Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: SABR/Sports Econ update

Expand Messages
  • Kevin Pelton
    ... This is all important stuff, naturally, but I do believe you ve saved the best for last here, DeanO. For me, it was impossible to read _Moneyball_ without
    Message 1 of 52 , Jul 30, 2003
    • 0 Attachment
      --- In APBR_analysis@yahoogroups.com, "Dean Oliver" <deano@r...>
      wrote:
      > At the end of the conferences, I also got a call from a friend
      > with the Celtics who just read Moneyball and said that a lot of
      > NBA people were reading it. They're looking for the Bill James
      > like wisdom that inspired that book. He said he mentioned my book
      > to a few other teams. So, yeah, maybe in a few years we will have
      > teams looking at what we're doing now.

      This is all important stuff, naturally, but I do believe you've
      saved the best for last here, DeanO. For me, it was impossible to
      read _Moneyball_ without thinking of its NBA implications (only in
      part since I had lunch with DeanO the next day). Management types
      cannot ignore _Moneyball_, and I doubted they would miss the
      connection. Still, it's nice to know for certain that this is the
      case.

      It seems like for all that baseball's sabermetric community has done
      to promote itself, _Moneyball_ has really had an incomparable effect
      in terms of bringing those ideas to everyone who follows baseball.
      Even if what's being said is still being rejected by many fans and
      analysts like Joe Morgan, the fact that it's even being discussed so
      widely is a terrific sign for the future of sabermetrics.

      Given that, what's surprised me is that the media hasn't really
      picked up on any possible connection to the NBA (and, most
      specifically, the Draft). The only place I saw that line drawn was
      by Bill Simmons on ESPN.com, using it to support his argument for
      Luke Walton. (Odd in that Walton's college stats were pretty
      mediocre last year, though they were far better in his junior year.)

      I did a quick search on Google for NBA and Moneyball. I came up with
      a couple of my own columns intertwining the two and a lot of
      references to Pro Basketball Prospectus, but only two more articles -
      one in the _Chicago Tribune_ referring to Dwyane Wade's post-season
      success and a question in a SportingNews.com mailbag that really got
      to the heart of the matter and took NBA scouts to task a bit for
      doing everything the same and being too quick to take teenagers.

      Not sure what all of that means . . . just wanted to get it off my
      chest.
    • igor eduardo küpfer
      ... From: Gary Collard To: APBR_analysis@yahoogroups.com Sent: Thursday, August 07, 2003 12:13 PM Subject: Re: [APBR_analysis] SABR/Sports Econ update ... That
      Message 52 of 52 , Aug 8, 2003
      • 0 Attachment
         
        ----- Original Message -----
        Sent: Thursday, August 07, 2003 12:13 PM
        Subject: Re: [APBR_analysis] SABR/Sports Econ update

        Jim Armstrong wrote:
        >
        > On Mon, Aug 04, 2003 at 04:00:38PM -0500, Gary Collard wrote:
        > > I'm not sure why that was so controversial.  The concept of market size in
        > > the NFL is pretty much meaningless, since most league revenue is shared
        > > equally.  The reason that a Yankees in baseball have such an advantage is
        > > that they have local TV revenues that are an order of magnitude or more
        > > greater than most (all?) of the other teams and is significant compared to
        > > national revenue, thus they can afford to have a payroll that is 60%
        > > greater than any other team even before they pay the luxury tax as they do
        > > in 2003.  In the NFL, there is no local TV at all, and (over a period of
        > > years, letting spikes in bonus payments wash out) little payroll deviation,
        >
        > Actually, if you look at the distribution of team player payrolls, the NFL
        > and the NBA are quite comparable (see standard deviation in data below).

        That is why I specifically said "over a period of years, letting spikes in
        bonus payments wash out" in the case of the NFL.  The one year payroll
        numbers you listed are meaningless to my point, do you have the data to run
        them for the last 5 years or more?  That will tell you who has the "harder"
        cap.

        --
        Gary Collard
        Maybe the coefficient of variation (SD / Mean * 100) is a more apt measure for comparing the variation of payrolls for different sports across seasons.
         
        Year     NHL     NFL     NBA     MLB
        1994    28.3     8.7    15.2    26.6
        1995    26.6    12.7    24.1    27.7
        1996    43.3    11.9    21.9    31.4
        1997    #N/A    15.3    28.9    33.0
        1998    #N/A    12.1    27.0    37.4
        1999    33.4    12.0    23.0    43.1
        2000    37.4    13.8    23.6    38.3
        2001    31.1    13.5    24.6    38.3
        2002    33.0    18.1    20.6    36.6
        2003    35.9    #N/A    24.0    38.9
         
        On this measure, NBA teams show less variation in payroll than baseball and hockey teams, but the NFL teams are more level than any of them.

        Data from Rodney Fort's excellent resource: http://users.pullman.com/rodfort/SportsBusiness/BizFrame.htm
         
        ed
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.