Comments on: The Last 4 Years: Part 4 (Wins & Payroll Correlation) http://sdpads1.wordpress.com/2008/01/22/the-last-4-years-part-4-wins-payroll-correlation/ San Diego Padres Baseball Sat, 17 Oct 2009 17:44:21 +0000 http://wordpress.com/ hourly 1 By: Friday Links (25 Jan 08) http://sdpads1.wordpress.com/2008/01/22/the-last-4-years-part-4-wins-payroll-correlation/#comment-27 Friday Links (25 Jan 08) Fri, 25 Jan 2008 15:07:47 +0000 http://sdpads1.wordpress.com/2008/01/22/the-last-4-years-part-4-wins-payroll-correlation/#comment-27 [...] continues his reflection on the Petco Park era by examining the relationship between a team’s payroll and its on-field success. This line of inquiry fascinates me, and [...] [...] continues his reflection on the Petco Park era by examining the relationship between a team’s payroll and its on-field success. This line of inquiry fascinates me, and [...]

]]> By: MB http://sdpads1.wordpress.com/2008/01/22/the-last-4-years-part-4-wins-payroll-correlation/#comment-25 MB Wed, 23 Jan 2008 19:36:19 +0000 http://sdpads1.wordpress.com/2008/01/22/the-last-4-years-part-4-wins-payroll-correlation/#comment-25 Ahh ... interesting. I've seen similar studies where the correlation is similar to your's here (IIRC), and it's always good to see this stuff again. Awesome job on the series. Ahh … interesting. I’ve seen similar studies where the correlation is similar to your’s here (IIRC), and it’s always good to see this stuff again. Awesome job on the series.

]]> By: sdpads1 http://sdpads1.wordpress.com/2008/01/22/the-last-4-years-part-4-wins-payroll-correlation/#comment-24 sdpads1 Wed, 23 Jan 2008 06:46:01 +0000 http://sdpads1.wordpress.com/2008/01/22/the-last-4-years-part-4-wins-payroll-correlation/#comment-24 If you take out the Yankees totals the correlation goes down even more. The AL has big spending teams like the Orioles (#7) & the Mariners (#4) towards the bottom in overall record. Plus it also has low spending teams like the Twins (#11) and Indians (#13) towards the top in overall record. I think I may do an AL version of this series (although not as in depth) soon. I gathered all the info the same time I did the NL's so all I have to do is put together some posts. Needless to say there are 4 teams that put the Pirates & Giants 20 games under statistic to shame. If you take out the Yankees totals the correlation goes down even more. The AL has big spending teams like the Orioles (#7) & the Mariners (#4) towards the bottom in overall record. Plus it also has low spending teams like the Twins (#11) and Indians (#13) towards the top in overall record. I think I may do an AL version of this series (although not as in depth) soon. I gathered all the info the same time I did the NL’s so all I have to do is put together some posts. Needless to say there are 4 teams that put the Pirates & Giants 20 games under statistic to shame.

]]> By: MB http://sdpads1.wordpress.com/2008/01/22/the-last-4-years-part-4-wins-payroll-correlation/#comment-23 MB Tue, 22 Jan 2008 22:56:27 +0000 http://sdpads1.wordpress.com/2008/01/22/the-last-4-years-part-4-wins-payroll-correlation/#comment-23 Right. I think we're on the same page. I wonder if the Yanks have anything to do with it in the AL because their payroll is so high. If you take them out, does it go up? (or down?) Right. I think we’re on the same page.

I wonder if the Yanks have anything to do with it in the AL because their payroll is so high. If you take them out, does it go up? (or down?)

]]> By: sdpads1 http://sdpads1.wordpress.com/2008/01/22/the-last-4-years-part-4-wins-payroll-correlation/#comment-22 sdpads1 Tue, 22 Jan 2008 22:10:03 +0000 http://sdpads1.wordpress.com/2008/01/22/the-last-4-years-part-4-wins-payroll-correlation/#comment-22 Hey thanks Corey I always enjoy reading your posts and reading your stuff on the Pads site. And yes MB you are correct....I sometimes have problems putting math and numbers into words (which you do rather well) but that is what I was trying to put across. First and foremost money is important. There is a decent trend with teams who spend more, win more. But the correlation is .71 meaning it is not strictly tied to money. Meaning if you spend middle of the pack money (like the Padres) and have a great front office (like the Padres) you should be competitive year in and year out (like the Padres). Even the Marlins have the lowest payroll yet come in at number 9 in winning percentage 1 spot ahead of the #7 ranked team in payroll, the Giants. I figured it out for the AL as well and the correlation is quite lower than the NL....so money is even less of a factor in the AL opposed to the NL.....which suprised me. Hey thanks Corey I always enjoy reading your posts and reading your stuff on the Pads site.

And yes MB you are correct….I sometimes have problems putting math and numbers into words (which you do rather well) but that is what I was trying to put across. First and foremost money is important. There is a decent trend with teams who spend more, win more. But the correlation is .71 meaning it is not strictly tied to money. Meaning if you spend middle of the pack money (like the Padres) and have a great front office (like the Padres) you should be competitive year in and year out (like the Padres). Even the Marlins have the lowest payroll yet come in at number 9 in winning percentage 1 spot ahead of the #7 ranked team in payroll, the Giants. I figured it out for the AL as well and the correlation is quite lower than the NL….so money is even less of a factor in the AL opposed to the NL…..which suprised me.

]]> By: MB http://sdpads1.wordpress.com/2008/01/22/the-last-4-years-part-4-wins-payroll-correlation/#comment-21 MB Tue, 22 Jan 2008 21:07:48 +0000 http://sdpads1.wordpress.com/2008/01/22/the-last-4-years-part-4-wins-payroll-correlation/#comment-21 Great stuff! My take is that money is actually more important, overall. An r of .71 means the r2 is like .5041. I believe that implies that over the last 4 years, payroll explains about 50% of winning. The other half is other factors like talent evaluation and luck. At the same time, as long as you're spending enough, if your front office is good enough, you can easily overcome a lower payroll. Anyway, correct me if I'm wrong and keep up the great work. Great stuff!

My take is that money is actually more important, overall.

An r of .71 means the r2 is like .5041. I believe that implies that over the last 4 years, payroll explains about 50% of winning. The other half is other factors like talent evaluation and luck.

At the same time, as long as you’re spending enough, if your front office is good enough, you can easily overcome a lower payroll. Anyway, correct me if I’m wrong and keep up the great work.

]]> By: Corey http://sdpads1.wordpress.com/2008/01/22/the-last-4-years-part-4-wins-payroll-correlation/#comment-20 Corey Tue, 22 Jan 2008 19:45:48 +0000 http://sdpads1.wordpress.com/2008/01/22/the-last-4-years-part-4-wins-payroll-correlation/#comment-20 Good breakdown, interesting stuff. You've got a good knack for numbers. I can't balance a checkbook, which is why, I guess, I became a writer. Anyway, keep up the good work! Corey Good breakdown, interesting stuff. You’ve got a good knack for numbers. I can’t balance a checkbook, which is why, I guess, I became a writer. Anyway, keep up the good work!

Corey

]]>