Here is the table including last nights games (NASL hasn't updated the single table page of their standings, only the conference page which is kind of funny as the conferences don't mean jack).

This means that fordprefect can do more amazing number calculations!

Standings:

Team GP PT
Austin 7 14
Portland 7 11
Rochester 7 11
Montreal 6 11
FC Tampa 6 9
Vancouver 6 9
Baltimore 7 7
Minnesota 8 7
Puerto Rico 3 6
Carolina 5 5
Miami 5 5
ACK St Louis 7 4

Obviously the big wild card is Puerto Rico with only 3 games played. Carolina is also a little shady, but they have one hell of a road trip coming up. The big surprise is obviously CPB and all the points they picked up on a crazy 4 game 11 day road trip against Vancouver, Portland, Austin and Rochester!

Our Stars need to grab points.

We also need someone to link to that site that calculates playoff possibilities, as it is never too early to discuss Playoffs!

Fordprefect brought out the stats geek in me.

I agree that comparisons midseason - especially right now - are messy due to the uneven number of games played. I also agree that the EPL probably displayed greater parity in terms of points per game than the USSFD2 table currently shows, but I don't think the difference is quite as great as Fordprefect's figures suggest. I'd argue that the correct metric to look at is not the difference between the top and bottom of the table (which will necessarily be distorted by outliers) but the average and standard deviation of the range.

USSFD2 currently shows an average points per game of 1.39, with a standard deviation of 0.54. The EPL 2010 average was very similar at 1.37, but with a smaller standard deviation, 0.48, suggesting somewhat greater parity, but not hugely greater.

Looking at it another way, the possible range of points per game is from 0 to 3, so examining how many teams are in the middle of that space (between 1 and 2 points per game) should give an additional rough sense of parity. The EPL had 13 teams (65% of the league) in that range, while the USSFD2 has 7, or 58% of the league.

Again, the unequal number of games played in our league makes these comparisons pretty bogus, since a game here or there has a disproportionate impact.

It's also worth considering the fact that Portsmouth had nine points deducted for entering administration - taking that into account, their points per game should be a mere 0.5. However, I agree with Fordprefect's methodology in keeping those nine points in the calculation, since we're trying to evaluate the parity in team performance, not financial management.

[Oh - and I did my math based on the PPG figures in Fordprefect's post, so it doesn't include last night's games. Also, the Sports Club Stats guy doesn't seem to be doing US Division 2 this year; not sure why. He is doing the World Cup, though: http://www.sportsclubstats.com/WorldCup.html]

Does the fact that it's impossible to get 2 throw things off at all? I'm asking because I'm not good at math.

Wow, wikipedia failed me, my numbers weren't even close to up to date.

Real PPG table...
Austin 2
PR 2
Mont 1.83
Port 1.57
Roch 1.57
TB 1.5
Vanc 1.5
CPB 1
Car 1
Miami 1
NSC .875
STL .57

So slightly better parity. Like others were saying, this is all kind of pointless with so few games played. I'm just a nerd.

Also, even if our team was named after the Northstars, it still wouldn't be as lame as naming them after English Championship relegation fodder with absolutely no connection to our city. New expansion team next year, 'Scunthorpe of Scranton'.

That is a matter of opinion. I know a lot of people who think that it's pretty sad. Really sad.
The Baltimore and London clubs have a connection and it is the same erh, uhm sport.

Glad that you guys got the Wild (another sorry name) and that the Twins got a new stadium and will be able to stay. Stars works a lot better than NSC Twins.

Thanks for crunching the numbers (seriously). It is fun to see some sort of comparison contrast and even if my math were good, I would have never have the ambition to attempt it.

Bernie - it's impossible to get 2 points from a single game, but having an average of 2 points per game is entirely possible (see Austin's example), as is any average from 2 to 3. So while I haven't thought it through really carefully, I don't think that would affect anything, at least once there are enough games played to start drawing meaningful conclusions.

I suppose certain values for the average are unlikely (or maybe impossible), but that should affect every team (and league) the same, and not throw off the comparisons as long as all the leagues being considered have the same rules.

Oh, I got ya. The range of "points per game" is from 0 to 3. But the range of points you can get in *A* game is from 0 to 3 except that thou cannot achieve 2.

Five is right out.