Best teams over the past 5 years...

[Citrus Dad]

Originally Posted by sciencenuetzel

What kind of direct assistance? (You aren't talking about cheesecake are you?)

I think we were cheesecaked in 2011 at Champs!

We've worked with 971 and 254 on robot design issues, including off season projects, they've hosted drive practice, and innumerable times they've worked on our bot at competition.

1983 has helped with resources, ideas, classroom concepts, and at Champs, scouting--we've been in the same division 3 years in a row. (My brother in law is a Woody Flowers finalist from their team.)

[The other Gabe]

One thing I will say about 1983 is that their robot is rarely the absolute best in the PNW. it's nearly always in the top 5, but not always the best. their success comes with knowing how to play well with others, making robots that don't break, and fantastic scouting. That and some luck with their division competitions this year- there were 3 world-class robots at 2 of their district events- themselves, 3663 and 1318. by picking 1318 every time, they essentially locked in the win at those events.

[waialua359]

Some use championship success as the metric, others use regional/district wins, and as mentioned beautiful engineering.
There are a great number of teams that can be on this list.
But without a doubt,
in the last 5 years, and arguably of all time, there is no doubt that
254, 469, 987, 1114 and 2056 are on this list.
If its the last 3 years, I'd add 1678.

[Bob Steele]

Originally Posted by The other Gabe

One thing I will say about 1983 is that their robot is rarely the absolute best in the PNW. it's nearly always in the top 5, but not always the best. their success comes with knowing how to play well with others, making robots that don't break, and fantastic scouting. That and some luck with their division competitions this year- there were 3 world-class robots at 2 of their district events- themselves, 3663 and 1318. by picking 1318 every time, they essentially locked in the win at those events.

Thanks for the compliments... let's not forget another world-class robot at the other two events...955... we were lucky enough to play with them at another district and at the district champs...!!

[Lij2015]

I'm gonna call 1983 the most underrated team in FRC compared to how they perform year in and out(specifically this time frame).

[JB987]

Can a moderator deal with this vitriol please?

[ErvinI]

Got bored, so I made a fairly simple formula that I felt represented what I thought would be the "best" team in terms of robot performance:

SCORE = REGIONAL_WINS/MAX_REGIONAL_WINS + EINSTEIN_APPEARANCES/MAX_EINSTEIN_APPEARANCES + EINSTEIN_WINS/MAX_EINSTEIN_WINS

Where the maximum values is the number of wins/appearances of the top team in each category (14 regional wins for 2056, 3 Einstein appearances for multiple teams, 2 Einstein wins from 254).

The rankings for the top 12 came out as follows:

1. 254
2. 1678
3. 118
4. 469
5. 1114
6. 987
7. 1477
8. 25
9. 973
10. 2056
11. 148
12. 16

[logank013]

Originally Posted by Citrus Dad

I'm really glad to see 1983 Skunkworks on your list! (But I have a personal bias.)

Why we might be on this list: because 3 other teams on this list have been our alliance partners for our trips to Einstein. And we've gotten very direct assistance from 3 other teams on this list.

I'm not sure about other years but you, as in your team, were one of the best robots this year. Putting up 3-5stacks consistently at worlds was good and was a major reason your alliance won on Einstein.

[logank013]

Originally Posted by ErvinI

Got bored, so I made a fairly simple formula that I felt represented what I thought would be the "best" team in terms of robot performance:

SCORE = REGIONAL_WINS/MAX_REGIONAL_WINS + EINSTEIN_APPEARANCES/MAX_EINSTEIN_APPEARANCES + EINSTEIN_WINS/MAX_EINSTEIN_WINS

Where the maximum values is the number of wins/appearances of the top team in each category (14 regional wins for 2056, 3 Einstein appearances for multiple teams, 2 Einstein wins from 254).

