![[DEV] ISFL Forums](http://dev.sim-football.com/forums/images/emerald/logo.png "[DEV] ISFL Forums"){kind=logo}
+- [DEV] ISFL Forums (http://dev.sim-football.com/forums)
+-- Forum: Community (http://dev.sim-football.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=5)
+--- Forum: Media (http://dev.sim-football.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=37)
+---- Forum: Graded Articles (http://dev.sim-football.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=38)
+---- Thread: *The Awards Committee Sux Lmap (/showthread.php?tid=22684)
Pages:
1
2
*The Awards Committee Sux Lmap - Memento Mori - 06-04-2020
Just to be clear, because tone is sometimes hard to read on the internet: The title is a joke and this is not a slam piece targeting any of the users or players involved.
The S22 Award Nominations were not good. I think in most cases the player who eventually won the award was the worthiest candidate, but a lot of players who should have been on the ballot were not. This matters because people care about being nominated for awards, even when they don’t win. The recognition that being nominated for an award brings is a positive thing. The right people being nominated for awards is good for everyone, because those who are nominated feel good about having been nominated, and those who haven’t been nominated are secure in the fact that there were good reasons why they weren’t nominated.
I’ll provide some examples of nominations I thought were really poor, and rather than just complaining I’ll suggest some possible solutions to prevent this happening in future.
DE of the Year
There’s an obvious snub for the Defensive End of the year award. ILove Gimmy of the Philadelphia Liberty recorded 40 tackles, 7 TFLs, 1 FR and 7 sacks. Of the nominees, only Matt Hole (20 and 3) recorded more combined sacks and TFLs, and only Lawrence Bass (18 and 3) recorded an equal number. So, why were four players with comparable or fewer sacks and TFLs nominated ahead of Gimmy? Immanuel Blackstone, the eventual winner, had 12 TFLs and 6 sacks (both fewer), but also had 2 forced fumbles, 2 fumble recoveries, a safety and a blocked punt. This nomination makes sense. As above, Lawrence Bass accumulated 18 TFLs and 3 sacks, but also had a safety. This seems fair too. Simeon Works posted 32 tackles, 17 for loss, 1 forced fumble, 1 fumble recovery, 2 sacks and a safety. Works was an elite run defender, but not on the level of Hole or Bass. I’d rather see the nomination go to someone who defended the run comparably (Gimmy had 8 more tackles, 3 fewer TFLs) but who also had 5 more sacks, more than tripling Works’ number. Maybe the awards committee really loved safeties, but they’re such a rare play that I feel uncomfortable assigning too much value to them. But that’s certainly debatable, and maybe that’s the conversation the awards committee had. Now, we come to Ben Tu'inukuafe. Ben T. recorded 47 tackles, 13 for loss, 2 fumble recoveries and 5 sacks. Nominating Ben T. over Gimmy implies that you value 7 tackles and a fumble recovery over a TFL and 2 sacks. I don’t think this is defensible. Fumble recoveries, at least in the real life game of football, are mostly random and not indicative of a talent for recovering fumbles (source: – you can find other articles too if you’re curious). I don’t think 7 tackles are worth more than a TFL and two sacks.
But that’s okay, because maybe you do value tackles at the defensive end position slightly more than TFLs and sacks. Or maybe, despite the heavy dose of luck involved, you value the extra turnover that Ben T. contributed to. In which case, I’d draw your attention to Nero Alexander of the Yellowknife Wraiths. With 13 TFLs and 5 sacks, Alexander recorded an identical number of TFLs and sacks. Alexander recorded 44 tackles, just 3 fewer than Ben T., but also forced 2 fumbles. Unlike fumble recoveries, forcing fumbles does appear to be a skill, at least on an individual level (source: some players consistently force higher numbers of fumbles compared to their peers). If you care more about plays in the backfield, Gimmy should have been nominated over Ben T. If you care more about turnovers, then Alexander should have been nominated over Ben T. If you care more about tackles, then Gimmy or Alexander should’ve been nominated over Works.
DT of the Year
The DT of the Year award is relevant because it supports the case that the Awards Committee was inconsistent in determining who should be nominated. I’d like to draw attention to Rapid Eagle. Rapid Eagle accumulated 38 tackles, 3 TFLs, a forced fumble, a fumble recovery, 5 sacks, a safety and a blocked punt. That’s 8 combined TFLs/sacks, two potential turnovers (one if we’re dismissing fumble recoveries as relevant), a safety and a blocked punt. If we compare Rapid to the other nominees, we see that while he had fewer tackles and combined sacks/TFLs than each of the nominees. I think leaving Rapid off the ballot would be unwise, but defensible if they’d been applying the same logic to each of the positions. But as we saw with the DE of the Year award, being among the top 5 in combined sacks/TFLs isn’t enough to get you nominated for a DL award. Bubba Thumper had 2 more tackles, and two more combined TFLs/sacks (though Rapid recorded 3 TFLs to Thumper’s 0), but Rapid forced a fumble, recorded a safety and blocked a punt. Looking at the DE of the Year awards, it appears the committee prioritised turnovers, safeties and blocked punts over tackles, TFLs and sacks. So why was Rapid not nominated over someone who had 2 more tackles and 2 more combined TFLs/sacks given Rapid’s forced fumble, safety and blocked punt?
