The 49ers ... actually better than GB?

Well one thing this formula doesn't account for is strength of competition. The Packers' schedule was a tougher one.

Originally posted by whatawegot:

Originally posted by johnnyredneat:
Some of you guys might be familiar with the so-called Pythagorean projection in sports. In a nutshell, it says if you plug a team's points scored and points conceded into a simple equation, you can predict a team's future won-loss record better than just about any other way, including the team's current record)

(Example: a team goes 8-8 but significantly outscores its opponents. Next year, you'd do better predicting their record based upon the point differential, instead of the 8-8 record, or their offensive/defensive rankings, strength of schedule, etc.)

Another way of thinking of it is that the Pythagorean projection identifies how lucky/unlucky teams were to get to their record.

So, plugging the numbers for this year in...it turns out that the 49ers have the best "expected" record in the league: 9.6 wins. Green Bay only has 9.0 wins, suggesting that the Packers have been significantly lucky to get to 12-0. Green Bay isn't even in 2nd place - Houston has 9.2 expected wins, although with their QB situation that's probably not going to last for long.

This stat isn't the gospel or anything. Green Bay may well be getting under-appreciated a bit. But also reflects how a more-rounded team like SF might actually be playing better overall than a team that does one thing extraordinarily well but really struggles elsewhere (e.g., the Packers having 47 rushing yards on 24 carries against a bad, banged up NYG rush D - truly pathetic numbers when you have a Rodgers passing attack)

If anything, it bodes very well for our future staying power as a NFC powerhouse.

This stat isn't the gospel or anything. Green Bay may well be getting under-appreciated a bit. But also reflects how a more-rounded team like SF might actually be playing better overall than a team that does one thing extraordinarily well but really struggles elsewhere (e.g., the Packers having 47 rushing yards on 24 carries against a bad, banged up NYG rush D - truly pathetic numbers when you have a Rodgers passing attack)QUOTE. LOL


hey Einstein. Let me ask you something. If a team does something really well. I mean exeptionally well and the opposing team knows it and prepares for it yet cant stop it then please explain why you need to even run it. THey run just enuf to keep the teams honest. Rodgers is lights out. Thow all your harvard regresion analysis and your multiplication win percentage. It means squat. THE GREEN BAY PACKERS ARE 12-0 FOR A REASON. THEY PASS THE BALL AND HAVE AN ELITE QB. A more rounded team is great for soup talk but the bottom line is that they along with new orleans are huge hurdles to overcome playoff time. Hurdles that they will not overcome. Hows that for quantitative analysis.

Did your crystal ball tell you that?

The dude is just sharing some information he found which I am eating up because it glosses the niners. The Packers are 12-0, yes, there is no denying that, and while having arguable the best QB in the league helps it is also a product of some great fortune. The niners are a 50+ yard field goal and 2 blown calls away from 12-0. So this stat putting us where it is makes sense.

Originally posted by whatawegot:

Originally posted by johnnyredneat:
Some of you guys might be familiar with the so-called Pythagorean projection in sports. In a nutshell, it says if you plug a team's points scored and points conceded into a simple equation, you can predict a team's future won-loss record better than just about any other way, including the team's current record)

(Example: a team goes 8-8 but significantly outscores its opponents. Next year, you'd do better predicting their record based upon the point differential, instead of the 8-8 record, or their offensive/defensive rankings, strength of schedule, etc.)

Another way of thinking of it is that the Pythagorean projection identifies how lucky/unlucky teams were to get to their record.

So, plugging the numbers for this year in...it turns out that the 49ers have the best "expected" record in the league: 9.6 wins. Green Bay only has 9.0 wins, suggesting that the Packers have been significantly lucky to get to 12-0. Green Bay isn't even in 2nd place - Houston has 9.2 expected wins, although with their QB situation that's probably not going to last for long.

This stat isn't the gospel or anything. Green Bay may well be getting under-appreciated a bit. But also reflects how a more-rounded team like SF might actually be playing better overall than a team that does one thing extraordinarily well but really struggles elsewhere (e.g., the Packers having 47 rushing yards on 24 carries against a bad, banged up NYG rush D - truly pathetic numbers when you have a Rodgers passing attack)

If anything, it bodes very well for our future staying power as a NFC powerhouse.

This stat isn't the gospel or anything. Green Bay may well be getting under-appreciated a bit. But also reflects how a more-rounded team like SF might actually be playing better overall than a team that does one thing extraordinarily well but really struggles elsewhere (e.g., the Packers having 47 rushing yards on 24 carries against a bad, banged up NYG rush D - truly pathetic numbers when you have a Rodgers passing attack)QUOTE. LOL


hey Einstein. Let me ask you something. If a team does something really well. I mean exeptionally well and the opposing team knows it and prepares for it yet cant stop it then please explain why you need to even run it. THey run just enuf to keep the teams honest. Rodgers is lights out. Thow all your harvard regresion analysis and your multiplication win percentage. It means squat. THE GREEN BAY PACKERS ARE 12-0 FOR A REASON. THEY PASS THE BALL AND HAVE AN ELITE QB. A more rounded team is great for soup talk but the bottom line is that they along with new orleans are huge hurdles to overcome playoff time. Hurdles that they will not overcome. Hows that for quantitative analysis.

