NFL Playoff Predictions thread - Page 10

tdarko · #91 01-03-2007, 03:36 AM

[ QUOTE ]
WTF? It's fun to speculate about how well team x matches up with y, but given that Dallas has played neither team this year and Chicago is much better than Seattle; picking a Dallas 2nd round exit is perfectly reasonable.

[/ QUOTE ]

Did you even read my post?

First I predicted a first round exit for Dallas, and secondly if you have watched the three teams all year and have any idea about the game you can come up with who matches up better against each other, you don't have to play each other to come up with that. Did I say the Cowboys would win either of these games...go back to my post and reread for that answer, plus you simply can't know that ever. But what you can do is understand which team proposes a bigger threat to them and it is a team with multiple offensive weapons, not a team thats only weapon is a banged up defense.

I personally think they would lose both games if they were to play both teams, but if you think they could beat Seattle I would think they would have a sound shot at Chicago.

Oh, and dig up the Dallas/Indy thread in Sports Betting when I was basically told that I was a fool for thinking the Dallas +1 line was correct and that Dallas had a legitimate chance at beating Indy b/c they matched up well against them. They hadn't played each other but it doesn't take a genius to understand Peyton and co.'s problems against the 3-4 defense.

Jeff W · #92 01-03-2007, 06:13 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Source? I'd like to see how DVOA fares against sportsbook futures and pythagorean wins.

[/ QUOTE ]

FO says that about their statistics all the time. If you want their correlation research ask them.

[/ QUOTE ]

If you claim that "[DVOA has a] higher correlation to future success than any other ranking system out there", then you should have evidence to support your claim.

onlinebeginner · #93 01-03-2007, 08:29 AM

does DVOA take in to account injuries? For example is Mcnabb's early season success contributed into it? Because this would obviously make any predictions resulting from it invalid

PokerFink · #94 01-03-2007, 01:19 PM

[ QUOTE ]
If you claim that "[DVOA has a] higher correlation to future success than any other ranking system out there", then you should have evidence to support your claim.

[/ QUOTE ]

Various people over at FO have written that basic statement plenty of times in their articles. Since you read FO, you have probably seen that. Since they either haven't published their correlation data (or I haven't read it) I don't have the proof you want - but I'll dig something up for you if you want when I get back from AC on Sunday. But I'm heading out the door right now.

The easier solution would just be to email Aaron if you're curious.

Have a good week ya'll =)

PokerFink · #95 01-03-2007, 01:23 PM

[ QUOTE ]
does DVOA take in to account injuries? For example is Mcnabb's early season success contributed into it? Because this would obviously make any predictions resulting from it invalid

[/ QUOTE ]

No, injuries are not included. One thing you will notice is that the Eagles are ranked higher in full season DVOA than weighted DVOA. Weighted is a forumula that weights the second half of the season higher than the first half - ie McNabb's contributions are lessened. But Garcia's numbers are, shockingly, not that far away from McNabb on a per play basis. McNabb's overall value is much higher since the Eagles throw more with McNabb - but the decline from McNabb to Garcia has actually been pretty small.

kyro · #96 01-03-2007, 01:40 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Weighted is a forumula that weights the second half of the season higher than the first half

[/ QUOTE ]

That's interesting. Indy is 7th in total and 4th in weighted, yet they started 8-0 and finished 4-4.

MCS · #97 01-03-2007, 01:50 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Weighted is a forumula that weights the second half of the season higher than the first half

[/ QUOTE ]

That's interesting. Indy is 7th in total and 4th in weighted, yet they started 8-0 and finished 4-4.

[/ QUOTE ]

Hmmmm. Good point. Maybe they played better teams or had more fluke bad plays that DVOA doesn't penalize as harshly as "real life" does (maybe the plays aren't considered predictive).

onlinebeginner · #98 01-03-2007, 05:04 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
does DVOA take in to account injuries? For example is Mcnabb's early season success contributed into it? Because this would obviously make any predictions resulting from it invalid

[/ QUOTE ]

No, injuries are not included. One thing you will notice is that the Eagles are ranked higher in full season DVOA than weighted DVOA. Weighted is a forumula that weights the second half of the season higher than the first half - ie McNabb's contributions are lessened. But Garcia's numbers are, shockingly, not that far away from McNabb on a per play basis. McNabb's overall value is much higher since the Eagles throw more with McNabb - but the decline from McNabb to Garcia has actually been pretty small.

[/ QUOTE ]
second half of the season... that's fairly arbitrary no? why not week 9? 10? 7? i feel like they can easily really improve on the system. Altho I do think it is a very good system. (mostly because I do think the ravens are the best team right now)

Kneel B4 Zod · #99 01-03-2007, 05:32 PM

[ QUOTE ]
KC seems like a trendy upset pick. Imo Indy will roll in this one. A few things to consider:

-Indy is 8-0 at home this year including wins over Jacksonville, Tennessee, Philly, and Cincy

-KC is 3-5 on the road this year with their only wins over Oakland, Arizona, and St Louis

-Two years ago they met in the playoffs, Priest Holmes ran for 200+ yards and Indy still won by more than a touchdown.

I havn't seen what the point spread for this game is, but based on the public opinions that I've heard so far, I think I'd be all over Indy.

[/ QUOTE ]

Indy was a much better team 2 years ago. They averaged about a TD more per game, and their run defense was not historically bad.

(granted, KC was better as well).

but anyway, Indy has been really limping down the stretch. I don't put much stock into games played 2 years ago by basically 2 different teams. I'm taking the points here.

Richard Tanner · #**100** 01-03-2007, 06:01 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
KC seems like a trendy upset pick. Imo Indy will roll in this one. A few things to consider:

-Indy is 8-0 at home this year including wins over Jacksonville, Tennessee, Philly, and Cincy

-KC is 3-5 on the road this year with their only wins over Oakland, Arizona, and St Louis

-Two years ago they met in the playoffs, Priest Holmes ran for 200+ yards and Indy still won by more than a touchdown.

I havn't seen what the point spread for this game is, but based on the public opinions that I've heard so far, I think I'd be all over Indy.

[/ QUOTE ]

Indy was a much better team 2 years ago. They averaged about a TD more per game, and their run defense was not historically bad.

(granted, KC was better as well).

but anyway, Indy has been really limping down the stretch. I don't put much stock into games played 2 years ago by basically 2 different teams. I'm taking the points here.

[/ QUOTE ]

People say this but I'm not sure what the basis is. If you actually watch the games, teams play the Colts in almost constant Nickel and Dime, which means Peyton will beat you in 12 plays instead of 3, so naturally the numbers are down.

Also, the Colts D was never good, they were simply benifeting from the 14-28 point leads that Peyton and Co. would put up. Now that D's have slowed, but not stoped, the out front scoring, the D isn't defending only the pass anymore and racking up INTs at an alarming rate.

Watch the games, don't just read the box scores.

All that said, KC-38 IND-34

Cody