DREAM TEAM & SUPERCOACH
{also posted identic post in DREAMTEAM/PLAYERS FORUM.}
Hi All, there are a few points I want to make here and I will lay out the different ways the both Dream Team and Supercoach award points to players during games. For those of us that play both games it's handy to know who are DT STUDS but SC SPUDS or the other way around.
Because of the way players are awarded points in the two different games and of course the obvious difference in player pricing certain players may be must haves for DT or must haves for SC but not both.
I see the obvious difference being the way Supercoach punishes bad use of the ball where Dream Team works purely off disposals be they effective or not. Meaning Supercoach players with few "effective" disposals can outscore players with many"ineffective" disposals. Where DT just rewards the most disposals.
Please feel free to expand on this and name any players that come to mind that are particularly one or the other.
Dream TeamKick 3 Points
Handball 2 Points
Mark 3 Points
Tackle 4 Points
Free Kick For 1 Point
Free Kick Against -3 Points
Hitout 1 Point
Goal 6 Points
Behind 1 Point
Super CoachEffective kick 4 Points
Ineffective kick 0 Points
Clanger kick -8 Points
Effective Handball 2 Points
Ineffective handball 0 Points
Handball clanger -6 Points
Handball receive 1 Point
Hardball get 4 Points
Loose-ball get 4 Points
Goal 8 Points
Behind 1 Point
Mark uncontested (maintaining possession) 1 Point
Mark contested (maintaining possession) 6 Points
Mark uncontested (from opposition) 4 Points
Mark contested (from opposition) 8 Points
Tackles 4 Points
Free kick for 4 Points
Free kick against -6 Points
Hitout to Advantage 3 Points
Can't think of any right now
judd, dal santo and newman are a couple that come to mind. none set the world on fire in DT but they are among the cream of the crop SC wise
shannon hurn would be one, i think one year in DT sylvia was worth more than ablett
Quote from: LiveTheDream on January 08, 2012, 10:13:30 PM
judd, dal santo and newman are a couple that come to mind. none set the world on fire in DT but they are among the cream of the crop SC wise
True i think Judd will be top 3 supercoach mids and unpicked in dream team
What about Stanton?
He racks up possesions, but isn't terribly effective.
I don't actually play DT, but I know I wouldn't pick him in SC. Some might consider him for DT.
SC points are weighted (adjusted), DT points are not.
The same number (3300) of points are awarded for each game in SC, whereas in DT the size of the pie can, and does, differ across each match.
There's heaps more but I'm too drunk to expand
Quote from: itchytradefinger on January 09, 2012, 12:03:18 AM
SC points are weighted (adjusted), DT points are not.
The same number (3300) of points are awarded for each game in SC, whereas in DT the size of the pie can, and does, differ across each match.
There's heaps more but I'm too drunk to expand
Had no idea - still ahve no idea- i'm working on getting drunk too, so another night maybe?? keen to work this out.
If you look at SC scores at 1/4 time, they're huge. I believe these are just 'pure' points, before any adjustments. Remember there are 60 odd acts that can score you SC points (unlike DT, not all are made public. I think only 10 or so are, the ones you named above). By half time they have an idea of where the game is headed and start to adjust points accordingly. So you see guys go from 60 points to only 65, even though their second quarter seemed almost as good as their first.
If a player does well to half time and the game is over by then, it matters little (certainly less) what he does in the second half. The bulk of the points have been awarded and his score will continue to trend north (even if he gets subbed out) because the contest is effectively over. The bulk of SC points are awarded when the contests up for grabs. More often than not, this if the first half.
awesome so that makes a huge difference to players suitability for SC over DT.
Thanks for the info, I don't get live scoring updates on SC site never have only on the DT sight do not know why?? so had never noticed what you just pointed out.
QuoteSC points are weighted (adjusted), DT points are not.
- this is true
QuoteThe same number (3300) of points are awarded for each game in SC, whereas in DT the size of the pie can, and does, differ across each match.
this is not entirely true but i beleive is used as a guide number to ensure that all games are represented equally so scoring for teams and players is not effected by playing conditions and other variables.
champion data formulises the SC scoring system and they do not release the full scoring system but it rewards good football acts which is why you see good footballers scoring very well in SC and not so much in DT sometimes.
Judd is a SC machine because he gets loads of clearences, inside 50's and assits which i can uncategorcally say, are heavily rewarded in SC along with rebound 50's and pressure acts such as tackles and spoils.
