tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38600807.post592672113318186242..comments2023-11-05T04:16:44.937-05:00Comments on Advanced Football Analytics (formerly Advanced NFL Stats): The Weekly League: Notes and Ideas for Week ElevenUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger15125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38600807.post-39778861104173306372010-11-23T03:28:14.848-05:002010-11-23T03:28:14.848-05:00Princess Bride?
As to what the word means, I pref...Princess Bride?<br /><br />As to what the word means, I prefer to think of football team performance that is not predictible from past performance simply as being "not repeatable" or "not predictible" rather than the result of chance, luck, randomness. Because it can result from foresight, skill, good coaching. <br /><br />E.g., when the Giants showed up at the NFL championship game against the Bears with sneakers to switch into if the field was icy, then did and blew 'em out, that wasn't chance or randomness like a bouncing ball or play results not coming in a happy sequence. It was superior coaching in a big game. But it was not repeatable because you don't expect that situation to happen again, and if it does you'd expect the other side to have learned from the first time. (Though the Giants did that to the Bears in the NFL Championship twice, 1934 and 1956 -- some franchises learn more slowly than others.)<br /><br />One could cite other examples of coaching innovations that turned games but weren't repeatably successful because later opponents with notice of them could adjust. OK, maybe I should apologize for being pedantic since 99% of what we're talking about really is random chance, but it doesn't seem that all of it is.Jim Glassnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38600807.post-28006507029588347402010-11-22T14:45:31.419-05:002010-11-22T14:45:31.419-05:00It's inconceivable anyone wouldn't recogni...It's inconceivable anyone wouldn't recognize that reference, or my hint.Jameshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01838293735141324662noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38600807.post-79845818879237660042010-11-22T11:41:10.952-05:002010-11-22T11:41:10.952-05:00I'm stumped.I'm stumped.Brian Burkehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12371470711365236987noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38600807.post-6547690417617759902010-11-22T11:03:20.945-05:002010-11-22T11:03:20.945-05:00To me, "unlucky" is simply a word to des...To me, "unlucky" is simply a word to describe anyone who doesn't know what wonderful movie I referenced.Jonathannoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38600807.post-41656173019445221292010-11-21T16:59:45.899-05:002010-11-21T16:59:45.899-05:00To understand what's meant by teams being &quo...To understand what's meant by teams being "unlucky" or "lucky" you first need to let go of the results-driven approach of assessing the quality of a football team. The quality of a team should be measured by the process rather than the end result - i.e., a team's stats (particularly those that are reproducible and correlate strongest with winning) is a better indicator of how good they are, rather than W-L record. One untimely interception, missed field goal, or something or other can skew a W-L record.<br /><br />As Brian said, if a team is 85% to make a field goal and win the game, but misses and ends up losing, that's an extremely unfortunate event. While the game goes as a total loss in the W-L column, it really should be considered as something like .85 of a win (slightly more, considering they still could have won after missing the field goal).Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38600807.post-76363990177504839592010-11-21T16:09:51.562-05:002010-11-21T16:09:51.562-05:00What do you think it means, Jonathan?What do you think it means, Jonathan?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38600807.post-713164341111098842010-11-21T16:07:29.693-05:002010-11-21T16:07:29.693-05:00"Here unlucky means a lot of things."
Y..."Here unlucky means a lot of things."<br /><br />You keep on using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.Jonathannoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38600807.post-72371319858291854942010-11-21T14:34:35.997-05:002010-11-21T14:34:35.997-05:00terrible tradeterrible tradeAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38600807.post-66621116307012116292010-11-21T00:03:29.256-05:002010-11-21T00:03:29.256-05:00Have you looked at success rate over the years? I...Have you looked at success rate over the years? If the Pats were consistently good at this in these same years, it may be necessary to back off just how much the cheating may or may not have helped them and focus more on just how much bb was making his team better by focusing on a stat that your model didn't incorporate.Chrisnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38600807.post-23522494540590349032010-11-20T23:15:24.423-05:002010-11-20T23:15:24.423-05:00I think there is evidence that Belichick broke the...I think there is evidence that Belichick broke the rules repeatedly, at fair risk, and at considerable expense. He saw value in it, and continued the practice despite being warned by the league. I believe that he believed it gave him an advantage.<br /><br />Usually, when there is a freakish outlier like that, there is a combination of factors all working in the same direction. My best guess is that the Pats were good, and were cheating, and were lucky, and were probably good at the things the model does not detect.Brian Burkehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12371470711365236987noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38600807.post-55313456962959236832010-11-20T22:49:33.418-05:002010-11-20T22:49:33.418-05:00I remember a while back you made a post explaining...I remember a while back you made a post explaining how the Patriots, year after year, finished well above their expected win total, and that there was no way any team could have that level of sustained "luckiness" over such a long period of time. Thus you attributed New England's success to cheating, but in recent years (2007-2010) they have continued to out perform expectations based on your stats. Do you think there is something that contributes the the Pat's success that is not accounted for in your stats, is BB still somehow cheating and getting away with it, or are the Patriots just really lucky?Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05862971655648617649noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38600807.post-78183661111544632502010-11-20T15:19:26.399-05:002010-11-20T15:19:26.399-05:00Here unlucky means a lot of things, including has ...Here unlucky means a lot of things, including <i>has had poor special teams play in the past</i>. For example, if a FG kicker is typically 85% from the 25, but misses a game-winner in OT, that team would be considered unlucky.<br /><br />It also means a team has been unfortunate to have an easy schedule to date. <br /><br />But it primarily means that because of how the chips of fallen, and in what order they've fallen, a team has not converted into wins their ability to move the ball and stop other teams from moving the ball. This can be caused by random bunching or clustering effects or by sample error effects in high-leverage situations.Brian Burkehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12371470711365236987noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38600807.post-77881289644298279802010-11-20T15:03:48.961-05:002010-11-20T15:03:48.961-05:00Somehow I think "unluckiest" means "...Somehow I think "unluckiest" means "has the worst special teams play".Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38600807.post-17530954815842841752010-11-20T14:44:38.275-05:002010-11-20T14:44:38.275-05:00Unluckiest. They "should" have 7.2 wins....Unluckiest. They "should" have 7.2 wins.Carson Cistullihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07899471165689117765noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38600807.post-39048375185078918232010-11-20T14:42:35.882-05:002010-11-20T14:42:35.882-05:00does this table mean san diego is the most unlucky...does this table mean san diego is the most unlucky and atlanta is the luckiest? or visa versa?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com