BuzzerBeater Forums

League tables have been updated again.

This might well have been one of the most interesting Regular Season rounds of the whole HGL history.

2 matches went into overtime (and one to the double overtime!), and 5 of 8 matches were close calls.
(5 out of 6 matches if we don't count matches of VPO and HAD, who in most cases, are expected to win and in some cases, win big).

- VIV-WAG: unfortunately for me, VIV took a clear win in this important match which would've either equalized our W-L records, but now VIV is 2 wins ahead. It wasn´t even a close call... both teams were playing a slow offense, but still 202 points were scored, so perhaps it wasn't the greatest celebration of defense. (Part of the high scoring is explained though when we take a look at FT%, which were 96 and 91%, respectively).

- KKS-HB: in this very important match in terms of fighting for the 4 best positions. KKS trailed by 4 12 minutes to play, but won by 3 in this inside offense-orientated match.

-ED-VMO: another tight match, in where ED led by 1 before 4th and won by 7 eventually due to good 4th quarter. WMO had 9 more second chance attempts, but 2 of their opening lineup players were fouled out after 28 and 36 minutes of play - did this turn the scale to favor ED?

- LGM-RAJ: double overtime, do I need to say more? RAJ´s inside offense rating was 13 and FG% 51,6% (LGM 42,6%, but they were better behind the 3 point arc and had 11 more second chance attempts than RAJ). No fouled out players in this 58 minute thriller...

- TRO-FRE: another overtime battle of Round 12, and this one was outside offense-orientated one. Should FRE had won this, they both would've gone to 1 win and 11 losses, but now TRO took 2 win edge over FRE. TRO had 12 more second chance attempts to score (by snatching no less than 21 offensive rebounds). While FRE had a clear edge on blocks (10-2), they also turned the ball over 5 more times than TRO and left lots of point on the free throw line (20 of 31 shooting, which means less than 65%).

- EOS-D: LennuK. already wrote a match report on this, but once again one more proper thriller for Round 12, which kept Playoff dreams alive for D (however, they do have a challenging schedule for the last 3 rounds). D won the 4th quarter by 8, and were able to get a W despite of leaving possibly HGL record breaking (?) amount of points to the free throw line (only 19 of 34 shooting, at less than 56% accuracy). In that regard, EOS shot FT´s at 68% leaving 7 points to the line, so their hands were slightly shaky as well from the charity stripe yesterday. I wasn't checking the match replay so I don't know how big of an impact it had that 2 EOS opening lineup players were fouled out, after 38 and 45 minutes, but usually that does have an impact of some sort.
For EOS, loss means they're still tied with SUM in a fight for last (12th) place in Playoffs, but have an edge over SUM currently due to Regular Season win on Season 3. It's going to be very interesting fight, as I'm sure SUM also wants to reach Playoffs during their last HGL season. (Last for now, as nobody still knows if they might return later - I definitely hope they do)!



Last edited by Wagner at 11/29/2025 6:34:26 AM

yeah I was lucky on friday
LGM has amazing skils to salary ratio, maybe the biggest here (no offense for others -just my thought)

Few big games left, may the best win

yeah I was lucky on friday :+(
LGM has amazing skils to salary ratio, maybe the biggest here (no offense for others -just my thought) (y)

Few big games left, may the best win :)

Maybe there was part luck, but also part of something else... I mean 11W-2L record doesn't come by accident. :)

LGM indeed can't be taken lightly by any means, and as I mentioned in another post, it's been pleasurable to see how many even matches there have been in HGL this season! Given your very strong track record (and win-loss record this season) in HGL, they did a great job making you really earn those valuable 2 league table points!

Indeed, 2 Rounds left and many positions can still be gained or lost, so everyone, give it all you got!
This week it's especially difficult to optimize game shapes and training simultaneously, as it's all star week...

Last edited by Wagner at 12/2/2025 9:16:53 AM

@all: Speaking of important match results and Playoffs that are closing in, I suggest the following in terms of determining which team is ranked higher in Official Regular Season Rankings (ORSR) in equal Regular Season wins-situations, when 3 or more teams have a tied win-loss record.
First post acts as a compilation (TLDR), second post lists part of ruleset, and third post rest of the ruleset and couple of example scenarios.
Please let me know what you think of it.


Part 1/3:

*****Compilation of essential points, but please read through full set of rule proposition, 2 next posts after this one:*****

- Regular Season (RS) match success is first and foremost method of comparison, and attempts are first being made to reduce number of 3 or more teams (in tied in wins-comparison) to as low number as possible (for example, if team has lost all it's matches against "tied in wins"-teams, it will be dropped out of comparison and positioned into a lowest position of those teams, and same will be done for teams that have won all their said matches)

- If tied wins-situation between 3 or more teams occur (in where one or more of the teams haven't won or lost all matches against "tied in wins-teams"), only then we´d proceed to Regular Season +/- point differential (RS PD) comparison, as it's not possible to reduce number of teams (based on Regular Season wins against said opposition) to 2.

