Big Data vs Better Data vs NO Data

As mentioned in previous posts, the majority of my experience is from the “business” world.  I’ve done analytic models for companies on four continents and a wide variety of industries.  This has provided me with an diverse perspective, especially when looking at professional sports and their attempts at “analytics”.

I’ve told the folks that work with me at Real Sports Analytics several times that the book (and movie) “Moneyball” was great for sports analytics.  No, not because there was any significant analytical work done by Billy Beane in the story (trust me on that, his approach is what I call a “frog in the blender”), but the movie did raise awareness of a potential use of analytics in professional sports.  Some say I’m the “Moneyball of football”, well maybe I am, but what I’ve invented at Real Sports Analytics is much closer to the performance management work I’ve done in the business world and nothing at all like what Mr. Bean did at the Oakland A’s – mine is a frog safe approach. 

(side note: being played by Brad Pitt in a movie is just not me, George Clooney would be a much better choice)

With all of that said, let’s get to our topic of the day.  Big data is typically defined as taking a large amount of “raw” data, meaning data that doesn’t mean anything at all by itself and that has no intrinsic value with the exception of its volume, BUT given proper processing algorithms certain observational deductions can be made when these sets are jammed together and “mined” for data.  (see the Wikipedia article on data mining)  With this large data set, patterns can emerge or “nuggets” of important information (thus the “mining” analogy) can be discovered, but typically only after huge databases have been created and large amounts of computing power have been thrown at the problem and “experts” have analyzed the results.  Again, think mining analogy like the 49ers of old panning for gold and hoping to find a nugget hidden within tons of mushy dirt.

Now, again, with my experience in the industry I have some pretty strong opinions.  Read previous blog posts about the question I love to ask (SO WHAT?) when setting up any analytic model.  I think “Big Data” and “No Data” in many cases are equivalent.  How is that?  Because most people in the sports world are looking at the WRONG data without even knowing it (think the old 49er panning for gold in someone’s swimming pool).  For example, you may download from NOAA the entire meteorological record of New Orleans and correlate the weather patterns that are most favorable for the Saints winning football games, BUT unless someone makes you aware the the Saints football games are played in an INDOOR facility, you’d really be crunching all of those numbers just for the sake of crunching numbers.  (which a lot of people do)

Now, this is an extreme example, but so many times I’ve seen in business (and now in sports) people trying to count the “oranges” by looking at the rows in the apple orchard.

Case in point.  The Jacksonville Jaguars.  Any NFL fan is aware of the struggles of this organization over the past few years.  They have repeatedly failed to find a quarterback (denial), have failed to keep their best players (through poor management and bad trade evaluations), have not drafted well (again poor player evaluations), and now have a guy at the head of their analytics department whose only real qualification is that he was born to the right father (i.e. the current owner of the Jacksonville franchise).  Read the fourth paragraph of this article:

Jacksonville Jaguars seek “the truth” 

Ok, so maybe I’m being picky, but if I’m presenting someone with information concerning a multi-million dollar decision I’m not going to present the information on “three handwritten sheets of paper” that can hardly be deciphered.  It’s unprofessional and (in my mind) throws serious doubt on the contents.

This guy graduated college in 2007 and in the interim (before joining the Jaguars in 2012), wait for it…  helped to build a biodiesel fuel factility.  I’m not making this up - http://www.jaguars.com/team/football-staff/tony-khan.html.

If you Google Jacksonville Jaguars and analytics you’ll get two pages of hits on stories about how the Jaguars are “maximizing their returns” using analytics.  Yeah, not too many teams give their owner’s kid a cushy job that he’s obviously not qualified for, go 0-5 to start the year and even resort to giving away coupons for free beer in an attempt to fill the seats.  I’ll give them this, their press management is top notch.

The Jacksonville Jaguars are a great example where “Big Data” really equates to “No Data”.  If you’re not asking the right questions and you don’t have the right people with the right experience finding the answer – really if ANY of those are the case, HOW THE HECK can you expect to be delivering the right answers.

Ok, now for “Better Data”.  “Better Data” doesn’t always involve big server farms, huge spreadsheets or bunches of guys that look like this.  In fact, rarely does “Better Data” involve more than a few megabytes of information.  “Better Data” involves professional people with EXPERIENCE that come in and ask the right questions.  How do you currently measure performance?  What would make that simpler or more useful in what you are trying to accomplish?  Do you think your current performance metrics are correct for your organization?  What (in your opinion) works when you team is successful?  What are your teams current weaknesses?

