Schedule matchups Idea

[KapG]

Why should you be rewarded for losing 8-7 to Toronto and again for 15-1 against Dallas? It's stupid. Just like the real nhl (which we try to mimic as much as possible) a win is worth the same as another win no matter who you play.

I should be rewarded for going 8-7-1 against mike because most of you scrub teams just get blown out. So why should my loss of 8-7-1 be the same as you getting destroyed 16-0?

[CAM]

It wont go to WLT. No H2H format would use that even in yahoo. Scoring cant be changed. keep it the same, introduce an additional 3 more opponents per week, divide all categories by 4, totals add up to 16 at weeks end.

[kimmer]

Not to be such a troll but I noticed arian lost to Steve by only like 2 pts lol. But I lost to him like 0.5 to 15.5 lolllll

[KapG]

And he should be rewarded for only losing to Steve by that much....

[The BBKL Insider]

my team has been sucking last 3 weeks, gone ice cold

almost lost to arian and getting pumped by tony. I can only hope they decided to play hockey again at some point this season haha. Luckily i had a quick start to the season so i've made up enough points to make the playoffs

[Arian The Insider]

I think the only teams that get hurt by this are the ones that pray on crappy teams and lose to good ones. If you're bad you're bad and if you're good you're good.

I lost to Steve so why should I be rewarded lol. Congrats for not getting spanked?

[Arian The Insider]

I meant prey not pray sorry

[CasperX22]

I think the only teams that get hurt by this are the ones that pray on crappy teams and lose to good ones. If you're bad you're bad and if you're good you're good.

I lost to Steve so why should I be rewarded lol. Congrats for not getting spanked?

I mean this is the line of thinking of every sport that has ever existed in all of creation. That said, once a scoring system has been created and been implemented I have never been a fan of making drastic changes down the line. It hurts owners that have been building with a certain scoring system and rules in mind.

[Nick]

It isn't a drastic change, it decreases the error in the measure , it does not entirely change what is measured.


I've explained this is detail enough times that it's just annoying, but what Kyle and Kyle are referring to isn't accurate.

By crossing levels and types of measurements we've made something that has a lot of noise in it. we lost information in creating the category wins, that comparison is only accurate when compared against your opponent; however we then compare category wins against the other 28 teams. The metaphor of giving team extra points for scoring more goals is actually a good comparison if you're getting lost in any of this.

Hell three times in the past 8 years I've shown how little the final standings would change, it's almost always been just the 7/8/9/10 spots.

My grandpa always tells me that there is no use arguing with a drunk or an idiot. Not calling anyone here a drunk or an idiot though...

[Arian The Insider]

I think the only teams that get hurt by this are the ones that pray on crappy teams and lose to good ones. If you're bad you're bad and if you're good you're good.

I lost to Steve so why should I be rewarded lol. Congrats for not getting spanked?

I mean this is the line of thinking of every sport that has ever existed in all of creation. That said, once a scoring system has been created and been implemented I have never been a fan of making drastic changes down the line. It hurts owners that have been building with a certain scoring system and rules in mind.

well we would be using the same stats categories as before. what would be changing is how we score a teams record, not the value of players.

[CasperX22]

I think the only teams that get hurt by this are the ones that pray on crappy teams and lose to good ones. If you're bad you're bad and if you're good you're good.

I lost to Steve so why should I be rewarded lol. Congrats for not getting spanked?

I mean this is the line of thinking of every sport that has ever existed in all of creation. That said, once a scoring system has been created and been implemented I have never been a fan of making drastic changes down the line. It hurts owners that have been building with a certain scoring system and rules in mind.

well we would be using the same stats categories as before. what would be changing is how we score a teams record, not the value of players.

And you don't see that as a drastic change? I like the WLT format better personally, so I'm not disagreeing with your points. It is however a matter of opinion and it seems a lot of guys like it the way it is.

[Arian The Insider]

I think the only teams that get hurt by this are the ones that pray on crappy teams and lose to good ones. If you're bad you're bad and if you're good you're good.

I lost to Steve so why should I be rewarded lol. Congrats for not getting spanked?

I mean this is the line of thinking of every sport that has ever existed in all of creation. That said, once a scoring system has been created and been implemented I have never been a fan of making drastic changes down the line. It hurts owners that have been building with a certain scoring system and rules in mind.

well we would be using the same stats categories as before. what would be changing is how we score a teams record, not the value of players.

