Teams ranked by number of player arrests

SnoCoHawk · Sep 23, 2014

Thought this was interesting...

http://www.bizjournals.com/sanjose/...-teams-with-most-player-arrests-rankings.html

idahohawksfan · Sep 23, 2014

I am surprised that we have more than the whiners but perhaps recent events being easier to recall are clouding my memory?

fenderbender123 · Sep 23, 2014

The pictures are just screen prints of each team's official website. That is pretty lazy.

Laloosh · Sep 23, 2014

I stumbled upon the link below a while back. I like to be able to see the actual data. Also beats the hell out of clicking through 32 slides...

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/nfl/arrests/all/all/all/

suppaball · Sep 23, 2014

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?

CANHawk · Sep 23, 2014

We'd be way lower if not for LeRoy Hill and Jerremy Stevens.

mikeak · Sep 23, 2014

Glad we got rid of doughnut thief. Those hardened criminals needs to go!

UK_Seahawk · Sep 24, 2014

Is this arrests or actual convictions? Innocent people get arrested too.

MizzouHawkGal · Sep 24, 2014

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.

Popeyejones · Sep 24, 2014

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?

Not only humans, but they're more law abiding humans than the general population of men their age.

http://www.psmag.com/navigation/politic ... man-91074/

Imagine that.

Popeyejones · Sep 24, 2014

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.

The problem with that is that it doesn't really get to the question, as if you go through the data there's much less stability in team arrest rates from one year to the next (or year 1 to year 3) than there is when looking at ten and fifteen year trends. You're basically relying on outliers and flukes at expense of trends, which are more stable than I think most would reasonably expect.

See the last graph and explanation at the toward the bottom here:

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/13/upsho ... &referrer=

EDIT: Another way to say this is that the Jaguars' arrests (or any other team) from 2000-2006 are more predictive of their arrests this year than their arrests last year are.

kidhawk · Sep 24, 2014

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.

Popeyejones · Sep 24, 2014

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.

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.

MizzouHawkGal · Sep 24, 2014

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.

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.

Popeyejones · Sep 24, 2014

MizzouHawkGal":97f8f09s 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.

MizzouHawkGal · Sep 24, 2014

Popeyejones":bwp2vqdw said:
MizzouHawkGal":bwp2vqdw said:

For instance anything before 2010 is meaningless for Seattle same goes for San Francisco and 2011.

Click to expand...

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.

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.

Seahwkgal · Sep 24, 2014

I was talking with some friends the other day and we all agree that certain scrutiny should be applied to ALL levels of the game.
Too many freakish athletes starting from the HS and College levels are coddled and given 'perks'(good grades,etc). Then people wonder why a handful of these guys can't stay out of trouble when they are adults. It's actually sickening to me and unfair to the athlete, who never truly had to earn their way in nor abide by the rules. Bad life lesson.
How many of these NFL players do you actually think learned life lessons and absorbed their HS and College educations? If I were guessing, I would say about 80%. The other 20% are the kids getting in trouble for the most part.

kidhawk · Sep 24, 2014

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.

Click to expand...

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.

Didn't anyone ever tell you about "assuming" (or suspecting)?

There was no underlying meaning to what I posted. I'd honestly think it's a more telling stat. Teams can't control what players do at home. They can control who they keep on their roster.

I have no idea what teams have more or less players who have been convicted.

By the way, when I say conviction, IMO, the statistical analysis would have to include anyone who's conviction got set aside due to plea deals that would put them in probationary status or diversion type programs. I'd also like the list to include alongside the conviction, exactly what the circumstance was in which they were arrested. This would give us a more realistic picture as to what types of players are on current rosters and what NFL organizations are willing to forgive and look past.

bigtrain21 · Sep 24, 2014

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.

I realize this isn't your main point but don't confuse players coach for being someone that allows his players to walk all over him.

Marvin49 · Sep 24, 2014

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?

It's because most of them are recent. 10 arrests in Harbaugh era and 6 of those were just 2 guys.

Teams ranked by number of player arrests

New member

New member

Well-known member

New member

Well-known member

New member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Active member

Active member

Well-known member

Active member

Well-known member

Active member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

New member

Well-known member

Similar threads