- If tie exists exactly between two teams/if it's possible to reduce number of tied teams to 2 (for example if one or more teams has won or lost all RS matches against "tied in wins"-teams), then normal "winner of the current season RS match"-rule is being applied in the first place (and point difference is not applied at this point as a comparison method as only 2 teams are being compared anymore).

- As a second comparison method (should RS matches between teams tied in wins fail to provide team rankings) Regular Season +/- point differential (RS PD) is being used.

- Should RS PD be tied among 3 (or more than 3) teams, third layer of comparison would be "virtual table" point difference (VT PD), then points allowed (VT PA), then points scored (VT PS). However, this is extremely unlikely scenario.
(Virtual table includes only matches between compared teams; number of compared teams in virtual table is not necessarily the same as number of "tied in wins"-teams, as number of compared teams has already been reduced to as small as possible first, having already been positioned to upper or lower rank based on current season RS match success against compared teams - in other words if they have already been dropped out of comparison due to that, their matches won't be count in a virtual table calculations).

- If still more than 2 teams tied, ss a last resort, we'd use full Regular Season PA, then PS (all HGL RS matches).

- After that we have ran out of options, and shall just either
A) give better position to a team that had more successful previous HGL Season (RS W-L record), or
B) flip a coin and let it decide, and fill another lottery coupon, as it's an exceptional day defying all odds.

*****End of compilation*****



Last edited by Wagner at 12/2/2025 7:23:26 PM

Part 2/3:

"Tied in wins"-situations; more thorough ruleset with more details (and partly with more repetition):

1. In the case of a 2-teams with tied in wins, better team is determined based on Regular Season match of this Season, as said in the rules.

2. In 3 or more teams tie-situations, as a basic rule, it is first and foremost tried to be solved by comparing Regular Season wins in RS games played within/against those opponents (with the similar spirit to normal "winner of RS match is better ranked team"-rule).

If 3 (or more) teams are tied at Regular Season win-loss record, first it's always attempted to reduce number of teams as much as possible, and by doing that reach a situation where normal 2 team comparison-rule could be applied (winner of RS match is better ranked).
(In other words, it's attempted to drop teams to lower positions who have lost against all with similar record, or put team in first place within their comparison group if they have won all RS matches against the comparison group opponents).
Only win-loss-record against each other within that whole comparison group (meaning teams tied at similar number of wins, that are still being compared against each other) is used at this stage of comparison, and not yet point differential, PD).

-> if it is possible to reduce number of compared teams to 2 teams by RS match comparison, we'll go with option "4.2.", below (normal, existing rule; RS match winner higher ranked)

-> if it's not possible to reduce number to 2 teams within a comparison group (meaning that teams have won each other during RS), we'll first use comparison method "3.", below, and then if needed, "5.".

-> if 3 or more tied wins-teams (who have won each other and can't be rated based on RS match results because they have won each other) have same RS +/- point differential, we´ll go with option "5."; this is extremely unlikely scenario.


3. If teams have won matches against each other so that it can't be determined who's better (in a group of 3 or more), then we´d compare full Regular Season +/- point difference (RS PD).
Note:
-> If teams can be put into ranking order based on this RS PD (in other words, no RS PD tie-situations with teams tied in wins), it will be done (like explained in "4.1."), naturally better RS PD giving better rank among these compared teams.
-> If exactly 2 teams are tied after applying "2." (which is attempt to reduce team numbers based on RS wins within comparison group) and applying "3." (RS +/- PD) comparisons, we'll use "4.2." (normal, existing rule) to solve situation.


4.1. In the case more than 2 teams would have same Win-Loss record (and number of comparison group teams couldn't be reduced to 2 based on how they have won against each other in RS matches), and out of those teams two teams would have same RS point differential , we would first try to sort teams to upper or lower than these two teams (whose RS +/- PD is even) based on whether their RS +/- PD is better or worse than those two teams that are tied in RS PD. For the teams tied in RS +/- PD, other comparison methods would take place (as long as team classification has succesfully been made), and comparison stage "5." would be applied at this point to RS PD-tied teams.

4.2. If out of all compared teams in question (that comparison group, that has first been reduced by RS match win-loss comparison against each other into as small group as possible) exactly 2 teams would have same RS PD, then we would simply compare who's better team by checking out result of their Regular Season meeting (applying the normal, existing rule to situation).

