iapetus said:No. Coaching experience and other subjective things don't come into it at all. Their projections have LJ taking a pretty massive fall in production, based on the fact that most backs who rush as many times as he did last season have a big drop off (or injury) the following year.
ioi does football said:Offense, defense, and special teams DVOA are all projected separately using a system based on 2000-2006 numbers. The equations include a number of variables based on performance over the past two seasons in different splits (by down, passing vs. rushing, red zone vs. whole field) plus variables based on recent draft history, injury history, offensive and defensive pace, coaching experience, quarterback experience, and even weather. Strength of schedule was then figured based on the average projected total DVOA of all 16 opponents for 2007 (yes, projected performance, not 2006 performance).
PantherLotus said:Yeah....no. It's not a legitimate projection. It's stats and random adjustments made to make what the designer intends appear legit. I compare it to something similar to what ioi did on the gaming side with his ******** bullshit.
Rorschach said::lol
Gigglepoo said:Everyone is laughing at the Saints holding the Eagles to 13 points, right?
Tamanon said:Er.....more like the Colts losing the AFC championship game and then losing the Super Bowl somehow.
iapetus said:No. Feel free to disagree with its results (because obviously they won't always be right) but to describe it like that is just a combination of sour grapes and ignorance. Hell, go to the effort of actually reading the full article rather than just bitching and moaning because your favourite team is ranked low and you'll see there are cases where the author of the article disagrees with its predictions because of things that can't be represented by a statistical model, or because gut feeling and football knowledge go against what raw stats do.
But to misrepresent the work FO do as some sort of false statistical analysis where they tweak the figures until they get the results they want is just a bad joke. And to claim they tweak it until it 'appears legit' when the predictions are - in some cases - so far from common wisdom just shows you haven't thought your case through.
Where did you see / hear this?Gigglepoo said:Josh McCown is starting! Awesome!
Karakand said:Where did you see / hear this?
Karakand said:Where did you see / hear this?
Bill Simmons said:15. Travis Henry
A little scary because of the fumbling problem and Mike Shanahan's abject hatred for fantasy owners ... and that's before we get to last weekend's remarkable "nine kids by nine different women" revelation. Remember when we were all blown away when it was reported that Shawn Kemp had seven kids by six different women? If Kemp was like Roger Bannister breaking the four-minute mile, then Henry just brought the sports fertility record down to the 3:35 range. You have to admire the way he's spreading his seed around. According to the guys at Football Outsiders, Henry has the highest kids-per-partners rate (100.0) since they started keeping track of the stat in 1993.
PantherLotus said:http://www.footballoutsiders.com/methods.php
Perhaps I worded my argument a bit strongly, and perhaps it was even because they have KC rated 26th in defense and 30th in offense. I can only say that it brought attention to the folly of their method. I should take back the part about them making it look the way they wanted, that is an insult.
However, the projection is ridiculous, and the method only less so.
I did read the whole article, and its no less absurd. More over, I read their entire Method, which reads like a junior-level statistical survey with a fantasy backing. Look, I'm not sure if you work for them, know somebody who writes for them, or based your picks this year off of what they say, but there are so many things that determines wins and losses other than what can possibly be included in this calculation that it just makes the whole thing, while appearing quite deep, rather shallow indeed.
For example:
1. How do they take rookies into account?
2. What about penalties?
3. What about bad calls?
4. What about the effect of home games? Prime-time games?
5. 2-minute offenses?
6. Poor time management?
Obviously it's easy to point out the flaws in the method, but it's just as easy to ignore them and hold up the "average gain on 2nd down by a specific player against a specific defense" and combine it with the "average defensive play against this player" and stir it up and hope for the best. It looks like it started out as a way to predict fantasy results (and I applaud them for that), but then they tried applying it to the entire league.
They actually use the play-by-play as the main source of their data. Seriously. It's an interesting method, but seriously, seriously flawed.
Edit:
And were you going to address my original assertion which you rejected (about the inclusion of Coaching experience), but is clearly quoted above?
