Paraag Marathe Thread

Originally posted by leakyfausett:
I got some facts for all of you. You are the annoying guys that everyone wants to kick the s**t out of at every party.

lol. yes.

Getting kinda pissy in here..

Originally posted by midrdan:

Originally posted by NinerGM:
So how did Paraag go from doing cap and contracts to screwing with Harbaugh and moneyballing the 49ers in one season? This logic has to be explained.

It hasn't been one season. You aren't following the bouncing ball. Marathe joined the 49ers in 2001 from Bain, which was hired to perform analytics on draft value by Bill Walsh. Marathe came up with a system that apparently impressed 49ers brass and he was hired as a result. He has, since 2001, steadily become more influential within the organization. Both he and the organization acknowledge that he is in charge of the salary cap and contract negotiations, and has been for some time. He apparently prefers metrics when it comes to drafting players - he has said that those metrics apply to how the 49ers evaluate and draft players.

In 2005, when Marathe was 28, he was appointed the assistant to the General Manager. John York publicly affirmed that he relied on Marathe in identifying and hiring Coach Nolan. His ascension within the organization closely paralleled Jed York's (then 23 years old) involvement with the team. Marathe was given authority at the time to hire non-scouts to essentially "scout" players using his statistical model. http://www.sfgate.com/sports/article/WHO-IS-PARAAG-MARATHE-Numbers-added-up-to-2703495.php.

And in 2008 - the following article confirmed at least one source within the 49ers organization had reported that Marathe's influence extended to player selection and play calling: http://www.sanfranciscosentinel.com/?p=17011

"Mike Holmgren was under consideration for the coaching job of the San Francisco 49ers in 2004, but a mathematical calculation by the owners' son and the team's number-cruncher killed any hopes of hiring Holmgren. The 49ers selected Mike Nolan instead—based on another set of mathematical calculations and data by the two young men. Using a statistical analysis devised by 49ers number-cruncher Paraag Marathe and business school graduate Jed York, son of owners John and Denise DeBartolo York, the pair determined that no head coach of a Super Bowl winning team had ever left that team and won a Super Bowl as the head coach of another National Football League franchise.

Jed York and Paraag Marathe's numbers-crunching analysis came after the team fired then Coach Dennis Erickson after his losing 2004 football season. Both Marathe and York the Younger presented their evidence that no Super Bowl winning coach had ever joined another team as head coach and won another Super Bowl with the new organization.

"Jed and Paraag devised an entire series of spread sheets that provided statistical outcomes of various coaching choices," according to a 49ers insider. "They had reams of papers to prove that Holmgren was a bad choice and that Nolan was a good choice based upon his record in Baltimore and history at the Giants, Jets and Redskins. This year Paraag and Jed continue to use a statistical analysis combined with game films to make choices about what plays to run and what players to draft or acquire."

omg.... now i'm depressed.

Originally posted by midrdan:

It hasn't been one season. You aren't following the bouncing ball. Marathe joined the 49ers in 2001 from Bain, which was hired to perform analytics on draft value by Bill Walsh. Marathe came up with a system that apparently impressed 49ers brass and he was hired as a result. He has, since 2001, steadily become more influential within the organization. Both he and the organization acknowledge that he is in charge of the salary cap and contract negotiations, and has been for some time. He apparently prefers metrics when it comes to drafting players - he has said that those metrics apply to how the 49ers evaluate and draft players.

In 2005, when Marathe was 28, he was appointed the assistant to the General Manager. John York publicly affirmed that he relied on Marathe in identifying and hiring Coach Nolan. His ascension within the organization closely paralleled Jed York's (then 23 years old) involvement with the team. Marathe was given authority at the time to hire non-scouts to essentially "scout" players using his statistical model. http://www.sfgate.com/sports/article/WHO-IS-PARAAG-MARATHE-Numbers-added-up-to-2703495.php.

And in 2008 - the following article confirmed at least one source within the 49ers organization had reported that Marathe's influence extended to player selection and play calling: http://www.sanfranciscosentinel.com/?p=17011

"Mike Holmgren was under consideration for the coaching job of the San Francisco 49ers in 2004, but a mathematical calculation by the owners' son and the team's number-cruncher killed any hopes of hiring Holmgren. The 49ers selected Mike Nolan instead—based on another set of mathematical calculations and data by the two young men. Using a statistical analysis devised by 49ers number-cruncher Paraag Marathe and business school graduate Jed York, son of owners John and Denise DeBartolo York, the pair determined that no head coach of a Super Bowl winning team had ever left that team and won a Super Bowl as the head coach of another National Football League franchise.

Jed York and Paraag Marathe's numbers-crunching analysis came after the team fired then Coach Dennis Erickson after his losing 2004 football season. Both Marathe and York the Younger presented their evidence that no Super Bowl winning coach had ever joined another team as head coach and won another Super Bowl with the new organization.

"Jed and Paraag devised an entire series of spread sheets that provided statistical outcomes of various coaching choices," according to a 49ers insider. "They had reams of papers to prove that Holmgren was a bad choice and that Nolan was a good choice based upon his record in Baltimore and history at the Giants, Jets and Redskins. This year Paraag and Jed continue to use a statistical analysis combined with game films to make choices about what plays to run and what players to draft or acquire."

