Analysis SuperCoach Scoring Explained, Observations & Complaints On Scoring

[stephen]

Pretty sure I saw clarification on Twitter at some point that 3rd man up HO to advantage was still worth 5 points. Also don't think there's any suggestion that anything has changed from last year.

 

[Athomas]

Cheers I just found the article too. It sounds ridiculous if it's true. I'm sure Blics got points last year when he did an effective one. I would assume a third man up hitout to advantage would get 5 points. Would be great to confirm, I'll send some tweets out ha!

It does seem quite odd that 3rd man up HTA are not scorers. I wonder if third man up HTDA is a negative scorer??

If not scored on the basis of not being the primary ruckman you'd think at least it'd be recorded as a 1%/knock-on/whatever..... it can't just be nothing!







p.s not sure selecting Blicavs with 3rd man ups in mind is a good idea anyway.

Pretty sure I saw clarification on Twitter at some point that 3rd man up HO to advantage was still worth 5 points. Also don't think there's any suggestion that anything has changed from last year.

Yep, championdata clarified it pretty quickly for me:

 

[Goodie's Guns]

Yep, championdata clarified it pretty quickly for me:

View attachment 1057

Nice work mate.

 

[Erich1036]

I think we most certainly have.

Consider Rance for example.

Effective disposal is now even more important. He operates at 83.17% (ranked #36 in the entire competition last year).
One percenters such as spoils, shepherds are now worth points, Rance averaged 8.83 one percenters last year (BEST in the competition last year).

Rance could well gain 10 ppg on the basis of this updated scoring system.

This isn't an 'updated scoring system', it's exactly the same as it was last year.

 

[Jordan]

Can anyone confirm that these are the same rules as last year. Is it Just the first time they have told us about these point allocations.
Never remembered seeing -8.5 for 50m penalty on the live scoring match view last year

 

[Nathan]

Can anyone confirm that these are the same rules as last year. Is it Just the first time they have told us about these point allocations.
Never remembered seeing -8.5 for 50m penalty on the live scoring match view last year

They always allocate +/- anyway so I don't think it really matters.

 

[Hasnoshoes]

This isn't an 'updated scoring system', it's exactly the same as it was last year.

Which is why Rance had his big score increase last year.

When you look at Rance's stats (sorry don't have time to find them now) he has been remarkably consistent over the last 4-5 years. Under the current scoring system it would make him one of the most reliable scorers in the backline had this scoring system been in place over those years. Now that the scoring system from last year has been confirmed he is my #1 lock in defense.

 

[Rowsus]

This isn't an 'updated scoring system', it's exactly the same as it was last year.

Which is why Rance had his big score increase last year.

When you look at Rance's stats (sorry don't have time to find them now) he has been remarkably consistent over the last 4-5 years. Under the current scoring system it would make him one of the most reliable scorers in the backline had this scoring system been in place over those years. Now that the scoring system from last year has been confirmed he is my #1 lock in defense.

There seems to be a lot of over reaction to this information.
I remember reading 2 or 3 seasons ago, there were something like 53 elements that go into a players SC score. Obviously, we were only given information on the simpler ones: Kicks, marks, hballs etc.
Apart from the Ruck changes last season, nothing has changed. Some interpretations may have been tweaked, but the nuts and bolts haven't changed.
There were no radical differences to explain the Rance/McDonald scores last season. They were scored under the same system as 2014 (apart from any hitouts they might have recorded). I repeat, the only changes, apart from the Ruck changes in 2015, might be some interpretive tweaks.
Cool your jets people, now is not the time to panic, and go looking into this stat, or that stat, to change your team!

 

[doc ron]

There seems to be a lot of over reaction to this information.
I remember reading 2 or 3 seasons ago, there were something like 53 elements that go into a players SC score. Obviously, we were only given information on the simpler ones: Kicks, marks, hballs etc.
Apart from the Ruck changes last season, nothing has changed. Some interpretations may have been tweaked, but the nuts and bolts haven't changed.
There were no radical differences to explain the Rance/McDonald scores last season. They were scored under the same system as 2014 (apart from any hitouts they might have recorded). I repeat, the only changes, apart from the Ruck changes in 2015, might be some interpretive tweaks.
Cool your jets people, now is not the time to panic, and go looking into this stat, or that stat, to change your team!

Some me sage advice from an experienced campaigner.

 

[Hasnoshoes]

OK now that I have a bit of time let me clarify my point about Rance.

First of all, this isn't a reaction to today's information, it just seems like a relevant thread for this.

Until now we have been kept in the dark on a lot of how Supercoach is scored and like you said, we were only given information on the simpler ones: Kicks, marks, hballs etc. From the table below we can see that Rance has been fairly consistent in these categories over the last 5 years.

