Nonstopdrivel
13 years ago
Several years ago, Gregg Easterbrook pointed out that the record of the average pundit in picking NFL winners on a weekly basis is little better than chance; a simple glance at the year-to-date records of the pundits on any major television or radio network show (say, Fox Sports) will reveal that some of the pundits will be at or even below .500 on their picks for the season. In the effort to be clever, or ride the current trendy bandwagon, or just listen to their gut, many pundits are flat-out wrong more often than not. In fact, Easterbrook pointed out, in a recent year (I think it was 2009), the following simple algorithm posted a better predictive record than all but one published pundit:

Season Record Algorithm

Pick team with better season record.
(if a tie) Pick home team.

"Gregg Easterbrook" wrote:



Sounds absurdly simple, but it works surprisingly well. The algorithm tends not to be extremely effective for the first two weeks of the season, but it did go 10-6 in both Weeks 1 and 2 for a combined record of 20-12 (.625), which isn't bad. (By way of comparison, Peter King is 26-6 or .781 over that same span.) It will be interesting to see how effective the algorithm is as the season progresses.

However, I think there are algorithms that could predict weekly winners with even more accuracy, so I have devised a couple that I believe will be effective. These algorithms will test the trope that "Offense wins games, but defense wins championships." I am intrigued by the fact that teams with the better defensive passer rating have been overwhelmingly successful at winning championships over the past for decades. Last year alone, the team with the better defensive passer rating went 10-1 in the playoffs. Likewise, it seems as though the teams with offensive juggernauts are the ones who tend to dominate in the regular season; think Kurt Warner, Drew Brees, Peyton Manning, Tom Brady, Brett Favre. On the other hand, these teams don't always have the best records in the playoffs. Therefore, I predict that the offensive passer rating algorithm will have better predictive success in the regular season, while the defensive passer rating algorithm will be more effective in the playoffs. It will be interesting to see how it pans out.

Here are the two passer rating algorithms:

Offensive Passer Rating Algorithm

Pick team with better offensive passer rating.
(if a tie) Pick home team.

"Nonstopdrivel" wrote:



Defensive Passer Rating Algorithm

Pick team with better offensive passer rating.
(if a tie) Pick home team.

"Nonstopdrivel" wrote:



And here is an algorithm I personally think would have the highest success of all:

Hybrid Passer Rating Algorithm

Pick team with better offensive passer rating.
(if a tie) Pick team with better defensive passer rating.
(if a tie) Pick home team.

"Nonstopdrivel" wrote:



Feel free to contribute and track your own algorithms in this thread. I would love to compare the efficacy of a variety of predictive strategies. I would especially appreciate it if members would volunteer to track an algorithm so I wouldn't have to do all the work myself.
UserPostedImage
Formo
13 years ago
You are such an effing geek.

And this is coming from a guy who's last Facebook status was, "Its super embarassing when my wifey catches me pretending to be HeMan. I was raising my invisible sword and whispering, "By the power of GraySkull" and she caught me. :/ 
UserPostedImage
Thanks to TheViking88 for the sig!!
Wade
  • Wade
  • Veteran Member
13 years ago
Easterbrook is showing off his econ background. It's a basic technique of prediction that economists, particularly those inclined to telling macro stories, love: use an average of past performance to predict future performance.

Query: Which, if any, of the following yield the same predictions as Easterbrook's algorithm?

1. Let Xi = 1 if a win in week i, 0 if a loss, i=1,...,n where Xn is the last game. Then Y (prediction for week n + 1) = "Win" if (∑Xi )/i> 1, "Lose" if (∑Xi)/i < 1. If ∑Xi/i = 1, pick home team.
2. Let Xi = 1 if a win in week i, 0 if a loss, i=1,...,n where Xn is the last game. If ∑Xi (team A) >∑Xi(team 😎, predict team A to win in week n+1. If ∑Xi(team A) =∑Xi(team 😎, pick home team.
3. Let X = wins through n games for team A, Y = wins through n games for team B. If X > Y, pick team A. If X
Signed,
Geezer (but senile) geek.


Edit: See, this is why the goddam "slapnuts" macro or whatever it is has to go.
And do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, that you may prove what is that good and acceptable and perfect will of God.
Romans 12:2 (NKJV)
macbob
13 years ago

Easterbrook is showing off his econ background. It's a basic technique of prediction that economists, particularly those inclined to telling macro stories, love: use an average of past performance to predict future performance.

Query: Which, if any, of the following yield the same predictions as Easterbrook's algorithm?

