Jacoby Brissett Impressions (Perma Merge)

[SteelCityColt]

10 minutes ago, PrincetonTiger said:

Season to Season can be problematic because Coaches, Offensive schemes, and players Might change every year

 

     For example

        Just 20 years ago Princeton had run the same Offense since 1986 but in the 20 years since PCHS has had 7 different coaches and Os

 

Which is fine as we don't need consistency there. You've basically got 356 "seasons" where for each a team will have finished with a known record (Win %) and a number of known metrics. We're looking at the correlation between the two. 

[EastStreet]

I'm still waiting on the R squared answer

 

[GRUMPY OLD MAN]

28 minutes ago, SteelCityColt said:

 

Yes... what you're talking about is a very small sample, i.e. one game. This is about over a longer sustained period of time (season or seasons), there is very much things that are successful that teams tend to have in common. Some is common sense, like having a positive points differential, some things aren't as obvious until you look at the dataset. 

 

Do you know what R squared signifies (genuine question)? 

you cant have 100 percent r squared in football based on historical stats, just too many factors involved in winning, but you seem to enjoy trying to pick a winner this way and more power to you if it helps you enjoy the game. go colts!!

[SteelCityColt]

3 minutes ago, DEFENSE said:

you cant have 100 percent r squared in football based on historical stats, just too many factors involved in winning, but you seem to enjoy trying to pick a winner this way and more power to you if it helps you enjoy the game. go colts!!

 

1) You don't get a 100% R squared anything, it's a value between -1 and 1 and anything fully -1 or 1 is going to be messed up data. It's being used here as an indicator of relative correlation of metrics and winning. 

2) It's not about picking a winner at all. 

[PrincetonTiger]

2 minutes ago, SteelCityColt said:

 

Which is fine as we don't need consistency there. You've basically god 356 "seasons" where for each a team will have finished with a known record (Win %) and a number of known metrics. We're looking at the correlation between the two. 

I prefer hard evidence to go with stats

 

    For example this past season 

       Princeton went into the tournament with one win and in the semifinal a 2 win Tiger team who had struggled in most weeks went up against a 8 win Team who had blown teams out

             Princeton won 35-6

         I was in the stands for the exact opposite when a 8-0 Tiger team hosted a below .500 team and lost by 2 scores

 

 

here my final answer

    Stats when used alone can be faulty

     

[lollygagger8]

1 hour ago, crazycolt1 said:

You took a shot at those who defend JB.

Even went as far as calling us trolls.

IMO it did not come off as a joke being you wasn't clear that it was a joke. 

Maybe a lol or a would have made it clear? 

Both of our comments were sarcastic so there it is. 

No problem. 

 

I think you got the wrong guy there boss. I didn't call anybody trolls or take shots at anyone. I said he was the best at handing the ball off last week.  

[SteelCityColt]

4 minutes ago, PrincetonTiger said:

I prefer hard evidence to go with stats

 

    For example this past season 

       Princeton went into the tournament with one win and in the semifinal a 2 win Tiger team who had struggled in most weeks went up against a 8 win Team who had blown teams out

             Princeton won 35-6

         I was in the stands for the exact opposite when a 8-0 Tiger team hosted a below .500 team and lost by 2 scores

 

 

here my final answer

    Stats when used alone can be faulty

     

 

You're comparing a single trial to looking over a large sample size to identify trends. They are not the same thing. 

[GRUMPY OLD MAN]

6 minutes ago, SteelCityColt said:

 

1) You can't have a 100 % R squared anything. It's being used here as an indicator of relative correlation of metrics and winning. 

2) It's not about picking a winner at all. 

did you realize that r squared can be very low and we still can win because of factors you cant account for in stats? 

[SteelCityColt]

2 minutes ago, DEFENSE said:

did you realize that r squared can be very low and we still can win because of factors you cant account for in stats? 

 

Yep and I never stated anything different.  In fact did I even reference the above to the Colts. It was comparing two metrics and the relative correlation to win %. 

