Enhanced Manager Ratings

There was a time that SOM listed “Manager Ratings”. I believe the formula they used was:

(Wins×(Win Pct−0.4))+(Playoffs×10)+(Championships x 20)

Applying this formula to the Manager Records (sorted by descending Championships), the Top 50 managers would be:

1. 53035 nevdully's
2. 48045 The Last Druid
3. 42950 DGF102052
4. 38522 nomadbrad
5. 38368 Frank Bailey
6. 34163 andycummings65
7. 33939 tmm6883
8. 33638 divad
9. 32407 scorehouse
10. 26864 Main Line Expos
11. 26221 dharmabums
12. 25271 Altec1969
13. 25207 THE GERMS
14. 22915 Salty
15. 22222 Morpheus
16. 21207 J-Pav
17. 20855 drfreeze49
18. 20345 SR2012
19. 19022 BC15NY
20. 19007 FRANKMANSUETO
21. 18890 B.o.b.b.y...
22. 18763 muellerinwesttn
23. 18392 N Texas Widowmakers
24. 17918 Goreds54
25. 17821 siyankeeclipper
26. 17546 unesid
27. 17369 mike_miller
28. 17176 tmfw30
29. 17162 Private Jet Mama's Boys
30. 16738 durantjerry
31. 16544 RiggoDrill
32. 16521 Jeepdriver
33. 16358 deepdrive
34. 16013 DonFESQ
35. 15559 Thomasmore
36. 15357 emart
37. 15264 ironwill1
38. 15181 bontomn
39. 15171 l.strether
40. 14829 Badjam
41. 14774 sschu
42. 14737 1787
43. 14727 Moriarity
44. 14329 RangerJoe
45. 14307 jw4412
46. 13920 Hack Wilson
47. 13887 fowldawg
48. 13884 pacoboy
49. 13741 ShadowCaptain
50. 13720 jddoug

It goes without saying that the primary statistic in maximizing ratings points was simply the number of teams played.

Since we all (well, mostly) play for Championships, and using Playoff teams x .25 as a proxy for Championships lost, here are the Top 50 managers sorted by credits won per team played:

1. 0.89 jw4412
2. 0.88 labratory
3. 0.81 AdamKatz
4. 0.76 franky35
5. 0.76 MaxPower
6. 0.73 havefaith
7. 0.71 RuyLopez
8. 0.71 barrmorris
9. 0.69 MARCPELLETIER
10. 0.69 nomadbrad
11. 0.68 hallerose
12. 0.67 Play By The Rules
13. 0.67 cristano1
14. 0.66 DonFESQ
15. 0.65 jflatour99
16. 0.65 djmacb
17. 0.64 gamiam
18. 0.63 hackra
19. 0.60 BruceF
20. 0.59 Radagast Brown
21. 0.59 pushpin76
22. 0.59 jimbo7777777
23. 0.59 jet40
24. 0.59 qksilver69
25. 0.59 boyer14
26. 0.56 emart
27. 0.56 STEVEJENSEN
28. 0.56 The Last Druid
29. 0.55 kev
30. 0.55 Goreds54
31. 0.55 Steve F
32. 0.55 Iceman44
33. 0.54 Moodywoody
34. 0.54 supertyphoon
35. 0.54 BC15NY
36. 0.54 RiggoDrill
37. 0.54 J-Pav
38. 0.54 djmemphis
39. 0.53 gkhd11a
40. 0.52 tmfw30
41. 0.52 nevdully's
42. 0.52 jlt53
43. 0.52 BDWard
44. 0.52 stevep107
45. 0.51 irish iii
46. 0.51 Morpheus
47. 0.51 cbarclay11
48. 0.50 springer0432
49. 0.50 Axlerod Gunderson
50. 0.50 chuckwonup

The weakness with ratings points is teams played. The more you play, the higher your rating. The weakness with credits per team played is the inverse: 100 teams played and 1500 teams played are not really apples to apples either. Another shortcoming of both systems is that you really need to separate out the formats (ATG, 200x, Mystery, etc).

So my question for discussion is, Would it be worthwhile to code an Elo rating (like chess and other 1v1 games) into the game (by format), so that literally every single game contested between managers is factored in? In this system, points are awarded or taken away based on the strength of the opponent. Managers pursuing the best ratings would need to seek out the highest rated opponents.

