This week, since it's still too early for a MOTW, we're going to look back at the correlation of week 1 performance to the team's eventual standing in the league, and what that means for the teams that won or lost this week. All data is from when the first year of a 12 man league (2011) until last year.
Some observations:
1) Week 1 performance seems to indicate some weird trends. While it doesn't predict the champion (4 losers of week 1 have been champ vs. 3 winners of week 1), it paints a clear picture on placing in the league. Only 6 of the 42 week 1 losers were able to place and win money while 15 of the 42 winners have done the same. Additionally, all of the 2nd place finishers have won week 1.
2) I also did some research on what your week 1 score was vs. how you perform in the league. There's definitely a bigger correlation than just the ability to win or lose in the first week. Anyone who has scored less than 70 points in the first week has never placed, with only 2 of the 7 teams even making the playoffs. The ability to score high correlates to placing as well as the ability to score in explosive bunches is key to winning matchups.
- 115+: 2 championships, 2 runner-ups, 3 third (7 total)
- 100-115: 1 championship, 3 runner-ups, 2 third (6 total)
- 85-100: 2 championships, 2 runner-ups, 1 third (5 total)
- 70-85: 2 championships, 0 runner-ups, 1 third (3 total)
- <70: 0, 0, 0
3) Next, I combined the two groups to see if being unlucky (high scoring and losing) or lucky (low scoring and winning) carries with the team through that season. There were 6 instances of teams that scored 100+ and lost their first week. 4 didn't make the playoffs and only 1 was able to place. On the flip side, there were 4 teams that scored less than 85 and won (nobody won scoring less than 70), of which only 1 was able to make the playoffs.
What does this mean for our league this season?
1) Bad news for Biggie as he was unable to break the 70 point marker in week 1. If he can place this year, he will make history as the first team to do so with such a terrible start.
2) Dan shouldn't fret too much about losing with the second highest score this week. History has shown that there is a higher correlation to score than the actual win or loss. Let's just hope he doesn't add to the data for 'unlucky' teams carrying that unluckiness to the end.
3) There actually weren't that many outliers this season in week 1 so the teams that deserved to win won and the teams that deserved to lose lost. David Y might consider himself a bit unlucky but it's not unheard of.
Some other random observations about team names as I was gathering this data:
1) Cho has never changed his name. Don't go running to him for creative ideas.
2) Jon and David Y (sneakily) come up with the corniest names. I won't even repeat them here as they are horrifying. They try to balance humor with being appropriate and the latter ruins their ability to fulfill the former.
3) David K and Paul are the opposite of their cousin and always come up with the most vulgar names. Never change.
4) Dan Park, I love that you made my job easy. Office Reference = Dan. Just in case you're throwing your hat in the air from the praise I'm bestowing upon you, I have a great line for that: "May your hats fly as high as your dreams"... I know nobody is graduating! Wow. Relax, spazzy boy.
Let me know if you'd like the data to play around with it yourself. Just shoot me an e-mail and I can send it to you. Also, if anyone has incriminating photos of Chris Chung, please provide so I can update the banner.
Good luck to all!
Simon Kim
No comments:
Post a Comment