We may not know the exact scoring system, but those that complain that DT is better because you know the scoring system is, need to realise that SC rewards good football. (not to say DT doesnt) midfielders are obviously much higher scoring because the ball is in their area of play more often much the same as DT and this is the reason why good midfielders will generally outscore key defenders even if they have had a stellar game shutting a key forward down. (this is hard to measure)
Overall, in SC good players who sill manage to find the ball regularly are rewarded much the same as DT, but it also rewards those players that have big impact with lesser disposals like Newman, Hurn and the king of low possesion high SC scores Josh Drummond.
when picking for DT look for ball magnets that are always around the ball that do not handball to regularly for their disposals
when picking for SC there is probably a little mroe to consider but it depends how you look at it. you can say well clearances and hard in and under work is highly rewarded ill pick matthew boyd cause he gets the ball alot while doing alot of the grunt work and scoring big clearence numbers, but hang on these types of players disposal efficiency is way down compared to more outside midfielders. its a fine balance those players that do the gruntwork as well as get alot of it and use it well like an Ablett or Pendles are absolute gold in SC. not bad in DT either mind you ;)
In a nutshell, DT scoring is basic and transparent, SC is not. But it's true that DT rewards quantity of possessions and SC rewards quality. I've seen C Rioli get 16 possessions and end up with 160 SC points. On the flip side, I've seen M Boyd get 41 possies and end up with 100 odd SC points. Basically, SC is all about how damaging you are. DT just rewards the ball magnets.
Quote from: Usman on January 09, 2012, 12:56:11 AM
QuoteSC points are weighted (adjusted), DT points are not.
- this is true
QuoteThe same number (3300) of points are awarded for each game in SC, whereas in DT the size of the pie can, and does, differ across each match.
this is not entirely true but i beleive is used as a guide number to ensure that all games are represented equally so scoring for teams and players is not effected by playing conditions and other variables.
It is true. Please check your facts before posting.
Do you remember last year when WCE were playing the WB, and West Coast were up by 2pts and Dean Cox took a game saving? mark in the square, then moments later took a mark in the forward line and goaled sealing the game, WC won by 8pts.
Cox ended up on 213 S/C pts.
I was watching, "After the Bounce," the one on Fox, with Dunstall, Frawley.... and in their segment where they do the best S/C scorers, one of them mentioned that Cox got, (someting like,) 120 for the acts mentioned above, (2minute piece of play.)
Here's a link you may find useful Colli.
http://www.kick2kick.net/afl/the-supercoach-scoring-system-is-a-scam
QuoteIf you look at SC scores at 1/4 time, they're huge. I believe these are just 'pure' points, before any adjustments. Remember there are 60 odd acts that can score you SC points (unlike DT, not all are made public. I think only 10 or so are, the ones you named above). By half time they have an idea of where the game is headed and start to adjust points accordingly. So you see guys go from 60 points to only 65, even though their second quarter seemed almost as good as their first.
If a player does well to half time and the game is over by then, it matters little (certainly less) what he does in the second half. The bulk of the points have been awarded and his score will continue to trend north (even if he gets subbed out) because the contest is effectively over. The bulk of SC points are awarded when the contests up for grabs. More often than not, this if the first half.
this is also a good point, but i also think champion data rewards acts to scale. So if someone gets 30 posessions in a game where no-one else gets above 20 that will be more highly rewarded, and this could be the case for some high 1st quarter scores because stats have not leveled out at this stage yet. Some players could have 13 or 14 effective possesions and no-one else is near them after the first quarter. Then as the game goes on, other players and the portion that the originally player had of this particular stat overall in the game would be much less. This could apply for any type of scoring act also, for eg: goals contested marks clearences tackles. thats just my thought anyway???
well awesome info guys seriously awesome, thats kind of what i thought but drummond who as a DT player starting out in SC would think to pick drummond, lucky it's early January so I have the time to work on My SC team because it seems it will take some working out.
Hopefuly this post doesnt open up a DTvSC ants nest tho healthy debating and conversation is not a bad thing if it does imo :)
QuoteIt is true. Please check your facts before posting.
It is not true not all matches equal up to 3300, i also used to beleive this, but i now believe it is a guide to make all AFL matches roughly the same despite the conditions and other variables. Champion data does not say "the points do not equal 3300 so lets just give this player a few extra points for nothing so it is an even number"
The truth is, all games equal somewhere between 3297 and 3303. I'm calling that 3300. There are no exceptions.
dont get me wrong im not saying that what you where saying is wrong im just saying its not ENTIRELY true not all matches equal 3300 thats the rough number which is achieved through scaling players stats IMO. nothing anyone has said so far on this has been wrong. but champion data do not award points for no reason and that is why not all games equall 3300 because the closest they could get by scalling players stats to 3300 was in between 3297 and 3303 the fundementals of the post is correct but as soon as people think "wait each game has to equal 3300 becuase that is the magic number,this game is different SC is a load of bull they just make it up as they go" i should have mentioned that when it is not entirely true i meant it is a small discrepancy to fit in with thier scaling formula.
a very, very small discrepancy! Cheers mate, no worries. The 3300 pt rule is important to know about however as it's perhaps the biggest difference between SC and DT.
