Wait ‘Til Next Year: Which League Gives Last Place Teams the Most Hope

(Click Chart to Enlarge) This is the second part of a four-part series in which I will try to compare parity in NBA, NFL, and MLB.  The proxy for parity in this series will be “the ability of the cellar-dwellers to improve next year”. 

I won’t concentrate as much on the year-to-year improvement as I will on the 5-year average because the 5-year average is a more stable and shows a trend.  To create this chart I looked at the worst 5 teams in the league for each season from 1980 to 2009 and calculated the average improvement of those teams in the following season.  For example, in 1997 season the worst 5 teams improved by an average of 16 games from the previous season.

The graph shows that the teams’ abilities to improve increased steadily until it peaked in 1993.  It has since been on the decline until recently.  Since 2003 the improvement has jumped up and down, but stayed in the same range.  There are several possible reasons for the steady decrease in the bad teams’ ability to improve.  I think the main reason is that beginning around 1993, with the Barry Bonds and Greg Maddux contracts, the growth in players salaries seemed to increase exponentially more than the growth in team revenues.  When that happened, the large market teams began to have a distinct advantage in acquiring superstar players.  The future does look bright for the smaller-market teams; the worst year for improvement since 1981 was 2010.
Advertisements

Randy Velarde & Performance Enhancers: Could He Be More Obvious? (Click Image To Enlarge)



Click Here for chart explanation.



Bobby Bonds: Nothing Else To Say, Except That He’s Barry’s Dad. (Click Image to Enlarge)

Remarkably consistent career, and no evidence of PED use.

A great way to detect an abnormal career progression; it uses OPS+ as a proxy to measure overall batting skill.  Relative OPS+ is measured by comparing 5-year periods of a player’s career.  For instance, when 32 is seen on the age axis it represents the player’s performance from age 28 through age 32, and age 33 represents ages 29 through 33 and so on.  The relative part is introduced when all of the player’s other 5-year periods are indexed to the player’s best 5-year period.  The best 5-year period equals 100 and the rest of the 5-year periods are measured accordingly.  The chart above  displays the career progression in which 80% of players fit.  A couple of things to remember when viewing the chart is that the area between the 10% lines is 80% of all players measured. Additionally, the player’s performance is compared to himself, so if Player A has an 85 rating at age  32 and Player B has an 89 rating at the same age, that does not necessarily mean that Player  B was a better player; it just means Player B closer to his peak than Player A. 

Wait ‘Til Next Year: Which League Gives Last Place Teams the Most Hope for Improvement, the NBA, NFL, or MLB. (Part 2 of 4)

(Click Chart to Enlarge) This is the second part of a four-part series in which I will try to compare parity in NBA, NFL, and MLB.  The proxy for parity in this series will be “the ability of the cellar-dwellers to improve next year”. 

I won’t concentrate as much on the year-to-year improvement as I will on the 5-year average because the 5-year average is a more stable and shows a trend.  To create this chart I looked at the worst 5 teams in the league for each season from 1980 to 2009 and calculated the average improvement of those teams in the following season.  For example, in 1997 season the worst 5 teams improved by an average of 16 games from the previous season.
The graph shows that the teams’ abilities to improve increased steadily until it peaked in 1993.  It has since been on the decline until recently.  Since 2003 the improvement has jumped up and down, but stayed in the same range.  There are several possible reasons for the steady decrease in the bad teams’ ability to improve.  I think the main reason is that beginning around 1993, with the Barry Bonds and Greg Maddux contracts, the growth in players salaries seemed to increase exponentially more than the growth in team revenues.  When that happened, the large market teams began to have a distinct advantage in acquiring superstar players.  The future does look bright for the smaller-market teams; the worst year for improvement since 1981 was 2010.
What do you think?

Barry Bonds: The Chart Speaks for Itself…His Giant Head Does Too…(Click Image to Enlarge)

Check Out These Related Posts: