Bills and Steelers historically "lucky" according to FiveThirtyEight article

[Beast]

I guess we are in trouble if or when they start factoring in stupid stats.

 

 

[The Frankish Reich]

Point differential isn't a very good measure in football. Not enough games to have an adequate sample, gross disparities in strength of schedule (what division in playing the NFC East this year?), etc, etc.

In MLB: 162 games ... it's a damn good indicator of which teams are "better" or "worse" than their records would tell us.

[Madbillsfan]

Click bait me thinks

[DaBillsFanSince1973]

luck is when preparation meets opportunity

[Matt_In_NH]

There aware 8 or 9 games played.  One game can skew things a lot and this is low sample size for this kind of analysis.  From watching the games the bills have been the better team in their wins and have dominated at times although the score did not reflect that at the end of the game.  
 

don’t let this worry you.  It’s kind of useless

[Mickey]

Is there any stat, too ridiculous, too irrelevant and too insanely picayune for even the most OCD afflicted numerical fetishist to embrace?

 

 

[Reader]

At a quick glance half the historic teams that are paired with the Steelers make it to the super bowl so...not exactly sure what the takeaway here is...

[Like A Mofo]

You know what I say to these:

 

Expect THIS

[Simon]

38 minutes ago, Mickey said:

Is there any stat, too ridiculous, too irrelevant and too insanely picayune for even the most OCD afflicted numerical fetishist to embrace?

 

 

What are the odds that there's a significant and measurable degree of certainty that this bore the tone of a challenge?

[DQW87]

3 hours ago, matter2003 said:

That being said the Bills area also ranked 7th in their ELO ratings at 1607 

 

 

[hondo in seattle]

I realize some very talented statisticians work at 538.  And I know their game predictions are pretty good.  But if their model says the Bills should have 4.7 wins, their model is wrong. 

 

We didn't get 7 wins off of unearned turnovers or weird bounces.  We outplayed our opponent 7 times this year.  Sometimes I watch a game and feel like the better team lost.  I never had that feeling so far watching the Bills this year.  

 

I think it's interesting 538 attributes the Bills good record to luck rather than to a flaw with their "Pythagorean expectations."  They can't possibly believe their predictive model is perfect, can they?  

 

 

[TroutDog]

31 minutes ago, hondo in seattle said:

I realize some very talented statisticians work at 538.  And I know their game predictions are pretty good.  But if their model says the Bills should have 4.7 wins, their model is wrong. 

 

We didn't get 7 wins off of unearned turnovers or weird bounces.  We outplayed our opponent 7 times this year.  Sometimes I watch a game and feel like the better team lost.  I never had that feeling so far watching the Bills this year.  

 

I think it's interesting 538 attributes the Bills good record to luck rather than to a flaw with their "Pythagorean expectations."  They can't possibly believe their predictive model is perfect, can they?  

 

 

I agree. Statisticians are an interesting breed. Dealing with them when I’m doing budgets is particularly interesting as they base their view of what I will do across the entire organization (this is in my last life). I consistently outpaced the many but that was never factored in. 
 

I fought it tooth and nail to no avail. That’s just the way they work...and I understand it...but don’t agree with it. 

[Reader]

3 minutes ago, TroutDog said:

I agree. Statisticians are an interesting breed. Dealing with them when I’m doing budgets is particularly interesting as they base their view of what I will do across the entire organization (this is in my last life). I consistently outpaced the many but that was never factored in. 
 

I fought it tooth and nail to no avail. That’s just the way they work...and I understand it...but don’t agree with it. 

 

I feel like they are really good at getting the science down for that 90-95% of situations, but can't (due to mathematical models) account for nuance. The Bills have played significantly better than their point differential.

[BillsFan619]

3 hours ago, Artful Dodger said:

The Bills have an extremely competitive quarterback who is capable of willing the team to victory.  Is that a measurable statistic?

 

The Bills are "lucky" that Josh Allen is their quarterback.

Yup, good thoughts! There's just some things you just can't measure.

Edited November 14, 2020 by BillsFan619

[Orlando Buffalo]

18 minutes ago, Reader said:

 

I feel like they are really good at getting the science down for that 90-95% of situations, but can't (due to mathematical models) account for nuance. The Bills have played significantly better than their point differential.

The NFL is the worst sport to try and use simple math with since the season is too short and one game can skew numbers so much ala Titans game. In baseball simple numbers mean much more. 

[Call_Of_Ktulu]

Its like when a crappy bowler says to me " I'd rather be lucky than good" or sand baggers I should say. The Bills are playing very good football right now and have the young talent to get even better as the season wears on.  

[TroutDog]

33 minutes ago, Reader said:

 

I feel like they are really good at getting the science down for that 90-95% of situations, but can't (due to mathematical models) account for nuance. The Bills have played significantly better than their point differential.

‘Nuance’ isn’t included in statistical science. Just saying. 😃 

[mannc]

Yep, that’s the Bills for you; just spoiled for good luck...

[BBills88]

Let this luck bring us a Superbowl victory this season

[ganesh]

4 hours ago, Artful Dodger said:

The Bills have an extremely competitive quarterback who is capable of willing the team to victory.  Is that a measurable statistic?

 

The Bills are "lucky" that Josh Allen is their quarterback.

this !