Explanations of the Ratings

EXPLANATIONS OF THE RATINGS

This section of the document outlines how players and teams were rated. Note: there is an excel program available which will automatically turn entered data into cards which can be printed out . Please download this from the Table Top Sports Forum on Delphi. All ratings etc. are for my computerized version of SP and will not work realistically with the original FACs.

INDIVIDUAL PLAYER RATINGS

FG is the percentage of two points FGs made. Three point FGAs and FGs are subtracted from total FGAs and FGs to get this rating.

ATT are the player’s attempts per 30 minutes played. The number in parentheses are the player’s 3 point attempts per 30 minutes played. In the original ratings ATT was based on FGAs per game with no allowance for minutes played.

3PT is the percentage of 3 point FGs made.

FT is obviously the percentage of FTs made.

REB is based on rebounds per 30 minutes but is also adjusted for the total rebounds available during that team’s games. “REBs Available” refer to the total of that team’s rebounds (not counting dead ball rebounds which are generally not included in stats from the late 70’s on) plus the opponent’s rebounds. So if a team averaged 40 rebs per game and their opponents averaged 35 the “REBs available” equals 75. A player’s REBs per 30 minutes is then adjusted proportionally using the fraction “70/rebs available”. The resulting total is multiplied by 4 to get the REB rating. EXAMPLE: Smith averaged 10 REBs per 30 minutes on a team which hade 75 REBs available. Smith’s rating is (10*70)/75 then multiplied by 4. This would equal 700/75 (9.33) times 4 (37.33) rounded to 37. The basic idea is that rebound averages are reduced for players on teams which had many REBs available (>70 per game) and increased for players on teams with fewer REBs available (<70).

FOULS are (PF/minutes)*100. SP used this total to create a foul range. The foul range is not used in this version.

FD (foul drawing) is (FTAs/minutes)*100. This is exactly how SP did it.

BLOCK is (Blocks/minutes)*100, exactly as SP did it.

ASSIST is (Assists/minutes)*60. Some formulas have been published elsewhere suggesting that SP multiplied by 100. However a check of the cards I own (92-93) indicates that 60 is the correct multiplier.

STEAL is (Steals/minutes)*100, exactly as SP did it.

TEAM RATINGS

TEMPO rating. These are used to adjust the overall TEMPO of a game and are based on the total of a team’s average FGAs per game plus their opponent’s average FGAs per game. Consult the ‘LOOKUPS’ worsksheet in the CARDMAKER program to see the cutoff points for the various ratings.

The purpose of TEMPO ratings is to allow teams to have an effect on the rate at which their opponent’s attempt FGs. I have had discussions with several individuals about this who believe that feature is absent in my game. It isn’t. The general belief is that the game should include some sort of “reduce opponent’s FGAs” ratings probably based on the average FGAs of that team’s opponents. I believe that logic is incorrect and that any rating based solely on opponent’s FGAs is flawed.

Let’s use a modern day Princeton as an example. Clearly, teams shoot less FGAs against Princeton than they do against other teams. Part of that is because Princeton’s defense may force that team to take more time before finding a decent shot, and part of that is because Princeton uses up so much time when they have the ball. These factors can not be neatly separated/measured by looking at offensive FGAs versus opponent’s FGAs. In any basketball game both teams basically have the same number of possessions. If you average 60 FGAs per game while the opponents in your games average 50 FGAs, it is NOT because you forced them to use more time before shooting. They might have shot more FTs, been poorer offensive rebounders or committed more turnovers. In fact one of those three factors are pretty much the ONLY reasons for the difference in FGAs. It has little to do with you shooting more quickly or the opponents taking more time to shoot.

Therefore, separate TEMPO ratings for offense and defense (or some kind of “DEF RATING to reduce FGAs”) are meaningless. Princeton’s games have less FGAs because the overall TEMPO of their games is slower. The single TEMPO rating captures that fact. When replaying a team like Princeton the TEMPO rating for the GAME (basically the average of each team’s TEMPO rating) will slow down the pace of play, including the rate at which the opponents shoot. Princeton’s attempts ratings will also tend to be lower, further slowing down the pace of play.

