I don't see Tavita or any of our assistants on this list!

I don't see Tavita or any of our assistants on this list! - Printable Version

+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: C-House! (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: I don't see Tavita or any of our assistants on this list! (/thread-23334.html)

Pages: 1 2 3 4

RE: I don't see Tavita or any of our assistants on this list! - BostonCard - 08-04-2022

A few comments on injuries.

First, injuries are mostly stochastic. You put enough force at the wrong angle, and even the most resilient players can get injured. Sometimes it is dumb luck: does a cleat catch on something as a lateral force is applied to the knee. Did two hits happen within a fraction of a second, or did the player have time to absorb the first hit before the second came.

That being said, within all the effect of luck, strength and conditioning can play a role. It is well know that underdeveloped hamstrings compared to quads are a risk factor for ACL injuries (mostly in jumping sports like basketball). Generally speaking, stronger players are more likely to be able to resist forces (but also, stronger players generate more force, which can be bad). Teasing it all out is not easy, especially given my first point.

Notwithstanding specific injuries during Turkey’s tenure, I think my subjective perception of the data (and I am welcome to being proven wrong) is that there have been more players losing more time to injury since he left than when he was here. I remember at one point in time the discussion was about our “injury luck” while he was here. I’d love to see someone compile the data and test the hupothesis if it is accessible to see if my subjective assessment is merited.

Even if the above is true, establishing a causal link between Turley’s presence and fewer injuries is impossible. We might have just been lucky, and then experienced a reversion to the mean.

All that being said, Sam is right that the other consideration is that the impact of injuries due to critical lack of depth at key positions. “Next man up” only works if the next man up is up to the task.

BC

RE: I don't see Tavita or any of our assistants on this list! - JohnR34231 - 08-04-2022

(08-04-2022, 11:30 AM)BostonCard Wrote: A few comments on injuries.

First, injuries are mostly stochastic. You put enough force at the wrong angle, and even the most resilient players can get injured. Sometimes it is dumb luck: does a cleat catch on something as a lateral force is applied to the knee. Did two hits happen within a fraction of a second, or did the player have time to absorb the first hit before the second came.

That being said, within all the effect of luck, strength and conditioning can play a role. It is well know that underdeveloped hamstrings compared to quads are a risk factor for ACL injuries (mostly in jumping sports like basketball). Generally speaking, stronger players are more likely to be able to resist forces (but also, stronger players generate more force, which can be bad). Teasing it all out is not easy, especially given my first point.

Notwithstanding specific injuries during Turkey’s tenure, I think my subjective perception of the data (and I am welcome to being proven wrong) is that there have been more players losing more time to injury since he left than when he was here. I remember at one point in time the discussion was about our “injury luck” while he was here. I’d love to see someone compile the data and test the hupothesis if it is accessible to see if my subjective assessment is merited.

Even if the above is true, establishing a causal link between Turley’s presence and fewer injuries is impossible. We might have just been lucky, and then experienced a reversion to the mean.

All that being said, Sam is right that the other consideration is that the impact of injuries due to critical lack of depth at key positions. “Next man up” only works if the next man up is up to the task.

BC

Was referring to him as "Turkey" a Freudian slip?

RE: I don't see Tavita or any of our assistants on this list! - msqueri - 08-04-2022

(08-04-2022, 01:01 PM)JohnR34231 Wrote:
(08-04-2022, 11:30 AM)BostonCard Wrote: A few comments on injuries.

First, injuries are mostly stochastic. You put enough force at the wrong angle, and even the most resilient players can get injured. Sometimes it is dumb luck: does a cleat catch on something as a lateral force is applied to the knee. Did two hits happen within a fraction of a second, or did the player have time to absorb the first hit before the second came.

That being said, within all the effect of luck, strength and conditioning can play a role. It is well know that underdeveloped hamstrings compared to quads are a risk factor for ACL injuries (mostly in jumping sports like basketball). Generally speaking, stronger players are more likely to be able to resist forces (but also, stronger players generate more force, which can be bad). Teasing it all out is not easy, especially given my first point.

