Comparative analysis of teams with easy strength of schedule

[SeaWolv]

Yeah I'm still upset over that. According to the DVOA we should have won that game.

Making fun of DVOA just shows a lot of us how much you don't know, FYI. You should really read up on it, and how accurate it has been in myriad ways for the last decade.

It's not some guarantee that Seattle's going to beat you, or anything; but it's by far the best single stat out there to gauge a football team by. Nothing else really comes close.

This DVOA stuff is interesting. At least it looks like we have a chance I mean we are #3 it's not like it is #1 versus #25 or something.

And that playoff odds article they just posted actually has us with the higher percentage of playing in the NFCCG. So that is interesting. Basically 50-49 so it should be a great battle.

Good luck and enjoy our city if you make it out here to the east coast.

Actually based on the DVOA stats posted 1/11/16 Seattle is #1 and Carolina is #5.

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/dvoa-r ... oa-ratings

 

[Polaris]

Figure I would add another Panther's perspective. I'll add my top 5 facts.

#1. Carolina had the easiest schedule in the NFL.
#2. Carolina is a very good team.
#3. Seattle is a very good team.
#4. Previous games, DVOA, MVP, and Forum/Media chatter will have zero impact on the result.
#5. The team that plays better this Sunday will advance to NFCCCG.

For all the DVOA defenders on here please explain to me why you aren't filthy rich gambling? There is no metric in the world that will give you anything other than a probability, and probabilities have the attribute of being anything from correct to wildly incorrect at any moment.

The most neutral view I can have on this game is either team is capable of winning by a variety of margins. I don't need a lot of numbers for that conclusion, simply watching the games is enough for me.

Actually there are some people that have done well gambling using DVOA. That said, DVOA is not a predictive stat and no one here is saying that it is. It is, however, the best measure we have of a football team's overall efficiency, i.e. how "good" they are. It also is a good measure not just now but historically of how good a team really is vs what their record says (no a team is not as good or as bad as their record in a lot of cases, sorry Parcells).

As for the fifth point, well, DUH. As for the other points, I agree, but I would say this:

1. I feel based on the body of evidence that Seattle is the better team.
2. The advanced statistical metrics bear this out.
3. The first two are no assurance of victory and as I've said before, I'll say again: I expect a close and hard fought game.

Edit PS: The reason it's hard to make money gambling using DVOA is that the WISE GUYS use DVOA as an important part of their "power metric" when determining point spreads. Essentially DVOA has become (at least in part) what the wise guys use to make sure the house always wins.

 

[panthers4life]

Beyond DVOA, which clearly favors Seattle (no I didn't say guarantees victory), there is SOS which historically shows that teams with low SOS struggle a great deal against teams with high SOS. In this case we're talking #4 Seattle vs. #27 Carolina. Again this is no guarantee of victory but yet another stat that suggests Seattle will most likely win this weekend.

Sorry, but DVOA says Seattle should never lose, ever. That isn't a very reasonable expectation though is it? I mean St. Louis beat you just a few weeks ago, and the Vikes did enough to win the game last week. The arrogance of acting like the game is a foregone conclusion is just going to make it that much sweeter if Carolina wins, so thanks for that.

 

[Polaris]

Beyond DVOA, which clearly favors Seattle (no I didn't say guarantees victory), there is SOS which historically shows that teams with low SOS struggle a great deal against teams with high SOS. In this case we're talking #4 Seattle vs. #27 Carolina. Again this is no guarantee of victory but yet another stat that suggests Seattle will most likely win this weekend.

Sorry, but DVOA says Seattle should never lose, ever. That isn't a very reasonable expectation though is it? I mean St. Louis beat you just a few weeks ago, and the Vikes did enough to win the game last week. The arrogance of acting like the game is a foregone conclusion is just going to make it that much sweeter if Carolina wins, so thanks for that.

