BuzzerBeater Forums

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!

I am also filing an appeal for the conspiracy of mllama stopping my top vote getter from getting more votes...

im too lazy to post the details so tehe...

Brakenhoff was shooting against my worst player, where as Sandel Nica was shooting against a better player, so that explains the slight difference in shooting percentage. But it should also be considered that Nica shot 50% from the 3 point line and Brakenhoff shot 0%.

Why is Brakenhoff giving away a foul and freethrows bullshit? Nica didn't give away any points via freethrows and Brakenhoff gave an opportunity for easy points to the opponent.

I don't think the assists should be dismissed so quickly, sure Brakenhoff had to create his own shots but he only scored 27 points against a crap defender in a Motion offence, Nica was able to score slightly less points, but was playing in a Look Inside offence, and also his 7 assists means he should get some credit for 14 additional points.

And while defence may not be entirely linked to the rating, I'm sure you would agree that it is linked, and it can't simply be ignored that Nica got 3 higher on the rating, especially given the fact he played more minutes.

Also Brakenhoff got 27 points in a team where he and Urwin were the only ones keeping them in the match and so got the ball more often to shoot. However, Nica managed to score an incredible 26 points even though 3 other members on the team scored over 20 points each. Nica would have scored a lot more points if I had played an outside offence like Maggots did.

And are you sure that SF doesn't mean a player should grab more rebounds?? I certainly think an SF should be grabbing more rebounds than a SG.

Have no fear, the kitty cat is here!

Well well well, if it isn't Naker again! Never seem happy do you!

Ok I'm gonna go your way for this challenge and run through the points you made with your +1's

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

Yes +1 for Brak as he did it in less minutes also and you could also +1 him again for how much more efficient manner he did it in, but I'll let you off the hook and only give +1 to Brak

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

Certianly not +1 to Nica. Yes on average SF's get slightly more rebounding opportunities to SG's but you played a 3-2 Zone which realistically gives Nica some SF rebounding opportunities also. Nica also conceded as many as he got, where as Brak at least pulled down more then his opponent and in less minutes so if anything +1 to Brak again.

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

You can have that one, SG's should get plenty more assists then SF's, but 7 is very nice for a SG so +1 to Nica

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

Yeah another one to Nica I'll give you that, +1 Nica

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

Its 1 foul, completely irrelevant, in fact as been mentioned it was on a layup so could be considered a smart foul and could be +1 to Brak if you wanna get smart But not worth +1ing anyone for this...

So this brings us to your last point with the scores tied at 2 each...

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.

Dunno if you know much about ratings but my nanna could get a decent rating at SG, and the only skill she has above prominant is baking! It is much harder to get higher ratings at SF as it takes into account all skills not just the outside skills. A 10.5 while playing SF for 41 minutes is not that bad. Could maybe slightly give Nica the advantage here but considering Brak didn't get an extra +1 for being so efficient I'm not gonna give Nica one for getting a higher rating at an easier rating position.

Also Brakenhoff got 27 points in a team where he and Urwin were the only ones keeping them in the match and so got the ball more often to shoot. However, Nica managed to score an incredible 26 points even though 3 other members on the team scored over 20 points each

Nica took 25 shots and Brak 18? so wouldn't that mean Nica had the ball more often to shoot?

Nica would have scored a lot more points if I had played an outside offence like Maggots did.

Woulda, Coulda, Shoulda, But you didnt play an outside offense, so irrelevant!


Another point is winning team, Nica was on the winning team and i like to rate that highly, but as you pointed out you had 4 guys scoring over 20 points, meaning was Nica's value really that high? you could have still won without him... Where as the Maggots only had Brak and Urwin keeping them in the game, they lose Brak and they had no hope, so realistically who had more value in that game?


In my opinion the votes could have gone either way. Yes Nica could have gotten 2 votes and there is a case to back that up, But there is just a strong a case to backup Brak getting them. Peixoto could have been even thrown in the mix as a possible vote getter also. Being so close i really don't see the point of changing it and to me it seems like a bit of nit picky dispute so as Chief Indian Disputer i rule that the original votes stand!

Well well well, if it isn't Naker again! Never seem happy do you! :P

haha well none of my players ever stay on my team long enough to win the MVP for this PL so I figure I might as well have some fun with appealing decisions :D

Yes +1 for Brak as he did it in less minutes also and you could also +1 him again for how much more efficient manner he did it in, but I'll let you off the hook and only give +1 to Brak

The only reason he was more efficient at scoring was because he was against a weaker player. Nica was against a stronger opponent so naturally his scoring percentage was lower. And anyway, Nica was a far superior shooter from the 3 point line (50% compared to 0%).

Certianly not +1 to Nica. Yes on average SF's get slightly more rebounding opportunities to SG's but you played a 3-2 Zone which realistically gives Nica some SF rebounding opportunities also. Nica also conceded as many as he got, where as Brak at least pulled down more then his opponent and in less minutes so if anything +1 to Brak again.

