BuzzerBeater Forums

This thread is for MVP Appeals. Please post any appeals here. I guess discussion is welcome here as well from anyone that has an opinion.

C-Cat is the arbitrator of all appeals and has the final say.

Our First Appeal Hooray!

By Monkeybiz

This is the match report.

Viral Infections vs. Monkey Business 70 - 91

The Naker Virus tried his 5 man team experiment again with the usual results. 5 tired players just getting blown away in the 3rd 25-8 before they got to salvage a little in the 4th in garbage time. As usual Monkey Business had an even performance from their very even team. The Virus had his tactics right but the strong defence of Monkey Business allowed few easy baskets and by the end of the game most of the Infections had to be driven from the court, in a ambulance, straight to the transfer list! (c) Zyler.

3 Júlio Peixoto Viral Infections 23 PTS 25 REB 10 O-REB 14.5 rating. In a game where almost the entire Monkey team was effective, but none outstanding, as usual, J-Lio was outstanding. Top score, most rebounds and best rating in the game, he did everything his coach asked him to do.When interviewed about his performance after the match, Coach Naker said, "If you buy him now you get a free set of steak knives."

2 Eduard Deltell Monkey Business 17 PTS 7 REB. This could have been half a dozen players but Eduard distinguished himself with the best score for his team and keeping his opposing SF to 8 points.

1 Marco Manara Monkey Business 13 PTS 7 REB 13.5 rating. A solid performance was capped by the best defensive rating for his team.

Here is his appeal.

1) It was a blowout. My players all got even minutes give or take whereas all his players played the whole game

2)Julio Top scored because he played the whole game whereas my top scorer only played 28 minutes. If I had played 5 guys 48 minutes then one of my guys would have more than likely top scored

3) Julio only had 17 rebounds at the end of the 3rd. Meaning he got 1/3rd of his rebound total against my scrubs in garbage time

4) He played against my backup C. My backup C guarded him the whole night instead of my starter due to foul trouble and by the time 4th Q came around, it was already a blowout so no point sending my starter back on. My starter played 8 minutes, picked up 4 fouls but got the team +11 PD in those 8 minutes.

5) My backup C successfully shut him down as Julio shot 33% from the field and 50% from FT which is extremely low for a big man. My backup C also came within 3 assists of a triple double

6) His rating is highest because of tactics. If I had played inside tactics, he would be challenged a lot more and his ratings would have taken a hit. Likewise he played an inside tactic so my inside player's ratings took a slight hit

Hope you take this into consideration and agree to change MVP selection for my game

Here is my defence of my decision.

Monkey Biz utterly destroyed the Naker Virus. But when you look at the box score he has probably about 8 players that contributed fairly evenly. Many only played limited minutes due to the blowout. Choosing which of them is the MVP is almost a coin toss. But there was one outstanding player who didn't just top score, didn't just get the most rebounds, he also was the best defender. Best + best + best seemed to = best to me.

However I agree that it was a blowout and I did feel very uncomfortable giving the MVP to a losing team player in a blowout. But to me it seemed like Michael Jordan and some U12 girls playing mixed basketball against a local A grade club. MJ and the girls will be flogged but he will still be the MVP.

I completly understand if I am overruled on this one.

Over to C-Cat.

I knew it wouldn't take long!! But I think that we have a good process in place and c-cat is the right man for the job!

I gotta say, I'm probably inclined to agree with Monkey on this one. WIth 33% shooting in a LI tactic, Peixoto probably contributed more to his teams loss than anything. Not to mention Deltell abused the opposing SF defensively.

Ok uncle C-Cat is here to save the day, here i go


At half time, Viral were only down by 9 points, Peixoto was on 15 points and 11 boards with 5-11 shooting. He had played quite well up until this point but Monkeys starting C had only played 6 minutes, he was playing on backups which makes it a little less impressive. But then come 3/4 time the scores were 45-71 and Peixoto had only added 4 points off 13 shots that quarter and now shooting 7-24 from the field and it was still largely against the backups! So the third quarter is where the game was won and lost, and Peixoto was a massive negative value to his team in this quarter playing like a big piece of steaming poo and chucking shots he wasn't hitting and it was all against backups still. His rebound tally ended up large but as Monkey said 1/3 were int he last quarter when Monkey's scrubs were missing, the large chunk of offensive rebounds were not that impressive either considering how many misses Viral actually had.

The last quarter is completely irrelevant, the game was over, you cant be valuable in junk time that means nothing. His stats at the end were not really that impressive either when you consider he played 48 minutes. His opposing C for the game (even though it was a zone) ended up with 11 points (4-9 shooting) 16 rebounds and 7 assists in 9 less minutes then Pexito and was the 2nd string.