Notwithstanding specific injuries during Turkey’s tenure, I think my subjective perception of the data (and I am welcome to being proven wrong) is that there have been more players losing more time to injury since he left than when he was here. I remember at one point in time the discussion was about our “injury luck” while he was here. I’d love to see someone compile the data and test the hupothesis if it is accessible to see if my subjective assessment is merited.

Even if the above is true, establishing a causal link between Turley’s presence and fewer injuries is impossible. We might have just been lucky, and then experienced a reversion to the mean.

All that being said, Sam is right that the other consideration is that the impact of injuries due to critical lack of depth at key positions. “Next man up” only works if the next man up is up to the task.

BC

Was referring to him as "Turkey" a Freudian slip?

I imagine that, unlike the Stanford football team, BC hasn't seen Turley with his pants down and has some plausible deniability on your question.

RE: I don't see Tavita or any of our assistants on this list! - CowboyIndian - 08-04-2022

One of the recurring themes on Bear Insider back in the Turley days regarding our look "getting off the bus" was that players were somehow juicing. I don't have any info except the ongoing paranoia of Cal Bear fans but it doesn't seem outside the realm of possibility, either, especially given the drop off in "look" and obvious strength deficiencies.

RE: I don't see Tavita or any of our assistants on this list! - msqueri - 08-04-2022

(08-04-2022, 02:30 PM)CowboyIndian Wrote: One of the recurring themes on Bear Insider back in the Turley days regarding our look "getting off the bus" was that players were somehow juicing. I don't have any info except the ongoing paranoia of Cal Bear fans but it doesn't seem outside the realm of possibility, either, especially given the drop off in "look" and obvious strength deficiencies.

Doesn't it seem overwhelmingly likely given that two of the top Party in the Backfield maniacs got busted for cheating at the NFL level?

RE: I don't see Tavita or any of our assistants on this list! - msqueri - 08-04-2022

(08-04-2022, 11:30 AM)BostonCard Wrote: A few comments on injuries.

First, injuries are mostly stochastic. You put enough force at the wrong angle, and even the most resilient players can get injured. Sometimes it is dumb luck: does a cleat catch on something as a lateral force is applied to the knee. Did two hits happen within a fraction of a second, or did the player have time to absorb the first hit before the second came.

That being said, within all the effect of luck, strength and conditioning can play a role. It is well know that underdeveloped hamstrings compared to quads are a risk factor for ACL injuries (mostly in jumping sports like basketball). Generally speaking, stronger players are more likely to be able to resist forces (but also, stronger players generate more force, which can be bad). Teasing it all out is not easy, especially given my first point.

Notwithstanding specific injuries during Turkey’s tenure, I think my subjective perception of the data (and I am welcome to being proven wrong) is that there have been more players losing more time to injury since he left than when he was here. I remember at one point in time the discussion was about our “injury luck” while he was here. I’d love to see someone compile the data and test the hupothesis if it is accessible to see if my subjective assessment is merited.

Even if the above is true, establishing a causal link between Turley’s presence and fewer injuries is impossible. We might have just been lucky, and then experienced a reversion to the mean.

All that being said, Sam is right that the other consideration is that the impact of injuries due to critical lack of depth at key positions. “Next man up” only works if the next man up is up to the task.

BC

Testing this hypothesis was one of my top research priorities this off-season but every time I came up with a methodology I liked I realized how much work it would be. If there's a convenient data set out there, or if somebody can use PFF data to count up snaps/games by the preseason expected starters (that part of it would require qualitative grunt work I imagine), I'd be super interested.

For what it's worth, thinking about this impressionistically/subjectively, I'm skeptical of the idea Stanford has been unusually injury-prone. I start from the premise that we know Shaw, for all his many admirable traits, to be a pretty excuse-prone coach. Then I think about all my years watching football and what an incredibly violent, injury-prone sport it is. Then there's the issue that's been discussed in this thread that injuries are much more noticeable when you can't weather them, regardless of whether they're actually occurring with more prevalence. Think about the 2013 season when we lost Henry Anderson and Ben Gardner for big chunks of the season, and how we could weather that compared to what happened when we had some receiver injuries last year.

