The Patriots vs. Good Teams

Some rumblings in this forum the past couple of days about how the Pats beat up on the league's 90 pound weaklings but can't seem to beat good teams. So I looked into their results from 2005-2012 (minus 2008 b/c they were without Brady) - the "we're awesome but can't win a Super Bowl" time period for New England. Here's what I found.

First, I looked at every game played against a team that finished 8-8 or better. Here were the results:

65 games
48 wins
27 losses
.640 winning percentage
+7.1 average margin of victory
.638 total regular season win % of opponents

That's pretty amazing right there. Against the upper half of the league, teams that win 64% of their games, the Pats won 64% of their games against this level of competition. Now, here is the breakdown by # of opponent wins (i.e., teams with 8 wins, teams with 9 wins, etc.).

Vs. 8 win teams
16-1 (.941), +16.6 MOV

Vs. 9 win teams
6-8 (.429), +1.2 MOV

Vs. 10 win teams
7-5 (.583), +3.7 MOV

Vs. 11 win teams
8-5 (.615), +10.9 MOV

Vs. 12 win teams
6-3 (.667), +7.3 MOV

Vs. 13 win teams
4-3 (.571), -0.7 MOV

Vs. 14 win teams
1-2 (.333), -5.7 MOV

Against "elite" teams (teams that win 12+ games)
11-8 (.579), +2.3 MOV

Those "elite" teams had a total record of 241-63, meaning they won more than 79% of their games, and yet the Pats won 58% of their games against this elite group.

It is a myth that the Pats are not built to beat good teams. They beat elite teams nearly 60% of the time since 2005. The problem is that you have to beat, generally speaking, THREE elite teams in a row. If you just go with the probability of 60%, the math works out to:

.6 x .6 x .6 = .216

That means the Pats, based on their own level of success against elite teams, essentially have a 21.6% chance of winning all three games. That's about 1 in 5. Well, they're a bit under that, because they're 0-7 in their last 7 seasons (again, not counting 2008). So they're "due". But they've come THISCLOSE on at least two occasions (2007, 2011), and this razor thin margin can be attributed to a lot of things, but certainly not the notion that they're not built to beat good teams.

They're the best in the league at beating good teams, and have been for a very long time.

EDIT: .58 x .58 x .58 = .195, meaning they have less than a 1 in 5 chance to beat three elite teams in a row

pats will be playing plenty of good teams next year

Interesting. Thanks for putting those stats together.

ivanvamp said:

Some rumblings in this forum the past couple of days about how the Pats beat up on the league's 90 pound weaklings but can't seem to beat good teams. So I looked into their results from 2005-2012 (minus 2008 b/c they were without Brady) - the "we're awesome but can't win a Super Bowl" time period for New England. Here's what I found.

First, I looked at every game played against a team that finished 8-8 or better. Here were the results:

65 games
48 wins
27 losses
.640 winning percentage
+7.1 average margin of victory
.638 total regular season win % of opponents

That's pretty amazing right there. Against the upper half of the league, teams that win 64% of their games, the Pats won 64% of their games against this level of competition. Now, here is the breakdown by # of opponent wins (i.e., teams with 8 wins, teams with 9 wins, etc.).

Vs. 8 win teams
16-1 (.941), +16.6 MOV

Vs. 9 win teams
6-8 (.429), +1.2 MOV

Vs. 10 win teams
7-5 (.583), +3.7 MOV

Vs. 11 win teams
8-5 (.615), +10.9 MOV

Vs. 12 win teams
6-3 (.667), +7.3 MOV

Vs. 13 win teams
4-3 (.571), -0.7 MOV

Vs. 14 win teams
1-2 (.333), -5.7 MOV

Against "elite" teams (teams that win 12+ games)
11-8 (.579), +2.3 MOV

Those "elite" teams had a total record of 241-63, meaning they won more than 79% of their games, and yet the Pats won 58% of their games against this elite group.

