BRHL2 Schedule

Jackets1 · Veteran Member

RE: BRHL2 Schedule

Philippe27 · Guru

Florida, your last two posts just proved exactly what I said that you have no idea what effect a 95-35 scale would have on the ratings. No point in arguing.

-- Edited by Philippe27 at 23:07, 2007-03-20

Philippe27 · Guru

Jackets1 wrote:

IMO the best way to make ratings for an NHL rerate league is to run exhaustive tests with current NHL rosters in an attempt to exactly mimic what happened in the NHL in the past season. Read carefully what I've wrote, with existing NHL rosters. You tinker with things until you get it as close to what happened in the NHL in the past year as possible. Nothing is perfect, but that's what should be aimed for.

Then once you've done that, obviously we have different teams, and you let the pieces fall where they will, you've done the best you can to be accurate and realistic.

That is the point isn't it, to have the players resemble the players they play like in the NHL. That's why it's NHL rerate and not FHL rerate.

As for changing the ratings, I don't see why people wouldn't want improvements. The goal is realism, that's why you trade Staal, Preissing, Smid and a 1st for Crosby.

Go Matt!

PHO · Senior Member

You lost me at "most..."

Are you telling me we cannot challenge anything you put on this message board? Just because you say that it works doesn't mean we are not going to have questions surrounding the issue. We need to discuss it and all come to the same understanding. Some may take longer than others so simmer down a bit.

Florida Panthers · Senior Member

Philippe27 wrote:

No point in arguing.

-- Edited by Philippe27 at 23:07, 2007-03-20

Indeed. Given that you can't provide an argument based on logic and are unwilling to address issues brought up that are in opposition to what you're saying, there's no point in you continuing.

-- Edited by Florida Panthers at 14:33, 2007-03-21

Florida Panthers · Senior Member

Jackets1 wrote:

IMO the best way to make ratings for an NHL rerate league is to run exhaustive tests with current NHL rosters in an attempt to exactly mimic what happened in the NHL in the past season. Read carefully what I've wrote, with existing NHL rosters. You tinker with things until you get it as close to what happened in the NHL in the past year as possible. Nothing is perfect, but that's what should be aimed for.

Then once you've done that, obviously we have different teams, and you let the pieces fall where they will, you've done the best you can to be accurate and realistic.

That is the point isn't it, to have the players resemble the players they play like in the NHL. That's why it's NHL rerate and not FHL rerate.

A suggestion based on reason and logic, hey about that. Issues with it though could potentially be that it takes a buttload of time to do that, and it's quite a different system from what we started with.

Jackets1 wrote:

As for changing the ratings, I don't see why people wouldn't want improvements. The goal is realism, that's why you trade Staal, Preissing, Smid and a 1st for Crosby.

So far, most of what's been said hasn't been about improvements. It's been about whining because player X is a top player in the NHL and isn't being a top player in the BRHL2. It's been about how things are far too random (with the laugable idea that it's not far off from 100% random)... It's been about the unwillingness to accept that it's very realistic to have some large underachievers and large overachievers and being a top player doesn't mean you're going to get 90% of what you get in the NHL every time.

PHO · Senior Member

Nick here.

Philippe,I am currently playing around with your 2006/07 player files that you posted on the FHLSim site. I am not here to bash them, because I think they are very well done, and I am appreciative of your efforts. I do think they are pretty realistic. However, just to prove some of our points, I simmed a season using your files, with basically the same rosters as this year. Also note that I used the same slider settings that you suggested...A few notes:

Slava Kozlov finished 3rd in goals.
Gary Roberts finished in top 10 in points (he is on Florida for sim purposes)
Kyle Calder finished top 20 in points
Bobby Holik finished FIFTH in overall points
Martin Gerber finished 5th in GAA
John Grahame finished 7th in GAA
Jochen Hecht finished 6 in goals scored
Sergeri Samsonov finished with the 3rd most PPGs
Alex Auld finished with the 2nd most shutouts

Now before you reply, read what I am saying. I am HAPPY with this. It shows that there is some other element other than actual NHL stats. Holik 5th in scoring? Are you serious? Now I am NOT here to bash any of this at all. I am just showing that regardless of how much testing you do, and how much you try to perfect the ratings, these things will and DO happen. I really like your player files, and judging by your posts on the FHL Sim Forum, you have done some extensive testing....but again, no matter how hard we try, FHL will not mimic the NHL.

