Message board »Message Board home »Sign-in or register to get started
Online now: 1 member: TABLE SETTER 11; 116 anonymousDiscussion: How would YOU rate teams
| Posted | Discussion |
| Feb. 18, 2010 E4/E6 Men's 70 873 posts | How would YOU rate teams I see several ways we would like to see our teams rated. What would be simplest system? Or is there one? |
| Feb. 18, 2010 taits Men's 65 4548 posts | I'd bet there would be close to as many ways as there are teams. Only rational way I feel is if all assns shared scores and team data, which will not happen. Too many differences in how done between them as well as it is now. The basics; You put up with it, complain about it, or don't go. |
| Feb. 18, 2010 Dbax Men's 65 2101 posts | Question to SSUSA staff. What is the reason for bumping a team up when they win a tournament? Why not let them finish out the season and attempt to win a world championship or triple crown at their current level. Then move them up the following year if they do win the World? |
| Feb. 18, 2010 pushin60 Men's 60 61 posts | They moved our 55AAA team up two years ago, after playing AAA for 8 years, because they needed more teams at major. We didn’t deserve the bump, but it didn’t matter. We, of course, complained and appealed our move to various people at SSUSA, and were finally told that the ONLY opinion that mattered was Terry’s. I was told that by more than one person there. The fact that he hadn’t seen our team play in over 5 years didn’t matter to him because he needed more teams at major. Later in the year they moved other teams up from AAA because they moved some of the majors up to M+. It’s all about getting more teams in the upper divisions to make sure the brackets look full in Phoenix. |
| Feb. 18, 2010 WOW 197 posts | There is no formal rule being followed, just a lot of lip service. |
| Feb. 19, 2010 Paco13 424 posts | You pay you play whaterver division you want, no mandatory move ups. I can guarantee the M+ division will go away and indirectly better competition will follow. |
| Feb. 19, 2010 taits Men's 65 4548 posts | There is always old school with one change: All teams are thrown into a hat literally, by age only. Draw six out, that becomes the bracket. So if you happen to be a AA team of any age divisions, but one or more drawn team was a M+ team, have fun. One could also code teams, Say 50's=B, 55's+I, 60=N, 65+G, 70+O and draw them out with little balls. If there are younger, they play with them selves...lol or 75 pluses they go 70's. Or thrown them in the mix & really stir the pot. This is the best it'll get, unless there are some additional voices heard about decisions made with all face on the table. The problem is getting all the facts from all other assns results. |
| Feb. 19, 2010 Webbie25 Men's 70 2414 posts | Great points. Our little team that has been together for 20 years had the 'stars align' in Phoenix in October and took 3rd in 50-AAA. We have one hitter that hit more than 1 HR the whole 9 games. I was so afraid we would get moved to major, where we would have just been destroyed.(They did move CJ&S, and Los Vatos).We don't even keep stats-our book is a lot of black diamonds for runs and occasionally someone writes down a home run.My question-does SSUSA keep comprehensive stats on each player during each tourney and compile them to rate teams, or just look at the overall team success over a year? Also, do they ever rerate players based on their performance? |
| Feb. 19, 2010 JohnBob Men's 65 256 posts | This is my 14th year in senior ball and have been in aaa and major about same amount. What I have observed is that there is very little difference between aaa and major but a big gap between aa and aaa and a bigger gap between M and M+. Before a team is moved from M to M+ staff should look at rooster and see if its a local league team or a hand picked team from 4-5-or 6 states etc. There is no way a league team can compete with a hand pick team no matter what equalizer is used. One game maybe but not for whole weekend. We are rated major and last 2 years a very good player from a bordering state has asked about playing with us,but they can not play in our league so was told no. We us league games as practice for tourney's,some will say that give us an advantage and I agree but if one of our players get hurt or can not go to a tourney we do not pick up any one we go with what is left or do not go. I know M+ has low # of teams at most tourney's and I am amused when M+ player's post on here that combine the M & M+ will fix the promblem, well the M divison is not broke we have good # at most tourney's and I'm tired of bale outs. Why not fix the problem in house and do away with the 55 age group in M+ and go with 50-57 & 58-64 most do not move up when eligible anyway. My 2 cents |
| Feb. 19, 2010 Lecak Men's 60 1026 posts | E4/E6 great question.Here is what I'm doing to get my team to AA. Add players that have never played senior softball put the gloves on opposite hand from your natural side, swing Easton hammers, wear jeans and wife beaters, and swing from the opposite side. Play a couple big events have SSUSA review the scores and then your in business. On a serious note no one would want me to rate teams. I get a small chance this year here in Vegas to assess some teams playing in some local tournies I'm involved with I will not do divisions or ages your either an upper or lower. Both events about 10-12 teams so most teams I invite don't really care in the long run. Most who post here about ratings would not be good candidates to play in these type of events too much drama for my taste. |
