Sunday, November 13, 2011
Wednesday, November 9, 2011
Penn State and Head Coach Joe Paterno
UPDATE: Penn State's board of trustees fired head coach Joe Paterno later that evening on 11/9/2011.
Penn State's head coach Joe Paterno will retire at the end of this season as the head football coach with the most Division I wins. While there is no way that I can look at Penn State under Paterno's entire career, let's take a look since 2008.
In 2008 the Penn State Nittany Lions went 11-2 and finished as the #5 most productive team in the NCAA Football Bowl Subdivision. Penn State's offense was #13 in terms of production and their defense was #5 in terms of production. Penn State played against a strength of schedule equal to 63.92, which is slightly easier than an average schedule.
The following 2009 season saw an equally impressive performance with the Nittany Lions finishing 11-2. In terms of production, they were the #6 most productive team in the NCAA FBS. On offense they ranked #20 overall and on defense they ranked #8. Their strength of schedule was a 68.15 for the season.
Last season Penn State faltered finishing 7-6 (including an Outback Bowl loss to Florida - as predicted by the model). Under the production model PSU's final overall ranking was #69, with the 65th best offense and 58th best defense and a strength of schedule equal to 52.15.
This 2011 season the Nittany Lions are 8-1 (only loss to Alabama). As of last weekend, Penn State ranks #40 in the nation overall, with the 4th best defense in the football bowl subdivision, but with the 87th ranked offense and a strength of schedule equal to 60.6, which is almost exactly average in FBS.
Skip Sauer's perpective on the impact a head coach has on a university.
Penn State's head coach Joe Paterno will retire at the end of this season as the head football coach with the most Division I wins. While there is no way that I can look at Penn State under Paterno's entire career, let's take a look since 2008.
In 2008 the Penn State Nittany Lions went 11-2 and finished as the #5 most productive team in the NCAA Football Bowl Subdivision. Penn State's offense was #13 in terms of production and their defense was #5 in terms of production. Penn State played against a strength of schedule equal to 63.92, which is slightly easier than an average schedule.
The following 2009 season saw an equally impressive performance with the Nittany Lions finishing 11-2. In terms of production, they were the #6 most productive team in the NCAA FBS. On offense they ranked #20 overall and on defense they ranked #8. Their strength of schedule was a 68.15 for the season.
Last season Penn State faltered finishing 7-6 (including an Outback Bowl loss to Florida - as predicted by the model). Under the production model PSU's final overall ranking was #69, with the 65th best offense and 58th best defense and a strength of schedule equal to 52.15.
This 2011 season the Nittany Lions are 8-1 (only loss to Alabama). As of last weekend, Penn State ranks #40 in the nation overall, with the 4th best defense in the football bowl subdivision, but with the 87th ranked offense and a strength of schedule equal to 60.6, which is almost exactly average in FBS.
Skip Sauer's perpective on the impact a head coach has on a university.
Tuesday, November 8, 2011
Mississippi Rebels in 2011
Mississippi will not retain the head coaching services of Houston Nutt after this season. I looked at Mississippi under head coach Nutt earlier this season. So let's take a look at how Mississippi has done this season in more detail. First, here is Mississippi's regular season schedule and results as of last weekend.
As you can see, Mississippi is currently (2-7) and (0-6 in the SEC) with wins over Southern Illinois (non-FBS school) and Fresno State (currently ranked #96 in terms of overall productivity), and losses to all six SEC schools they have played. Mississippi is currently ranked at #106 overall - which is the worst SEC ranking, but only one behind Kentucky.
What seems to be the final straw is the loss to Kentucky, a school now ranked as the #105 most production team in the nation. Given Ole Miss still faces LSU and Mississippi State (both ranked in the top 25 of the NCAA Production model), we can see that Mississippi does not expect a significant departure to their current losing trend. Oh, by the way, Louisiana Tech is currently ranked #58, so that game will not be all that easy as well.
