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

Re: SABR/Sports Econ update

Expand Messages
  • Dean Oliver
    ... I talk about the draft part with the Sonics every so often. They obviously took more seasoned ballplayers this year, but would have gone for LaBron or
    Message 1 of 52 , Jul 30, 2003
    • 0 Attachment
      --- In APBR_analysis@yahoogroups.com, "Kevin Pelton" <kpelton08@h...>
      wrote:
      > --- 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.
      > 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.

      I talk about the draft part with the Sonics every so often. They
      obviously took more seasoned ballplayers this year, but would have
      gone for LaBron or Bosh if they could have. Studying the draft is
      brutal work. I've done a bit of work and did some evaluation for the
      Sonics. Some of the traditional scouting lore is probably true --
      size and athleticism matter -- but it's difficult to account for.
      I've mentioned some of my efforts on size, but athleticism is
      something I am working on other methods to evaluate.

      Quality of competition has already rung true, though. James' games in
      Orlando and Boston weren't as good as some had hoped. His athleticism
      didn't shine like it did in HS, but it was clearly still good. His
      fundamentals are what scouts ended up talking about there, which was a
      big change from before. Quantify that!

      DeanO
    • 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.