Big Turk Posted November 13, 2020 Share Posted November 13, 2020 (edited) Says the Bills should have an average of 4.7 wins, meaning we have 2.3 wins more than expected based on point differential, which is the same as the Steelers who should have 5.7 wins. Bills are the 9th "luckiest" team after 9 games since 1960, Steelers the 8th based on this metric... That being said the Bills area also ranked 7th in their ELO ratings at 1607 and they project an 11-5 record for us...meaning apparently they feel we will keep being lucky... https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-steelers-and-bills-have-been-historically-lucky-so-far-the-chargers-have-not/ Edited November 13, 2020 by matter2003 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buffalo_Stampede Posted November 13, 2020 Share Posted November 13, 2020 Ours is actually flawed because we've dominated basically every game we won but let teams back in the game. 7 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JGMcD2 Posted November 13, 2020 Share Posted November 13, 2020 (edited) Yeah I saw this yesterday. It seems to me after looking at the information quickly that teams with winning records are in that “lucky” bin and teams with losing records are in that “unlucky” bin. There is very minimal crossover for a losing team winning more than they should and a winning team losing more than they should and in all of those instances it’s pretty close to being 0 difference. Which I find kind of odd... but it also supports the concept that teams in the NFL are all close in ability/talent and wins are hard to come by in the NFL... or something like that. Edited November 13, 2020 by JGMcD2 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Turk Posted November 13, 2020 Author Share Posted November 13, 2020 Just now, Buffalo_Stampede said: Ours is actually flawed because we've dominated basically every game we won but let teams back in the game. I agree with that to some degree and also it is highly skewed by one blowout loss to the Titans. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warcodered Posted November 13, 2020 Share Posted November 13, 2020 (edited) I mean it's not like we have a really tough schedule or anything. Edited November 13, 2020 by Warcodered 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsVet Posted November 13, 2020 Share Posted November 13, 2020 Five Thirty Eight? Come on man! 4 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tortured Soul Posted November 13, 2020 Share Posted November 13, 2020 27 minutes ago, matter2003 said: That being said the Bills area also ranked 7th in their ELO ratings at 1607 and they project an 11-5 record for us...meaning apparently they feel we will keep being lucky... Projecting 11-5 means 4-3 the rest of the way, which is in line with what our point differential says our record should be. So they are projecting regression. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SlimShady'sSpaceForce Posted November 13, 2020 Share Posted November 13, 2020 Why bother with idiot stories like that. Don’t even give them the clicks 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greg S Posted November 13, 2020 Share Posted November 13, 2020 Can we also say the Patriots were lucky these past 20 years or is that not allowed? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Freddie's Dead Posted November 13, 2020 Share Posted November 13, 2020 How anybody can listen to 538 is beyond me. Lucky? Just give it to 'em, Home Run Throw Forward, Wide Right, Leodis fumble, and on and on. 0 for the 70's against the Fish. Two decades being the Cheats female dog. Lucky my ass. 538 is dog *****. 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SageAgainstTheMachine Posted November 13, 2020 Share Posted November 13, 2020 (edited) The concept of Pythagorean Wins would be useful over a very large sample size where game-script permutations are smoothed out but over 9 games it's pretty much useless. In the Seattle game, for example, the game was 99.9% decided when we went up 41-20 but the Seahawks got a fluke TD and a garbage time TD that made the score look closer but probably did almost nothing to change the win probability at the time they were scored. So the notion of that win being valuated as less of a win because the margin was 10 instead of 21 (or on the other side the KC loss looking closer than it should) is garbage. EDIT: It's absolutely true that if you ran a simulation of these 9 games say...1,000 times...our 7-2 record would be in the higher end of the range. But saying that the AVERAGE result of those simulations would be a 4.7-4.3 record is asinine to anyone who's watched the games. Edited November 13, 2020 by SageAgainstTheMachine 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4_kidd_4 Posted November 13, 2020 Share Posted November 13, 2020 “Plucky” is what I think they meant to say. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jerome007 Posted November 13, 2020 Share Posted November 13, 2020 1 hour ago, Buffalo_Stampede said: Ours is actually flawed because we've dominated basically every game we won but let teams back in the game. No doubt luck IS involved, as the difference between a W or L can be a few plays, ref calls (or non-calls), lucky bounce, whatever. But as Buffalo_Stampede wrote, it doesn't apply here. Ridiculous to base "luck" on close scores. