If you could add a new button to the app...

Submitted by Amos Lee on Thu, 2017-02-23 09:55

Forums:

So this is come up a few times and I figure it's way better as its own thread.

If you could add one button to the stat keeping app that we use in Parity, what would it be?

Last year's most sought after button was a "flair" button. If you did anything on the field with flair (ex. layout)... you got the flair button.

Owen just suggested a "endzone turnover" button vs a "non-endzone turnover button" in another thread (lame).

I'd personally love a scoober button. And completing one nets you $1,500 instead of the usual $1,000.

I think if we implement enough of these ideas, we'll also have to start paying stat keepers.

Kindha Gorman

Thu, 2017-02-23 11:04

I'm sold. 

Chris Sullivan

Thu, 2017-02-23 12:05

Miscellaneous deduction button,

I want a button I can press that takes $1000 away from any player on or off the field for any reason of my choosing.  I think this would solve our scorekeeper volunteer problem.

Sebastien Belanger

Thu, 2017-02-23 12:24

For every turnover, I want a % allocation button. That way I could assign various percentages to the various people involved in the turnover (i.e. 80% Thrower, 10% Receiver, 8% Defender, 2% Heckler).

Kevin Hughes's picture

Kevin Hughes

Mon, 2017-02-27 12:58

I was actually considering this!

Laura Chambers ...

Thu, 2017-02-23 12:31

I volunteer for every week ever and will quit playing if there is a -1000 button. LOVE.

Laura Chambers ...

Thu, 2017-02-23 12:37

Each team should pick the other team's MVP of the week and give them an extra 10k. You could really f*ck with the stats (good or bad) this way. And give people financial bonuses for being really swell.

 

 

Tom Newman

Thu, 2017-02-23 13:41

I know this will come back to haunt me but there should be a Mute Button...primarily for Morgan and Amos.

Christopher Keates

Thu, 2017-02-23 14:21

If you were a Parity regular, I would be aghast at the very suggestion, but as you are a Parity rookie I suppose the mistake can be forgiven ONCE (and never again).

Amos Lee

Thu, 2017-02-23 15:48

I've never considered actively heckling one of my own players for the entirety of a game until now. 

Ariel Untiveros

Thu, 2017-02-23 16:23


or should we just call this the "Newman" button?

Alex Bush

Thu, 2017-02-23 20:56

If someone makes a good chirp, they get +10k. And if you are playing in the current game, you are ineligible. It'll increase the spectators.

Benjamin Piper

Fri, 2017-02-24 13:01

+1 to the chirp button. Though I think we need an objective way to judge a good chirp.

Christopher Keates

Fri, 2017-02-24 13:07

You know it when you see it.

Ariel Untiveros

Fri, 2017-02-24 13:11

When the rest of the sideline/spectators and current players on the field, stops to acknowledge the chirp, you know it's good.

Sina Dee

Thu, 2017-02-23 23:24

How about instead of rewarding parity money for chirping, we give some reward system for those who make parity great again.  They could get priority registration in the next year.  Priority is non transferable nor refundable.

We could do the same for volunteers.  We could get top 10 volunteer names into a ballot for priority registrations next year.

Christopher Keates

Fri, 2017-02-24 10:00

Like... hats?

Chris Sullivan

Fri, 2017-02-24 11:43

I think we should add a panel of judges for the B final and score both teams on artistic merit. This would score 50% of the result, with the other 50% being the points in the game

Sebastien Belanger

Fri, 2017-02-24 12:28

If we start awarding artistic merit scores then people would likely start coordinating their outfits to improve the on field sex appeal. I'm not sure I want to see Jay Thor in a sexy outfit (once was enough!).

Richard Gregory

Sun, 2017-02-26 13:16

I think the scoober for point is more reasonable. Otherwise everyone will just throw scoo... wait. Ok scoober button has merit. Though scoober for point should net you at least another $2k. 