| Date | Opponent | PF | PA | Venue | SOS | Result | ||||||
| 9/3/2011 | BYU | 13 | 14 | Home | 72 | Loss | ||||||
| 9/10/2011 | Southern Ill. | 42 | 24 | Home | 121 | Win | ||||||
| 9/17/2011 | Vanderbilt | 7 | 30 | Away | 51 | Loss | ||||||
| 9/24/2011 | Georgia | 13 | 27 | Home | 24 | Loss | ||||||
| 10/1/2011 | Fresno St. | 38 | 28 | Away | 96 | Win | ||||||
| 10/15/2011 | Alabama | 7 | 52 | Home | 4 | Loss | ||||||
| 10/22/2011 | Arkansas | 24 | 29 | Home | 36 | Loss | ||||||
| 10/29/2011 | Auburn | 23 | 41 | Away | 78 | Loss | ||||||
| 11/5/2011 | Kentucky | 13 | 30 | Away | 105 | Loss | ||||||
| 11/12/2011 | Louisiana Tech | Home | ||||||||||
| 11/19/2011 | LSU | Home | ||||||||||
| 11/26/2011 | Mississippi St. | Away |
As you can see, Mississippi is currently (2-7) and (0-6 in the SEC) with wins over Southern Illinois (non-FBS school) and Fresno State (currently ranked #96 in terms of overall productivity), and losses to all six SEC schools they have played. Mississippi is currently ranked at #106 overall - which is the worst SEC ranking, but only one behind Kentucky.
What seems to be the final straw is the loss to Kentucky, a school now ranked as the #105 most production team in the nation. Given Ole Miss still faces LSU and Mississippi State (both ranked in the top 25 of the NCAA Production model), we can see that Mississippi does not expect a significant departure to their current losing trend. Oh, by the way, Louisiana Tech is currently ranked #58, so that game will not be all that easy as well.
Monday, November 7, 2011
NCAA FBS Top 25 Production Week 10
Houston remains atop the NCAA FBS production rankings for the second straight week.
From last week both Alabama and LSU dropped, but Alabama still is more productive than LSU - so why would that be? Alabama and LSU both dropped because it was a very evenly matched performance. That means that neither Alabama or LSU significantly out-performed (on the field) each other, as Alabama and LSU have done in the previous games they played. Hence they dropped relative to the performance of Houston, Oregon and Wisconsin. Since LSU did not significantly out produce Alabama, Alabama is ranked higher than LSU.
Here are the current rankings along with their current BCS ranking and the previous rankings over the last few weeks after the top 25.
Week 9 NCAA FBS Top 25 Production Ranking
Week 8 NCAA FBS Top 25 Production Ranking
Week 7 NCAA FBS Top 25 Production Ranking
Week 6 NCAA FBS Top 25 Production Ranking
Week 5 NCAA FBS Top 25 Production Ranking
Week 4 NCAA FBS Top 25 Production Ranking
Week 3 NCAA FBS Top 25 Production Ranking
From last week both Alabama and LSU dropped, but Alabama still is more productive than LSU - so why would that be? Alabama and LSU both dropped because it was a very evenly matched performance. That means that neither Alabama or LSU significantly out-performed (on the field) each other, as Alabama and LSU have done in the previous games they played. Hence they dropped relative to the performance of Houston, Oregon and Wisconsin. Since LSU did not significantly out produce Alabama, Alabama is ranked higher than LSU.
Here are the current rankings along with their current BCS ranking and the previous rankings over the last few weeks after the top 25.
| 2011 Weights | BCS | ||
| Rank | School | ||
| 1 | Houston | (11) | |
| 2 | Oregon | (7) | |
| 3 | Wisconsin | (18) | |
| 4 | Alabama | (3) | |
| 5 | Stanford | (4) | |
| 6 | LSU | (1) | |
| 7 | Oklahoma State | (2) | |
| 8 | Oklahoma | (6) | |
| 9 | Boise State | (5) | |
| 10 | West Virginia | (-) | |
| 11 | Florida State | (-) | |
| 12 | Cincinnati | (23) | |
| 13 | Georgia Tech | (21) | |
| 14 | TCU | (-) | |
| 15 | Arizona State | (-) | |
| 16 | North Carolina | (-) | |
| 17 | Mississippi State | (-) | |
| 18 | South Carolina | (13) | |
| 19 | Virginia Tech | (10) | |
| 20 | Michigan | (24) | |
| 21 | Utah State | (-) | |
| 22 | Michigan State | (17) | |
| 23 | Southern Mississippi | (22) | |
| 24 | Georgia | (15) | |
| 25 | Illinois | (-) | |
Week 9 NCAA FBS Top 25 Production Ranking
Week 8 NCAA FBS Top 25 Production Ranking
Week 7 NCAA FBS Top 25 Production Ranking
Week 6 NCAA FBS Top 25 Production Ranking
Week 5 NCAA FBS Top 25 Production Ranking
Week 4 NCAA FBS Top 25 Production Ranking
Week 3 NCAA FBS Top 25 Production Ranking
Friday, November 4, 2011
Alabama vs. LSU - 2011
This weekend the Alabama Crimson Tide (ranked #2 in the BCS standings) face the Louisiana State Tigers (ranked #1 in the BCS standings). So let's take a look through the lens of the NCAA FBS production model as to how these two teams have fared up to this point in the season. Here is the top 25 most productive teams as of last weekend.
