Supercoach Scoring: Please Explain?

[sblack]

North didn't play a SC friendly style game.

Hawks had 60 more possessions. A better Disposal efficiency. They had 44 more tackles eek: 112-68). Hawks had more clearances, and less clangers.

North had more of an even spread of scores. 75 is the average score (3300 / 44). Hawks had 11 compared to 10 from North under 75. Hawks had 6-3 under 50. Shows they had more contributors throughout the game, instead of relying on a group of 5 stars.

 

[DrummoSolo]

North didn't play a SC friendly style game.

Hawks had 60 more possessions. A better Disposal efficiency. They had 44 more tackles eek: 112-68). Hawks had more clearances, and less clangers.

North had more of an even spread of scores. 75 is the average score (3300 / 44). Hawks had 11 compared to 10 from North under 75. Hawks had 6-3 under 50. Shows they had more contributors throughout the game, instead of relying on a group of 5 stars.

Not all quite true, I think you're misreading the stats column a bit - the 112-68 is uncontested marks, not a big SC stat. The clearances and clangers are the wrong way around too - North had slightly more clearances, and slightly less clangers, about 5 different for each.

You just wouldn't think a 76% to 73% efficiency and about 60 more posessions would make a BIG difference by the time you factor in weighting of key moments and what-not, but alas, maybe it did this time!

Anyone able to think of a statisically similiar game for comparision?

 

[sblack]

It's late, and the columns are very close

 

[ocat1979]

I used to think that all this talk of bias towards certain players was bullshit, but after this round with goddard scoring 101 while doing bugger all then ablett scoring 173 in a side that loses by 40 points, i'm starting to think otherwise............

 

[thomas_m18]

I used to think that all this talk of bias towards certain players was bullshit, but after this round with goddard scoring 101 while doing bugger all then ablett scoring 173 in a side that loses by 40 points, i'm starting to think otherwise............

That's not a just argument.

Ablett was good. His team got beat, but HE was good. Matthew Pavlich and Aaron Sandilands have played in crap teams, in your argument, that makes them crap Supercoach players. Add Greg Broughton onto that one as well.

33 touches, 7 marks, 2 goals 1. 16 kicks, 2 contested marks, 18 contested possessions, four frees for. He was good (shut up, Mark Thompson. You're ruining my argument).

It's the individual effort, not the team effort.

We have discussed Goddard. He did what he did.

 

[SJ]

I used to think that all this talk of bias towards certain players was bullshit, but after this round with goddard scoring 101 while doing bugger all then ablett scoring 173 in a side that loses by 40 points, i'm starting to think otherwise............

Oh my, Ablett was phenomenal today - did you not watch the game?

 

[russea]

hehe if im not mistaken Selwood would have gotten more than 98 points if geelong had won and i would have won my SC league game

 

[remedi]

If you saw the game, you would of expected that ablett was gonna score big. Only guy that look like winning it for geelong.

Goddard was zzzzzzzzz though.

 

[jinny1]

Oh my, Ablett was phenomenal today - did you not watch the game?

did you??

mark Thompson begs to differ

 

[thomas_m18]

did you??

mark Thompson begs to differ

I beg to differ from Mark Thompson. Don't follow the opinions of others, form your own. That's his opinion, and my opinion is that he was great.

 

[jinny1]

I beg to differ from Mark Thompson. Don't follow the opinions of others, form your own. That's his opinion, and my opinion is that he was great.

good for you , you footy expert!!

i agree Ablettt was BOg for geelong...i was just saying how ridiculous mark thompson was by saying that

you know who weren't great?? the saints!!!!

 

[thomas_m18]

good for you , you footy expert!!

i agree Ablettt was BOg for geelong...i was just saying how ridiculous mark thompson was by saying that

you know who weren't great?? the saints!!!!

You're telling me...

 

[jinny1]

You're telling me...

soory i just nvr thought i wud see the day that melbourne would win and the saints wud lose in the same week!!! not to mention how much more exciting they were to watch...

 

[thomas_m18]

soory i just nvr thought i wud see the day that melbourne would win and the saints wud lose in the same week!!! not to mention how much more exciting they were to watch...

Was good to see the Dees win, was also good to see Brisbane lose. Definately will be a threat in a few years.

 

[SJ]

did you??

mark Thompson begs to differ

What Mark Thompson thinks and says may be completely different things.