I like the flair button which could also be used for scoober goal. You'd need to define flair worthy criteria  

A chirp button in theory sounds interesting but the button pusher would have too many names on the list  

You could consider a "D-mon" or "Demon" button that awards one player an extra $5k if their defensive mark on cutters shut down traditionally high scoring offensive players. One player per team max and is optional. I'm really just trying to find a way for Donahue to make a bit of money here.

If I had to choose one button I would go with Flair. You can use it for all of the above. For chirps, I still think the league should just buy a bottle of fireball to lure Dan T (Rex) to every game.

 

 

 

Mike Lee

Mon, 2017-02-27 18:35

Not a button but % increase when you throw to the opposite sex, other than throwndrops. #stoplookingopenpeopleoff

Hadrian Mertins-Kirkwood's picture

Hadrian Mertins...

Tue, 2017-02-28 08:17

This is actually a really cool idea. Not as "fun" as some of the other suggestions, but it would be relatively straightforward to calculate automatically and provide an objective incentive to distribute the disc more equitably.

What other stats are hidden in the data that we could use in this way? Maybe a % increase on a G/A/2A when your line starts on defense? A modifier on each D determined by the salary of the thrower (i.e. "better" players provide juicier Ds)?

Sebastien Belanger

Tue, 2017-02-28 08:52

Since we want to reward teams that throw to the opposite sex, it should actually be a % decrease, that way you would be penalized as a team instead of rewarded

Christopher Keates

Tue, 2017-02-28 09:27

This is why the stat-keeping guidelines say, "if someone touches the disk on a turnover, generally award the D, don't just call it a throw-away, even if it was thrown to no-one". Carrot, not stick.

We chirp, we heckle, we sideline shame and finger point, but that's in good fun. People attach value to numbers, and penalties don't feel good, especially ones that (may) be outside your control.

Beyond that, it's a sticky gender politics problem. Am I not throwing to my girl because I'm blind and stupid, or am I not throwing to my girl because she's covered by a baiting Megan Robb? Is my girl smothered by Alisha Zhao? Is my girl cutting to open space that is taken away by a cloggy dude, but it's stall 7 and I still need to complete a pass.... Are my girls open all day because of matchups or because my GM is Jaime Boss and she's gone 100% girl power, so the nature of this one game's matchup means I get 100% of my salary?

We can use data to find patterns that can isolate out some of these factors, but if we start using that data to punish or shame players, I don't think it solves a problem.

In addition, I think it possible that cynical GM's could very well game EITHER a bonus or a penalty to skew salary down to improve their team, given the nature of the league. That's not good.

So:

  • It creates an incentive that doesn't benefit the league.
  • It creates an incentive based on perceived behaviours and motivations.
  • It penalizes (or rewards) factors sometimes outside a player's control.

I'm pro-girl power but I don't think this is a good way to achieve it.

Benjamin Piper

Tue, 2017-02-28 09:54

If Making Parity Great Again includes regressive gender politics, then Keates has done it!

(KIDDING!)

Christopher Keates

Tue, 2017-02-28 09:58

This is actually an issue I take very seriously and think is important for the success of the league (and the sport). The problem is complex with many different underlying causes (even as the outcome is fairly straightforward), and I don't think building unbalanced systems or rules into this league or ultimate frisbee at any level fixes the underlying problem.

This joke makes me :( a little.

Benjamin Piper

Tue, 2017-02-28 12:09

For the record, I agree with you, which I why I put kidding in all caps!

The most obvious problem with adding salary for passing to women is that it's actually a disincentive to drafting strong women onto a team.

Laura Chambers ...

Tue, 2017-02-28 09:57

Given that this original conversation started with one of our most highly regarded players, perhaps he's making a statement about some teams and players that look off certain players.

Is this a gendered thing? I'm not sure. What I can say is that penalizing us for throw-drops means that I look more carefully at who/where I'm throwing and, perhaps, not giving some players the same opportunities for catches/touches that I would give a Mike Lee or Chris Keates. I'm sure that the stat line isn't making me do it... but it's capturing something that implies penalizing exactly what we're trying not to do (as you say above Keates). 

