|
![]() |
#61 |
#triggering
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Tejas
|
Ok... I downloaded your spreadsheet, I'm going to need an hour or so for nothing but copy/paste... I'll do what I can to get this one (Denver) to you by Monday.
|
Posts: 30,429
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#62 |
Playing for #1 Draft Pick
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Just West of Lambs land
|
The Dungver,Faiders,Sandyeggo spreadsheet would be interesting
|
Posts: 25,901
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#63 |
Herm is the worst...horrible
Join Date: Sep 2000
|
|
Posts: 2,014
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#64 |
MVP
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Newport, Or
|
|
Posts: 14,736
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#65 |
One with the Force
Join Date: Jan 2010
|
|
Posts: 879
![]() ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#66 |
www.nfl-forecast.com
Join Date: Sep 2000
|
Update! Update!
|
Posts: 45,556
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#67 |
BAMF!
Join Date: Nov 2007
|
|
Posts: 8,358
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#68 |
www.nfl-forecast.com
Join Date: Sep 2000
|
|
Posts: 45,556
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#69 |
BAMF!
Join Date: Nov 2007
|
|
Posts: 8,358
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#70 |
NFL's #1 Ermines Fan
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: My house
|
You asked for it, you got it. The funny thing is, I was just thinking about this a week or so ago and hoping I could find the file.
The Chiefs' stock index currently stands at -17.26. This is a notable increase from -22.42 at the end of 2009, which was one loss from being in the bottom ten indexes in Chiefs history (all of which had occurred between Week 9 of 1988 and Week 10 of 1989). When Todd Haley took over the team, the index was at -16.60, so Todd is currently still negative for his career, but that'll happen when you go 4-12 your first year. In looking at the graph, you can see that we have apparently hit a floor in the market, so I would recommend buying Chiefs stock as a long-term buy. Here's a graph of how the various Chiefs coaches have fared. We can see that only three coaches have produced a positive change in the index: Schottenheimer with an enormous gain, Stram with a strong gain, and Mackovic eked out a minor gain. Herm presided over the largest drop in franchise history, at almost 22 points. Wiggin was somewhat equivalent, dropping 18 points in fewer games. (Bettis is an outlier considering he coached only 7 games.) Interestingly, though, Wiggin (and Bettis) took over a team that was already in free fall - Stram's teams had dropped 14 points between the Christmas 1971 game and Stram's departure. Wiggin and Bettis merely continued that trend until Levy began pulling out of the dive and Mackovic got the nose turned upward again. The Gansz thing was a failed experiment, producing equivalent results to Herm, more or less, before the Space Shuttle Schottenheimer launched. As of this point, we can view coaches quite clearly in one of three camps: Successes - Schottenheimer, Stram Mediocres - Vermeil, Mackovic, Levy, Cunningham (though Cunningham is pushing the bottom edge) Disasters - Wiggin, Bettis, Gansz, Edwards Haley has proven (to date) that he's not in the first camp, and he's arcing upward. Code:
Start Finish Games PPG Change Stram 0 16.4706 218 0.08 16.5 Wiggin 16.4706 -1.4429 35 -0.51 -17.9 Bettis -1.4429 -7.2554 7 -0.83 -5.8 Levy -7.2554 -13.9729 73 -0.09 -6.7 Mackovic -13.9729 -13.1761 65 0.01 0.8 Gansz -13.1761 -23.3491 31 -0.33 -10.2 Schottenheimer -23.3491 10.5904 170 0.20 33.9 Cunningham 10.5904 5.4264 32 -0.16 -5.2 Vermeil 5.4264 4.9787 81 -0.01 -0.4 Edwards 4.9787 -16.5967 49 -0.44 -21.6 Haley -16.5967 -17.2639 27 -0.02 -0.7 And you want to hear something else interesting? Haley has produced the second-best start to a coaching career in Chiefs' history when you consider index change. While he's still slightly negative, every coach except Marty was more negative, even Hank Stram. Index Changes in First 27 Games Schottenheimer = +8.5 Haley = -0.7 Mackovic = -2.0 Cunningham = -2.8 Stram = -3.0 Edwards = -3.2 Bettis = -5.8 (7 games only) Vermeil = -6.3 Gansz = -8.0 Levy = -8.8 Wiggin = -12.8 Last edited by Rain Man; 11-28-2010 at 11:33 PM.. |
Posts: 142,246
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#71 |
www.nfl-forecast.com
Join Date: Sep 2000
|
Thanks!
