Team efficiency rankings are listed below in terms of generic winning probability. The GWP is the probability a team would beat the league average team at a neutral site. Each team's opponent's GWP is also listed, which can be considered strength of schedule. The adjusted GWP (ADJGWP) modifies the generic win probability to reflect the strength of to-date opponents. A full explanation of the methodology can be found here.
| TEAM | GWP | Opp GWP | ADJGWP |
| IND | 0.91 | 0.39 | 0.85 |
| DEN | 0.94 | 0.31 | 0.85 |
| NE | 0.97 | 0.17 | 0.80 |
| PHI | 0.80 | 0.51 | 0.80 |
| DAL | 0.91 | 0.28 | 0.80 |
| PIT | 0.90 | 0.22 | 0.77 |
| TB | 0.85 | 0.28 | 0.74 |
| JAX | 0.63 | 0.60 | 0.68 |
| SEA | 0.61 | 0.63 | 0.68 |
| TEN | 0.61 | 0.52 | 0.62 |
| WAS | 0.60 | 0.50 | 0.60 |
| HOU | 0.54 | 0.61 | 0.59 |
| GB | 0.59 | 0.44 | 0.57 |
| ARI | 0.53 | 0.45 | 0.51 |
| CIN | 0.52 | 0.38 | 0.46 |
| NYG | 0.34 | 0.70 | 0.44 |
| SF | 0.40 | 0.54 | 0.42 |
| MIA | 0.37 | 0.58 | 0.41 |
| MIN | 0.49 | 0.35 | 0.41 |
| KC | 0.46 | 0.38 | 0.40 |
| CAR | 0.47 | 0.33 | 0.38 |
| DET | 0.34 | 0.50 | 0.35 |
| BAL | 0.34 | 0.43 | 0.30 |
| BUF | 0.08 | 0.94 | 0.30 |
| ATL | 0.26 | 0.53 | 0.28 |
| NYJ | 0.23 | 0.56 | 0.26 |
| STL | 0.20 | 0.57 | 0.23 |
| SD | 0.20 | 0.56 | 0.23 |
| OAK | 0.23 | 0.49 | 0.22 |
| CLE | 0.19 | 0.55 | 0.22 |
| NO | 0.03 | 0.79 | 0.18 |
| CHI | 0.13 | 0.52 | 0.14 |
I've been going through some of your past posts to figure out how you are accounting for opponent strength. I understand that you are averaging the GWP of previous opponents to obtain OPP GWP.
I thought that you were adding the logit value from GWP to the logit value of OPP GWP and then recalculating the ADJGWP using that adjusted logit, but I think there is a step missing.
Take Buffalo for example. Their GWP is 0.08, for a logit value of -2.44. Their OPP GWP is 0.94 for a logit value of 2.75. Summing these together we get an adjusted logit of 0.31, which gets us an ADJ GWP of 57.7%. Your table, however, shows an ADJ GWP of 0.30. Maybe there is another step in the process that you have not explained???
You've got the process right. Later on in the year I improved the adjustment by iterating it. Once I've adjusted all the team's GWP, that changes everyone's OppGWP, which changes everyone's GWP, and so on. I iterated until the solution converges.
It looks to be a typo in the chart. It should be 0.28 I think. See if that makes sense. NO looks wrong too, It's probably 0.13 for them. The Opp GWP looks off for BUF and NO looks off too.