Another lesson in CalPreps

[ECHS05]

A teams rating at CalPreps is solely, 100% based on who they play... and in a way, where the team and the teams it plays, start the year. No teams are rated against teams they dont play... except that...

If McEachern GA plays Hillgrove GA, and Hillgrove GA plays North Paulding GA, McEachern will slightly be connected to North Paulding... for the lone reason that North Pauldings rating is affected by the game they played vs Hillgrove, and Hillgroves rating is affected by the game they played vs North Paulding. While McEacherns rating is directly affected by Hillgrove, its indirectly & less affected by North Paulding. McEachern would also be slightly connected to the teams North Paulding plays, bc the teams North Paulding played effect North Pauldings rating. And North Pauldings rating affects Hillgrove who directly affects McEachern. But each time you go down that chain, the effect gets less and less. By the time you are 3 or 4 teams in, the effect isnt even noticeable.

But... the reason for this post is to get another factoid out there.

Ive said countless times, that using CalPreps, the most accurate use of their rankings is to just use them to rank Regions. Like 5-8 team Regions where all the teams have to play each other during the season... Georgia has 8 Regions within its classes... the reason those ratings are the most accurate is because all those teams have played they are each connected to each other multiple times indirectly & directly. They have great affect on each others ratings.

Then less accurate than Region rankings , would be Class Rankings... like GAs 6A or 7A. Theres 8 Regions that make up GAs 7A. Now, Teams from 1 Region do play other Regions within the same class. In fact, if a team isnt playing a team from their own Region, its most common they are playing a team within their class. But... all these Regions that make up classes still arent as connected as a single Region is. For this reason, Region rankings are the most accurate.. then Class rankings would be slightly less accurate because all these Regions that make up a Class, arent as connected as a single Region.

After Class, youve for the whole state... apply the same logic to the this as we used with the Region to Class argument, and State Rankings become even Less accurate. Although interclass play does occur, just not as often as Region play or same-Class play. So State Rankings would be less accurate than Region or Class rankings.

After State, youve got National Rankings... now weve gone from Region -> Class -> State -> National. National Rankings would be the most unaccurate of all because theres less connectivity nationally than in a single state, or class, or region. In fact, for the most part (outside of a few, very few compared to what would be needed for accurate rankings nationally) National Rankings rely on the Scale Ned sets in the Preseason. Now a scale isnt literal. Its just that, when teams are ranking/rated in the Preseason, a ceiling is being put on a states potential because of the ratings given to teams within a state. California has 11 teams in the Top 100 of CalPreps current preseason ratings. Georgia has 4. California also has 91 teams in the Preseason top 1000, GA has 47. Its easier for California to finish with more in the Top 100 because of this. Because theres more rating points to go around within their circle of teams thatll be playing.

In reality, CalPreps should just have State Rankings for each State and leave the National Rankings out of it. Because it can never be accurate without super long seasons (100+ games) where teams play all over the country every week. So the whole country is connected.  Alas, HSFB does need a National Ranking that ranks all teams, and unfortunately... this is all we got.

 

 

[ECHS05]

For anyone that sticks with it, and reads it all... Im betting you now have atleast a slightly better understanding of CP.

[hardhit1]

No body cares

you win

[ECHS05]

2 minutes ago, hardhit1 said:

No body cares

you win

 

[hardhit1]

7 minutes ago, ECHS05 said:

 

Beautiful 

[FootballGuy]

You ought to be a lawyer, my dude. 

[Ararar]

Thing is just about everybody already knows this about CP.Nobody takes CP literally it's just the only site of its kind so it's easy to reference.Dont you think that California or Ohio or Texas guys have looked at CP state ratings and thought they were wrong? I know I have.

[Omaha Vol]

46 minutes ago, Ararar said:

Thing is just about everybody already knows this about CP.Nobody takes CP literally it's just the only site of its kind so it's easy to reference.Dont you think that California or Ohio or Texas guys have looked at CP state ratings and thought they were wrong? I know I have.

MOST of the state ratings are wrong. Calpreps is a great resource for looking up scores, but should never be used to rate/rank teams. 

[Nolebull813]

[Cossacks]

1 hour ago, Omaha Vol said:

MOST of the state ratings are wrong. Calpreps is a great resource for looking up scores, but should never be used to rate/rank teams. 

Look at it every once in awhile. Not really a fan of the site. They have decent hard data info (scores/schedules) but that's about it. Nothing I'd waste any time worrying about.

[GloryDays]

For the love of all that is holy...

Would you please go take a Stat class at your local JUCO.

 

[AztecPadre]

I got as far as the title. Wow. Thems a lot of words.

[MC Rockets]

1 hour ago, AztecPadre said:

I got as far as the title. Wow. Thems a lot of words.

???...Me too!!!

[ECHS05]

3 hours ago, GloryDays said:

For the love of all that is holy...

Would you please go take a Stat class at your local JUCO.

 

Other, & myself, would be better served if I were to teach a local stat class, not "take".

[ECHS05]

5 hours ago, Ararar said:

Thing is just about everybody already knows this about CP.Nobody takes CP literally it's just the only site of its kind so it's easy to reference.Dont you think that California or Ohio or Texas guys have looked at CP state ratings and thought they were wrong? I know I have.