Sauce Merrett gets a showerload of score in SC for spoils to advantage.
Quote from: meow meow on January 09, 2012, 01:51:17 AM
Sauce Merrett gets a showerload of score in SC for spoils to advantage.
I call it fisting his opponents.
Quote from: Roy.G.Biv on January 09, 2012, 01:05:31 AM
Do you remember last year when WCE were playing the WB, and West Coast were up by 2pts and Dean Cox took a game saving? mark in the square, then moments later took a mark in the forward line and goaled sealing the game, WC won by 8pts.
Cox ended up on 213 S/C pts.
I was watching, "After the Bounce," the one on Fox, with Dunstall, Frawley.... and in their segment where they do the best S/C scorers, one of them mentioned that Cox got, (someting like,) 120 for the acts mentioned above, (2minute piece of play.)
Here's a link you may find useful Colli.
WOW .... :o
http://www.kick2kick.net/afl/the-supercoach-scoring-system-is-a-scam
There is a 3300 point rule, but it's not set in stone.
Some explanation of the SC scoring system from one of Champion Data's statisticians Karl Jackson.
Enjoy:
We all know that a game-winning goal kicked at the death of a close game is worth a premium, but how does the weighting work in other situations? For instance, in a blowout (Think Ess v GC), do the actions from the first quarter receive a premium? What about a game that is tight until half time that blows out in the third?
KJ: The weighting is applied to everything that happens within a game. To put it basically, the more likely it is that the result of the match is going to change, the higher the weighting is. This works in both ways “ as time goes on in tight games, a player's actions become more important because the game is up for grabs, but as time goes on in blowout games, events are weighted down because the game is moving closer and closer to 'junk time'Â.
Now, as a particular case study â€" it's been asked, what exactly did Rioli do in round 9 to secure 100 points? 13 touches at a 77% efficiency rating including a goal and two goal assists in a 56 point win seems a little much, particularly when you have someone like Hodge, who scored 99 points off 10 more touches and 2 goals. Is there anything you can say that could shed some light on this example?
KJ: As for Rioli v Hodge “ Rioli's goal and two assists all came in the third quarter, which is when Hawthorn ran away with the game. With the margin at 18 points with four minutes to go in the third quarter, Cyril made a tackle, won the free kick and kicked the goal “a 30 second block that saw him get 19 points. Hawthorn went on to kick another four unanswered goals after Rioli's goal so that was when the game was most in the balance. Luke Hodge had six touches in the first 15 minutes of the third, but just 50% were effective. When Hawthorn were on their streak of five goals in a row, Hodge only had one touch and that was after they'd stretched the lead to 42 points, so he missed out on getting bumped up.
On a side note, I'll just highlight the fact that you can't compare the outputs of players in different games and expect their rankings to follow suit. Because of the 3300 point rule, a 25 disposal game in a tight, low-possession game could be worth the same as a 40 disposal game in a free-flowing contest. Likewise, a 10 goal game in a high scoring contest may be less valuable than a four goal return in a low scoring game. It avoids any bias towards a particular game style or weather conditions.
The other example that’s being asked about is Goddard from round 10- injured in the first quarter and yet his quarter-by-quarter scores went: 56 SC at qtr time 44 at half time and 51 at 3 qtr time and finally 57 at full time- I’m assuming it weighting his first quarter efforts so highly because the game blew out so far in the 1st, but an official word would be most appreciated!
KJ: The quarter time updates on the Herald Sun website take into account the 3300 point rule, but because of the fluctuations that happen within the game, they're always going to change. As the game blows out more and more, the first quarter gets pumped up because of the reduced value of actions later in the game. In a stock standard game you'd expect 25% of the ranking points to come from each quarter, but as an example, in that Fremantle v St Kilda game in Round 10, 39% of the points were won in the first quarter. This is what helped Goddard maintain his score. If it was tight all the way to the siren, his score would have dropped as the game went on.
QuoteDo you remember last year when WCE were playing the WB, and West Coast were up by 2pts and Dean Cox took a game saving? mark in the square, then moments later took a mark in the forward line and goaled sealing the game, WC won by 8pts.
Cox ended up on 213 S/C pts.
