Concepts some posters could benefit from learning

[makewayhomer]

Just keep in mind that the majority of the 40 pages is negative regarding the stat geek.

actually, most of the 40 pages is 3 or 4 ignorant people flaming me . some really smart people like fencer and emoney are making good and constructive comments

 

[makewayhomer]

You can give me all your statistics and I would still say I'd beat 9 out of 10 of them on a game to game prediction because the most important elements determining who will win can't be found in the statistics.

care to make a wager?

 

[makewayhomer]

No you don't know wht you are talking about. I am talking about PALMER created a stat that he considered to measure offensive performance of a player that corrolated directly to WINS. Your guy used PALMERS stats for his paper and made a STATEMENT that said the opposite. That is not reasonable at all unless you are saying that there is not really a fact based conclusion only complete BS. (still have not seen one single fact or stat to back up his statement, unlike plenty of stats I provided BTW...where is it?)

here it is:

Palmers stat is Batting Wins: "this measures the number of wins a player added relative to the league average hitter". this reasonable and correctly measures the TOTAL contribution a player made in all his at-bats towards scoring runs/winning./ ie, his at bats from the first inning to the last. it's a good approach.

some further "clutch" studies have been based off the work of Batting Wins, but ONLY using the at-bats in "clutch situations". ie close and late or whatever.

so imagine a player that was the best in the league through innings 1-5, but poor in the late innings. his Batting Wins stat would be good, but a clutch study done using Batting Wins as the metric would rate him poorly.

understand now?

 

[PatsWickedPissah]

Excellent Point. Think of the hubris of the math nerds that think they can apply statistical analysis (any oxymoron when attempting to apply stats to most real world situations) to something like football.

Those 'math nerds' built the real world internet you're using. Lots of statistics and math were involved.

 

[PatriotsReign]

the head coach of your football fan happens to be very receptive to stats. go read Chris Gaspers new book

What does that have to do with discussions on this board? The point most of us making is that we don't care to read posts from stats geeks...hope you're ok with that

 

[PatriotsReign]

I made an offer earlier in the thread to use solely DVOA in a pick contest, against the spread, for remaining NFL games. nobody has taken me up yet.

If you haven't gotten the hint yet...we just don't like stats geeks. Hope that was blunt enough.

 

[PatriotsReign]

Those 'math nerds' built the real world internet you're using. Lots of statistics and math were involved.

So what...AND?? Doesn't mean any of us want to have discussions with or hang out with them. If Bill Gates came knocking on my door to watch a Patriots game, I wouldn't answer it. He's not the type of person most of us here want to discuss or watch football with. I believe that's pretty understandable.

 

[makewayhomer]

What does that have to do with discussions on this board? The point most of us making is that we don't care to read posts from stats geeks...hope you're ok with that

the point is that you're an idiot if you fear/loath/go out of your way to ignore the techniques that the leaders of the teams you root for use, and then praise them for how awesome they are

 

[PatriotsReign]

care to make a wager?

Sure! On which games? The only problem here is, you may be a knowledgeable football person AND a stats geek. My contention is vs. a pure stats geek...but I'll still accept your offer.

 

[makewayhomer]

What does that have to do with discussions on this board? The point most of us making is that we don't care to read posts from stats geeks...hope you're ok with that

all remaining NFL games through week 16. against the spread. or we can pick our favorite 10 or whatever games every week. my knowledge of football will matter little here, I'm just going off formulas built off of DVOA

 

[PatriotsReign]

the point is that you're an idiot if you fear/loath/go out of your way to ignore the techniques that the leaders of the teams you root for use, and then praise them for how awesome they are

Bill Bellichicks success is far more dependent on his abilities to motivate, focus and train his players to execute a game plan than it is upon statistics...that my friend is a fact....so GFY

I have actually coached a football team in my life, have you?

 

[PatriotsReign]

all remaining NFL games through week 16. against the spread

OK. Why don't we start with next week and both of us will post our predictions on this thread by this Wednesday since there are games on Thursday. We can then post our weekly predictions by Wednesday of each week.

Any changes in that proposal you want to make?

Just to show you how foolish this is, I won a March Madness pool back in the year Utah won the national championship. I split the pool with a guy who knew NOTHING about college hoops and he was the one who picked Utah.

My point is, whether you or I win will prove nothing. But I would love to beat you.

 

[makewayhomer]

OK. Why don't we start with next week and both of us will post our predictions on this thread by this Wednesday since there are games on Thursday. We can then post our weekly predictions by Wednesday of each week.

Any changes in that proposal you want to make?

sounds mostly good. how about we use the lines used on CBS Sportsline? I can post the the lines here when they come out (usually Tuesday or Wednesday), we need to post our picks by the first game of the week on Thursday

just let me know if you want to pick every game, or your favorite 10

$50 to the winner?

 

[Pat_Nasty]

Why do people so obviously feel threatened by statistics?