First, let's take a look at the Crimson Tide. Alabama is currently 8-0, but the Crimson Tide has played a rather weak schedule from the perspective of the NCAA FBS model, with a strength of schedule of 76.3, which is higher than an average strength of schedule equal to 60.5. In terms of the NCAA FBS production model, Alabama is currently the #3 team in the nation in overall production, with the #25th most productive offense and the #1 ranked defense. Here is Alabama's 2011 regular season schedule and their opponents strength of schedule as of this past weekend.
LSU is currently 8-0 against a strength of schedule of 62.5, which is much closer to an average strength of schedule. In terms of overall productivity, LSU is the #5 ranked team overall, with the #22 ranked offense and the #2 ranked defense. Here is LSU's regular season schedule as well.
As NCAA FBS fans already know, this game is a toss up - pitting two superior defenses against two excellent offenses. I wish the model could give some insight as to who was going to win, but it does not.
First, let's take a look at the Crimson Tide. Alabama is currently 8-0, but the Crimson Tide has played a rather weak schedule from the perspective of the NCAA FBS model, with a strength of schedule of 76.3, which is higher than an average strength of schedule equal to 60.5. In terms of the NCAA FBS production model, Alabama is currently the #3 team in the nation in overall production, with the #25th most productive offense and the #1 ranked defense. Here is Alabama's 2011 regular season schedule and their opponents strength of schedule as of this past weekend.
| Date | Opponent | PF | PA | SOS | Venue | ||||
| 9/3/2011 | Kent St. | 48 | 7 | 108 | Home | ||||
| 9/10/2011 | Penn St. | 27 | 11 | 27 | Away | ||||
| 9/17/2011 | North Texas | 41 | 0 | 110 | Home | ||||
| 9/24/2011 | Arkansas | 38 | 14 | 40 | Home | ||||
| 10/1/2011 | Florida | 38 | 10 | 71 | Away | ||||
| 10/8/2011 | Vanderbilt | 34 | 0 | 53 | Home | ||||
| 10/15/2011 | Ole Miss | 52 | 7 | 113 | Away | ||||
| 10/22/2011 | Tennessee | 37 | 6 | 88 | Home | ||||
| 11/5/2011 | LSU | Home | |||||||
| 11/12/2011 | Mississippi St. | Away | |||||||
| 11/19/2011 | Ga. Southern | Home | |||||||
| 11/26/2011 | Auburn | Away |
LSU is currently 8-0 against a strength of schedule of 62.5, which is much closer to an average strength of schedule. In terms of overall productivity, LSU is the #5 ranked team overall, with the #22 ranked offense and the #2 ranked defense. Here is LSU's regular season schedule as well.
| Date | Opponent | PF | PA | SOS | Venue | ||||
| 9/3/2011 | Oregon | 40 | 27 | 2 | Neutral Site | ||||
| 9/10/2011 | Northwestern St. | 49 | 3 | 121 | Home | ||||
| 9/15/2011 | Mississippi St. | 19 | 6 | 25 | Away | ||||
| 9/24/2011 | West Virginia | 47 | 21 | 10 | Away | ||||
| 10/1/2011 | Kentucky | 35 | 7 | 111 | Home | ||||
| 10/8/2011 | Florida | 41 | 11 | 71 | Home | ||||
| 10/15/2011 | Tennessee | 38 | 7 | 88 | Away | ||||
| 10/22/2011 | Auburn | 45 | 10 | 72 | Home | ||||
| 11/5/2011 | Alabama | Away | |||||||
| 11/12/2011 | Western Ky. | Home | |||||||
| 11/19/2011 | Ole Miss | Away | |||||||
| 11/25/2011 | Arkansas | Home |
As NCAA FBS fans already know, this game is a toss up - pitting two superior defenses against two excellent offenses. I wish the model could give some insight as to who was going to win, but it does not.