Ablett played an awesome game by any measure.

Clearly the best on the ground and I defy you to prove otherwise.

 

[Ed_Gein]

Ablett was great today, didn't think he was going to pull in a 173 though. Gave away a 50, out on the full going for goal.... Had 80% efficiency from 33 possies though.

EDIT: The more i look actually, it's not surprising i guess. 7 tackles and 4 frees for as well.

 

[SJ]

Ablett was great today, didn't think he was going to pull in a 173 though. Gave away a 50, out on the full going for goal.... Had 80% efficiency from 33 possies though.

18 contested possessions, eight clearances, seven marks (two contested), 2.1. Epic game.

 

[johnsmith05]

Supercoach scoring facts

this is how the scores work, every game there is 3300 % given to each game, you have to see each players final score as a % of 3300 not a score.

each quarter is given allocated % to fill up the 3300 , and in the last quarter it gets more %. for example 700, 700, 700,1200

all the ways players get POINTS towards there final % is on the supercoach website. such as loose ball get 4 points, hard ball get 4 points, handball recieved 1 point, goal 8 points, effective kick 4-6? innefective kick 0, clanger -8.

ok, so at the end of every quarter, they add up all the scores, for the quarter both sides might add up to 1000 in total points, but what they do is they turn there points into a % of 700. and so on with the rest of the quarters, thats how they can tell you what the players scores are on the website at the quarter time breaks. because 4th quarter has more allocated points, this is why garry ablett last year got 200 odd coz he kicked 3 goals and 12 possies all effective in the final term. understanding how the points system work is really how you should select your side and no WHY guys like garry ablett, okeefe, montagna and judd are never going to drop in price over the big picture and WHY they are good buys and WHY they are certainties.

hope this helps, its called champion data.

 

[_JC_]

Re: Supercoach scoring facts

this is how the scores work, every game there is 3300 % given to each game, you have to see each players final score as a % of 3300 not a score.

each quarter is given allocated % to fill up the 3300 , and in the last quarter it gets more %. for example 700, 700, 700,1200

all the ways players get POINTS towards there final % is on the supercoach website. such as loose ball get 4 points, hard ball get 4 points, handball recieved 1 point, goal 8 points, effective kick 4-6? innefective kick 0, clanger -8.

ok, so at the end of every quarter, they add up all the scores, for the quarter both sides might add up to 1000 in total points, but what they do is they turn there points into a % of 700. and so on with the rest of the quarters, thats how they can tell you what the players scores are on the website at the quarter time breaks. because 4th quarter has more allocated points, this is why garry ablett last year got 200 odd coz he kicked 3 goals and 12 possies all effective in the final term. understanding how the points system work is really how you should select your side and no WHY guys like garry ablett, okeefe, montagna and judd are never going to drop in price over the big picture and WHY they are good buys and WHY they are certainties.

hope this helps, its called champion data.

Some of this is not right at all.

Firstly the quarters are not broken up as you stated, but are weighted with regard to their importance in the game.

E.g Game is close till half time then in the 3rd quarter one team kicks away by 5 goals and ends up winning easily. In this case the 3rd quarter would be weighted heavily as it is when the game was won, and the 4th quarter would be worth much less as it was all over at this stage.

Also there are more stats that give points than are listed on the supercoach site. Things such as 1%ers, kick outs, score assists, inside 50's are all worth points too.

 

[billybloggs]

Re: Supercoach scoring facts

Garry "caught with the ball" Ablett

 

[Plogs]

Re: Supercoach scoring facts

Garry "caught with the ball" Ablett

Chris "caught with the ball" Judd

 

[marky53]

Re: Supercoach scoring facts

Does anyone know how supercoach will operate when byes come in?

 

[WatWouldCyrilDo]

Weird score

Just looking at the melb/dogs game at qtr time, am I missing somethng.

Hargrave has had 2 handballs up till qtr time, but he has 16 points?

How does that work?

 

[thomas_m18]

Re: Weird score

Just looking at the melb/dogs game at qtr time, am I missing somethng.

Hargrave has had 2 handballs up till qtr time, but he has 16 points?

How does that work?

I don't want to spoil what's happening in the game for myself, but did you take into account tackles, for one?

 

[abs_of_STEELE]

Re: Weird score

Nope, no tackles. His stats are:

2 handballs, 50% efficiency, 1 contested possession
=16 points???

Well that's SC for ya!