RaiderPride
15 years ago
This was the weakest ass post to explain his two year long ignorance. A elementary explanation for being a less than true packer fan.

I do not give a hill of beans what Gavedigga posts. It is like reading the inside door in a truck stop bathroom shitter 80% of the time. A statement that has a stream of venom in it, no matter how suttle, almost always.

I have seen some real Jack Ass Ignorant posters on Packer Forums over the years, but I have never had zero respect for one of them. Not one. Until Garvedigga.

I have zero respect for him, simply because he flaunts it. His Avatar, his posts about how he will be happy when Brett beats the Packers.

It is OK to point out ones concerns, bitch about MM, call for a firing.. But Gravediggga actually flaunted the fact he wanted the Packers to lose to The Vikes. He got a kick out of it.

I will take his advice and ignore him.

All I hope is that his Turncoat ass is not in Game day Chat during the playoffs. It is impossible to ignore a misdirected personality in the rapid fire Game day Chat.
""People Will Probably Never Remember What You Said, And May Never Remember What You Did. However, People Will Always Remember How You Made Them Feel."
HoustonMatt
15 years ago

It really does amaze me that this team was literally 3 seconds away from going 12-4. 12-4 does sound so much better than 11-5.

But I'll take 11-5 over, well, almost anything else any day.

"Nonstopdrivel" wrote:



It's worth noting that the Vikings were just as few seconds away from being 11-5.

I know what people will say. "You are what your record is" and all that bullshit coach-speak, but it's simply not true. Luck plays a huge role in sports, as it does in life. That's why the Packers were 6-10 last year despite outscoring opponents by 39 points (if I remember correctly).

I know I'm getting somewhat off topic, but I don't know that this thread has had a consistent topic for the last 4 pages anyhow.

However, it's interesting to note that this Packer team actually leads the league in Pythagorean Wins. (Uh-oh...stat nerd alert!)

http://www.imarc.net/writable/archives/pythagorean_wins/ 

For those who don't know what Pythag Wins are, they derived from a formula based on points scored and points allowed to arrive at the number of games a team should have "expected" to win based on those point totals. With larger sample sizes (such as in baseball) they're remarkably accurate.

What's even more interesting is that Aaron Schatz of Football Outsiders said that 16 of the last 20 Super Bowl winners were the team with the highest Pythag Win total.

http://www.imarc.net/communique/21-pythagorean_wins_for_the_nfl 

It's unclear to me whether or not that means the team with the most Pythag Wins for the regular season has won the Super Bowl 80% of the time or if it simply means that once the two Super Bowl teams are decided, of those two teams, the better Pythag record has won the game 80% of the time. Regardless, nobody should be surprised if this Packer team makes a deep run.

Just some food for thought.
blank
Nonstopdrivel
15 years ago
Welcome back to the board, HoustonMatt; I've missed your incisive, fact-based analyses.

This concept of Pythagorean wins is interesting. How is the factor derived? Empirically?

A couple of comments. First, the "16 of the last 20 Super Bowls" statistic dates to 2005. I wonder how well it's held up in the subsequent few Super Bowls? Second, I note that of the 6 teams who gave up fewer points than the Packers, none of them scored as many points as the Packers; Green Bay actually scored the third most points in the league this year. Fourth, this quote (from the 2005 article) is rather mind boggling:

Green Bay's winning percent is 55.2% - based on the number of points they've scored and allowed. (201^2.37 / (201^2.37 + 184^2.37)). They should win more than half the games they play. Yet at week 10 in the season, the Packers are 2-7. New England has a winning percentage of 41.2% - they should be a sub-.500 team, yet they're currently leading the AFC East at 5-4.


UserPostedImage
HoustonMatt
15 years ago

Welcome back to the board, HoustonMatt; I've missed your incisive, fact-based analyses.

This concept of Pythagorean wins is interesting. How is the factor derived? Empirically?

A couple of comments. First, the "16 of the last 20 Super Bowls" statistic dates to 2005. I wonder how well it's held up in the subsequent few Super Bowls? Second, I note that of the 6 teams who gave up fewer points than the Packers, none of them scored as many points as the Packers; Green Bay actually scored the third most points in the league this year. Fourth, this quote (from the 2005 article) is rather mind boggling:

Green Bay's winning percent is 55.2% - based on the number of points they've scored and allowed. (201^2.37 / (201^2.37 + 184^2.37)). They should win more than half the games they play. Yet at week 10 in the season, the Packers are 2-7. New England has a winning percentage of 41.2% - they should be a sub-.500 team, yet they're currently leading the AFC East at 5-4.