[DiogoZ]

I guess the point about the stats in which @SteelCityColt is showing us, is not about predict with 100% accuracy, but to only show us that most of the time, when a team have "X YPA" or "Z YPG" or whatever, the win or lose.

 

It's obvious that you'll never predict all the games, and to be fair, it's crazy to think that people keep saying that he wants to only use stat and never consider any other thing. There will be upsets, bad teams can sometimes win against good teams, but like the stats show MOST of the time, it'll happen as the history (and stats) show us.

 

 

[PrincetonTiger]

1 minute ago, SteelCityColt said:

 

You're comparing a single trial to looking over a large sample size to identify trends. They are not the same thing. 

You are using Analytics I am using stats

 

   There is a big difference

 

 

      I was comparing complete seasons between 2 teams and showing how they can be misleading 

       In the 2 examples I used most people would have picked the loser to win handily 

 

 

 

 

 

[SteelCityColt]

6 minutes ago, PrincetonTiger said:

You are using Analytics I am using stats

 

   There is a big difference

 

 

      I was comparing complete seasons between 2 teams and showing how they can be misleading 

       In the 2 examples I used most people would have picked the loser to win handily 

 

 

I'm not offering it up as a way to predict single games.. and the above very much isn't analytics. Scatter chart/correlation if stats. Now if I was to use the correlations of historic data to build a predictive model, that's analytics. 

[PrincetonTiger]

1 minute ago, SteelCityColt said:

 

I'm not offering it up as a way to predict single games..

Some are

 

 

 

   All I have every said is that

         Using Stats alone can get you in trouble

 

   I know of no respected prediction service that doesn’t use some form of eye test

[shasta519]

4 hours ago, EastStreet said:

Yup. FWIW, I know a few horse racing bettors that have made a nice living off of it for the last 30 years. I've been pretty good since my teens too (I do not bet regularly at all). Vegas really doesn't care that some win as the whole process is built to bring it all to the middle. A few of my best friends were bookies from HS to late 20s, and the "game" is pretty clear. I was closely around it those years, and loosely involve for a few. The biggest challenge, collecting LOL.

 

Pro gamblers are reallly just trying to gain a very small margin...on a very large sum of bets...similar to how the casino works. The issue a lot of them run into is that sportsbooks won't take their action when they think they have encountered a sharp. 

[SteelCityColt]

17 minutes ago, DiogoZ said:

I guess the point about the stats in which @SteelCityColt is showing us, is not about predict with 100% accuracy, but to only show us that most of the time, when a team have "X YPA" or "Z YPG" or whatever, the win or lose.

 

It's obvious that you'll never predict all the games, and to be fair, it's crazy to think that people keep saying that he wants to only use stat and never consider any other thing. There will be upsets, bad teams can sometimes win against good teams, but like the stats show MOST of the time, it'll happen as the history (and stats) show us.

 

 

 

I only offered up those in response to a direct question about rushing and passing yards/attempt surely going hand in hand. You really need to look across the board to build the full picture. Patience... I'm working on it, many graphs. 

3 minutes ago, shastamasta said:

 

Pro gamblers are reallly just trying to gain a very small margin...on a very large sum of bets...similar to how the casino works. The issue a lot of them run into is that sportsbooks won't take their action when they think they have encountered a sharp. 

 

I'll take your action.

[DiogoZ]

Just now, SteelCityColt said:

 

I only offered up those in response to a direct question about rushing and passing yards/attempt surely going hand in hand. You really need to look across the board to build the full picture. Patience... I'm working on it. 

I am patiently waiting

[SteelCityColt]

2 minutes ago, DiogoZ said:

I am patiently waiting

 

One good thing about my job, when people look over and see lots of numbers/graphs, they don't question what I'm doing. Perfect cover for NFL write ups...

[EastStreet]

7 minutes ago, shastamasta said:

 

Pro gamblers are reallly just trying to gain a very small margin...on a very large sum of bets...similar to how the casino works. The issue a lot of them run into is that sportsbooks won't take their action when they think they have encountered a sharp. 