One of your rebuttals may be that I only simmed once, whereas you simmed 100 seasons, and the averages were very close to the NHL. That's fine. But unfortunately when you are running a league, you can't run it 100 times and then average everything out. You only have one shot.

Anyways, that's all on this issue for me. I am not saying anyone is right or wrong, but I just don't think there will ever be a league that has everything perfect in terms of stats. Some better than others, sure. But perfect, no.

-- Edited by PHO at 15:16, 2007-03-21

WildJamie · Senior Member

Just to clear up some misunderstanding from my post... I do not suggest the top goal scorer and assist getter get 99 in either of those categories, there needs to be some room at the top (something like 80 assists get a 99 passing and 0 assists in 82 games gets a 30 passing).
The main point being, use most of the range. I find we are missing out on using the lower end of the range more than the upper end, and this includes the farm players.
More than anywhere I have the most problems with the goalies. I have never been in the league where the goalies are not always the toughest rates to nail... and they do always have the most under and over achievers... but in this league it seems almost random. If you look at Minnesota for example - we traded for John Grahame because for some reason the sim likes him in this league. I would rather have him right now than Kipper, Brodeur or Luongo.

Philippe27 · Guru

PHO wrote:

Nick here.

Philippe,I am currently playing around with your 2006/07 player files that you posted on the FHLSim site. I am not here to bash them, because I think they are very well done, and I am appreciative of your efforts. I do think they are pretty realistic. However, just to prove some of our points, I simmed a season using your files, with basically the same rosters as this year. Also note that I used the same slider settings that you suggested...A few notes:

Slava Kozlov finished 3rd in goals.
Gary Roberts finished in top 10 in points (he is on Florida for sim purposes)
Kyle Calder finished top 20 in points
Bobby Holik finished FIFTH in overall points
Martin Gerber finished 5th in GAA
John Grahame finished 7th in GAA
Jochen Hecht finished 6 in goals scored
Sergeri Samsonov finished with the 3rd most PPGs
Alex Auld finished with the 2nd most shutouts

Now before you reply, read what I am saying. I am HAPPY with this. It shows that there is some other element other than actual NHL stats. Holik 5th in scoring? Are you serious? Now I am NOT here to bash any of this at all. I am just showing that regardless of how much testing you do, and how much you try to perfect the ratings, these things will and DO happen. I really like your player files, and judging by your posts on the FHL Sim Forum, you have done some extensive testing....but again, no matter how hard we try, FHL will not mimic the NHL.

One of your rebuttals may be that I only simmed once, whereas you simmed 100 seasons, and the averages were very close to the NHL. That's fine. But unfortunately when you are running a league, you can't run it 100 times and then average everything out. You only have one shot.

Anyways, that's all on this issue for me. I am not saying anyone is right or wrong, but I just don't think there will ever be a league that has everything perfect in terms of stats. Some better than others, sure. But perfect, no.

-- Edited by PHO at 15:16, 2007-03-21

Oh I totally agree with you, it will never be exactly like the NHL and I don't want it to be. Those were based on 2005-06 stats I believe and I believe that's an older version with not as much spread between players as my new ones.
I know there will always be overachievers and underachievers and I want there to be some but on a general basis I think we need to widen the scale so that there are fewer of them. I'm still working on mine since I'm still not totally happy with them but I think it's a step in the right direction comparing with what we have now.

I think simply using a 95-30 scale instead of a 90-50 like we are now will improve the ratings. If you guys want I can take the current BRHL ratings and just expand the scale a little and show you what I mean by that and also test and give an example of what the scoring leaders would look like.
I'm a little busy tonight but probably tomorrow night I can work on that and show you what I mean.

PHO · Senior Member

Watch it Minny.........that's our baby Brodeur you're talking about! :)