Go over to Football Outsiders and educate yourself. Seriously. DVOA is NOT a predictive stat and never has been. I don't say that. Aaron Schatz who designed it says that. I also point out that just because a team has a better DVOA doesn't mean that team always wins. In fact there is a regular column on Football Outsiders called "Any Given Sunday" that addresses this because there is usually about one game a week where it doesn't work that way. It IS a good measure of how efficient (and thus how "good") a team really is, and if you look at the 8 surviving playoff teams, you find that they all fall in the TOP NINE of DVOA with only Cincy being the odd man out [largely because Cincy went brain dead in the final minute of their game but that's another topic].

 

[panthers4life]

Edit PS: The reason it's hard to make money gambling using DVOA is that the WISE GUYS use DVOA as an important part of their "power metric" when determining point spreads. Essentially DVOA has become (at least in part) what the wise guys use to make sure the house always wins.

Really, you do realize you don't have to make straight bet, there is the moneyline option.

 

[Polaris]

Edit PS: The reason it's hard to make money gambling using DVOA is that the WISE GUYS use DVOA as an important part of their "power metric" when determining point spreads. Essentially DVOA has become (at least in part) what the wise guys use to make sure the house always wins.

Really, you do realize you don't have to make straight bet, there is the moneyline option.

Sure, but the return is really cruddy and you are avoiding my point. DVOA is NOT a predictive stat. It is a measure of team efficiency. Nothing more and nothing less.

 

[panthers4life]

Go over to Football Outsiders and educate yourself. Seriously. DVOA is NOT a predictive stat and never has been. I don't say that. Aaron Schatz who designed it says that. I also point out that just because a team has a better DVOA doesn't mean that team always wins. In fact there is a regular column on Football Outsiders called "Any Given Sunday" that addresses this because there is usually about one game a week where it doesn't work that way. It IS a good measure of how efficient (and thus how "good") a team really is, and if you look at the 8 surviving playoff teams, you find that they all fall in the TOP NINE of DVOA with only Cincy being the odd man out [largely because Cincy went brain dead in the final minute of their game but that's another topic].

I have been there, and I know what DVOA is. My comments aren't based on what DVOA is, my comments are based on the numerous posts using it as some grindstone to predict a win. At the bottom of all this, I think we're agreeing, either team can win this Sunday.

 

[Polaris]

Go over to Football Outsiders and educate yourself. Seriously. DVOA is NOT a predictive stat and never has been. I don't say that. Aaron Schatz who designed it says that. I also point out that just because a team has a better DVOA doesn't mean that team always wins. In fact there is a regular column on Football Outsiders called "Any Given Sunday" that addresses this because there is usually about one game a week where it doesn't work that way. It IS a good measure of how efficient (and thus how "good") a team really is, and if you look at the 8 surviving playoff teams, you find that they all fall in the TOP NINE of DVOA with only Cincy being the odd man out [largely because Cincy went brain dead in the final minute of their game but that's another topic].

I have been there, and I know what DVOA is. My comments aren't based on what DVOA is, my comments are based on the numerous posts using it as some grindstone to predict a win. At the bottom of all this, I think we're agreeing, either team can win this Sunday.

Then you are reading what you want to read. I don't see a single post here that is using DVOA to predict a Seattle win. There are a lot of us here that feel confident that Seattle can and should (and I feel will) win because we feel that Seattle is the better team, and DVOA can absolutely be used to justify that. I know you Panther fans hate DVOA, but don't shoot the messenger. Instead reflect on the message. DVOA is just the messenger.

 

[panthers4life]

Sure, but the return is really cruddy and you are avoiding my point. DVOA is NOT a predictive stat. It is a measure of team efficiency. Nothing more and nothing less.

No I get your point. DVOA is an efficiency rating that can be referred to when making an argument for a prediction. But it's in no way a predictive tool and should not be used for wagering.

 

[panthers4life]

At any rate, was a fun conversation, and I appreciate that. I always try to be a realist and a good guest when visiting your board. I'm hoping for a Carolina victory this Sunday despite our lack of worthiness. Will check back in after the game win or lose, hope you do as well.