"Nonstopdrivel" wrote:



To be honest, Im not sure exactly how the formula for football (PF^2.37/PF^2.37 + PA^2.37) was derived, but I assume it was done in the same way as Bill James created the original formula for baseball. Its simply a matter of trial and error. All he did was use runs scored and runs allowed and tinkered with the exponent. With each different exponent, he simply went back through baseball history and tested it. Eventually he found one (1.82) that accurately predicted a teams record. For the outliers who were more than a standard deviation away from their expected win-loss total, you can take it one step further and look at the following season. If your formula is worth a damn, a team that underperformed its expected victory total should improve the following year (as did the Packers from 08 to 09) and vice versa (see this years Miami Dolphins and Carolina Panthers).

As for the Super Bowl winners from 06 to current, I calculated their Pythag wins to see if the pattern held steady. This is incomplete as I didnt do the whole league to see if the Super Bowl winner led the league in Pythag wins, but it should give us some idea.

09 Pittsburgh 11.84 Pythag Wins
08 NY Giants 8.57 Pythag Wins
07 Indianapolis 9.59 Pythag Wins
06 Pittsburgh 11.61 Pythag Wins

Without knowing the other teams Pythag wins, Id assume Pittsburgh in 06 and 09 were among the top 3 at least. The Giants in 08 were predictably an outlier, though NE finished the season a remarkable +315 in point differential, so only a David Tyree catch prevented the Pythag Wins leader from winning the Super Bowl that year. In 07, Id estimate Indy was in the 5-6 range for Pythag Win total, but their opponent, the Bears, look to be either one or two (Baltimore had a very strong Pythag win total that year as well).

So did the pattern hold? Well, kind of.
blank
earthquake
15 years ago



i'd take rodgers 5 td runs over that 7 days in a week. and you, for sure, too :cyclopsani: i don't have to miss the ironic sign :bigsmurf:

"GermanGilbert" wrote:



Lol, you would take 5 qb sneaks over an extra 3td's? Cool, good for you. QB sneaks are all skill

"Gravedigga" wrote:



how many tds from brett? 33. how many tds from aaron? 35. be quite, subborn.

"GermanGilbert" wrote:



5 Sneaks? Right, all Rodgers does is score rushing TDs on sneaks, my grandma could do that. I guess that is why he lead all QBs in rushing yards.

4
12
1
14
1

Distance for Rodger's rushing TDs.
35 TDs no matter how you look at it

The funny thing is that it is somehow assumed that QB sneak TD's are the easiest thing in the world, if this were the case every QB in the league would have about 5 rushing TDs every year, but most teams prefer to use a large running back or fullback in these situations, telling isnt it?

