BuzzerBeater Forums

Sure, if we agree to have the day of the first HGL game (Monday after the first regular league game) as the ultimate deadline, then I will do the same calculations from Season 4 accordingly to make sure that the top-8 salaries of respective seasons don't have to be adjusted mid-season.

Feel free to let me know if you want me to recalculate the top-8 statistics for other teams apart from FRE for this season, where transfers were done between October 15th and October 20th. I can then also try to recreate the teams for affected teams on October 20th and provide the corrected data.

I think it would be most clear option to use this moment of start of the new HGL season as a deadline for determining top8-salaries. Then we wouldn't probably ever have to wonder in the future how was this detail/practice handled, if we use that deadline, as it's quite logical (at least to me).

I have almost finished checking the transfers-post content on Seasons 2 and 3, and prior to publication I can send you a list of possibly affected teams by BBMail. I can/may also send some potential questions that might arise (in terms of what should the season beginning top8-values be, if and as we use October 20th as a deadline for Season 3), and whether or not you can easily recall if some transfers were included in your calculations.
Nevertheless, thank you for your offer and continuous help - I'll keep that offer in mind and please don't forget, that help is much appreciated (whether or not I end up utilizing the offer on a given occassion)!

[...]
As mentioned before, I'd consider it more optimal to have an equal number of teams instead of odd number of teams and currently we have 17 teams for Season 4 (as Alanurmon Rikkaat will join us for Season 4), if Suuret Muinaiset and Hårdboll will decide to keep on playing on HGL Season 4. This way also every team would play on every Round...

I quoted myself above, as content of this post is going to be related to that.

Unfortunately, Suuret Muinaiset (manager cthulhu) has decided to leave HGL after this season. For me personally, of course losing Finnish team from our HGL team roster is grim news, but it's understandable and it's life, and I thank cthulhu for all these seasons in HGL, and warmly wish you welcome to HGL in the future!
(And let's not forget addition of another Finnish team, Alanurmon Rikkaat, to our HGL team roster on Season 4)!

So as HGL Season 4 is concerned, it seems more likely day by day that we'll be running with 16 team roster on Season 4 as well.

This would mean that we could utilize/use the same schedule than what we have been using during first 3 seasons.

We could, however, do some small changes to schedule if that's what managers would want(?)

By changes I refer to changing match blocks to different places. For a single team this would mean the same as shuffling the schedule, so you'd just meet different teams at different stages of the season.

As for positives with the current setup (using the exact same schedule than during first 3 seasons) there's the obvious positive side that you can easily check out previous season's schedules, and see how you've fared up against the same opponent when you played them last time (and that's especially true for me as I can't see anyone's games in their regular team schedule).

Positive side of changing match blocks to different rounds would include changing the "difficulty" of beginning, mid and end of season schedules, so difficulty of season wouldn't be repeated as such from season to season.
(However, team strengths do change quite a lot from season to season, so perhaps apart from VPO and HAD who haven't been beaten by anyone else but each other, mid-level teams may be able to give very strong teams a good run for their money in one or two seasons for now if not on this season, so this lessens the negative effect of repeating the schedule from season to season).

@all HGL managers:
What do you guys think, should we on Season 4
A) use the same schedule (matches on exactly same order) than on previous HGL Seasons, or
B) change places of match blocks (for example, Round 1 matches could be played during Round 4, etc.), which would shuffle the schedule? (Same matches would take place during the same game days, but for a single team that would feel like the whole schedule has been changed. For example for Round 15 WAG-LGM and ED-TRO etc. are nowadays scheduled, and all current Round 15 matches would still be played during the same match day, but these matches would be moved to some other Round instead of Round 15).

Both of these options would prevent us from having to redo the whole schedule (which by hand/by utilizing AI is either somewhat risky and/or arduous process, as manual check is having to be made to ensure validity/correctness of the schedule), so feel free to tell us your opinion about your preference ((option A) or B)).

Last edited by Wagner at 11/27/2025 7:28:22 AM

League tables have been updated again.

This might well have been one of the most interesting Regular Season rounds of the whole HGL history.

