SnoCoHawk
New member
Thought this was interesting...
http://www.bizjournals.com/sanjose/...-teams-with-most-player-arrests-rankings.html
http://www.bizjournals.com/sanjose/...-teams-with-most-player-arrests-rankings.html
suppaball":2xdts76s said:So, my take on this is, suprise NFL players are humans too. Every one screws up even pro athletes.
Wow who would have think it?
MizzouHawkGal":9xrr6adi said:Meaningless since it goes back to 2005. Make it 2010-11 and then it might be relevant given that's who would still be on a team or still in the NFL in most cases.
kidhawk":1c24nwnj said:I think a better and more telling stat about an organization, is not the number of arrests, but the number of players with convictions on their current roster and what those convictions are for.
This is what I am trying to say. Number arrests is basically meaningless what type of crime commited is better. The the most meaningful is who is on your roster now with either. For instance anything before 2010 is meaningless for Seattle same goes for San Francisco and 2011.kidhawk":3n3d408f said:I think a better and more telling stat about an organization, is not the number of arrests, but the number of players with convictions on their current roster and what those convictions are for.
MizzouHawkGal":97f8f09s said:For instance anything before 2010 is meaningless for Seattle same goes for San Francisco and 2011.
Not directly but the ethos he and the rest of the ownership instills does. Coaches can only do so much because these are grown men and expected to act as such.Popeyejones":bwp2vqdw said:MizzouHawkGal":bwp2vqdw said:For instance anything before 2010 is meaningless for Seattle same goes for San Francisco and 2011.
I think one of the most interesting things about the data is that they're NOT meaningless (and far from it), although I understand why we might expect them to be.
How many teams have had the same coach in place since 2000? The Patriots? If it's the coach that matters, we'd expect there to not be a correlation between arrests from 2000-2006 and arrests from 2007-20013, and instead there's a strong one. That's fascinating.
Edit: also worth saying that if it WAS the coach who mattered, we'd expect a renowned player's coach (e.g. Pete Carroll) to have more arrests on his team than a strong, father figure disciplinarian type (e.g. Mike Singletary). We could investigate that question if we could get players to rank all the NFL coaches in terms of their role as disciplinarians, but it might be a waste of time given that we already have a reasonable suspicion that it's not the coach that matters.
Popeyejones":1e42dxah said:kidhawk":1e42dxah said:I think a better and more telling stat about an organization, is not the number of arrests, but the number of players with convictions on their current roster and what those convictions are for.
I suspect the subtext here might be that you think this would make the Hawks organization appear to be more law abiding than these less preferable stats do.
As for the idea, *current roster* convictions introduces all the same randomness that just looking at one or two years of arrests introduces.
The other problem with convictions is that in trying to eliminate noise you're actually creating more noise: one player gets arrested for a DUI and gets convicted, whereas another gets arrested for a DUI and just gets filtered into a diversionary program. Not because they did anything different, just because there's HUGE variation across states (and cases) in the outcomes of arrests that are the same along the relevant malfeasance.
Likewise, you'd also be penalizing a team for rostering a 34 year old model citizen who was convicted of drinking in public when he was a teenager about to enter college. I don't think that's what we're talking about.
No data are perfect of course, but in the grand scheme of things I think arrests are 1) MUCH easier to gather data on (which is no small thing) and 2) actually more reflective of the question than convictions.
Popeyejones":1zzezvjp said:Edit: also worth saying that if it WAS the coach who mattered, we'd expect a renowned player's coach (e.g. Pete Carroll) to have more arrests on his team than a strong, father figure disciplinarian type (e.g. Mike Singletary). We could investigate that question if we could get players to rank all the NFL coaches in terms of their role as disciplinarians, but it might be a waste of time given that we already have a reasonable suspicion that it's not the coach that matters.
idahohawksfan":3qv7b0z8 said:I am surprised that we have more than the whiners but perhaps recent events being easier to recall are clouding my memory?