Quote:
Originally Posted by Fred Sayre
I have read a bit about this method of generating OPR and I was curious about your input for the Seattle Regional. My team, 488 ranks quite low on OPR and average score, but multiple teams of scouts confirmed we were in the top few for average scoring per match including human and robot scoring. I would say 3 of the top 5 scorers are ranked below 10 for opr. There are teams ranked in the top 10 that we did not record scoring a ball during the entire event. Is this biased based on strength of schedule or something like that? I would love to use this tool in ATL, but having my own experience at a regional, I need to know how far to trust this data.
Thanks!
|
Sorry it took so long to get back to you. Our team was competing last weekend at the Michigan State Championship. We qualified for Atlanta and I was busy yesterday and today securing money from various sources and arranging bus transportation and hotel at the last minute.
I looked at the Seattle Regional. Your team, 488, is ranked 22 out of 64 teams. Your OPR of 19.7 is ranked 23rd which is quite respectable. Another thing I look at is comparing the average score with OPR. The green color means the OPR is higher than the average score. It means your team is contributing more points to the matches than your alliance partners on average. I don't know if there were any penalties against your alliance for your matches. If there is, it will lower your OPR score.
Team 2660 is ranked 4th with an impressive record of 6 wins and 1 loss. However its OPR is only 12.2 which ranked 40th and they have a negative CCWM. You can PM me and tell me how they actually perform. They picked 2 very good partners though.
Team 1983's record of 3 wins and 4 losses ranked as 33rd. However their OPR is 39.4 and ranked number 1. Their CCWM is 9.4 which is quite high also. With the average score of 19.5 and average CCWM of -0.4, I can tell that this team had a tough schedule or some very weak partners because they scored most of the points and their partners dragged them down. The data seemed to show that they were picked number 1 which means other teams recognize them as a good team with some bad luck. I think the numbers are quite accurate in telling the story.
I would be careful with the data when there are 64 teams and each team only plays 7 matches. There is not enough of interaction between all the teams. I would put a +/- 5 on the OPR data.
That is the problem when there are many teams and some of them are not competitive. At the Michigan State Championship, most of the 64 teams are highly competitive so the data is a lot more accurate.
I will be at Atlanta. If you want to talk a little more about OPR and CCWM, please stop by our pit and ask for me.
Ed