Mar
29
Size Does Matter, from Alston Mabry
March 29, 2009 |
A little NCAA Tournament counting:
If you go to Yahoo Sports you can grab data on each team in the NCAA basketball tourney. For any team, determine an average weight and average height for the players that are actually playing.
Take the average minutes per game for each player and multiply this stat by the player's weight, and also by his height (in inches) to create two new stats that show an aggregate value of the weight and height that player contributed during the team's total time on the court per game.
Total these stats for the entire team and divide by the total of the average minutes played for all the players, and you have essentially an overall average weight and average height for the five players the team had on the court during games.
Here is an example:
University of Oklahoma
Player GP Min HT WT min*HT mi*nWT
Allen 18 4.7 83 267 7,022 22,588
Cannon 9 6.8 80 230 4,896 14,076
Crocker 35 29 78 206 79,170 209,090
Davis 34 14.9 77 208 39,008 105,373
Franklin 12 2.2 71 161 1,874 4,250
Gerber 13 2 80 228 2,080 5,928
Griffin 34 33.1 82 251 92,283 282,475
Griffin 35 29.8 79 238 82,397 248,234
Johnson 35 31.3 75 176 82,163 192,808
Leary 33 10.2 71 173 23,899 58,232
Pattillo 18 13.7 78 216 19,235 53,266
Warren 35 31.2 76 207 82,992 226,044
Willis 16 6.4 78 172 7,987 17,613
Wright 32 8.1 81 234 20,995 60,653
total team min: 7020.5
total height: 546,001
total weight: 1,500,630
Avg Team Height: 77.8 in
Avg Team Weight: 213.7 lbs
These calculations were done for the 32 teams that made it out of the first round.
Then the point differential was calculated for each of the 28 games that those 32 teams played in rounds 2, 3 and 4.
In 18 of 28 games, the team that won also had the heavier average player. In 19 of the 28 games, the team that won had the taller average player.
To run a correlation, a winner/loser score ratio was calculated for each of the 28 games (i.e., Big State beats Western U by a score of 100 to 80, then the score ratio is 100/80, or 1.25), as well as a difference between the two teams playing in average height and average weight.
Example:
Louisville 79, Siena 72
Louisville
avg wt: 211.7
avg ht: 77.0
Siena:
avg wt: 201.2
avg ht: 76.3
score ratio: 1.097
weight diff: +10.5
(i.e., winner heavier than loser by 10.5 lbs)
height diff: +0.712
(i.e., winner taller than loser .712 inches)
Running a correlation of the score ratio and height difference for the 28 games produced a surprising p of -0.24. So while the winning team was taller in 68% of the games, there were shorter teams that won by big margins, and taller teams that won by small margins.
The correlation between score ratio and weight difference was initially even more surprising - to me, at least, because I was certain a priori that weight mattered significantly. But the correlation was only +0.08. So, the winning team was usually heavier, but more bulk affected the margin of victory only slightly
The Final Four looks as follows:
Team / avg ht / avg wt
North Carolina 77.2 / 216.1
Villanova 77.1 / 207.7
Connecticut 79.0 / 215.5
Michigan State 77.2 / 212.2
So, it looks like Carolina beats Villanova on weight (though Pitt weighed in at 217.3), and UConn beats Michigan State on height. Then it looks like it's UConn on height again in the final against Carolina (with their weights being too close to matter).