Further, Noob Leagues consisting of lower Elo rated managers could find common ground (managers with 10 teams played and sub 750 Elo ratings are welcome to join). That is, players could choose to either pursue or avoid leagues depending on their own particular goals.

I asked ChatGPT about implementing something like this and the answer was a pretty straightforward yes, complete with the python code added for good measure.

Opinions? Something, or making too much of nothing?

those rankings are way cool especially the last one, since I'll never catch up to the marathon runners who've played thousands of leagues

I was surprised to have placed about halfway down that 2nd list (66%), albeit with only several handfuls (27) of qualifying teams....

I like your "credits earned criteria, but feel there might be some other reward also for making playoffs

the finals loser gets 1 credit, but he's (or she) is still a loser (meaning only didn't win the championship) same as 1st round playoff losers.....I understand the line needs to be drawn somewhere

very interesting read though, I'm forwarding to Arte Johnson ;- /

I hear you Fred, justed checked I have played 244 teams. Have 31 titles, lost finals 42 times, lost semi 59 times and have 2 active team that are in semi.. So 132 out of 244 I think pretty good. Especially I don't have ratings. I wing it or check teams I have played against for ideas

I hear you Fred, justed checked I have played 244 teams. Have 31 titles, lost finals 42 times, lost semi 59 times and have 2 active team that are in semi.. So 132 out of 244 I think pretty good. Especially I don't have ratings. I wing it or check teams I have played against for ideas

wtg bro

I don't know if you mean like "diamond dope" = ratings, but I don't use any other info also...only whats available on cards, SOM chartes, rules, etc....

I probably would use diamond dope if I knew how to use it better, but haven't learned yet

good luck, i'm sure we'll cross paths in a league sooner or later

Love this idea. And it would be great for business. I wonder how many people stop playing after losing to the experts.

“ Further, Noob Leagues consisting of lower Elo rated managers could find common ground (managers with 10 teams played and sub 750 Elo ratings are welcome to join). That is, players could choose to either pursue or avoid leagues depending on their own particular goals.‘

I knew I would be top 20 minimum on any list that considered winning percentage, percentage of playoff teams and percentage of champions.
I get a chuckle out my " veteran "rating when guys who are legends and Hall of Famers have less championships and winning percentages 50 points lower than mine.

They need a real ratings system. I've played 273 teams, and have 181 playoffs and 58+ championships with a .556 winning percentage and a playoff winning percentage of. 527. Plus I'm in two more championship series right now.

There aren't 15 managers with better percentages than that. I'm a HOF GM for sure. I'm literally not even an ALL-STAR by their absurd metrics. lol

ELO would be cool but they need to grow the game first honestly. ELO would be used so when you create a team you queue into a league full of managers with similar ELOs. Right now leagues take long enough to fill that they need all available players, waiting for only managers with similar ELOs would be unrealistic given the small size of the current player pool.

Max you hit the nail right on the head. be curious how many the total active players their are? I am now retired so have free time to give to this hobby but as you said i hate fixing a team and wait for something to fill. So now playing a fun keeper league and random join when one of those build leagues get close to filling.

ELO would be cool but they need to grow the game first honestly. ELO would be used so when you create a team you queue into a league full of managers with similar ELOs. Right now leagues take long enough to fill that they need all available players, waiting for only managers with similar ELOs would be unrealistic given the small size of the current player pool.

Perhaps … but a chicken and egg. My view is you would grow the user pool by having some mechanism for newbies to get a break before they get frustrated and quit. Maybe something similar to the rookie leagues?

ELO would be cool but they need to grow the game first honestly. ELO would be used so when you create a team you queue into a league full of managers with similar ELOs. Right now leagues take long enough to fill that they need all available players, waiting for only managers with similar ELOs would be unrealistic given the small size of the current player pool.

Perhaps … but a chicken and egg. My view is you would grow the user pool by having some mechanism for newbies to get a break before they get frustrated and quit. Maybe something similar to the rookie leagues?

I think the most frustrating thing for new players would be waiting forever for the league they joined to fill.

Playing against better managers offers more of an opportunity to see what really works and to improve your own approach. Competing only with rookies and bots, not so much.