16/17 GW 26 Intermediate Results – Saturday

Welcome to intermediate results for GW 26. The stats include confirmed bonus points as below.

CHE 3 – 1 SWA Fabregas CHE (3) Pedro CHE (2) Llorente SWA (1)
CRY 1 – 0 MID van Aanholt CRY (3) Hennessey CRY (2) Tomkins CRY (1)
EVE 2 – 0 SUN Coleman EVE (3) Gueye EVE (2) Funes Mori EVE (1)
HUL 1 – 1 BUR Huddlestone HUL (3) Maguire HUL (2)
Brady BUR (2)
WBA 2 – 1 BOU Fraser BOU (3) Cook BOU (2)
Mings BOU (2)
McAuley WBA (2)
WAT 1 – 1 WHU Deeney WAT (3) Ayew WHU (2) Reid WHU (1)

SUMMARY

Top 10K Overall
Teams in Sample 10,000 20,000
AVERAGE RESULTS
Points Scored 38.0 23.6
Points Deducted 1.2 0.9
Net Points Scored 36.8 22.8
PLAYERS PLAYED
Aggregate Measure* 8.0 5.6
– Started Players (out of 11)** 7.2 5.1
– Captains*** 80.1% 44.8%

* Icludes all the started players who played positive minutes; captains are counted twice, triple captains are counted thrice; players who played twice are counted twice
** Includes all the started players out of 11 (or 15 if Bench Boost is on) who played positive minutes; players who played twice are counted once
*** Includes captains who played positive minutes (both normal and triple captains); captains who played twice are counted once

DISTRIBUTION OF AVERAGE POINTS

Chart with Distribution of Gameweek Points

PROJECTED GAMEWEEK RANKS

CLICK HERE

AVERAGE SCORE BY CHIP PLAYED

Top 10K Overall
Score Gain/Loss on Normal Teams Score Gain/Loss on Normal Teams
Normal Teams 37.7 23.1
Triple Captain 46.0 +8.3 42.0 +18.8
Bench Boost 48.5 +10.8 39.9 +16.8
All Out Attack 34.5 -3.2 28.7 +5.6
Wildcard 42.1 +4.4 37.1 +14.0
All Teams 38.0 +0.3 23.6 +0.5

AVERAGE CONTRIBUTION BY PLAYER

Top 10K Overall
# Player Team GW Points Per Average Team # Player Team GW Points Per Average Team
1 Lukaku EVE 6 7.5 1 Costa CHE 6 3.3
2 McAuley WBA 10 4.6 2 Lukaku EVE 6 3.1
3 Costa CHE 6 4.2 3 McAuley WBA 10 2.8
4 Coleman EVE 12 4.1 4 Hazard CHE 5 1.9
5 Hazard CHE 5 2.6 5 Coleman EVE 12 1.8
6 Baines EVE 6 1.5 6 Pedro CHE 12 0.9
7 Pedro CHE 12 1.3 7 Baines EVE 6 0.7
8 Sigurdsson SWA 5 1.2 8 Sigurdsson SWA 5 0.6
9 van Aanholt CRY 15 0.9 9 Defoe SUN 2 0.6
10 Alonso CHE 2 0.8 10 van Aanholt CRY 15 0.5
Other Players 9.1 Other Players 7.6
TOTAL 38.0 TOTAL 23.6

GW 26 HALL OF FAME

Top 10K Random Sample
Maximum Points 75 points 78 points
Best Back Line 51 points 57 points
Best Midfield 37 points 41 points
Best Forwards 31 points 33 points
Maximum Bonus Points 13 points 14 points
Best Bench 30 points 41 points

GW 26 HALL OF SHAME

Top 10K Random Sample
Minimum Points 4 points -1 points
Worst Back Line 0 points 0 points
Worst Midfield 0 points 0 points
Worst Forwards -1 points -2 points
Cards Magnet -8 points -9 points
Advertisements

2 comments on “16/17 GW 26 Intermediate Results – Saturday

  1. Hey Smartypants.
    Have you ever considered graphing the distribution of average points differently? It might be more interesting with a log scale on the x-axis, thereby showing more detail at the lower ranks.
    I realize that might screw up your average calculations, since I presume that you sample an equal number of teams in each 5% interval.
    But at the same time, people don’t necessarily look at the overall average numbers, since we know that they are watered down with so many dead teams. The top 10k averages are much more representative for the active player (Even when we are not in the top 10k).
    Just a thought. Maybe something to toy with for next season.

    • I have. I think I had this planned for last summer, but never got my hands on it.

      Right now that chart just slices the 20K overall random sample based on rank into 20 groups of usually 800-1200 teams (since it’s random those groups are not equal) and calculates the average for each group – to give an idea of how average points are allocated across the overall table. Nothing more, nothing less. More details for higher ranked teams would be interesting – I agree here, unfortunately, it’s not that easy to implement with my current setup, some work is required. Not sure about log-scales – but I’ll think how I can improve that in the future.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s