Power rankings laugher... - New England Patriots Forums

***PatsRI*** · 01-11-2006, 12:42 PM

this one from Aaron Schatz.
http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/5237156

I usually don't even care but I do read them and had to share this one. He has Washington, at least they're in the playoffs, and the Bengals ahead of the Pats. A team that lost last week ahead of the Pats? Also says the 10 game win streak in the playoffs is overrated.

Just read that they used a statstical formula to rank them. Still funny though.

***PATSNUTme*** · 01-11-2006, 12:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PatsRI

this one from Aaron Schatz.
http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/5237156

I usually don't even care but I do read them and had to share this one. He has Washington, at least they're in the playoffs, and the Bengals ahead of the Pats. A team that lost last week ahead of the Pats? Also says the 10 game win streak in the playoffs is overrated.

Just read that they used a statstical formula to rank them. Still funny though.

Aaron Schatz is overrated. See, anyone can do that, try it.

Chris · 01-11-2006, 01:12 PM

id be interested in hearing from him why 10-0 in the playoffs is overrated? 16-0 in the reg season could be if you dont win the superbowl..

onegameatatime · 01-11-2006, 01:42 PM

10-0 is not overrated as an accomplishment for a franchise. But as a predictor of future success, I would agree it is overrated. I believe that the only people who started in the 2001 playoffs and are starting now are TB, Tedy, Willie, and Seymour ... whichy makes the franchise accomplishment even greater.

upstater1 · 01-11-2006, 01:47 PM

his pants.

***alamo*** · 01-11-2006, 02:47 PM

Have you considered reading the other thread on this posted today?

Oh, and I agree the 10-0 is overrated, because it's just a byproduct of winning three Super Bowls. The REAL accomplishment is the Super Bowls and the fact they missed the playoffs in 2002 instead of squeaking in with a 99% chance of losing and breaking the streak means nothing.

I guarantee that if they lose this week they won't care one bit about the streak, and people here will be downplaying it as well.

GameDay · 01-11-2006, 03:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PatsRI

this one from Aaron Schatz.
http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/5237156

I usually don't even care but I do read them and had to share this one. He has Washington, at least they're in the playoffs, and the Bengals ahead of the Pats. A team that lost last week ahead of the Pats? Also says the 10 game win streak in the playoffs is overrated.

Just read that they used a statstical formula to rank them. Still funny though.

I do something similar to DVOA ranking as a hobby. I must agree with Aaron Schatz. (It's like game theory - See the movies "A Beautiful Mind").

Look at it this way. Say a person (called him Pat) does marathon 10 times with results ranging from 3 hours to 5 hours, average is 4 hours.

If you must guess what his time would be the next run, what can
you say? 4 hours?

Let's say a Broncos guy runs with average 2.5 hours, but ranges
from 2 to 5 hours, we have to rank the Bronc guy above the Pat guy, right?

But the next run, can we be sure that the Bronc guy will beat the Pat guy?

I have to say that in my estimate, the Broncos has a better chance of winning than the Pats, as they are more well rounded (run offense, run defense, pass O, pass D, special/kicking...) based on past 16-game record .

(but past performance is not predictive of future returns)

If we model the game statistically (sort of like Madden game simulators), being well rounded has a much better chance of winning than being excel at a few, but worse at the others. It's multiplicative, not additive. Like this:

(0.1 x 0.7=0.07, which is less than 0.4 x 0.4= 0.16, even though
0.1+0.7 = 0.4 +0.4=0.8)

Pats' weakness is their running game and suspect 2ndary.

So I likens the Broncos and Pats' chance to a game of rolling the dices.
Let's say whoever have a bigger total, wins. The Broncos have 2 dices,
the Pats, just one. So, the Broncos' expected score is 7, the Pats': 3.5.

They should indeed be favored. But that's if they play 100 times.

Just for one time? The Pats may roll a six, and the Broncos may roll a snake eye.

"That's why they play the game" (and why it's entertaining).

For me, the fun part is the psychological aspect of the game. Mental
toughness is not intangible. They are measurable effects on athletes'
performance. We can have confidence in Brady and Pats' coolness under
pressure, but what about the Broncos at home? They can be just as
tough and confident. So this "edge" may not be as much as the hype.

I have noticed the Pats' "prone to panic" early this year, worse than
2003 season. If the Broncos is up 10-0 and the Pats start to
go gun every down, and Brady gets frustrated, it'll be a long night.

***PATSNUTme*** · 01-11-2006, 03:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GameDay

I do something similar to DVOA ranking as a hobby. I must agree with Aaron Schatz. (It's like game theory - See the movies "A Beautiful Mind").

Look at it this way. Say a person (called him Pat) does marathon 10 times with results ranging from 3 hours to 5 hours, average is 4 hours.

If you must guess what his time would be the next run, what can
you say? 4 hours?

Let's say a Broncos guy runs with average 2.5 hours, but ranges
from 2 to 5 hours, we have to rank the Bronc guy above the Pat guy, right?

But the next run, can we be sure that the Bronc guy will beat the Pat guy?

I have to say that in my estimate, the Broncos has a better chance of winning than the Pats, as they are more well rounded (run offense, run defense, pass O, pass D, special/kicking...) based on past 16-game record .

(but past performance is not predictive of future returns)

If we model the game statistically (sort of like Madden game simulators), being well rounded has a much better chance of winning than being excel at a few, but worse at the others. It's multiplicative, not additive. Like this:

(0.1 x 0.7=0.07, which is less than 0.4 x 0.4= 0.16, even though
0.1+0.7 = 0.4 +0.4=0.8)

Pats' weakness is their running game and suspect 2ndary.

So I likens the Broncos and Pats' chance to a game of rolling the dices.
Let's say whoever have a bigger total, wins. The Broncos have 2 dices,
the Pats, just one. So, the Broncos' expected score is 7, the Pats': 3.5.

They should indeed be favored. But that's if they play 100 times.

Just for one time? The Pats may roll a six, and the Broncos may roll a snake eye.

"That's why they play the game" (and why it's entertaining).

For me, the fun part is the psychological aspect of the game. Mental
toughness is not intangible. They are measurable effects on athletes'
performance. We can have confidence in Brady and Pats' coolness under
pressure, but what about the Broncos at home? They can be just as
tough and confident. So this "edge" may not be as much as the hype.

I have noticed the Pats' "prone to panic" early this year, worse than
2003 season. If the Broncos is up 10-0 and the Pats start to
go gun every down, and Brady gets frustrated, it'll be a long night.

You bored the **** out of me.

***Patters*** · 01-11-2006, 03:40 PM

At least Scatz got it right about McGinest: "Underhyped: Willie McGinest setting the all-time postseason sack record. When you hear that McGinest passed Bruce Smith and Reggie White, you figure he only did it because the Patriots have played so many more postseason games â€” but you would be wrong. McGinest took only 17 games to break a record Smith and White set in 20 and 19 games, respectively. Impressive."

Gameday, you're absolutely right, but we really need to take into account the fact that BB has exceptional ability in getting his team ready for the playoffs. It's almost as if the Pats become a different team in post-season. Whether that's true or not will be tested this week, and if the Pats win, you can figure out how to weigh that into your calculations!

Na_polian · 01-11-2006, 04:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GameDay

Blah blah blah.

You have now offically annoyed me. As you are doing so under a screen name while using the internet, you are in violation of Federal Law.

Now, where did I write down the FBI's number...? Hmmm... I know it'a around here somewhere....