LB of the Year
This is one that got a lot of attention on the stream, on podcasts and in media so I’ll try and keep this concise. Honda Edmond recorded the most tackles (135) of any player since the league moved to a 13 game season, and more tackles per game (10.4) than the record holder for tackles in a season (Kurt Hendrix, with 144 in 14 games, or 10.3). Maybe the voters would’ve looked at his 1 TFL, 1 FF, 1 FR, 3 sacks and 4 passes defended and concluded that despite his record-breaking season someone else was the best linebacker in the league this past season. A nominee such as Ugarth the Dissector just had Wayne Howyanow’s season, but worse (Ugarth had 8 fewer tackles, 2 fewer TFLs, one more forced fumble and 0 defensive TDs to Howyanow’s 1). Another nominee, Galf Wilf, just had Mo Berry’s season but worse (10 fewer tackles, 2 more TFLs, one fewer forced fumble, 2 fewer sacks, 3 fewer interceptions). The awards committee decided that voters shouldn’t even have the opportunity to vote for a linebacker who recorded the most tackles per game in the league’s 22 season history. This achievement has gone unrecognised by the awards committee. The league doesn’t even have a history of snubbing linebackers who manage to record a huge number of tackles. Edmond’s company in the top 10 tackling seasons includes Hall of Famers and LBotY winners.
Safety of the Year
The elephant in the room here is Awkward Sexjoke. After the awards committee decided that Edmond’s 135 tackles were not worthy of a nomination, the player who led safeties in tackles is nominated for safety of the year. Sexjoke had 125 tackles, 1 FF, 1 FR, an interception and 9 PDs. Players like Johnny Hellzapoppin recorded 4 sacks, 3 interceptions and 5 PDs. A player like Prince Vegeta matched or bettered Sexjoke in every category except tackles and PDs (with 3 fewer PDs). Quinn Hughes did the same, adding more TFLs, more potential turnovers (via fumbles), more interceptions and got a defensive touchdown. To be clear: I’m not saying Sexjoke should not have been nominated for this award. But it’s clear, when you compare his stats to safeties that weren’t nominated, that the number of tackles Sexjoke recorded were key to the argument that he should be nominated. But at the linebacker position, where some in the community have said they believe tackles to be the most important statistical contribution, the player with a record-breaking number of tackles was not nominated.
I’m already at 1,200+ words, and it seems like overkill to hammer these points home even more. So just one more egregious example.
Defensive Breakout Player of the Year
Maurice Virtanen recorded 83 tackles, 1 FF, 13 sacks and 7 PDs in S21. In S22, he recorded 96 tackles, 1 TFL, 1 FR, 12 sacks and 10 PDs. These stat lines are almost identical. Some would even argue that Virtanen’s S21 was superior. The fact that there’s any doubt that Virtanen actually improved statistically makes this really obviously a bad choice.
Summary:
1. The awards committee did a poor job selecting the award nominees.
2. The awards committee appears to have applied inconsistent logic in determining who should be nominated.
3. Perhaps these inconsistencies and poor selections can be attributed to the way the awards committee is comprised and the team rep system. Team reps are inherently biased, and some may see the function of the role as being to make the case for your teammates. I’d suggest a system where some calm, reasonable members of the community are selected or elected to the awards committee instead of the current system. I’d be interested to hear your thoughts on how the awards committee should be reconstructed below.
4. Leakers from the awards committee claimed that some decisions were voted on, some weren’t. There appears to have been infighting within the awards committee that resulted in processes not being followed and people leaking information – someone passed on to me a leaked google doc of the nominees as early as the 25th May, which were seemingly leaked to invite criticism of the awards committee’s decisions. The best case scenario is that the committee was dysfunctional, and the worst case scenario is that this dysfunction was intentional in order to produce outcomes certain committee members wanted.
5. If the awards committee is making bad decisions, fighting among themselves and leaking against each other then the committee is not fit for purpose. The league awards are important for the positive reasons I mentioned at the beginning of the article, but this awards season was a really negative affair where bad decisions were made and people personally insulted one another. I’m not suggesting that the awards committee is entirely responsible for this, but it started with them. This shouldn’t be allowed to happen next season, changes are required.
6. A common response to criticism of the workings of the league is words to the effect of ‘apply for this role then’. In which case, if it’d help reduce some of the toxicity and dysfunction, sure, I’ll happily be a part of a new awards committee.
Code:
1751 words*The Awards Committee Sux Lmap - retrospace111 - 06-04-2020
The Awards Committee Sux Lmap
*The Awards Committee Sux Lmap - CLG Rampage - 06-04-2020
k lmap
*The Awards Committee Sux Lmap - HalfEatenOnionBagel - 06-04-2020
I love lmap
But for real a very well thought out and presented discussion. Would be interesting to see some comments from the committee about nominations and selections
*The Awards Committee Sux Lmap - Billybolo53 - 06-04-2020
I think there the awards committee needs to come up with a criteria that the voters can follow, so there is at least consistency in the voting. Not telling exactly how to vote but some guidelines for each award would be helpful imho.