There's so many options these days (to bet). Unless your betting huge coin at a time, you're fine. Spread it around. My buddy that's been betting for 30 years now hardly leaves the house (to gamble). Has 6 computer screens with races and tons of off shore options going.

[shasta519]

12 minutes ago, SteelCityColt said:

 

I only offered up those in response to a direct question about rushing and passing yards/attempt surely going hand in hand. You really need to look across the board to build the full picture. Patience... I'm working on it, many graphs. 

 

I'll take your action.

 

Haha...I don't have that problem. 

 

I don't bet on sports though...but I do play DFS (NFL, NHL and MLB) every day.

[shasta519]

9 minutes ago, EastStreet said:

There's so many options these days (to bet). Unless your betting huge coin at a time, you're fine. Spread it around. My buddy that's been betting for 30 years now hardly leaves the house (to gamble). Has 6 computer screens with races and tons of off shore options going.

 

There are options everywhere...but not all options have the same numbers to exploit. 

 

Sports books are popping up all over the place...and European companies are coming here to run them. From what I have read, those books are historically more strict on taking certain levels of action (bet limits...total and individual). But it's the guys betting big coin.

 

 

[EastStreet]

1 minute ago, shastamasta said:

 

There are options everywhere...but not all options have the same numbers to exploit. 

 

Sports books are popping up all over the place...and European companies are coming here to run them. From what I have read, those books are historically more strict on taking certain levels of action (bet limits...total and individual). But it's the guys betting big coin.

A lot VPN to offshore. 1000s of them out there. When I lived down in Central America for a while, my office was in the same building as one of the OSs. They were all over CA, SA, and the islands. Nowadays, they're everywhere. 

[braveheartcolt]

Stats are great. For example, did you know that 5 out of 3 people can't do fractions?

 

So, will the Colts win tonight?

[ColtsBlueFL]

1 hour ago, SteelCityColt said:

 

Yes... what you're talking about is a very small sample, i.e. one game. This is about over a longer sustained period of time (season or seasons), there is very much things that are successful that teams tend to have in common. Some is common sense, like having a positive points differential, some things aren't as obvious until you look at the dataset. 

 

Do you know what R squared signifies (genuine question)? 

 

Pie is ready?  Pi R squared?  Or is that Pie are round, cornbread R squared? I'm all confused now...

[SteelCityColt]

4 minutes ago, braveheartcolt said:

Stats are great. For example, did you know that 5 out of 3 people can't do fractions?

 

So, will the Colts win tonight?

 

I'm 2 of the 5. 

 

Depends a lot if Hilton plays, and if it's a high scoring game or not for me. 

[shasta519]

18 minutes ago, EastStreet said:

A lot VPN to offshore. 1000s of them out there. When I lived down in Central America for a while, my office was in the same building as one of the OSs. They were all over CA, SA, and the islands. Nowadays, they're everywhere. 

 

Back in the day...if you lived in Vegas or AC...you probably just drove around looking for numbers you could beat at different books.

[shasta519]

17 minutes ago, braveheartcolt said:

Stats are great. For example, did you know that 5 out of 3 people can't do fractions?

 

So, will the Colts win tonight?

 

My statistical model says "Reply hazy, please try again." But 60% of the time it works every time.

[EastStreet]

3 minutes ago, shastamasta said:

 

Back in the day...if you lived in Vegas or AC...you probably just drove around looking for numbers you could beat at different books.

back in the day, i just called my bookie :-)

 

and said, said the pass word... R squared.... 

[SteelCityColt]

3 minutes ago, shastamasta said:

 

My statistical model says "Reply hazy, please try again." But 60% of the time it works every time.

 

Statistically there should be 0.17 Panthers actively posting in this topic.

[GRUMPY OLD MAN]

23 minutes ago, SteelCityColt said:

 

I'm 2 of the 5. 

 

Depends a lot if Hilton plays, and if it's a high scoring game or not for me. 

is your r squared high or low?