I was watching, "After the Bounce," the one on Fox, with Dunstall, Frawley.... and in their segment where they do the best S/C scorers, one of them mentioned that Cox got, (someting like,) 120 for the acts mentioned above, (2minute piece of play.)
Here's a link you may find useful Colli.
WOW ....
http://www.kick2kick.net/afl/the-supercoach-scoring-system-is-a-scam
haha its not a scam its common sense, one AFL game should be equal to another AFL game that is the idea behind the bell curve which is what i meant by scaling. I believe champion data use a bell curve on all stats not just overall points scored by both teams. As for superstar status causing players to score big pointsfor no reason WHAT A LOAD OF CRAP. I have already mentioned the amount of highly rewarded stats judd gets because he does influencial things during a game. And as for cox scoring so high champion data do weight scoring for important moments as well, as mentioned by itchy. Meaning if its a blow out and one team is up by 10+ goals and say Dane Swan is already on 120 SC yet seems to do nothing in the last quarter he will still most likely score 150+ because they weight the first three quarters were he dominated more heavily. where as if it is a very close game and (ill use Swan again for the example) he is on 60 at 3 QT if he gets 10-15 effective possesions in the last quarter those will be heavily rewarded becuase the game was up for grabs.
Live the dream beat me to it
Quote from: Usman on January 09, 2012, 01:17:06 PM
QuoteDo you remember last year when WCE were playing the WB, and West Coast were up by 2pts and Dean Cox took a game saving? mark in the square, then moments later took a mark in the forward line and goaled sealing the game, WC won by 8pts.
Cox ended up on 213 S/C pts.
I was watching, "After the Bounce," the one on Fox, with Dunstall, Frawley.... and in their segment where they do the best S/C scorers, one of them mentioned that Cox got, (someting like,) 120 for the acts mentioned above, (2minute piece of play.)
Here's a link you may find useful Colli.
WOW ....
http://www.kick2kick.net/afl/the-supercoach-scoring-system-is-a-scam
haha its not a scam its common sense, one AFL game should be equal to another AFL game that is the idea behind the bell curve which is what i meant by scaling. I believe champion data use a bell curve on all stats not just overall points scored by both teams. As for superstar status causing players to score big pointsfor no reason WHAT A LOAD OF CRAP. I have already mentioned the amount of highly rewarded stats judd gets because he does influencial things during a game. And as for cox scoring so high champion data do weight scoring for important moments as well, as mentioned by itchy. Meaning if its a blow out and one team is up by 10+ goals and say Dane Swan is already on 120 SC yet seems to do nothing in the last quarter he will still most likely score 150+ because they weight the first three quarters were he dominated more heavily. where as if it is a very close game and (ill use Swan again for the example) he is on 60 at 3 QT if he gets 10-15 effective possesions in the last quarter those will be heavily rewarded becuase the game was up for grabs.
I totally agree with you!
The scam bit is just silly.
There were points in the article explaining the 3300pts.
At the end of the day, Supercoach, (from the admin p.o.v,) is about getting as many people (website hits,) as they can, so the points system they have in the rules are enough of a guide for your average "Joe Shmo," playing the game.
awesome info guys and it covers a lot of questions about SC compared to the basic DT.
I think i am a fan of watching the game and knowing how each player is going in DT terms, but full credit to SC i think the scoring system be it a scam or not is a lot better in rewarding the effective players.
It's not a matter of which do you prefer i think but each to his own. Me i'm going to play both and for the next month or so i'm going to look into who is a SC gun and why as i dont think you can take a great DT put it in SC and expect it to do any good, and that was what a lot of the reason I posted this was for
thanks again guys and feel free to post more info but I knew little of what you have stated in the post so thanks :) i dont like to be clueless.
DT = quantity and SC = quality
I have been in top 30 overall in 2011 both and I think both SC/DT have their purpose.
You just need to adapt to the rules of each game and admittingly, I believe there are flaws in both SC and DT.
The 3300 rule to me is important in SC because in the brownlow it's 3-2-1 and each game is 4 points. You don't get 10 points per game by winning by 200 pointsm you still get 4. You don't get 10 brownlow votes for getting 60 possies. But then again there are also flaws in SC for example a guy who kicks the winning goal, against a guy who has 30 possies. On the DT side, you shouldn't get a kick for kicking it to an opponent etc etc.
My point is and just to re-iterate, I like both DT and SC and both have flaws as well as great scoring system. Enjoy both.
the behind thing really bugs me :P
Quote from: Ziplock on January 10, 2012, 12:46:49 AM
the behind thing really bugs me :P
LOL Zip love your work, persistant and so so very true !