And you don't see that as a drastic change? I like the WLT format better personally, so I'm not disagreeing with your points. It is however a matter of opinion and it seems a lot of guys like it the way it is.

when you said owners were building with a certain scoring system i just thought you meant stat categories when i first read it. my bad if i didn't get what you were saying the first time. we have several months to discuss it anyways and if more people like the way it already is then we should keep it that way.

[kyuss]

Just as a premise I'll copy here what has always been my stance inside the CC:

As I wrote when this discussion occurred months ago, i'm strongly against a switch to a pure W-L-T points system.

The reason is simple: it would turn half of our RS matchups into a snoozefest that not even the GMs directly involved would pay attention to.
We have A LOT of one-sided matchups in this league, where the winner of the week is obvious even before its start, or matchups whose outcome in terms of W-L-T is crystal clear by the 3rd day of the week.. what makes all those matchups worth following till the end of the week is the final score being relevant towards our standings: if winning 16-0-0 is the same as winning 14-2-0 then those matchups become completely useless.

Now, having 4 matchups per week instead of 1 would increase the chances there would be at least a matchup worthy to follow your team week, making the issue less worse. But for the very top teams and the very worst teams, most weeks would still be pointless as only those weeks featuring a matchup vs one of the very top teams or one of the very worst teams would be worth following.

This being said, what I've always been in favour of is recognizing macthups W-L-T adding pts for W and T, but without taking away the pts for each stats result, which would make the final score irrelevant.

[Shoalzie]

82 is not divisible by 4 though.

I guess you should play 5 opponents for 2 weeks, and only 4 in the other 18. Leaving more weeks than we have now for the playoffs, which is good I think.

I think you can do the 4 matchup weeks in a basic 7 day week but for the short weeks (around the All-Star break for instance), you can limit the number of matchups.

The idea would be to have around 82 matchups total and if we did the W-L format...our standings would look closer to the NHL's. To have that many matchups and still use the categories...16 categories for 82 games = 1312 x 2 = 2624 points possible. You can have some crazy numbers in the standings. With 82 W-L results...you can at least have some more realistic records but you can at least the amount of category wins in some tiebreaker format.

[kyuss]

It isn't a drastic change

it is, not sure how anyone advocating for a straight change from our current scoring system to a simple W-L-T could maintain it isn't a drastic change.

it decreases the error in the measure

it doesn't.

It only decreases the error in the measure IF ALL you want to measure is who wins the matchup.
A pure matchupW-L-T system is the one that takes into account the less data and as such is an even less accurate measure of teams performance than the others unless you only care about the matchup W-L-T outcome. Which is what you want to do.
Showing that a scoring system provides a more accurate measure of what you want to measure is completely different from proving it is a more accurate measure of teams' performances.

If you want a reliable measure of teams' performances (and NOT of direct matchups outcomes only, which is the only thing YOU want to matter, something that doesn't make it any closer to reliable per se) you should push for a rotisserie system, certainly not for matchupsW-L-T.

I've explained this is detail enough times that it's just annoying,

it's annoying mainly because your explanations are based on a wrong premise.

[kyuss]

82 is not divisible by 4 though.

I guess you should play 5 opponents for 2 weeks, and only 4 in the other 18. Leaving more weeks than we have now for the playoffs, which is good I think.

I think you can do the 4 matchup weeks in a basic 7 day week but for the short weeks (around the All-Star break for instance), you can limit the number of matchups.

yeah I think that was already covered later in the thread.

The idea would be to have around 82 matchups total and if we did the W-L format...our standings would look closer to the NHL's. To have that many matchups and still use the categories...16 categories for 82 games = 1312 x 2 = 2624 points possible. You can have some crazy numbers in the standings.

I don't know why that would be a problem, but anyway, if that is supposed to be a problem for you guys, just divide each week totals by four and you're back to the same numbers we currently have, numbers you don't seem to have a problem with.

[dave1959]

how about we do scoring the way we do it now....and post W-L-T beside the regular stats, in the Standings Thread

[kyuss]

how about we do scoring the way we do it now....and post W-L-T beside the regular stats, in the Standings Thread

we already did that in the past, for that matter:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/pub ... REE&gid=21

[KapG]

we could just leave something that's been fine for 6-7 fucking years.

Anyways, Boston kyle made a good suggestion of just dividing by 4 at the end. Miks talking bout the same.thing above.

[kyuss]

we could just leave something that's been fine for 6-7 fucking years.

it's not like what we have had for 6-7yrs was perfect though, there is room for improvement (but obviously, as said, a lot of room for worsening as well)