[2006Coltsbestever]

Never a dull moment in this thread. I just went through and read all the posts. Here is a question for everyone, is it fair to say that JB is defying all odds by being 6-2 in games he has started and finished based on his stats? If so, next time I go to Vegas I need him with me because 6-2 = 75% winnings   

[GRUMPY OLD MAN]

1 hour ago, SteelCityColt said:

 

Which is fine as we don't need consistency there. You've basically got 356 "seasons" where for each a team will have finished with a known record (Win %) and a number of known metrics. We're looking at the correlation between the two. 

did you ever think there might not be a correlation? could it just be random events?

[SteelCityColt]

Just now, DEFENSE said:

did you ever think there might not be a correlation? could it just be random events?

If it was just random events why would you pay certain players more than others? 

[SteelCityColt]

14 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

Never a dull moment in this thread. I just went through and read all the posts. Here is a question for everyone, is it fair to say that JB is defying all odds by being 6-2 in games he has started and finished based on his stats? If so, next time I go to Vegas I need him with me because 6-2 = 75% winnings   

It’s fair to say we’re currently outperforming expectations, both in terms of qualitative and quantitive expectations, especially our Pythagorean one. It would be remiss to Not say that it could beinfluenced by the unquantifiable such as leadership, motivation etc. Areas I think, Brissett especially, we are strong in.
 

Small number of games, you’ll get outliers. I guess my counter question is do you think our current style/level of play is sustainable in the long term to win consistently, both for the rest of the season and beyond? 

[GRUMPY OLD MAN]

2 minutes ago, SteelCityColt said:

If it was just random events why would you pay certain players more than others? 

because someone r squared them? maybe?

[PrincetonTiger]

6 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

Never a dull moment in this thread. I just went through and read all the posts. Here is a question for everyone, is it fair to say that JB is defying all odds by being 6-2 in games he has started and finished based on his stats? If so, next time I go to Vegas I need him with me because 6-2 = 75% winnings   

The only time Vegas comes out of my mouth is if I am talking about the old TV shows or Jackie Young’s team

 

 

     Even if I wanted to I wouldn’t need to since I have a casino less the 30 minutes away

[SteelCityColt]

1 minute ago, DEFENSE said:

because someone r squared them? maybe?

Ah... so that’s your game. 

[GRUMPY OLD MAN]

1 minute ago, SteelCityColt said:

It’s fair to say we’re currently outperforming expectations, both in terms of qualitative and quantitive expectations, especially our Pythagorean one. 
 

Small number of games, you’ll get outliers. I guess my counter question is do you think our current style/level of play is sustainable in the long term to win consistently, both for the rest of the season and beyond? 

yes you said we could win with a low r square

[PrincetonTiger]

2 minutes ago, SteelCityColt said:

It’s fair to say we’re currently outperforming expectations, both in terms of qualitative and quantitive expectations, especially our Pythagorean one. It would be remiss to Not say that could he influenced by the unquantifiable such as leadership, motivation etc. Areas I think, Brissett especially, we are strong in.
 

Small number of games, you’ll get outliers. I guess my counter question is do you think our current style/level of play is sustainable in the long term to win consistently, both for the rest of the season and beyond? 

And you just went over the heads of about 50% of the people here

[GRUMPY OLD MAN]

5 minutes ago, SteelCityColt said:

Ah... so that’s your game. 

you brought this topic back to life today with your r squared stats, good job colts fan

[2006Coltsbestever]

1 minute ago, SteelCityColt said:

It’s fair to say we’re currently outperforming expectations, both in terms of qualitative and quantitive expectations, especially our Pythagorean one. 
 

Small number of games, you’ll get outliers. I guess my counter question is do you think our current style/level of play is sustainable in the long term to win consistently, both for the rest of the season and beyond? 

It can be because we have the right team around JB. We are a run 1st team now with a great O.Line. JB can win games as long as he has talent around him and we have the mind set that running the ball 1st is the most important thing. JB is a QB that rarely makes mistakes is why we can win playing the style we play. Can we win a SB with JB? That I am not sure of but we didn't with the great Andrew Luck either. I still think we are a good DT, a playmaker at WR to help JB, and another consistent young kicker away from being a great team. We are good right now though.