Year Gam Kic Han Dis Mar G B Tac HO FFo FA 1%s Fant SC_ Fan/SC
2015 23 08.8 8.5 17.4 5.9 0 0 3.0 0.3 1.3 1.2 8.83 71.0 97.0 1:1.36
2014 18 08.6 8.8 17.3 5.8 0 0 2.7 0.0 1.7 1.1 8.56 70.1 88.6 1:1.26
2013 23 09.8 6.8 16.6 6.6 0 0 2.2 0.1 1.7 1.1 7.26 70.5 87.2 1:1.24
2012 22 10.7 7.2 18.0 6.2 0 0 2.2 0.0 1.7 1.4 7.64 71.4 86.9 1:1.22
2011 19 10.0 8.2 18.2 6.0 0 0 2.6 0.1 1.5 1.4 8.00 72.0 84.3 1:1.70

Without any radical differences in key stats the only logical conclusion is a change in the scoring system. It/They may not have been significant but it was enough to take Rance from Supercoach irrelevance to the second highest scoring defender in 2015. My guess is a combination of a change in interpretation and/or scoring of the defensive stats he excels at such as one percenters or intercept mark/possessions.

My point is that if we apply his fantasy/sc ratio under last years rules / interpretation of rules then he becomes one of the most reliable and consistent performers of not just last year but the last 4-5 years. Unless we see anything to suggest those rules / interpretation of those rules are changing again in 2016, and the NAB scores suggest it/they haven't, then it makes Rance a much more tempting pick.

 

[Beijing_Sting]

There seems to be a lot of over reaction to this information.
I remember reading 2 or 3 seasons ago, there were something like 53 elements that go into a players SC score. Obviously, we were only given information on the simpler ones: Kicks, marks, hballs etc.
Apart from the Ruck changes last season, nothing has changed. Some interpretations may have been tweaked, but the nuts and bolts haven't changed.
There were no radical differences to explain the Rance/McDonald scores last season. They were scored under the same system as 2014 (apart from any hitouts they might have recorded). I repeat, the only changes, apart from the Ruck changes in 2015, might be some interpretive tweaks.
Cool your jets people, now is not the time to panic, and go looking into this stat, or that stat, to change your team!

Fortunately (time will tell), I'm not footy smart enough to understand the intricacies of how it could benefit or hinder my selections beyond the player's role change, improvement, or return from injury... so my team stays the same until the rookie drops occur.

 

[Manikato1]

The penalty for a ruckman hitting a tap out that is sharked by an opposition player seems harsh. Is that the fault of the ruckman who is probably successfully hitting it to the pre agreed location only to have an opposition player shark it. It isn't a huge issue but Sandi would be the most sharked ruckman in the comp and not because he is bad but simply because the opposition players give up expecting their ruckman to win it and instead just go wherever they think Sandi is hitting it. Zero would be better, after all the player who sharked the ball is already getting points for the possession and disposal.

 

[Bomber18]

From memory I think they increased points for disposals earnt in the back and forward 50s last season over those earnt in the mids. The 2015 HS article I linked on page 1 explains this better.

 

[I am Cursed :(]

The point isn't that the scoring system has changed, just that we have never had this kind of visibility before. This information shouldn't drastically change your team, just give you a better understanding of why people score the way that they do. Game day there will always be people complaining that player x had y disposals and only scored z.

The more information, the better.

 

[Peanutz]

But spoil and shepherd? I've never seen this on any published list from previous years'. Has anyone else? Is this a new inclusion by stealth?

 

[Rowsus]

But spoil and shepherd? I've never seen this on any published list from previous years'. Has anyone else? Is this a new inclusion by stealth?

There are no new inclusions, and no stealth.
You have just never seen a complete list, as the Supercoach have never listed it. Even this expanded list is incomplete!

 

[Peanutz]

There are no new inclusions, and no stealth.
You have just never seen a complete list, as the Supercoach have never listed it. Even this expanded list is incomplete!

Interesting - why would HS not be transparent? I have seen lists of point scoring actions and was aware of time, position on ground, game score scaling etc.... why wouldn't they have added these to the list in previous years.
I am sceptical.

 

[jaca]

Because, no matter how specific they are around how points are allocated, it's still a human allocating them based on their interpretation. Leaves some margin for error not revealing all.

 

[Nathan]

But spoil and shepherd? I've never seen this on any published list from previous years'. Has anyone else? Is this a new inclusion by stealth?

There are no new inclusions, and no stealth.
You have just never seen a complete list, as the Supercoach have never listed it. Even this expanded list is incomplete!

Interesting - why would HS not be transparent? I have seen lists of point scoring actions and was aware of time, position on ground, game score scaling etc.... why wouldn't they have added these to the list in previous years.
I am sceptical.

Can't seem to find the articles but I remember a few about 1% scoring prior to the 2013/14 season. That's not to say it was new then but it's definately not new in 2016.

 

[Philzsay]

FYI Champion Data has just confirmed that there are NO CHANGES to scoring this year.