Christopher Keates

Tue, 2017-02-28 10:04

When we rolled this out, we went with an NFL model of "if you threw it and it wasn't caught, we'd capture it." I called it the Peyton Manning rule, as at the time he was having one of the best seasons ever seen, where his biggest statistical "negative" seemed to be drops which were hitting receivers in the hands.

I thought (and still think!) it's funny, but if it's frustrating to enough people or actively discouraging to people playing frisbee, the league should look into scrapping it, recording it but attaching zero value to it, or finding a way to track it where throwaways/drops are either 100% handler, 100% receiver, or 50%/50%, stats keeper's discretion.

Owen Lumley

Tue, 2017-02-28 10:34

Easiest would be for the app to have 3 separate buttons:

Throwaway (100% throwers fault), Drop (100% catchers fault), Throwdrop (50/50).

A Drop would no longer allocate any negative salary to the thrower as a throwdrop.

Alessandro Cola...

Tue, 2017-02-28 10:57

Leave it to Stephen Close to put forward a clear, efficient solution to Parity analytics.

Mike Lee

Tue, 2017-02-28 11:09

 Adding in more opportunities for discretion by the stat keeper may not be favourable. ie. if you get a touch but don't keep possession of the disc it is a drop. Sometimes it sucks but too bad. 

Same, if you laser it into someones gut and they drop it, too bad. Throw better next time. But at least everyone will be judged on the same scale. -> Parity. 

I agree negative salaries should be taken out. It further widens the gap between throwing to "90% option" and a "50% Option" which doesn't need to be widened. The decision to make a throw or not should not be based on Salary it should be based on playing smart ultimate. Also, a team is getting double penalized by a single turnover (minus for throwdrop AND receiver drop). So maybe an % increase insentive isn't required if you get rid of throwdrop penalties. Similar outcome. Only one way to find out! 

Chris Sullivan

Tue, 2017-02-28 11:22

I don't think lookoffs are explicitly a gendered thing (though it becomes gendered when a thrower zones in on the tallest or fastest player on the field to the exclusion of others).  As near as i can tell, Jamie is throwing 90% of his passes to Ashlin this session and she has the scraped knees and elbows to prove it. The reward should go to throws to any player who receives less passes. This isn't really practical for stats but it does describe a good thrower.  I think this is something most of the good throwers in Parity do very well- find the person with less touches and as an experienced player make the tough throw to get him/her the disc.

Christopher Cas...

Tue, 2017-02-28 11:33

Sully, are you suggesting we implement progressive salary gains? So as you touch the disc more often, the less salary you make for each catch/throw?

I agree with you that experienced handlers and captains tend to do this naturally (try to move the disc around for everyone's enjoyment).

Chris Sullivan

Tue, 2017-02-28 16:19

I am not suggesting the stats be used to promote disc equity, I'm just reframing Mike's comment to include all players who see less disc.

Not to say gender bias isn't at play in ultimate. I've seen plenty of stand around the new woman in a circle cuts. But one advantage of a league like Parity is that everyone knows each other well enough to have a positive and informed view of people's abilities. When Jesse picks up the disc and 11 people run into the far endzone, they are not doing it because she is a girl. They are doing it because Jesse has an extremely gender-neutral approach to her decision making wrt chucking it.

Laura Chambers ...

Tue, 2017-02-28 11:34

Yes. YES!

Morgan Howard

Tue, 2017-02-28 11:56

If this behaviour is the gold standard then we should just stop keeping score.

Benjamin Piper

Tue, 2017-02-28 12:16

This discussion about how to infuse more equity into statkeeping is really getting at the tension of keeping stats at all (or as Morgan points out, score) in a sport full of people who like being nice to each other. 

Did anyone else see this article in the Atlantic recently? https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2016/02/the-quantified-we...

In other words, it proposes that the more you quantify something that’s rewarding for its own sake, the less likely you are to enjoy it—and the less likely you are, too, to do more of it. Across a series of experiments, Jordan Etkin, a marketing professor at Duke University, found that people’s intrinsic motivation to do something—whether it be coloring, reading, or walking—declined once it was measured.

