ESPN thorugh numberfire says the Pats have 41.4% chance of winning the Super Bowl

[Rob0729]

FWIW, ESPN has a number cruncher calculate the chances of an upset of this week's and the Super Bowl. Based on their numbers, the Pats are the odds on favorite to win the Super Bowl at a 41.4% chance (San Fran is second at 26.1% chance). They have the Pats chances of winning this weekend at 59.31%.

Evaluating the chances of an upset in either championship game - NFL - ESPN

 

[TruthSeeker]

According to ESPN's snappy new computer thing, the Giants only had a 40% chance of beating Green Bay. As far as I know, computers have no impact on the field.

 

[Rob0729]

According to ESPN's snappy new computer thing, the Giants only had a 40% chance of beating Green Bay. As far as I know, computers have no impact on the field.

That's why I used FWIW. It is just a predictive model. I thought people would be interested, but it is no guarantee.

But if you have a 40% chance of winning a game, that means you do have a shot at winning it.

 

[Ice_Ice_Brady]

This is very odd because they give SF a 61% chance of winning, and they give us only a 59% chance.

If you look at the Vegas moneylines- and yes, they want even betting, but they still don't usually go more than a few points away from their projections- the Pats have closer to a 70% chance, while the 49ers have roughly a 55-60% chance.

They differ by five points from the nine point spread. That's a lot of points.

Here's another extremely odd point:

The Pats beat the Ravens by an average of 3.9 points.
The Niners beat the Giants by an average of 3.4 points.

Again, they give the Niners a higher probability of winning. That seems especially odd to me because their conclusion points to Niners having a bigger advantage over the Giants in a close game than the Pats have over the Ravens. Tom Brady in a close game versus Joe Flacco? Alex Smith versus Eli Manning? Looks to me like the advantage should be reversed.

 

[BradyManny]

I'll take it. Bottom line - we're in the final four.

The last time the Patriots won a Super Bowl, the parade turnout was quite weak. I think people around took this for granted how much work it takes to just get to this point. Reality has since set in that football is too random (so ultimately I agree maybe the odds are meaningless, but whatever). Let's savor this for what it's worth. We're two games away from a title, either way. Meaning we're damn close.

 

[Ice_Ice_Brady]

According to ESPN's snappy new computer thing, the Giants only had a 40% chance of beating Green Bay. As far as I know, computers have no impact on the field.

Only a 40% chance? I would say it did a good job in predicting the probability there, considering this was a 15-1 team at home against a team that was outscored during the regular season.

 

[Brady'sButtBoy]

According to ESPN's snappy new computer thing, the Giants only had a 40% chance of beating Green Bay. As far as I know, computers have no impact on the field.

The Packers game against the Giants highlighted what I was worried about for the Pats should they have played the Ravens in their first playoff game - which could have happened had the Ravens lost to Cincy and then the Ravens beaten Denver. That is: a hot, or at least fired up team can overwhelm a superior team with momentum and emotion. The Giants made some great plays but the Packers played the worst they have in a while when it mattered. They dropped passes, didn't tackle on easy plays, lined up in the wrong place, etc., etc. The Giants were slightly more ready, while the Pack looked like they were offended anything but a blowout was occurring.

I think this same phenomena - hot, hyped (legit) winning team coming in against a team with a layoff too long for their own good (especially for their psyches) knocks them around enough they go off course. This is what happened to the Pats the last 2 years. This weekend it almost happened to 49ers, and the Ravens, did to the Pack. The Pats were the only winner to slam dunk their game early on. Remember the Pats did this same thing - hot road team beating a favorite at home after their bye - twice while on their way to two SB wins.

Getting one well played game under their belt should stand the Pats very well. It's less likely they'll be nervous and tentative wondering how well they can play under pressure when the playoff whistle blows. They have the can't win in the postseason monkey off their back, and they have the knowledge they can beat a playoff team (BB surely had/has them believing Denver was a vital threat). Instead of wondering what winning playoff football feels like, they can focus on stomping the necks of a team that stands in their way to the holy grail. I like their chances...

