Biggest mismatch in Super Bowl according to DVOA

[HeatEquation]

.

What does that even mean? "Believe in randomness."

There's an entire field of mathematics devoted to the topic of randomness called probability and stochastic processes. I'm sure you've heard of it, but wouldn't be surprised if you haven't.

Randomness is just the lack of a pattern or the ability to individually predict events. I'm glad you brought it up, because the outcome of a football game is largely random.

 

[MontanaHawk05]

These types of threads are generally very embarrassing for people who take them too seriously, and they don't even realize it.

I doubt many of you have taken a stats course beyond intro stats, so I don't expect you to have knowledge of advanced statistics on a theoretical level. Suffice to say, that the application of advanced statistics in fields outside of physical sciences is something you have to refrain from taking too seriously, due to the sample size, lack of ability to replicate the experiment in a controlled manner, etc. Without context, and without taking into account schemes and game plans, these stats mean nothing.

Not to mention that overall metrics that take into account the entire year don't mean much at the moment anyways.

It'd be great if people stopped misusing stats, but clearly that isn't going to happen any time soon.

Thank you, Mr. 72 Posts, for appointing yourself another board's personal Patrolman of Post Seriousness Levels.

 

[AbsolutNET]

HeatEquation, if you don't want to talk about a certain statistical measurement on a Seahawks message board, then please refrain from doing so. dont throw a thread off track because you don't agree with the metric.

 

[HeatEquation]

If you believe in randomness, than maybe not. But as a master statistician, and scientist, you must be aware that randomness doesn't really exist. Therefore, you should be able replicate the same outcome, no?

What nonsense is this? Randomness exists. Microscopic phenomena in quantum mechanics is one example.

 

[Our Man in Chicago]

Will HeatEquation make it to 100 posts? Put that through your DVOA machine, smarties.

 

[Foghawk]

These types of threads are generally very embarrassing for people who take them too seriously, and they don't even realize it.

I doubt many of you have taken a stats course beyond intro stats, so I don't expect you to have knowledge of advanced statistics on a theoretical level. Suffice to say, that the application of advanced statistics in fields outside of physical sciences is something you have to refrain from taking too seriously, due to the sample size, lack of ability to replicate the experiment in a controlled manner, etc. Without context, and without taking into account schemes and game plans, these stats mean nothing.

Not to mention that overall metrics that take into account the entire year don't mean much at the moment anyways.

It'd be great if people stopped misusing stats, but clearly that isn't going to happen any time soon.

I haven't read so many words that said absolutely nothing since I was forced to read Tess of the D'Urbevilles in high school and I HATED that book. For all your ranting, you made exactly no comment on the actual subject, just criticized the use of statistics by "people" and subjected us to what really amounts to a nerdy tantrum.

Unfortunately for you, statistics is defined as the study, collection, interpretation, presentation and organization of data. Thus, I give you, data as accrued throughout a season of football played by 32 teams each with a 53 man starting roster where all play must fall within controlled parameters as set by the NFL Competition Committee. Any variety in the resultant outcome of the plays would be due to variables in the application of the rules and the players' abilities.

In short, it'd be great if people stopped saying stupid things, but that clearly isn't going to happen any time soon.

 

[RolandDeschain]

HeatEquation: there are stats, which are generally worthless or semi-useful at best.

Then, there's DVOA. Educate yourself rather than continue looking like a Johnny-come-lately football fan that barely understands the game.

 

[Laloosh]

These types of threads are generally very embarrassing for people who take them too seriously, and they don't even realize it.

I doubt many of you have taken a stats course beyond intro stats, so I don't expect you to have knowledge of advanced statistics on a theoretical level. Suffice to say, that the application of advanced statistics in fields outside of physical sciences is something you have to refrain from taking too seriously, due to the sample size, lack of ability to replicate the experiment in a controlled manner, etc. Without context, and without taking into account schemes and game plans, these stats mean nothing.

Not to mention that overall metrics that take into account the entire year don't mean much at the moment anyways.

It'd be great if people stopped misusing stats, but clearly that isn't going to happen any time soon.

[youtube]TbkmjctIaXI[/youtube]

 

[AgentDib]

DVOA is good on aggregate levels such as "run defense" or "rushing offense". Where it breaks down is when FO tries to use it to evaluate individual position groups or players because it's difficult (impossible?) to tease apart individual contributions based on group outcomes without actually watching the games.

The weighted measurements are probably the best ones to look at in this context, as both SEA and NE are different teams today than they were at the start of the season. Using that context, this looks like a pretty even contest overall.

This Super Bowl could not be a closer statistical matchup. Our playoff odds formula gives New England a 50.5 percent chance of winning Super Bowl XLIX. Our FO Premium spread formula projects the line as New England -0.27. You are reading that correctly. That's less than half a point.

 

[ivotuk]

These types of threads are generally very embarrassing for people who take them too seriously, and they don't even realize it.

I doubt many of you have taken a stats course beyond intro stats, so I don't expect you to have knowledge of advanced statistics on a theoretical level. Suffice to say, that the application of advanced statistics in fields outside of physical sciences is something you have to refrain from taking too seriously, due to the sample size, lack of ability to replicate the experiment in a controlled manner, etc. Without context, and without taking into account schemes and game plans, these stats mean nothing.