How was Mike Holmgren under consideration for the job in 2004? Were they gonna steal him from Seattle? Holmgren went to Seattle in 1999 and led them to a SB in 2005.

Also any system that picks Mike Nolan over Mike Holmgren is a flawed system and should immediately be reworked. Let's see, DC vs SB winning uber WCO mind...how f**ked is that?

WHAT? So we could have had Holmgren in 2004, but this ass clown is the reason that we went with Nolan instead? Ok, now I'm pissed.

Originally posted by midrdan:

Originally posted by NinerGM:
So how did Paraag go from doing cap and contracts to screwing with Harbaugh and moneyballing the 49ers in one season? This logic has to be explained.

It hasn't been one season. You aren't following the bouncing ball. Marathe joined the 49ers in 2001 from Bain, which was hired to perform analytics on draft value by Bill Walsh. Marathe came up with a system that apparently impressed 49ers brass and he was hired as a result. He has, since 2001, steadily become more influential within the organization. Both he and the organization acknowledge that he is in charge of the salary cap and contract negotiations, and has been for some time. He apparently prefers metrics when it comes to drafting players - he has said that those metrics apply to how the 49ers evaluate and draft players.

In 2005, when Marathe was 28, he was appointed the assistant to the General Manager. John York publicly affirmed that he relied on Marathe in identifying and hiring Coach Nolan. His ascension within the organization closely paralleled Jed York's (then 23 years old) involvement with the team. Marathe was given authority at the time to hire non-scouts to essentially "scout" players using his statistical model. http://www.sfgate.com/sports/article/WHO-IS-PARAAG-MARATHE-Numbers-added-up-to-2703495.php.

And in 2008 - the following article confirmed at least one source within the 49ers organization had reported that Marathe's influence extended to player selection and play calling: http://www.sanfranciscosentinel.com/?p=17011

"Mike Holmgren was under consideration for the coaching job of the San Francisco 49ers in 2004, but a mathematical calculation by the owners' son and the team's number-cruncher killed any hopes of hiring Holmgren. The 49ers selected Mike Nolan instead—based on another set of mathematical calculations and data by the two young men. Using a statistical analysis devised by 49ers number-cruncher Paraag Marathe and business school graduate Jed York, son of owners John and Denise DeBartolo York, the pair determined that no head coach of a Super Bowl winning team had ever left that team and won a Super Bowl as the head coach of another National Football League franchise.

Jed York and Paraag Marathe's numbers-crunching analysis came after the team fired then Coach Dennis Erickson after his losing 2004 football season. Both Marathe and York the Younger presented their evidence that no Super Bowl winning coach had ever joined another team as head coach and won another Super Bowl with the new organization.

"Jed and Paraag devised an entire series of spread sheets that provided statistical outcomes of various coaching choices," according to a 49ers insider. "They had reams of papers to prove that Holmgren was a bad choice and that Nolan was a good choice based upon his record in Baltimore and history at the Giants, Jets and Redskins. This year Paraag and Jed continue to use a statistical analysis combined with game films to make choices about what plays to run and what players to draft or acquire."

So Marathe chose Nolan over Holmgren just because over some "metrics"? Like what? How many likes Nolan had on Facebook? Every day I'm finding this matter more depressing how this dumbass became team president with his miracle juice skills. We got back to "Real" Dark Ages but my only hope is another Black Plague strike down 49ers FO.

Originally posted by blunt_probe:

WHAT? So we could have had Holmgren in 2004, but this ass clown is the reason that we went with Nolan instead? Ok, now I'm pissed.

I still don't think this was possible....he led Seattle to the SB in 2005. I don't recall him being a FA coach. Maybe one of their metrics was under contract with another team as a HC.

Originally posted by NIMV4683:

So Marathe chose Nolan over Holmgren just because over some "metrics"? Like what? How many likes Nolan had on Facebook? Every day I'm finding this matter more depressing how this dumbass became team president with his miracle juice skills. We got back to "Real" Dark Ages but my only hope is another Black Plague strike down 49ers FO.

Holmgren wasn't available.

I'm leaking from my bunghole right about now with all this mess, but whatever, I'm still trying to decide if I like it better now, or the way it felt in '99

Originally posted by btthepunk:

Holmgren wasn't available.

That what I thought as well. So Holmgren failed miserably on the "available" metric.

And this, from Bloomberg, confirms Marathe's meteoric rise through the organization: http://www.bloomberg.com/research/stocks/private/person.asp?personId=71545615&privcapId=7728258

The guy has been - Assistant to the General Manager then Director of Football Operations then Vice President of Football Operations then Chief Operating Officer, and now President.