 

[Ring 6]

The Packers game against the Giants highlighted what I was worried about for the Pats should they have played the Ravens in their first playoff game - which could have happened had the Ravens lost to Cincy and then the Ravens beaten Denver. That is: a hot, or at least fired up team can overwhelm a superior team with momentum and emotion. The Giants made some great plays but the Packers played the worst they have in a while when it mattered. They dropped passes, didn't tackle on easy plays, lined up in the wrong place, etc., etc. The Giants were slightly more ready, while the Pack looked like they were offended anything but a blowout was occurring.

I think this same phenomena - hot, hyped (legit) winning team coming in against a team with a layoff too long for their own good (especially for their psyches) knocks them around enough they go off course. This is what happened to the Pats the last 2 years. This weekend it almost happened to 49ers, and the Ravens, did to the Pack. The Pats were the only winner to slam dunk their game early on. Remember the Pats did this same thing - hot road team beating a favorite at home after their bye - twice while on their way to two SB wins.

Getting one well played game under their belt should stand the Pats very well. It's less likely they'll be nervous and tentative wondering how well they can play under pressure when the playoff whistle blows. They have the can't win in the postseason monkey off their back, and they have the knowledge they can beat a playoff team (BB surely had/has them believing Denver was a vital threat). Instead of wondering what winning playoff football feels like, they can focus on stomping the necks of a team that stands in their way to the holy grail. I like their chances...

The Patriots couldnt have played the Ravens in their first playoff game. They were 1 and 2 seeds.

 

[Rob0729]

This is very odd because they give SF a 61% chance of winning, and they give us only a 59% chance.

If you look at the Vegas moneylines- and yes, they want even betting, but they still don't usually go more than a few points away from their projections- the Pats have closer to a 70% chance, while the 49ers have roughly a 55-60% chance.

They differ by five points from the nine point spread. That's a lot of points.

Here's another extremely odd point:

The Pats beat the Ravens by an average of 3.9 points.
The Niners beat the Giants by an average of 3.4 points.

Again, they give the Niners a higher probability of winning. That seems especially odd to me because their conclusion points to Niners having a bigger advantage over the Giants in a close game than the Pats have over the Ravens. Tom Brady in a close game versus Joe Flacco? Alex Smith versus Eli Manning? Looks to me like the advantage should be reversed.

Vegas is irrelevant because they set their lines based on how they think people will bet, not who they think will win.

As for these predictive models, they run thousands of scenarios. That means that when the Pats win in their models, the Pats just win big while the 49ers win closer games. But there may be more scenarios where the Pats lose to the Ravens than when the 49ers lose to the Giants.

 

[Brady'sButtBoy]

The Patriots couldnt have played the Ravens in their first playoff game. They were 1 and 2 seeds.

Yes, they could have played Baltimore in the playoffs had the Ravens lost to Cincy the last regular season game as I described in my post. Then they would have been the 5th seed instead of Pitt, etc. That, to me would have been the worst case scenario for the Pats - facing a foe that had beaten you at your own house last time in the playoffs and one that had just won a playoff game while the Pats would be coming out cold from their bye with the nasty haven't-won-a-playoff-game-in-4-years monkey on their backs. Though the Pack won the SB last year, they did the way the Giants did it in 2007 (and this year???) - on the road against higher ranked teams. Just like people are saying the Giants have the Packs number in GB, the talk would have been the Ravens had the Pats number at Gillette as well had they come instead of Denver and whacked our boys again.

 

[PatsFan24]

FWIW, ESPN has a number cruncher calculate the chances of an upset of this week's and the Super Bowl. Based on their numbers, the Pats are the odds on favorite to win the Super Bowl at a 41.4% chance (San Fran is second at 26.1% chance). They have the Pats chances of winning this weekend at 59.31%.

Evaluating the chances of an upset in either championship game - NFL - ESPN

Hmmm. Much lower then my calculations of 98%