Not to mention that overall metrics that take into account the entire year don't mean much at the moment anyways.

It'd be great if people stopped misusing stats, but clearly that isn't going to happen any time soon.

High Horse much?

Edit: By the way, I have a degree in Mathematics, and one in Computer Science, both from an accredited University. My statistics class was "Statistics with Calculus." So, I do know a little about stats, not much, but a little.

 

[jkitsune]

I have a late entry for the 'Most Argumentative .NET Member' debate...

 

[dumbrabbit]

What the **** is this heatequation guy talking about...?

 

[TheGreenMan]

These types of threads are generally very embarrassing for people who take them too seriously, and they don't even realize it.

I doubt many of you have taken a stats course beyond intro stats, so I don't expect you to have knowledge of advanced statistics on a theoretical level. Suffice to say, that the application of advanced statistics in fields outside of physical sciences is something you have to refrain from taking too seriously, due to the sample size, lack of ability to replicate the experiment in a controlled manner, etc. Without context, and without taking into account schemes and game plans, these stats mean nothing.

Not to mention that overall metrics that take into account the entire year don't mean much at the moment anyways.

It'd be great if people stopped misusing stats, but clearly that isn't going to happen any time soon.

So you want take the Patriots victory on faith then? Because.. what else is there?

No. There are other more appropriate methods to make predictions regarding the outcome of football games. Statistical analysis helps when you thousands of predictions over the course of the entire year. In the presence of statistical analysis, you're more likely to be correct in most of those games given that wins and offense/defense stats will converge to their expected value over the course of a season. In a one game showdown, they mean nothing, however.

You probably also think that Brownian Motion is good model for the evolution of stock prices.

Isn't that what the OP just pointed out? The statistics over the course of the season showing that Seattle by DVOA is the better overall team going into the Superbowl. As someone else pointed out DVOA cannot be applied to individual players as means of forecasting some outcome for that player but it uses statistics over the course of the season to determine who has the better rushing defense and better rushing offense etc.

And for your information.. I don't touch the stock market kid, I play hi lo blackjack in Vegas. The only Brownian motion that will be applied is when the Seahawks wipe their collective a$$es with the Patriots on Feb 1.

 

[kearly]

Unger vs. Wilfork will be a key matchup. If Seattle can run on New England they will control the game, because Blount is not the kind of RB that can beat Seattle.

 

[ShaunPope]

Why has this heat equation douche not been banned yet? He's clearly a troll just bashing the hawks.

 

[checkdanews]

Hey guys I come to a rival teams message board, post on every topic disagreeing with the OP, tell everybody about my degree(this is the internet, we don't believe you) then spout off some shit I prob heard on "The Big Bang Theory" then wiki'd, and basically BRADY IS GOWD * gotta say it in a boston accent* assskkk not what tyom brady can dyoo for youuu....ask what YOU cyan dyoo for tyom braaady!


WAIT THERES MORE

Then I try to talk about quantum mechanics in a football message board, because well boston's better then you

 

[CANHawk]

I have a general disdain for stats based arguments which stems largely from my hate of fantasy football, but to throw out team stats as a means to predict what the game may look like or how it might play out is loony tunes. By your argument, we should just assume that Jacksonville would beat Seattle because "hey! Shit happens!"

 

[Foghawk]

Did HeatSink finally dissipate 8)

 

[SalishHawkFan]

These types of threads are generally very embarrassing for people who take them too seriously, and they don't even realize it.

I doubt many of you have taken a stats course beyond intro stats, so I don't expect you to have knowledge of advanced statistics on a theoretical level. Suffice to say, that the application of advanced statistics in fields outside of physical sciences is something you have to refrain from taking too seriously, due to the sample size, lack of ability to replicate the experiment in a controlled manner, etc. Without context, and without taking into account schemes and game plans, these stats mean nothing.

Not to mention that overall metrics that take into account the entire year don't mean much at the moment anyways.

It'd be great if people stopped misusing stats, but clearly that isn't going to happen any time soon.

It's obvious to me that you're a troll.

According to the metrics we're talking about, Seattle would beat Green Bay yesterday because Green Bay couldn't stop our running game and we could stop theirs. According to those metrics, both Green Bay and Seattle would have trouble throwing the ball.

Gee, Seattle ran all over Green Bay and bottled up GB's rushing attack. Both teams had trouble throwing the ball.

The only thing those metrics didn't address was the turnovers. Even with all those turnovers, the game still played out as expected in general.

 

[TheHawkster]

I have a general disdain for stats based arguments which stems largely from my hate of fantasy football, but to throw out team stats as a means to predict what the game may look like or how it might play out is loony tunes. By your argument, we should just assume that Jacksonville would beat Seattle because "hey! Shit happens!"

Don't hate on Fantasy Football.
That's how I supplement my income!

Sh*t happens is only applicable to Brandon Bostick trying to catch a ball with Jordy Nelson directly behind him.