Posted by slymonium on 8/22/2010 12:15:00 AM (view original):
Trevor, how are any of your posts can you honestly say are useful or contain any useful info amongst all the crap? They all start out with "fwiw" (which is nobody), or "I said in 2004" (again nobody cares). Now before you get all defensive and think I'm just here to bash you, take a second and think. I don't ever come on here and bash you. All I'm saying is to step back, take a second and read your posts- they don't contribute one piece of useful information.

I'm really just giving you all my opinion.  DEF ratings are so bad/useless that you can make the argument that the game just might  be better without them, though that will never happen because it's probably too much trouble than it's worth.

Posted by slymonium on 8/22/2010 12:21:00 AM (view original):
Anyway, I thought you retired?? Regardless, my guess is that the new salaries and work on the game is due to your input and feedback? Then two years from now when people are at their boiling point with the state of the sim, you'll be there to remind us all about all the great ideas you provided that didn't end up being incorporated. 

Nobody is ever really retired from WIS until they're dead.  I'm not sure I ever used the word retirement...I said I was done, and I don't see a reason to recant that statement, however that doesn't mean that I'll never be back.  I guess the "I told ya so" stuff stems from my general frustration with the sim/seble and to be honest, I like being right...who doesn't?  If everyone forgot about what someone said/did and it came to pass...they have the right to bring it back up (ANYONE NOT JUST ME) to receive their just due.  It doesn't really matter if it helps or forwards a conversation about the current problems in the sim, you were right and should have the right to remind people that you were...it adds credibility I think.  If it makes me an ******* then so be it...I can handle that.

Posted by colonels19 on 8/22/2010 10:28:00 AM (view original):

Posted by slymonium on 8/22/2010 12:15:00 AM (view original):
Trevor, how are any of your posts can you honestly say are useful or contain any useful info amongst all the crap? They all start out with "fwiw" (which is nobody), or "I said in 2004" (again nobody cares). Now before you get all defensive and think I'm just here to bash you, take a second and think. I don't ever come on here and bash you. All I'm saying is to step back, take a second and read your posts- they don't contribute one piece of useful information.

I'm really just giving you all my opinion.  DEF ratings are so bad/useless that you can make the argument that the game just might  be better without them, though that will never happen because it's probably too much trouble than it's worth.

I think the majority like defensive ratings, they just wish they were a little less insane in some select cases

Posted by colonels19 on 8/22/2010 10:34:00 AM (view original):

Posted by slymonium on 8/22/2010 12:21:00 AM (view original):
Anyway, I thought you retired?? Regardless, my guess is that the new salaries and work on the game is due to your input and feedback? Then two years from now when people are at their boiling point with the state of the sim, you'll be there to remind us all about all the great ideas you provided that didn't end up being incorporated. 

Nobody is ever really retired from WIS until they're dead.  I'm not sure I ever used the word retirement...I said I was done, and I don't see a reason to recant that statement, however that doesn't mean that I'll never be back.  I guess the "I told ya so" stuff stems from my general frustration with the sim/seble and to be honest, I like being right...who doesn't?  If everyone forgot about what someone said/did and it came to pass...they have the right to bring it back up (ANYONE NOT JUST ME) to receive their just due.  It doesn't really matter if it helps or forwards a conversation about the current problems in the sim, you were right and should have the right to remind people that you were...it adds credibility I think.  If it makes me an ******* then so be it...I can handle that.

Why do you even care though? If you know you were right before, why do you need to post it here? Nobody Cares. Nobody reads your post and says to themselves, "Geez, colonels was right. I should listen to him more often." Why? Because Nobody Cares. Nobody cares about receiving their "just due" or whatever. It doesn't add credibility to anything to post here saying "I was right." I never said it made you an ****hole, all I'm saying is that Nobody Cares. You stating your opinion about something is perfectly fine, but to preclude it or follow it with, "I have been saying since 2004" or whatever is just ridiculous because Nobody Cares.

So... what you're saying, sly, is that someone cares?

Exactly!

When I said "redo defensive ratings" I didn't mean change the system, just rerun the logic with updated position listings, which I have done for the spreadsheet.  I expected more of a change in certain guys, but for now it is what it is.  I agree that using defensive rebounding doesn't really mesh with how the engine uses it, but if we removed it (which would require redoing the entire process) then all we'd be left with is steals and blocks.  At that point we're pretty much back to where we were before.  There just isn't enough data to come up with a great process for defensive ratings.  I really wish there were.

