To me the mind-blowing data point is that in your sample "how well or poorly your opponents passed had almost 0 correlation to winning". I wonder if that holds true for good club teams at 16s/17s or D2 and D3 teams. Could it be that pin hitters are so good at the top D1 level that pass quality is less relevant, but with less elite pins pass quality has a bigger impact on sideout offense?
Probably a better way to say that would be, "how well or poorly your opponents passed had almost 0 correlation to season win %." I'm going to make a note of that on the top of the next article in this series...
Hey Joe. I think it's interesting how slim the correlation is between opponent good passing and season win%. I think the statistic itself however could be a little saturated with various elements since winning is just that. I wonder what insights could be had looking at team profiles where we take the correlation between opponent pass percentage and winning that rally. This would also yield interesting differences between how well different teams convert these opportunities. Maybe a team that's only marginally better at converting these KO balls as compared to good passes would just take their chances putting the ball in more often.
I agree. I think it's also a function of recruiting. Within an individual match, passing is a decent predictor of winning. But over the course of the season, I think there's just not as much variation. My read on that is that it's easier to recruit passers who can pass at the NCAA level than it is to recruit attackers who can attack at the NCAA level.
To me the mind-blowing data point is that in your sample "how well or poorly your opponents passed had almost 0 correlation to winning". I wonder if that holds true for good club teams at 16s/17s or D2 and D3 teams. Could it be that pin hitters are so good at the top D1 level that pass quality is less relevant, but with less elite pins pass quality has a bigger impact on sideout offense?
Probably a better way to say that would be, "how well or poorly your opponents passed had almost 0 correlation to season win %." I'm going to make a note of that on the top of the next article in this series...
Hey Joe. I think it's interesting how slim the correlation is between opponent good passing and season win%. I think the statistic itself however could be a little saturated with various elements since winning is just that. I wonder what insights could be had looking at team profiles where we take the correlation between opponent pass percentage and winning that rally. This would also yield interesting differences between how well different teams convert these opportunities. Maybe a team that's only marginally better at converting these KO balls as compared to good passes would just take their chances putting the ball in more often.
I agree. I think it's also a function of recruiting. Within an individual match, passing is a decent predictor of winning. But over the course of the season, I think there's just not as much variation. My read on that is that it's easier to recruit passers who can pass at the NCAA level than it is to recruit attackers who can attack at the NCAA level.