http://www.advancednflstats.com/2010/11/randomness-of-win-loss-records.html#more
My name is Padre31, and I'm not a Stat Monkey, the lockout..is..making..me do things, I normally would not do...such as post this in furtherence of Brother Deej's "variables" theory.
Maurice Smith, Roger Goodell, I hope you are happy now.:cry:
-
DevilFin13, JMHPhin, Disnardo and 2 others like this.
-
Guest
I agree with the idea. Usually you have to gather a large sample size of data to truly determine "the best". The MLB is it to the extreme. Right now, the playoffs act as the extended games to prove who is truly the best imo. I think some evidence to the point was out 1-15 season. We lost a few close games. It took a good sample size, though, to to see our 1st win (13 games). And, correct me if I'm wrong, but according to that bell curve, 6-11 win season are statistically random. 12 wins or go home!
-
Which imho KM is one of the reasons why Football does not lend itself well to Statistical Modeling, the sample is small and because there is contact it is also chaotic, for example the All Pro tackle should be worth "X" number of points towards a win in a Statistical Model, the fact they tore their Labrum in the last game means they are not as proficient as they normally are so the model cannot account for that difference.
-
Guest
I have to make the point that it may have to do with the lack of games. It can't adhere to statistical modeling because 16 games is not enough data. -
I don't know a lot of that stuff Pod, but what I do know is, its called a team game for a reason, and its our job to take those things into account, so we don't falsely accuse someone when making a projection about that players future on our team..I think the position of QB is the most important to include variables...See Dan Marino's ringless fingers..
The top of the food chain in offense is the man calling the plays..not just execution.. -
Basically Deej, the discussion we had with Ck about luck and bounces in games going against us in 2010 as one of the huge reasons why our record was not better then it was, a fumble recovery, dropped int's, Wr's slipping, all are in that 46% part called "randomness".MrClean likes this.
-
I knew the point you were trying to make brother..
A good point was made in that other thread...and that was, were our bounces attributed to poor physical traits, that led to not being able to capitolize on the opponents mistakes?..
Take our 20 to 25 easily dropped int's...Do you consider those bad bounces, bad luck or physical and mental limitations?.. -
Bad Luck, add in Henne had 1 Int dropped against him, were Sanchez had 13 dropped, and we were not getting the bounces.
"If" that was properly called a fumble recovery vs the Stealers
"if" Bess does not slip vs the Lions
"if" Carpenter does not miss 3 Fg's vs the Bills
"if" ST does not surrender an astonishing 4 or 5 returns for Td's
"if" Henne does not have the ball tipped at the LoS and land in the Db's hands and takes it down to the 1 yd line with :53 seconds left
If it an event was random, and bad, it went against us in 2010.MrClean likes this. -
.
I don't think we can include the dropped Int's as bad luck...Sean and Chris have bad hands and some mental issues in that dept..They determine the outcome with their abilities, or lackthereof, not variables...
My take on this was not that we were better than we thought, but that we could improve with certain upgrades that were holding the rest of the team back..Its really just about the blame put on a young QB, because of some destructive variables that related to him being not able to win ballgames..
Dropped int's...the players fault, and thats who they are..
Bad run game..not Qb's fault..
Predictable offensive coordinator..not QB's fault
bad special teams..not QB's fault..
no speed on offense..not QB's fault. -
Well, I also see randomness as positive outcomes, like the INT by the end of regulation against the Bengals, and also the FG in OT against the Packers, which got the wins...
The outcome of the randomness are directly affected by the talent/abilities of the personnel involved in that moment in time...
I guess what I am trying to say that there are 22 chances at randomness which affects the outcome in each play. That being the personnel on Offense, Defense or Special Teams...
Just putting out there to see if it makes sense...
and by the Way...
Happy Memorial Day... Thanks to all those men and women who have given so much to keep our way of life...siciliansith, padre31 and djphinfan like this. -
Nice post padre. Just want to add that though you can't do much statistically with a single season you can do stuff with more than one season. And within one season there are a lot of individual plays that can provide enough of a sample size to provide statistical significance. But we should definitely keep this in mind when discussing things.
-
I always thought that if you don't score more points than the other team, you then lose the game????
-
Imho, what Stats can do is show trends and be used for comparisons, but at it's core it will not be as accurate as say MLB.
I have seen enough NFL games to state not only are there odd bounces and tough breaks, but sometimes a team will simply have the wrong game plan and just get killed, ala the Saints v Seahawks in the NFC playoffs. -
This is who leads either side..and you wonder why I watch the CFL. -
i agree with randomness, but what a stat may say is random, i would call it the handful of plays that make or break almost every game you see. but these are the things you cant quantify easily and you only know them when you see them....like a RB breaking 2 tackles and getting the first down that seals the game or a critical sack. sort of like what disnardo is saying; it is moment specific.
but these events dont always happen. there are plays made and plays not made (like a dropped INT). and there are not always the same amount every game. what isnt random is that many of the same players make these types of plays