|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole
Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 7 years, 9 months
|
|
You could make a similar argument that overall league success on 2 point conversions has zero relevance to the possible success of any particular team. What possible mechanism could be occurring? Well you mentioned one. Shootouts like that generally occur when both defenses suck and a sucky defense is a bad thing in the playoffs. Then there might be the residual cockiness factor. Like I said, the sample size may well be approaching statistical significance.
--------------------
|
LiquidSmoke
My title's cooler than yours DBK
Registered: 09/04/01
Posts: 25,335
Loc: S.A.G.G.Y.B.A.L.L.S.
Last seen: 8 months, 24 days
|
|
people use these simpleton statistics to generalize things because they're lazy and dont want to look into the details of each game, matchup, situation, etc etc.
-------------------- "Shmokin' weed, Shmokin' wizz, doin' coke, drinkin' beers. Drinkin' beers beers beers, rollin' fatties, smokin' blunts. Who smokes tha blunts? We smoke the blunts" - Jay and Silent Bob strike Back
|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole
Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 7 years, 9 months
|
|
Given that people who make a living covering football can't pick games suggests that all that information you speak of is useless. Even if they do get the inside dope, which almost nobody can, it doesn't really seem to help much. The bookies are still in business and all they need to do is
Like I said, it may be approaching statistical significance. Somebody run a T-test. I forgot how. It's been 30 years since I took statistics. It would certainly be foolish to completely ignore it.
--------------------
|
jimbotron
Patty-Cake Enthusiast
Registered: 02/24/09
Posts: 2,324
Last seen: 10 years, 4 months
|
|
Quote:
Senor_Doobie said: Significant to what? What does scoring 50 points do that makes it improbable to win the next week?
It leaves you fucking sore, that's what. There was some hard hitting going on in that game. Followed by a short week and travel. Versus a very well-rested team.
The Saints are a veteran (read: old) bunch for the most part, and while they made a lot of their wins look easy I think they pushed themselves farther than people realize. I don't buy the momentum business really. The only real problem on offense was that our O line wasn't holding up; linemen were getting hurt and getting blown off the line, Brees was getting knocked down. That's pure physical preparedness and I don't care how in the zone a lineman is, tired is tired and the Saints are fresh.
The defense is kind of another story. Not sure what's going on with the run defense, hopefully the rest will help us on that but Williams had better be thinking about how to fix it. As far as the secondary, Jenkins got beat a lot and McKenzie hasn't been on fire like he was vs. the Pats, not that I fault him one bit. But we have Porter and Greer and that means Sharper can get back to what he does best. They know what to do and as long as Greer is fully recovered the difference should be night and day.
-------------------- BEST TEAM IN THE UNIVERSE
|
LiquidSmoke
My title's cooler than yours DBK
Registered: 09/04/01
Posts: 25,335
Loc: S.A.G.G.Y.B.A.L.L.S.
Last seen: 8 months, 24 days
|
Re: Arizona @ New Orleans [Re: zappaisgod]
#11823909 - 01/13/10 05:51 PM (14 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
i dont know why i'm engaging in a sports discussion with the kind of inane rambling you did earlier in this thread.
but good job of blindly generalizing everything again. You didn't even listen to my point.
If you're going to blart out statistics about point spreads over a season as to why one team will beat another, you're ignoring so many details like strength of schedule, etc.
It's about as stupid to rely on as saying a name player is different than a player with a "name" .
-------------------- "Shmokin' weed, Shmokin' wizz, doin' coke, drinkin' beers. Drinkin' beers beers beers, rollin' fatties, smokin' blunts. Who smokes tha blunts? We smoke the blunts" - Jay and Silent Bob strike Back
|
cortex
[ H ] ψ = [ E ] ψ
Registered: 10/08/02
Posts: 15,171
Loc: Gedankenexperiment
|
|
Did you know only one out of 16 teams makes it to the Super Bowl?! They don't stand a CHANCE!
-------------------- Signature (up to 750 characters).
|
LiquidSmoke
My title's cooler than yours DBK
Registered: 09/04/01
Posts: 25,335
Loc: S.A.G.G.Y.B.A.L.L.S.
Last seen: 8 months, 24 days
|
Re: Arizona @ New Orleans [Re: cortex]
#11823981 - 01/13/10 06:03 PM (14 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
exactly
thank you
-------------------- "Shmokin' weed, Shmokin' wizz, doin' coke, drinkin' beers. Drinkin' beers beers beers, rollin' fatties, smokin' blunts. Who smokes tha blunts? We smoke the blunts" - Jay and Silent Bob strike Back
|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole
Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 7 years, 9 months
|
|
Quote:
LiquidSmoke said: i dont know why i'm engaging in a sports discussion with the kind of inane rambling you did earlier in this thread.
but good job of blindly generalizing everything again. You didn't even listen to my point.
