35:35 GMT -6
Minimum of 15 games required to be seeded in playoffs by power ratings. If you play less and qualify, you will be seeded after all teams that play their minimum... Same as volleyball rules.
|
|
p_malinich
Data Expert
www.elevenlions.com
Posts: 4,201
|
Post by p_malinich on Dec 19, 2012 11:46:17 GMT -6
Minimum of 15 games required to be seeded in playoffs by power ratings. If you play less and qualify, you will be seeded after all teams that play their minimum... Same as volleyball rules. When you say, if you play less and qualify, that would be as 1 of the top 2 in your district, is that right? For wildcard spots, below the minimum would cause you not to be eligible, is that true?
|
|
|
Post by Chalmetteowl on Dec 19, 2012 14:01:30 GMT -6
yep
it will help grow the sport as it ensures all serious soccer schools play a nice schedule
|
|
|
Post by beauchenecoach on Dec 19, 2012 18:45:52 GMT -6
Only district champs auto qualify with power ratings... All other playoff spots are wildcards.
|
|
p_malinich
Data Expert
www.elevenlions.com
Posts: 4,201
|
Post by p_malinich on Dec 19, 2012 19:42:53 GMT -6
Only district champs auto qualify with power ratings... All other playoff spots are wildcards. Wow! That's a huge new fact (at least to me).
|
|
|
Post by beauchenecoach on Dec 19, 2012 20:07:02 GMT -6
All sports with power ratings only auto qualify district champs. Now sports are actually considering proposong to ot have any auto qualifiers at all over the past few years. It hasn't happened yet, nor do I expect it to, but 1 per district is PLENTY enough for auto qualifying. Everyone else is a wildcard and needs to play a good schedule and gets some good results. Better than scheduling pansies and avoided good divisional teams and sneaking in over a good team that loses great games.
|
|
p_malinich
Data Expert
www.elevenlions.com
Posts: 4,201
|
Post by p_malinich on Dec 19, 2012 20:30:02 GMT -6
All sports with power ratings only auto qualify district champs. Now sports are actually considering proposong to ot have any auto qualifiers at all over the past few years. It hasn't happened yet, nor do I expect it to, but 1 per district is PLENTY enough for auto qualifying. Everyone else is a wildcard and needs to play a good schedule and gets some good results. Better than scheduling pansies and avoided good divisional teams and sneaking in over a good team that loses great games. Totally agree. Just didn't realize that it was part of the change. A far cry from just a few years ago when top 3 in district made it.
|
|
|
Post by Boomer on Dec 31, 2012 14:16:02 GMT -6
1. 15 games minmum next year will require teams stay on top of situation. Unless a team participates in a tournament, it may be hard to get 15 games in. Soccer outdoors, winter, will never have the structure that basketball has.
Several traditional programs this year do not apparently have 15 games scheduled... As a matter of fact, probably a majority of teams in D-III do not have 15 games scheduled this year. Might need to review and modify this game requirement for D-III. 2. the schedule-results google doc for a lot of teams are almost always considerably out of date sometimes by a week or two ... Some schedules themselves are not updated or correct despite submittals long ago. Would more people tranposing data help?
3. Many problems seem to be caused by schedule conflicts submitted by opposing teams, unreported changes in date due to weather, etc.
Additions-deletions to schedule seem to be difficult to resolve, or report. The indivudal team records sometimes do not coorespond to the records posted on the Rankings update page and cannot be rationalized due to no updated database.
More help needed? Should individual coaches enter results directly into the data base?
4. Disinterest by a lot of coaches of teams who just don't want to post their results, don't know about the resource, are not computer literate, just put things off. When you see a school's web site with no schedule, no results posted, no roster, etc., you can hardly expect timely submissions to this site. What to do?
