Women's ABL Player of the week

I have calculated womens player of the week (Rounds 1 - 5) using the following formula
(Pts+Reb+AST+BLK+STL-TO)x opposition team rank
in order to be player of the round your team must have won the game

The teams have been ranked as follows (i believe these rankings as the same as Botis preseason rankings... I may have some inverted though)
West 1.9
Norwood 1.8
Forestville 1.7
Sturt 1.6
North 1.5
Eastern 1.4
South 1.3
Southern 1.2
Woodville 1.1
Centrals 1

Round 1
K.Webber WABC
M.Newley FEBC
T.Holland WABC

Round 2
T.Madgen EMBC
J.Mahoney FEBC
M.Newley FEBC

Round 3
T.Madgen EMBC
J.Mahoney FEBC
A.Maycock SSBC

Round 4
S.Woosnam WABC
M.Newley FEBC
J.Bow FEBC

Round 5
M.Newley FEBC
M.Bowley SSBC
N.Martin WABC

Topic #22935 | Report this topic

Rebel
Years ago

Deosn't really mean POW, need to take into account winning and losing, importance of stats, ie last 3 minutes in a close game.

Reply #276741 | Report this post

Anonymous
Years ago

What difference does it make if the team wins or looses. The best player is best player on the court.
You also can't judge just from Stats. You have to see the game to see what the player is actually doing.

Reply #276754 | Report this post

god
Years ago

I agree this equation is just way too simplistic.

For starters you need to factor in minutes played. And to leave out shooting percentage (or at the very least factor in shots missed) is criminal.

I think the team rating calc is unnecessary. It distorts the values to an alarming level. If someone on the top team averages say 25 per game, that gives them a 5 week value of 237. For someone on the Centrals to be of equal value it would require them to average 48 per game. It needs to be a level playing field.

Anyways interesting idea. Sorry to be critical without providing alternate ideas. I'm no maths wiz lol.

Reply #276794 | Report this post

filthy mexican
Years ago

Some interesting points to be sure...
however I havent been to EVERY game so I cannot make judgments on only the games I have attended. Stats are the only consistent that we have.
I of course have taken (in my opinion the best 3) players based on points and rebounds for the winning team and plugged their stats into this formula,and lets be honest who cares if you had 40 points if your team lost to be player of the week you should have contributed to a win, the referees can pick the best player of the game for the halls medal, not player of the week.
the team rankings are to level the playing field for example a player that leads their team to a win against West Adelaide deserves more credit than a player with the same stats that leads their team to a win over Central Districts.
Bag the system thats fine... give me alternatives to a formula that is fair to all players and I will give it a look

Reply #276796 | Report this post

Anonymous
Years ago

If you were the top scorer, top rebounder, top assists, top stealer, top blocker and lowest turnovers for the game you would obviously be the best player, regardless if your team lost. If you were that good in a game you would most likely be player of the week, as well as best player in the game

Reply #276817 | Report this post

Juno
Years ago

Truely rediculous anonomous.

By that reconning, if you played on a bad team where nobody else could get a rebound, you shot it every time and scored 30, played no defence other than trying to steal it every time down the floor leading to 5 steals but 20 layup for the other team, never set a screen for a team mate or dove on a lose ball. and sucked in the last 5 mintues when the game mattered you are the best player?

Reply #276829 | Report this post

Isaac
Years ago

This argument will never be truly resolved. That said, I don't think it's unreasonable to factor the success of a team into the "MVP" equation. Considering the strength of the opposition is good also.

Reply #276857 | Report this post

Hoops

Women's ABL Player of the week

Recent Posts