1. Let Xi = 1 if a win in week i, 0 if a loss, i=1,...,n where Xn is the last game. Then Y (prediction for week n + 1) = "Win" if (∑Xi )/i> 1, "Lose" if (∑Xi)/i < 1. If ∑Xi/i = 1, pick home team.
2. Let Xi = 1 if a win in week i, 0 if a loss, i=1,...,n where Xn is the last game. If ∑Xi (team A) >∑Xi(team 😎, predict team A to win in week n + 1. If ∑Xi(team A) =∑Xi(team 😎, pick home team.
3. Let X = wins through n games for team A, Y = wins through n games for team B. If X > Y, pick team A. If X
Signed,
Geezer (but senile) geek.


Edit: See, this is why the goddam "slapnuts" macro or whatever it is has to go.

Originally Posted by: Wade 



Wade-it's possible to get around the macro. Check out the quote.

Looks like 2 & 3 would render the same results. Don't think 1 would as written, as it doesn't make any comoparison between the two teams.
Nonstopdrivel
13 years ago

It's a basic technique of prediction that economists, particularly those inclined to telling macro stories, love: use an average of past performance to predict future performance.

Originally Posted by: Wade 


Well, yes. The downside to this technique is that it is vulnerable to unexpected short-term fluctuations. It cannot compensate if, for example, Tom Brady or Aaron Rodgers were to go down for a game; it would predict the outcome of the game as though they were still in the game. The upside to the technique is that it is immune to the hot-hand fallacy so prevalent among sports commentators. For example, Tom Brady threw for 511 yards last week, leading a gushing Peter King to proclaim that he could walk right into the Hall of Fame now if he wanted, and no doubt leading other sports commentators to overestimate what he will do this week. Given that Tom Brady is only the sixth NFL quarterback in league history to throw for 400 yards in two consecutive games (the fifth, incidentally, was Cam Newton, so I have to think that last week marked the first time two quarterbacks had ever accomplished that feat on the same day), Tom Brady is much more likely to revert back to a number more closely approximating his career average of 246 yards per game than duplicate his career-best performance. This predictive technique refuses to be overawed by Brady's historic feat and stubbornly predicts that his performance from week to week will probably be typical instead of anomalous. It may therefore be inaccurate in the short term, but just as level-headed poker players usually take pokers chasing the hot hand to the cleaners, it will probably kick the asses of the bandwagon-chasing sports commentators over the long haul. (I remember being shocked to watch pregame shows last year and see that some TV commentators were sporting prediction records as low as 6-10 and 7-9; they would have been better off pulling names out of a hat or asking a chimpanzee's advice.)

That being said, here are the predictions for this week.
UserPostedImage
Zero2Cool
13 years ago

Edit: See, this is why the goddam "slapnuts" macro or whatever it is has to go.

Originally Posted by: Wade 



No sir, I do not see why the "goddamn" slapnuts must go.
UserPostedImage
Nonstopdrivel
13 years ago
Season Record Algorithm (20-12)

JAC (1-1) @ CAR (0-2): Jacksonville
DET (2-0) @ MIN (0-2): Detroit
 SF (1-1) @ CIN (1-1): Cincinnati
MIA (0-2) @ CLE (1-1): Cleveland
 NE (2-0) @ BUF (2-0): Buffalo
NYG (1-1) @ PHI (1-1): Philadelphia
DEN (1-1) @ TEN (1-1): Tennessee
HOU (2-0) @  NO (1-1): Houston
NYJ (2-0) @ OAK (1-1): New York
 KC (0-2) @  SD (1-1): San Diego
BAL (1-1) @ STL (0-2): Baltimore
ATL (1-1) @  TB (1-1): Tampa Bay
 GB (2-0) @ CHI (1-1): Green Bay
ARI (1-1) @ SEA (0-2): Arizona
PIT (1-1) @ IND (0-2): Indianapolis
WAS (2-0) @ DAL (1-1): Washington

Offensive Passer Rating Algorithm

JAC  40.0  @  CAR  89.1: Carolina
DET 113.2  @  MIN  71.3: Detroit
 SF  95.2  @  CIN 104.1: Cincinnati
MIA  79.4  @  CLE  82.2: Cleveland
 NE 128.0  @  BUF 102.3: New England
NYG  80.5  @  PHI  93.3: Philadelphia
DEN  85.4  @  TEN  94.2: Tennessee
HOU 100.4  @   NO 114.9: New Orleans
NYJ  87.7  @  OAK  99.7: Oakland
 KC  49.5  @   SD  90.8: San Diego
BAL  82.8  @  STL  75.1: Baltimore
ATL  85.1  @   TB  82.7: Atlanta
 GB 126.4  @  CHI  84.1: Green Bay
ARI 110.3  @  SEA  80.1: Arizona
PIT  80.4  @  IND  71.4: Pittsburgh
WAS  90.6  @  DAL  99.9: Dallas