DEFENSIVE RATE. This replaces the individual defense ratings in SP which are used to affect FG%. Use the team defensive rate the same way except it is the same for all players. The rating is based on the percentage of two point FGs allowed by a team (3 pt FGs and ATTs are subtracted out). relative to the college average for the year. 47.9% was used as the college average. This was based on the 98-99 college season. At any rate, for every percentage point below 47.9 a team gets one negative DEFENSIVE RATING point which will have the effect of reducing an opponent’s 2 pt FG%. So a team allowing only 42.9% on two point baskets would be a minus 5 (-5) A positive number (no sign on the team card) increases an opponent’s 2 pt Fg%. (Note: the baseline used for the pros is also based on the 99-00 season and is equal to 46.8%. This value is valid within a point or two back to around the 69-70 season.)

If you’ve seen data on FG% it APPEARS to be dropping steadily and APPEARS to be currently around 43% (or slightly greater). However remember such published figures include 3 pt FGs and ATTs. When those are subtracted out of overall ATTs the remaining two pt % has consistently been over 47% for many years. Each year 3 pt ATTs increase thereby lowering overall FG%. Even when rating older teams it is appropriate to keep a constant baseline in order to normalize cross season play with “great teams”. Note that I use 43.9% for all college teams from seasons prior to 72-73. (Those same teams are rated relative to the season in which they played in Above the Rim Classic.)

DEFENSIVE – 3 PT. This rating is used to adjust an opponent’s 3 pt FG% in the same way as the DEFENSIVE RATE described above is used for 2 PT FG%. It is based on 3 pt % allowed relative to 34.4%.

TURNOVER OFFENSE. SP had no mechanism by which teams made more or less turnovers than other teams. This was a major weakness in the game. The TURNOVER OFFENSE rating is based on turnovers committed per game. Less than 10 TOs game (rare) receives a rating of 0, 10-10.49 merits a rating of 1, 10-5 to 10.99 a rating of 2 etc. (The range for assigning ratings for the pros is slightly different.) The chart can be found in “lookups”. Remember even a team with a TURNOVER RATING of 0 will still make TOs as there are still some automatic turnovers, and, more noticeably turnovers will be made because of steals (around 7.8 steals per game in college).

TURNOVER DEFENSE. This is based on turnovers forced and is used to adjust the offensive rating (+4 for example increases the opponent’s OFF TO rating by 4 for that game). The method used to assign the rating can again be found under “lookups” on the spreadsheet. The important thing to realize is that many TOs will be caused already because of a team’s STEAL ratings. Consequently a team’s TURNOVER DEFENSE rating is only based on non-steal turnovers forced. To determine the rating take TOs forced (that is, opponent’s TOs) and subtract a team’s total steals. Divide by games played to get a per game average. An average of 8.0 to 8.49 merits a rating of 0, 8.5 to 8.99 is +1, 9.0 to 9.49 is +2 etc while 7.5 to 7.99 is –1, 7.0 to 7.49 is –2 etc. 8.0 to 8.49 is assigned a rate of 0 (no effect) because that represents about the average number of non-steal turnovers committed in college basketball over the last several seasons. (The range for assigning ratings for the pros is slightly different. The range used for the pros needs adjustment when playing older teams against each other. There is more information on this in the cardmaking program for the pros.)

STRENGTH OF SCHEDULE. This is the Sagarin rating for schedule strength. SS ratings are a must in college Bball sims since the quality of a team’s schedule can drastically affect their statistics. Differences in SS ratings between two opponents affect each team’s DEF RATE as outlined under SETUP. Note: published Sagarin ratings do not include the effects of playing non-Division I teams yet such games improve the stats. I assume such non-Division I teams are rated 50 and redo the SS ratings. SS ratings with an asterisk indicate such an adjustment was made. (Two * indicate two non-division I opponents.)

Ratings for seasons prior to 84-85 are from someone who has a program to simulate Sagarin ratings. He inputs the scores for every college game for a given year. Sagarin ratings are not included for the pros.Also note this individual has not yet completed every season prior to 84/85. Thus schedule strength ratings for some pre 84-85 seasons are estimates on my part based on a variety of factors. I’d still suggest using them. When estimated by me, the ratings are given as –1, 0, +1 , +2 etc. A rating of “0” is intended to correspond to a Sagarin SS rating of 75, +1 corresponds to a 76 etc. Use the difference between the estimates the same way as actual SS ratings. SS ratings are not included/used for the pros.

SAGARIN RATINGS are actual Sagarin ratings from USA Today. Ratings for many seasons prior to 84-85 are from someone who has a program to simulate Sagarin ratings. He inputs the scores for every college game for a given year. Sagarin ratings are not included for the pros.

SAGARIN RANKING and AP RANKING should be self-explanatory. Note AP rankings are prior to the NCAA tourney. AP rankings above 25 are based on the “others receiving votes” when I have that info available. These are not used for the pros.