His philosophy, in his own words, from a 2005 interview: http://www.sfweekly.com/sanfrancisco/offensive-line/Content?oid=2158707&storyPage=2

"The name of the game is not finding the best players, as conventional wisdom says," according to Marathe. "The name of the game is finding the best possible players for the lowest price. ... It's just being smart about managing your money. It's what a financial adviser would do for a client." Two off-season acquisitions stand out: Marques Douglas, an underrated defensive end from Baltimore whom Pro Football Prospectus described as possibly "the most economically sound signing of free agency"; and, perhaps counterintuitively, Jonas Jennings, a 28-year-old left tackle who has missed most of the season with a shoulder injury. In March, Jennings signed a reported seven-year, $36 million contract. "People thought Jonas Jennings was an expensive free agent," Marathe says. "But... left tackles -- productive ones -- play a long time, and he was the youngest possible unrestricted free agent." Moreover, according to the NFL Players Association, the average base salary for an offensive tackle with four years of experience is about $5.8 million a year. "He's clearly better than an average left tackle, in our scouting view," Marathe adds. "To us, it was a great value."

His philosophy on coaching, from the same article:

Part of the problem, Marathe says, was that the Niners were one of three teams looking for a head coach, "and we were the only team doing the non-conventional approach." In football, he says, the "common business practice" is the old boy network: "'I knew somebody who knew somebody who knew somebody else who knows him.'" Or maybe there's a hot college coach whose name gets dropped nightly on SportsCenter. The 49ers, however, "wanted to be agnostic about the process," Marathe says. Sifting through the past 25 years of NFL history, they identified a dozen or so of the most successful coaches based on measures like playoff appearances, average victories per season, and team improvement in their first two years on the job. The list that resulted could probably be drawn up in 10 minutes on a cocktail napkin in a sports bar -- Joe Gibbs, Bill Walsh, Bill Belichick, Andy Reid, Mike Shanahan, and so on -- but what happened next was unique: They identified the traits those "superstar head coaches" had in common, traits that Marathe placed in two "buckets." "The first bucket is, What did those superstars possess prior to getting the job?" he explains. "Who else did those superstars work for before they got their chance? What was their background? In their previous jobs, if they were coordinators, did they improve their unit? The second bucket is, What did they possess during their job that made them successful? That was a little more subjective, but we were able to do a ton of research." From his analysis, he discovered that the best coaches tended to have worked on the staffs of winning teams, often under other top coaches. In addition, he found that nearly all of the superstar coaches were disciplinarians by reputation.

Using those traits as screening criteria, the 49ers whittled down the list of candidates to just a handful -- coaches who hit on most, if not all, of the important measures. "Boiling the ocean," Marathe calls it. An advisory committee that included former 49ers players and coaches further thinned the list, down to five who would go on to interview. (Noticeably absent from the interviews were any college coaches. Marathe, while emphasizing that there were "a lot of other factors," points to the track record of college coaches making the jump to the pros without any prior NFL experience. Only two or three have had career winning records.)

The interviews -- all but one of them conducted in a hotel in St. Louis, away from media scrutiny in the Bay Area -- were epic sessions, some lasting six, seven hours, straight through lunch and into the afternoon. The questions ranged across the spectrum, but they all coalesced around a single point. "You're not just looking for a guy who's a head coach," Marathe says. "You want a guy who can manage the inflows and outflows of personnel, and understands that, in the Salary Cap Era, you're going to have churn on your roster. How a coach can manage churn, or how he understands that he has to manage that churn, is an important part of today's football knowledge."

Originally posted by Ike49:

I'm leaking from my bunghole right about now with all this mess, but whatever, I'm still trying to decide if I like it better now, or the way it felt in '99

I still go with '99 being worse....it was the end of a better more successful era.

Originally posted by Niners816:

Originally posted by Ike49:

I'm leaking from my bunghole right about now with all this mess, but whatever, I'm still trying to decide if I like it better now, or the way it felt in '99

I still go with '99 being worse....it was the end of a better more successful era.

You are absolutely right, I feel less dramatic this time.

Originally posted by Niners816:

Originally posted by blunt_probe:

WHAT? So we could have had Holmgren in 2004, but this ass clown is the reason that we went with Nolan instead? Ok, now I'm pissed.

I still don't think this was possible....he led Seattle to the SB in 2005. I don't recall him being a FA coach. Maybe one of their metrics was under contract with another team as a HC.

The seahawks were 10-6 in 2003, and went 9-7 in 2004, both teams losing in the WC round. Maybe Holmgren didn't have much of an attachment to that organization and was willing to bolt if he felt he didn't have the best job security.

Not sure if Holmgren was available or not ... he has always thought of returning to SF as his ideal scenario though. I think, however, that the analytics are simply pointing out that Holmgren would not be a good hire compared to, say, Mike Nolan, because of Holmgren's history and the fact that few coaches with that history went on to win another SB.

Originally posted by blunt_probe:

The seahawks were 10-6 in 2003, and went 9-7 in 2004, both teams losing in the WC round. Maybe Holmgren didn't have much of an attachment to that organization and was willing to bolt if he felt he didn't have the best job security.

If he was available and dumbf**k pick Nolan over him that's proves furthermore how messed up his analytics are. I'd love to see the "reams" of data that shows an advantage of Mike Nolan over Mike Holmgren.

Can't be shocked though, same s**t apparently spit out tomsula as an NFL HC.