Defensive Passer Rating Algorithm

JAC  90.1  @  CAR 124.1: Jacksonville
DET  60.0  @  MIN  87.4: Detroit
 SF  89.0  @  CIN  85.9: Cincinnati
MIA 120.4  @  CLE  78.0: Cleveland
 NE  95.4  @  BUF  85.5: Buffalo
NYG  92.5  @  PHI  83.0: Philadelphia
DEN  99.8  @  TEN  68.5: Tennessee
HOU  69.5  @   NO  95.6: Houston
NYJ  56.2  @  OAK  80.3: New York
 KC 114.3  @   SD 111.3: San Diego
BAL  74.3  @  STL  87.3: Baltimore
ATL 105.1  @   TB 102.1: Tampa Bay
 GB  92.9  @  CHI  94.8: Green Bay
ARI  91.3  @  SEA 106.4: Arizona
PIT 100.0  @  IND  89.2: Indianapolis
WAS  81.3  @  DAL  92.4: Washington

Hybrid Passer Rating Algorithm

JAC  @  CAR: Carolina
DET  @  MIN: Detroit
 SF  @  CIN: Cincinnati
MIA  @  CLE: Cleveland
 NE  @  BUF: New England
NYG  @  PHI: Philadelphia
DEN  @  TEN: Tennessee
HOU  @   NO: New Orleans
NYJ  @  OAK: Oakland
 KC  @   SD: San Diego
BAL  @  STL: Baltimore
ATL  @   TB: Atlanta
 GB  @  CHI: Green Bay
ARI  @  SEA: Arizona
PIT  @  IND: Pittsburgh
WAS  @  DAL: Dallas

UserPostedImage
zombieslayer
13 years ago
Well, I guess we're a lock then to beat da Bears. 🖐
My man Donald Driver
UserPostedImage
(thanks to Pack93z for the pic)
2010 will be seen as the beginning of the new Packers dynasty. 🇹🇹 🇲🇲 🇦🇷
Wade
  • Wade
  • Veteran Member
13 years ago

No sir, I do not see why the "goddamn" slapnuts must go.

Originally Posted by: Zero2Cool 



Fuker.

:)

