09-03-2017, 02:37 AM (This post was last modified: 09-03-2017, 02:37 AM by Muford.)
(09-03-2017, 01:28 AM)To12143 Wrote:How am i gonna write an article about this list if it doesn't get finished. We should riot for a better designated workhorse! BURN THE NSFL DOWN
Seriously though you're fine, take your time and get it out when you can.
09-03-2017, 04:43 PM (This post was last modified: 09-03-2017, 04:43 PM by 124715.)
(08-30-2017, 11:03 PM)Noble Wrote:Okay so it worked on a system like this.
1. Players who failed to qualify for last season's list that WERE on an experts' ranking were still placed by average ranking. So the 25% change for these players' is still equivalent to their "final rankings"
2. Players who failed to qualify for last season's list that were NOT on an experts' ranking were given a final ranking of 77 because 76 players total DID receive votes meaning if a player did not they were just below those who did and all technically equal.
3. Players who were not eligible (aka S2 Draftees) were given an average ranking of 51, meaning they would have been technically just shy of qualifying and were considered the highest ranked players who did not.
When sorted by this year's ranking, the average margin of error was 11.4 picks between experts, or 22.8%. When sorted by the weighted rankings, the average margin of error drops too 9.4 picks, or 18.8 percent. This 4 percent difference isn't huge, but shows that the weighted rankings produce a slightly smaller range or error.
In terms of players who miss out, 7 players qualify for the list when sorted by weighted that do not qualify when sorted by actual ranking. The reverse of this, 10 players qualify for the list when sorted by actual that do not qualify for weighted. This again shows the weighted being slightly more accurate.
(09-03-2017, 05:43 PM)124715 Wrote:When sorted by this year's ranking, the average margin of error was 11.4 picks between experts, or 22.8%. When sorted by the weighted rankings, the average margin of error drops too 9.4 picks, or 18.8 percent. This 4 percent difference isn't huge, but shows that the weighted rankings produce a slightly smaller range or error.
In terms of players who miss out, 7 players qualify for the list when sorted by weighted that do not qualify when sorted by actual ranking. The reverse of this, 10 players qualify for the list when sorted by actual that do not qualify for weighted. This again shows the weighted being slightly more accurate.
So what you're saying is, I'm not getting in this year because I wasn't ranked last year, no matter how good I did this year and the fact that this year, I was loads better then the TE that made it last year? Lmaoo
(09-05-2017, 10:47 AM)SimmerDownBruhh Wrote:So what you're saying is, I'm not getting in this year because I wasn't ranked last year, no matter how good I did this year and the fact that this year, I was loads better then the TE that made it last year? Lmaoo
You made the list don't worry buddy. Promise to finish this all up once I'm out of school.