How can you think state rankings are wrong, but believe their national rankings are right... that makes 0 sense as state rankings would be 100× more accurate than national rankings.

But youre right, state rankings arent very good either.

Region rankings would be your best bet for accuracy, as they all play so the ratings come full circle... somewhat.

[Ararar]

4 hours ago, ECHS05 said:

How can you think state rankings are wrong, but believe their national rankings are right... that makes 0 sense as state rankings would be 100× more accurate than national rankings.

But youre right, state rankings arent very good either.

Region rankings would be your best bet for accuracy, as they all play so the ratings come full circle... somewhat.

I think it goes without saying that if I thought the state ratings were off I would think the national ones were to.The point is you are obsessing over nothing people were complaining about CP long before you decided to make them your personal crusade.

[noonereal]

10 hours ago, Ararar said:

Thing is just about everybody already knows this about CP.Nobody takes CP literally it's just the only site of its kind so it's easy to reference.Dont you think that California or Ohio or Texas guys have looked at CP state ratings and thought they were wrong? I know I have.

please provide a link to to a ranking/rating that is "right." 

thanks

[noonereal]

11 hours ago, ECHS05 said:

A teams rating at CalPreps is solely, 100% based on who they play... and in a way, where the team and the teams it plays, start the year. No teams are rated against teams they dont play... except that...

 

 

you are an idiot

the worst kind, an insistent idiot 

[ECHS05]

8 minutes ago, noonereal said:

you are an idiot

the worst kind, an insistent idiot 

My gosh... I haven't heard such a fact filled rebuttal in all my life.

 

[ECHS05]

13 minutes ago, noonereal said:

please provide a link to to a ranking/rating that is "right." 

thanks

 

We arent talking about other rankings/ratings. We are talking about CalPreps. 

Try to stay on topic, and give a semblence of fact instead of letting your bias take control of your posting.

[noonereal]

1 minute ago, ECHS05 said:

My gosh... I haven't heard such a fact filled rebuttal in all my life.

 

you keep insisting stating values are not eliminated as Ned says they are, like in all algorithms 

anyway, have a nice day

just stop this stupidity 

[noonereal]

1 minute ago, ECHS05 said:

 

We arent talking about other rankings/ratings. We are talking about CalPreps. 

Try to stay on topic, and try to give a semblence of fact... 

so you can't

got it

let's then do it this way, at years end, did you feel Cal was more corrcet or USAToday was more correct?

Be honest. (if you are able) 

[ECHS05]

Just now, noonereal said:

you keep insisting stating values are not eliminated as Ned says they are, like in all algorithms 

anyway, have a nice day

just stop this stupidity 

If you read his actual statements... he says they are "washed out" as time goes on and become less relevant. The word eliminated is only used bc he wants you to understand they dont really matter in an individual teams final rating.

But what they have done... is set a scale within a state. 

And I showed you examples of ratings week after week last year... NO ONR could tell ratings were ever eliminated... some even went as far as saying they must be eliminated in November bc they couldnt tell before then. Which wasnt true... just looking at 1 team, Ocean Lakes in 2015, showed ratings were Never eliminated completely... Ocean Lakes , in November, had a higher Rating then ANY of their Performance Ratings to date in November 2015. That is impossible without the inclusion of their insanely high starting point. Which if youll look back and see, was an 82.9 .... they lost a lot of that when they lost to Oscar Smith that year... but the fact remained, up until November 26th, the starting points hadnt been eliminated.

Now..to a bigger point... Starting Ratings ... create a State Average Rating at seasons beginning, which creates a ceiling for a state.. and that average never changes by more than a tiny tiny fraction, bc there isnt enough OOS games for it to. ... I showed that every single year for years and years.

[noonereal]

Just now, ECHS05 said:

If you read his actual statements... he says they are "washed out" as time goes on and become less relevant. The word eliminated is only used bc he wants you to understand they dont really matter in an individual teams final rating.

But what they have done... is set a scale within a state. 

And I showed you examples of ratings week after week last year... NO ONR could tell ratings were ever eliminated... some even went as far as saying they must be eliminated in November bc they couldnt tell before then. Which wasnt true... just looking at 1 team, Ocean Lakes in 2015, showed ratings were Never eliminated completely... Ocean Lakes , in November, had a higher Rating then ANY of their Performance Ratings to date in November 2015. That is impossible without the inclusion of their insanely high starting point. Which if youll look back and see, was an 82.9 .... they lost a lot of that when they lost to Oscar Smith that year... but the fact remained, up until November 26th, the starting points hadnt been eliminated.

Now..to a bigger point... Starting Ratings ... create a State Average Rating at seasons beginning, which creates a ceiling for a state.. and that average never changes by more than a tiny tiny fraction, bc there isnt enough OOS games for it to. ... I showed that every single year for years and years.

i am begging you, just stop.

[ECHS05]

7 minutes ago, noonereal said:

so you can't

got it

let's then do it this way, at years end, did you feel Cal was more corrcet or USAToday was more correct?

Be honest. (if you are able) 

So I cant, eh?

Your response in all of these threads is Im an idiot.

I ask you to prove what Im saying wrong. Which you never do.

SO, YOU cant.