A big part of how snake-bitten a team feels by injuries depends on other factors. We've talked about the resilience/depth factor. There's also timing, both in terms of when on a schedule injuries happen and whether it coincides with other injuries. In 2019 we had a lot of OL injuries concurrently. Last year WR and DB appeared to be snake-bit (not incidentally, positions that get injured more often than others typically). But does that mean we had a lot of injuries? I'm not sure it does.

RE: I don't see Tavita or any of our assistants on this list! - old spanish trail - 08-04-2022

(08-04-2022, 03:44 PM)msqueri Wrote:
(08-04-2022, 02:30 PM)CowboyIndian Wrote: One of the recurring themes on Bear Insider back in the Turley days regarding our look "getting off the bus" was that players were somehow juicing. I don't have any info except the ongoing paranoia of Cal Bear fans but it doesn't seem outside the realm of possibility, either, especially given the drop off in "look" and obvious strength deficiencies.

Doesn't it seem overwhelmingly likely given that two of the top Party in the Backfield maniacs got busted for cheating at the NFL level?

Who 'dat?

RE: I don't see Tavita or any of our assistants on this list! - msqueri - 08-04-2022

(08-04-2022, 04:58 PM)old spanish trail Wrote:
(08-04-2022, 03:44 PM)msqueri Wrote:
(08-04-2022, 02:30 PM)CowboyIndian Wrote: One of the recurring themes on Bear Insider back in the Turley days regarding our look "getting off the bus" was that players were somehow juicing. I don't have any info except the ongoing paranoia of Cal Bear fans but it doesn't seem outside the realm of possibility, either, especially given the drop off in "look" and obvious strength deficiencies.

Doesn't it seem overwhelmingly likely given that two of the top Party in the Backfield maniacs got busted for cheating at the NFL level?

Who 'dat?

Trent Murphy and Josh Mauro.

RE: I don't see Tavita or any of our assistants on this list! - BostonCard - 08-04-2022

(08-04-2022, 01:01 PM)JohnR34231 Wrote: Was referring to him as "Turkey" a Freudian slip?

Not unless Siri knows about his “incident”. It was an autocorrect, which I caught the second time (annoyingly having to retype it three times before it stopped changing his name to “Turkey”), but clearly I missed it at least once.

BC

Murphy: https://syndication.bleacherreport.com/amp/2703761-redskins-lb-trent-murphy-suspended-4-games-for-violating-nfl-ped-policy.amp.html

Mauro: https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/29712499/jaguars-dl-josh-mauro-suspended-5-games-peds

His second time.

BC

RE: I don't see Tavita or any of our assistants on this list! - BigJohn043 - 08-05-2022

(08-04-2022, 04:26 PM)msqueri Wrote:
(08-04-2022, 11:30 AM)BostonCard Wrote: A few comments on injuries.

First, injuries are mostly stochastic. You put enough force at the wrong angle, and even the most resilient players can get injured. Sometimes it is dumb luck: does a cleat catch on something as a lateral force is applied to the knee. Did two hits happen within a fraction of a second, or did the player have time to absorb the first hit before the second came.

That being said, within all the effect of luck, strength and conditioning can play a role. It is well know that underdeveloped hamstrings compared to quads are a risk factor for ACL injuries (mostly in jumping sports like basketball). Generally speaking, stronger players are more likely to be able to resist forces (but also, stronger players generate more force, which can be bad). Teasing it all out is not easy, especially given my first point.

Notwithstanding specific injuries during Turkey’s tenure, I think my subjective perception of the data (and I am welcome to being proven wrong) is that there have been more players losing more time to injury since he left than when he was here. I remember at one point in time the discussion was about our “injury luck” while he was here. I’d love to see someone compile the data and test the hupothesis if it is accessible to see if my subjective assessment is merited.

Even if the above is true, establishing a causal link between Turley’s presence and fewer injuries is impossible. We might have just been lucky, and then experienced a reversion to the mean.

