TMVL NMR Design - Revision history

SteveT: /* Lineup Orders */

2024-09-13T19:26:45Z

Lineup Orders

SteveT: /* CP Orders */

2024-09-13T19:09:08Z

CP Orders

RogerM: Musings!

2024-09-12T19:58:37Z

Musings!

AllanS at 22:20, 10 September 2024

2024-09-10T22:20:25Z

AllanS at 22:16, 10 September 2024

2024-09-10T22:16:43Z

AllanS: Created page with "This section will be used for developing a design when we need an automated NMR program to create lineup orders and recruiting orders. === Lineup Orders === ''Add ideas below..."

2024-09-10T21:59:48Z

Created page with "This section will be used for developing a design when we need an automated NMR program to create lineup orders and recruiting orders. === Lineup Orders === ''Add ideas below..."

New page

This section will be used for developing a design when we need an automated NMR program to create lineup orders and recruiting orders.

=== Lineup Orders ===
''Add ideas below''

*
*

=== Recruiting Orders ===
''Add ideas below''

*
*

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:26, 13 September 2024
Line 14:		Line 14:

	I like your ideas Al. It feels like NMR teams should be ‘development’ sides so that a new coach can walk into a reasonable setup. For me that would mean prioritising XP over results when choosing line-ups. I’d agree with only allowing players to appear in 2 matches per session to keep FIT neutral but perhaps focus more T7 players on winnable games (home before neutral before away games) to maximise CPs and/or rank competitions in order of importance.		I like your ideas Al. It feels like NMR teams should be ‘development’ sides so that a new coach can walk into a reasonable setup. For me that would mean prioritising XP over results when choosing line-ups. I’d agree with only allowing players to appear in 2 matches per session to keep FIT neutral but perhaps focus more T7 players on winnable games (home before neutral before away games) to maximise CPs and/or rank competitions in order of importance.
		+
		+	I don't know how easy it would be to code but some players only need to play one game per session to get the XP they need e.g 3* L and MB but a 5* Jr OH like Brehme at Columbia needs two games per session and some. So maybe some kind of system to prioritise who always gets two games. With D or worse potential they don't need to play (4th MB and OH in a 3 game session).
		+
		+	As for the lineup, say in a 3 game session decide which L gets 2 games (if both need just one then the stronger gets the second) and randomly assign to each game.

	*		*

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:09, 13 September 2024
Line 24:		Line 24:

	Above idea makes sense to me. Perhaps, as a development side, also prioritise coaching based first on age - with youngest first - and then with impact according to the equations I recall seeing somewhere. I think that would mean Setters SET first, then MB BLOCK, you’ll know the rest!		Above idea makes sense to me. Perhaps, as a development side, also prioritise coaching based first on age - with youngest first - and then with impact according to the equations I recall seeing somewhere. I think that would mean Setters SET first, then MB BLOCK, you’ll know the rest!
		+
		+	I would consider prioritising Potential grades, so a potential A Sophomore rather than a potential C freshman.

	=== Recruiting Orders ===		=== Recruiting Orders ===

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:20, 10 September 2024
Line 16:		Line 16:
	*		*

		+	=== CP Orders ===
		+	This would be a focus on Skills and not any usage of CP for FIT
		+
		+	''Add ideas below''

	=== Recruiting Orders ===		=== Recruiting Orders ===

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:16, 10 September 2024
Line 2:		Line 2:

	=== Lineup Orders ===		=== Lineup Orders ===
		+	We have an existing NMR program now. Essentially this will take in the number of players at a position and randomly assign one to the starting lineup. This runs once for each match. It does not try to take a full session view and say "hey, if its a 3-match session, I really should only allow a player to play 2 matches". So it can result into both some FIT +1 and some FIT -1 scenarios that could get uglier as the season progresses on the negative FIT side.
		+
		+	So we really need a more thoughtful program. Such as preventing a player from EVER playing more than 2 matches a session. How good or bad we make the NMR lineups is open to discussion but we could use something like "overall" as a guide to determine how much a player plays in a 2, 3, or 4 match session.
		+
		+	I'd prefer not to just make NMR lineups terrible (i.e. play the WORST of 2 setters 2/3 matches and the BEST in 1/3 matches a session). But maybe some randomness to that.
		+
		+	Also perhaps an emphasis on more playing time/XPs for Freshman. So really I don't have a clear direction, just some background.
		+
		+
	''Add ideas below''		''Add ideas below''

@@ Line 12: / Line 12: @@
 ''Add ideas below''
+*
@@ Line 20: / Line 22: @@
 ''Add ideas below''
 === Recruiting Orders ===
 ''Add ideas below''
+*
+*