For what it’s worth, I ran SuperCoach statistics based ratings across every player to rank the teams. SuperCoach attempts to have the top players from every position generating similar scores, so I adjusted wing to a maximum player score of 10, centre to 12 and I had the other positions at a max score of 15. So only the top player in each position can score a 15. Players that scored above 14 were Turbo, Cleary, Taumalolo, Klemmer, Cook, Fonua-Blake, Papalii and Smith. Then high 13’s were Shaun Johnson, Taupau, Bateman, Roger Tuivasa-Sheck, DCE.
Anyway the team scores were:
Sea Eagles 179.2
Cowboys 177.5
Sharks 174.4
Rabbits 173.6
Knights 161.5
Dragons 159.3
Warriors 157.6
Panthers 156.3
Raiders 154.7
Anyway the team scores were:
Sea Eagles 179.2
Cowboys 177.5
Sharks 174.4
Rabbits 173.6
Knights 161.5
Dragons 159.3
Warriors 157.6
Panthers 156.3
Raiders 154.7
If you would have enough free time to run the model again Mr Brownstone and list each teams' starting score then we would be able to determine most improved as well as the best team.
If you did have time to do that additional work - then would be comfortable endorsing your analysis as the official results for the competition.
Just a thought,
Cheers
I’m happy to do that although there’s a bit of work involved. Also just thinking about it some more, I think it might be best to base player scores off who is the highest ranked in each position across the entire comp rather than just across the 9 teams. For example, Payne Haas is the highest ranked prop across the NRL and would score the 15, with every other prop’s score being adjusted relative to that.
Not fussed whether it is used as an official ranking or not, there’s pluses and minuses to any method although perhaps what surprised me was that the outcome was a bit different to me just eyeballing teams.
My vote is that you don't recalibrate it based on Haas etc...because of the extra work involved and doubt it would change the order of the rankings...
If you did have time to do the starting teams that would be swell - then we can list out who improved the most.
Any system so long it is consistent for all teams will be fine.
Would like to endorse your analysis as official if possible as it has less human judgement than the others.
Only if you have time though Mr B as you said there is a fair bit of work involved...
Cheers
wizards rage
Not to far, off what I had picked...
Except the system seems to be weighted against the Raiders
eudebrito
|-|
Contributor
You mean the JaidersNot to far, off what I had picked...
Except the system seems to be weighted against the Raiders
Yeah I was surprised by the Raiders score. Probably the single biggest inconsistency between a players ability and SuperCoach score would be Hodgson, he just doesn’t seem to pick up that many assists, etc. Thats why I wouldn’t necessarily use it as a final assessment of ranks. The most improved team should be pretty accurate however.Not to far, off what I had picked...
Except the system seems to be weighted against the Raiders
Defence
That is quite interesting- have say I found your team the hardest to judge just because of the balance of the side.
So is that based solely on last years stats?
I’ve never played super coach.
It is nearly all based off last years stats. I used 2018 stats for say Valentine Holmes, included some weighting to 2020 for younger players that saw very little minutes in 2019 and have had a step up in workload in 2020. Just trying to keep it as current as possible. So for example I’ve used Blayke Brailey’s 2020 average score to date rather than 2019 given he’s now the starting hooker rather than playing off the bench.
wizards rage
It will be interesting to see if a teams combined 2019 player rankings accurately reflects a teams final ladder position. I don’t really know how the stats are done.
Does an attacking team accumulate higher points for its players than a lower scoring team, even if over the season the lower scoring finishes higher up the ladder?
The scoring is stacked in favour of attacking play although making plenty of tackles helps as well.
tajhay
🏉
It's incredibly addictive. It will consume your life. Don't do it!
If you have never played, this year is probably a good year to start. Makes watching other games not involving Warriors more enjoyable. Will be so much to learn so use the year as a practice run. Then over time learn stuff like how/When to trade, AE usage, VC loopholes etc. Essentially though, you are there to make money (buy low/sell high) whilst creating the most formidable team for playoffs. No bye planning this year would be helpful for new guys.
Defence
Oh man I think I’m all managered out after this one.
I’m in a tipping comp- there’s 12 of us- 6 couples- I started it a couple of years ago pretty much just to get all our wives interested in the footy haha. It worked too. $50 entry and whoever wins has to put on a shout on grand final day.
Keg and hangi at my place last year
I’ve run the stats for the original lineups. Firstly an apology to wrighty - I referenced the wrong Walker when pulling the scores in and you were hit with the ordinary (relatively) Dylan Walker’s score for your number 6 rather than prized recruit Cody, so your final team score improves by 5 points and lifts you above the Knights.