Wouldn't playing a 3-2 zone mean less opportunities for Nica to get rebounds??? And Maggots played Man to Man which means it provides more rebounds than a 3-2 zone. So his SF only got 9 rebounds in a defence and a position where is is easier to get rebounds, where as Nica got 5 rebounds in a defence and position where it is harder to get rebounds.

Nica took 25 shots and Brak 18? so wouldn't that mean Nica had the ball more often to shoot?

I wasn't saying that Brak got the ball more often than Nica, I was saying that on Maggots team Brak got the ball more often because he was up against a weak matchup and so was able to shoot often, however Nica only got the ball to shoot as a last resort and still managed to score almost the same number of points.

Another point is winning team, Nica was on the winning team and i like to rate that highly, but as you pointed out you had 4 guys scoring over 20 points, meaning was Nica's value really that high? you could have still won without him... Where as the Maggots only had Brak and Urwin keeping them in the game, they lose Brak and they had no hope, so realistically who had more value in that game?

So because Nica was on a team where everyone does well, and Brak was on a team where everyone did bad, Brak should get the vote over Nica? That's faulty logic :P Yes I could have still won without Nica, but that isn't really relevant, all Brak did was keep the scores closer, and all Nica did was make the scores further apart, so how is Brak more valuable than Nica? It's like putting the worst NBA player on a high school basketball team and putting Scottie Pippin on the old Chicago Bulls team and having the 2 teams play against each other, and then saying that the Chicago Bulls team would have won without Scottie, but the high school basketball team would have had no hope without the worst NBA player on their team. In this hypothetical, Scottie should still get the MVP vote over the NBA player on the high school basketball team.

If you aren't willing to put Nica as 2 points, would you at least consider putting Peixoto in as the 2 points or even replacing Nica and giving Peixoto the 1 point instead? Peixoto scored just as many points as Nica but shot with almost 70% efficiency! And in addition to this Peixoto got 21 rebounds!!! So I think Peixoto was superior to Nica.

Thanks again C-Cat :)

The only reason he was more efficient at scoring was because he was against a weaker player. Nica was against a stronger opponent so naturally his scoring percentage was lower. And anyway, Nica was a far superior shooter from the 3 point line (50% compared to 0%).

You played 3-2? Brak didn't have a direct opponent? If Nica shot so well from behind the arc it makes his 2pt shooting look even worse!

Wouldn't playing a 3-2 zone mean less opportunities for Nica to get rebounds??? And Maggots played Man to Man which means it provides more rebounds than a 3-2 zone. So his SF only got 9 rebounds in a defence and a position where is is easier to get rebounds, where as Nica got 5 rebounds in a defence and position where it is harder to get rebounds.

Yeah 3-2 means slightly less opportunities then Man to Man, but it evens up the rebound opportunities that a SF's and SG's get more which is the point i was making. Nica still didn't out rebound his opponent but Brak did, no matter what the tactics...

I wasn't saying that Brak got the ball more often than Nica, I was saying that on Maggots team Brak got the ball more often because he was up against a weak matchup and so was able to shoot often, however Nica only got the ball to shoot as a last resort and still managed to score almost the same number of points.

If he was the last resort with 25 attempts you obviously put up a lot of very late shots Brak did what he needed to do with the opportunities he got...

So because Nica was on a team where everyone does well, and Brak was on a team where everyone did bad, Brak should get the vote over Nica? That's faulty logic Yes I could have still won without Nica, but that isn't really relevant, all Brak did was keep the scores closer, and all Nica did was make the scores further apart, so how is Brak more valuable than Nica?

Is it the Most Valuable Player award or Best Stats award? Brak was on a team where everyone but him did bad, except him, so he was extremely valuable to his team, He kept the scores closer in a game that could have otherwise got very ugly. If you'd still have won without Nica how was he that valuable? Especially seeing as he was apparently the last resort for his limited 25 shot attempts?

It's like putting the worst NBA player on a high school basketball team and putting Scottie Pippin on the old Chicago Bulls team and having the 2 teams play against each other, and then saying that the Chicago Bulls team would have won without Scottie, but the high school basketball team would have had no hope without the worst NBA player on their team. In this hypothetical, Scottie should still get the MVP vote over the NBA player on the high school basketball team.

Lol you can use examples as outrageous as that for anything! Kevin Garnet won an MVP on a shit high school like Minnesota team, Hasn't got much on a quality Chicago Bulls like Boston team.

If you aren't willing to put Nica as 2 points, would you at least consider putting Peixoto in as the 2 points or even replacing Nica and giving Peixoto the 1 point instead? Peixoto scored just as many points as Nica but shot with almost 70% efficiency! And in addition to this Peixoto got 21 rebounds!!! So I think Peixoto was superior to Nica.

That's not what you appealed


I think the key here is, all this MVP stuff is opinion, this one was not a clear cut right or wrong answer and realistically it could just have easily gone either way depending on who you ask. If there is no clear error in judgment and its a a very close call like this one i will always back the guy who has put the time and effort in to do the voting as seems a little disrespectful to change it for something so minor.