2 matches went into overtime (and one to the double overtime!), and 5 of 8 matches were close calls.
(5 out of 6 matches if we don't count matches of VPO and HAD, who in most cases, are expected to win and in some cases, win big).

- VIV-WAG: unfortunately for me, VIV took a clear win in this important match which would've either equalized our W-L records, but now VIV is 2 wins ahead. It wasn´t even a close call... both teams were playing a slow offense, but still 202 points were scored, so perhaps it wasn't the greatest celebration of defense. (Part of the high scoring is explained though when we take a look at FT%, which were 96 and 91%, respectively).

- KKS-HB: in this very important match in terms of fighting for the 4 best positions. KKS trailed by 4 12 minutes to play, but won by 3 in this inside offense-orientated match.

-ED-VMO: another tight match, in where ED led by 1 before 4th and won by 7 eventually due to good 4th quarter. WMO had 9 more second chance attempts, but 2 of their opening lineup players were fouled out after 28 and 36 minutes of play - did this turn the scale to favor ED?

- LGM-RAJ: double overtime, do I need to say more? RAJ´s inside offense rating was 13 and FG% 51,6% (LGM 42,6%, but they were better behind the 3 point arc and had 11 more second chance attempts than RAJ). No fouled out players in this 58 minute thriller...

- TRO-FRE: another overtime battle of Round 12, and this one was outside offense-orientated one. Should FRE had won this, they both would've gone to 1 win and 11 losses, but now TRO took 2 win edge over FRE. TRO had 12 more second chance attempts to score (by snatching no less than 21 offensive rebounds). While FRE had a clear edge on blocks (10-2), they also turned the ball over 5 more times than TRO and left lots of point on the free throw line (20 of 31 shooting, which means less than 65%).

- EOS-D: LennuK. already wrote a match report on this, but once again one more proper thriller for Round 12, which kept Playoff dreams alive for D (however, they do have a challenging schedule for the last 3 rounds). D won the 4th quarter by 8, and were able to get a W despite of leaving possibly HGL record breaking (?) amount of points to the free throw line (only 19 of 34 shooting, at less than 56% accuracy). In that regard, EOS shot FT´s at 68% leaving 7 points to the line, so their hands were slightly shaky as well from the charity stripe yesterday. I wasn't checking the match replay so I don't know how big of an impact it had that 2 EOS opening lineup players were fouled out, after 38 and 45 minutes, but usually that does have an impact of some sort.
For EOS, loss means they're still tied with SUM in a fight for last (12th) place in Playoffs, but have an edge over SUM currently due to Regular Season win on Season 3. It's going to be very interesting fight, as I'm sure SUM also wants to reach Playoffs during their last HGL season. (Last for now, as nobody still knows if they might return later - I definitely hope they do)!



Last edited by Wagner at 11/29/2025 6:34:26 AM

yeah I was lucky on friday
LGM has amazing skils to salary ratio, maybe the biggest here (no offense for others -just my thought)

Few big games left, may the best win

yeah I was lucky on friday :+(
LGM has amazing skils to salary ratio, maybe the biggest here (no offense for others -just my thought) (y)

Few big games left, may the best win :)

Maybe there was part luck, but also part of something else... I mean 11W-2L record doesn't come by accident. :)

LGM indeed can't be taken lightly by any means, and as I mentioned in another post, it's been pleasurable to see how many even matches there have been in HGL this season! Given your very strong track record (and win-loss record this season) in HGL, they did a great job making you really earn those valuable 2 league table points!

Indeed, 2 Rounds left and many positions can still be gained or lost, so everyone, give it all you got!
This week it's especially difficult to optimize game shapes and training simultaneously, as it's all star week...

Last edited by Wagner at 12/2/2025 9:16:53 AM

@all: Speaking of important match results and Playoffs that are closing in, I suggest the following in terms of determining which team is ranked higher in Official Regular Season Rankings (ORSR) in equal Regular Season wins-situations, when 3 or more teams have a tied win-loss record.
First post acts as a compilation (TLDR), second post lists part of ruleset, and third post rest of the ruleset and couple of example scenarios.
Please let me know what you think of it.


