I began to prepare cards for the next game on my schedule, when my imaginary UTEP team took on the Matadors of Cal State Northridge. Here are the Cal State Northridge cards:
The other set of cards is my UTEP set, which has been adjusted up by a factor of 1.104.
Why did I adjust UTEP's set up by a factor of 1.104? I looked at the relative strengths of the the Big West Conference - the conference to which CS-Northridge belongs - and the strength of Conference USA. Take the average RPI of Conference USA and divide it by the average RPI of the Big West. At the time I created the cards, the result was 1.104.
Therefore, all of the good stats of UTEP get adjusted up by 1.104 - field goals made, 3-point goals made, rebounds, offensive rebounds, steals, assists, and blocks. Personal fouls are adjusted down, but it doesn't matter all that much as the foul ratings for any team - who has the highest foul drawing scores, what is the foul range, etc. - depends only on the team in question. The only stat that I don't adjust upward is that of free throw shooting.
Why do I adjust UTEP's scores up and not adjust CS-Northridge's scores down? If there's a blowout, the score is more likely to be 90-50 than 50-10. Making UTEP the standard and dividing anything CS-Northridge does by 1.104 makes it very hard for the Matadors to score.
Next up: The results of the second game, comments about UTEP's schedule, etc.
I have a goal of putting all of this wonderful information into one spreadsheet that creates both sets of cards. That, however, is a long term project.
Monica Andys is Tonicia Tademy. Vickie DeJesus is Whitney Ligon.
ReplyDeleteAmazing how a team with six wins can say it's turning things around!
You're exactly right on Andys being Tamedy and DeJesus being Ligon.
ReplyDeleteEgad. The Matadors haven't done very well since I finished this set.