There are hundreds of questions, thousands of permutations these conversations can take and I certainly am not going to give away the “ancient Chinese secret” in a blog post.  But, my point is this.  Always ask the question “SO WHAT?”.  I’m sure those guys at Jacksonville have a huge budget and are now asking themselves where is our return?  How long will it take to get that return?  Just because someone says they are experienced with “big data” doesn’t mean they are right for your organization – find someone that comes in and asks questions first.  (hopefully)  Also find someone with some experience in the game or at least someone who can bring those valuable people to the table.  I know at Real Sports Analytics we have a team of former NFL players advising us every step of the way and their experience and knowledge are INVALUABLE to how we build our analytic models.

Some teams are doing this effectively, it’s pretty obvious who they are in the NFL and NCAA ranks.  The most valuable aspect of this is knowing the difference between those three types of data and becoming an engaged partner with an experienced, knowledgeable analytics company.

Thinking ahead, one of my future blog posts will be about the ways analytics are used in the business world and how that relates (directly) to the world of professional sports.  Until then, keep this quote in mind.

“Appear weak when you are strong, and strong when you are weak.”
― Sun Tzu, The Art of War

Why I don’t watch baseball

Yes, I know it’s football season, but the other day I came across this article:

http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20130918&content_id=61017384&vkey=news_atl&c_id=mlb

After doing some research apparently this particular umpire (CB Bucknor) has had some issues in the past with calling balls and strikes.

http://deadspin.com/5921148/better-know-an-umpire-cb-bucknor

http://www.complex.com/sports/2013/06/mlb-umpire-cb-bucknor-calls-player-out-two-strikes

http://38pitches.wordpress.com/2009/10/09/why-c-b-bucknor-is-not-a-good-umpire/

I’m not writing this as an op-ed piece meant to bring down a guy who has been an umpire since 1996.  The guy obviously knows the game of baseball, enjoys the spotlight and enjoys his job.  Even with all of these ejections, players/coaches squaring up with him, etc he seems to remain fairly calm and handles the situation admirably.  His “crisis handling” skills are certainly not in question.

But, let’s get to the point.  Baseball is boring.  Sorry folks it is.  You can make whatever excuse you want.  The worst part is, you get to a penultimate moment in the game, a place where you are REALLY INTERESTED in what’s going on and the WHOLE THING is RUINED by a BLOWN CALL.  I would say a vast majority of the blown calls I’ve seen recently were specifically about balls and strikes – the instant reply system that MLB is trying out right now I think can be considered a success for the other ones.

Hey, I love tradition.  I live in a very historical city and we enjoy seeing horse drawn carriages, people dressing up in “period” attire and I love attending historical dinners, etc meant to remember a pivotal occasion in US history.

BUT, baseball is supposed to be a somewhat “modern” game.  They have embraced (to some degree) instant replay for example.  Baseball parks have gotten a lot nicer than what I remember growing up in the late 70s and early 80s.  Every billboard is a giant HDTV, anybody remember the old flip cards out in the outfield telling you balls/strikes and the scores of other games?

So we have come a long way, so why do we still rely on umpires behind home plate, behind the catcher, in what many have called the worst place on the field to observe balls and strikes?  It makes absolutely no sense.

A simple solution to those “traditionalists” out there (yes, you know who you are, you’re the ones who still get “bled” by leeches when you’re not feeling well):

Keep the umpire behind home plate.  He’s still important and has a great perspective on foul balls and (obviously) plays at the plate.  He can also be helpful on occasion by calling safe/out plays at 2nd base, balks and other miscellaneous disagreements with managers.  He’s still the “guy in charge” as anything relates to the officials on the field of play.

BUT, instead of having the umpire decide on ball strikes use the TECHNOLOGY AVAILABLE to us and instead give him a buzzer or maybe a green/red light in his mask that instead tells him if the pitch is a ball or strike when it crosses the plate.  Something like this for example:

See the bottom right corner.  This is a technology via TBS called “Pitch Trax”.  C’mon man, TBS has this, but MLB refuses to use it, really?