Posted by seble on 8/23/2010 9:13:00 AM (view original):
When I said "redo defensive ratings" I didn't mean change the system, just rerun the logic with updated position listings, which I have done for the spreadsheet.  I expected more of a change in certain guys, but for now it is what it is.  I agree that using defensive rebounding doesn't really mesh with how the engine uses it, but if we removed it (which would require redoing the entire process) then all we'd be left with is steals and blocks.  At that point we're pretty much back to where we were before.  There just isn't enough data to come up with a great process for defensive ratings.  I really wish there were.

You should use DRtg, Stl%, Blk%, and all-defensive selections (and not use DReb%).  If the formula is applied correctly, at least 90% of the players should have a reasonable defensive rating.

Posted by seble on 8/23/2010 9:13:00 AM (view original):
When I said "redo defensive ratings" I didn't mean change the system, just rerun the logic with updated position listings, which I have done for the spreadsheet.  I expected more of a change in certain guys, but for now it is what it is.  I agree that using defensive rebounding doesn't really mesh with how the engine uses it, but if we removed it (which would require redoing the entire process) then all we'd be left with is steals and blocks.  At that point we're pretty much back to where we were before.  There just isn't enough data to come up with a great process for defensive ratings.  I really wish there were.

So you're okay with Troy Murphy, an average on his best-night, lackluster on most nights defender being rated the same as Bill Russell and Hakeem Olajuwon, unanimously agreed upon as being two of the greatest defensive players of all-time?  Oh, different position, you say?  How about Scottie Pippen?

This is ridiculous.

I would rather have Defensive rating just be a flat 50 for everyone, add in stl%/blk% and then add points for making the all-defensive teams.  read:  Not 40 points.  Like - 20 for 1st team, 10 for 2nd team.  Maybe 5 for a vote.


"At that point we're pretty much back to where we were before."

And why is now better than before?

I HAVE NO COMMENT!

Posted by ncmusician_7 on 8/23/2010 12:13:00 PM (view original):

Posted by seble on 8/23/2010 9:13:00 AM (view original):
When I said "redo defensive ratings" I didn't mean change the system, just rerun the logic with updated position listings, which I have done for the spreadsheet.  I expected more of a change in certain guys, but for now it is what it is.  I agree that using defensive rebounding doesn't really mesh with how the engine uses it, but if we removed it (which would require redoing the entire process) then all we'd be left with is steals and blocks.  At that point we're pretty much back to where we were before.  There just isn't enough data to come up with a great process for defensive ratings.  I really wish there were.

You should use DRtg, Stl%, Blk%, and all-defensive selections (and not use DReb%).  If the formula is applied correctly, at least 90% of the players should have a reasonable defensive rating.

What we use is a variant of Dean Oliver's work.  DRtg also incorporates defensive rebounding as far as I know.  I would argue that 90% of the players in this game are rated reasonably.  There are a few exceptions, like Murphy, but they are just that, exceptions.  There are some more advanced metrics that have come about in recent years, but if we can't use something for all the historical seasons we include, then it's not something we want to do.

I can't believe having any exceptions that indicate something as ludicrous as Zach Randolph equaling Hakeem Olajuwon in a defensive standpoint is something you'd want to do.

Seriously, I think having no defensive rating at all is better than this.

I don't agree that having no defense rating at all would be preferable.  Then, as has been noted elsewhere, the wide world of players renowned more for man defense rather than help defense would truly be nerfed by the system.  So much for Rodman, Moncrief, Michael Cooper, etc.  There must be a way to do some common sense quality control of the quantifications. 

seble, would you all consider taking suggestions regarding defense ratings that just don't pass the straight face test and exercising judgment to make at least a few manual adjustments accordingly?  I understand you can't afford to go very far down the slippery slopes of either second-guessing the system you've established or letting the inmates run the asylum, but some of the ratings (and you've heard us complain about them) are silly enough to detract from satisfaction with the game.  You could focus on our top 10 suggestions for D-rating adjustment regarding specific player seasons...something like that.