What blind generalization? That even professional sports followers with more information than you'll ever have can't pick games for shit? There's nothing blind about that. It's a fact.Quote:
If you're going to blart out statistics about point spreads over a season as to why one team will beat another, you're ignoring so many details like strength of schedule, etc.
But I didn't. Did I?Quote:
It's about as stupid to rely on as saying a name player is different than a player with a "name" .
No, it isn't. But I'm not going to restart that. Because the man with the gayest avatar ever said we were gay. At least I think he's a man. Look, dippy, all I said was that when you have a sample of nearly 10 games and you observe a result that produces one fifth of what a random distribution would dictate (11% vs 50%) it is definitely something to look at for statistical significance. Do you know what statistically significant means? Do you even know what a T-test is?
--------------------
|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole
Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 7 years, 9 months
|
Re: Arizona @ New Orleans [Re: cortex]
#11824234 - 01/13/10 06:44 PM (14 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
cortezthekiller said: Did you know only one out of 16 teams makes it to the Super Bowl?! They don't stand a CHANCE!
Did you know that even a top notch team that would win 70% of it's games against other playoff teams has less than a 50% chance of making it to the super Bowl and only about a 35% chance of winning it?
--------------------
|
cortex
[ H ] ψ = [ E ] ψ
Registered: 10/08/02
Posts: 15,171
Loc: Gedankenexperiment
|
Re: Arizona @ New Orleans [Re: zappaisgod]
#11824358 - 01/13/10 07:04 PM (14 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Did you know 98% of things posted on message boards is complete bullshit?
-------------------- Signature (up to 750 characters).
|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole
Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 7 years, 9 months
|
Re: Arizona @ New Orleans [Re: cortex]
#11824419 - 01/13/10 07:18 PM (14 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
I found a spiffy little site that did all the work, all I had to do was enter the data. I think I did it right. According to the calculations there is less than a 1% chance that a normal distribution of 9 games would produce the result of 8 losses. That is to say, we can be 99% sure that there is a statistically significant deleterious effect of scoring 50 points in a playoff game. Something about scoring 50 points in a playoff game is almost certainly indicative of a weakness that bodes ill for a teams chance of winning the next game. This test does not determine just how great that weakness is just that there is one.
--------------------
|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole
Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 7 years, 9 months
|
Re: Arizona @ New Orleans [Re: cortex]
#11824433 - 01/13/10 07:20 PM (14 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
cortezthekiller said: Did you know 98% of things posted on message boards is complete bullshit?
Not mine. Oh no no no. Especially not the characterization of the Texas queen's avatar as hopelessly gay.
--------------------
|
cortex
[ H ] ψ = [ E ] ψ
Registered: 10/08/02
Posts: 15,171
Loc: Gedankenexperiment
|
Re: Arizona @ New Orleans [Re: zappaisgod]
#11824474 - 01/13/10 07:24 PM (14 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
How many teams did you count that had a noticeable weakness to include in your sampling? How many total teams were sampled? What is your criteria for 'weakness'?
-------------------- Signature (up to 750 characters).
|
Senor_Doobie
Snake Pit Champion
Registered: 08/11/99
Posts: 22,678
Loc: Trump Train
|
Re: Arizona @ New Orleans [Re: jimbotron]
#11824498 - 01/13/10 07:28 PM (14 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
jimbotron said:
Quote:
Senor_Doobie said: Significant to what? What does scoring 50 points do that makes it improbable to win the next week?
It leaves you fucking sore, that's what. There was some hard hitting going on in that game. Followed by a short week and travel. Versus a very well-rested team.
The Saints are a veteran (read: old) bunch for the most part, and while they made a lot of their wins look easy I think they pushed themselves farther than people realize. I don't buy the momentum business really. The only real problem on offense was that our O line wasn't holding up; linemen were getting hurt and getting blown off the line, Brees was getting knocked down. That's pure physical preparedness and I don't care how in the zone a lineman is, tired is tired and the Saints are fresh.
The defense is kind of another story. Not sure what's going on with the run defense, hopefully the rest will help us on that but Williams had better be thinking about how to fix it. As far as the secondary, Jenkins got beat a lot and McKenzie hasn't been on fire like he was vs. the Pats, not that I fault him one bit. But we have Porter and Greer and that means Sharper can get back to what he does best. They know what to do and as long as Greer is fully recovered the difference should be night and day.
Its about time someone stuck up for the Saints with a legitimate argument.
We'll see how sore the Cards are this weekend. I don't think they will be. They pretty much scored at will on Sunday.
Its good that the Saints are rested and healthy but there is a fine line between rest and rust. Ask the Colts.
