Player Ratings so far

[The Dealer]

Still failing to acknowledge the relative differences between players as relevant.

There's nothing statistically interesting to be found in the way you go about the comparisons.

Combined with your self proclaimed ability to disregard some posters ratings based on what newspapers use as a base line even though the ratings would be essentially incredibly similar (e.g. newspapers give all 6's, after a loss poster gives all 4's, after a win poster gives all 8's) - it makes this nothing more than your own project you are trying to pass off as a community thing.

It's not a community thing because of how you deal with the data.

I would hope eventually posters can rise above impulsive high and low ratings according to the result. Ratings are getting better IMO.

My comparisons give a wider sourced and broader perspective on players performance. It's an alternative view. I am interested how others gauge performance. I don't want to rely on potentially impulsive or skewed ratings. So I give an alternative. A narrow and potentially biased spectrum of opinion without any vetting does not give a credible enough outcome, but that's my slant on it. Those that want a pure Spurs biased and skewed rating for fun purposes can go with that, I don't do it as a fun exercise.

The ratings process is in its early days on this forum. There is a long way to go yet. Let's just go with it, watch the comparisons, discuss the ratings a bit more without getting nasty about it and see what happens.

 

[The Dealer]

Vdv minimum of an 8 for me. Going by what my eyes personally tell me.

He might get there by seasons end. He has been fantastic especially for his age.

 

[cretinousgoat]

What a waste of time.

TBH I've changed my mind. If The Dealer wants to do this kind of thing, unless he's breaking forum rules (which he isn't) then he's entitled to do it.

I guess those who aren't interested can just ignore the thread?

I'm not particularly bothered on it, but live and let live.

 

[The Dealer]

Sorry, The Dealer I like that we have a resident stats-nerd, I just don't know what to make of the stats. Are you saying that our stats and stats elsewhere differ?

I've recapped this thread... was the post above about it not mattering just saying they are so close as to make no difference?

Maybe it would help to explain a few things:

1. The order of merit and how we might use that mentally or practically.
2. Who the 'other' stats are.
3. Why opinion-based stats matter.
4. Who are you and what is your special relationship with the admin?
5. How much for a gram of gianluca?

Small margins make a big difference across the season for the order of merit

1. It's ok rating the players each game and producing an indicator on who performed best and worst but the order of merit can give a season long result. Player of the season if you like ?

2. The stats I compile are from newspapers, Spurs websites, neutral websites , podcasts, TV.

3. My own ratings method involves noting down good play and bad per player. So each one has a scoresheet. That's just my way of doing it. I watch and re- watch passages of play on Spurplay if I need to. For me it's not oh a 7 will do, it's a bit more in depth. It's up to the poster how they rate. I pushed for 0.50 increments to allow a bit more accuracy and fine tuning. It will never be an exact science but its early days and I think the quality of ratings is improving.

4. I don't have a relationship with admin, he hates me and wants to ban me.

5. I'm an antiques dealer.

 

[McCOYS]

TBH I've changed my mind. If The Dealer wants to do this kind of thing, unless he's breaking forum rules (which he isn't) then he's entitled to do it.

I guess those who aren't interested can just ignore the thread?

I'm not particularly bothered on it, but live and let live.

I no longer bother giving any match ratings for players at all. I just don't see the point in it. I simply watch the matches and decide who's played well and who hasn't. I'd rather have a rational conversation than to give each player a made up rating number.

I don't see the need to compare our players with each other. As long as we as a team play as well as, or better than the opposition that's all I care about.

I've tried to do The Dealer a favour in stopping him wasting his time and the time of anyone reading the thread. He doesn't seem to appreciate it so.... I shan't be wasting any more of my time discussing player's ratings.

 

[The Dealer]

TBH I've changed my mind. If The Dealer wants to do this kind of thing, unless he's breaking forum rules (which he isn't) then he's entitled to do it.

I guess those who aren't interested can just ignore the thread?

I'm not particularly bothered on it, but live and let live.

It's early days, not even a full season of comparisons yet. The two systems order of merits don't match so my first thought is why ?
I'm not sure yet, I haven't looked into it.

 

[The Dealer]

I no longer bother giving any match ratings for players at all. I just don't see the point in it. I simply watch the matches and decide who's played well and who hasn't. I'd rather have a rational conversation than to give each player a made up rating number.

I don't see the need to compare our players with each other. As long as we as a team play as well as, or better than the opposition that's all I care about.

I've tried to do The Dealer a favourite in stopping him wasting his time and the time of anyone reading the thread. He doesn't seem to appreciate it so.... I shan't be wasting any more of my time discussing player's ratings.

