Message board »Message Board home »Sign-in or register to get started
Online now: 1 member: TABLE SETTER 11; 73 anonymousDiscussion: Team Ratings
| Posted | Discussion |
| May 27, 2005 DMac Men's 60 207 posts | Team Ratings There doesn't seem to be any rhyme or reason to the process of moving a team up or down in the ratings. I think there is a definite need to eliminate the subjective nature of this and set down some concrete parameters. |
| May 27, 2005 NorCal1B 11 posts | I always get a bit of a chuckle when a problem issue gets raised by somebody that offers no potential solution. What do you suggest DMac? It'd be nice to have some ideas to consider. |
| May 27, 2005 DMac Men's 60 207 posts | Sorry NorCal, but I don't have the answers. Heck, I'm still trying to figure out the BCS system. That should not preclude me, however, from trying to start a discussion about a situation that has bothered senior players for a long time. What is the criterium for moving a team up? I looked at the website a couple of days ago and found out my team is now rated major. Why? Who did we beat? We haven't won a decent tournament since last May. Terry said the word out is that we beefed up. Who's word? Three managers whose teams would greatly benefit by our departure? Maybe umpires could have a greater role in rating teams. Maybe managers or players from the next higher age division could rate teams. Theoretically they would have no stake in their reports. Maybe all tournaments could be given a point value which would go towards determining each team's division placement. What does everyone else think? |
| May 27, 2005 salio2k Men's 60 547 posts | DMac.....you have a very strong team and I am sure that you and your team will do well in Reno. You could even win your division. Take it easy on Media Masters. Good luck. |
| May 27, 2005 rabbit Men's 70 319 posts | Hi DMac,according to the Softball Summit, it was decided that if you win a National Tourney or finish second in one, it is automatic that you move up to the next division, then the next year, you have to play in 3 tourneys,before you can apply to be rerated, you have to turn in last years roster, this years roster, all the scores of your games you played this year and who againest,the you send it to Ridge Hooks, B.J. Thomas and Terry Hennesey, they are the rating panel, and they meet and decide if you will be moved down or will stay the same, you can also get moved up, when the tourney directors think a team is playing down and should be in the next division, no matter if you have won a National or not, this keeps teams that change names and sandbagg so they wont have to play up. I know this to be true, since the Indiana Classics have won 3 national Championships since 1999 and finished second last year(SPA) in the 50's divison have been moved up to Major and not won hardly any games and then have been rerated later in the following year,we are like a roller coaster,we can play with some the majors, just can not get over the hump to beat them, so we remain a good AAA team. But thats the rules so you play what you have too and then do what you need to do to get rerated, and we do not thorw any games either to get rerated, we just try are best. The only thing I disagree with is, I think the National Tourney you win, should have at least 12 teams in it before they move you up, winning a Five team tourrney to me doesnt warrant a move up, but who listens to me? Rabbit, Coach of the Indiana Classics, AAA 50's |
| May 28, 2005 DMac Men's 60 207 posts | Thanks for your input, Rabbit. I was aware that the first and second place teams would move up but what about the other finishers? We finished fourth at the Worlds and haven't played a big tourney since. We beat a nice team from your neighborhood, the Indy Masters, twice but both games were very close. Should they get moved up? I'm not crying. We have a very good team and we'll do fine at the Major level. It just seems that the entire rating process is arbitrary and the teams with the best lawyers will receive the best treatment. |
| May 28, 2005 DJPoway 2 posts | I play with DMAC and nothing we have done on the field justifies our elevation to major. We have had a ghastly run of illness and injury luck and we are still weeks away from putting our full team on the field for the first time this year. There are a handful of teams who are politically active. The push to get the lowest classification they can, and then lobby to get rid of everyone in that division they think they can't bet. I'm sure that's what happened to us. My solution? Put every sanctioned tournament game in a database and let performance on the field determine ratings. You could develop metrics to determine when a team goes up or down. Bottom line for us though, is that we can compete as a major when the team returns to health. |
| May 29, 2005 rabbit Men's 70 319 posts | Hi DMac and DJPoway, I agree with you both 100%, I think the only other answer is rate the players and if you have over X amount of major players you play majors, if ,lets say you have 3 major players 8 AAA and maybe 1 AA. you would play in the AAA division, and if you have 8 major,1 major plus and rest AAA, that would mean you play in Major, which ever you have the majority thats where you play, I think that would end a lot of the speculation about certain teams and it would be fair to all, same goes for AA, if they load up with AAA or higher, they move up,regardless. What do you think of this idea ??, It might take a lot of effort at the bigging entering the names and ranking the players, but once done there should be no problems, with the computors programs we have today, later, Rabbit |