 

[Polaris]

Sure, but the return is really cruddy and you are avoiding my point. DVOA is NOT a predictive stat. It is a measure of team efficiency. Nothing more and nothing less.

No I get your point. DVOA is an efficiency rating that can be referred to when making an argument for a prediction. But it's in no way a predictive tool and should not be used for wagering.

Right. That said, (as I said before), the bookies DO use DVOA to help determine their starting lines.

 

[Polaris]

At any rate, was a fun conversation, and I appreciate that. I always try to be a realist and a good guest when visiting your board. I'm hoping for a Carolina victory this Sunday despite our lack of worthiness. Will check back in after the game win or lose, hope you do as well.

Points to bolded text. There is not need to be like that. No one here has said that Carolina isn't 'worthy' or anything close to the mark. I am sensing both here and lurking on the Carolina board a lot of insecure Panther fans. All we are saying is that just comparing raw records and seeds....or even one game in October really misses the mark. Carolina is a damn good team and I expect a hard fought game. I simply feel that Seattle is better.

 

[RichNhansom]

At any rate, was a fun conversation, and I appreciate that. I always try to be a realist and a good guest when visiting your board. I'm hoping for a Carolina victory this Sunday despite our lack of worthiness. Will check back in after the game win or lose, hope you do as well.

Points to bolded text. There is not need to be like that. No one here has said that Carolina isn't 'worthy' or anything close to the mark. I am sensing both here and lurking on the Carolina board a lot of insecure Panther fans. All we are saying is that just comparing raw records and seeds....or even one game in October really misses the mark. Carolina is a damn good team and I expect a hard fought game. I simply feel that Seattle is better.

I'm not real sure why this is confusing. The discussion is about why Seahawks fans believe we have the upper hand going into this game. The DVOA reference is just that a reference tool outside our own opinion, that agrees with us and breaks down why.

If you don't like DVOA then give a reasonable explanation of why it is flawed other than you just don't like it. Or provide a different source that backs up your reasons like has been done here with DVOA.

We can all sit around and say my dad is bigger than your dad but it's kind of fruitless isn't it?

Feel free to show us anything that says you guys should have the upper hand beyond one previous match up that can get easily explained away with any given Sunday. Please bring something to the table more than "because I said so".

All that said I like our chances but I also acknowledge we are coming off a brutal week in Minnesota and have had a week less to plan than you have. I still like our chances but no question this game could go either way.

 

[carolinablue]

So you're not impressed with the 15-1 record because in reality we shouldn't be 15-1? If you say we don't measure up to our record that then implies that we exceeded any reasonable expectation. I would say that's a good thing, no?

No, it means what the Atlanta or Texan records meant a couple of years ago. You smashed up a bunch of tin cans. Good for you. You're supposed to do that; no one is saying you haven't earned your seed. However, don't expect people outside the South East to be all that impressed.

I don't know man, during the last month your team beat the Browns, Ravens and lost to the Rams. None of those teams are very good. And you lost to the Rams earlier in the year too. We may not have played as many good teams as you have but the good teams we did play we beat. I don't think I agree with the notion that losing to most of the good teams is better than winning against the bad ones.

Dude, the only "good" teams Carolina has played this year are Green Bay and the Hawks. Props for winning these two games (although Hawks fans think they gave that game away to Carolina) but please don't even try to argue that your schedule wasn't anything short of filled with powderpuffs.

Even the Rams are a tougher team than the Texans and Redskins, the only other two teams the Panthers played with barely a winning record (9-7). The Panthers never played a team with more than 10 wins this season.

Just don't think the Rams are all that good. And the also the Redskins beat the Rams 24-10 so I wouldn't necessarily say they are tougher.

 

[Laloosh]

Just don't think the Rams are all that good. And the also the Redskins beat the Rams 24-10 so I wouldn't necessarily say they are tougher.

The Rams thing might be a sore spot for some Seattle fans because they swept us (and always play us tough) but I think any team with a passable offensive line and quarterback can beat the Rams. Offensive line being the key.