-------------------- "America: Fuck yeah!" -- Alexthegreat “Nothing can now be believed which is seen in a newspaper. Truth itself becomes suspicious by being put into that polluted vehicle. The real extent of this state of misinformation is known only to those who are in situations to confront facts within their knowledge with the lies of the day.” -- Thomas Jefferson The greatest sin of mankind is ignorance. The press takes [Trump] literally, but not seriously; his supporters take him seriously, but not literally. --Salena Zeto (9/23/16)
|
LiquidSmoke
My title's cooler than yours DBK
Registered: 09/04/01
Posts: 25,335
Loc: S.A.G.G.Y.B.A.L.L.S.
Last seen: 8 months, 24 days
|
Re: Arizona @ New Orleans [Re: zappaisgod]
#11824531 - 01/13/10 07:33 PM (14 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
zappaisgod said: But I'm not going to restart that.
of course you're not.
because you looked like a retard once it was clear you had no point.
i caught you contradicting yourself about Darren Sproles and after that you couldn't even explain yourself.
-------------------- "Shmokin' weed, Shmokin' wizz, doin' coke, drinkin' beers. Drinkin' beers beers beers, rollin' fatties, smokin' blunts. Who smokes tha blunts? We smoke the blunts" - Jay and Silent Bob strike Back
|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole
Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 7 years, 9 months
|
Re: Arizona @ New Orleans [Re: cortex]
#11824543 - 01/13/10 07:35 PM (14 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
cortezthekiller said: How many teams did you count that had a noticeable weakness to include in your sampling? How many total teams were sampled? What is your criteria for 'weakness'?
The date were that in 8 out of 9 times a winning team scored 50+ points they lost the next game. That's the data set. All of it. The null hypothesis was no difference, random distribution expected.
Weakness is anything at all that contributes to a failure to win the next game. It is non-specific. Like I said, this test does not determine what the actual likelihood is of a team to win the next week, just that there is some effect in play. Not what or how much or, for that matter, in what direction. There may actually be a less than 11% chance that the team scoring 50+ will win.
--------------------
|
LiquidSmoke
My title's cooler than yours DBK
Registered: 09/04/01
Posts: 25,335
Loc: S.A.G.G.Y.B.A.L.L.S.
Last seen: 8 months, 24 days
|
Re: Arizona @ New Orleans [Re: zappaisgod]
#11824550 - 01/13/10 07:36 PM (14 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
The only badass backup with a name LT had is Sproles.
Quote:
zappaisgod said: Sproles isn't a "name" player either.
go ahead, explain this to me. I would love to hear just how you didnt "fuck up".
-------------------- "Shmokin' weed, Shmokin' wizz, doin' coke, drinkin' beers. Drinkin' beers beers beers, rollin' fatties, smokin' blunts. Who smokes tha blunts? We smoke the blunts" - Jay and Silent Bob strike Back
|
Senor_Doobie
Snake Pit Champion
Registered: 08/11/99
Posts: 22,678
Loc: Trump Train
|
|
LS, you really gotta learn when to let shit go.
-------------------- "America: Fuck yeah!" -- Alexthegreat “Nothing can now be believed which is seen in a newspaper. Truth itself becomes suspicious by being put into that polluted vehicle. The real extent of this state of misinformation is known only to those who are in situations to confront facts within their knowledge with the lies of the day.” -- Thomas Jefferson The greatest sin of mankind is ignorance. The press takes [Trump] literally, but not seriously; his supporters take him seriously, but not literally. --Salena Zeto (9/23/16)
|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole
Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 7 years, 9 months
|
Re: Arizona @ New Orleans [Re: zorbman]
#11824634 - 01/13/10 07:48 PM (14 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
LiquidSmoke said:
Quote:
zappaisgod said: But I'm not going to restart that.
of course you're not.
because you looked like a retard once it was clear you had no point.
i caught you contradicting yourself about Darren Sproles and after that you couldn't even explain yourself.
I explained myself quite clearly.
Quote:
zorbman said:
Quote:
A "name" player should be known to the casual fan.
I saw and pretty much agreed with your point all along. By the time the casual fan becomes aware of a player their best years are often behind them. And many teams will overpay for such a player based upon reputation alone.
Only a Poid would fail. Do you think Darren Sproles is a "name" player? He's a fucking backup. As far as Michael Turner goes I don't get the wet drawers at all. He's been in the league for 6 years and gone over 1,000 yards exactly once.
--------------------
|
Paw_Paw
OTD`s Cranky Hyperetard
Registered: 08/20/09
Posts: 14,293
Loc: Northern Hemisphere
Last seen: 1 year, 6 months
|
Re: Arizona @ New Orleans [Re: zappaisgod]
#11824645 - 01/13/10 07:49 PM (14 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
Quote:
Paw_Paw said: I wish i was a sports forum mod because i would bann both of you for 24 hrs The bann reason would be for "fagg fighting"
Ummmm, I don't think somebody with David Gilmour (I think it's Gilmour) impersonating a 14 year old girl in his avatar should be calling anybody else a fag.
I am tired of your stupid ass shit in this forum
|
|