|
|
Post by Brophdog88 on May 4, 2010 16:06:06 GMT -5
So this isn't all historical including before the last five seasons? It's just covering the last five? If it's just the last five I have no qualms and am actually quite surprised we're as high as second. If it's meant to cover all of history though, no way any team should be close to my Bulls IMO with 5 titles. The next closest is 2. This is all inclusive...sorry man, but your titles are defeated by the insane 7 finals and 172 wins the Grizzliews have put together, as well as the extra 100 wins |
|
|
|
Post by Tigertecz on May 4, 2010 16:12:21 GMT -5
Damn. I gotta say that's messed up lol. Grizzlies have made 7 finals, 2 titles. We've made 6 and won 5. Surely that's gotta be better.
|
|
|
|
Post by Brophdog88 on May 4, 2010 16:17:39 GMT -5
Damn. I gotta say that's messed up lol. Grizzlies have made 7 finals, 2 titles. We've made 6 and won 5. Surely that's gotta be better. by my points system no...you have 75 extra points from the titles but his 50 more wins in the playoff give him 100 points, and his 100 more wins in the regular season give him 100 points.........I wanted to make it so that a strong consistent team would come out on top, not a team that makes a run wins a title, or two, tanks five years and repeats does that....your rebuilding and his dominance this past period put him on top |
|
|
|
Post by Brophdog88 on May 4, 2010 16:18:34 GMT -5
by the way your Cavs are 12th overall in BBS....Suns and 76ers dominate over there
|
|
|
|
Post by Tigertecz on May 4, 2010 16:22:28 GMT -5
Yeah but I've only been competitive for a few seasons. First five or so I literally did nothing with my team. Didn't rebuild, didn't make moves to win. Was just a treadmill 8th seed for ages lol. Only recently pulled my finger out.
I still think the consistency of 6 finals with 5 wins beats out 7 finals with 2 wins by far.
|
|
|
|
Post by csdude07 on May 4, 2010 16:23:07 GMT -5
these articles are always awesome, well done again broph.
Damn our finals record sucks! Oh well, we're doing something right by getting there 7 times i suppose
|
|
|
|
Post by Clifford "Poop" Harris on May 4, 2010 16:26:23 GMT -5
Does my rankings have more to do with the previous gm or do i just suck?
|
|
|
|
Post by Brophdog88 on May 4, 2010 16:29:41 GMT -5
Yeah but I've only been competitive for a few seasons. First five or so I literally did nothing with my team. Didn't rebuild, didn't make moves to win. Was just a treadmill 8th seed for ages lol. Only recently pulled my finger out. I still think the consistency of 6 finals with 5 wins beats out 7 finals with 2 wins by far. hey, my Bucks are the worst...so I have nowhere to go but up.... The Grizzlies have 50 more playoff wins is the big thing....and more playoff appearances and more wins in the regular season...the only thing you are ahead of them in is titles....they average more wins per playoff appearance even.......yeah titles are the main goal, and thats why they are worth more points than anything else....you win a title you get 72 points.....it takes 64 wins to match that in the regular season.....but, Power Rankings reward consistency....the Hornets have two titles, but they sit 11th cause they have been shit since those two titles....You had the lead at the last checkpoint, but you got 250 points while the Grizz got 513 in the last five years..... |
|
|
|
Post by csdude07 on May 4, 2010 16:32:15 GMT -5
Past few years have been great...and I've only gotten laughable offers for my players, so I will be competing for as long as Preira is in the league.
|
|
|
|
Post by Tigertecz on May 4, 2010 16:33:02 GMT -5
Fair enough I suppose. But I'm not sure I agree with your formula now.. Because say a team is like 3rd seed every year and make the conf finals each year but never go further. Say they do it for ten years. Then say another team doesn't make the playoffs for 8 of the 10 seasons, makes two finals and wins one title. Which team scores better? Because despite consistency, the team didn't win anything.
|
|
|
|
Post by Tigertecz on May 4, 2010 16:33:48 GMT -5
Past few years have been great...and I've only gotten laughable offers for my players, so I will be competing for as long as Preira is in the league. Sounds like what I was saying when I had Preira after my fourth title LOL. |
|
|
|
Post by csdude07 on May 4, 2010 16:33:52 GMT -5
I've always liked the formula
|
|
|
|
Post by csdude07 on May 4, 2010 16:34:21 GMT -5
Lol Preira can hoop...even with F potential and at 37 years old
|
|
|
|
Post by Brophdog88 on May 4, 2010 16:42:11 GMT -5
Fair enough I suppose. But I'm not sure I agree with your formula now.. Because say a team is like 3rd seed every year and make the conf finals each year but never go further. Say they do it for ten years. Then say another team doesn't make the playoffs for 8 of the 10 seasons, makes two finals and wins one title. Which team scores better? Because despite consistency, the team didn't win anything. you beat the Grizzlies in most of your title runs as I recall....you got 27 points for winning that fourth game...I think thats enough of a bonus....but the team getting to the conference finals each year? well if I am a fan though I get frustrated...however it is nice to be competitive every year, and as an owner I am gonna take in a hell of a lot more money winning that much.....I ran through this formula quite a bit, but if I weighted the playoffs much more it pretty much went by Playoff score, rather than a balance...notice that me and the Pacers both are actually higher individually in each the Total Regular Season, and Playoff points total positions than our overall, because teams can make up huge ground in the playoffs |
|
|
|
Post by Tigertecz on May 4, 2010 16:42:13 GMT -5
Of course he can. He can hoop on one leg.
|
|