Part 1/3:

*****Compilation of essential points, but please read through full set of rule proposition, 2 next posts after this one:*****

- Regular Season (RS) match success is first and foremost method of comparison, and attempts are first being made to reduce number of 3 or more teams (in tied in wins-comparison) to as low number as possible (for example, if team has lost all it's matches against "tied in wins"-teams, it will be dropped out of comparison and positioned into a lowest position of those teams, and same will be done for teams that have won all their said matches)

- If tied wins-situation between 3 or more teams occur (in where one or more of the teams haven't won or lost all matches against "tied in wins-teams"), only then we´d proceed to Regular Season +/- point differential (RS PD) comparison, as it's not possible to reduce number of teams (based on Regular Season wins against said opposition) to 2.

- If tie exists exactly between two teams/if it's possible to reduce number of tied teams to 2 (for example if one or more teams has won or lost all RS matches against "tied in wins"-teams), then normal "winner of the current season RS match"-rule is being applied in the first place (and point difference is not applied at this point as a comparison method as only 2 teams are being compared anymore).

- As a second comparison method (should RS matches between teams tied in wins fail to provide team rankings) Regular Season +/- point differential (RS PD) is being used.

- Should RS PD be tied among 3 (or more than 3) teams, third layer of comparison would be "virtual table" point difference (VT PD), then points allowed (VT PA), then points scored (VT PS). However, this is extremely unlikely scenario.
(Virtual table includes only matches between compared teams; number of compared teams in virtual table is not necessarily the same as number of "tied in wins"-teams, as number of compared teams has already been reduced to as small as possible first, having already been positioned to upper or lower rank based on current season RS match success against compared teams - in other words if they have already been dropped out of comparison due to that, their matches won't be count in a virtual table calculations).

- If still more than 2 teams tied, ss a last resort, we'd use full Regular Season PA, then PS (all HGL RS matches).

- After that we have ran out of options, and shall just either
A) give better position to a team that had more successful previous HGL Season (RS W-L record), or
B) flip a coin and let it decide, and fill another lottery coupon, as it's an exceptional day defying all odds.

*****End of compilation*****



Last edited by Wagner at 12/2/2025 7:23:26 PM

Part 2/3:

"Tied in wins"-situations; more thorough ruleset with more details (and partly with more repetition):

1. In the case of a 2-teams with tied in wins, better team is determined based on Regular Season match of this Season, as said in the rules.

2. In 3 or more teams tie-situations, as a basic rule, it is first and foremost tried to be solved by comparing Regular Season wins in RS games played within/against those opponents (with the similar spirit to normal "winner of RS match is better ranked team"-rule).

If 3 (or more) teams are tied at Regular Season win-loss record, first it's always attempted to reduce number of teams as much as possible, and by doing that reach a situation where normal 2 team comparison-rule could be applied (winner of RS match is better ranked).
(In other words, it's attempted to drop teams to lower positions who have lost against all with similar record, or put team in first place within their comparison group if they have won all RS matches against the comparison group opponents).
Only win-loss-record against each other within that whole comparison group (meaning teams tied at similar number of wins, that are still being compared against each other) is used at this stage of comparison, and not yet point differential, PD).

-> if it is possible to reduce number of compared teams to 2 teams by RS match comparison, we'll go with option "4.2.", below (normal, existing rule; RS match winner higher ranked)

-> if it's not possible to reduce number to 2 teams within a comparison group (meaning that teams have won each other during RS), we'll first use comparison method "3.", below, and then if needed, "5.".

-> if 3 or more tied wins-teams (who have won each other and can't be rated based on RS match results because they have won each other) have same RS +/- point differential, we´ll go with option "5."; this is extremely unlikely scenario.


3. If teams have won matches against each other so that it can't be determined who's better (in a group of 3 or more), then we´d compare full Regular Season +/- point difference (RS PD).
Note:
-> If teams can be put into ranking order based on this RS PD (in other words, no RS PD tie-situations with teams tied in wins), it will be done (like explained in "4.1."), naturally better RS PD giving better rank among these compared teams.
-> If exactly 2 teams are tied after applying "2." (which is attempt to reduce team numbers based on RS wins within comparison group) and applying "3." (RS +/- PD) comparisons, we'll use "4.2." (normal, existing rule) to solve situation.