Seriously, the emotional nature of the responses, from the very beginning, seems to me to be an entirely inappropriate reaction. This isn't the first time I've seen people who don't like stats respond aggressively to the very suggestion that there could be some wisdom gained by their study.

Seems to me that people's problem with statistics stems from a strange misconception that ceding any value to statistics means surrendering the entirety of your judgment to a statistical model. Nothing could be further from the case.

Any statistician worth his salt is entirely aware of just how limited any statistical model is. It is limited by the integrity and comprehensiveness of the data, and care needs to be taken about the assumptions made when interpreting it. At their best, statistics in sports are meant as a TOOL to aid your judgment, not a substitute for it. Nobody is suggesting that stats can or should replace scouting or "watching the games."

But a lot of things happen in every game. The human mind can't possibly keep track of every play of every game of every weekend. A statistical model can. Thus, stats, when scrupulously interpreted, can provide insight that is often counter-intuitive, and, when synthesized with scouting analysis, can provide a more complete picture of the reality of football than either tactic can alone.

 

[PatriotsReign]

all remaining NFL games through week 16. against the spread. or we can pick our favorite 10 or whatever games every week. my knowledge of football will matter little here, I'm just going off formulas built off of DVOA

And I'll just go off each teams record and my knowledge of their performance combined with my gut instinct.

 

[Patters]

The whole tone of the original poster is rather strange. Football is an emotional sport, and most of us don't formulate our opinions based on objective criteria. That's why even when the Pats sucked, we found ways to root for them and believe they had a chance in every game.

In addition, if we had a 70% chance to win each superbowl, it means we had a 70% chance to win each one. If you placed the bet in 2001 that we would win all three, then the chance of winning each game would be less. But, most of us take it one game at a time.

Stats are very useful, but there are so many variables that there are many ways stats can be applied and interpreted. If I was a Dolphins fan, I'd probably find a way to show how Ricky Williams and the change of QB will lead to good things. But, in the end, most of us watch football for the excitement and form our views to feed that excitement, not to make some formal calculation.

 

[makewayhomer]

Why do people so obviously feel threatened by statistics?

Seriously, the emotional nature of the responses, from the very beginning, seems to me to be an entirely inappropriate reaction. This isn't the first time I've seen people who don't like stats respond aggressively to the very suggestion that there could be some wisdom gained by their study.

Seems to me that people's problem with statistics stems from a strange misconception that ceding any value to statistics means surrendering the entirety of your judgment to a statistical model. Nothing could be further from the case.

Any statistician worth his salt is entirely aware of just how limited any statistical model is. It is limited by the integrity and comprehensiveness of the data, and care needs to be taken about the assumptions made when interpreting it. At their best, statistics in sports are meant as a TOOL to aid your judgment, not a substitute for it. Nobody is suggesting that stats can or should replace scouting or "watching the games."

But a lot of things happen in every game. The human mind can't possibly keep track of every play of every game of every weekend. A statistical model can. Thus, stats, when scrupulously interpreted, can provide insight that is often counter-intuitive, and, when synthesized with scouting analysis, can provide a more complete picture of the reality of football than either tactic can alone.

well said pat nasty, jambalaya

 

[PatriotsReign]

Why do people so obviously feel threatened by statistics?

Seriously, the emotional nature of the responses, from the very beginning, seems to me to be an entirely inappropriate reaction. This isn't the first time I've seen people who don't like stats respond aggressively to the very suggestion that there could be some wisdom gained by their study.

Seems to me that people's problem with statistics stems from a strange misconception that ceding any value to statistics means surrendering the entirety of your judgment to a statistical model. Nothing could be further from the case.

Any statistician worth his salt is entirely aware of just how limited any statistical model is. It is limited by the integrity and comprehensiveness of the data, and care needs to be taken about the assumptions made when interpreting it. At their best, statistics in sports are meant as a TOOL to aid your judgment, not a substitute for it. Nobody is suggesting that stats can or should replace scouting or "watching the games."

But a lot of things happen in every game. The human mind can't possibly keep track of every play of every game of every weekend. A statistical model can. Thus, stats, when scrupulously interpreted, can provide insight that is often counter-intuitive, and, when synthesized with scouting analysis, can provide a more complete picture of the reality of football than either tactic can alone.

It is not fear, it is utter DISLIKE of the personality type. Basically the type-A nerd trying to make himself feel a part of the football fan culture. The only ones willing to hang out and watch a game with them are other geeks...you know the type that likes to bring some stats to show their friends and maybe discuss some new Bill James insight at halftime.

They are loners.

 

[PatsFanInVa]

Oh no he di'int! Oh it's on now!

 

[PatsFanInVa]

Sirrously. It'll be fun to see how the predictive model fares. Theoretically it will do as well as it does as a retrospective tool... You guys post this whole "John Henry" contest for the rest of us to watch, will ya?

PFnV