A good question.

I think a data point for a team over a whole season would be more informative. I asked the question originally to see how consistent a high ppg over a season was with doing well in the league and winning games, and how much variation there was (and therefore how much is down to chance).

Not that any of that would alter my or anyone elses tactics.

The points plotted on the graph are the average ppg for a team at the end of the season vs. the winning percentage of that team at the end of the season. For this season, the points are just the current standings.

rmcneeley wrote:

The points plotted on the graph are the average ppg for a team at the end of the season vs. the winning percentage of that team at the end of the season. For this season, the points are just the current standings.

So it is correct that some teams average 220+ ppg over a season, and fail to win a single game?

Yeah there's no way thats true...

All star teams appear to be in the mix. let me try to pull them out and get another graph up.

The Broham should be following this post with the new and improved PPG vs. winning percentage graph but here are the results:

By removing the all-star teams and some unintentional (0,0) points in the data, the graph looks a lot more like what you would expect. Also, this allowed Excel to calculate a trendline that fits the data better. The new equation is y= .0162x - 2.614

Here's the data for my teams:

Team Name	League	PPG	Record	Win %	y= .028x-5 (old)	y=.0162x - 2.614 (new)
Shake 'N' Bake	Travishamockery	197	5-3	0.625	0.516	0.5774
Chuck Norris	Paris Hilton	201	4-4	0.500	0.628	0.6422
The Sixteen Horsemen	The Octagon	214	7-1	0.875	0.992	0.8528

The new equation is slightly more accurate for Shake and The Sixteen, but not so much for Chuck Norris.

good work!