All 32 schools, sorted by average weight:
SCHOOL / AVG HT / AVG WT
Xavier 78.1 221.5
Pittsburgh 76.3 217.3
USC 78.4 217.1
Gonzaga 78.4 216.7
North Carolina 77.2 216.1
Connecticut 79.0 215.5
Syracuse 77.0 215.3
Memphis 78.7 214.7
Oklahoma 77.8 213.7
Arizona State 76.7 212.4
Michigan State 77.2 212.2
Wisconsin 76.9 211.8
Louisville 77.0 211.7
Duke 77.6 209.6
Marquette 75.6 209.1
Maryland 77.5 208.1
Texas 76.2 208.0
Villanova 77.1 207.7
LSU 77.7 207.5
Washington 75.5 207.5
Missouri 77.8 207.1
Dayton 77.2 207.1
Arizona 76.8 206.4
Oklahoma State 75.6 206.0
Texas A&M 78.0 205.8
Kansas 76.6 205.2
UCLA 77.2 204.7
Purdue 76.7 204.0
Siena 76.3 201.2
W. Kentucky 76.6 200.4
Michigan 76.1 197.7
Cleveland State 76.1 197.3
All 32 schools, sorted by average height:
SCHOOL / AVG HT / AVG WT
Connecticut 79.0 215.5
Memphis 78.7 214.7
Gonzaga 78.4 216.7
USC 78.4 217.1
Xavier 78.1 221.5
Texas A&M 78.0 205.8
Missouri 77.8 207.1
Oklahoma 77.8 213.7
LSU 77.7 207.5
Duke 77.6 209.6
Maryland 77.5 208.1
UCLA 77.2 204.7
Dayton 77.2 207.1
North Carolina 77.2 216.1
Michigan State 77.2 212.2
Villanova 77.1 207.7
Syracuse 77.0 215.3
Louisville 77.0 211.7
Wisconsin 76.9 211.8
Arizona 76.8 206.4
Purdue 76.7 204.0
Arizona State 76.7 212.4
Kansas 76.6 205.2
W. Kentucky 76.6 200.4
Siena 76.3 201.2
Pittsburgh 76.3 217.3
Texas 76.2 208.0
Cleveland State 76.1 197.3
Michigan 76.1 197.7
Marquette 75.6 209.1
Oklahoma State 75.6 206.0
Washington 75.5 207.5
Comments
WordPress database error: [Table './dailyspeculations_com_@002d_dailywordpress/wp_comments' is marked as crashed and last (automatic?) repair failed]
SELECT * FROM wp_comments WHERE comment_post_ID = '3667' AND comment_approved = '1' ORDER BY comment_date
Archives
- January 2021
- December 2020
- November 2020
- October 2020
- September 2020
- August 2020
- July 2020
- June 2020
- May 2020
- April 2020
- March 2020
- February 2020
- January 2020
- December 2019
- November 2019
- October 2019
- September 2019
- August 2019
- July 2019
- June 2019
- May 2019
- April 2019
- March 2019
- February 2019
- January 2019
- December 2018
- November 2018
- October 2018
- September 2018
- August 2018
- July 2018
- June 2018
- May 2018
- April 2018
- March 2018
- February 2018
- January 2018
- December 2017
- November 2017
- October 2017
- September 2017
- August 2017
- July 2017
- June 2017
- May 2017
- April 2017
- March 2017
- February 2017
- January 2017
- December 2016
- November 2016
- October 2016
- September 2016
- August 2016
- July 2016
- June 2016
- May 2016
- April 2016
- March 2016
- February 2016
- January 2016
- December 2015
- November 2015
- October 2015
- September 2015
- August 2015
- July 2015
- June 2015
- May 2015
- April 2015
- March 2015
- February 2015
- January 2015
- December 2014
- November 2014
- October 2014
- September 2014
- August 2014
- July 2014
- June 2014
- May 2014
- April 2014
- March 2014
- February 2014
- January 2014
- December 2013
- November 2013
- October 2013
- September 2013
- August 2013
- July 2013
- June 2013
- May 2013
- April 2013
- March 2013
- February 2013
- January 2013
- December 2012
- November 2012
- October 2012
- September 2012
- August 2012
- July 2012
- June 2012
- May 2012
- April 2012
- March 2012
- February 2012
- January 2012
- December 2011
- November 2011
- October 2011
- September 2011
- August 2011
- July 2011
- June 2011
- May 2011
- April 2011
- March 2011
- February 2011
- January 2011
- December 2010
- November 2010
- October 2010
- September 2010
- August 2010
- July 2010
- June 2010
- May 2010
- April 2010
- March 2010
- February 2010
- January 2010
- December 2009
- November 2009
- October 2009
- September 2009
- August 2009
- July 2009
- June 2009
- May 2009
- April 2009
- March 2009
- February 2009
- January 2009
- December 2008
- November 2008
- October 2008
- September 2008
- August 2008
- July 2008
- June 2008
- May 2008
- April 2008
- March 2008
- February 2008
- January 2008
- December 2007
- November 2007
- October 2007
- September 2007
- August 2007
- July 2007
- June 2007
- May 2007
- April 2007
- March 2007
- February 2007
- January 2007
- December 2006
- November 2006
- October 2006
- September 2006
- August 2006
- Older Archives
Resources & Links
- The Letters Prize
- Pre-2007 Victor Niederhoffer Posts
- Vic’s NYC Junto
- Reading List
- Programming in 60 Seconds
- The Objectivist Center
- Foundation for Economic Education
- Tigerchess
- Dick Sears' G.T. Index
- Pre-2007 Daily Speculations
- Laurel & Vics' Worldly Investor Articles