Of course it is fine discussing players performance generally and that in itself throws up different opinions. But there is no way of measuring it unless it's recorded in numbers. Then a final number is produced at the end of the season whether that's agreed with or not.

 

[TottsAmazeballs]

Small margins make a big difference across the season for the order of merit

1. It's ok rating the players each game and producing an indicator on who performed best and worst but the order of merit can give a season long result. Player of the season if you like ?

2. The stats I compile are from newspapers, Spurs websites, neutral websites , podcasts, TV.

3. My own ratings method involves noting down good play and bad per player. So each one has a scoresheet. That's just my way of doing it. I watch and re- watch passages of play on Spurplay if I need to. For me it's not oh a 7 will do, it's a bit more in depth. It's up to the poster how they rate. I pushed for 0.50 increments to allow a bit more accuracy and fine tuning. It will never be an exact science but its early days and I think the quality of ratings is improving.

4. I don't have a relationship with admin, he hates me and wants to ban me.

5. I'm an antiques dealer.

Thankyou, that was useful.

I agree that regularly-submitted opinions that form a body of empirical evidence is a much better metric than an end of season "who do recall being the most impressive the most often?". Expecting anyone to recall all players over 9 months is obviously going to give in to recency bias, or at least the 'first and last' memory filter.

Personally, I do find it interesting that there is any resemblance between local and remote ratings, but I guess that's averages for you!

Oh dear. Are you stepping on each other's toes? I did wonder the other day why we don't have a widget/plugin that makes choosing ratings easier. The whole text-based thing is a bit of a mess. I'd help but I'm pretty sure Xenforo is written in PHP, which I would rather avoid.

A stats-nerd antiques dealer... interesting.

 

[The Dealer]

I have reviewed both order of merit versions and the differences could be down to the inclusion of sub appearances. I don't include sub appearances generally unless it's a player coming on early due to injury or a half time switch.
Rating a sub performance is difficult because its about how their cameo affects the game in potentially a short time frame. If for example Hojbjerg comes on to see out 15 minutes when we are in front he may do that very well and do all that's asked of him and rate a 7 or higher. If he played the whole game that might come down or go up if he scores ( which is unlikely if he sees the game out as a sub ).

So the two order of merit tables could be incomparable due one having sub appearances included.

 

[The Dealer]

Thankyou, that was useful.

I agree that regularly-submitted opinions that form a body of empirical evidence is a much better metric than an end of season "who do recall being the most impressive the most often?". Expecting anyone to recall all players over 9 months is obviously going to give in to recency bias, or at least the 'first and last' memory filter.

Personally, I do find it interesting that there is any resemblance between local and remote ratings, but I guess that's averages for you!

Oh dear. Are you stepping on each other's toes? I did wonder the other day why we don't have a widget/plugin that makes choosing ratings easier. The whole text-based thing is a bit of a mess. I'd help but I'm pretty sure Xenforo is written in PHP, which I would rather avoid.

A stats-nerd antiques dealer... interesting.

I started the ratings thread but Admin took over with his forum only based system which was more appealing to the majority who wanted to keep it local and more fun.

 

[zin]

Thankyou, that was useful.

I agree that regularly-submitted opinions that form a body of empirical evidence is a much better metric than an end of season "who do recall being the most impressive the most often?". Expecting anyone to recall all players over 9 months is obviously going to give in to recency bias, or at least the 'first and last' memory filter.

Personally, I do find it interesting that there is any resemblance between local and remote ratings, but I guess that's averages for you!

Oh dear. Are you stepping on each other's toes? I did wonder the other day why we don't have a widget/plugin that makes choosing ratings easier. The whole text-based thing is a bit of a mess. I'd help but I'm pretty sure Xenforo is written in PHP, which I would rather avoid.

A stats-nerd antiques dealer... interesting.

Easier than just clicking on the number next to the player? Are you after something that records your thoughts?

 

[Yiddy]

He might get there by seasons end. He has been fantastic especially for his age.

I think he's a phenomenal player. Dare I say it may get better than Jan in the future.

 

[TottsAmazeballs]

Easier than just clicking on the number next to the player? Are you after something that records your thoughts?

The thread I saw had loads of text based lists in different formats…

 

[Rocket]

The thread I saw had loads of text based lists in different formats…

It's an auto generated post. You click the link which takes you to a form to fill out by clicking on of 20 radio buttons next to each player's name. Then when you have clicked as many ratings as you want you just click post and it puts all info in the post for you. You can also add comments to the post if you desire.

 

[TottsAmazeballs]

It's an auto generated post. You click the link which takes you to a form to fill out by clicking on of 20 radio buttons next to each player's name. Then when you have clicked as many ratings as you want you just click post and it puts all info in the post for you. You can also add comments to the post if you desire.

Cheers