| Feb. 19, 2010 JohnBob Men's 65 256 posts | Meant to say roster no rooster lol |
| Feb. 19, 2010 SSUSA Staff 3490 posts | Webbie25 - The SSUSA does NOT rate individual players, however we DO maintain a player 'history' for each registered player who plays in any SSUSA event. Here's the process, and you can ask your manager (if that's not you) for more specific information. • Manager completes online roster for tournament, which is eligibility-checked in house, printed and sent to Director; • Director 'yellow highlights' each player name as he/she checks in at the tournament, adding players that were not on original roster; • After tournament, Director sends hard copy check in sheets back to SSUSA; • SSUSA staff edits online roster and 'deletes' any player that was on pre-tournament roster but didn't show up and 'adds' players not on original roster that came and played anyway; and • SSUSA then has accurate roster of your team for that event if you wish to use it as the 'qualifying roster' for either the Eastern or Western Nationals, the World Championships or the TOC if you won a TOC qualifying event. Accordingly, over time SSUSA has the data to maintain accurate records on: • Every player who played on a specific team at any SSUSA event; and • Every team (and its rating at the time) a player played on in SSUSA events. The player history is important in allowing an informed decision when a team attempts to add a new player online. A player with, say, 'history' on a Major+ team will not be allowed to be added to a AAA or AA online roster. The online roster software traps that attempt and blocks the roster addition. The software also blocks the addition of a player who does not meet the geographic eligibility criteria (such as an Arizona team trying to add an Oregon player.) Any online roster prepared by a manager who adds players with a ratings history above the team's current rating is flagged and reviewed in-house before the tournament. Depending on the player's history, and the number of such players, the manager will likely get a call from SSUSA to discuss the effect those players may have on the team rating. The effects include, but are not limited to, being allowed to play at their current rating but on a 'watch list' for that tournament, not being allowed to add all of the players, or being allowed to add them all and accept a ratings increase immediately in order to have them added. That type of conversation occurs with great frequency and with a lot on managers prior to any tournament. The SSUSA does not maintain individual player statistics, only history. The team's performance over time is the primary rating criteria. The only statistic looked at, other than won/loss and runs scored/allowed, is the total number of home runs (regardless of how they might be scored) a team hits on a game-by-game basis. That number is recorded on the Official Game Card by the home plate umpire. It is relevant information to know if, for example, a AAA team is actually hitting 7 or 8 balls a game out of the park, even though it's only scored as three HR's and outs thereafter. |
| Feb. 19, 2010 taits Men's 65 4548 posts | Good info. The type needed. So why won't SSUSA post a database , since you have the info at hand? Name, age, location, team(s) played for last 2 years w\ rating? Someone might catch something missed, like is occasionally done in scheduling. |
| Feb. 19, 2010 salio2k Men's 60 547 posts | I concur on the Staff notes above. When my team went to the winter-worlds in '08, I attended the managers meeting in lieu of our absent manager. I was surprised to find hand written notes on the roster that our manager had submitted. SSUSA staff had written, by each players name, the teams and rankings that we had played on. They also put us on the watch list. We won and were bumped up. |
| Feb. 19, 2010 Bob50 Men's 60 242 posts | When these discussions arise, its a relief to play Major Plus. There are a lack of teams at some tournaments but the competition is always good. You get to see some of the best players in the country and you do not ever worry about protecting your rating because you can't be bumped up. Step up boys if you can. Its not that tough. |
| Feb. 19, 2010 Webbie25 Men's 70 2414 posts | Thank you, Staff! I was curious in the vein of this thread to find out your criteria. After reading it, I am not sure there is much I could add without getting exhaustively statisticalized :-), meaning having to get so many statistics that it overburdens a system. No system will be perfect and please everybody.After this response, I feel that you guys are discussing each idea posted here, if you feel there is any relevance. We can't ask for more, can we? |