It is a myth that the Pats are not built to beat good teams. They beat elite teams nearly 60% of the time since 2005. The problem is that you have to beat, generally speaking, THREE elite teams in a row. If you just go with the probability of 60%, the math works out to:

.6 x .6 x .6 = .216

That means the Pats, based on their own level of success against elite teams, essentially have a 21.6% chance of winning all three games. That's about 1 in 5. Well, they're a bit under that, because they're 0-7 in their last 7 seasons (again, not counting 2008). So they're "due". But they've come THISCLOSE on at least two occasions (2007, 2011), and this razor thin margin can be attributed to a lot of things, but certainly not the notion that they're not built to beat good teams.

They're the best in the league at beating good teams, and have been for a very long time.

Click to expand...

I think they are very competitive vs good teams. The fact that they dominate lesser teams causes people to think they can walk through good teams.
I suggested the other day they are about 50/50 vs good teams, and these #s are in that area.
My opinion is the mentality, team approach, plus Tom Brady and Bill Belichick elevate them to that, and with an average QB and average HC this would be a .500 team that rarely beat good teams.

thanks for doing all that legwork!

your analysis seems to validate what has been kicked around on the board lately (and laid out cogently by Andy Johnson).

the pats do very well against lesser opponents (80% against 8-8 teams) but its a 50/50 proposition against the best teams (or maybe 60/40)

unfortunately, i tend to head into every playoff thinking we are 80% likley to win! :rocker:

-- FRITZ

AndyJohnson said:

I think they are very competitive vs good teams. The fact that they dominate lesser teams causes people to think they can walk through good teams.
I suggested the other day they are about 50/50 vs good teams, and these #s are in that area.
My opinion is the mentality, team approach, plus Tom Brady and Bill Belichick elevate them to that, and with an average QB and average HC this would be a .500 team that rarely beat good teams.

Click to expand...

Well, yeah. Having a first-ballot HOF coach and a first-ballot HOF quarterback certainly elevates the rest of the team. I don't think there's anyone that would disagree with that. Put Mike Tice in charge and have Kevin Kolb at QB and this team looks very different.

But even with Brady and Belichick, they're about a 60% chance to win any game against an elite team. People around here think they should be shoo-ins to win against the top teams in the league but that's silly thinking. To beat the elite teams 60% of the time is *amazing*, but it means that in any given such game, there's a 40% chance they'll lose. That's a pretty big number when, if it comes up, you go home.

Good stuff, as a stats junkie and math guy I appreciate the analysis.

ivanvamp said:

That's pretty amazing right there. Against the upper half of the league, teams that win 64% of their games, the Pats won 64% of their games against this level of competition. Now, here is the breakdown by # of opponent wins (i.e., teams with 8 wins, teams with 9 wins, etc.).

Those "elite" teams had a total record of 241-63, meaning they won more than 79% of their games, and yet the Pats won 58% of their games against this elite group.



They're the best in the league at beating good teams, and have been for a very long time.

Click to expand...

That last statement... am I reading your post wrong, or do have data that backs that up? So far, you've proven that they are better against 12+ win teams than against 8-10 win teams, but how are the other teams in the league at playing 12+ win teams?

Brady_to_Moss said:

pats will be playing plenty of good teams next year

Click to expand...

Steelers
Saints
Broncos
Texans
Ravens
Bengals
Falcons

Plus the division teams that usually play NE tough for a game.

ivanvamp said:

Some rumblings in this forum the past couple of days about how the Pats beat up on the league's 90 pound weaklings but can't seem to beat good teams. So I looked into their results from 2005-2012 (minus 2008 b/c they were without Brady) - the "we're awesome but can't win a Super Bowl" time period for New England. Here's what I found.

First, I looked at every game played against a team that finished 8-8 or better. Here were the results:

65 games
48 wins
27 losses
.640 winning percentage
+7.1 average margin of victory
.638 total regular season win % of opponents

Click to expand...

Im not being facetious Ivan but the 48 + 27 = 75, how does that affect the percentages? Is it 48 wins from 75 or is it 38 wins from 65?

Just double checking, obviously the 48 from 75 equals the .640%.

Shed83 said:

Im not being facetious Ivan but the 48 + 27 = 75, how does that affect the percentages? Is it 48 wins from 75 or is it 38 wins from 65?

Just double checking, obviously the 48 from 75 equals the .640%.

Click to expand...

Yeah it was just a typo. 75 games played, 48 wins, 27 losses, .640 winning percentage. I just typed "65" instead of "75". My bad. Thanks for the correction.