- Joined
- Sep 7, 2006
- Messages
- 68,309
- Reaction score
- 105,238
Oh boy...
After I read this, I went back to BB's presser about his philosophy about coaching/ball security.
He or someone must have read this and suggested he get in front of this.
http://www.slate.com/articles/sport...s_lose_an_insanely_low_number_of_fumbles.html
After I read this, I went back to BB's presser about his philosophy about coaching/ball security.
He or someone must have read this and suggested he get in front of this.
http://www.slate.com/articles/sport...s_lose_an_insanely_low_number_of_fumbles.html
There is no other team even close to being near to their rate of 187 offensive plays per fumble lost. The league average is 105 plays per fumble lost. Most teams are within 21 plays of that number.
I spoke with a data scientist whom I know from work on NFLproject.com and sent him the data. He said:
Based on the assumption that fumbles per play follow a normal distribution, you’d expect to see, according to random fluctuation, the results that the Patriots have gotten over this period, once in 16,233.77 instances.
Which in layman’s terms means that this result only being a coincidence, is like winning a raffle where you have a 0.0000616 probability to win. [In] other words, it’s very unlikely that it’s a coincidence.
Could the Patriots be so good that they just defy the numbers? As my friend theorized: Perhaps they’ve invented a revolutionary in-house way to protect the ball, or perhaps they’ve intentionally stocked their skill positions with players who don’t have a propensity to fumble. Or perhaps, still, they call plays that intentionally result in a lower percentage of fumbles. Or maybe it’s just that they play with deflated footballs on offense. It could be any combination of the above.
But regardless of what, specifically, is causing these numbers, the fact remains: This is an extremely abnormal occurrence and is not simply random fluctuation.
Last edited: