tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38600807.post802815268742764273..comments2023-11-05T04:16:44.937-05:00Comments on Advanced Football Analytics (formerly Advanced NFL Stats): Team Efficiency Rankings - Week 15Unknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger12125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38600807.post-44049641954768991852009-12-22T05:54:42.945-05:002009-12-22T05:54:42.945-05:00Hi Brian,
I have been following you blog for a wh...Hi Brian,<br /><br />I have been following you blog for a while now and as a big NFL fan. I must say that i have found your site a great help with my NFL betting. Just wanted to say Many Thanks for your insite.<br /><br />Many Thanks<br /><br />Mr Sport UKMr Spork Ukhttp://mrsportuk.co.uknoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38600807.post-357700561168791372009-12-17T19:34:58.848-05:002009-12-17T19:34:58.848-05:00Regarding NFC East and AFC west teams being ranked...Regarding NFC East and AFC west teams being ranked 3,4,5,6, and 8. Those teams have performed incredibly poorly when playing other top teams<br /><br />The NFC East teams listed in the top 8 are 0-9 and negative 102 pts when playing teams listed in your top 15. I really doubt that if they were the 4th, 6th and 8th best teams in the NFL that they would produce such weak results against other top 1/2 teams.<br /><br />Additionally SD and Den - the top teams the NFC East has lost most of the 9 games I mentioned (5) have preformed very poorly against your top 15 teams other than beating up on the NFC East. <br />Their record against your top 15 when not playing each other or the NFC East 1-5 - negative 65 pts.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38600807.post-34698643602669873162009-12-16T20:30:23.157-05:002009-12-16T20:30:23.157-05:00Brian, have you ever toyed with using data from pa...Brian, have you ever toyed with using data from past seasons to see if it increases correlation? For example, doing some sort of linear combination of 2009 passing efficiency with 2008 passing efficiency, etc. I feel that model would be less succeptible to regression to the mean since most NFL data (from season to season) is relevant to the current team. At what point do you think increasing the dataset (in the NFL) compromises the process of predicting the current teams' future statistics? I ask because predicting MLB team success includes a significant percentage of previous (before that season) data.Marverhttp://pigskintelligence.blogspot.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38600807.post-15322033258619489132009-12-16T12:24:33.706-05:002009-12-16T12:24:33.706-05:00No over-weighting of recent games in the model thi...No over-weighting of recent games in the model this year. I've compared both methods and there was no detectable improvement in prediction accuracy when over-weighting. PIT started slow, got really good, and is now falling back down to earth.Brian Burkehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12371470711365236987noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38600807.post-13709042740006465322009-12-16T11:52:28.268-05:002009-12-16T11:52:28.268-05:00How heavily to do you weight, if at all, recent ga...How heavily to do you weight, if at all, recent games over earlier games?<br /><br />Pittsburgh is not playing like a top 10 team recently, but they looked very good early in the year.Dr Obvioushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00966038406811006557noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38600807.post-82450165901886180852009-12-16T00:31:46.848-05:002009-12-16T00:31:46.848-05:00Thanks guys, appreciate it.Thanks guys, appreciate it.Natenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38600807.post-5135783649567562832009-12-16T00:24:54.353-05:002009-12-16T00:24:54.353-05:00Thanks, Zach. That's just about on the money! ...Thanks, Zach. That's just about on the money! It'll be .71 I think when the numbers come out.Brian Burkehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12371470711365236987noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38600807.post-59925416822167511572009-12-15T23:55:47.490-05:002009-12-15T23:55:47.490-05:00Nate, you can use the log5 method to find estimate...Nate, you can use the log5 method to find estimated win probability. http://www.sonicscentral.com/apbrmetrics/viewtopic.php?t=14&highlight=log5<br /><br />So the Saints at .80, facing the Cowboys at .71, with a .59 HFA yields a 70% chance the Saints win. As an approximation, for close matchups you can simply do:<br /><br />GWP_team1 - GWP_team2 + .500 + HFA<br /><br />So the WP for the Saints:<br /><br />.80 - .71 + .5 + .09 = 68%.Zachnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38600807.post-84489582838033410412009-12-15T19:05:08.482-05:002009-12-15T19:05:08.482-05:00Alright, so lets take the DAL @ NO game as an exam...Alright, so lets take the DAL @ NO game as an example. NO has a .80 GWP, and DAL has .71, and the game's in NO. So that's a .09 advantage based on GWP and a .09 GWP for NO being at home. <br /><br />Would that make it a .59 chance NO wins and .41 that DAL wins, as an approximation? <br /><br />Is the math to get it precisely somewhere on this site?Natenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38600807.post-66987951848635355842009-12-15T14:07:54.231-05:002009-12-15T14:07:54.231-05:00Sure. You can do it precisely with some math, but ...Sure. You can do it precisely with some math, but the quick way is to just compare GWP. Throw in home field, which is worth about 0.09 for even match-ups and worth 0.05 for mismatches.Brian Burkehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12371470711365236987noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38600807.post-46180430424901634882009-12-15T14:04:37.510-05:002009-12-15T14:04:37.510-05:00Is there any way to get from GWP to a specific gam...Is there any way to get from GWP to a specific game probability? I use your weekly game probablities for betting purposes when they come out, but Thursday is kind of late in the week. Any correlation between GWP and game probablity?Natenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38600807.post-80169540870020862392009-12-15T12:36:16.912-05:002009-12-15T12:36:16.912-05:00As a complete shot in the dark first impression it...As a complete shot in the dark first impression it looks to me like the whole NFCE is about 3 spots too high. PIT looks a bit high to me too.<br /><br />I am surprised MIN and GB are quite that low, but they have played easy schedules.<br /><br />Anyway interesting stuff as always. If I have some more down time at work I might try to dig into the numbers a bit to examine why some of them are so far off my intuitions.<br /><br />In the case of MIN DRANK I might point to the large amount of time they have spent in a semi-prevent when ahead.Becephalusnoreply@blogger.com