Thursday, November 3, 2011
Boise State's Head Coach Petersen Salary Increase
ESPN reports that Boise State's head football coach Chris Petersen has received a salary increase. Details are in the link. Boise State has had a great run in terms of productivity over the last few years, and this is a great reason (or excuse) to document how productive Boise State has been over the last few years.
The 2008 Boise State Broncos were 12-0 during the regular season but were unsuccessful against TCU in the Poinsettia bowl - losing by one point. Using the NCAA FBS production model the 2008 Boise State Broncos were the 6th best team in terms of overall production with the 15th best offense and the 8th best defense.
In 2009 the Broncos were 13-0 during the regular season and avenged their 2008 Poinsettia Bowl loss by defeating TCU 17-10 in the Fiesta Bowl. Boise State was the 2nd most productive team overall, with the 13th ranked offense and the 2nd ranked defense. All of this against a strength of schedule of 71.21, which is easier than an average schedule.
In 2010 Boise State finished the regular season 11-1 (only loss was an overtime loss to Nevada) and defeated Utah in the Maaco Las Vegas Bowl. The Broncos were the #1 most productive team in college football on both sides of the ball and thus were the #1 team in terms of production in the NCAA Football Bowl Subdivision. All of this was done against a strength of schedule of 69.69, which is an easier schedule than average.
This season, Boise State has taken a step backwards, which is natural given their superior performance last season. Boise State is currently 7-0, and ranked 5th in the BCS standings. Boise State is ranked 9th overall in the NCAA FBS model and 9th in offense and 23rd in defense against a strength of schedule of 55.1 (currently).
Given the large salaries given to NCAA FBS head coaches - in terms of just production - Peterson is well worth the money. Of course, those following who remember their Prin. of Microeconomics will note that production (or more specifically marginal productivity) is not the only feature that impacts an employees salary - the other is marginal revenue.
The 2008 Boise State Broncos were 12-0 during the regular season but were unsuccessful against TCU in the Poinsettia bowl - losing by one point. Using the NCAA FBS production model the 2008 Boise State Broncos were the 6th best team in terms of overall production with the 15th best offense and the 8th best defense.
In 2009 the Broncos were 13-0 during the regular season and avenged their 2008 Poinsettia Bowl loss by defeating TCU 17-10 in the Fiesta Bowl. Boise State was the 2nd most productive team overall, with the 13th ranked offense and the 2nd ranked defense. All of this against a strength of schedule of 71.21, which is easier than an average schedule.
In 2010 Boise State finished the regular season 11-1 (only loss was an overtime loss to Nevada) and defeated Utah in the Maaco Las Vegas Bowl. The Broncos were the #1 most productive team in college football on both sides of the ball and thus were the #1 team in terms of production in the NCAA Football Bowl Subdivision. All of this was done against a strength of schedule of 69.69, which is an easier schedule than average.
This season, Boise State has taken a step backwards, which is natural given their superior performance last season. Boise State is currently 7-0, and ranked 5th in the BCS standings. Boise State is ranked 9th overall in the NCAA FBS model and 9th in offense and 23rd in defense against a strength of schedule of 55.1 (currently).
Given the large salaries given to NCAA FBS head coaches - in terms of just production - Peterson is well worth the money. Of course, those following who remember their Prin. of Microeconomics will note that production (or more specifically marginal productivity) is not the only feature that impacts an employees salary - the other is marginal revenue.
Tuesday, November 1, 2011
Pay and Performance in MLB
I have written previously about pay and performance in a variety of sports leagues included Major League Baseball. We have written about this in our book - The Wages of Wins - and have stated repeated that payroll (or over time relative payroll) statistically has very little relationship with regular season performance using a statistic called r-squared. I have also explained why r-squared is a superior statistical measure.