| May 29, 2005 DMac Men's 60 207 posts | I think your ideas have merit, Rabbit. Bruce from Georgia is a big advocate of having a rating system for players. Maybe it's time to put it to work. |
| May 30, 2005 a/c Men's 65 44 posts | I AM WONDERING WHO WOULD TAKE ON THIS TASK? HOW CAN IT BE DONE WITHOUT SELF ENTEREST RAISING ITS UGLY HEAD. HOW WOULD YOU GO ABOUT RATING PLAYERS? WOULD ONE JUST RATE THE MAJOR PLAYERS OR WOULD ALL THE PLAYERS BE RATED AA,AAA, ECT. DO YOU THINK THE ASSOC. WILL GO THROUGH EVERY ROSTER AND CHECK EACH TEAM? |
| May 30, 2005 Ken Men's 55 462 posts | The concept is great, but who will be responsible for rating the players? It almost puts you back to the same situation. If you let the same people rate the players you will end up with the same results as the team ratings (and wait ëtil you see the politics on THAT). If you try to computerize the ratings you will have to have someone (unbiased) keep detailed stats on the players (ìwhatís a hit and what isnít?î). That may already be done at the qualifiers, but I doubt it. Again, the concept is great, but the logistics would be a nightmare. Maybe some kind of summit where all the team managers whose teams attended the National Tournaments would be invited to rate players or come up with a rating system that is fair and will eliminate politics. I agree that something has to be done about the ratings. If a AAA team that is moved up after winning or placing 2nd in the nationals has a tough time for a while, thatís just the way it goes. Sometimes you arenít one of the best teams in the division. You just have to get better or add to your roster to improve. If you petition to move down, and get what you want, you will be back on top of AAA, and maybe thatís not right. Last year in AAA my team lost twice in Vegas to the team that took second. They were hitting balls out like crazy. After the tournament they were immediately moved up to major. If that team was sent back to AAA, that would be wrong. I heard that team only played in one qualifier to get rated. Teams probably should have to play in 2 or 3 qualifiers at least to allow the rating committee a fair shot at rating them. JMO. Thanks for listening. |
| May 31, 2005 DMac Men's 60 207 posts | I don't think this would be as unmanageable as it appears. How's this for a start. At the end of the year, the final ratings come out and each team's players are assigned the same rating as their team. Let's say the following point values were used: Major Plus---4pts Major----------3pts AAA------------2pts AA--------------1pt We take the top twelve players on each team, add up their point totals and assign the team as follows: Major Plus---over 40pts Major---------over 32pts AAA-----------over 24pts AA-------------under 24pts These numbers are arbitrary, of course. If a player does not like his rating, then it is up to him to appeal. This might take the politics out of the system. A team would be hesitant to "beef up" if they know for sure that this will move them to a higher division. Food for thought. P.S. How do you like me now, NorCal? |
| May 31, 2005 TotallyRec Men's 50 33 posts | DMAC..after reading your post, I agree a rating system is in order. I congratulate you on taking a stab at trying to find a plausable solution. However, my question to you would be, what characteristics would define a Major + player; a Major player; etc. Just playing on a Major + team does not mean that you are a Major + caliber player. My team is rated Major +, however there are only 2 to 3 players that can consistently hit homeruns on any field. The rest of us are place hitters. We are not a power team by any stretch of the imagination, but we play consistent defense and can string a few hits in a row. We were bumped to Major + after having one very successful tournament, the World's. Does that mean that we are automatically a Major + caliber team? As you indicated in regards to your team that you will be competitive in Majors, so will we in Major + division. I like your shot at coming up with a rating system and I hope it doesn't end here. See you in SoCal. |
| June 3, 2005 GDR24 Men's 50 13 posts | I really don't have any solution to the team ratings but I do have a little bit of a problem with the second place finisher in a tournament moving up a class (unless they have won a major tournament that year). I think everybody who plays in these tournaments is out for one thing, a ring and a title, Ithink the second place finisher should be given a chance to win one the following year. I know I'd hate to come so close and then find out the next year you'll be playing up a division. You should be allowed to have your shot at a title, which still isn't guaranteed with older players moving on and younger players coming in to other teams. |
| June 3, 2005 Robo2 238 posts | I agree with the position that a team should win a National Championship before they are bumped up. Even teams that win don't necessarily do well at the next level unless they make changes. Let's face it, most of the games are competitive and the final outcome is usually decided by whether one or two of the players are hot. At least that is what I have noticed. While I do not see a big difference between AAA and Major, I see a huge difference between Major and Major +. |