So here’s the summary of starting and finishing team scores:
Starting teams
1. Raiders 167.7
2. Sharks 167.0
3. Rabbits 165.3
4. Cowboys 161.3
5. Panthers 159.0
6. Sea Eagles 158.7
7. Warriors 157.6
8. Dragons 157.2
9. Knights 155.9
just a couple of comments on those starting teams - the Knights were negatively impacted by a very ordinary backline and Ese’ese at lock. The Sea Eagles score suffered from an incredibly weak bench.
Final teams & score change
1. Sea Eagles 179.2, +20.5
2. Cowboys 177.5, + 16.2
3. Sharks 174.4, +7.4
4. Rabbits 173.6, + 8.2
5. Warriors 162.6, +5.0
6. Knights 161.5, +5.6
7. Dragons 159.3, +2.1
8. Panthers 156.3, -2.8
9. Raiders 154.7, -13.0
So based on this analysis I would be handing both best team and most improved team to the Sea Eagles!
So here’s the summary of starting and finishing team scores:
Starting teams
1. Raiders 167.7
2. Sharks 167.0
3. Rabbits 165.3
4. Cowboys 161.3
5. Panthers 159.0
6. Sea Eagles 158.7
7. Warriors 157.6
8. Dragons 157.2
9. Knights 155.9
just a couple of comments on those starting teams - the Knights were negatively impacted by a very ordinary backline and Ese’ese at lock. The Sea Eagles score suffered from an incredibly weak bench.
Final teams & score change
1. Sea Eagles 179.2, +20.5
2. Cowboys 177.5, + 16.2
3. Sharks 174.4, +7.4
4. Rabbits 173.6, + 8.2
5. Warriors 162.6, +5.0
6. Knights 161.5, +5.6
7. Dragons 159.3, +2.1
8. Panthers 156.3, -2.8
9. Raiders 154.7, -13.0
So based on this analysis I would be handing both best team and most improved team to the Sea Eagles!
Defence
Well done.
Interesting that the starting team scores don’t really correspond with where the teams finished last year so having the best stats doesn’t necessarily mean winning the most games.
Finishing order last year-
1 rabbits
2 Raiders
3 sea eagles
4 sharks
5 panthers
6 knights
7 warriors
8 cowboys
9 dragons
Cowboys would have been boosted in 2020 by Marsters and Holmes In their line up, however they’ve been terrible under performers when you consider how much Taumalolo brings to the team. As I said, outside of Ponga, the Knights backline is pretty ordinary - even Pearce is only mid-table amongst the halfbacks. Sea Eagles bench was full of no names plus no decent hooker following the loss of Korisau & Fainu, however what was really amazing from last year was that Turbo was injured for most of the season.
Last edited:
warriors55
I'm really stoked with that! Have had a pretty crap past couple of weeks so this has really boosted my spirits
Cheers to Wrighty for organizing this GM game and to Mr Brownstone, Wizards and everyone else for their input and calculations. Look forward to doing this again in the future with all of you.
Also Rabbits lost Burgess x2, Sutton, so they start 2020 a weaker team. Raiders were grand finalists & finished top of the rankings. I’d say there’a pretty good consistency between the stats & who finished where once you allow for team changes between seasons.
Across the entire comp, the top players in SuperCoach in 2019 were in order: Tedesco, Haas, Taumalolo, Turbo, Cook, Smith, Bateman, Roger Tuivasa-Sheck, Mitchell, Murray, Munster, Ponga. Hard to argue with any of that.
Across the entire comp, the top players in SuperCoach in 2019 were in order: Tedesco, Haas, Taumalolo, Turbo, Cook, Smith, Bateman, Roger Tuivasa-Sheck, Mitchell, Murray, Munster, Ponga. Hard to argue with any of that.
Bit surprised that the sea eagles improved the most when they made the least transactions.
Are you sure it is all correct Mr Brownstone the only reason I ask is that The warriors went up by exactly 5 points. And unless you had've spotted the Dylan walker vs Cody walker issue the Warriors would have stayed absolutely identical on 157.6 points both in their starting team and final team?
Can you have a quick glance at the calculations and lists of final team vs starting team before we bless this as the final results? The starting teams are posted in the opening post of this thread so maybe double check you didn't re-run the final teams twice for a couple of the teams?
Just a thought?
Similar threads
wizards rage
Last Game
12 May
24 - 12
7.2
Total Avg Rating
10.0
Your Avg Rating
Highest Rated Player
Lowest Rated Player
Compiled from 8 ratings