All that being said, Sam is right that the other consideration is that the impact of injuries due to critical lack of depth at key positions. “Next man up” only works if the next man up is up to the task.

BC

Testing this hypothesis was one of my top research priorities this off-season but every time I came up with a methodology I liked I realized how much work it would be. If there's a convenient data set out there, or if somebody can use PFF data to count up snaps/games by the preseason expected starters (that part of it would require qualitative grunt work I imagine), I'd be super interested.

For what it's worth, thinking about this impressionistically/subjectively, I'm skeptical of the idea Stanford has been unusually injury-prone. I start from the premise that we know Shaw, for all his many admirable traits, to be a pretty excuse-prone coach. Then I think about all my years watching football and what an incredibly violent, injury-prone sport it is. Then there's the issue that's been discussed in this thread that injuries are much more noticeable when you can't weather them, regardless of whether they're actually occurring with more prevalence. Think about the 2013 season when we lost Henry Anderson and Ben Gardner for big chunks of the season, and how we could weather that compared to what happened when we had some receiver injuries last year.

A big part of how snake-bitten a team feels by injuries depends on other factors. We've talked about the resilience/depth factor. There's also timing, both in terms of when on a schedule injuries happen and whether it coincides with other injuries. In 2019 we had a lot of OL injuries concurrently. Last year WR and DB appeared to be snake-bit (not incidentally, positions that get injured more often than others typically). But does that mean we had a lot of injuries? I'm not sure it does.

I think it would be great to test this empirically. But we all know the reality.

Winners don't make excuses. They rail against defeat and won't accept anything less that victory. Losses must be analyzed. Issues to improve must be identified and fixed. Sacred cows only lead to more losses. That was Harbaugh.

It isn't Shaw.

RE: I don't see Tavita or any of our assistants on this list! - CardinalSagehen - 08-05-2022

(08-04-2022, 07:46 PM)BostonCard Wrote:
(08-04-2022, 01:01 PM)JohnR34231 Wrote: Was referring to him as "Turkey" a Freudian slip?

Not unless Siri knows about his “incident”. It was an autocorrect, which I caught the second time (annoyingly having to retype it three times before it stopped changing his name to “Turkey”), but clearly I missed it at least once.

BC

Murphy: https://syndication.bleacherreport.com/amp/2703761-redskins-lb-trent-murphy-suspended-4-games-for-violating-nfl-ped-policy.amp.html

Mauro: https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/29712499/jaguars-dl-josh-mauro-suspended-5-games-peds

His second time.

BC

And in the defensive backfield (not the other team's backfield), Richard Sherman received a PED suspension in the NFL but won his appeal on a technicality: https://www.nfl.com/news/richard-sherman-of-seattle-seahawks-wins-ped-appeal-0ap1000000117644

RE: I don't see Tavita or any of our assistants on this list! - old spanish trail - 08-05-2022

(08-04-2022, 07:46 PM)BostonCard Wrote:
(08-04-2022, 01:01 PM)JohnR34231 Wrote: Was referring to him as "Turkey" a Freudian slip?

Not unless Siri knows about his “incident”. It was an autocorrect, which I caught the second time (annoyingly having to retype it three times before it stopped changing his name to “Turkey”), but clearly I missed it at least once.

BC

Murphy: https://syndication.bleacherreport.com/amp/2703761-redskins-lb-trent-murphy-suspended-4-games-for-violating-nfl-ped-policy.amp.html

Mauro: https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/29712499/jaguars-dl-josh-mauro-suspended-5-games-peds

His second time.

BC

Weird because I can't say I'm surprised.

RE: I don't see Tavita or any of our assistants on this list! - winflop - 08-05-2022

(08-04-2022, 04:26 PM)msqueri Wrote: A big part of how snake-bitten a team feels by injuries depends on other factors. We've talked about the resilience/depth factor. There's also timing, both in terms of when on a schedule injuries happen and whether it coincides with other injuries. In 2019 we had a lot of OL injuries concurrently. Last year WR and DB appeared to be snake-bit (not incidentally, positions that get injured more often than others typically). But does that mean we had a lot of injuries? I'm not sure it does.