So my conclusion is. A team that gets smashed by so much is going to find it hard to have a player that gets 3 votes. No matter how good he is he was obviously not good enough so i fail to see how he can be the most valuable player in the game. The fact he shot so badly, was useless in the 3rd Quarter when he was needed and shot like a girl with a horrible % makes him not worthy of 3 votes, he didn't even really outclass his direct opponent, he just had more volume. I conclude both Monkey players move up a spot each and Pexito takes the 1 vote purely for being the only respectable player out there for Viral, and if it wasn't for him in the first half the game would have been lost from the get go. Although he was lucky to still get 1 vote as i find it very hard to justify anyone on a team that is smashed being of more value then someone from the winning team. Especially when they play 48 min's and most of their numbers are against 2nd stringers. It is Most Valuable Player, not necessarily the biggest numbers.

so

3- Eduard Deltell
2- Marco Manara
1- Júlio Peixoto

Great work C-Cat and I much appreciate your prompt and excellent efforts.

Congratulations, Monkeybiz, your appeal is upheld and you get to appeal again in the future. A great result for everyone except for Peixoto who is henceforth to be known as either "a big piece of steaming poo" or "the little girl".

I will update the MVPs as soon as I can get to my spreadsheet.

Case closed!

Last edited by yodabig at 2/25/2011 10:12:43 PM

Hey Yoda,
I would like to appeal the MVP decision for my game this week.
This is what was said:

Viral Infections vs. Maggots 116 - 94

Both these teams have been struggling in the Private League this season, stark contrast to their League performances. The Virus showed that the wheelchairs can be put away for another week, with a resounding victory over the Hamilton-less Maggots. It was later reported that Nica from the Virus required oxygen from a machine after going down in a friendly match with opposing fans, and will be out for 2 weeks. His pension will still be paid during this time.

3 Ginés Beato Viral Infections 32 PTS 19 REB 14.0 rating. Played against what seemed like a "Ghost in the Post". Easily blew by nobody, or ghost.. called Serra for his 32 points. Serra ended the game 0-7 with 0 points. Ghost in the Post.

2 Christian Brakenhoff Maggots 27 PTS 9 REB 10.5 rating. One of the healthy Maggots who had a great game, but apart from Urwin and Brakenhoff, the rest of the team took the night off.

1 Sãndel Nica Viral Infections 26 PTS 7 AST 13.5 rating. In what may be his last game in the private league (doctors say he doesn't have long to live), Nica had a typically good game, quietly scoring 26 points whilst Beato scored against shadows all night long.

However, I believe Sandel Nica deserves the 2 points and Christian Brakenhoff should get only 1 point for the following reasons:

Nica scored 1 point less than Brakenhoff. +1 to Brakenhoff
Brakenhoff only got 9 rebounds whilst playing SF, while Nica got 5 rebounds playing at SG! +1 to Nica.
Nica got 7 assists compared to Brakenhoff getting 0 assists! + 1 to Nica.
Nica got 1 turnover and 3 steals, Brakenhoff got 3 turnovers and 0 steals. +1 to Nica.
Nica got 0 fouls, Brakenhoff got 1 foul. +1 to Nica.
Nica had a 13.5 rating and played more minutes than Brakenhoff who only got a 10.5 rating showing that Nica was a far superior defender. +1 to Nica.

I think this clearly demonstrates that Nica was superior to Brakenhoff in this match and deserves 2 MVP points.
Thank you,
Virus

Nica scored 1 point less than Brakenhoff. +1 to Brakenhoff

Ok

Brakenhoff only got 9 rebounds whilst playing SF, while Nica got 5 rebounds playing at SG! +1 to Nica.

Brakenhoff grabbed 27% of the team's rebounds. Maggots in general rebounded poorly, but Brak was team leader. SF doesn't mean he'll grab more rebounds than a guard...

Nica got 7 assists compared to Brakenhoff getting 0 assists! + 1 to Nica.

Again, whilst Nica gets the nod on this, Braken had to create most of his own shots. He scored efficiently when most of his team sucked balls.

Nica got 1 turnover and 3 steals, Brakenhoff got 3 turnovers and 0 steals. +1 to Nica.

Noted.

Nica got 0 fouls, Brakenhoff got 1 foul. +1 to Nica.

This part is bullshit.

Nica had a 13.5 rating and played more minutes than Brakenhoff who only got a 10.5 rating showing that Nica was a far superior defender. +1 to Nica.

Bullshit again. Small forward takes into account far more ID and OD than SG does. If Braken has the same OD as Nica and he played SF but doesn't have good ID, his game rating will always suffer. Similar situation to my guard Iregui, who can grab 10-12's at SG, but rates 9 at SF purely based on his lower ID than someone like Dell'Asta. That said, Dell'Asta is a far superior defender compared to Nica but only averages 13.5. To say defense is entirely linked to rating is rubbish.

I don't care either way, Yoda can decide.

Last edited by iwen at 3/15/2011 2:34:26 AM

1 8:49 4 — 9 C. Brakenhoff (H) is whistled for a shooting foul.
Good foul. It was on a layup.

I think the most important point (and probably why the votes are how they are) is that Brack shot 13-18, while Nica shot 12-25.

Otherwise, it is fairly close - but the efficiency would tip me towards Brack personally.

I will forward this appeal to our official appeals judge. C-Cat!