BuzzerBeater Forums

Bugs, bugs, bugs > Player rankings

Player rankings

Set priority
Show messages by
From: hoo-cee
This Post:
00
54816.1
Date: 10/23/2008 17:33:31
Overall Posts Rated:
106106
FT% comparison between Niko Salonranta (N) (4405453) and Gabriel Lindqvist (G) (4405447):

Own series - Suomi II - Suomi - Global
N: 6 - 12 - 67 - 370
G: 4 - 10 - 46 - Does not rank in the top 1000 in any category

Just to make it clear, Gabriel (G) has the better FT%.

From: hoo-cee

This Post:
00
54816.2 in reply to 54816.1
Date: 10/27/2008 07:21:15
Overall Posts Rated:
106106
FT% comparison between Niko Salonranta (N) (4405453) and Gabriel Lindqvist (G) (4405447):

Own series - Suomi II - Suomi - Global
N: 6 - 12 - 67 - 370
G: 4 - 10 - 46 - Does not rank in the top 1000 in any category

Just to make it clear, Gabriel (G) has the better FT%.

Only to say that even after updates the same problem is there. Will be my last contribution here for now.

N: 6 - 12 - 59 - 312
G: 5 - 10 - 44 - 22408 (from the "whole" page)

This Post:
00
54816.3 in reply to 54816.2
Date: 10/27/2008 08:40:57
Overall Posts Rated:
3737
I don't know the answer for sure, but it looks like there's a different standard for number of free throw attempts to qualify for the world rankings. One of my guys (with a different FT% , but not a lot of attempts) is also ranked 22408 at the moment.

So your Niko with 4.25 FTA/G qualifies at the world level, but Gabriel with 3.22 does not.

There are other possibilities, too... maybe at the world level, the denominator is 20 games right now, but at the other levels the denominator is the actual number of games played by the player. And maybe the cutoff at both levels is 3.0 FTA/G. That would be a way that Gabriel could qualify locally (3.22), but not globally (2.90).

Whatever the issue, it's fair to say that it's a bug that the standards are different at different levels.

This Post:
00
54816.4 in reply to 54816.3
Date: 10/27/2008 09:03:18
Overall Posts Rated:
106106
Whatever the issue, it's fair to say that it's a bug that the standards are different at different levels.

After posting the first message I almost regretted it right away as it occured to me that maybe he hasn't met the standards. However, few seconds later, I realized that it would be very weird to have different kind of standards for different levels.

One of my guys (with a different FT% , but not a lot of attempts) is also ranked 22408 at the moment.

That's actually quite an interesting piece of information. So it's probably like you said - different standards and the players not meeting the standards are put tied in the last place.

This Post:
00
54816.5 in reply to 54816.4
Date: 10/27/2008 15:14:40
Overall Posts Rated:
587587
With the proof presented here, it really seems the criteria are different. While I think this is an understandable design choice as such, in my opinion the current implementation ruins much of the fun the rankings bring. We should at least be always able to tell whether a given player is eligible for the ranking.

There is absolutely no reason to show some arbitrary figure for those who do not meet the criterion. This should be fixed asap.

From: Milly
This Post:
00
54816.6 in reply to 54816.5
Date: 10/29/2008 18:53:01
Overall Posts Rated:
4646
My player Sondre Sundet ((3119790)) rank No 10 in RB / Game (/BBWeb/playerRanks.aspx?PlayerID=3119790), but the ranking says: Does not rank in the top 10 in any category.
How is this counted?

Older than the rest ...
From: hoo-cee
This Post:
00
54816.7 in reply to 54816.6
Date: 03/31/2009 18:25:48
Overall Posts Rated:
106106
It's funny how one of my players (4893313) is 45th in 3FG% in his league rank, but 1st in 3FG% in his division rank (41st in country rank).

As he plays for a team in I, I think he should have the same rank in both league and division ranks. Anyway, he doesn't have the same rank in any category. I think it's a bit weird not having the same criteria for both the league and division lists.

Well, the whole criteria thing seems to be a bit weird in some cases...

Last edited by hoo-cee at 03/31/2009 18:26:26

This Post:
00
54816.8 in reply to 54816.7
Date: 03/31/2009 18:45:40
Overall Posts Rated:
303303
I believe that each type of ranking is calculated at different times (this is a game day).

Let us know if there's still a discrepancy at this time tomorrow.

NO ONE at this table ordered a rum & Coke
Charles: Penn has some good people
A CT? Really?
Any two will do
Any three for me
Any four will score
Any five are live
This Post:
00
54816.9 in reply to 54816.8
Date: 04/01/2009 06:36:13
Overall Posts Rated:
106106
I believe that each type of ranking is calculated at different times (this is a game day).

Let us know if there's still a discrepancy at this time tomorrow.

Yes, that seems to be the case: the league and division ranks now match each other pretty well, but not perfectly. In some categories (3FG %, 3FG attempted, PF / game, PF, PF / 48 min, TO, TO / game, TO / 48 min) there's a one-place-difference, the league rank having worse rank.

E: Well, it hasn't been 24h yet, but the ranks have been clearly updated (at least the division ones).

Last edited by hoo-cee at 04/01/2009 06:37:47

This Post:
00
54816.10 in reply to 54816.9
Date: 04/01/2009 17:46:08
Overall Posts Rated:
303303
In that case I'm guessing that there may be ties that are broken differently for some reason.

NO ONE at this table ordered a rum & Coke
Charles: Penn has some good people
A CT? Really?
Any two will do
Any three for me
Any four will score
Any five are live