When injuries are a major factor over multiple seasons, it's no longer bad luck. It's bad S&C.

RE: I don't see Tavita or any of our assistants on this list! - fullmetal - 08-06-2022

Yes, if there's a trend of recurring injuries of similar type. If there's no trend in injury tissue type or location, I wouldn't say S&C bears the blame.

RE: I don't see Tavita or any of our assistants on this list! - winflop - 08-06-2022

(08-06-2022, 05:21 PM)fullmetal Wrote: Yes, if there's a trend of recurring injuries of similar type. If there's no trend in injury tissue type or location, I wouldn't say S&C bears the blame.

Injuires, particularly in the trenches, have exploded since Turley was shown the door. Not saying firing him was the wrong decision, but since he left S&C has been a major issue every season. I hope this year is different, but as with everything else related to coaching, when you stand pat after a 3-9 season it doesn't give me confidence that anything will be materially different.

RE: I don't see Tavita or any of our assistants on this list! - msqueri - 08-08-2022

Ok, you guys have gotten this bee in my bonnet and it can't get out without empirical observations. With full acknowledgement of the sbortcuts/flaws/blind spots in this approach, here is a list of every Pac-12 team since 2014 ranked by number of games missed by players in their season-end top 15 for snaps on either offense or defense:

1. 2021 Washington - 61 (12 games) - 5.08
2. 2017 UCLA - 54 (12 games) - 4.50
3. 2020 Washington State - 16 (4 games) - 4.00
4. 2021 Arizona State - 50 (13 games) - 3.85
5. 2016 Arizona State - 46 (12 games) - 3.83
6. 2021 Oregon - 51 (14 games) - 3.64
7. 2019 USC - 47 (13 games) - 3.62
8. 2019 Stanford - 43 (12 games) - 3.58
9. 2020 Colorado - 21 (6 games) - 3.50
9. 2016 Oregon - 42 (12 games) - 3.50
11. 2016 Utah - 45 (13 games) - 3.46
12. 2016 Arizona - 41 (12 games) - 3.42
13. 2017 Arizona State - 44 (13 games) - 3.38
14. 2015 Oregon State - 40 (12 games) - 3.33
15. 2021 Cal - 38 (12 games) - 3.17
15. 2016 Oregon State - 38 (12 games) - 3.17
15. 2021 Stanford - 38 (12 games) - 3.17
18. 2017 Oregon State - 37 (12 games) - 3.08
18. 2016 UCLA - 37 (12 games) - 3.08
20. 2015 Oregon - 39 (13 games) - 3.00
20. 2020 Oregon State - 21 (7 games) - 3.00
20. 2014 Washington - 42 (14 games) - 3.00
20. 2014 Washington State - 36 (12 games) - 3.00
24. 2018 USC - 35 (12 games) - 2.92
25. 2017 USC - 40 (14 games) - 2.86
26. 2019 Cal - 37 (13 games) - 2.85
26. 2018 Stanford - 37 (13 games) - 2.85
28. 2019 Colorado - 34 (12 games) - 2.83
28. 2021 USC - 34 (12 games) - 2.83
30. 2020 Cal - 11 (4 games) - 2.75
31. 2017 Utah - 35 (13 games) - 2.69
32. 2021 Arizona - 32 (12 games) - 2.67
32. 2021 Colorado - 32 (12 games) - 2.67
32. 2014 Oregon State - 32 (12 games) - 2.67
32. 2019 Oregon State - 32 (12 games) - 2.67
36. 2015 USC - 36 (14 games) - 2.57
37. 2018 Cal - 33 (13 games) - 2.54
