Supercoach Scoring: Please Explain?

[Pout]

Roo was on 14 at half time, 15 at 3 quarter time and 25 at the end of the game?
lol

 

[remedi]

roo had 24 at 3 quarter time, no?

 

[LiverpoolRed]

Roo was on 14 at half time, 15 at 3 quarter time and 25 at the end of the game?
lol

No, Roo was on 24 at 3qtr time, he went up because they had to adjust the scores each quater, the start of conservative and then ad points on each qtr. And coz it was a bit of a scrappy match ever bodys scores got a bit of a boost. King was on -5 at half tame and 63 at 3qtr time, that means he scored 68pts in a quater, but if you look at his stats he shouldnt have been on that much. I feel Gilbert was robbed his stats and influence on the game were huge, he had wat 35 touches 20 marks and a goal? not to mention his solid performance shuting down guys in defence.

 

[Clunk]

The only thing they need to do IMHO is make key defenders more effective. Spoil kings like Merret, Glass etc should score higher to reflect their influence on a game.

Presti an SC gun

 

[Ed_Gein]

No, Roo was on 24 at 3qtr time, he went up because they had to adjust the scores each quater, the start of conservative and then ad points on each qtr. And coz it was a bit of a scrappy match ever bodys scores got a bit of a boost. King was on -5 at half tame and 63 at 3qtr time, that means he scored 68pts in a quater, but if you look at his stats he shouldnt have been on that much. I feel Gilbert was robbed his stats and influence on the game were huge, he had wat 35 touches 20 marks and a goal? not to mention his solid performance shuting down guys in defence.

To be fair i only watched the 2nd half, but i think all of the marks he took were uncontested being the loose man across half back. (1 point for uncontested, 6 points for contested) Not to mention i'm pretty sure he kicked it out on the full twice.

 

[Jezzza]

Can someone clear this up for me. I've been under the impression that Frees Against are included in the Clanger count, is this correct or not?

Cheers

 

[AssassinAndy]

Can someone clear this up for me. I've been under the impression that Frees Against are included in the Clanger count, is this correct or not?

Cheers

That's my understanding as well Jezzza. Frees against count towards the clanger count.

 

[sblack]

Yes, they count in the stats column, but not in the scoring side essentially.

They will be punished with the -6 (guess, cbf looking up the number) for the FA, but not the -6 for the clanger as well.

 

[Skystyler]

I haven't seen Hawthorn play much this year, but I've never thought of Sam Mitchell as ball-butcherer or downhill skier. Yet his SC/DT ratio has been absimal this year. Whats the story there?

 

[dlanod]

I haven't seen Hawthorn play much this year, but I've never thought of Sam Mitchell as ball-butcherer or downhill skier. Yet his SC/DT ratio has been absimal this year. Whats the story there?

The last two games (Cats and Bulldogs) have been pretty tough ones with a lot of pressure around the ball. I suspect his scores may be being pulled down by clangers and non-clean possessions. You could probably check his disposal effectiveness and clangers/frees against for the last couple of weeks to confirm

 

[Guardian Hawk]

Poor scoring analysis by Champion Data sums it up.

More specifically, I noticed he gets a lot of 'first possessions' at centre bounces amongst 6 or 7 players where he throws it on the boot in the direction of Franklin and Roughead. Often, the opposition end up taking a mark and Mitchell loses 6 points for a clanger.

Also, he often hanballs whilst he is being tackled (as he gets the No1 tag) to the advantage of a team mate - often these are marked as ineffective as they reach the teammate on the bounce or even a clanger if the opposition goes in harder and gets the ball.

Just my observations

 

[sblack]

Mitchell was punished in the Geelong game for being very quiet in the second half.

He had 21 of his 29 possessions in the first half. When the game was won in the 4th qtr, he only managed 1-2 possessions.

Need to be in it, to win it.

 

[SJ]

Poor scoring analysis by Champion Data sums it up.

More specifically, I noticed he gets a lot of 'first possessions' at centre bounces amongst 6 or 7 players where he throws it on the boot in the direction of Franklin and Roughead. Often, the opposition end up taking a mark and Mitchell loses 6 points for a clanger.

Also, he often hanballs whilst he is being tackled (as he gets the No1 tag) to the advantage of a team mate - often these are marked as ineffective as they reach the teammate on the bounce or even a clanger if the opposition goes in harder and gets the ball.

Just my observations

Contested possessions are rewarded highly, effective or ineffective (obviously the former is better).

Not sure if you are in a contested situation in the centre and you throw it on the boot inside 50 if that would register as a clanger. I would doubt it.

 

[sblack]

Poor scoring analysis by Champion Data sums it up.

More specifically, I noticed he gets a lot of 'first possessions' at centre bounces amongst 6 or 7 players where he throws it on the boot in the direction of Franklin and Roughead. Often, the opposition end up taking a mark and Mitchell loses 6 points for a clanger.