THIS WOULD ELIMINATE all discussions about balls and strikes unless the technology wasn’t working.  OK, technology sometimes fails, in that case we would resort back to the umpire calling balls/strikes.  SEE?  We have a built-in failsafe!

I predict this would make the game more interesting, focusing more on the real strategy of the teams, performance of the players and NOT so much of an emphasis on where so-and-sos strike zone is.

Then again, maybe this baseball thing is a microcosm as to why so many of us are resistant to change…

Are you?

Player Safety

Unless you've been living under the proverbial rock the last few years you know that player safety, mostly focused on the NFL, has been in the limelight.  There are many issues at stake here.  Some former NFL players have actually gone so far as to file a lawsuit against the NFL asking for damages related to long-term effects of injuries sustained during their career.  My lawyer friends tell me that the legal format is similar to other lawsuits focused on "unsafe working conditions" which have become more and more popular here in the US.  Some of the players involved in this lawsuit (ironically enough) are actually beginning to work with the NFL in the hopes of increasing awareness of player safety.

On top of that, we also have the countless lawsuits filed by non-professional players, youth, high school, etc saying that some equipment manufacturers haven't done enough to "warn" younger players about the dangers of the game.  While I sympathize with these folks (I really do) and the injuries sustained while playing football this reminds me a lot of the old McDonald's hot coffee fiasco.

I play golf.  (sounds like an AA admission doesn't it?)  I enjoy playing the game and I like being out in the great outdoors being endlessly frustrated by something that should be very simple.  Occasionally, on the course I have come close to either hitting someone else with my ball (when I actually do make contact with the darned thing) or being hit by someone else's ball.  The lawsuits mentioned above give me pause to think, if/when I do get hit can I file a lawsuit against the ball manufacturer for not putting a warning label on the ball and making sure the offending person had read and understood the risks of striking this object?  What about those odd-shaped sticks that we use to play the game?  There's got to be a lawsuit in the making there.

Maybe sidewalks should have warning labels on them.  I mean, you could always trip over the curb or not look both ways - either way sidewalks are suddenly very scary...

My point is this, there is danger everywhere.  You need to identify those dangers, do what you can to mitigate the risk and go on living your life.  No one wants to be wrapped in shrink wrap bubbles their entire life.  Playing any sport is no different and I really hope most people don't let the media overreaction dictate their decisions.

Speaking of the media, they of course have done nothing but sensationalize this issue and make it extremely larger that it probably needs to be.  Sports are inherently dangerous, in fact football is the 3rd most dangerous for youth participation according to this study.  Note, this study is just based in America, I can imagine that European Football (soccer) would be pretty high on that list if more popular with youth in America.  I know that the only time I've taken my son to the emergency room for a sports related injury it was because of soccer (he was fine by the way, I was being rightfully over-cautious).  Any time you have human beings running around as fast as they can and running into each other you are going to have injuries.  The gelatinous substance floating in liquid surrounded by a hard bone material that we call a "brain" is suspect in such collisions to bruising and other damages.  It's been going on since the first cave man chased the first cave woman and ran into a tree.

Equipment manufacturers are spending billions of R&D dollars in a race to make the "safest" helmet, but at the end of the day, given the g-forces, rotational speeds and impact accelerations a player is subjected to during a football game, I have a hard time believing they will ever deliver a "magic pill" to make this issue go away.

The problem (and the subsequent answer) lies NOT with the equipment manufacturers, but in the methods used to teach and play the game.

So where am I going with this?

Today I am proud to announce publicly (we're not big enough yet to have a full-time PR person, we are looking for interns though) that Real Sports Analytics is introducing our "Player Safety Rating" (PSR).

Much like our "Player Effectiveness Rating" (PER) that measures how well someone is playing a particular sport our "Player Safety Rating" (PSR) gives us a way to effectively measure how safely someone is playing the game.

How do we do this?  Over the last few months we have added several former NFL/NCAA players, coaches and administrators to our advisory council.  I've spent a lot of time with each of them and we have developed not only the on-field components of this model, but also on the camp/seminar aspects of teaching a safer way to play the game.  We are also working with companies that deliver these camps/seminars as well as equipment manufacturers on how best to promote this safety model.