| Feb. 19, 2010 SSUSA Staff 3490 posts | Webbie25 - A lot of the discussion has taken one of two forms here: comments about a perceived ratings injustice done to a particular team, or problems (or maybe more accurately, a lack of understanding) with how SSUSA strives to provide a fair and competitively balanced team rating structure. Here's the fundamental concept that drives the entire ratings process. There is really only ONE goal in ratings decisions made during the season: To have ALL teams properly rated before the SSUSA World Championships in Phoenix. And that means doing our best at periodically identifying teams that should play up and those that should play down from their current rating. That's the sole rationale for mid-season ratings changes ... And as we get later in the season, meaning after the first round of re-rates annually in March, only compelling statistical data, coupled with competent on-site Field and Tournament Director written input, is a factor ... In the final ratings meeting for the year last August, all of the 'close calls' went in favor of 'no-change' or 'move down' for the teams that were under rating review. Those that were moved either up OR down, or were 'no-change', deserved it based upon performance and competitive balance for Phoenix ... When it comes to the World Championships, we believe a team that ultimately wins has to do only ONE (really big) thing and have ONE other important thing happen ... • Play as well as they can and as close to their potential as possible over a lengthy tournament; and • Catch a favorable break or bounce or close call somewhere along the way. It almost always takes some luck! If those things happen, you will earn a World Championship. If you don't win, there is an implied obligation to honestly evaluate your team's play in the mirror after the tournament to see what you can do next time to get over the top. We recognize we may miss on occasion, but we're more willing to accept the rare occurrence of a single team being over-matched rather than the 15 other teams in the bracket being over-matched by one team. It's a very tough call every time, and one that we probably get right way more often than not, but yes, we'll miss occasionally. We noticed a large jump last year in the number of qualifying teams for the most recently concluded TOC. More teams won more qualifying tournaments in 2009, where in the past there were a few teams that won as many as five TOC qualifiers. We're also seeing a lot more tournament brackets being decided in the "If" game. Fewer teams are escaping any tournament unbeaten and there are fewer teams that go 0-5. Many of our larger brackets could be played over and over with a different team winning each time. Competition is more balanced in our view, and this is because the ratings process is improving. It's not perfect, nothing is. We'll probably have it perfected about the time the participating teams play error-less ball for an entire tournament! |
| Feb. 19, 2010 stever Men's 70 99 posts | SSUSA Staff: You probably need to save these two explanations because I know from 13 years of playing senior softball that this will come up again and again. This is the best explanation I have ever seen, though. I also know, having had many, many converstations with staff members regarding teams and players that the staff tries to do the best possible job in keeping the competition fair. In every case where I have been called (or have called) I came away feeling that the staff had bent over backwards to be fair. As you admitted, you aren't perfect, but I will take issue with anyone who says you don't try. |
| Feb. 19, 2010 grumpy55 Men's 60 102 posts | SSUSA, you should put those explanations under your priority messages and leave them there all year. As stever said, this will come up again and again at rating time. I now understand the ratings a little better now. |
| Feb. 19, 2010 Bob50 Men's 60 242 posts | I agree. Latest post by SSUSA is a very good explanation of the rationale behind rating changes. You are not told often enough what a good job SSUSA does. Thanks. |
| Feb. 19, 2010 Webbie25 Men's 70 2414 posts | I also say thanks. We blog, but you guys are making the hard calls.Maybe these interjections will remind everyone that you are watching and listening. (I am still working on that carbon tetraoxide bat that is enhanced by global warming and the contact of the bat and the ball. Einstein is closely monitoring progress to achieve a 1.62 BPA after exactly 77 swings. The problem is that the carbon Quintoxide or CO5 is behaving badly and mutating to only carbon Octoxide or CO8. Hang on Einie-we will have the 850 foot hr before you know it). |
| Feb. 19, 2010 E4/E6 Men's 70 873 posts | Webbie, doesnt sound very GREEN to me. Anything above CO2 is going to need EPA/Carb approval. Not to mention a NOX rating. Then theres the issue of the Spotted Owl and low flying aircraft. |
| Feb. 20, 2010 Webbie25 Men's 70 2414 posts | It's very green, yanking life, world and universe threatening CO2 out of the air and concentrating it inside the Carbon Tet bat where it will reside for 100 years, or until we are gone and don't care any more.However, you bring up good points about the Spotted owl and aircraft. No more fields within 20 miles of an airport or habitat of the Owl. Then there is the silvery minnow.No ball near the Rio Grande. And the polar bear-no ball near the Arctic Circle. And......what was this thread about? :-) |