And do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, that you may prove what is that good and acceptable and perfect will of God.
Romans 12:2 (NKJV)
Fan Shout
Mucky Tundra (8h) : Oh I know about Jacobs, I just couldn't pass up an opportunity to mimic Zero lol
buckeyepackfan (9h) : Jacobs was just sat down, Watson re-injured that knee that kept him out 1 game earlier
buckeyepackfan (9h) : I needed .14 that's. .14 points for the whole 4th quarter to win and go to the SB. Lol
Mucky Tundra (9h) : Jacobs gonna be OK???
Zero2Cool (9h) : Watson gonna be OK???
packerfanoutwest (12h) : Inactives tonight for the Pack: Alexander- knee Bullard - ankle Williams - quad Walker -ankle Monk Heath
packerfanoutwest (12h) : No Jaire, but hopefully the front 7 destroys the line of scrimmage & forces Rattler into a few passes to McKinney.
packerfanoutwest (13h) : minny could be #1 seed and the Lions #5 seed
Zero2Cool (15h) : We'd have same Division and Conference records. Strength of schedule we edge them
Zero2Cool (15h) : I just checked. What tie breaker?
bboystyle (15h) : yes its possible but unlikely. If we do get the 5th, we face the NFCS winner
Zero2Cool (15h) : Ahh, ok.
bboystyle (15h) : yes due to tie breaker
Zero2Cool (15h) : I mean, unlikely, yes, but mathematically, 5th is possible by what I'm reading.
Zero2Cool (15h) : If Vikings lose out, Packers win out, Packers get 5th, right?
bboystyle (15h) : Minny isnt going to lose out so 5th seed is out of the equation. We are playing for the 6th or 7th seed which makes no difference
Mucky Tundra (16h) : beast, the ad revenue goes to the broadcast company but they gotta pay to air the game on their channel/network
beast (17h) : If we win tonight the game is still relative in terms of 5th, 6th or 7th seed... win and it's 5th or 6th, lose and it's 6th or 7th
beast (17h) : Mucky, I thought the ad revenue went to the broadcasting companies or the NFL, at least not directly
Zero2Cool (17h) : I think the revenue share is moot, isn't it? That's the CBA an Salary Cap handling that.
bboystyle (17h) : i mean game becomes irrelevant if we win tonight. Just a game where we are trying to play spoilers to Vikings chance at the #1 seed
Mucky Tundra (17h) : beast, I would guess ad revenue from more eyes watching tv
Zero2Cool (17h) : I would think it would hurt the home team because people would have to cancel last minute maybe? i dunno
beast (18h) : I agree that it's BS for fans planning on going to the game. But how does it bring in more money? I'm guessing indirectly?
packerfanoutwest (18h) : bs on flexing the game....they do it for the $$league$$, not the hometown fans
Zero2Cool (19h) : I see what you did there Mucky
Zero2Cool (19h) : dammit. 3:25pm
Zero2Cool (19h) : Packers Vikings flexed to 3:35pm
Mucky Tundra (19h) : Upon receiving the news about Luke Musgrave, I immediately fell to the ground
Mucky Tundra (19h) : Yeah baby!
Zero2Cool (19h) : LUKE MUSGRAVE PLAYING TONIGHT~!~~~~WOWHOAAOHAOAA yah
Zero2Cool (20h) : I wanna kill new QB's ... blitz the crap out of them.
beast (20h) : Barry seemed to get too conservative against new QBs, Hafley doesn't have that issue
Zero2Cool (21h) : However, we seem to struggle vs new QB's
Zero2Cool (21h) : Should be moot point, cuz Packers should win tonight.
packerfanoutwest (21h) : ok I stand corrected
Zero2Cool (21h) : Ok, yes, you are right. I see that now how they get 7th
Zero2Cool (21h) : 5th - Packers win out, Vikings lose out. Maybe?
beast (21h) : Saying no to the 6th lock.
beast (21h) : No, with the Commanders beating the Eagles, Packers could have a good chance of 6th or 7th unless the win out
Zero2Cool (22h) : I think if Packers win, they are locked 6th with chance for 5th.
beast (22h) : But it doesn't matter, as the Packers win surely win one of their remaining games
beast (22h) : This is not complex, just someone doesn't want to believe reality
beast (22h) : We already have told you... if Packers lose all their games (they won't, but if they did), and Buccaneers and Falcons win all theirs
Zero2Cool (22h) : I posted it in that Packers and 1 seed thread
Zero2Cool (22h) : I literally just said it.
packerfanoutwest (22h) : show us a scenario where Pack don't get in? bet you can't
Zero2Cool (22h) : Falcons, Buccaneers would need to win final two games.
Zero2Cool (22h) : Yes, if they win one of three, they are lock. If they lose out, they can be eliminated.
packerfanoutwest (22h) : as I just said,,gtheyh are in no matter what
Please sign in to use Fan Shout
2024 Packers Schedule
Friday, Sep 6 @ 7:15 PM
Eagles
Sunday, Sep 15 @ 12:00 PM
COLTS
Sunday, Sep 22 @ 12:00 PM
Titans
Sunday, Sep 29 @ 12:00 PM
VIKINGS
Sunday, Oct 6 @ 3:25 PM
Rams
Sunday, Oct 13 @ 12:00 PM
CARDINALS
Sunday, Oct 20 @ 12:00 PM
TEXANS
Sunday, Oct 27 @ 12:00 PM
Jaguars
Sunday, Nov 3 @ 3:25 PM
LIONS
Sunday, Nov 17 @ 12:00 PM
Bears
Sunday, Nov 24 @ 3:25 PM
49ERS
Thursday, Nov 28 @ 7:20 PM
DOLPHINS
Thursday, Dec 5 @ 7:15 PM
Lions
Sunday, Dec 15 @ 7:20 PM
Seahawks
Monday, Dec 23 @ 7:15 PM
SAINTS
Sunday, Dec 29 @ 3:25 PM
Vikings
Saturday, Jan 4 @ 11:00 PM
BEARS
Recent Topics
5m / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

4h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

8h / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

20h / Random Babble / Martha Careful

22-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / packerfanoutwest

19-Dec / Random Babble / Zero2Cool

18-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

17-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

17-Dec / Featured Content / Zero2Cool

16-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

16-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / Martha Careful

16-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

16-Dec / Feedback, Suggestions and Issues / Mucky Tundra

16-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

16-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

Headlines
Copyright © 2006 - 2024 PackersHome.com™. All Rights Reserved.