So, let's take a look how well this holds for just the 2011 MLB regular season. Using data from the USAToday's MLB salary database and the 2011 MLB regular season standing, I ran a linear regression with the dependent variable 2011 regular season winning percent and the independent variable 2011 team payroll. I find that team payroll is statistically significant at the 95% confidence level. While that is supportive of the hypothesis that teams with higher payroll will have higher performance, there are two other problems. Let's take a deeper look.
First, r-squared (which measures the relationship between the variation in the dependent and independent variables) is 0.168. This means that variation in team payroll "explains" about 16.8% of the variation in regular season performance for the 2011 MLB season. Our problem is that those that hold to the payroll-performance hypothesis, payroll should have a much greater effect on team performance than about 17%. Given this low relationship, I conclude that while payroll and performance are related, it is not that strong.
The other issue is the effect that payroll has on regular season performance. The payroll coefficient from the regression of wins and team payroll is 0.000000114375468825704, which is a very small number. In other words to generate one more win, a MLB team would need to increase their payroll by $8.743 million (and no other team change their payroll or increase their payroll by $8.743 million more than the average increase in payroll). Given that the average payroll last season was $92.872 million an average team (81 wins) results in spending $1.147 million per win. Thus teams would have to spend nearly 8 times the average cost for each win.
Yet, what about the post season? Of the eight teams that made the playoffs this post-season, New York and Philadelphia were in the top payroll quartile, Detroit, St. Louis and Texas were in the second quartile, Milwaukee was in the third quartile and Arizona and Tampa Bay were in the bottom payroll quartile. Here's the percentage of wins for the League Division Series (LDS), League Championship Series (LCS) and the World Series (WS).
While not definitive, teams in the top half of the regular season have won a greater percentage of post-season games, yet the hypothesis would have a higher winning percentage than observed. Now I admit, that one season is not a large enough sample to make a definitive conclusion, and that different seasons will have different results, it does ask for more research on the payroll and performance hypothesis in MLB. This I will return to in the future.
So, let's take a look how well this holds for just the 2011 MLB regular season. Using data from the USAToday's MLB salary database and the 2011 MLB regular season standing, I ran a linear regression with the dependent variable 2011 regular season winning percent and the independent variable 2011 team payroll. I find that team payroll is statistically significant at the 95% confidence level. While that is supportive of the hypothesis that teams with higher payroll will have higher performance, there are two other problems. Let's take a deeper look.
First, r-squared (which measures the relationship between the variation in the dependent and independent variables) is 0.168. This means that variation in team payroll "explains" about 16.8% of the variation in regular season performance for the 2011 MLB season. Our problem is that those that hold to the payroll-performance hypothesis, payroll should have a much greater effect on team performance than about 17%. Given this low relationship, I conclude that while payroll and performance are related, it is not that strong.
The other issue is the effect that payroll has on regular season performance. The payroll coefficient from the regression of wins and team payroll is 0.000000114375468825704, which is a very small number. In other words to generate one more win, a MLB team would need to increase their payroll by $8.743 million (and no other team change their payroll or increase their payroll by $8.743 million more than the average increase in payroll). Given that the average payroll last season was $92.872 million an average team (81 wins) results in spending $1.147 million per win. Thus teams would have to spend nearly 8 times the average cost for each win.
Yet, what about the post season? Of the eight teams that made the playoffs this post-season, New York and Philadelphia were in the top payroll quartile, Detroit, St. Louis and Texas were in the second quartile, Milwaukee was in the third quartile and Arizona and Tampa Bay were in the bottom payroll quartile. Here's the percentage of wins for the League Division Series (LDS), League Championship Series (LCS) and the World Series (WS).
| Quartile | LDS | LCS | WS |
| 1 | 21.05% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
| 2 | 47.37% | 83.33% | 100.00% |
| 3 | 15.79% | 16.67% | 0.00% |
| 4 | 15.79% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
While not definitive, teams in the top half of the regular season have won a greater percentage of post-season games, yet the hypothesis would have a higher winning percentage than observed. Now I admit, that one season is not a large enough sample to make a definitive conclusion, and that different seasons will have different results, it does ask for more research on the payroll and performance hypothesis in MLB. This I will return to in the future.
Labels:
MLB,
Payroll Analysis
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)