Sports: Money Doesn't Guarantee Success in NBA, NFL

As soon as I published Money Doesn't Guarantee Success, But... about the direct correlation between spending money and success in Major League Baseball, I knew there would be a follow-up.

Well, here it is.

Such an article is incomplete without doing a similar study in the other two major sports leagues, the NBA and NFL. We've already proven that there is more parity in those leagues, both financially and results based.

That said, how much does the amount of money a franchise spends in those leagues determine success?

Whereas I used data from both the past five and 10 years for baseball, I'll focus only on the five year window for the NFL and NBA. The reason for this is that I used USAToday for the baseball data and want to do the same for the other two leagues. They do not provide information back far enough for a 10 year study.

Major League Baseball
You've already seen it, but let's show the chart again...

Team	5 yr %	$ Avg	W/L Rank	$ Rank	Diff
NY Yankees	.590	$200,627,941	1	1	0
LA Angels	.586	$108,674,798	2	4	2
Boston	.577	$128,353,439	3	2	-1
Philadelphia	.552	$96,899,494	4	10	6
St. Louis	.541	$89,702,917	5	13	8
Minnesota	.533	$62,650,708	6	22	16
Chicago Sox	.529	$100,771,666	7	7	0
NY Mets	.527	$120,957,962	8	3	-5
LA Dodgers	.519	$101,788,768	9	6	-3
Cleveland	.510	$63,951,300	10	20	10
Detroit	.510	$99,931,115	10	8	-2
Chicago Cubs	.507	$106,856,519	12	5	-7
Atlanta	.507	$92,599,372	13	11	-2
Toronto	.507	$75,581,900	13	15	2
Milwaukee	.505	$65,921,933	15	18	3
Oakland	.503	$61,462,581	16	24	8
Houston	.499	$89,803,266	17	12	-5
Florida	.498	$32,911,967	18	30	12
Texas	.494	$65,657,492	19	19	0
Colorado	.492	$57,533,700	20	25	5
San Diego	.490	$61,741,871	21	23	2
Arizona	.488	$62,760,063	22	21	-1
San Francisco	.472	$85,937,185	23	14	-9
Seattle	.470	$99,749,130	24	9	-15
Cincinnati	.465	$67,876,655	25	17	-8
Tampa Bay	.463	$39,270,833	26	29	3
Baltimore	.426	$74,870,527	27	16	-11
Washington	.424	$52,872,200	28	27	-1
Pittsburgh	.409	$44,154,273	29	28	-1
Kansas City	.404	$56,011,267	30	26	-4

The measure for a success vs. money spent correlation here is having a small number of teams fall outside of the +/- nine range when comparing win/loss rank and payroll rank.

For baseball, there were five teams that fell outside of this range: Three teams found ways to succeed without spending large sums of money and two spent a lot of money without success.

Every other team fell within a reasonably expected range of success based on the amount of money they shelled out on payroll.

National Basketball Association
While there is a soft cap in the NBA, that certainly doesn't prevent some teams from spending more than others. In fact, these teams can still spend large sums of money, but face the dollar for dollar tax after a certain threshold.

Following is the chart for the NBA:

Team	5 yr %	$ Avg	W/L Rank	$ Rank	Diff
San Antonio	.707	$55,742,851	1	27	26
Dallas	.698	$80,426,300	2	2	0
Phoenix	.678	$65,738,866	3	7	4
Detroit	.656	$65,273,290	4	8	4
Cleveland	.617	$67,605,767	5	3	-2
Houston	.598	$63,833,037	6	11	5
LA Lakers	.593	$66,723,331	7	5	-2
Denver	.590	$62,561,401	8	12	4
Boston	.561	$62,442,082	9	13	4
Orlando	.544	$60,110,569	10	18	8
Utah	.537	$56,509,465	11	24	13
Miami	.520	$64,423,567	12	10	-2
Chicago	.515	$53,725,606	13	28	15
Charlotte/New Orleans Hornets	.488	$56,124,018	14	25	11
New Jersey	.488	$58,791,823	14	20	6
Philadelphia	.480	$64,611,477	16	9	-7
Indiana	.468	$66,184,370	17	6	-11
Washington	.463	$58,517,432	18	21	3
Golden State	.456	$60,801,041	19	16	-3
Sacramento	.444	$67,338,662	20	4	-16
Toronto	.441	$58,872,956	21	19	-2
Portland	.427	$57,782,460	22	23	1
LA Clippers	.405	$56,074,913	23	26	3
Vancouver/Memphis	.395	$60,208,536	24	17	-7
Seattle/Oklahoma City	.393	$60,987,577	25	15	-10
Milwaukee	.385	$58,008,366	26	22	-4
Minnesota	.378	$61,154,474	27	14	-13
Atlanta	.373	$50,360,051	28	29	1
Charlotte Bobcats	.351	$43,020,428	29	30	1
New York	.351	$91,709,481	29	1	-28

So, there were five teams that fell out of a reasonable win/loss vs. payroll disparity in baseball and nine in the NBA. Without looking at any more data, we can already make the statement that money is less likely to buy you success in the NBA than in Major League Baseball.

