NFL Balance Sheet [Baltimore @ Dolphins]

[Casino7Man]

For those of you who didn't know, I am an Accountant.

I analyse what we call a Balance Sheet all day long.

Basically, Assets are things you own or things that people owe you, Liabilities are things that you owe somebody and Equity is the difference which is better when higher.

I know Cow would appreciate this as he is an Accountant too. Where is Cow anyway?

I decided to put together Balance Sheets for the Dolphins and the Ravens to see who has higher Equity to try and predict the final score. According to what I put together here, Baltimore should win by 10.

I like that I chose this match-up for the first of this "System" because I am a Dolphin Fan and MadJack is a Raven Fan.

I am looking for feedback to see what everyone thinks.

What did I obviously leave out and should be added?

What did I include that is NOT significant and should be removed?

Any significant change could favor the Dolphins by 10. I hope, with your feedback, we can balance out the Balance Sheet by includeing those things that are important and getting ride of those things that are not important.

What things do you consider when cappin' a game?

Thanks in advance!


Dolphins Ravens
Assets

YTD Record Wins 500 400
YTD Wins Against The Spread 550 600
Percent Standing Over 500 56 0
Points For 210 177
Home Wins [If Playing At Home] 300 0
Road Wins [If Playing On The Road] 0 100
AFC Wins [If Playing AFC] 400 400
NFC Wins [If Playing NFC] 0 0
Divisional Wins [If Playing Divisional] 0 0
Winning Streak 0 100
Won Against Before Score 0 0
Rested From A Bye Week 0 0
Off A BIG Win [Double Didgets] 0 100
Off A SMALL Loss [3 Points] 100 0
Number Of BIG Wins 300 200
Number Of SMALL Loses 100 300
Number Of Times Shut-Out A Team 0 0
Won Straight-Up When Underdog 200 300

Total Assets 2716 2677



Liabilities

YTD Record Loses 400 500
YTD Loses Against The Spread 350 300
Percent Standing Under 500 0 56
Points Against 180 189
Home Loses [If Playing At Home] 100 0
Road Loses [If Playong On The Raod] 0 300
AFC Loses [If Playing AFC] 300 200
NFC Loses {If Playing NFC] 0 0
Divisional Loses [If Playing Divisional] 0 0
Losing Streak 300 0
Lost Against Before Score 0 0
Any Key Injuries [500] 500 500
Off A BIG Loss [Double Didgets] 0 0
Off A SMALL Win [3 Points] 0 0
Number Of BIG Loses 300 200
Number Of SMALL Wins 100 0
Number Of Times Shut-Out By A Team 0 100
Lost Straight-Up When Favored 200 100

Total Liabilities 2730 2445



Total Equity -14 232

Final Balance Sheet Score -1.4 23.2
Balance Sheet Spread 24.6 -24.6
Actual Current Spread -4.5 4.5
Final Spread Calculation 10.05 -10.05

 

[Senor Capper]

Thanks for the post

Thanks for the post

Psst FYI it's "analyze" not analyse.

 

[Casino7Man]

Abosolutly, I'm sure there are more typos than just that one.



So, whats your analysis findings of the Balance Sheet?

 

[GM]

Hi Casino7Man,

I haven't analyzed everything here, a fair bit of data...but a few thoughts I had, in no particular order:

* How did you come up with 100 pts = 1 win for a team? Just an arbitrary guess? I see you also give extra credit for large wins or narrow losses to attempt to reward bigger wins or cushion the blow in narrow defeats, but to me it seems the figures are a bit out of whack when compared to total pts scored. IE. Miami has scored 217 pts, but this is only worth the equivalent of about 2 wins (or 2 close losses even).

* Also teams seem to be doubly-penalized for losing a game, as they not only don't get 100 for a win, but they also lose 100 more for the loss. (In essence each win is worth 200 pts when you think about it). And then it's compounded even more by adding in percentage standing points. And further compounded if a team has won or lost a number of games in a row. Then compounded AGAIN by adding in road/home wins and subtracting road/home losses...counting some of the same wins and losses numerous times. So in my opinion wins are grossly exaggerated in this system. A team like Green Bay, on a 7 game winning streak with a record of 8-1, should be favored by a HUGE number of points against anybody in this system. But as soon as they lose a game, their rating will plummet because they no longer have 700 pts for a winning streak, PLUS they will be losing 100 pts for a losing streak. So they'll go from looking unbeatable in any matchup to just "better than average" with just one defeat. I'd be very curious to see what the system turns up for the GB/Minn game this week. My guess is it says go LARGE LARGE LARGE on GB.

* "Rested from a bye week" - I am not sure this is even an asset, as many teams appear to actually be hurt by the bye week. Bye weeks tend to kill momentum (in my opinion, I haven't proven it). A team that is losing may benefit from it, but a team on a roll may be hurt by it.

* I'd also remove shutouts. Holding a team to 0 is not really that much better than holding them to 3. A team may give up a junk score at the end of the game because they have a huge lead, their backups are in, or they just don't care.

My final thought...the system doesn't take into account WHO each team has been playing. A team can build a 4-game winning streak and very impressive numbers by simply having a soft schedule and winning games against weak opponents that they are expected to win. The system may then point you towards playing ON this team. But maybe now they are up against a strong team that just happens to be coming off a defeat to a good team.

So my suggestions would be...find a way to evaluate the quality of the opponents a team has played (or maybe just recent opponents they have played), and base the system less on wins and losses and more on relative performance. IE. When they lost was it to the best team in the league (understandable), or to a garbage team that they should have beaten easily (a very discouraging defeat)?

Sorry, I know it looks like a lot of criticism. Not trying to be negative, just trying to give you the feedback you were looking for.

Good luck.

 

[Casino7Man]

Thanks for the feedback GM!

Much appreciated!

Your comments were exactly what I was looking for.

I agree that I need to factor things in as to who they actually won against. If it was against a tough team or an easy team. I didn't want to put a whole lot into it until I got some feedback.

To comment on your GB/Minn example, I think by giving 700 points for the straight wins and then giving them a negative 100 the following week if they lose is good because maybe this means they lost some momentum. But then again, like you said, GB would probably be a huge favorite against Minn in this Balance Sheet approch. So, if they did lose, then this approch is a failure anyway. But then again, thats not true eaither as I doubt the system could be 100% anyway.

I think this Balance Sheet approch needs alot of work and more time than I can probably spend working on it. I'll work on it as I can to fit in with your great comments.

Thanks again!