Also, he often hanballs whilst he is being tackled (as he gets the No1 tag) to the advantage of a team mate - often these are marked as ineffective as they reach the teammate on the bounce or even a clanger if the opposition goes in harder and gets the ball.

Just my observations

Exactly. He should be credited with a clanger if he is just going to turn the ball over. No point winning it in the middle, if he is going to give it straight back. If it goes to a contest, within 40m (IIRC) of the disposal, then it would be ineffective. If it travels over 40m, even to a contest, then he would get an effective possessions (Long Kick)

You are slightly off with your handball analysis.

He would only be marked with an ineffective HB if the receiver doesn't dispose of the ball. Mostly due to them being tackled, as the HB was in close. Therefore, no real influence came from the Mitchell disposal.

Even if it gets there on the bounce, it will still be effective if the receiver disposes of the ball.

You're also wrong about the supposed clanger. If he handballs into traffic, and the opposition gain possession in a contested manner, then it would be classed as ineffective. Clangers are only when the opposition takes an uncontested possession, ie a direct turnover (although that is slightly off, as a kick that goes directly to the opposition on the bounce would be classed as a Loose Ball get, and therefore a Contested possession, but you get the idea)

 

[Pocket_Pears]

Anyone notice that Dangerfield was on 40 at 3/4 time and finished on 34? I guess he must have given away a free kick or two from his hospital bed.

 

[_JC_]

Anyone notice that Dangerfield was on 40 at 3/4 time and finished on 34? I guess he must have given away a free kick or two from his hospital bed.

Would be the result of scaling the crows scores down and his for not playing when the game was in the balance.

 

[rocker_oz33]

Anyone notice that Dangerfield was on 40 at 3/4 time and finished on 34? I guess he must have given away a free kick or two from his hospital bed.

yeah l did l looked at the herald sun site he was on 40 then back to 34 must of kicked the ball out of bounds that's -6 any way l hope young patty is alright

 

[Pocket_Pears]

yeah l did l looked at the herald sun site he was on 40 then back to 34 must of kicked the ball out of bounds that's -6 any way l hope young patty is alright

Just seems strange, considering he was stretchered off in the 3rd, and spent the rest of the 3rd and all of the 4th either in an ambulance or in hospital. So for his 3/4 time score to go down, someone at Champion Data is making some manual adjustments to the scores or something.

 

[GUMBLETRON]

So for his 3/4 time score to go down, someone at Champion Data is making some manual adjustments to the scores or something.

Or it's the same automatic, end-of-half, 3300-point weighting that applies to every other player.

 

[Pocket_Pears]

Or it's the same automatic, end-of-half, 3300-point weighting that applies to every other player.

Which is another thing that annoys me. All the things he did at the start of the game is all of a sudden made less important because of what happened at the end. Sure its only 6 points in the Dangerfield case, but I've seen much larger drops in points between quarters last year while players were still having a positive impact.

 

[thomas_m18]

Just take the scoring on face value. It makes the game what it is. If you wanted clear, black and white scoring, Dream Team is the game for you.

If a player gets a low score, they most likely deserve it.

 

[jinny1]

A flaw in the champion data scoring system is that in a shocking, low scoring and error riddled match..players scores have to be highly inflated than they actually played so they reach the necessary amount of scores in the match..

this means that players that actually dont deserve the points are actually awarded free points...
This goes against the "weight" system and the whole point of this scoring system where players are given points not just due to the stats but their effectiveness and influence on the game/...

 

[sblack]

A flaw in the champion data scoring system is that in a shocking, low scoring and error riddled match..players scores have to be highly inflated than they actually played so they reach the necessary amount of scores in the match..

this means that players that actually dont deserve the points are actually awarded free points...
This goes against the "weight" system and the whole point of this scoring system where players are given points not just due to the stats but their effectiveness and influence on the game/...

Not really. They would scale each player up in ... a scale, pretty much.

It's not like everyone gets 10 extra points. The better players will get more 'free' or deserved points. While those that are stuggling will get less, if any (ie Milne)

 

[IDIG]

Haven't read everyone's post so if this has been said please disregard but the main aspect of sc scoring most don't realise is that plays and stats that lead directly to scores especially in closer games are the ones that get more weight (for the positive and negative). Efficiency and influence and plays leading to direct scores is how i guesstimate scores. I do agree though that is should be a little more transparent but like thomas said take it on face value and try not to overthink it too much. It will do your head in...just a general understanding of how it works does me fine

 

[DrummoSolo]

Here's a query for the good people here - how do Hawthorn lose, and get 7 players over 100 and a total of 1713, while North win, and get 2 players over 100 and a total of 1590? Usually, I can see some logic in the so-called dubious calls they make, but this one has me utterly baffled.