Nate Silver has the Pats Winning Their 4th Super Bowl

[shmessy]

Silver predicts Pats-Seahawks Super Bowl - New England Patriots Blog - ESPN Boston

"....Silver doesn't necessarily like the Seahawks' chances to win it all.

"I'd say that Denver and New England are the best two teams in the NFL," he said.

"You have to have one team from each conference, so if you have a Denver-New England AFC Championship Game, it might be one of those cases where it really is the de facto Super Bowl......"

 

[JackBauer]

Hopefully his sports prediction is as accurate as his election prediction!

 

[Kontradiction]

I wasn't aware that Peyton Manning had playoff success year in and year out...

 

[mayoclinic]

Silver's a johnny-come-lately. I made that prediction months ago.

 

[BadMoFo]

Seems like we have been favored to win it all in four of the past five years.

 

[Bella*chick]

I love Nate. Thank goodness he made this prediction even if it means nothing. This way I don't have to look like a big fat hypocrite saying he doesn't know what he is talking about.

 

[SVN]

Seahawks wont get past ATL. Guranteed.

 

[PatriotsReign]

Hopefully his sports prediction is as accurate as his election prediction!

Let us thank God Obama's not playing....

 

[aluminum seats]

I don't begrudge the guy for getting all the exposure he can after nailing the election stuff, but him calling football games based on somebody else's research just seems really lame.

 

[BradyFTW!]

I don't begrudge the guy for getting all the exposure he can after nailing the election stuff, but him calling football games based on somebody else's research just seems really lame.

He credits FO extensively, and makes sure that people know whose models he's using. Their methodologies are fundamentally similar, and I doubt FO minds the exposure. Nate used to work for Baseball Prospectus, so it's not like this is a radical departure for him.

 

[aluminum seats]

He credits FO extensively, and makes sure that people know whose models he's using. Their methodologies are fundamentally similar, and I doubt FO minds the exposure. Nate used to work for Baseball Prospectus, so it's not like this is a radical departure for him.

No, I get that--that's not really what I meant. It just struck me as lame that he was offering his two cents on football. But if there really is an overlap w/what they do and he does, then I suppose it's fine. (I haven't read his book and honestly don't know much about his methodology, other than the fact he completely nailed all of the election stuff.)

 

[SHOWTIME15]

Hopefully his sports prediction is as accurate as his election prediction!

Not thrilled with his election prediction, but hope he is just as accurate

 

[SHOWTIME15]

A couple of things to consider:

1. Silver to my knowledge has never made a super bowl prediction in the past, so his methodology may still be a work in progress. Im sure he's spent a few years perfecting his election model.

2. He is relying on data frm football outsiders, mainly, whose numbers may or may not be the best to base predictions off of.

3. He says NE and Denver are the two best teams in the league and that either brady or manning should win it - has he even seen manning play in the playoffs?

4. Weather and injuries are always going to be factors this time of year.

 

[RodThePat]

I wasn't aware that Peyton Manning had playoff success year in and year out...

Well, he seems to go in-and-out of the playoffs every year, so I guess that's the same, right?

 

[DarrylS]

Nate Silver is gaining credibility..

 

[shmessy]

3. He says NE and Denver are the two best teams in the league and that either brady or manning should win it - has he even seen manning play in the playoffs?

Other than Brady, Manning has played in more Super Bowls than any other QB in this year's playoffs.

So what's your point?

 

[TyronePoole]

Nate invented PECOTA, which at the time he left Baseball Prospectus was incredibly accurate so it's not like he doesn't have familiarity with sports. I think he probably recognizes that FO is very good at assessing the performance of teams through advanced statistics, and that's how he comes to his conclusion. Where FO gets criticized is that historically as a predictive tool they haven't fared particularly well against the market.

Also, I wish eh would have elaborated on this:

"Things, for example, like the Patriots are very aggressive on going for it on fourth down. ... And Bill Belichick will do those things, and he reads the papers and so forth -- not the newspapers, but reads like the academic papers that say you want to actually keep your offense on the field on fourth down a lot.

"And those little marginal things when you have to win now three more games against really good teams, can begin to add up."

since I had very little success trying to explain it to certain people here. Game theory optimal playcalling and decision making (which nobody in the NFL currently utilizes, BB included) is probably worth 2 games a season. Since BB is the closest to utilizing it it's an edge. That's why when you still see people saying that his aggressive 4th down decisions are "stupid" it's maddening because all they're doing is gauging it relative to conventional ultra-conservative wisdom. BB himself is too conservative much of the time.

 

[BTTA]

Nate Silver began his career in sports statistics. But that's just where he started. He's a generalist, a scientist in his field. Comparing his analysis to that of any popular media prognosticator is like comparing the medical opinions of a physician vs. those of a tarot card reader. You can do it, you can defend it, you can wrap tradition around it, you can convince yourself you are right, you can build society around it, but you are still going to be wrong most of the time.

 

[BradyFTW!]

Nate invented PECOTA, which at the time he left Baseball Prospectus was incredibly accurate so it's not like he doesn't have familiarity with sports. I think he probably recognizes that FO is very good at assessing the performance of teams through advanced statistics, and that's how he comes to his conclusion. Where FO gets criticized is that historically as a predictive tool they haven't fared particularly well against the market.

Also, I wish eh would have elaborated on this:



since I had very little success trying to explain it to certain people here. Game theory optimal playcalling and decision making (which nobody in the NFL currently utilizes, BB included) is probably worth 2 games a season. Since BB is the closest to utilizing it it's an edge. That's why when you still see people saying that his aggressive 4th down decisions are "stupid" it's maddening because all they're doing is gauging it relative to conventional ultra-conservative wisdom. BB himself is too conservative much of the time.

Small sample size yields low confidence. It's far more difficult to predict the outcome of a football game than a presidential election. The problem with FO isn't its methodology, but rather the very nature of the thing that it's trying to predict.

That's why FO largely eschews using wins as a data point, instead looking to make predictions and evaluations based on sample sets with far more data points (typically play-by-play, adjusted for strength of opponent and situation).

 

[TyronePoole]

Small sample size yields low confidence. It's far more difficult to predict the outcome of a football game than a presidential election. The problem with FO isn't its methodology, but rather the very nature of the thing that it's trying to predict.

That's why FO largely eschews using wins as a data point, instead looking to make predictions and evaluations based on sample sets with far more data points (typically play-by-play, adjusted for strength of opponent and situation).

good post. I would only add that predictive models aren't measured against a mythical degree of perfect accuracy, they're measured against other predictive models. In that vein FO still comes up a little short imo and it certainly doesn't beat the betting market. I just don't think predictions are FO's forte.