For example:
1. How do they take rookies into account? - see below
2. What about penalties? - They record all of them, but you can't predict penalties in the future
3. What about bad calls? - Bad calls by referees tend to even out, again you can't predict them
4. What about the effect of home games? Prime-time games? - Home-field advantage is debatable
5. 2-minute offenses? - You got me there
6. Poor time management? - YOu got me there
I discredit sabremetrics because people have turned it into a fucking religion and refused to acknowledge anything that can't be quantified down to the tiniest quark. As I've said in the MLB threads, they are useful but they aren't the only thing you should use to evaluate players. Like it or not baseball is still a random ass sport.sorryaboutdresden said:They are to football what sabermetrics are to baseball - and both are equally misunderstood, misinterpreted, and largely discredited by most fans who rely principally on their subjective observations, conventional wisdom, and media pundits for their information.
Karakand said:I discredit sabremetrics because people have turned it into a fucking religion and refused to acknowledge anything that can't be quantified down to the tiniest quark. As I've said in the MLB threads, they are useful but they aren't the only thing you should use to evaluate players. Like it or not baseball is still a random ass sport.
Which leads me to...
As for their NFL counterpart, like sabremetrics I think they're worthwhile but to a lesser degree given the increased amount of flux in the sport. Thankfully there's no cult around them (yet) though so I don't get hot and bothered about them too much.
PantherLotus said:dresden:
thanks for taking the time to respond thoughtfully. if i've misrepresented myself, I am aware of concepts like standard deviation and variation.
I can see how they could project individual performances; that much seems evident. What I don't understand is how they can project team performances? What is the basis of their 2007 team projections?
And while it sounds like pure homerism, I have to point out that this is the only place I've seen the KC Defense ranked less than 16th. Is this the standard "aging secondary" bullshit that Peter King wrote about but forgot to mention our two starting rookie safeties? I'm not sure how they came up with a 26th for KC D.
Edit:
The quote you posted is basically an apology for making judgment calls (with their 'eyes') when necessary. I just want somebody to admit somewhere that this isn't entirely based on a formula and is in fact based upon more than a few observationally-based opinions.
Karakand said:I discredit sabremetrics because people have turned it into a fucking religion and refused to acknowledge anything that can't be quantified down to the tiniest quark. As I've said in the MLB threads, they are useful but they aren't the only thing you should use to evaluate players. Like it or not baseball is still a random ass sport.
Which leads me to...
As for their NFL counterpart, like sabremetrics I think they're worthwhile but to a lesser degree given the increased amount of flux in the sport. Thankfully there's no cult around them (yet) though so I don't get hot and bothered about them too much.
PantherLotus said:Looks like the cult has already started.
The point I'd like to make is that the talent levels in the NFL are basically equal when it comes down to it, and using a formula to make predictions is cute, but not very productive. Every team is one injury away from disaster, and one free-agent (or rookie) explosion from a SuperBowl. Formulas can't measure that.
It is very hard to repeat. Lets see if the Colts can even get back to the playoffs let alone repeat.Flizzzipper said:Well, tomorrow we start the party. I'm getting off at 3 to pretend I'm going to the NFL season launch party to watch Kelly Clarkson and Faith Hill, but am going home to chill until kickoff.
I don't know what to make of the Colts this year. Offensively I've got zero worries as long as Manning is on the field and defensively they can't be any worse, right? I'll probably be watching new LT Ugoh on every play anyways, scrutinizing his every move. I was actually most worried about defensive backs this season, with having all new starters, but from all accounts they are doing even better...we'll see. Hopefully Sanders can stay healthy enough to play in at least half the games.
I'm not really worried about any teams in the Central, the Jags always come up short and seem as capable of winning ten games as losing ten. Then again they may rush the ball 400 times again and win both games.
I'll say the Colts start the year 10-0, get bored and take the rest of the meaningless season off then dominate in the playoffs again for a repeat. Manning hurts his arm but we find out he secretly practices throwing left handed at night so he comes back out and doesn't miss a step, becoming the first QB in NFL history to throw for a TD with both arms in the same game. I think we'll also start to see the pouting Marvin Harrison a lot more this year with Wayne, Clark, and Gonzales all primed for good years.
PantherLotus said:Looks like the cult has already started.
The point I'd like to make is that the talent levels in the NFL are basically equal when it comes down to it, and using a formula to make predictions is cute, but not very productive. Every team is one injury away from disaster, and one free-agent (or rookie) explosion from a SuperBowl. Formulas can't measure that.
bionic77 said:It is very hard to repeat. Lets see if the Colts can even get back to the playoffs let alone repeat.