4.1. In the case more than 2 teams would have same Win-Loss record (and number of comparison group teams couldn't be reduced to 2 based on how they have won against each other in RS matches), and out of those teams two teams would have same RS point differential , we would first try to sort teams to upper or lower than these two teams (whose RS +/- PD is even) based on whether their RS +/- PD is better or worse than those two teams that are tied in RS PD. For the teams tied in RS +/- PD, other comparison methods would take place (as long as team classification has succesfully been made), and comparison stage "5." would be applied at this point to RS PD-tied teams.

4.2. If out of all compared teams in question (that comparison group, that has first been reduced by RS match win-loss comparison against each other into as small group as possible) exactly 2 teams would have same RS PD, then we would simply compare who's better team by checking out result of their Regular Season meeting (applying the normal, existing rule to situation).

***Continues on next post***

Last edited by Wagner at 12/2/2025 7:28:00 PM

Part 3/3:

"Tied in wins"-situations; rest of more thorough ruleset with more details (and partly with more repetition):


5. If all 3 or more teams would have same RS +/- point difference (extremely unlikely situation!) after all afore mentioned comparisons, then we would calculate a separate league table (like Paul George mentioned, "virtual table") into which only matches against those with the same RS win-loss record and the same RS PD would be counted (in the case of 3 even teams, that's 3 RS matches), and from those matches we can use as a first comparison method +/- point difference (PD), points allowed (PA) as a 2nd comparison method, and points scored (PS) as third comparison method.
If for some reason it would be still tied with more than 2 teams, then we would proceed to first fill a lottery ticket, and after that, comparing whole Regular Season PA and then PS. If still tied, I don't know what to say. ;)

Example situation #1:
Teams D, E, F and G are tied in wins. Team D has won his RS matches against E, F and G, in other words all critical matches.
E, F and G have won each other. E won F during Regular Season.
Solution: First we conclude that D has won all matches against opponents in question (tied in wins), so D is automatically ranked as highest of 4 teams, and in further ranking comparison is made with only 3 remaining teams (E, F, G). For the sake of an example let´s assume none of these teams won or lost all of their matches, but won each other, so it's not possible to reduce amount of teams to 2. In this case we would then proceed to full Regular Season +/- point differential comparison between 3 teams; better RS PD, better ranking (among these 3 teams).

Added example: As an example, let's for the purpose of reusing this first example imagine that while team D had won all their 3 competitors, team G would've lost all 3 games against "tied in wins"-opposition (3 matches). Therefore two teams would be automatically "dropped" out of comparison, by being able to give them league positions that they deserve, based on Regular Season match success against tied opposition.
So in this case D would be ranked 1st of these four teams, G as last, and then ranking between E and F would depend on their Regular Season match, and as E won F in this example, so E will be ranked 2nd of those 4 teams.


Example situation #2:
Teams A, B and C have 8-7 Regular Season record. They all have won each other during RS (and team B won team C 90-85). In other words, none of the teams have won or lost all matches against teams with same win-loss record.
Team A´s Regular Season +/- point difference (RS PD) +20, Team B +10 and Team C+10.
Solution: First we conclude team ranking can´t be determined by RS match results (teams have won each other).
Second we rank Team A highest of all three, due to having best RS +/- PD.
Third, we conclude Team B and C have same point differential. As a result, we check their Regular Season match which team B won, so correct order is teams A, B and C.
Added note: If for example team A woud've won their RS matches against teams B and C, then they would've automatically been ranked best of those 3 teams. That would result team A being dropped out of comparison group, and therefore teams B and C would proceed to normal RS match result comparison first, and not to the RS +/- PD comparison in first place.
This means that basic, already existing rule of better RS success against opposition in question, is tried to be applied before point difference(s) are being applied as comparison methdod.

Please anyone let me know if I forgot to add something important in this proposal of mine, or if you find anything that's not logical... It's surprisingly complicated subject if you dive deep into different scenarios.

And everybody please feel free to comment if you accept this proposal.

Last edited by Wagner at 12/2/2025 7:30:43 PM