But let's not stop only with the nine vs. five numbers. Let's look at the "quality" of those nine vs. five.

In baseball, no team exceeded their expected range by more than 16. An example would be having the 28th highest payroll and finishing with the 12th best record (or vice versa).

In the NBA, three teams exceeded their expected range by more than 16. In fact, one of the best and one of the worst teams can be used as prime examples of how money does not directly correlate to success in the NBA.

The New York Knicks are a famous example of a team that spends exorbitant amounts of money without success. They have the highest payroll during the past five years, but with only the 28th best record to show for it.

On the other hand, the San Antonio Spurs are an example of winning without spending large sums of money. They have the league's best record during the past five years, but only the 27th highest payroll.

Also important to point out that it is the Spurs' choice to spend less, giving them payroll flexibility. They are not at a disadvantage as a result of spending less. They still have stars (Tim Duncan, Manu Ginobili, and Tony Parker) on their team. They simply spend more intelligently than the Knicks.

National Football League
If you thought the NBA was a nice example of money not guaranteeing success, you're in for a treat with the NFL. There is no correlation between payroll and success in the NFL. None.

Let's take a look:

Team	5 yr %	$ Avg	W/L Rank	$ Rank	Diff
Indianapolis	.788	$99,396,969	1	6	5
New England	.788	$97,443,207	1	13	12
Pittsburgh	.700	$98,265,425	3	9	6
San Diego	.675	$93,807,798	4	22	18
Denver	.588	$92,023,896	5	28	23
NY Giants	.588	$92,769,657	5	27	22
Philadelphia	.581	$98,581,955	7	8	1
Dallas	.575	$103,003,482	8	3	-5
Carolina	.563	$98,125,795	9	11	2
Chicago	.563	$96,428,079	9	15	6
Jacksonville	.563	$93,845,641	9	21	12
Seattle	.563	$100,922,646	9	4	-5
Baltimore	.550	$97,697,184	13	12	-1
Atlanta	.513	$93,361,478	14	23	9
Green Bay	.513	$87,071,459	14	32	18
Minnesota	.513	$105,671,155	14	2	-12
Tennessee	.500	$90,651,175	17	29	12
Cincinnati	.481	$92,982,068	18	25	7
Tampa Bay	.475	$87,394,887	19	31	12
Washington	.475	$105,956,632	19	1	-18
NY Jets	.463	$95,248,006	21	19	-2
New Orleans	.450	$100,464,296	22	5	-17
Buffalo	.438	$92,854,574	23	26	3
Arizona	.413	$96,398,273	24	16	-8
Kansas City	.400	$88,372,411	25	30	5
Houston	.388	$98,898,660	26	7	-19
Miami	.388	$93,952,520	26	20	-6
Cleveland	.350	$96,948,225	28	14	-14
St. Louis	.338	$95,400,482	29	18	-11
San Francisco	.313	$93,327,309	30	24	-6
Detroit	.263	$95,737,560	31	17	-14
Oakland	.250	$98,130,065	32	10	-22

So let's recap. In Major League Baseball, there are five teams during the past five seasons who's win/loss rank vs. payroll rank is +/-10 or greater. In the NBA, there were nine such teams.

In the NFL, there are 16 teams that fit this description. Half. Eight that exceed MLB's largest range buster of 16.

Arguably the most successful team during the past five years (or decade, for that matter), the New England Patriots have the 13th highest payroll covering the past five seasons.

The Washington Redskins spend the most. Yes, those Redskins.

The team that spends the least is the Green Bay Packers, who have the 14th best record.

In Conclusion
These results shouldn't be particularly surprising, but it's good to get confirmation. In baseball, money often wins championships. At the very least, having money provides a significant advantage, and not spending is a disadvantage.

The NBA and NFL have salary cap systems in place for the purpose of preventing such a situation. In fact, one might even say that in a hard cap scenario that spending too much money can be a major hindrance.

In these two leagues, it is the teams that best manage the cap -- not spend the most money -- that are typically most successful. It's the strategy of having the best players, the most productive players, for as long as possible while staying within their financial restrictions.

Imagine that? Strategy, sound decisions, and fiscal restraint result in success. In baseball, those who spend the most will most often win.

There is something inherently wrong with this.