***Continues on next post***

Last edited by Wagner at 12/2/2025 7:28:00 PM

Part 3/3:

"Tied in wins"-situations; rest of more thorough ruleset with more details (and partly with more repetition):


5. If all 3 or more teams would have same RS +/- point difference (extremely unlikely situation!) after all afore mentioned comparisons, then we would calculate a separate league table (like Paul George mentioned, "virtual table") into which only matches against those with the same RS win-loss record and the same RS PD would be counted (in the case of 3 even teams, that's 3 RS matches), and from those matches we can use as a first comparison method +/- point difference (PD), points allowed (PA) as a 2nd comparison method, and points scored (PS) as third comparison method.
If for some reason it would be still tied with more than 2 teams, then we would proceed to first fill a lottery ticket, and after that, comparing whole Regular Season PA and then PS. If still tied, I don't know what to say. ;)

Example situation #1:
Teams D, E, F and G are tied in wins. Team D has won his RS matches against E, F and G, in other words all critical matches.
E, F and G have won each other. E won F during Regular Season.
Solution: First we conclude that D has won all matches against opponents in question (tied in wins), so D is automatically ranked as highest of 4 teams, and in further ranking comparison is made with only 3 remaining teams (E, F, G). For the sake of an example let´s assume none of these teams won or lost all of their matches, but won each other, so it's not possible to reduce amount of teams to 2. In this case we would then proceed to full Regular Season +/- point differential comparison between 3 teams; better RS PD, better ranking (among these 3 teams).

Added example: As an example, let's for the purpose of reusing this first example imagine that while team D had won all their 3 competitors, team G would've lost all 3 games against "tied in wins"-opposition (3 matches). Therefore two teams would be automatically "dropped" out of comparison, by being able to give them league positions that they deserve, based on Regular Season match success against tied opposition.
So in this case D would be ranked 1st of these four teams, G as last, and then ranking between E and F would depend on their Regular Season match, and as E won F in this example, so E will be ranked 2nd of those 4 teams.


Example situation #2:
Teams A, B and C have 8-7 Regular Season record. They all have won each other during RS (and team B won team C 90-85). In other words, none of the teams have won or lost all matches against teams with same win-loss record.
Team A´s Regular Season +/- point difference (RS PD) +20, Team B +10 and Team C+10.
Solution: First we conclude team ranking can´t be determined by RS match results (teams have won each other).
Second we rank Team A highest of all three, due to having best RS +/- PD.
Third, we conclude Team B and C have same point differential. As a result, we check their Regular Season match which team B won, so correct order is teams A, B and C.
Added note: If for example team A woud've won their RS matches against teams B and C, then they would've automatically been ranked best of those 3 teams. That would result team A being dropped out of comparison group, and therefore teams B and C would proceed to normal RS match result comparison first, and not to the RS +/- PD comparison in first place.
This means that basic, already existing rule of better RS success against opposition in question, is tried to be applied before point difference(s) are being applied as comparison methdod.

Please anyone let me know if I forgot to add something important in this proposal of mine, or if you find anything that's not logical... It's surprisingly complicated subject if you dive deep into different scenarios.

And everybody please feel free to comment if you accept this proposal.

Last edited by Wagner at 12/2/2025 7:30:43 PM

That makes sense to me, thanks for summarizing this all!

Hi Wagner and all managers,

I noticed one scenerio:

imagine that 4teams will have 11-4 record (KKS, ED, RAJ, HB) which is perfectly possible .

In that case we might check all games between us:
KKS won with ED
KKS won with HB
RAJ won with KKS
RAJ won with HB
ED won with RAJ
HB won with ED

So it might mean that:
RAJ will be #3 because have two wins and won with KKS which also has two wins
KKS will be #4
HB will be #5 because has one win and won with ED which also has one win
ED will be #6

It's little wierd because KKS might have better +/- than RAJ and:
ED might have better +/- than HB and ED won with possible #3 seed
ED even can have the best +/- out of our 4

Life can be complicated


Last edited by Paul George at 12/3/2025 6:17:09 AM

Hi Wagner and all managers,

I noticed one scenerio:

imagine that 4teams will have 11-4 record (KKS, ED, RAJ, HB) which is perfectly possible :).

In that case we might check all games between us:
KKS won with ED
KKS won with HB
RAJ won with KKS
RAJ won with HB
ED won with RAJ
HB won with ED

So it might mean that:
RAJ will be #3 because have two wins and won with KKS which also has two wins
KKS will be #4
HB will be #5 because has one win and won with ED which also has one win
ED will be #6

It's little wierd because KKS might have better +/- than RAJ and:
ED might have better +/- than HB and ED won with possible #3 seed
ED even can have the best +/- out of our 4 :/

Life can be complicated :D

Life is definitely complicated, and I'm getting more and more confident that rating teams can be complicated as well... :D

You presented good points. I'm going to use your post as a base/continuation, to offer one solution/more accurate explanation of my previous rule postings.

I figured out a one rule/solution to this, which would be quite logical and clear to follow (at least in my opinion - again, faults/mistakes in my thinking are possible so please correct me if necessary), and I actually should likely emphasize this in my previous rule set proposition more (if people accept this as a solution).