One more question. When we win the SB this season, will we still be in negative territory? I would hate to be all pumped about winning the SB, but have a negative Dow index put a big damper on everything. |
Posts: 45,556
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#72 |
NFL's #1 Ermines Fan
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: My house
|
Here's another interesting analysis.
I looked at each coach's first 27 games and last 27 games, and how the index changed. (I used 27 games because that's how many games Todd has coached.) If you compare a coach's first 27 games to those of his predecessor, you can tell if his regime represented a step up from the previous regime (setting aside some uncontrollable factors like retirements). If you compare a coach's last 27 games to his first 27 games, you can see whether he had the team on the right track. A positive difference means he was on the right track, and a negative means he was dragging them down. 1st 27 games Last 27 games Stram -2.99 -9.51 Wiggin -11.77 -16.74 Bettis x -15.63 Levy -8.79 -0.85 Mackovic -2.02 1.17 Gansz -9.25 -8.69 Schottenheimer 8.55 -0.90 Cunningham -2.82 -5.64 Vermeil -6.30 2.00 Edwards -3.24 -19.52 Haley -0.67 x We can see that Hank Stram started out mediocre with a clean slate, but the team was in freefall in his final years. (Obviously he had some great years in the middle, though.) Wiggin took a team in freefall and made it worse immediately (his 1st 27 were worse than Stram's last 27), and made it even worse as time went on. Wiggin was obviously unsuccessful, but not as bad as his record would indicate given what Stram had been doing at the bitter end. Bettis didn't coach 27 games, but obviously the freefall continued. Levy's immediate impact was to slow down the fall, indicating that he was a better coach than his predecessor(s) of Wiggin and Bettis. In fact, his last 27 games were almost at breakeven. He was pretty clearly moving the team in the right direction. Mackovic was initially a minor step back from Levy, but his final 27 games were better than his first 27 games, so he was a positive. Gansz then took a team that was trending positive and totally cratered it from start to finish. He was obviously a horrific hire. Arguments can be made for both him and Herm as the worst coaching hire in Chiefs history. Marty then took a team that was in a meteoric nose dive and IMMEDIATELY turned them significantly positive. That was an amazing turnaround. But by the time he left they were trending slightly negative. His time had come. Cunningham did worse with the talent than Marty did, and he was getting worse by the time he left. The team was sliding negative strongly. Vermeil actually did worse than Cunningham starting out. However, his last 27 games were notably better than his first 27, and were back in the black. Herm took a team that was trending positively and immediately turned it negative. He then proceeded to absolutely destroy the team in a manner not seen since Caligula named a horse to the Roman Senate. Haley took over a team that was positively subterranean and, while still slightly negative, has immediately stopped the dive. If you compare each coach's 1st 27 games to his predecessor's last 27 games, here are the changes you get: Haley = +18.85 Schottenheimer = +17.24 Levy = +6.84 Vermeil = -0.66 Mackovic = -1.17 Cunningham = -1.92 Wiggin = -2.26 Stram = -2.99 Edwards = -5.24 Gansz = -10.42 I'm not sure if this means anything, other than whether a coach was better than the coach before him. While one can argue that Haley's turnaround is on par with Schottenheimer's turnaround in 1989, I think the real indication is that Schottenheimer and Haley are both good coaches who took over for horrendous coaches. The more you look at it, the Schottenheimer and Haley situations are very, very similar. At this point, it looks like Haley may have just had a slower Year One but has otherwise done just what Marty did in the Great Miracle of 1989 and 1990. Before Schottenheimer took over, the previous coach's last two seasons were 4-12 and 4-12. Schottenheimer immediately took the team to 8-8 his first year, and then 11-5 the second year. He did this with a new GM at the helm. Before Haley took over, the previous coach's last two seasons were 4-12 and 2-14. Haley's first year was another 4-12, and right now he's on pace for a 10-6 or 11-5 second year. He did this with a new GM at the helm. Kind of eerie, isn't it? Last edited by Rain Man; 11-29-2010 at 12:27 AM.. |
Posts: 142,246
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#73 | |
NFL's #1 Ermines Fan
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: My house
|
Quote:
Nonetheless, that would be a pretty spectacular stock increase, so I'd be happy with it. |
|
Posts: 142,246
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#74 |
Threepeat!
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Milk/Honey/Gazland
|
This is like algebra...my head hurts. BTW, I love lamp.
|
Posts: 20,769
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#75 |
▓▓▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▓▓
Join Date: Jan 2009
|
Ok...I'm stupid...by why do you do this: " I then add it to 99 percent of the score of the previous week."?
|
Posts: 64,027
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
![]() ![]() |
|
|