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TH3 Posted November 13, 2020 Share Posted November 13, 2020 Entire Industry of spreadsheet heroes who maintain their formulas and algorithms are smarter than actuall W/L...AND that is what we should believe..... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Artful Dodger Posted November 13, 2020 Share Posted November 13, 2020 The Bills have an extremely competitive quarterback who is capable of willing the team to victory. Is that a measurable statistic? The Bills are "lucky" that Josh Allen is their quarterback. 3 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atlbillsfan1975 Posted November 13, 2020 Share Posted November 13, 2020 Any stats that equates to ‘luckiest’ should be taken with a grain of salt. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
uticaclub Posted November 13, 2020 Share Posted November 13, 2020 What are these stats based on? Just random numbers thrown together to make random graphs doesnt move the needle for me 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thenorthremembers Posted November 13, 2020 Share Posted November 13, 2020 Yet the Phins score 21 points on defense and special teams over the course of two weeks and its because their weak armed QB is a transcendent talent...ok. 1 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
QLBillsFan Posted November 13, 2020 Share Posted November 13, 2020 538 has predicted the last two elections. Let’s just say they have not done well. Zero credibility. They have a bias to predict what they want to have happen. They are just poor at it! 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SageAgainstTheMachine Posted November 13, 2020 Share Posted November 13, 2020 (edited) 5 minutes ago, uticaclub said: What are these stats based on? Just random numbers thrown together to make random graphs doesnt move the needle for me It's a barely more complex statistic than W/L record itself and the thing it pretends to illustrate (luck) isn't what it illustrates at all. If I wanted to start an analysis of luck I'd look at truly high variance things like fumble recovery percentage, tip drills and wind conditions for FG kicking. Edited November 13, 2020 by SageAgainstTheMachine 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beast Posted November 13, 2020 Share Posted November 13, 2020 I guess we are in trouble if or when they start factoring in stupid stats. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Frankish Reich Posted November 13, 2020 Share Posted November 13, 2020 Point differential isn't a very good measure in football. Not enough games to have an adequate sample, gross disparities in strength of schedule (what division in playing the NFC East this year?), etc, etc. In MLB: 162 games ... it's a damn good indicator of which teams are "better" or "worse" than their records would tell us. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Madbillsfan Posted November 13, 2020 Share Posted November 13, 2020 Click bait me thinks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaBillsFanSince1973 Posted November 13, 2020 Share Posted November 13, 2020 luck is when preparation meets opportunity 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt_In_NH Posted November 13, 2020 Share Posted November 13, 2020 There aware 8 or 9 games played. One game can skew things a lot and this is low sample size for this kind of analysis. From watching the games the bills have been the better team in their wins and have dominated at times although the score did not reflect that at the end of the game. don’t let this worry you. It’s kind of useless Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mickey Posted November 13, 2020 Share Posted November 13, 2020 Is there any stat, too ridiculous, too irrelevant and too insanely picayune for even the most OCD afflicted numerical fetishist to embrace? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reader Posted November 13, 2020 Share Posted November 13, 2020 At a quick glance half the historic teams that are paired with the Steelers make it to the super bowl so...not exactly sure what the takeaway here is... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Like A Mofo Posted November 14, 2020 Share Posted November 14, 2020 You know what I say to these: Expect THIS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Simon Posted November 14, 2020 Share Posted November 14, 2020 38 minutes ago, Mickey said: Is there any stat, too ridiculous, too irrelevant and too insanely picayune for even the most OCD afflicted numerical fetishist to embrace? What are the odds that there's a significant and measurable degree of certainty that this bore the tone of a challenge? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DQW87 Posted November 14, 2020 Share Posted November 14, 2020 3 hours ago, matter2003 said: That being said the Bills area also ranked 7th in their ELO ratings at 1607 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hondo in seattle Posted November 14, 2020 Share Posted November 14, 2020 I realize some very talented statisticians work at 538. And I know their game predictions are pretty good. But if their model says the Bills should have 4.7 wins, their model is wrong. We didn't get 7 wins off of unearned turnovers or weird bounces. We outplayed our opponent 7 times this year. Sometimes I watch a game and feel like the better team lost. I never had that feeling so far watching the Bills this year. I think it's interesting 538 attributes the Bills good record to luck rather than to a flaw with their "Pythagorean expectations." They can't possibly believe their predictive model is perfect, can they? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TroutDog Posted November 14, 2020 Share Posted November 14, 2020 31 minutes ago, hondo in seattle said: I realize some very talented statisticians work at 538. And I know their game predictions are pretty good. But if their model says the Bills should have 4.7 wins, their model is wrong. We didn't get 7 wins off of unearned turnovers or weird bounces. We outplayed our opponent 7 times this year. Sometimes I watch a game and feel like the better team lost. I never had that feeling so far watching the Bills this year. I think it's interesting 538 attributes the Bills good record to luck rather than to a flaw with their "Pythagorean expectations." They can't possibly believe their predictive model is perfect, can they? I agree. Statisticians are an interesting breed. Dealing with them when I’m doing budgets is particularly interesting as they base their view of what I will do across the entire organization (this is in my last life). I consistently outpaced the many but that was never factored in. I fought it tooth and nail to no avail. That’s just the way they work...and I understand it...but don’t agree with it. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reader Posted November 14, 2020 Share Posted November 14, 2020 3 minutes ago, TroutDog said: I agree. Statisticians are an interesting breed. Dealing with them when I’m doing budgets is particularly interesting as they base their view of what I will do across the entire organization (this is in my last life). I consistently outpaced the many but that was never factored in. I fought it tooth and nail to no avail. That’s just the way they work...and I understand it...but don’t agree with it. I feel like they are really good at getting the science down for that 90-95% of situations, but can't (due to mathematical models) account for nuance. The Bills have played significantly better than their point differential. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsFan619 Posted November 14, 2020 Share Posted November 14, 2020 (edited) 3 hours ago, Artful Dodger said: The Bills have an extremely competitive quarterback who is capable of willing the team to victory. Is that a measurable statistic? The Bills are "lucky" that Josh Allen is their quarterback. Yup, good thoughts! There's just some things you just can't measure. Edited November 14, 2020 by BillsFan619 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orlando Tim Posted November 14, 2020 Share Posted November 14, 2020 18 minutes ago, Reader said: I feel like they are really good at getting the science down for that 90-95% of situations, but can't (due to mathematical models) account for nuance. The Bills have played significantly better than their point differential. The NFL is the worst sport to try and use simple math with since the season is too short and one game can skew numbers so much ala Titans game. In baseball simple numbers mean much more. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Call_Of_Ktulu Posted November 14, 2020 Share Posted November 14, 2020 Its like when a crappy bowler says to me " I'd rather be lucky than good" or sand baggers I should say. The Bills are playing very good football right now and have the young talent to get even better as the season wears on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TroutDog Posted November 14, 2020 Share Posted November 14, 2020 33 minutes ago, Reader said: I feel like they are really good at getting the science down for that 90-95% of situations, but can't (due to mathematical models) account for nuance. The Bills have played significantly better than their point differential. ‘Nuance’ isn’t included in statistical science. Just saying. 😃 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mannc Posted November 14, 2020 Share Posted November 14, 2020 Yep, that’s the Bills for you; just spoiled for good luck... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BBills88 Posted November 14, 2020 Share Posted November 14, 2020 Let this luck bring us a Superbowl victory this season Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ganesh Posted November 14, 2020 Share Posted November 14, 2020 4 hours ago, Artful Dodger said: The Bills have an extremely competitive quarterback who is capable of willing the team to victory. Is that a measurable statistic? The Bills are "lucky" that Josh Allen is their quarterback. this ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts