Friday, July 8, 2011

Day and Night : Nationals



No, this post is NOT about how the Washintion Nationals blow 8 run leads but rather a question I was thinking over the past few weeks. After watching a Braves Game at 1:00pm, I saw a rather small crowd (Apparently 21,000) at the game. So I started to wonder, does the whole Day game thing really work, or are teams losing potential profit by having their games at night. Below is a graph I made up, with the time of the game, and the attendance there. This is for the 2010 season, and I only did 5 teams, because trust me this takes some time. As one can see, there really isn't a difference. The Braves are the only team appear to have a difference. Being such, I ran some fantsy statistical tests (a Two-Sample T Test for all you nerds out there), and found that there wasn't a difference between the two. Well, how about the Nationals, they appear to have a huge dip between day and night games right. All those hard working politicians dont see the games at night right? Nope, there is not statistical difference between the attendance of a day game and a night game. They on average receive roughly the same number of people.

Overall, there is no difference between a teams Day Attendance, and Its Night Attendance!




Monday, June 27, 2011

Harry Potter : The Best Worst Seeker

I was walking to a bar with a group of friends when we started to talk our typical Fantasy non-sense, like who is the best batter, who has the best fastball and all of that typical sports non-sense, when the weirdest conversation struck us. Who would we draft if we did a Quidditch Draft.

So due to my nature, and obsession with facts and figures (follow @patchstats to see this) I began researching Quidditch statistics. Although the game in nature is flawed, and the scoring is somewhat "Abstract" , and the rules are clearly to reach five year olds not to cheat, there are some metrics that can be obtained. While doing my research I came across a lot of Harry Potter's brilliant run as a seeker, and his failure to go Pro. So one can ask is Tryell Prior just pulling a Harry Potter and not going back for his final year to go save the world. [Unlikely, since Prior is leaving to avoid any more investigation of the Ohio State University].

Harry Potter: The Worst Best Seeker|
I love Harry Potter, dont get me wrong. But what a waste of Talent. Harry Potter has never finished an entire season of Quidditch, he had either been knocked off his broom (Year 3) or getting banned (Year 5) or being injuried (Year 1). So if I were to draft Harry Potter I would run into the same risk as drafting Greg Oden, and we all saw how that played out. Harry has good game, winning all but one snitch battle, and is generally a good player. But his off the pitch life and social habits seem to make him more of a threat rather than a reward. He actually gets replaced in Year 6 by Ginny Wesley Potter, who is a better fit for a seeker anyway. She is lighter and smaller, making her the better build for the position anyway. Harry Potter's ending of a career is a lot like Drew Bledsoe , great until knocked out of a game and his replacement is better.

Where would I draft them : Late First Round Early Second Round.

Draco Malfoy : His Father was the coach
Although the Malfoy's were not directly in charge of the coaching of Slytherin, they practically were, with Lucious Malfoy's power Draco was a shoe in for the seeker position.Draco becomes the new Seeker for the Slytherin Quidditch team after his father, Lucius Malfoy, donates new, high-quality Nimbus 2001 broomsticks But I wouldn't draft this kid at all. His college ball at Hogwarts was very displeasing. He played terrible is the best way to put it. He couldnt beat Harry Potter and really didnt have the stuff to make it beyond college Ball to be honest. I dont think his dad could pay me enough to draft him.

Where would I draft them : I wouldn't

Katie Bell: All Star but hardly known.
Katie Bell is a classic sleeper, but I truly dont know why. She has more talent than most outside chasers. She was on Hogwart's Best Team in history. She made the team her second year, which is average for a Player, although not a rookie she played a solid year. She played a solid 5 years. It is not known if there was a seventh season for her, but I would draft her regaurdless. She is easily one of the top 10 chasers to ever play at Hogwarts, and is an easy early round draft pick.

Where Would I draft them : Early Second Round

Angelina Johnson: Star player, draft low
She became the captain in year 5, and handled the pressure pretty well. She is not a start athlete but a natural born leader. She handled a large "UNC esc" expolotion of the team, and had to find replacements quick. Although I can't say she was the best of her year, Huffepuff's Smith was a better chaser.

Where Would I draft them : Middle Fourth.

Fred/George Weasley : The Sedin's of Quidditch
It goes without saying the two were good Beaters. However, they were not enough for me. They played maybe enough to make it in the pros, but their off the pitch actions make them a liability. Their fireworks mishap reminds me a lot of Plaxico Burress. You can't teach discipline, and these two had a huge problem with this. They would make a solid pair if you could trade up to get two solid picks, but its not really known how they would play by themselves. So if you could get them as a package deal, then maybe take the risk, but I don't know if the upside of them is really worth the risk.

Where Would I draft them : Late fifth if separated, Mid fourth together

Charlie Weasley : The Wayne Rooney of Quidditch
Draft! The Scouts report that he has the broom speed unlike anyone else out there. He also is known to be the best recruit coming out of Hogwarts, a good Quidditch school. Although he was not the captain his senior year, dont let that turn you away. His solid performance his worth the early pick. There is some debate as to his sucess rate, because Slytherin Won the Cup the 7 years that Charlie was there, but other accounts say that Gryffindor hasn't won since Charlie was there. All in All Charlie Weasley is a great pick.

Where Would I draft them: Early First Round

Ginevra "Ginny" Molly Weasley : From a Family of Quidditch

Her older brother, Charlie was a legend at Hogwarts. Weasley was forced to end her career at Hogwarts when the school ran into NCAA issues, causing them to shut down the program. However, the potential there is unmatched by this draft class. The key ingredient here is her age. She is the Kyrie Irving of Quidditch, young, and can move quickly. She is also a small nimble seeker, which is the best size for the position. So I would say its a sure bet she will be able to move quickly and grab the snitch.

Where Would I draft them: Early First Round

Oliver Wood : A Born Profressional
Wood was Drafted actually, by Puddlemere United. Although he never started. Its a classic example of drafting is the easiet thing to do. He was a keeper, so i wouldn't draft him that high (more on that later). But clearly someone saw something in him, so he must have been a good keeper.

Where Would I draft them: Early Fifth Round

Ron Weasley : Scared to Save
Eh. Ron Weasley is average, and probably low on my draft board. There were talks of him taking magical enhancing potions, which of course is frowned upon with Quidditch officials. So I would be risking the few game suspensions he would receive from that. Also he is a keeper, and an average one at that. The little bit of playing time he received in College was because the primary keeper left school to go play pro. His injury in year 6 scares me, and could be a permanent thing. So take caution. Some scouts say he is capable and worth the risk, but im not paying more than i have to for him.

Where Would I draft them: Late 7th

Now there are a ton of players, and I will post a second round of drafting results. But below is my philosophy of drafting Quidditch Players.

Order of Drafting:
Seekers - A good seeker ends the game when you are ahead, and a bad one never gets the snitch. They are tough to come by and typically cost a lot of money. A Good seeker is aware of the field and when it is good to grab the snitch. Wait to the team is ahead then go in for the kill. It is debatable the most important position on the pitch and the hardest to play.

Chasers - Offence wins Championships, everyone thinks the counter, but you need people that can score, and if you have a bad seeker, you need to keep the game out of reach until your seeker can end the game. Its a medium difficulty to play, but it is important. Draft them early.

Beaters - Important if they can knock the opponent off the ground. They don't require much training so they are typically drafted at max potential. That is why they are drafted so low, because you know what you get when you draft them. A Duo is important, because a team within a team for Quidditch is important. You need your beaters to be on the same page.

Keepers - They tend to be inconscient. Sure everyone thinks that a "Goalie" is the most important position, but why waste a high draft pick. All keepers are just one bad game from being replaced. They also need to prove they can handle the professional speed and shots. Which is hard to find even at the College level. So typically draft them lower and grab them off Free Agency or Trade for them. But draft them low.



Friday, February 11, 2011

Beyond the Game : The Stephen Strasburg Effect


Stephen Strasburg, the man that saved the Washington Nationals. And of course, by saved, I mean made them relevant again. That of course until Bryce Harper came into the picture. The Nationals need to make money, because not only are they a business, but they spend a lot of money , more than they should. Regardless, they picked up an amazing pitcher who was going to get them into the playoffs. The sad things is that most teams that are bad really struggle to get out. However, the Nationals can afford a few loses with the change in attendance from this guy.

Below is a bar chart of the games Strasburg appeared in.

A few things to note about this. At the end, Strasburg was injured, so a lot of fans werent interested in coming if he wasnt going to pitching. Another note is that the Phillies always sell close to capacity, so it is hard for any given factor to increase attendance.

Attendance increase on average 38% when Strasburg came pitched. So although he is injured and may never play another game, it did show to the nationals that the city will come if you put great players on the mound!