I'm confident in saying the only way the Colts could possibly miss the playoffs would be if Manning gets injured and misses more than 8 games.bionic77 said:It is very hard to repeat. Lets see if the Colts can even get back to the playoffs let alone repeat.
Flizzzipper said:I'm confident in saying the only way the Colts could possibly miss the playoffs would be if Manning gets injured and misses more than 8 games.
soulja224466 said:ill admit, i havent read up on the dvoa forumula, im too lazy to read all that....
BUT....i dont care what formula they use, the rams do not have a bottom 5 offense, thats just ludicrous. that invalidates everything they say to me.
Wow. What the hell is up with Peyton's upper body development or should I say lack thereof?Gigglepoo said:Or if Peyton forget how to throw the ball.
soulja224466 said:ill admit, i havent read up on the dvoa forumula, im too lazy to read all that....
BUT....i dont care what formula they use, the rams do not have a bottom 5 offense, thats just ludicrous. that invalidates everything they say to me.
Tamanon said:Er....are you reading the chart right? It says 24th ranked offense.
dont be mad smitty, tye hill is a future probowl CB. you're not dealing with jason sehorn anymore buddy
I don't doubt Manning be his usual self, it is the rest of the team I see having a letdown. And it seems that while all the breaks go your way when winning the Superbowl they seem to all go against you the next year.Flizzzipper said:I'm confident in saying the only way the Colts could possibly miss the playoffs would be if Manning gets injured and misses more than 8 games.
PantherLotus said:I can see how they could project individual performances; that much seems evident. What I don't understand is how they can project team performances? What is the basis of their 2007 team projections?
PantherLotus said:And while it sounds like pure homerism, I have to point out that this is the only place I've seen the KC Defense ranked less than 16th. Is this the standard "aging secondary" bullshit that Peter King wrote about but forgot to mention our two starting rookie safeties? I'm not sure how they came up with a 26th for KC D.
PantherLotus said:The quote you posted is basically an apology for making judgment calls (with their 'eyes') when necessary. I just want somebody to admit somewhere that this isn't entirely based on a formula and is in fact based upon more than a few observationally-based opinions.
sorryaboutdresden said:Eh, I don't want you guys to think of the two of us as a cult. Especially not like the religion of sabermetrics. Haha, and besides two people is hardly a cult.
Shinobi said:Saints at Colts
That's all for now...I'll pick the rest of mine later when I'm not half asleep.
And er, go Redskins and stuff.
soulja224466 said:apparenty steve smith is angry that tye hill shut him down last year.
dont be mad smitty, tye hill is a future probowl CB. you're not dealing with jason sehorn anymore buddy![]()
The Rams were unable to stop a five-game slide this week in Carolina. The Panthers were successful in getting good matchups outside, especially wide receiver Steve Smith against Rams rookie cornerback Tye Hill. Smith was able to use his outstanding speed, skill and quickness to get open against the less-talented rookie. The Panthers controlled the clock by taking advantage of the Rams' inability to stop the run.
soulja224466 said:ill admit, i havent read up on the dvoa forumula, im too lazy to read all that....
BUT....i dont care what formula they use, the rams do not have a bottom 5 offense, thats just ludicrous. that invalidates everything they say to me.
sorryaboutdresden said:Take this for what you will though, but they are estimating you guys to have a lot more injuries this coming year. Again, its just one of there things. You guys were one of the most injury free teams last year. Is that due to excellent conditioning or just luck. Who knows.
iapetus said:WOO! I am a happy iapetus today.
Just got an email through saying that I was selected in the third and final lottery to have a chance at buying tickets for the London game (Giants vs Dolphins). Now all I have to do is get my order in first thing on Wednesday...
NFL really screwed up by not sending the Steelers over there. If the British saw Big Ben in the flesh I guarantee that within a week every kid in England would threw their old world football and cricket bat into the garbage can and replace it with an American football and Big Ben jersey.iapetus said:WOO! I am a happy iapetus today.
Just got an email through saying that I was selected in the third and final lottery to have a chance at buying tickets for the London game (Giants vs Dolphins). Now all I have to do is get my order in first thing on Wednesday...