What does the PSR do?  Easy, much like our PER displays a very simple representation of how well someone is playing the game based on their position (7.2, 8.1, 6.5, etc) we now can represent how safely someone is playing their position.  As with the PER we observe each player on a play-by-play basis and apply safety metrics.  For example, a good "form" tackler like Brian Urlacher would probably score pretty highly (except that he has unfortunately retired).  Over his career he has been known as one of the hardest hitters in the game, but also one of the safest.  If you watch his film his form is good, his arms are out, he doesn't lead with his head and he focuses on his body position and control to make plays.

I was going to mention some players that do NOT play the game (in what we measure) in a safe manner, but I won't.  The NFL has singled out certain players that always seem to get an unfair share of attention when it comes to the "safety issue".  Or is that attention really unfair?  They don't know, why?  The old adage applies here "You can't improve what you can't measure".

Up until now it has been virtually impossible to measure this safety factor. That's why this is such an exciting time for us here at Real Sports Analytics - the future is now!

The “next level”

Springtime is a marvelous time of the year for American football.  National signing day was just concluded and the annual track meet (a.k.a. the combine) is going on in Indianapolis.  Why do people watch this?  Well, it’s either that or figure skating or bowling.  So, can you really blame them?

We are (as of today) 221 days until the start of the regular NFL season and 186 days until college football begins.

So what the heck do we do for the next 100+ days?

We’ll watch Youtube highlights of last season.  We’ll analyze, re-analyze and over-analyze anything that happened during the combine and/or national signing day.  We will watch some premier league games (at least I will, even though the title is all but settled already).  And we’ll probably watch a combination of golf, spring baseball and reruns on our DVRs of the televised NCAAF spring football scrimmages.

Hopefully, you will also read my blog, even though I’ve promised to publish more and have not (thus far).

So, now on to the topic of conversation today.  The “next level”.  Much of our spring fascination and ongoing debates during this time of year revolve around high school players going to the “next level” (NCAAF) and collegiate players graduating to the “next level” (NFL).

Who will be a success?  Who will be a “bust”?  Who will be drafted (or signed) with low expectations and become an all-star (ala Tom Brady) player?

For the record, I have not watched nor do I plan to watch any of the Indianapolis track meet going on this week.  I won’t rant about this again this year.  (although if you do want to see a previous rant you may click here)  It is interesting to me that ESPN and others have marketed this thing to the masses in such a way that observers really think NFL teams are learning something here, THEY ARE NOT.  If that was the case, then why doesn’t college football have something like this?  The answer is that most collegiate coaches have (at one time or another) coached at the high school level.  They focus on fundamentals and focus on that with their current rosters.  THEY WATCH FILM!  Which of course is the ONLY way to understand how well someone plays the game (ANY GAME).  Don’t you think that the “real” NFL scouts and player personnel directors look at film 100x more than they tune into ESPN this week?  Let’s try to use some common sense here.

I was thinking on this today and here’s what I WANT as a consumer, fan and professional.

I WANT a consistent way to measure how well someone plays the game.

I WANT easy to understand numbers that tell me that Player A is better than Player B and exactly WHY that is.

I WANT player rankings that make sense so that I KNOW (or at least understand better) what players are the best at their position both coming out of high school and entering the NFL draft.

I WANT players to be measured for their on-field ability AND THEN (only then) compare that on-field performance with their performance at the “track meet”.

I WANT historical information telling me that a player had certain rankings/abilities/shortcomings coming out of high school those were developed in a measurable way by (insert name of college position coach here) and because of that he is now a top rated player going to the next level.

IS THAT REALLY TOO MUCH TO ASK?

Think to yourselves, do you make ANY type of decision with significant monetary value without having hard, discernable facts and objective review.  Could you imagine buying a car without knowing it’s performance numbers (0-60, mpg, etc)?  Could you imagine buying a home without an inspection or information regarding taxable value or utility rates?

Then how pray tell, can you really value one football player vs. another by watching them run between some cones?  Better question, how can you believe that NFL personnel do the same?

Between a rock and a hard place

I’m not sure how this is going to play out with the NFL…

Well, by now everyone has heard of the tragedy in Kansas City the last few days (link).

And all of the talking heads from local sportscasters to Bob Costas have decided to put in their opinion.  (How I feel about opinions)  Costas even tried to make some sort of anti-gun 2nd amendment speech regarding this issue…  (really?)