The rankings for the top 12 came out as follows:

1. 254
2. 1678
3. 118
4. 469
5. 1114
6. 987
7. 1477
8. 25
9. 973
10. 2056
11. 148
12. 16

You don't need to show the work but can you post the "answers" or number calculated with that equation next to the side? Thanks

[Kevin Leonard]

Originally Posted by ErvinI

Got bored, so I made a fairly simple formula that I felt represented what I thought would be the "best" team in terms of robot performance:

SCORE = REGIONAL_WINS/MAX_REGIONAL_WINS + EINSTEIN_APPEARANCES/MAX_EINSTEIN_APPEARANCES + EINSTEIN_WINS/MAX_EINSTEIN_WINS

Where the maximum values is the number of wins/appearances of the top team in each category (14 regional wins for 2056, 3 Einstein appearances for multiple teams, 2 Einstein wins from 254).

The rankings for the top 12 came out as follows:

1. 254
2. 1678
3. 118
4. 469
5. 1114
6. 987
7. 1477
8. 25
9. 973
10. 2056
11. 148
12. 16

Interesting list. I like how objective it is.
The other thing to perhaps take into account is 1) Finalist appearances (especially division finals), and 2) District Championship wins
I feel like 67, 33, and 1983 being off your list might be as a result of those factors.

[Basel A]

Because I enjoy tooting my own horn, here's an alternate methodology: OPR-Based Ranking

[JB987]

Originally Posted by JB987

Can a moderator deal with this vitriol please?

Problem solved...thanks!

[ErvinI]

Originally Posted by logank013

You don't need to show the work but can you post the "answers" or number calculated with that equation next to the side? Thanks

For the sake of making the data slightly more readable, I multiplied that value by 100/3 to give each team a score out of a maximum of 100 on my own spreadsheet.

1. 254 (79.37)
2. 1678 (69.05)
3. 118 (67.46)
4. 469 (67.46)
5. 1114 (61.90)
6. 987 (50.00)
7. 1477 (48.41)
8. 25 (46.03)
9. 973 (46.03)
10. 2056 (44.44)
11. 148 (43.65)
12. 16 (42.06)

There were two ties between 118 and 469 and 25 and 973.

Interesting list. I like how objective it is.
The other thing to perhaps take into account is 1) Finalist appearances (especially division finals), and 2) District Championship wins
I feel like 67, 33, and 1983 being off your list might be as a result of those factors.

I wasn't bored enough to make a full-blown script using the TBA API; I just used an Excel spreadsheet and manually entered in the wins and appearances . If I had more time, I'd definitely account for elimination finishes at both the regional and championship level.

District championship wins are currently accounted within regional wins, but I wouldn't put much more emphasis into them since not all teams are within a district.

FWIW, 33 was tied for 14th with 4 other teams (They only made it to Einstein once), 67 was 18th (again, only 1 Einstein appearance in the last 5 years), and 1983 was 25th (never made it to Einstein).

[tindleroot]

Originally Posted by ErvinI

For the sake of making the data slightly more readable, I multiplied that value by 100/3 to give each team a score out of a maximum of 100 on my own spreadsheet.

Ahh, I thought this data was for all years, not just the past 5. It makes more sense now why 67 didn't make the list (If it was every year, they would probably be on top).

[Knufire]

Originally Posted by tindleroot

Ahh, I thought this data was for all years, not just the past 5. It makes more sense now why 67 didn't make the list (If it was every year, they would probably be on top).

Jim Zondag has a sheet similar to this thread that ranks teams based on championship elimination finishes for the past 15 years. There's an adjustible depreciation factor in order to weight how much time matters.

http://www.chiefdelphi.com/media/papers/3133

With the standard depreciating factor of 66.67%:
1678 140
1114 139
118 123
987 119
67 112
148 112
469 108
254 107
2056 95
33 92


With a depreciating factor of 100% (no depreciation):
67 577
254 516
469 509
1114 453
217 435
233 425
33 420
987 374
148 344
330 318