Also, you would rather have 3 TDs than 5 TDs, what is this, GOLF?
blank
Dulak
15 years ago
rodgers has the most rushing yards out of any QB I thought also ...
bozz_2006
15 years ago
true
UserPostedImage
Cheesey
15 years ago
I don't really care what Peter King, or any other talking head says. But it DOES show that others outside of the Packer fan base are seeing what we are seeing. That Ted Thompson is doing a pretty darn good job.
I always stated that i would wait to judge Ted Thompson based on the outcome. It's a shame that some can't "force" themselves to do the same.
"DON'T BOTHER ME WITH THE FACTS.....MY MIND IS MADE UP!!!" seems to be the cry of a few.
UserPostedImage
Fan Shout
Zero2Cool (2h) : Bahah, I was like WTF why isn't anyone posting on PP.com ... oops no one has permissions
dfosterf (4h) : tell her I reckon
dfosterf (4h) : Micah Robinson cut. Probable PS player tomorrow. Has to call mom back and t
Zero2Cool (6h) : New site so much better. Might make switch and deal with it.
dfosterf (6h) : Mecole Hardman to our practice squad
dfosterf (7h) : Nick Nieman from Texans our 5th linebacker. Special teams signing
TheKanataThrilla (8h) : Looks like we signed Clayton Tune as QB3
wpr (8h) : TKT people lose their minds over QB3. Point is almost none of them are ready that's why they are on the PS and other teams don't take them.
TheKanataThrilla (9h) : Unfortunately he doesn't seem ready to be an emergency QB.
TheKanataThrilla (9h) : As a Canadian and a follower of Canadian University football. I am rooting for him
dfosterf (9h) : I bet a lot of us will follow the Taylor Elgersma journey with interest. Personally, got a Kurt Warner vibe goin' on. I like him
TheKanataThrilla (9h) : Not sure if either will be claimed though.
TheKanataThrilla (9h) : Tune or Hooker would make sense
dfosterf (9h) : Clayton Tune cut by the Cards? Don't know if that's the guy, we shall see
TheKanataThrilla (9h) : Per Bill Huber, the Packers will not be bringing back Taylor Elgersma or Sean Clifford on the practice squad, so a new third quarterback
Mucky Tundra (10h) : Schefter must have deleted his tweet
dfosterf (11h) : Hopefully Jerry reaches under the seat cushions and ashtrays of his jet and scrapes up the 45 million apr and spares us further nonsense
dfosterf (12h) : Have to admit the PO'd Cowboy fan videos would be fun to watch. Problem with draft picks is half their fanbase barely knows what that is
beast (12h) : I think Cowboys fans are ready to get their pitch forks and burning sticks if Jerry were to trade Micah
dfosterf (12h) : If Jerry traded Micah to GB, here in northern Va. they would have to quick build yet another data center to handle the internet hate traffic
Zero2Cool (12h) : its signing and trades that you don't hear about, other then announced
Zero2Cool (12h) : If you hear rumors about Packers sign or trade, won't happen. Not how they work
dfosterf (12h) : 19 players in a contract year. Jones called loss to us worst loss in Cowboy history. Forget Parsons trade. Not happenin' Cap'n
packerfanoutwest (14h) : The Packers, meanwhile, are the youngest team in the league for the third consecutive year.
dfosterf (16h) : That it was darkest before the dawn in Bengals and Commanders before they got deals done
Zero2Cool (16h) : what is Schefter saying?
dfosterf (16h) : He was getting Dorito infusion therapy
dfosterf (16h) : He's outta shape. Why, just the other day I saw him splayed out on the trainers table
Mucky Tundra (23h) : Parsons has followed Rasheed Walker on Twitter. Quite the choice
Mucky Tundra (23h) : Kuhn is a former player who works for the team, if somethings going down, he would be close to it
Mucky Tundra (23h) : @kuhnj30 Micah Freaking Parsons
Mucky Tundra (23h) : A LOT of buzz on the Bird App regarding Parsons; even Schefter is saying it's serious
dfosterf (26-Aug) : *Orzech*
dfosterf (26-Aug) : Orzich long snapper 3 yr extension
Zero2Cool (26-Aug) : Packers signed someone for three year deal
Zero2Cool (26-Aug) : lol i know it's insane ... sign up for the waiver wire then you'll know
wpr (26-Aug) : YES!!!!!!
Mucky Tundra (26-Aug) : WE WANT THE LIST! WE WANT THE LIST!
Zero2Cool (26-Aug) : @JJLahey · 2m Holy crap, Packers, where the heck is the list?
Zero2Cool (26-Aug) : haha folks on Tweeter every year this time ... 'where is list Packers!!" hahaha
wpr (26-Aug) : He played pretty good.
Zero2Cool (26-Aug) : NAZIR STACKHOUSE HAS MADE THE 53
Zero2Cool (26-Aug) : NOOOOO KALEN IS GONE
Zero2Cool (26-Aug) : Kalen King and Kamal Hadden making it. me thinks
schroeder84 (26-Aug) : @dfosterf I suspect Elgersma WILL be hard to hide. Raw, but talented
Zero2Cool (26-Aug) : pp.com is broken, halt testing, gotta go do work things for a bit
hardrocker950 (26-Aug) : Mecole Hardman was released, to the surprise of few
Zero2Cool (26-Aug) : PP.com updated. Reset Password works, and now User Profile pages are a thing
Zero2Cool (25-Aug) : Soft hope plan is having fantasy football weekly on-site that i build. cannot do that with this setup.
Zero2Cool (25-Aug) : It's older technology, resource hog, cannot be upgraded/changed. That's to start.
Please sign in to use Fan Shout
2025 Packers Schedule
Sunday, Sep 7 @ 3:25 PM
LIONS
Thursday, Sep 11 @ 7:15 PM
COMMANDERS
Sunday, Sep 21 @ 12:00 PM
Browns
Sunday, Sep 28 @ 7:20 PM
Cowboys
Sunday, Oct 12 @ 3:25 PM
BENGALS
Sunday, Oct 19 @ 3:25 PM
Cardinals
Sunday, Oct 26 @ 7:20 PM
Steelers
Sunday, Nov 2 @ 12:00 PM
PANTHERS
Monday, Nov 10 @ 7:15 PM
EAGLES
Sunday, Nov 16 @ 12:00 PM
Giants
Sunday, Nov 23 @ 12:00 PM
VIKINGS
Thursday, Nov 27 @ 12:00 PM
Lions
Sunday, Dec 7 @ 12:00 PM
BEARS
Sunday, Dec 14 @ 3:25 PM
Broncos
Friday, Dec 19 @ 11:00 PM
Bears
Friday, Dec 26 @ 11:00 PM
RAVENS
Saturday, Jan 3 @ 11:00 PM
Vikings
Recent Topics
2h / Feedback, Suggestions and Issues / Zero2Cool

2h / Fantasy Sports Talk / Zero2Cool

3h / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

5h / Green Bay Packers Talk / bboystyle

10h / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

23h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Cheesey

26-Aug / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

26-Aug / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

25-Aug / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

24-Aug / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

24-Aug / Around The NFL / beast

23-Aug / Feedback, Suggestions and Issues / Zero2Cool

22-Aug / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

21-Aug / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

20-Aug / Green Bay Packers Talk / bboystyle

Headlines
Copyright © 2006 - 2025 PackersHome.com™. All Rights Reserved.