At the same time (flip side) we see articles like this – Ed Reed, NFL powder-puff league

And actually, as much as I hate to use this oft-used misnomer, what we really have here is the 3 sided coin…

One side – football is a violent game that breeds violence within individuals that sometimes cannot be contained.  In fact, while players are active it is encourage by coaches, other players, fans and society in general.  Whether or not there are guns involved really isn’t the issue, look at the UK for examples on what happens when gun laws are enacted.

2nd side – because of this violence some players are hurt rather badly.  In some cases bodily and physiological damage results in suicides.  Lately these individuals, when they are choosing to end their lives, do so in a manner so that their brains may be studied for this damage.

(see link)

3rd side – in putting in place policies, rules, etc the NFL is coming down hard on head-shots, violent collisions involving “defenseless” players and calling everything anywhere near a QBs head.   With these rules some (including Mr. Reed) claim the NFL is taking something away from the game.  What happens when you take the so called “violence” away from an inherently violent sport?

This is a tough one to call.  The rash of former NFL players is both astounding and tragic.  These are men with any other profession would be at the prime of their lives.  They leave behind children, wives, brothers, sisters and numerous friends.

So what’s the answer?  I don’t know.  What I do know is that one former player is taking this into his own hands.  Lavar Arrington’s Xtreme Procision WILL change how the game is taught and (hopefully) how the game is played.  These strategies as well as advancements in equipment and g-force monitoring MUST BE PUT IN PLACE AS SOON AS POSSIBLE.  If we can teach the next generation how to properly and safely play the game these injuries and deaths CAN BE PREVENTED.

The game is changing.  The game must change.  If these changes don’t happen then the future of American football is in jeopardy.

Time for a little “I told you so”

The thing that still gets to me, even after all this time, even being the “inventor” of this product is that the damn thing just works.

Film study by qualified people DOES NOT LIE.

Chad Henne in yesterday’s loss to Houston.

16/33

354 yds

4 TDs

no interceptions

For those of you who don’t remember, Chad (in his fours games last year) scored right up there, with some pretty big names…

I’m sure Gabbert is a nice guy and he will make a successful backup somewhere in the NFL, but (as I’ve posted before) Chad Henne before injury last year was playing at a very, very high level.  I know that Gabbert is Gene Smith’s darling in Jacksonville, but at some point it becomes painfully apparent who SHOULD be starting for this team.  Unfortunately for this season I think it’s probably too late.

The teams that are successful make personnel calls on FACTS not gut feel or player “preference”.

Quick Posts

I have been asked recently by a reader to shorten my posts (and to make them more often) – this I promise to do starting in 3, 2, 1….

As we enter Week 11 of the NFL season I have a few observations based on our scoring…

- The recent “rise” of the Tampa Bay Buccaneers has nothing to do with Josh Freeman.  He’s still scoring at the bottom of the league as far as QBs go.  When will the experiment end?  This guy to going to be a GREAT backup QB somewhere, as a starter though he continues to make (rookie) mistakes.  At this point in his career he should be playing much better than Andrew Luck and well, he isn’t.

- The Gabbert experiment in Jacksonville is also near completion.  The result?  Well, because he “bet his career” on the development of this mid(low) level talent, Gene Smith will probably lose his job.  Ironically in the offseason they signed Chad Henne – who you might remember as scoring VERY well last year in the four games with the Dolphins before injury.  How well?  Like Brady/Brees/Eli well.  Unfortunately this is an obvious case of “new coach syndrome” and the GM is deciding which QB to start – NOT a good way to run a team.

- The Romo coaster continues in Dallas and I will say this, Tony has scored fairly well this year – at least the times he’s not been lying on his back.  The offensive line there has been atrocious and since I think the talent is there (expensive talent I might add) there must be something else at play.  Unfortunately for Jason Garrett (who I think is one of the brightest up and coming minds in football), the masses in Dallas (including it’s owner) are an impatient lot.  I’d be surprised if he gets another year to pull things together, there’s just too many good (experienced, super bowl winning) coaches out there looking for a job.

Speaking of that…

- Like you, I’ve seen the hirejongruden.com web site.  There is NO freakin’ way that guy is going to coach any team at the collegiate level.  I mean, he can barely stand rookie QBs, what would he do with an 18 year old freshman?

OK, I said I would keep it short, going to keep my promise.

More next week!

Peace, out.