It's hard to win 15 games and I respect that. It still chaps my ass that we gave up a 4th quarter lead on a broken coverage by our two best members of the secondary. Luckily we get a chance to rectify it.

 

[Polaris]

No, it means what the Atlanta or Texan records meant a couple of years ago. You smashed up a bunch of tin cans. Good for you. You're supposed to do that; no one is saying you haven't earned your seed. However, don't expect people outside the South East to be all that impressed.

I don't know man, during the last month your team beat the Browns, Ravens and lost to the Rams. None of those teams are very good. And you lost to the Rams earlier in the year too. We may not have played as many good teams as you have but the good teams we did play we beat. I don't think I agree with the notion that losing to most of the good teams is better than winning against the bad ones.

Dude, the only "good" teams Carolina has played this year are Green Bay and the Hawks. Props for winning these two games (although Hawks fans think they gave that game away to Carolina) but please don't even try to argue that your schedule wasn't anything short of filled with powderpuffs.

Even the Rams are a tougher team than the Texans and Redskins, the only other two teams the Panthers played with barely a winning record (9-7). The Panthers never played a team with more than 10 wins this season.

Just don't think the Rams are all that good. And the also the Redskins beat the Rams 24-10 so I wouldn't necessarily say they are tougher.

The Rams are a lot better than you think. In DVOA the Rams finished the season with a -2.2% DVOA. Washington (who made the playoffs) finished their season with a -2.0% DVOA (almost the same). The highest NFC South team other than Carolina (Tampa Bay) had a season end DVOA of -9.3% or 20th in the league.

 

[Seahawk Sailor]

Just don't think the Rams are all that good. And the also the Redskins beat the Rams 24-10 so I wouldn't necessarily say they are tougher.

Just don't think the Panthers are all that good. They lost to the Falcons. And also the 7-9 Saints beat the Falcons. Twice. And 6-10 Tampa Bay beat the Falcons too. Twice. So I wouldn't necessarily say they are tougher.

See how it sounds when you cherry pick stats?

 

[carolinablue]

Just don't think the Rams are all that good. And the also the Redskins beat the Rams 24-10 so I wouldn't necessarily say they are tougher.

Just don't think the Panthers are all that good. They lost to the Falcons. And also the 7-9 Saints beat the Falcons. Twice. And 6-10 Tampa Bay beat the Falcons too. Twice. So I wouldn't necessarily say they are tougher.

See how it sounds when you cherry pick stats?

I didn't cherry pick stats. Dude said Rams were tougher than the Redskins. Rams lost to the Redskins. No cherries there, only a loss for the Rams.

 

[rideaducati]

Just don't think the Rams are all that good. And the also the Redskins beat the Rams 24-10 so I wouldn't necessarily say they are tougher.

Just don't think the Panthers are all that good. They lost to the Falcons. And also the 7-9 Saints beat the Falcons. Twice. And 6-10 Tampa Bay beat the Falcons too. Twice. So I wouldn't necessarily say they are tougher.

See how it sounds when you cherry pick stats?

I didn't cherry pick stats. Dude said Rams were tougher than the Redskins. Rams lost to the Redskins. No cherries there, only a loss for the Rams.

I hope that makes you happy, because after Sunday you're gonna be wondering how the Panthers lost to a team that lost to the Rams...twice.

 

[Polaris]

Just don't think the Rams are all that good. And the also the Redskins beat the Rams 24-10 so I wouldn't necessarily say they are tougher.

Just don't think the Panthers are all that good. They lost to the Falcons. And also the 7-9 Saints beat the Falcons. Twice. And 6-10 Tampa Bay beat the Falcons too. Twice. So I wouldn't necessarily say they are tougher.

See how it sounds when you cherry pick stats?

I didn't cherry pick stats. Dude said Rams were tougher than the Redskins. Rams lost to the Redskins. No cherries there, only a loss for the Rams.

That doesn't mean that Washington is a better team than the Rams. It means they won the game that day and that's all. Otherwise I could argue that Atlanta is better than Carolina. After all they did beat you......

See? That's why you use the advanced stats!