*The Awards Committee Sux Lmap - LimJahey - 06-04-2020
They should hide the names of some of the potential nominees and have them choose off of that, might help get rid of some bias
*The Awards Committee Sux Lmap - gucci - 06-04-2020
The awards committee narrows the field before the season is over. At least I think so. This could be what causes them to overlook some players.
*The Awards Committee Sux Lmap - frithjofr - 06-04-2020
(06-04-2020, 10:19 AM)Memento Mori Wrote:A nominee such as Ugarth the Dissector just had Wayne Howyanow’s season, but worse (Ugarth had 8 fewer tackles, 2 fewer TFLs, one more forced fumble and 0 defensive TDs to Howyanow’s 1).
I think part of the consideration was that Ugarth was a first gen rookie. Also, to some of your other points, if you wanted the award to go to the guys who gets the most tackles, then why even vote on it? Why not just give the linebacker with the most tackles the award every season? And yes, often times in awards situations you can have players who had similar seasons, that's not a failure of the voters.
*The Awards Committee Sux Lmap - Memento Mori - 06-04-2020
(06-04-2020, 05:15 PM)LimJahey Wrote:They should hide the names of some of the potential nominees and have them choose off of that, might help get rid of some biasI don't like this for two reasons. First, it doesn't work in practice. If I ask you who you're picking of the QBotY nominees, if you don't already know that the one with the most touchdowns is Cooter Bigsby you can find that out in a few seconds.
Second, the context is important. For example, Sean O'Leary's receiving stats are made more impressive by the fact he was catching passes from 50 TPE Franky LaFleur for 5/13 games.
(06-04-2020, 05:16 PM)gucci Wrote:The awards committee narrows the field before the season is over. At least I think so. This could be what causes them to overlook some players.That makes sense. I think the last regular season game was on May 20th, though. Two weeks before the awards stream. There's time for them to make some changes without reducing the time voters have to vote.
(06-04-2020, 05:57 PM)frithjofr Wrote:I think part of the consideration was that Ugarth was a first gen rookie. Also, to some of your other points, if you wanted the award to go to the guys who gets the most tackles, then why even vote on it? Why not just give the linebacker with the most tackles the award every season? And yes, often times in awards situations you can have players who had similar seasons, that's not a failure of the voters.Ugarth was drafted in S21, so I think adding this caveat is a little misleading. But if younger players were given extra credit in the nomination process, why was this not applied to other players drafted in S21 or sooner like Rapid Eagle, Johnny Hellzapoppin or Quinn Hughes?
I think you've missed the point. I said the voters should decide, with the awards committee giving them the ability to make their own judgements on what they place the most value on. Not having Edmond on the ballot denies the voters the chance to decide how much to value tackles. I never said that Edmond, for example, should win the award, but that the voters should have had the ability to decide whether or not he should've done. I think Mo Berry should have won the award. But while some people made cases for someone like Honda Edmond, who wasn't even on the ballot, I didn't see a single case made for someone like Galf Wilf, who is.
I also didn't criticise the voters at any point, so I'm not sure what that part is referring to.
*The Awards Committee Sux Lmap - mithrandir - 06-04-2020
Hi Momento Mori. Thank you for offering these valid criticisms. There is certainly always room for improvement with awards, but let me offer some insights into these concerns as a team rep on the committee this year.
1. We had an incredibly tight turnaround and had about ten to twelve hours of discussion over a two day period.
2. The DE and DT awards were perhaps a little inconsistent. This particular award was discussed after about five hours of discussions and many of the team reps had checked out at that point.
3. I don't think there is a single defensible case that a potential winner of any of these awards was left off the ballot.
4. The linebacker positional award by itself was discussed for 90 minutes. Linebacker is an incredibly difficult position group to evaluate given their extreme versatility. In the end, Edmonds was the last person booted from the list, essentially the sixth place nominee. One could argue he deserved a nomination, but no one was beating Mo Berry for that award.
5. You and I have the exact same thought process on safeties. The inconsistency in leaving Edmonds off but including Sexjoke bothered me immensely. We messed this one up. I didn't think Awkward Sexjoke deserved a nomination over Hellzapoppin especially, and Vegeta and Hughes were also among the final cuts at the position.
6. We had a really hard time finding five good nominees for defensive breakout player but felt like we needed five. Clearly Kroustis and Virtanen didn't belong on that list as they were just as good last year. Obviously the voters agreed.
7. Leaking information about the awards ballot ahead of time is a serious offense and should result in a ban from ever serving on the committee again.
8. I didn't sense in-fighting on the committee. There were some passionate discussions as might be expected when two highly invested committee members disagree. I never saw any insulting or disrespectful conversations in the committee discussion. There is no place for that.