You've convinced me. The new formula for the Packers will now be:

win percent = (points scored)^2.37/((points scored)^2.37 + (points allowed)^2.37) + "thow" in an ELEVENTY BILLION POINT BONUS FOR HAVING ELITE QB!!!1!1

Originally posted by Fasteddy:
Well one thing this formula doesn't account for is strength of competition. The Packers' schedule was a tougher one.

By the barest of margins . . . basically the same difficulty.

GB Strength of Schedule: .458
SF Strength of Schedule: .443

nvm

Wait a second...what happens when you take out the Tampa Bay game

Points scored and conceded....so do we take out points in garbage time? When you are up 48 to 14 you are more than likely to put in your 3rd stringers in the 4th qtr....just saying.

Originally posted by SonocoNinerFan:

Originally posted by Fasteddy:
Well one thing this formula doesn't account for is strength of competition. The Packers' schedule was a tougher one.

By the barest of margins . . . basically the same difficulty.

GB Strength of Schedule: .458
SF Strength of Schedule: .443

Strength of schedule is a skewed stat to begin with, as well.

Originally posted by Jakemall:
Points scored and conceded....so do we take out points in garbage time? When you are up 48 to 14 you are more than likely to put in your 3rd stringers in the 4th qtr....just saying.

Nope, there aren't any adjustments in the normal Pythagorean calculation. It's basically impossible to separate out garbage time from normal time anyways. The niners 2nd half stats against the Eagles were arguably garbage time stats up until they weren't anymore.

For those that believe in the calculation (this includes most Vegas line-setters and professional gamblers, fwiw) the nice thing is you don't need to do any crazy adjustments. The theory is pretty damn accurate if you just take the simple points for/against.

Irrelvant

Us beating the dog sh*t out of the Buccaneers, Cardinals, Seahawks really doesn't mean much.

Originally posted by SonocoNinerFan:

Originally posted by Fasteddy:
Well one thing this formula doesn't account for is strength of competition. The Packers' schedule was a tougher one.

By the barest of margins . . . basically the same difficulty.

GB Strength of Schedule: .458
SF Strength of Schedule: .443

This site shows we are 30th in strength of schedule meaning we had the 3rd easiest schedule. GB had the 14th hardest schedule.

http://theredzone.org/Features/NFLStrengthofSchedule.aspx

Originally posted by Joecool:

Originally posted by SonocoNinerFan:

Originally posted by Fasteddy:
Well one thing this formula doesn't account for is strength of competition. The Packers' schedule was a tougher one.

By the barest of margins . . . basically the same difficulty.

GB Strength of Schedule: .458
SF Strength of Schedule: .443

This site shows we are 30th in strength of schedule meaning we had the 3rd easiest schedule. GB had the 14th hardest schedule.

http://theredzone.org/Features/NFLStrengthofSchedule.aspx

that was coming into the season. The season the way its played out is what Sonocco posted

Originally posted by valrod33:

Originally posted by Joecool:

Originally posted by SonocoNinerFan:

Originally posted by Fasteddy:
Well one thing this formula doesn't account for is strength of competition. The Packers' schedule was a tougher one.

By the barest of margins . . . basically the same difficulty.

GB Strength of Schedule: .458
SF Strength of Schedule: .443

This site shows we are 30th in strength of schedule meaning we had the 3rd easiest schedule. GB had the 14th hardest schedule.

http://theredzone.org/Features/NFLStrengthofSchedule.aspx

that was coming into the season. The season the way its played out is what Sonocco posted

Oh snap! That link should be burned!!

If the Niners commit to the the run against the Packers, I don't think there defense will stop our run attack. Even if they put eight or nine in the box that leaves the passing game wide open. It's good to be more than one dimensional. On the other hand the Packers won't run the ball on us, so all we have to do is slow down Aaron Rodgers. I ain't scerd!

The Saints actually scare me more than the GB does plus Saints are literally a scoring machine at home. We MUST GET A FIRST ROUND BYE

Originally posted by Axl49:
The Saints actually scare me more than the GB does plus Saints are literally a scoring machine at home. We MUST GET A FIRST ROUND BYE

We have too because we've seen that Saints team is unstoppable at the Super Dome but nowhere near that level on the road. For instance Monday night last year and going to SEA in the playoffs.