|
|
p_malinich
Data Expert
www.elevenlions.com
Posts: 4,201
|
Post by p_malinich on Dec 31, 2012 16:29:05 GMT -6
1. 15 games minmum next year will require teams stay on top of situation. Unless a team participates in a tournament, it may be hard to get 15 games in. Soccer outdoors, winter, will never have the structure that basketball has. Several traditional programs this year do not apparently have 15 games scheduled... As a matter of fact, probably a majority of teams in D-III do not have 15 games scheduled this year. Might need to review and modify this game requirement for D-III. 2. the schedule-results google doc for a lot of teams are almost always considerably out of date sometimes by a week or two ... Some schedules themselves are not updated or correct despite submittals long ago. Would more people tranposing data help?3. Many problems seem to be caused by schedule conflicts submitted by opposing teams, unreported changes in date due to weather, etc. Additions-deletions to schedule seem to be difficult to resolve, or report. The indivudal team records sometimes do not coorespond to the records posted on the Rankings update page and cannot be rationalized due to no updated database. More help needed? Should individual coaches enter results directly into the data base?4. Disinterest by a lot of coaches of teams who just don't want to post their results, don't know about the resource, are not computer literate, just put things off. When you see a school's web site with no schedule, no results posted, no roster, etc., you can hardly expect timely submissions to this site. What to do? 1. I'm okay with that. 15 games seems a reasonable request to get a team ready to participate in playoffs. That's only 5/month. If a team can't do that, it's fine, but they shouldn't enter into the playoffs and legitimately think anything positive will come of it. A team like that can play their games (however many they want) and then end their season & be happy. 2. These results do lag by a week (sometimes two), but they are lightning speed compared to the prior year's options (at least based on my memory). Part of the issue is Coaches/Parents not submitting them timely & they may be off-cycle depending on when the other volunteers have time to help enter data. Additional data entry folks might help solve the problem. I can set up the process to add more hands if others are willing to commit. Anyone interested can PM me (including those that may have offered in the past - those have been buried in the inbox at this point). 2A. "submittals long ago" feels like an exaggeration to me unless I'm missing something completely. It's my understanding that we have 4 schedules in the queue to be entered & that we'll be caught up. I've also posted the form on the Board for ANYONE to use to submit schedules directly to me & they'll be included in the absolute next publishing of data (which I'm working on now by the way). If you've previously submitted & they haven't shown up yet, send them to me at SetFreeMail@yahoo.com just to be sure. I'm doing all of the final audits currently. 3. MOST problems are caused by ALL of those situations. That's actually bigger than the data entry delays - the fact that our data entry folks and reviewers need to try to figure out what happened. The Rankings page and the Results pages have never been synchronized - they are closer this year than ever which is what highlights that time gap. But the reality is there's never been that mechanism (but we continue to close the gap). Changes are the hardest to deal with - if I get some additional volunteers, we could assign 1 or more to deal just with those issues (although they won't have much fun). 3A. I have toyed with having individuals post results directly; that would be ideal. I am open to suggestions as to how (although I'm not willing to give 150 people access to the spreadsheet itself). I've looked at GoogleForms as the option for that, but the amount of work that would go into designing a spreadsheet that could handle that many variables is incredible (unless I'm missing something). Give me a reasonable "HOW" and I'm more than willing to make it easier. 4. This is the part of it all that answers the rest. Next year's proposal around Power Ratings involves Coaches (or someone) submitting results to LHSAA within a few days. Much of the work doing that on this site SHOULD go away. Teams will be required to do it rather than requested to do it (and we'll try to mine the data from there for use in other things like stats).
|
|
|
Post by Boomer on Dec 31, 2012 19:08:47 GMT -6
OOPPPS, didn't mean to be obnoxious or picky about that data base post... more to point out some issues that the experts can ponder. I'd personally also like to know home team if possible... I also wish the display was a little more... colorful or something... and climatic data, size field, rosters, shots on goal, shots, corners, saves, referrees names and association, etc., for each game ... LOL
|
|
p_malinich
Data Expert
www.elevenlions.com
Posts: 4,201
|
Post by p_malinich on Jan 1, 2013 11:29:17 GMT -6
OOPPPS, didn't mean to be obnoxious or picky about that data base post... more to point out some issues that the experts can ponder. I'd personally also like to know home team if possible... I also wish the display was a little more... colorful or something... and climatic data, size field, rosters, shots on goal, shots, corners, saves, referrees names and association, etc., for each game ... LOL No offense taken. Maybe a few buttons pushed. But no offense. We've gone through 2 MAJOR revisions to the old process to get to where we are, but are starting to test the limits. Here are the 2 issues related to what you're asking: 1) Home team? My bad from the get-go on that. I overlooked that from prior model. But I think we now have all but a few schools re-entered to include it. So know we need info from the schools. If anyone has previously submitted something & it hasn't shown up yet, send it to me at SetFreeMail@yahoo.com just to be sure. For example, Fontainebleau sent me complete schedule yesterday & it was included last night when I published. 2) Change in display? I'm totally open. My Excel version does MUCH more than GoogleDocs will allow with conditional formatting, etc., but GoogleDocs the best I've been able to find for public sharing without hiring a web server and designer. GoogleDocs does allow more than we use with color, etc., but it loses it or misapplies it with the next publishing. So that's a never-ending battle of having to re-do every time we publish. I'm willing to investigate any other suggestions, but none have surfaced yet.
|
|