37. 2017 Oregon - 33 (13 games) - 2.54
39. 2018 Colorado - 30 (12 games) - 2.50
39. 2017 Stanford - 35 (14 games) - 2.50
39. 2020 USC - 15 (6 games) - 2.50
42. 2017 Washington - 32 (13 games) - 2.46
43. 2020 Utah - 12 (5 games) - 2.40
44. 2015 Arizona - 31 (13 games) - 2.38
45. 2018 Utah - 33 (14 games) - 2.36
46. 2017 Colorado - 28 (12 games) - 2.33
47. 2017 Arizona - 30 (13 games) - 2.31
47. 2015 Colorado - 30 (13 games) - 2.31
47. 2014 Utah - 30 (13 games) - 2.31
50. 2018 Oregon State - 27 (12 games) - 2.25
50. 2015 Utah - 27 (12 games) - 2.25
50. 2019 Washington - 27 (12 games) - 2.25
53. 2016 Stanford - 29 (13 games) - 2.23
54. 2018 Washington - 31 (14 games) - 2.21
55. 2016 Cal - 26 (12 games) - 2.17
55. 2018 UCLA - 26 (12 games) - 2.17
57. 2020 UCLA - 15 (7 games) - 2.14
57. 2021 Utah - 30 (14 games) - 2.14
59. 2014 Cal - 25 (12 games) - 2.08
59. 2017 Cal - 25 (12 games) - 2.08
61. 2014 Arizona - 29 (14 games) - 2.07
62. 2020 Arizona - 10 (5 games) - 2.00
63. 2019 UCLA - 23 (12 games) - 1.92
64. 2016 Washington - 26 (14 games) - 1.86
65. 2019 Arizona State - 24 (13 games) - 1.85
65. 2021 Washington State - 24 (13 games) - 1.85
67. 2018 Arizona - 22 (12 games) - 1.83
68. 2014 Oregon - 27 (15 games) - 1.80
69. 2018 Arizona State - 23 (13 games) - 1.77
70. 2014 Colorado - 21 (12 games) - 1.75
70. 2020 Washington - 7 (4 games) - 1.75
72. 2016 Colorado - 24 (14 games) - 1.71
73. 2014 Arizona State - 22 (13 games) - 1.69
73. 2015 Cal - 22 (13 games) - 1.69
73. 2015 Washington - 22 (13 games) - 1.69
76. 2014 UCLA - 21 (13 games) - 1.62
76. 2015 UCLA - 21 (13 games) - 1.62
78. 2019 Oregon - 22 (14 games) - 1.57
78. 2020 Oregon - 11 (7 games) - 1.57
80. 2015 Arizona State - 20 (13 games) - 1.54
81. 2020 Stanford - 9 (6 games) - 1.50
82. 2018 Oregon - 19 (13 games) - 1.46
82. 2021 Oregon State - 19 (13 games) - 1.46
82. 2014 USC - 19 (13 games) - 1.46
85. 2019 Arizona - 17 (12 games) - 1.42
86. 2016 USC - 17 (13 games) - 1.31
86. 2015 Washington State - 17 (13 games) - 1.31
88. 2020 Arizona State - 5 (4 games) - 1.25
89. 2017 Washington State - 15 (13 games) - 1.15
90. 2019 Utah - 14 (14 games) - 1.00
91. 2015 Stanford - 13 (14 games) - 0.93
92. 2014 Stanford - 12 (13 games) - 0.92
92. 2021 UCLA - 11 (12 games) - 0.92
94. 2016 Washington State - 11 (13 games) - 0.85
95. 2019 Washington State - 10 (13 games) - 0.77
96. 2018 Washington State - 9 (13 games) - 0.69

Observations:

* Shannon Turley was fired in April 2019. It is impossible not to draw a line between that date and a drop-off in Stanford's strength and conditioning but the propensity toward injury (or at least absences of contributing players) started at the tail end of Turley's tenure. The 2014, 2015, and 2016 teams were all healthier than the Pac-12 norm, with 2014 and 2015 spectacularly so. But 2016 was hovering around the median and then 2017 flipped over to the other side of the median. Turley's last team, 2018, was his most injury-prone.