Thursday, February 10, 2011

First Look : Attendance vs Winning

This is a rough rough sketch of a greater idea, sadly i dont have the time to do a full analysis, but this is an interesting finding. People always think, their team will sell more seats if their team wins. I took a look at four teams, the Yankees, the Red Soxs, the Rays and the Nationals. The first three teams are all actually good, while the Nationals could use a little more help.
The plot below shows the attendance rate. This is basically (Attendance of Game) / (Max Attendance of season). The closer to 1, means the team is closer to capicity (for that season of course). As one can see, the Yankees and Red Sox's sell out most of their games, and they do this regardless of their winning percentage. That is because (or so i think) since the beginning of time these teams have been winning and have a very large base of dedicated fans, but i wont go into that. The more interesting part to look at are the Nats and Rays, both small market teams (second graph shows just those two). These two teams are much more volatile compared to the heritage that is the Yankees and Red Soxs.



What is even more interesting is their winning percentages. Notice how they both have two extremes. The Rays, who qualified for the playoffs by winning (debatable the hardest) their division. The Nationals on the other hand, got more fans to come see How Do You Know at park than the Nationals.


Now if you were to overlay these, you would see that winning doesnt make a whole lot a difference in a given season. Fans love to see baseball live, its about the Foul Ball, not the result.



Friday, February 4, 2011

Snow Snow Go Away

As my friends can probably tell you, I love the weather (or just data in general). I actually love it so much that I normally run models on it and show historical data. With the All-Break halting sports statistics I figured I would share some weather data, visually and tell you some neat facts at that.

The graph below is of DC's snow fall, with Years : Current, Average,Last and the record amounts.

Lowest snowfall in DC history was 2.2 inches in 1972
Since 1950, DC has only received less than 10 inches 18 times.
The most amount of snow in a season was 2009-2010 with over 73 inches of snow.
A perfect storm, if it snowed the high, for every month there would be 133 inches of snow!

Now i am not from New York, but I have a few friends that live in the city, and complained how much snow they got this season. So i figured i would do the same analysis of their city as well.

Lowest snowfall in DC history was 2.8 inches in 1972 (as well!)
The most amount of snow in a season was 1995-1996 with over 75 inches of snow.
A perfect storm, if it snowed the high, for every month there would be 154inches of snow!

Monday, January 31, 2011

Haters Stop Hatin : The Liverpool Edition

Monday January 31st - The longest day in football analysis... ever.

As trades are made up until 11pm tonight, people across the football world will be asking, who is my team getting and who are we losing. That brings us to the major trade talk of this transfer period, the Fernando Torres, Luis Suarez & Andy Carroll.

This trade is not smart, but it helps Liverpool. Lets do some simple math. Now this is all speculation of course on fees and prices, but most of them are Pretty Accurate

Torres to Chelsea = + £50 Million
Carroll to LFC = - £35 Million
Suarez to LFC = - £23 MIllion
---------------------------------------
Total = £8 Million

Now lets get this correct, Liverpool are getting the Dutch footballer of the year, Andy Carroll who is currently 3rd (11 goals) in the league for goals scored.

This is why i love John Henry, one has to admit his ability to buy according to market is smart. Surely Carroll is not worth £35 million, but is the under performing Torres actually worth £50 million pounds, the answer is no. Torres is a great football player and I will not hate on him. But the Player is old. He is 26, while Suarez (24) and Carroll (21) are both younger, and they show their youth, while Torres shows his age with his lack of performance and injuries of old. It is not just liverpool either, Torres's goals in the World Cup (2) is far less than Suarez and Carroll.

The way to look at the trade is 8 Million for an extra player, rather than 35 for one player.

God Bless Liverpool

Friday, January 28, 2011

Athletic Gods - Lance Armstrong

Lance Armstrong brought the Tour de France to America, one of only two Americans to do this. But Lance did more than just win a really hard bike competition, but he did it 7 times. That is more than any other person. Lance brought a cycling culture to America that was unparalleled to any other sport. Men biking up and down mountains made real television, it was on the nightly news. Just six years after his final race, the Average American couldn't tell you what time of year the Tour was, or who was winning. That's because they know its not Lance Armstrong. Besides Lance being a robot (i mean he ran a sub 3hr marathon), he is all-around american, (minus that divorce of course). He has started up his own charity selling, as stupid as it sounds, wrist bands that say livestrong on them. Its not just a story of a biker, but an American Triumph. A guy who battled cancer, and then learned how to beat pain. Below is a graph of Tour De France winners, the four years before lance, and the four years after lance. Just look at the dip in times, and see the God that is Lance Armstrong.