This is how my added rule/solution would affect things, here's more accurate explanation of it:

In the tied in wins scenario for originally more than 2 teams, when reduction in number of teams is first attempted, only teams that have won or lost ALL their matches against comparison group (comparison group means teams tied in wins), will be moved up or down in rankings (again, within that comparison group) compared to those teams who haven't won or lost ALL matches against the comparison group teams.

(Remember, if reduction in number of compared teams is successful in reducing number of compared teams to 2, then normal/existing "winner of RS match of the season is higher ranked of 2 teams"-rule is applied, and no further "comparison rounds" - for instance point differential comparison - are being applied).

Example:
For instance in your 4-team tie scenario that I'm referring into here, nobody has won or lost every match against all other comparison group teams. Therefore with my ruleset we couldn't lift anyone first or drop anyone to last position in the 4 team comparison. As a result, we would then proceed to compare these teams Regular Season +/- point differential (RS PD), and rank teams based on that. In the case of draws in RS PD in this situation with more than 2 teams (extremely unlikely scenario), see my earlier ruleset.

Partly why I implemented this ONLY ALL wins or losses raise or drop team within a comparison group-rule, is to eliminate some of the problematic scenarios that you mentioned, such as

"ED might have better +/- than HB and ED won with possible #3 seed
ED even can have the best +/- out of our 4 :/"

Especially problematic from my point of view would be your note on "ED won with possible #3 seed".

When we take a look at RAJ-ED, it's in a way logical that RAJ would be higher with "2 comparison group wins" against ED´s 1, but on the other hand it is in a strong contradiction with the fact that ED won RAJ, and that still with this ranking system still RAJ would be #3 and ED #6, which is counter-intuitive (as you pointed out, thank you for that - great point/note!).

What is also noteworthy here is that I do not prefer to apply actual full "comparison team virtual league table" to comparison at this point, but instead only remove teams from comparison that have won or lost all their matches against the comparison group.
(Actual "virtual table" would be introduced as a last resort comparison method in my proposition, see "5.").

Last edited by Wagner at 12/3/2025 8:25:19 AM

That makes sense to me, thanks for summarizing this all!

Thanks LennuK.!
I tried to be comprehensive, but given the complexity of different possible scenarios, I thought something may have gone unnoticed/left unwritten.

Paul George (RAJ) wrote a good reply in where he presented one problematic scenario as an example, into which I replied - I hope that clarifies my added rule proposition to all you!

And again, if any problematic scenarios remain after you've read my added rule proposition (written just a moment ago), I'd appreciate feedback from anyone. :)

Hi Wagner and all managers,

I noticed one scenerio:

imagine that 4teams will have 11-4 record (KKS, ED, RAJ, HB) which is perfectly possible :).

In that case we might check all games between us:
KKS won with ED
KKS won with HB
RAJ won with KKS
RAJ won with HB
ED won with RAJ
HB won with ED

So it might mean that:
RAJ will be #3 because have two wins and won with KKS which also has two wins
KKS will be #4
HB will be #5 because has one win and won with ED which also has one win
ED will be #6

It's little wierd because KKS might have better +/- than RAJ and:
ED might have better +/- than HB and ED won with possible #3 seed
ED even can have the best +/- out of our 4 :/

Life can be complicated :D

While some might be tempted to say I'm pretty good at making things complicated, one of the added reasons why I would prefer using "only all wins or losses against comparison group teams drop team out of equal amount of wins teams-comparison" additional rule is to simplify things.
(You wouldn't expect to hear this from me, would you?;)

You did open up the possible scenario well (by showing some teams within comparison group would have one, and some others two wins), however, as you well pointed out, it's not problem free scenario to solve it that way as teams might be ranked higher even if they've lost RS match to the lower ranked team. (To be fair, probably nothing is completely "fair" to all, it all depends on the way you look at it.).

So on the other hand, to explain a bit further why I'd prefer this interpretation of the rule (that I presented shortly in this, and with more detail in my earlier posts).
As said and as you well pointed out, there can be problematic scenarios in terms of ranking teams in "fair" order, if you only count wins within comparison group. (Again, it is in a way just as fair way as any depending on the way you look at things, so don't get me wrong).

***
What I also mean by this is that maybe we all can agree that if team has won or lost all it's matches against comparison group (tied in wins-) teams, then they certainly deserve to be lifted above or dropped below other comparison group teams?

In other words, then we would decide even a bit inconclusive situations by comparing Regular Season +/- point differential (RS PD) as a next comparison method - but if someone has managed to wipe floor with other comparison group teams on this Regular Season, or lost to all of them during this RS, they would be lifted as best or dropped to last team of the comparison group, respectively.
***

Last edited by Wagner at 12/4/2025 8:42:40 AM