* Still, the drop-off after that is eye-popping. 2019, as I don't need to remind anybody, was catastrophic in terms of injuries. 2020 was, of course a weird year for everybody and less comparable to all the other data points, but for what it's worth we stayed healthy for that half season. But then the only other full season without Turley beside 2019 was back to being very injury-prone. Part of the reason I wanted to do this analysis was to see if our coaches are right about all the rotten injury luck in 2021. In a word: yes. Last year was bottom 16 percent of Pac-12 seasons in terms of number of games missed by the top contributors.

* The question all of us have to be asking is the extent to which rotten injury seasons are pure luck or reflective of strength/weakness/scheme/playcalling/etc. such that certain programs can be expected to be more/less injury-prone heading into a season. One way that occurs to me to think about propensity to injury within programs over time is to look at which teams have been more or less injury-prone over the course of this entire sample. Here's what I found in terms of the team ranking over the full sweep: Oregon State (2.67), Washington (2.58), USC (2.51), Arizona State (2.45), Oregon (2.42), Cal (2.38), Colorado (2.37), Utah (2.31), Arizona (2.28), UCLA (2.24), Stanford (2.23), Washington State (1.36). Two things emerge: Washington State is sui generis, simply playing another sport than everybody else given the way they play (which incidentally is an interesting data point for those worried about injuries in sports), and otherwise these things seem to generally smooth out over time. Teams can be expected to be missing 2.37 major contributors per game but of course there is variance such that in a given season a team may experience considerably more or less luck than that.

* To my mind, this research bolsters Shaw's narrative. The last two full seasons for Stanford have been inordinately unlucky in terms of missed games by key contributors and there can be a reasonable expectation of reversion to the mean going forward. We can expect about one more key contributor per game than we had in the two seasons that serve as the major cases against Shaw.

* It would be a separate analysis to assess how much injuries are tied to team performance. That is, it's not clear how many wins (if it's even one) having one more key contributor per game would produce. Now that I have this data that might be the next project.

RE: I don't see Tavita or any of our assistants on this list! - BostonCard - 08-08-2022

Just me or did it seem like 2021 was a brutal year injury-wise across the conference? There are 23 teams that have missed more than 3 players per game, and 5 of them were 2021 teams:
Washington, ASU, Oregon, Cal, and Stanford.

As bad as we were, we were pretty much in the middle of the PAC last year for injuries.

Turley’s injury luck doesn’t seem to have transferred to Colorado, who had a greater than average number of injuries.

BC

RE: I don't see Tavita or any of our assistants on this list! - msqueri - 08-08-2022

(08-08-2022, 08:30 AM)BostonCard Wrote: Just me or did it seem like 2021 was a brutal year injury-wise across the conference? There are 23 teams that have missed more than 3 players per game, and 5 of them were 2021 teams:
Washington, ASU, Oregon, Cal, and Stanford.

As bad as we were, we were pretty much in the middle of the PAC last year for injuries.

Turley’s injury luck doesn’t seem to have transferred to Colorado, who had a greater than average number of injuries.

BC

I'm glad you mentioned this. I had meant to highlight something like it in my post. The Pac-12 North (RIP!) was really snake-bit last season. While Stanford is counting on a reversion to the mean, so are almost all of the teams we aspire to compete against (even true for USC).

I can perhaps get into this in more detail when I look at the relationship between injuries and wins, but I'd be skeptical of anybody putting too much stock into health as a principal driver for a resurgence in Stanford football. Other teams will presumably get healthier too and, most fundamentally, our crappiness in 2019 and 2021 stemmed from an inability to compete in the trenches, which was only partially due to injuries in 2019 and not even in the least due to injuries in 2021.

RE: I don't see Tavita or any of our assistants on this list! - Phogge - 08-08-2022

Time to juice up. Have another shot of Dianabol!

Is anybody aware of any studies of East German swimmers now of middle age and any bad health consequences of their drugging? Covered a meet in Utrecht in the 70’s and they didn’t look exactly like girls.

RE: I don't see Tavita or any of our assistants on this list! - BobK - 08-08-2022

Or pre 1989 Several Women's track World records still held by East Germans