Have we reached ultimate parity, where parity implodes on itself?

Justine Price

Tue, 2017-02-28 12:41

No, I did not read this article (LOL!) But I assume, after last week's Dune frenzy, that everyone else did. As Keates always said, the stats are a gimmick. A fun gimmick, but just a gimmick. Thanks goodness, 'coz Chris may get off the couch today after calling my valiant effort to catch Keates' erroneous scoober a "drop". Seriously!?

Quantifying things too much gets out of hand, though tweaks can be progressive. It's a fun gimmick, and based on the buzz from the draft may not have had a lot of actual weight in selections.

For the record, I am not in favour of doing anything gender-based in stats (I don't see it as a problem, and I'm pretty nitpicky on this aspect), though I support all heckling that picks out all "look offs" and will continue to actively harass all offenders.

 

Benjamin Piper

Tue, 2017-02-28 12:50

Very true. Although the tricky part of any progressive change to the stats, is that they always work both ways. What is an incentive to specific players (i.e. throwing to the other gender or to players with few touches increases salary) becomes a disincentive to GMs in the draft or in trades.

Carrie-Anne Whyte

Tue, 2017-02-28 00:25

A distinction between a drop, threwdrop and throwaway...I think this is feasible. Ohhh and if possible a "i'm too lazy to get it" button lol

Chris Sullivan

Tue, 2017-02-28 11:30

The deduction for a throwdrop doesn't make a lot sense and the need for it diminishes if we take the crappy upside down bounce off a receiver's flailing hands throw and correctly label it as a throwaway rather than a drop. (I can say stuff like that now because I volunteered to do stats and have been called out for it on the forum)

Christopher Keates

Tue, 2017-02-28 11:37

scoober to Justine, it bounced of the top of her hands (nice tip from Kenzie), and your recording it as a drop got you banished to the couch.

Heather McCabe

Tue, 2017-02-28 12:39

It also goes both ways for if someone is pancaking the frisbee and drops or fumbles a simple pass. It's not like all the drops are on crazy hard to catch throws. Some are really just drops. 

Christopher Keates

Tue, 2017-02-28 12:59

Because I'm not sure if you remember this in the late game (perhaps you were too tired?) but last night Al threw a laser to Donahue that was a pancake of a catch, but because it was moving so fast it was bending space and time, Donahue's timing was a bit off, and he dropped it.

Richard Gregory

Tue, 2017-02-28 21:29

I still can't decide what was better: the pass that bent the space time continuum or the subsequent chirp. Perhaps a new thread can be started with replies being statistically analyzed. 

Mike Lee

Tue, 2017-02-28 13:21

There will always be the debate about whether a throw was "catchable" or if it was going "too fast" to be reasonable catchable.

"It's more fair to judge people equally unfair then to judge them fairly but different." - Confucius 

^not a real quote. 

 

 

Carrie-Anne Whyte

Tue, 2017-02-28 13:52

What you are saying seems reasonable but then sometimes you have to unfairly judge something as a throw away because no one touched the disc (going 100% to the handler) but it was a very catchable...I kept stats last night and there were a few times where we couldn't give a drop because the person didn't touch it...but really they should have been able to. So it always is to the disadvantage of the handler...

Christopher Keates

Tue, 2017-02-28 14:08

And the argument can always be made, know your receiver.

But more seriously, as long as stats are recorded consistently, and everyone is "punished" for the same "mistakes" in the same way, it evens out. This isn't always clear but, a throw away is just "did you throw it away?" and not "is it your fault?" It's part of the gimmick of parity, and I really hope that people do not take the numbers too seriously.

Carrie-Anne Whyte

Tue, 2017-02-28 14:22

of course I take them seriously...it's the only way I can afford my groceries...all that parity money... ;)

Brent Burton

Tue, 2017-02-28 16:18

I always knew Buckshot wasn't a receiver. Why I am throwing to someone who lets the disc go out the back of the endzone. I feel okay in my own skin about this.

Pages